HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Actions 05-02-94MUSSER
31962
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION
ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
May 2, 1994
2:00 p.m.
AGENDA FOR THE COUNCIL
Call to Order -- Roll Call.
AH Present. (Council Member
Musser left the meeting at
2:40 p.m.)
The Invocation was delivered by The Reverend Joy
Sylvester-Johnson, Director of Development, Roanoke City Rescue Mission.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America
was led by Mayor David A. Bowers.
Welcome. Mayor Bowers.
Adopted Resolution No. 31962-050294 recognizing and commending
the Northwest Neighborhood Environmental Organization, Inc., as recipient
of the 1994 President's Volunteer Action Award. (7-0)
Proclamation and remarks in connection with National Preservation
Week and Virginia Heritage Tourism Weeks to be observed on May 1 - 15,
1994. The Honorable David A. Bowers, Mayor; Mr. George Kegley,
President--elect, Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation; Dr. John R. Kern,
Director, Roanoke Regional Preservation Office; Ms. Martha Mackey,
Executive Director, Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau; and Mr.
Richard Willis, President, Old Southwest, Inc.
BID OPENINGS
Bids for repairs to Jefferson Street Bridge over Norfolk Southern
Railway, Contract I.
Three bids were referred to a committee composed of William White,
Sr., Chairperson, William F. Clark and Charles M. Huffine for
tabulation, report and recommendation to Council.
Bids for asphalt concrete overlays and pavement profiling of various
streets within the City of Roanoke.
Three bids were referred to a commiltee composed of William White,
Sr., Chairperson, William F. Clark and Charles M. Huffine for
tabulation, report and recommendation to Council.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Continuation of a public hearing on the request of Wal-Mart Stores,
Inc., and William Hunt Staples, et al., that a .6636-acre and a
.8091-acre portion of a tract of land containing 62.5379 acres, adjacent
to Interstate 581 and the terminus of Broad Street, N. W., identified as
Official Tax No. 2250101, be rezoned from LM, Light Manufacturing
District, and RS-3, Residential Single Family District, to C-2, General
Commercial District, subject to certain conditions proffered by the
petitioners. James F. Douthat and T. L. Plunkett, Attorneys.
2. CONSENT AGENDA
(APPROVED 7-0)
ALL MATI'ERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE
CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE BY THE MAYOR AND
MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL AND WILL BE ENACTED BY
ONE MOTION IN THE FORM, OR FORMS, LISTED BELOW.
THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THE ITEMS.
IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THE ITEM WILL BE REMOVED
FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED
SEPARATELY.
C-1
C-2
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
(1950), as amended.
A communication from Mayor David A. Bowers requesting input from
the City administration as to the necessary steps to be followed to ensure that
an interstate connector will be built to link Interstate 581 to Interstate 73,
southwest of the City.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refer to City administration for appropriate
response within 90 days.
At this point, Mr. Musser left the meeting.
3
REGULAR AGENDA
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATFERS:
None.
4. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
ao
A communication from the Roanoke City School Board requesting the
close-out of 61 school grants that have been completed, resulting in
a net reduction in appropriation of $462,329.00.
Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 31963-050294. (6-0)
5. REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
a. CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS:
A report with regard to the proposed 1994-95 Community
Development Block Grant Program and budget. (20 minutes)
Received and filed.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
A report recommending appropriation of additional
Comprehensive Services Act funds, in the amount of
$14,164.00, to cover the cost of services for targeted at-risk
youth and their families.
Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 31964-050294. (6-0)
A report recommending appropriation of $21,665.00 from the
Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program in
connection with procurement of certain equipment to ensure that
the City has a back-up 9-1-1 communications facility to
provide continued public safety services.
Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 31965-050294. (6-0)
A report recommending approval of Change Order No. 1 to the
City's contract with J. P. Turner and Brothers, Inc., in the
amount of $13,452.12, for construction of a Water and Access
Road in the Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology.
Adopted Ordinance No. 31966-050294. (6-0)
o
A report recommending approval of Change Order No. 1 to the
City's contract with E. C. Pace Co., Inc., in the amount of
$10,745.00, for construction of the Liberty Road sanitary sewer
replacement project; and appropriation of funds in connection
therewith.
Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 31967-050294 and Ordinance
No. 31968-050294. (6-0)
A report recommending execution of a limited concession
agreement with Roanoke Valley Youth Soccer Club, Inc., to sell
soccer related merchandise at River's Edge Sports Complex
during four requested soccer tournaments.
Adopted Ordinance No. 31969-050294. (6-0)
o
A report recommending execution of a three-party agreement
with the Virginia Department of Transportation and Appalachian
Power Company for adjustment of electric utilities required in
conjunction with the Wells Avenue roadway project; adoption
of a measure requesting the Virginia Department of
Transportation to place the utility relocations underground; and
appropriation of funds in connection therewith.
Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 31970-050294 and Resolution
No. 31971-050294. (6-0)
6. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
A report of the Roanoke Civic Center Commission recommending an
amendment to the City Code with regard to the deposit schedule for
Civic Center events. James W. Stephens, Vice-Chairperson.
Adopted Ordinance No. 31972-050294. (6-0)
A report of the Water Resources Committee recommending vacation
of the existing sanitary sewer easement adjacent to the Grand Piano
and Furniture Co., Inc. warehouse located in Statesman Industrial
Park. Council Member Elizabeth T. Bowles, Chairperson.
Adopted Ordinance No. 31973 on first reading. (6-0)
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None.
8. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION
ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: None.
OF
9. MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
Inquiries and/or comments by the Mayor and Members of City
Council.
6
bo
Vacancies on various authorities, boards, commissions and committees
appointed by Council.
10. OTHER HEARINGS OF CITIZENS:
The following persons spoke with regard to the request of Wal-Mart Stores,
Inc., and William Hunt Staples to rezone property located adjacent to
Interstate 581 and the terminus of Broad Street, N. W.:
Edmond A. Damus, 1920 Deyerle Road, S. W.
Sarah Cmwford, 3534 Courtland Road, N. W.
Anne Foster, 2322 Oakland Boulevard, N. W.
Patficia Nutter, 2328 Oakland Boulevard, N. W.
Dr. Panla Willis, 3835 Darlington Road, S. W.
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION. (5-0, Mr. McCadden was
out of the Council Chamber.)
7
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 2nd day of May, 1994.
No. 31962-050294.
A RESOLUTION recognizing and commending the members of the
Northwest Neighborhood Environmental Organization, Inc.
WHEREAS, at the beginning of the 1980's, the Gilmer
neighborhood was faced with many of the same problems suffered by
other inner-city residential areas, such as drugs, crime,
dilapidated housing and neglected property;
WHEREAS, a group of fifteen residents, led by Ms. Florine L.
Thornhill, decided to take control of their future and reverse the
decline;
WHEREAS, the fifteen residents formed the Northwest
Neighborhood Environmental Organization ("NNEO") and mobilized the
community as one of the four pilot neighborhoods to organize under
the Roanoke Neighborhood Partnership;
WHEREAS, through this coalition of businesses, non-profits,
neighborhoods and government, NNEO initiated a planning process to
improve the social fabric of its neighborhood by identifying social
and physical concerns of the neighborhood, developing action
strategies and partnerships to address those concerns, and creat%ng
resident commitment and involvement to carry out action strategies;
WHEREAS, NNEO has provided safe, affordable housing for
seventeen low or moderate income families, reduced the number of
unkempt lots by eighty (80) percent, reduced the number of
dilapidated and vacant houses within its boundary by fifty (50)
percent, repaired seven homes owned by elderly residents to prevent
displacement, spurred over $450,000.00 in investment in the
neighborhood over the last nine years, increased the assessment of
NNEO-owned properties by 600 percent between 1982 and 1992, and
employed twenty-seven (27) youths and residents in improvement
projects;
WHEREAS, through its innovation and willingness to take risks
to achieve its goals, the NNEO serves as a prototype for volunteer
organizations with a proven record of success; and
WHEREAS, NNEO and its President, Ms. Florine L. Thornhill,
have recently been honored by the President of the United States
through the bestowing of a 1994 Presidential Voluntary Action Award
on NNEO;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of
Roanoke as follows:
1. This Council adopts this resolution as a form of
recognition of the rare combination of courage, determination, and
vision to achieve visible, positive change in the community, and as
an expression of appreciation for
time and talent of the members
Environmental Organization, Inc.
the voluntary contribution of
of the Northwest Neighborhood
2. The City Clerk is directed to forward attested copies of
this resolution to the Northwest Neighborhood Environmental
Organization, Inc.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Given under our hands and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twenty-seventh
day of April nineteen hundred and ninety-four.
WHFag, F_.AS, historic preservation enriches the lives of all citizens by providing
a greater understanding of American heritage; and
WHEREAS,
historic preservation enhances the livability of communities
throughout the United States of America, from large metropolitan
cities to small rural towns; and
WHEREAS,
National Preservation Week and the second annual Virginia
Heritage Tourism Weeks provide an opportunity for citizens of all
ages and walks of life to realize the value of saving historic
buildings and sites for the cultural, environmental and economic
well-being of their communities; and
IYH~ ,
Heritage Tourism Weeks call for Virginians to recognize the
cultural and economic benefits that come from saving our history
and promoting historic sites visitation, efforts co-sponsored by the
Roanoke Regional Preservation Office, the Roanoke Valley
Preservation Foundation, the Roanoke Valley Convention and
Visitors Bureau, and local preservation organizations; and
the theme for National Preservation Week 1994 is: 'Tt's your
memory. It's our history. It's worth saving."
NOW, THEREFORE, L David A. Bowers, Mayor of the City of Roanoke, Virginia,
do hereby proclaim the weeks of May I - 15, 1994, as
HERITAGE TOURISM WEFI, S. ,
ATTEST:
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Da~d&Baw~
Mayor
COMMONWEALTH o[ VIRQINIA
Hugh C. Miller, Director
Department of Historic Resources
221 Governor Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
TDD: (804) 786-1934
Telephone (804) 786-3143
FAX: (804) 225-4261
March 31, 1994
Ms. Mary Parker
Roanoke City Clerk
215 Church Avenue, S.W.
Roanoke, VA 24011
Dear Ms. Parker:
National Preservation Week will be observed across the country May 8-14, 1994, and the second annual Virginia
Heritage Tourism Weeks will be celebrated throughout the Commonwealth May 1-15, 1994. This joint program
between the Department of Historic Resources and the Division of Tourism will focus attention for two weeks on
one of the state's leading assets--its history, and on the economic profits generated by historic sites visitation. The
Roanoke Regional Preservation Office, tho Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation, the Roanoke Valley
Convention & Visitors Bureau, and local preservation organizations are looking forward to the festivities
commemorating heritage tourism in our community.
This year's National Prcservation theme is 'It's your memory. It's your history. It's worth saving." Preservation
Week and Heritage Tourism Weeks call for us to recognize the cultural and economic benefits which come from
preserving and promoting visitation to the historic buildings and sites in our communities.
On behalf of the Roanoke Regional Preservation Office, the Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation, the Roanoke
Valley Convention & Visitors Bureau, and local preservation organizations, I am writing to request the opportunity
to appear on the Roanoke City Council agenda for the meeting on Monday May 2, 1994 at 2:00 p.m. Mr. George
Kegley, President-elect of the Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation, Ms. Martha Mackey, Executive Director
of the Roanoke Valley Convention & Visitors Bureau, Richard Willis, President of Old Southwest, Inc., and I
would like to address the City Council with very brief comments at that time. I have also written Ms. Joyce Sink
to request a proclamation from the Mayor and City Council.
Thank you for your assistance.
Enclosure
CC:
Mr. George Kegley, President-Elect
Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation
Ms. Martha Mackey, Executive Director
Roanoke Valley Convention & Visitors Bureau
Mr. Richard Willis, President
Old Southwest, Inc.
Roanoke Regional Preservation Office
1030 Penmas Avenue, SE
Roanoke, VA 24013
(703) 857-7585
FAX: (703) 857-7588
Director
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
May 6, 1994
File #102-223-514
The Honorable William White, Sr., Chairperson )
William F. Clark ) Committee
Charles M. Huffine )
Gentlemen:
The following bids for repairs to Jefferson Street Bridge over Norfolk Southern
Railway, Contract I, were opened and read before the Council of the City of Roanoke
at a regular meeting held on Monday, May 2, 1994:
BIDDER
Lanford Brothers Co., Inc.
Corte Construction Co., Inc.
Allegheny Construction Co., Inc.
TOTAL AMOUNT
$127,071.00
176,500.00
204,500.00
On motion, duly seconded and unanimously adopted, the bids were referred to you
for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council.
Sincerely, ~61.,~_
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP: sm
pc: Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
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
May 6, 1994
File #514-57
The Honorable William White, Sr., Chairperson )
William F. Clark ) Committee
Charles M. Huffine )
Gentlemen:
The following bids for asphalt concrete overlays and pavement profiling of various
streets within the City of Roanoke were opened and read before the Council of the
City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, May 2, 1994:
BIDDER BASE BID ALT. i ALT. 2
Adams Construction Co.
L. H. Sawyer Paving
Co., Inc.
S. R. Draper Paving
Co., Inc.
$1,163,168.30
1,251,105.80
1,268,641.70
$49,500.00
49,500.0ff
49,500.00
$249,820.00
252,299.00
260,820.00
On motion, duly seconded and unanimously adopted, the bids were referred to you
for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council.
Sincerely, ?~
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP: sm
pc: Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
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
May 6, 1994
File #51
James F. Douthat, Attorney
Woods, Rogers and Hazlegrove
P. O. Box 14125
Roanoke, Virginia 24038-4125
T. L. Plunkett, Jr., Attorney
Plunkett and Logan
305 First Street, S. W., Suite 300
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Gentlemen:
A request of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., and William Hunt Staples, et al., to withdraw a
petition to rezone a . 6636-acre and a . 8091-acre portion of a tract of land containing
62.5379 acres, adjacent to Interstate 581 and the terminus of Broad Street, N. W.,
identified as Official Tax No. 2250101, from LM, Light Manufacturing District, and
RS-3, Residential Single Family District, to C-2, General Commercial District,
subject to certain conditions proffered by the petitioners, was approved by the
Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, May 2, 1994.
Sincerely,
City Clerk
MFP: sm
pc:
Trustees of Valleyview Wesleyan Church, 2302 Oakland Boulevard, N. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Mr. John J. Showalter and Ms. Cleo S. Nolley, 3914 Greenland Avenue, N. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Mr. and Mrs. Wayne C. Bowman, 3908 Greenland Avenue, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24012
Ms. Belva Perrine and Mr. Harlin Perrine, 3836 Greenland Avenue, N. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Mr. and Mrs. Billy D. Creger, 3822 Greenland Avenue, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24012
James F. Douthat, Attorney
T. L. Plunkett, Attorney
May 6, 1994
Page 2
pc:
Ms. Norma J. Ridenhour and Ms. Augusta J. Dillon, 3902 Greenland Avenue,
N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Ms. Sofia R. Dominguez, 3810 Greenland Avenue, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia
24012
Mr. and Mrs. Fred H. Atalla, 3802 Greenland Avenue, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24012
Mr. and Mrs. John B. Noftsinger, 3730 Greenland Avenue, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24012
Mr. and Mrs. Randolph M. Mann, 3724 Greenland Avenue, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24012
Mr. and Mrs. William H. Gibbs, 3710 Greenland Avenue, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24012
Ms. Norma Findley Ramsey Cabaniss, 261 Locust Street, Tax Department,
Hartford, Connecticut 06114
Ms. Anne Foster, 2322 Oakland Boulevard, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Ms. Sarah Crawford, 3534 Courtland Road, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Ms. Patricia Nutter, 2328 Oakland Boulevard, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Dr. Paula Willis, 3835 Darlington Road, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. Edmond A. Damus, 1920 Deyerle Road, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24018
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Steven J. Talevi, Assistant City Attorney
Willard N. Claytor, Director of Real Estate Valuation
William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner
John R. Marlles, Agent, City Planning Commission
Evelyn D. Dorsey, Acting Zoning Administrator
¢1 ~ /~1 ~' -- ~ ~[I~ ~O~Ce of the City Manager
May 4, 1994
The Honorable David A. Bowers, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mayor Bowers and Council Members:
Subject: Wal-Mart
At your meeting on Monday, May 2, 1994, at which time the
request of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., and William Hunt Staples,
et al., to rezone portions of property in the vicinity of Valley
View Mall was withdrawn, Council requested information on next
steps related to this proposed development. This letter will
attempt to set forth what can be anticipated to the best of our
ability.
As has been previously stated on numerous occasions, the
25 acre site on which Wal-Mart plans to build is already zoned
C-2, General Commercial; therefore, no further zoning action by
City Council is required. The original rezoning request dealt
with two small parcels of adjoining property, no longer deemed
essential by Wal-Mart for its proposed development. The Planning
Commission will review the proposed site plan at its regular
meeting on Wednesday, May 4, 1994. Under Sec. 36.1-577 of the
City Code, the Planning Commission shall review and approve all
comprehensive development plans for any development which
includes the construction of a building in excess of 100,000
square feet of total gross floor area. The Planning Commission's
review will include the following considerations:
(a)
The compatibility of the development with its environment
and provision for such things as grading, screening,
lighting, and landscaping;
(b)
The ability of the development to provide for the convenient
and safe internal and external movement of vehicles and
pedestrians; and
(c) The location and adequacy of necessary drainage, sewage,
utilities, and erosion and sediment control measures.
Room 364 Municipal Building 215 Churcl~ Avenue. S W Roanoke. Virginia 24011 1591 (703) 981-2333
Mayor Bowers and Council Members
May 4, 1994
Page 2
Assuming the Planning Commission's approval, Wal-Mart will be
able to obtain building permits and proceed with development.
The City administration will continue to work with
representatives of Wal-Mart, Watts, Faison, and others with
interests in the Valley View area toward agreements dealing with
traffic issues. These might be two-party or multi-party
agreements addressing existing conditions as well as the possible
new connection from 1-581 to Valley View Boulevard Extended.
Wal-Mart has stated that they seek a two-party agreement prior to
Planning Commission consideration of the comprehensive plan. It
may be possible that Wal-Mart will present an agreement signed by
an appropriate representative of Wal-Mart within this time frame
that the City administration would recommend to City Council.
Whenever there is an agreement among the parties, it will be
brought to Council for your review and public consideration.
I hope this information is responsive to Council's request.
Please contact me if there are further questions for which the
administration could provide answers.
Respectfully,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH:WFC:pr
CC:
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
James D. Grisso, Director of Finance
William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Edmond A. Dumas, 1920 Deyerle Road, S. W.
Sarah Crawford, 3534 Courtland Avenue, N. W.
Anne Foster, 2322 Oakland Boulevard, N. W.
Patricia Nutter, 2328 Oakland Boulevard, N. W.
Dr. Paula Willis, 3835 Darlington Road, S. W.
Roanoke City Planning Commission
April 11, 1994
The Honorable David A. Bowers, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject:
Request from Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and William Hunt Staples, et al,
represented by James F. Douthat, attorney, and T. L. Plunkett, attorney,
that a portion of properties in the northwest quadrant of the City in the
Valley View Mall area, more specifically described as a northwestern
.8091 acre portion of Official Tax No. 2250101, currently zoned LM,
Light Manufacturing District, be rezoned to C-2, General Commercial
District, and a northern .6636 acre portion of property beating Official
Tax No. 2250101, currently zoned LM, Light Manufacturing District and
RS-3, Residential Single Family District, be rezoned to C-2, General
Commercial District, such rezoning to be subject to certain conditions
proffered by the petitioner.
I. Background:
Purpose of the rezoning request is to provide for the incorporation of two (2)
small tracts of land (total of 1.473 acres) into the adjoining 25 acre parcel for the
construction of a retail sales facility (Wal-Mart Supercenter).
Petition to rezone was filed on February 9, 1994. The following conditions were
proffered by the petitioners:
The property will be combined by properly approved plat with the
adjacent 25 acre parcel (identified as Tax No. 2370102).
The exterior treatment of the proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter will be
compatible architecturally with commercial buildings at Valley View
Shopping Center.
Room 162 Municipal Building 215 Chumh Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2344
Members of Council
Page 2
April 11, 1994
The exterior of the Wal-Mart Supercenter visible from Interstate Route
581 will be architecturally compatible with the other exterior walls of the
building. The rear loading and receiving areas will be screened from I~
581.
A landscaping plan compatible with the existing combination of berm and
vegetation in use at Valley View Shopping Center will be extended along
Interstate Route 581.
A form, 7460-1, Notice to Proposed Construction, will be filed with the
Federal Aviation Administration for a determination by the FAA that the
construction would have no substantial adverse effect on the safe and
efficient utilization of the navigable air space or on the operation of the
air navigation facilities.
Plannine Commission oublic hearing was held on Wednesday, March 2, 1994
(draft minutes attached). Mr. James Douthat, attorney, appeared before the
Commission on behalf of the petitioners.
Mr. Douthat summarized the rezoning request noting that it would be possible to
construct the Wal-Mart Supercenter on the 25 acre site already presently zoned
C-2. Mr. Douthat referenced a letter, dated 2/14/94, to Mr. Sparks, Acting
Chief of Economic Development (attached), which detailed what Wal-Mart was
willing to do as far as road construction. Mr. Douthat indicated that Wal-Mart
was concerned with the traffic situation and was willing to work with the City and
other property owners to provide the connector road to 1-581.
Mrs. Dorsey, City Planner, gave the staff report noting that staff was
recommending approval of the requested rezoning because it was a logical
extension of the existing C-2 zoning in the area. Mr. Marlles, Chief of
Community Planning, advised the Commission that since the preparation of the
staff report, the Planning Department had received numerous calls from citizens
who were concerned with the potential traffic impact from the development.
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works, appeared before the
Commission to summarize the status of the proposed connector with 1-581. Mr.
Clark noted that the proposed interchange was only a concept at this time and that
there was no guarantee that the interchange would be approved by the state or
federal government.
Commission members, staff and the petitioner's representatives discussed the
legality of proffering the proposed connector roadway and other on-site and off-
site improvements.
Members of Council
Page 3
April 11, 1994
Mr. John Knihb (Land Development Inc.) summarized the sequence of events of
the Wal-Mart project. He noted that numerous meetings had been held with
Faison, Watts and City staff regarding the project. He said he thought it would
be inappropriate to delay him further while he was doing everything in his power
to make the road happen.
Mr. Bradshaw noted that he had only seen the petition for six days and had just
received the traffic study at this meeting. He noted that it was the Commission's
charge to look at the request from a good planning perspective and that the
petitioner had to convince him that the petition was right.
There was extensive discussion regarding the traffic impact of the proposed
development and the various traffic studies that had been done in connection with
the proposed development and surrounding area.
Ms. Anne Foster (2322 Oakland Boulevard, NW) appeared before the
Commission and stated that she lived in the Valley View Mall area and the City
was trying to destroy the residents with this rezoning. Ms. Foster also noted that
she was only 10 minutes away from the Wal-Mart in south Roanoke and another
one was not needed in her area. She commented on the other established
businesses in the area and the impact that a Wal-Mart would have on them.
Ms. Sarah Crawford (3534 Courtland Road, NW) appeared before the
Commission and stated that she liked the Wal-Mart store, but did not feel one
was needed in her neighborhood. She said that she was very concerned about the
traffic, the school children, and the potential for a disaster at Valley View Mall
(i.e., fire).
Reverend Randy Garner (Valley View Wesleyan Church, 2302 Oakland
Boulevard, NW) appeared before the Commission and stated that his biggest
concern was the traffic at Valley View Mall. He said that he appreciated the City
trying to address the new ramp because he realized trying to get offand on 1-581
was a real issue.
Mr. John Showalter (3914 Greenland Avenue, NW) appeared before the
Commission and asked whether or not Avalon or Broad Street would be opened
up to through traffic. He also asked if anything would be done to Huff Lane
Park.
Mr. Bill Gibbs (3710 Greenland Avenue, NW) appeared before the Commission
and stated that he had lived in the area since 1976. He said that the development
of Valley View Mall had not been a great problem to him and that his greater
concern was the traffic. He said that he was glad that no roads had been opened
Members of Council
Page 4
April 11, 1994
from the residential area. He said that he liked to see the City doing well, but
his concern was that no streets lead from the shopping area to the neighborhood
and no business be located behind Greenland Avenue.
Mr. Bradshaw stated he felt the Commission needed further information as far as
traffic was concerned.
In response to a question from a Commission member, Mr. Marlles stated that
it would be possible for the petitioner's request to be tabled until the
Commission's April meeting and still be heard by City Council at their April 1 lth
public hearing.
In response to a question from Mr. Butler, Mr. Knibb stated that a delay would
stop the subdivision and comprehensive development plan review process.
II. Issues:
Zoning of the two (2) small parcels is LM, Light Manufacturing District and RS-
3, Residential Single Family District. The surrounding zoning pattern in the area
is as follows: to the north is C-2, General Commercial District; to the south and
west, across 1-581, is LM, Light Manufacturing District; and to the east and far
south (Oakland Boulevard and Greenland Avenue area) is RS-3, Residential
Single Family District.
Land use of the two (2) small parcels is currently vacant, undeveloped property.
Surrounding land uses in the area is as follows: to the north is a vacant 25 acre
tract adjoining Valley View Boulevard (south of the Sears store in the mall); to
the east is a vacant 62 acre tract which adjoins the single family residences along
Greenland Avenue; to the far south is an elementary school, a 12 acre vacant,
undeveloped tract and a church; and to the west, across 1-581, is vacant,
undeveloped land.
Utilities are available to the larger site of which these two (2) parcels will become
a part. All engineering and storm water management issues would be addressed
and resolved as part of the comprehensive site development plan review process
required for the construction of the proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter on the
adjoining 25 acre tract.
Access to the property is via the internal shopping center ring road, Valley View
Boulevard. No access is proposed nor will be permitted to any adjoining
residential collector streets, such as Oakland Boulevard, Greenland Avenue or
Broad Street. As indicated on the general site plan accompanying the rezoning
petition, direct access to the site is being proposed via a connector to 1-581. To
Members of Council
Page 5
April 11, 1994
date, numerous discussions have taken place between the Virginia Department of
Transportation, Faison (developers of the shopping center) and representatives for
Wal-Mart, Inc. however, no final plans nor commitments have been made.
According to a City staff analysis report prepared in 1978 when the original
rezoning took place for the shopping center development, traffic impacts was a
major issue addressed at that time. The report concluded that the proposed
commercial zoning of the overall site (160 acres) would produce roughly the same
peak hour traffic as the existing industrial zoning designation of the property if
it were fully developed. Furthermore, the report stated that the anticipated traffic
generation could be mitigated by the Hershberger Road improvements.
Eo
Industrial land in the City has been identified as a valuable economic asset and
should be protected. However, due to the fact that the majority of the adjoining
tract (25 acres) is currently zoned C-2, General Commercial District of which this
1.473 acres is to be a part, this particular land area is not considered valuable for
industrial development.
F. Comprehensive Plan recommends:
Commercial development is carefully evaluated to ensure minimal conflict
with residential areas and to promote good land use;
2. Neighborhood character and environmental quality be protected.
3. Encourage appropriate infill development.
III. Alternatives:
A. City Council deny the rezoning request.
Zoning of the subject property would remain LM, Light Manufacturing
District and RS-3, Residential Single Family District. The proposed use
of the 1.473 acre tract as part of the proposed adjoining development
would not be allowed to occur. The Wal-Mart Superstore could still be
developed on the 25 acre tract already zoned C-2, General Commercial
District.
Land use would remain vacant, undeveloped property available for infill
industrial development at some future date.
3. Utilities would be unaffected.
Members of Council
Page 6
April 11, 1994
Access to the site would not be an issue due to the fact that the
development of the adjoining commercially zoned 25 acre tract would be
a "use-by-right", subject to the requirements set forth in the zoning
ordinance for comprehensive development plan review.
Industrial land remains protected despite the fact that the site is not
suitable for industrial development. The same applies to the residentially
zoned portion of this 1.473 acre land area requested for rezoning despite
the fact that this area lies within an all-port approach area and further
residential development is strongly discouraged.
Comprehensive Plan issues as set forth could be followed at a later date.
City Council approve the rezoning request.
Zoning of the subject property would become conditional, C-2, General
Commercial District and the incorporation of the two (2) parcels (1.473
acres) into the adjoining 25 acre tract would occur as part of the
development of the Wal-Mart Supercenter retail sales facility.
Land use would be part of the Wal-Mart Supercenter retail sales facility
site, a part of the Valley View regional shopping mall.
Utilities would not be an issue. Storm drainage concerns and other design
or engineering issues will be addressed and resolved during comprehensive
site development plan review and approval process for the entire site.
Access to and from the property will be provided by the existing public
and private internal road system of the shopping center with possible
direct access from 1-581 via a proposed interchange south of the proposed
development site. Future traffic generation impacts on the area are
currentiy being studied by the project engineers, the City Traffic Engineer
and VDOT.
Industrial land although not preserved for industrial development, is
appropriately developed given the location of this 1.473 acre tract as it
adjoins the 25 acre commercially zoned parcel proposed for development
as part of the shopping center. Suitable development of the residentially
zoned portion of this request is also facilitated given the restrictions and
suggested prohibition of further residential development within an airport
approach surface area.
Members of Council
Page 7
April 11, 1994
6. Comprehensive Plan issues as set forth would be followed.
IV. Recommendation:
The Planning Commission, by a vote of 5-2 (Mr. Butler and Mrs. Coles voting for the
rezoning reques0 recommended denial of the rezoning request based on the finding that
there was insufficient time for the Commission or staff to evaluate the potential traffic
impacts of the proposed development on the existing road system surrounding Valley
View Mall.
Respectfully submitted,
Charles A. Price, Jr., Chairman
Roanoke City Planning Commission
JRM:EDD:mpf
attachments
cc: Assistant City Attorney
Director of Public Works
City Engineer
Building Commissioner
Zoning Administrator
Economic Development Specialist
Attorneys for the Petitioners
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLEP, X
215 C~urch Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Telephone: (703) 981-2~41
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy City Clerk
February 10, 1994
File #51
Charles A. Price, Jr., Chairperson
City Planning Commission
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Price:
Pursuant to Section 36.1-690(e) of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, I am enclosing copy of a petition from James F. Douthat, Attorney,
representing Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., and Williams Hunt Staples, et al, requesting
that a . 6636 acre and a. 8091 acre portion of a tract of land containing 62.5379 acres,
adjacent to Interstate 581 and the terminus of Broad Street, identified as Official Tax
No. 2250101, be rezoned from LM, Light Manufacturing .District, and RS-3,
Residential Single Family District, to C-2, General Commercial District, subject to
certain conditions proffered by the petitioners.
z-'"' ~-~/ ~;~'Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP: sm
r/wal-mart
Enc.
pc:
The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Roanoke City Council
James F. Douthat, Attorney, Woods, Rogers and Hazlegrove,
P. O. Box 14125, Roanoke, Virginia 24038-4125
~rohn R. Marlles, Agent, City Planning Commission
Evelyn D. Dorsey, Acting Zoning Administrator
Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner
Steven J. Talevi, Assistant City Attorney
VIRGINIA:
BEFORE THE COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF ROANOKE
IN RE:
Rezoning of a .6636 acre and a .8091
acre portion of a tract of land
containing 62.5379 acres adjacent
to Interstate 581 and the terminus
of Broad Street bearing Tax
No. 2250101 from LM Light Manufacturing
District and RS-3 Residential District
to C-2 General Commercial District,
such rezoning to be subject to
certain conditions
PETITION FOR
REZONING
TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL FOR THE CITY
Inc. has entered into an agreement
Katherine Watts, Ellen Watts, Mary
OF ROANOKE
(1) Wal-Mart Stores,
with William Hunt Staples,
W. Crutchfield, Margaret W. Turpin, Elizabeth Staples Weber,
Abram Penn Staples, Allen Watts Staples, Jr., Jean Showalter
Strom-Olsen and John Strom-Olsen, English Showalter, Jr. and
Elaine Showalter, David Watts Showalter and Ranea Showalter to
purchase two portions of a tract of land bearing Tax No.
2250101, the first, which contains .8091 acres, is currently
zoned LM-Industrial District, and the second, which contains
.6636 acres, is currently zoned LM-Industrial and RS-3
Residential District (the "Property"). The Property is to be
combined with an adjacent parcel bearing Tax Identification
No. 2370102 containing 25 acres.
(2) The 25 acre tract (Tax Identification No. 2370102)
and the Property are currently unoccupied. Pursuant to 36.1-
690, Code of the City of Roanoke (1970), as amended, the
199680
- 2 -
petitioners request the Property be rezoned from LM-Industrial
District and RS-3 Residential District to C-2, General
Commercial District, subject to certain conditions, in order
that the Property and the adjacent 25 acre parcel may be used
as the location of a Wal-Mart Supercenter and for retail and
commercial stores.
(3) The petitioners believe the rezoning of the Property
will further the intent and purpose of the City's zoning
ordinance and comprehensive plan in that the combination of
the Property with the adjacent 25 acre tract will allow the 25
acre tract to be used for the location of a major retail
facility to be constructed thereon and on the Property and
will cause the Property to be used in a manner consistent with
adjacent commercial property. The proposed development and
use will also result in an increase in the real estate tax
base of the City of Roanoke, provide additional Jobs to
citizens of the City, conform to existing commercial uses in
the area and along Route 581, and allow the development of the
proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter to be consummated in a more
practical and efficient matter.
(4) Wal-Mart hereby proffers and agrees that, if the
property is rezoned as requested, the rezoning will be subject
to and the petitioners will abide by the following conditions:
M L99680
- 3 -
1. The Property will be combined by properly
approved plat with the adjacent 25 acre parcel (Tax No.
2370102).
2. The exterior treatment of the proposed Wal-Mart
Supercenter will be compatible architecturally with commercial
buildings at Valley View Shopping Center.
3. The exterior of the Wal-Mart Supercenter
visible from Interstate Route 581 will be architecturally
compatible with the other exterior walls of the building. The
rear loading and receiving areas will be screened from I.-581.
4. A landscaping plan compatible with the existing
combination of berm and vegetation in use at Valley View
Shopping Center will be extended along Interstate Route 581.
5. A form 7460-1, Notice to Proposed Construction,
will be filed with the Federal Aviation Administration for a
determination by the FAA that the construction would have no
substantial adverse effect on the safe and efficient
utilization of the navigable air space or on the operation of
the air navigation facilities.
(5) The following documents are attached hereto:
Vicinity Map;
Appraisal Map No. 225;
Plat of property to be rezoned;
List of adjacent property owners.
M 199680
- 4 -
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
WAL-MART STORES, INC.
By
James F. Douthat, Esq.
WILLIAMS HUNT STAPLES, ET AL.
T.L. Plunkett, Jr., Esq.
James F. Douthat, Esq.
WOODS, ROGERS & HAZLEGROVE, P.L.C.
Dominion Tower, Suite 1400
10 South Jefferson Street
P.O. Box 14125
Roanoke, VA 24038-4125
(703) 983-7600
!199680
2~4120
LOCK HAVI~
ADJACENT OWNERS
Address
Jean B. Showalter, Et al.
1272 Rookland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
City of Roanoke--Roundhill School
2020 Oakland Blvd. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Jean B. Showalter, Et al.
1272 Rookland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Roanoke Area Association
c/o ARC--Bob Huddleston
P.O. Box 6157
Roanoke, VA 24017
for Retarded Citizens
First National Exhange Bank Trustees/Peter Huff
P.O. Box 14061
Roanoke, VA 24038
City of Roanoke, Virginia
Andrews Road, NW
Roanoke, VA 24017
City of Roanoke--Huff
Huff Lane NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Lane School
First National Exchange Bank of Virginia et al.
P.O. Box 14061
Roanoke, VA 24038
Sears Roebuck and Company
3333 Beverly Road
Hoffman Estates, IL 60179
Roanoke Leggett Realty
1016 Church St.
Lynchburg, VA 24505
Valley View Associates LTD
121 W. Trade St.
1900 Interstate Tower
Charlotte, NC 28202
Tax Map Number
2250101
2250102
2250103
2250105
2360101
2360102
2370101
2370102
2370103
2370104
2370107
Address
Noro-V&lle¥ View Associates Limited Partnership
121 W. Trade Street
1900 Interstate Tower
Charlotte, NC 28202
Noro-Valle¥ View Associates Limited Partnership
121 W. Trade Street
1900 Interstate Tower
Charlotte, NC 28202
Noro-Valle¥ View Associates Limited Partnership
121 W. Trade Street
1900 Interstate Tower
Charlotte, NC 28202
Noro-Valley View Associates Limited Partnership
121 W. Trade Street
1900 Interstate Tower
Charlotte, NC 28202
Tax Map Number
2370108
2370110
2370111
2370112
2
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
Address
Trs. Valleyview Wesleyan Church
2302 Oakland Blvd. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
John J. Showalter or Cleo $.
3914 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Nolley
Wayne C. & Mary E. Bowman
3908 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke VA 24012
Norma Jean Ridenhour or Augusta Jeanette Dillon
3902 Greenland Ave.
Roanoke VA 24012
Belva Perrine or Harlin Perrine
3836 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke VA 24012
John C. & Virgie C.
3836 Greenland Ave.
Roanoke VA 24012
Perrine
NW
Billy Dean & Alice
3822 Greenland Ave
Roanoke VA 24012
Marie Creger
· NW
Billy Dean & Alice Marie Creger
3822 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke VA 24012
Billy Dean & Alice Marie Creger
3822 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Sofia R. Dominguez
3810 Greenland Ave
Roanoke, VA 24012
Fred H. & Isabelle J. Atalla
3802 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Tax Map Number
2250104
2250501
2250502
2250503
2250504
2250505
2250506
2250507
2250508
2250509
2250510
M#199795
Address
John B. & Mary K. Noftsinger
3730 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Randolph M. & Jane $. Mann
3724 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
William H. & Alyce A. Gibbs
3710 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
William H. & Alyce A. Gibbs
3710 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Norma Findley Ramsey Cabaniss
261 Locust St. - Tax Dept.
Hartford, CT 06114
Tax Map Number
2250601
2250602
2250603
2250604
2250605
M#199795
Roanoke City Planning Commission
March 2, 1994
DRAE
Minutes
The regular meeting of the Roanoke City Planning Commission was held on Wednesday, March
2, 1994, in the City Council Chambers. The meeting was called to order at 1:32 p.m., by
Chairman Charles A. Price, Jr. Attendance was as follows:
Present:
John P. Bradshaw, Jr.
Paul C. Buford, Jr.
Gilbert E. Butler
Carolyn H. Coles (late)
Barbara N. Duerk
Richard L. Jones
Charles A. Price, Jr.
The following items were considered:
1. Aooroval of Minutes - February_ 2, 1994
There being no additions and/or corrections to the February 2, 1994, minutes, Mr. Buford
moved they be approved. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Duerk and approved 6-0.
~
Reauest from Wal-Mart and William Hunt Staples, etals
Property located in the Valley View Mall Area
Pt. Official Tax No. 2250101, rezone from LM and RS-3 to'C-~, conditional
Mr. James Douthat, attorney, appeared before the Commission. He reviewed the history of the
Huff Farm rezoning to C-2 for the current Valley View Mall shopping area and future
commercial development. He said that the access for the development was from the ring road.
He said that his client was now asking for a rezoning of two small sections of property adjacent
to the 25 acre commercially zoned tract for the purpose of allowing construction of a Wal-Mart
superstore. He said that the future question was what would happen to the Watts property
adjacent to the 25 acre tract. He said that Wal-Mart had entered into an agreement about a year
ago with the owners of the Huff Farm and came to the City to began working out plans to build
the center. He said that the 25 acre, commercially zoned tract was sufficient for a superstore.
Mr. Douthat referenced a letter, dated 2/14/94, which he had written to Mr. Phillip Sparks of
the City's Economic Development Department. He said that in that letter (Attachment 1) he
detailed what Wal-Mart was willing to do as far as road construction was concerned and Wal-
Mart's projected employment and sales figures.
Mr. Douthat stated that Wal-Mart could presently build on the 25 acre site, by right, with
comprehensive development plan approval. He said that Wal-Mart was requesting a rezoning
in order to allow two things to happen: (1) truck parking and dock at a location that would be
shielded from 1-581, the main entrance to the City; and (2) allow a private roadway with
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 2
March 2, 1994
additional landscaping. Mr. Douthat explained that there was a 13 foot grade difference between
the docks and 1-581. He said that Wal-Mart did not want to put their loading docks and trucks
at the rear of the building, as they have done at other stores, because of the visibility from 1-
581. He also noted that he had made a proffered condition relative to the exterior treatment of
the rear of the Wal-Mart building. Mr. Douthat presented the Commission with a proposed
landscaping plan which showed 50+ trees on the site and further noted that the location of the
docks and landscaping proposed made for good planning.
Mr. Douthat again stated that Wal-Mart could build on the 25 acre site today and gain access
to their property from the ring road, however, Wal-Mart wanted to look at the entire area. He
said that Wal-Mart was concerned about what would happen in the entire area as far as traffic
was concerned. He said that in 1991, a traffic study had been conducted and a road was
proposed though the Watts' property. He said that Wal-Mart was studying traffic even though
they already had a right to use the property. He said that Wal-Mart had entered into
negotiations with Faison (Valley View) and Watts and a tentative agreement, where Wal-Mart
would reserve enough land for the connector road, had been reached. He said that if Wal-Mart
could get a road coming beside them, down Valley View Boulevard, then they would build the
road and dedicate it to the City. He said that he believed the Wattses would do the same. He
said that the proposed rezoning and subsequent site plan review and approval, would allow them
the necessary acreage in which to build the connector road. Mr. Douthat noted that Wal-Mart
anticipated widening the ring road promptly. He pointed out a berm on the landscape plan, but
noted that he was not sure of the height of the berm because of the tentative nature of the
connector road.
Mrs. Coles arrived at this time (1.47 p.m.)
Mr. Douthat read the following proffers:
The property will be combined by properly approved plat with the adjacent 25
acre parcel (tax no. 2371012).
The exterior treatment of the proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter will be compatible
architecturally with commercial buildings at Valley View Shopping Center.
The exterior of the Wal-Mart Supercenter visible from Interstate Route 581 will
be architecturally compatible with the other exterior walls of the building. The
rear loading and receiving areas will be screened from 1-581.
A landscaping plan compatible with the existing combination of berm and
vegetation in use at Valley View Shopping Center will be extended along
Interstate Route 581.
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 3
March 2, 1994
5. A form 7460-1, Notice to Proposed Construction, will be filed with the Federal
Aviation Administration for a determination by the FAA that the construction
would have no substantial adverse effect on the safe and efficient utilization of the
navigable air space or on the operation of the air navigation facilities.
Mr. Bradshaw asked how much fill would be placed over the low point of the building.
Mr. Art Clanton (project engineer, CEI Engineering Associates) appeared before the
Commission and said that there was 22 feet at the lowest point. He noted that 54" storm drain
pipe and 12" of sewer pipe would be relocated. He said there would be six to seven feet of fill
added to the front of the building.
Mr. Bradshaw asked what the relative height elevation of the interstate was to the finished floor
of the building.
Mr. Clanton stated that it was 2-3 feet above the finished floor.
Mr. Bradshaw asked if you would be looking down on the site.
Mr. Clanton stated that was correct.
Mr. Price asked if there was any lettering on the 1-581 side of the ~buil.ding.
Mr. Clanton stated that normally the back of Wal-Marts were not normally signed. However,
Wal-Mart normally liked to sign any street frontage. He said that he assumed the signage issue
would be addressed during site plan review.
Mr. John Knibb, representing Wal-Mart, appeared before the Commission and stated that Wal-
Mart would be seeking their typical signage on the front of the store. He said he had asked
headquarter where they stood on interstate signage and they had informed him they would like
to have signage along the interstate and would be asking for it later during site plan review or
with a variance request.
Mr. Douthat said that if the Commission required a proffer relative to signage, then he could
put something together.
Mr. Bradshaw questioned the need for the fifth proffer, noting that if it was required by the
State, then it should not be a part of the petition.
Mr. Douthat stated that staff had requested that proffer, but he could remove it if necessary.
Mrs. Dorsey gave the staff report on the matter. She noted that she would not restate what had
already been presented by Mr. Douthat. She noted that Wal-Mart currently had a 25 acre tract,
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 4
March 2, 1994
zoned C-2, with no conditions and the proposed Wal-Mart could be built with no rezoning
necessary. She said that because the petitioner wanted to be sensitive to the traffic from 1-581
they elected to put the building parallel to 1-581 and put the loading area at a lower elevation.
She noted that the .6+ acre was currently zoned Single Family and Light Manufacturing and
that the other .86+_ acre tract was zoned Light Manufacturing. She said that if the rezoning
were successful, then those two tracts of land would be incorporated with the adjoining 25 acres
by subdivision. She noted the zoning in the immediate area: C-2 and LM to the north; LM to
the south; vacant RS-3 to the east; and C-2 and LM across 1-581 to the west. Mrs. Dorsey
further noted that the property was currently vacant and undeveloped and that utilities and traffic
access would be available through the private ring road in Valley View Mall. She noted that
Planning staff was recommending approval of the requested rezoning which contained less than
two acres. She said that it was good planning and a logical extension of the C-2 zoning.
Mr. Price said that he was looking at the rear of the building and asked if there would be
shrubbery and trees planted in that area.
Mrs. Dorsey responded that the minimum landscaping requirements set out in the zoning
ordinance would be exceeded by the plantings proposed by Wal-Mart.
Mr. Marlles advised the Commission that since the preparation of the staff report, numerous
calls from people in the area had been received who were concerned with the potential traffic
impact of the proposed development.
Mrs. Duerk said that she realized there would be no access from the residential collector streets
and that it was proposed to put a connector street on the Wal-Mart property to connect to a
proposed interchange. She noted that there had been no mention of an interchange in the
recently adopted Thoroughfare Plan and noted her concern about timing and funding of such
an interchange. She asked if there was any information about the proposed interchange.
Mr. Marlles stated that Mr. Clark was available for a presentation on that issue.
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works, appeared before the Commission and stated
that he could only talk about the concept of an interchange with 1-581, because it was only a
concept at this time. He noted that whether or not Wal-Mart was constructed, the City had had
a desire for an additional interchange on the interstate to serve the area. He said that the City
knew there was a need for relief on Hershberger Road and other areas. He said that before the
Wal-Mart project was ever announced, a traffic consultant had been engaged to look at an
interchange with 1-581. He noted that in previous thoroughfare plans that had been an
interchange at 10th Street, which had been dropped. He said that since that time, the concept
has been pursued for some type of interchange north of the interstate, which would open up
additional vacant land in the area, which is ripe for development. He said that it was only a
concept. He presented an aerial photo of the area and noted that the photo did not show what
the interchange would look like. He further stated there was no guarantee of an interchange and
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 5
March 2, 1994
the decision of how an interchange would be funded has not been made because there has been
no approval by the state or federal government. He said that the City believed a strong case
could be made for the interchange but the big hurdle was its close proximity to the Hershberger
Road interchange. He said that once traffic data was available, the City would attempt to justify
an interchange to the state and federal governments.
Mr. Price asked if the interchange would connect to any residential street.
Mr. Clark responded that he did not envision any connection to a residential area.
There was discussion about the former 10th Street widening project and interchange and the
impact that it could have had on the neighborhoods in the 10th Street area. Mr. Price voiced
his concern about the impact on the neighborhood in the future. He said that the large volumes
of traffic would separate a community.
Mr. Clark commented that the City would have to hold meetings with citizens to get their input
on the interchange.
Mr. Bradshaw asked if consideration had been given to just putting an off- and on-ramp off of
1-581, similar to the one at Williamson and Orange Avenue.
Mr. Clark said that had been studied. He said that engineers had stated t~hat only a north bound
off ramp and south bound ramp may be justified.
Mr. Bradshaw asked the timing of the study.
Mr. Clark said that it would be 30-45 days before the consultant's report was received and
probably six to nine months away from getting a reaction from the state and federal
governments.
Mr. Bradshaw asked about the road that Wal-Mart would dedicate. He noted it was not a
proffered condition.
Mr. Douthat said that the rezoning was for 1.4 acres and the road was located on the 25 acres
already properly zoned. He said that it was illegal to proffer something on property that was
not subject to the rezoning. He said that he was willing to enter into an agreement with the City
about the road.
Mr. Bradshaw said he thought the Commission needed to look at the whole picture. He said that
the petitioner was willing to proffer planting around the entire building and he asked why the
roadway couldn't be proffered also.
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 6
March 2, 1994
Mr. Butler asked if the petitioner could make a proffer that involved property not the subject of
the petition to rezone.
Mr. Dibling said that the petitioner had made all kinds of proffers not relative to the acreage to
be rezoned.
Mr. Douthat said that he disagreed with that, noting that the landscaping and building facade
were part of the property requested for rezoning. He said that he could not proffer a road if he
did not know if the City was going to build.
Mr. John Knibb appeared before the Commission and stated that the problem with proffers were
that they ran with the land and by that he would be proffering a section of public road which had
no connection with any other public road at this point in time. He said that it was not a question
of whether he was willing to do that, because he was ready to commit to do so. He said that
it was the vehicle by which the commitment could be made was the problem. He said that he
was suggesting that the vehicle was not a zoning proffer, but an agreement that would be entered
into with Wal-Mart, the City and others. He said that the Commission was exactly right in
identifying that that commitment should be made and he was prepared to make that commitment
in the form of a public/private agreement that ran with the land.
Mr. Bradshaw said that he could not vote on a promise.
Mr. Knibb said that he could proffer that the agreement would be d~ne~
Mr. Bradshaw said that all he wanted was the road across the property, if the interchange came
into play.
Mr. Butler referenced a Fairfax County zoning case on contract zoning and asked if this would
be contract zoning. He asked if it was acceptable to have a condition relative to the road as part
of the rezoning.
Mr. Douthat said that he thought that would be an illegal proffer because the road did not touch
the property to be rezoned.
Mr. Butler again raised the Virginia Supreme Court case on contract zoning, and asked how we
could accomplish what the City wanted and what the petitioner wanted without running into
trouble with that court case.
Mr. Dibling said that he did not think there would be any objection where the City, the
developer as well as other landowners in the area were agreeable to entering into an agreement.
He said that the agreement would not tie the hands of the Commission or City Council with
respect to a rezoning. He said that the rezoning would be independent of the agreement.
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 7
March 2, 1994
Mr. Butler asked if the multi-party agreement needed to exist prior to the Commission's
approval of the rezoning, so the Commission would not have to approve the rezoning subject
to an agreement.
Mr. Dibling said that the agreement did not have to exist for the Commission to make a
recommendation with respect to the rezoning.
Mr. Butler asked if the Commission needed to stay away from the appearance that they were
issuing an approval on the petition subject to the petitioner agreeing to certain off-site
improvements.
Mr. Bradshaw said that if both parties agreed that they wanted a contract, then the Supreme
Court decisions did not make any difference.
Mr. Douthat said that there would come a time when an agreement would be needed from the
Wattses as well as the other landowners.
Mr. Butler asked what would happen if the property were rezoned and the landowners were
unable to come to an agreement.
Mr. Douthat said that Wal-Mart would still build.
Mr. John Knibb said that in order to understand the sequence of events of the Wal-Mart project,
the Commission would have to go back over a year ago. He said that private access was
available on the ring road and the City brought to Wal-Mart's attention that there had been a
study of the 1-581 interchange near the property in question. He said that numerous meetings
had been held with Faison, Watts and City staff and legal counsel had been hired to prepare an
agreement. He said that Wal-Mart was trying to be the catalyst for making the road happen.
He said that he thought it would be inappropriate to delay him further while he was doing
everything in his power to make the road happen. He said there was no reluctance on Wal-
Mart's part to doing what the Commission wanted done. He said that the 1-581 interchange did
not become a reality, other recommendations had been made; i.e., 2 signals on the ring road.
He said that the process had been delayed for a long time while Wal-Mart tried to be a good
neighbor and a good citizen. He said that Wal-Mart wanted to be a part of the community and
needed to get this part of the approval so they could move forward with subdivision and
comprehensive development plan review.
Mr. Bradshaw said that he had only seen this petition for six days and just received the traffic
study at this meeting.. He said that it was the Commission's charge to look at the request from
a good planning perspective. He said that the petitioner had to convince him that the petition
was right.
Mr. Price asked Bob Bengtson, City Traffic Engineer, for comments relative to the proposal.
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 8
March 2, 1994
Mr. Bengtson appeared before the Commission and stated that approximately one month ago,
the traffic impact analysis was presented to him. He said that since that time, he had reviewed
the initial results and responded back to the petitioner. He said that he had received the revised
document back this morning and had not had an opportunity to review it. He said that there
were still some outstanding analyses that needed to be done and he understand that they would
be done this week. He noted that he did not have the full analysis in front of him and he did
not want to comment in any official capacity at this time. In response to a question, Mr.
Bengtson said that the study was done in late October, 1993.
Mr. Price asked if the City had any information about peak holiday traffic.
Mr. Bengtson said that the traffic volumes in late October needed to be factored up into a design
hour using traffic volumes recorded throughout the year at Valley View Mall.
Mr. Marlles commented that the Planning staff had not had an opportunity to review the revised
traffic information. He noted that there was a traffic analysis done in 1991 for Faison that
looked at different issues. He also said that an independent traffic study had not been done.
Mr. Bengtson stated that the 1994 study done by Wilbur Smith and Associates had been done
at the request of the City, not Faison.
Mr. Butler asked what the impact on the future extension of Valley View Boulevard would be
if the petitioner were denied and the proposed building had to be re,~onhgured.
Mr. Marlles said that he could not answer that question because he had not seen the traffic
analysis.
Mr. Butler asked what control the City would have in attempting to improve the extension of
Valley View Boulevard if the property were developed for Wal-Mart.
Mr. Marlles said that the project would have to go through comprehensive development plan
review and would come back to the Commission for that review.
Mr. Butler said that if the petition was denied, the superstore could be reconfigured and built
on the properly zoned 25 acres. He asked what authority the staff would have to reject a site
plan, if the site plan conformed to ail Cede requirements, but staff knew there would be an
enormous traffic impact.
Mr. Marlles said that it was a legal question.
Mr. Dibling said he would have to research that question and was not prepared to answer it.
Mr. Bradshaw asked if the traffic date was pre- or post-Lowe's opening.
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 9
March 2, 1994
Mr. Bengtson said he did not recall when Lowe's opened and was not sure that had a real
significant bearing on the study.
Mr. Price asked the radius of the study as far as dispersement of vehicles was concerned.
Mr. Bengtson said that the analysis was confined to the commercial area of Valley View Mall
Mr. Price asked if the City's analysis looked at the traffic once it hit Hershberger Road.
Mr. Bengtson said that the Wilbur Smith study took into account the Hershberger Road area.
Mr. Buford asked if the Wilbur Smith study stated that an interchange was desirable if there was
any significant development south of Valley View Mall.
Mr. Bengtson said that was correct.
Mr. Price asked why the 1991 study had been undertaken.
Mr. Phil Sparks, Acting Chief of City Economic Development, appeared before the Commission
and stated that the City was looldng at the possibility of opening up land on the east and west
sides of 1-581 and had requested a traffic analysis of the area.
Mr. Price asked if the Williamson/Plantation Road area had been lo0ke~ at.
Mr. Sparks responded that it had not.
Mr. Bob Landino (Barakos-Landino Design Group) appeared before the Commission and stated
he had prepared the traffic analysis for Wal-Mart. He gave each Commissioner a copy of the
analysis. Mr. Landino said that it was fair to say that the issue of whether or not traffic is
relevant in the rezoning of 1 1/2 acres was something that Wal-Mart did not want to consider
at the early stages of their project. He said that Wal-Mart wanted to know how safe access
could be provided to the ring road and then to their site. He said that the study included traffic
generated from the site to the Hershberger Road interchange, and did not include any analysis
of the interchange itself because of the Wilbur Smith study. He said that the report includes
existing conditions and future no-build conditions and future build conditions during a typical
Friday afternoon peak hour and Saturday afternoon peak hour. He noted that the study had
determined there was a high accident rate at the intersection of Valley View Boulevard and
Valley View Boulevard West, due to the short distance allowed for traffic to merge. He said
that factoring had occurred taking into consideration development of a Wal-Mart store. He said
that three separate conditions had been analyzed: (1) existing peak hour conditions; (2) future
no-build conditions; and (3) future build conditions. He said that 6-7 comments on the study
had been made by the City Traffic Engineer and received last week. He said that he had
responded to most of the comments, with the exception of one traffic volumes. He said that Mr.
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 10
March 2, 1994
Bengtson had been concerned that the traffic volumes were low and needed to be increased to
reflect a 30th highest hour traffic volume. Mr. Landino said that he agreed with that
assessment and had increased the volumes by 26% based on data provided by the City. He said
that the revised study he had given the Commission was a reflection of the increased volumes.
Mr. Landino went over the levels of service and noted that Wal-Mart has agreed to make
improvements to Valley View Boulevard at Valley View Boulevard West because of the high
accident frequency because of traffic merging north of the intersection and not because of the
operational deficiencies. Mr. Landino further discussed possible traffic improvements in the
Valley View Mail area, noting that signalization of Valley View Boulevard North and West and
the ring road was a possibility. He said that Wal-Mart had agreed to signalize the intersection.
He said that Valley View Boulevard North, at the ring road, would warrant a signal and Faison
had agreed to pay for that signal if necessary. He also noted that a signal was a possibility at
Valley View Boulevard West, however, Wal-Mart did not impact that intersection. He stated,
however, that Wal-Mart might agree to pay a pro-rata share. He said that he believed Wal-Mart
would be helping traffic by contributing to the road system even if the interchange were not
built.
Mr. Buford asked if the study took into consideration the driving habits of Roanokers.
Mr. Landino said that he was familiar with local driving habits.
Mr. Bradshaw said that the study only involved the interior routing Of traffic within the Valley
View Mall area.
Mr. Landino stated that was correct.
Mr. Bradshaw said that the crucial point was Hershberger Road.
Mr. Landino said that he had met with staff from the outset of the project and asked if the
Hershberger interchange should be studied and were told no because the City's study addressed
that area. He said that as a single developer, he had looked to the road system to get to regional
access.
Ms. Coles asked if holiday traffic was a consideration.
Mr. Landino said that the 30th highest traffic hour is used in traffic analysis.
Mr. Marlles noted that staff had received requests from a number of citizens wishing to speak.
Mr. Price said that each person requesting to speak would be given five minutes to make
comments. He asked that those persons not repeat what had been previously been stated.
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 11
March 2, 1994
Ms. Anne W. Foster (2322 Oakland Boulevard, N.W., 24012) appeared before the Commission
and stated that she lived in the Valley View Mall area and the City was trying to destroy the
residents with this rezoning. Ms. Foster commented on the noise from the incoming and
outgoing airplanes, the City trucks, the noise from 1-581, as well as some City services. She
said that there were churches and schools in the neighborhood and she was concerned about the
the children. Ms. Foster also noted that she was only 10 minutes away from the Wal-Mart in
south Roanoke and another one was not needed in her area. She commented on the other
established businesses in the area and the impact that a Wal-Mart would have on them. She said
that she did not want a rezoning and wanted her area to remain a community. She said that
better paying industry was needed and that politics and money were the main interests behind
this rezoning.
Mrs. Sarah Crawford (3534 Courtland Road, N.W., 24012) appeared before the Commission
and stated that she liked the Wal-Mart store, but did not feel one was needed in her
neighborhood. She said that she was very concerned about the traffic, the school children and
the potential for a disaster at Valley View Mall (i.e., fire).
Reverend Randy Garner (Valley View Wesleyan Church, 2302 Oakland Boulevard, 24012)
appeared before the Commission and stated that his biggest concern was the traffic at Valley
View Mall. He said that he appreciated the City trying to address the new ramp because he
realized trying to get off and on 1-581 was a real issue.
Mr. John Showalter (3914 Greenland Avenue, NW, 24012) appeared l~efore the Commission
asked whether or not Avalon or Broad Street would be opened up to through traffic. He also
asked if anything would be done to Huff Lane Park.
Mrs. Dorsey pointed to the map and noted that no access to any of the commercial property
would be from the adjoining residential subdivision. She said that good planning tried not to
mix commercial and industrial traffic with residential traffic.
Mr. Showalter said that it seemed that everyone had kept their promise about there not being
any access through the residential area. He asked if the Watts property was being considered
in any of this and if there would be a chain-link fence installed.
Mrs. Dorsey responded that right now the Watts property was zoned RS-3.
Mr. Showalter commented that the property was under the flight path.
Mrs. Dorsey said that staff did not recommend residential development in the area.
Mrs. Coles asked when the FAA form would be filed, and if an adverse impact were found,
would the matter come back to the Commission.
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 12
March 2, 1994
Mrs. Dorsey said that it was important for staff to get the information from the FAA before the
comprehensive development review.
Mr. Bill Gibbs (3710 Greenland Avenue, NW, 24012) appeared before the Commission and
stated that he had lived in the area since 1976. He said that the development of Valley View
Mall had not been a great problem to him and that his greater concern was the traffic. He said
that he was glad that no roads had been opened from the residential area. He said that he liked
to see the City doing well, but his concern was that no streets lead from the shopping area from
the neighborhood and no business be located behind Greenland Avenue. He asked about the
temporary road and asked if that would come off of Greenland or Huff Lane.
Mr. Douthat pointed out the area of the temporary road and noted that it would not come off
of any residential street.
Mrs. Duerk asked citizens if they were opposed to sidewalks from the residential area.
There was comment from Messrs. Showalter and Gibbs, and it was Mr. Gibbs' feeling that a
walkway was not desirable because people would park on residential streets to use it.
Mrs. Duerk said that she had two other concerns-lighting and increased water runoff.
Mrs. Dorsey said that those concerns would be addressed during c0mp.rehensive development
plan review.
Mr. Bradshaw said that there seemed to be potential confusion about the zoning and use of the
Watts property and noted that it was fair to say that it was currently zoned RS-3, but in all
likelihood it would become commercial sometime in the future. He said that part of that land
could possibly contain the interchange if it were ever built.
Mr. Clark noted that the Watts property was not the subject to today's rezoning and would
possibly be the subject of future rezonings requested by other landowners. He said that he could
not say when that would be.
Mr. Douthat said that regarding the walkway or berm, his client would probably put in a fence
and that would be discussed during site plan review. He again stated that the purpose of the
rezoning was twofold: (1) better location for loading dock and exterior of rear of building; and
(2) more landscaping on small strip.
Mr. Price questioned the term "screening" as set forth in proffer 3.
Mr. Marlles said that staff would look at the existing topography, fencing and landscaping as
part of the screening. He said that staff had not received a detailed landscape plan, and
therefore, had not reviewed it.
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 13
March 2, 1994
Mr. Price asked what would prevent the berm from being removed if the property were sold to
someone else.
Mr. Dibling said that proffers ran with the land.
Mr. Knibb said that he would agree to amend his proffer pertaining to the screening to specify
the berm in the area of the rezoning as shown subject to the site plan review.
Mr. Butler said that in looking at the big picture, construction of an interchange would be the
best scenario. He asked if the property had to be developed and the current usage and demand
shown, in order to justify the interchange.
Mr. Bengtson said that he did riot know how the Feder/d Highway Administration would look
at the situation.
Mr. Jones said that he lived in the area and was very much interested in what happened to the
property. He asked if the road system would be sufficient to handle the traffic generated by
Wal-Mart if the interchange were not constructed.
Mr. Bengtson said that the loop ramp from northbound Valley View Boulevard was already at
capacity. He said that any major development that added traffic would likely force the ramp to
operate above capacity.
Mr. Bradshaw said that he thought it was time to get another access into Valley View Mail. He
said he thought this was an ideal project, the proposed plan was great, but Hershberger Road
was on the verge of being "strangled" by traffic.
Mr. Marlles said that it was obvious that the petitioner, the City and Faison wanted to see the
connector road built, but noted that it was not going to happen in the near future. He said that
it was, therefore, incumbent upon the staff and the Commission to look at the existing traffic
impact of this proposed development very carefully. He said that Planning staff and the
Commission needed an opportunity to look at the traffic situation.
Mr. Price said that the Commission's options were, unless the petitioner was willing to table the
matter, to either vote the matter up or down.
Mr. John Kibb said that the Planning staff had had the traffic study for some time. He said he
did not think it was fair to say that the Planning staff had not seen it. He said that because the
City wanted them to take into consideration the future 1-581 interchange, he has had to go back
to the other landowners many times. He begged the Commission not to table the rezoning
request.
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 14
March 2, 1994
Mr. Price said that the Commission had a choice of either denying the request or continuing the
request. He said that the Commission was trying to resolve some of the problems that staff has
not been able to fully address. He said that the Commission was trying to find a solution to
potential problems in the community.
Mr. Knibb said that the petition in no way provided a problem because they had the right to
develop the 25 acres. He said that the question was whether the applicant has been responsive
to the concerns and he said that he had been responsive.
Mr. Douthat said that when Wal-Mart came to Roanoke in June, 1993, they had spent from that
time until the present getting things lined up with the City, Watts and Faison. lie said that Wal-
Mart's option would be up very quickly. He said that the rezoning allowed Wal-Mart to be
placed in the City with the truck area screened and the preservation of the land for the future
connector road. He said that if the matter were tabled, the Wal-Mart would have to make a
decision on whether they wanted to go ahead with the construction. He said that if he was going
to be told that they could not build on the land because of the traffic, then he needed to know
that so he could get back with his clients. He said that a delay would jeopardize the project.
Mr. Bradshaw asked where the agreement was.
Mr. Douthat said that he had a draft written agreement.
Mr. Price said that the matter was important to the Commission. H~ sai~l that the Commission
had only gotten to see this request one time. He said that the Commission wanted to encourage
development but they also needed time to evaluate the impact of the development.
Mr. Douthat said that his client had been meeting repeatedly with the City since June, 1993.
He said he could go in tomorrow and get a building permit on the 25 acre tract.
Mr. Bradshaw reminded the petitioner that the Commission would have to review the
comprehensive development plan.
Mr. Douthat stated he was aware of that.
Mr. Jones asked Mr. Knibb if he would be able to present the Commission with other
information if the request was tabled for 30 days.
Mr. Knibb said that the Commission had a letter that was their commitment of what they would
do. He said that he had met months ago with the City Manager and City Attorney on a
public/private agreement. He said the agreement was now being reviewed by Faison and Watts.
Mr. Price said that the petitioner had stated they could do the project the way they see fit
because they own the land. He said that the Commission was not the problem in trying to get
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 15
March 2, 1994
the agreement. He said that if the Commission approved the request, they wanted something
that was better than what was there at the current time and for the Commission to make such
a decision, they needed certain information. He said the Commission had been looldng at the
request for 5-6 days and the petitioner was now asldng them to approve something that would
affect a neighborhood in the City. He said that the Commission could not turn around and make
a decision without ail the facts.
Mrs. Duerk said that she thought Wal-Mart had a lot to gain by the rezoning because they would
be getting a road that would go right into their property. She said that the road would encourage
Roanoke to put pressure on the state to get the interchange. She commented on the water
problems in the area and further stated that the Commission did not have all the information they
needed to make a decision.
Mr. Knibb said that the Commission was putting the applicant in a position to commit
themselves to things that they should not have to commit to. He said that he could not make
people agree to a public/private partnership. He said that he thought the agreement would
happen and the rezoning would facilitate that. He asked the Commission to consider whether
the applicant had been responsive to the City.
Mr. Bradshaw said he felt the Commission needed further information as far as traffic was
concerned.
Mr. Butler again questioned whether or not the multi-party agreement would be considered
contract zoning and whether that was illegal.
Mr. Knibb said that traffic was a moot point as it related to the rezoning. He said that he could
build on the 25 acre and the traffic issue would remain. He said that if a multi-party agreement
is not reached, he would not be acquiring the Watts property and there would be no rezoning
of the other portions of land. He said that the rezoning was a critical step in the timing of the
project.
Mr. Price said he did not like the location of the building as it related to 1-581.
Mr. Knibb said that he had moved the building forward because of comments from staff.
Mr. Marlles explained to the Commission that the petitioner's request could be heard again by
the Commission in April and the petitioner could still he heard by City Council at their April
meeting.
Mr. Price asked if that would give staff adequate time for review.
Mr. Marlles said that he thought it would give the Planning staff an opportunity to review the
traffic study.
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 16
March 2, 1994
Mr. Buford said that additional time would also give the four parties time to work out the
agreement.
Mr. Knibb said that he had been doing that for some time and a continuation might just stop the
whole process. He said that he did not know what the Commission would gain by tabling the
matter.
Mr. Buford said that his concern was the traffic impact. He said that he could not see any
development going in there without some understanding of where the traffic would go.
Mr. Bob Landino appeared before the Commission and stated that the Wilbur Smith report
studied the justification for a 1-581 interchange assuming speculative development of all the
undeveloped land. He said that whether an interchange could be justified remained to be seen.
He noted that in terms of rezoning the 1.5 acres, the traffic issue, with or without the rezoning,
absolutely negligible. He said that the development of the site without the rezoning would
produce the same traffic, as well as other issues. He said that he believed the appropriate forum
was site plan review.
Mr. Butler asked if the petitioner would be at a disadvantage if the matter was tabled for 30
days.
Mr. Knibb said that they would because that would stop the subdivision and comprehensive
development plan review.
Mr. Talevi suggested that a motion be made.
Mr. Butler moved the petition be approved as amended.
The motion was seconded by Mrs. Coles.
A roll call vote was taken and the request was disapproved as follows:
Mr. Bradshaw - no
Mr. Butler- yes
Mr. Buford- no
Mrs. Coles- yes
Mrs Duerk - no
Mr. Jones - no
Mr. Price- no
Roanoke City Planning Commission Minutes
Page 17
March 2, 1994
3. Report on ISTEA applications.
Mr. Bradshaw advised that he would be abstaining from discussion and vote on the matter due
to his position on the Transportation Board. He asked to be excused from the meeting.
Mr. Marlles briefly talked about last year's ISTEA process and noted that the City had received
two requests for ISTEA funding this year. The requests were received from the Virginia
Museum of Transportation and Valley Metro. He noted that representatives from both
organizations were present to answer questions. Mr. Mar[les asked that the Commission take
action on the requests in order to keep on the cycle of the next Council meeting and to assure
submission to VDOT in a timely manner.
Mr. Price asked Mr. Bengtson if he had any comments.
Mr. Bengtson said that he had not comments at this time other than requesting the Commission's
endorsement so that the requests could be forwarded on.
Both representatives from Valley Metro and the Virginia Museum of Transportation had no
comments, but said they would be glad to answer any questions.
There being no further discussion, Mrs. Duerk moved to approve the request. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Buford and approved 6-0 (Mr. Bradshaw abstaining)..
4. Other Discussion
Mr. Price advised staff to poll the Commission on a suitable time for the Commission's
organizational meeting.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:35 p.m.
WOODS, ROGERS HAZT FGROVE
703/983-7662
Danville Office
.
February 14, 1994
Phillip F. Sparks,
Economic Development Department
City of Roanoke
Room 355
Municipal Building
215 Church Avenue
Roanoke, VA 24011
Re: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Dear Phil:
Confirming your meeting February 10, 1993, with John M.
Knibb, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. is prepared to go forward
immediately to construct a Wal-Mart Store on the 25 acre Huff
tract, Official Tax No. 2370102 adjacent to Valley View Mall.
Pursuant to Wil Dibling's letter of September 15, ~993, this site
can be developed by right and will accommodate a 126,000 square
foot Wal-Mart Store employing approximately 250 people. Wal-Mart
prefers, however, to construct a Wal-Mart Supercenter with
199,026 square feet employing approximately 450 people and a
total project cost of approximately $11.3 million. Although it
is impossible to predict sales revenue, Wal-Mart does an average
of $300 in sales per square foot which would translate into
annual retail sales of approximately $60 Million and annual sales
tax to the Commonwealth and the City of $2.7 million. Given
retail sales in the City of Roanoke and the inclusion of a
grocery store, this Wal-Mart Supercenter is anticipated to do
better than average.
Wal-Mart has carefully considered the highest and best use
of its site, the needs of adjacent property owners and the
community at large and intends to commit in this letter to
actions that it believes will provide for the best use of
property in the area of Valley View Mall and solve traffic
concerns for the entire 1-581/Hershberger/Airport corridor. The
traffic analysis submitted under separate cover indicates that
existing traffic problems and traffic generated by Wal-Mart can
M#200122
WOODS~ ~ ~ I-~ATl Ff2ROVE
Phillip F. Sparks
February 14, 1994
Page 2
be accommodated by the signalization of one intersection. Wal-
Mart proposes a much more comprehensive solution.
On February 9, 1994, Wal-Mart filed the attached conditional
rezoning petition for 1.46 acres of the adjacent Watts property
to allow the construction of the Supercenter as generally shown
on the attached preliminary February 10, 1994, Site Development
Plan for Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Roanoke, Virginia by CEI
Engineering Associates, Inc. In addition to the conditions
proffered in the rezoning, Wal-Mart is prepared to enter into
agreements with the City and adjacent property owners (Valley
View Associates, Ltd., Hersch Associates, Sears Robuck & Co. and
Watts, et al.) for the dedication and construction of an
extension of Valley View Boulevard from Tire America to a
compressed urban diamond interchange near the common property
line of Watts and Round Hill School as generally shown on the
attached February 10, 1994, Faison Associates Preliminary Site
Plan. To this end Wal-Mart will reserve an area along the
northeastern boundary of its property for a 35 to 50 foot
buffer/berm adjacent to Huff Lane Park and for a right-of-way
approximately 90 feet in width which would accommodate a four or
five lane Valley View Boulevard Extended. Wal-Mart will also
provide a replacement site for Tire America inasmuch as the
proposed Valley View Boulevard Extended, as evolved through
meetings and engineering initiatives among Watts, Valley View
Associates, Hersch Associates and the City of Roanoke, requires
its relocation.
Wal-Mart will also construct, to public road standards, that
portion of Valley View Boulevard Extended traversing its property
at whatever time viable public road connections are available
both north and south and will upgrade the existing Valley View
Mall ring road by the addition of a fourth lane through property
currently owned by Sears Robuck & Co. Wal-Mart will also provide
additional right-of-way for this ring road widening on its site.
The location and dedication of the buffer/berm, right-of-way and
Tire America site are not proffered in the rezoning as it is
assumed the exact location and construction of Valley View
Boulevard Extended must be determined by private agreement and
not as part of the rezoning.
It is imperative for the construction of the Supercenter and
the dedication and construction of Valley View Boulevard Extended
that Wal-Mart be assured it may legally subdivide its property in
order to add the tracts which are the subject of the pending
rezoning, to provide the replacement site for Tire America and to
dedicate the Valley View Boulevard Extended right-of-way through
M#200122
WOODS, I~ERS ~ I-~711~GROVE
Phillip F. Sparks
February 14, 1994
Page 3
the Wal-Mart site. In order to allow and induce Wal-Mart to
construct the Supercenter, to dedicate and construct the proposed
road improvements and to provide the replacement parcel for Tire
America, it is necessary for the City to actively pursue
comprehensive agreements with Wal-Mart and the adjacent property
owners, to assist and guide Wal-Mart in the pending rezoning and
to facilitate the subdivision of the Wal-Mart site. To this end
Wal-Mart suggests that an amount equal to 1% of the 4 1/2% sales
tax on retail sales generated by the Supercenter, $600,000 per
year, be set aside for the future construction of the proposed
interchange. Such initiatives by the City are appropriate and
necessary as the construction of Valley View Boulevard Extended
from its present terminus to an interchange on 1-581 will, in
fact, provide for the general'health, safety, welfare and
convenience of the public by resolving current and future public
access and safety considerations in the overall vicinity of the
Airport, Towne Square Shopping Center, Hershberger Road and
Valley View Mall.
JFD:srg
cc:
Very truly yours,
'JAMES F. DOUTHAT
John M. Knibb, President
Land Dev., Inc.
870 Greenbrier Circle
Chesapeake, VA 23320
M#200122
R~?~rgKE TI-~ES & NORLD-NEW$
~ NUMBER 325t9897
PUBLISHER'S FEE - $104.00
JAMES F DUOTHAT
10 S JEFFERSON ST
SUITE
PO BOX 14125
ROANOKE VA 24038
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CiTY I]F ROANOKe
AFFIDAVIT OF PUOLICATION
I, (THE UNDERSIGNED) AN AUTHORIZED
R~PRESENTATIYE OF THE TIMES-WORLD COR-
PORATION, NHICH CORPORATION IS PUBLISHER
OF THE ROANOKE TIMES g mORLO-NEWS, A
DAILY NEWSPAPER PU3LISHED IN ROANOKE, IN
THE STATS OF VIRGIqlA, DO CERTIFY THAT
THE ANNEXED NOTIC6 WAS PUJLISHED IN SAID
NEWSPAPERS ON TH~ FOLLOWING D&TES
03/25/94 MORNING
04/01/94 MORNI'~G
WITNESS? .THZ.2~ 5TH.DAY OF &PRIL 1994
AUTHORIZSD 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, April 11,
1994, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber in the Municipal
Building, 215 Church Avenue, S.W., on the question of rezoning from
LM, Light Manufacturing District, and RS-3, Residential Single
Family District, to C-2, General Commercial District, the following
property:
A .6636-acre and a .8091-acre portion of a tract of land
containing 62.5379 acres adjacent to Interstate 581 and
the terminus of Broad Street bearing Official Tax No.
2250101, 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 23rd day of March , 1994.
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk.
PubLish twice in the Roanoke Times and World-News, once on Friday, March 25,
1994, and once on Friday, April 1, 1994.
Send publisher's affidavit to:
Send bill to:
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Room 456, Municipal Buliding
215 Church Avenue, S. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536
James F. Douthat, Attorney
Woods, Rogers and Hazlegrove
P. O. Box 14125
Roanoke, Virginia 24038-4125
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 4~6
Roanoke, Vir~nia 24011
Telephone: (703) 981-2~41
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy City Clerk
March 24, 1994
File #51
James F. Douthat, Attorney
Woods, Rogers and Hazlegrove
P. O. Box 14125
Roanoke, Virginia 24038-4125
Gentlemen:
T. L. Plunkett, Jr., Attorney
Plunkett and Logan
305 First Street, S. W., Suite 300
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at
a regular meeting held on Monday, April 6, 1981, a public hearing will be held on
Monday, April 11, 1994, at 7:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor of the Municipal Building, 215
Church Avenue, S. W., on a request of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., and William Hunt
Staples, et al, that a .6636-acre and a .8091-acre portion of a tract of land
containing 62.5379 acres, adjacent to Interstate 581 and the terminus of Broad
Street, N. W., identified as Officiai Tax No. 2250101, be rezoned from LM, Light
Manufacturing District, and RS-3, Residential Single Family District, to C-2,
General Commercial District, subject to certain conditions proffered by the
petitioners.
For your information, I am enclosing copy of a notice of the public hearing, an
Ordinance and a report of the City Planning Commission with regard to the request
for rezoning. Please review the documents and if you have questions, you may
contact Steven J. Talevi, Assistant City Attorney, at 981-2431. Questions with
regard to the Planning Commission report should be directed to John R. Marlles,
Chief of Community Planning, at 981-2344.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC£AAE
City Clerk
MFP:sm
Apr
Enc.
James F. Douthat
T. L. Plunkett, Jr.
March 24, 1994
Page 2
pc:
Trustees of Valleyview Wesleyan Church, 2302 Oakland Boulevard, N. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Mr. John J. Showalter or Ms. Cleo S. Nolley, 3914 Greenland Avenue, N. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Mr. and Mrs. Wayne C. Bowman, 3908 Greenland Avenue, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24012
Ms. Norma J. Ridenhour or Ms. Augusta J. Dillon, 3902 Greenland Avenue,
N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Ms. Belva Perrine or Mr. Harlin Perrine, 3836 Greenland Avenue, N. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Mr. and Mrs. Billy D. Creger, 3822 Greeniand Avenue, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24012
Ms. Sofia R. Dominguez, 3810 Greenland Avenue, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia
24012
Mr. and Mrs. Fred H. Atalla, 3802 Greenland Avenue, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24012
Mr. and Mrs. John B. Noftsinger, 3730 Greenland Avenue, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24012
Mr. and Mrs. Randolph M. Mann, 3724 Greenland Avenue, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24012
Mr. and Mrs. William H. Gibbs, 3710 Greenland Avenue, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24012
Ms. Norma Findley Ramsey Cabaniss, 261 Locust Street, Tax Department,
Hartford, Connecticut 06114
Ms. Anne Foster, 2322 Oakland Boulevard, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Ms. Sarah Crawford, 3534 Courtland Road, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24012
MARY F.
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
March 24, 1994
File #51
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of the Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen:
Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke on
Monday, April 6, 1981, I have advertised a public hearing to be held on Monday,
April 11, 1994, at 7:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on
a request of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., and William Hunt Staples, et al, that a . 6636-acre
and a .8091-acre portion of a tract of land containing 62.5379 acres, adjacent to
Interstate 581 and the terminus of Broad Street, N. W., identified as Official Tax
No. 2250101, be rezoned from LM, Light Manufacturing District, and RS-3,
Residential Single Family District, to C-2, General Commercial District, subject to
certain conditions proffered by the petitioners.
For your information, I am enclosing copy of the City Planning Commission report
with regard to the abovedescribed public hearing.
If you desire additionai information prior to the public hearing, please do not
hesitate to call me.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk
MFP: sm
Apr
Enc.
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of the Roanoke City Council
March 24, 1994
Page 2
pc:
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Steven J. Talevi, Assistant City Attorney
Willard N. C]aytor, Director of Real Estate Valuation
William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner, w/notice of public hearing and
ordinance
John R. Marlles, Agent, City Planning Commission, w/notice of public
hearing and ordinance
Evelyn D. Dorsey, Acting Zoning Administrator, w/notice of public
hearing and ordinance
MARY F. PABKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 2~011
Telephone: (703) 98 I-2~41
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy City Clerk
February 10, 1994
File #51
Charles A. Price, Jr., Chairperson
City Planning Commission
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Price:
Pursuant to Section 36.1-690(e) of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, I am enclosing copy of a petition from James F. Douthat, Attorney,
representing Wal-Mart Stopes, Ine., and Williams Hunt Staples, et al, requesting
that a. 6636 acre and a. 8091 acre portion of a tract of land containing 62.5379 acres,
adjacent to Interstate 581 and the terminus of Broad Street, identified as Official Tax
No. 2250101, be rezoned from LM, Light Manufacturing District, and RS-3,
Residential Single Family District, to C-2, General Commercial District, subject to
certain conditions proffered by the petitioners.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP: s m
r/wal-mart
Enc.
pc:
The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Roanoke City Council
James F. Douthat, Attorney, Woods, Rogers and Hazlegrove,
P. O. Box 14125, Roanoke, Virginia 24038-4125
John R. Mariles, Agent, City Planning Commission
Evelyn D. Dopeey, Acting Zoning Administrator
Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner
Steven J. Talevi, Assistant City Attorney
Address
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
Trs. Valleyview Wesleyan Church
2302 Oakland Blvd. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
John J. Showalter or Cleo S. Nolley
3914 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Wayne C. & Mary E. Bowman
3908 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Norma Jean Ridenhour or Augusta Jeanette Dillon
3902 Greenland Ave.
Roanoke, VA 24012
Belva Perrine or Harltn Perrine
3836 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
John C. & Vtrgie C. Perrine
3836 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Billy Dean & Alice Marie Creger
3822 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Billy Dean & Alice Marie Creger
3822 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Billy Dean & Alice Marie Creger
3822 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Sofia R. Dominguez
3810 Greenland Ave.
Roanoke, VA 24012
Fred H. & Isabelle J. Atalla
3802 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Tax Map Number
2250104
2250501
2250502
2250503
2250504
2250505
2250506
2250507
2250508
2250509
2250510
M%199795
Address
John B. & Mary K. Noftsinger
3730 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Randolph M. & Jane S. Mann
3724 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
William H. & Alyce A. Gibbs
3710 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
William H. & Alyce A. Gibbs
3710 Greenland Ave. NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Norma Findley Ramsey Cabaniss
261 Locust St. - Tax Dept.
Hartford, CT 06114
Tax Map Number
2250601
2250602
2250603
2250604
2250605
M#199795
TO THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
PERTAINING TO THE REZONING REQUEST OF:
Request from Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and Williams Hunt Staples, et al,
represented by James F. Douthat, attorney, and T. L. PlunkeR, Jr., Attorney,
that a portion of properties in the northwest quadrant of the City in the Valley
View Mall area, more specifically described as a northwestern ~8091+ acre portion ~ffi-
of Official Tax No. 2250101, currently zoned LM, Light Manufacturing District be O/davit
rezoned to C-2, General Commercial District, and a northern .6636+ acre portion
of property bearing Official Tax No. 2250101, currently zoned LM,-Light
Manufacturing District and RS-3, Residential Single Family District be rezoned
to C-2, General Commercial District, such rezoning to be subject to certain )
conditions proffered by the petitioner.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) TO-WIT:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
The affiant, Martha Pace Franklin, first being duly sworn, states that she is Secretary 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 mall on the 18th day of February, 1994, notices of a
public hearing to be held on the 2nd day of March, 1994, on the rezoning captioned above to
the owner or agent of the parcels listed below at their last known address:
Parcel
Owner. A~ent or Occupant
Address
2250104
Trustees, Valleyview Wesleyan Chumh
2302 Oakland Blvd.
Roanoke, VA 24012
2250501
John J. Showalter
Cleo S. Nolley
3914 Greenland Avenue
Roanoke, VA 24012
2250502
Wayne C. and Mary E. Bowman
3908 Greenland Avenue
Roanoke, VA 24012
2250503
Norma Jean Ridenhour
Augusta Jeanette Dillon
3902 Greenland Avenue
Roanoke, VA 24012
2250504 Belva Perrine
Harlin Perrine
3836 Greenland Avenue
Roanoke, VA 24012
2250505
John C. and Virgie C. Perrine
3836 Greenland Avenue
Roanoke, VA 24012
2250506
2250507
2250508
Billy Dean and Alice Marie Creger
3822 Greenland Avenue
Roanoke, VA 24012
2250509
Sofia R. Dominguez
3810 Greenland Avenue
Roanoke, VA 24012
2250510
Fred H. and Isabelle J. Attalla
3802 Greenland Avenue
Roanoke, VA 24012
2250601
John B. and Mary K. Nofsinger
3730 Greenland Avenue
Roanoke, VA 24012
2250602
2250603
2250604
2250605
2250102
2370101
2250103
2250105
2360101
2370102
2370103
2370104
2370107
2370108
2370110
2370111
Randolph M. and Jane S. Mann
William H. and Alyce A. Gibbs
Norma Findley Ramsey Cabaniss
Roanoke City School Board
3724 Greenland Avenue
Roanoke, VA 24012
3710 Greenland Avenue
Roanoke, VA 24012
3702 Greenland Avenue
Roanoke, VA 24012
c/o Richard Kelley
Jean B. Showalter, et al
c/o William Watts
1272 Rockland Avenue
Roanoke, VA 24012
Roanoke Area Association for Retarded Citizens P.O. Box 6157
c/o ARC - Bob Huddleston Roanoke, VA 24017
First National Exchange Bank Trustees
for Peter Huff
P. O. Box 14061
Roanoke, VA 24038
Sears Roebuck and Company
Roanoke Leggett Realty
Valley View Associates, Ltd.
P. O. Box 13327
Roanoke, VA 24040
3333 Beverly Road
Hoffman Estates, IL
1016 Church Street
Lynchburg, VA 24505
121 W. Trade Street
1900 Interstate Tower
Charlotte, NC 28202
Noro-Valley View Associates Limil~l 121 W. Trade Street
Partnership 1900 Interstate Tower
Charlotte, NC 28202
Martha Pace Franklin
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, a Notary Public, in the City of Roanoke,
Virginia, this 18th day of February, 1994.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
//- 30-
REVISED AD 2-15-94
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINO BEFORE THE ROANOKB C1TY PLANNINO
COMMISSION
· 0 ~0~ ]~ ~Y CONCg~N:
The Ro~oke City Planing Commission will hold a public h~ng on W~nesday,
M~ch 2, 1994, at 1:30 p.m., or as s~n ther~fter m ~e matter may be h~d, in the City
Council Chamber, rough fl~r, Municip~ Building, 215 Church Avenue, S.W., in order to
consider the following:
R~uest from W~-M~ Stores, Inc. ~d Williams Hunt Staples, et ~, repre~nt~ by
J~es F. Douthat, a~omey, ~d T. L. Plunkett, Jr., At~mey, that a ~on of
pro~ies in ~e no~hwest quadr~t of the City in the V~ley View M~I ~, more
sp~ific~ly descfib~ as a no~hwestem .8091 ~ acre ~on of Offici~ T~ No.
2250101, cu~enfly zon~ LM, Light M~ufactufing Disffict be rezon~ to C-2,
Gener~ Commemial District, ~d a no,hem .6636~ acre ~ion of prope~y b~ng
Offici~ Tax No. 2250101, cu~ently zon~ LM, Light M~ufactufing District ~d RS-
3, Residenti~ Single Family District be rezon~ to C-2, Gener~ Commerci~ District,
such rezoning to be subj~t to cern conditions proffer~ by the petitioner.
A copy of s~d application is available for review in the Office of Community
Planing, R~m 162, Municip~ Building.
All p~es in interest ~d citizens may ap~ on the above date ~d be h~d on the
matter. M~ha P. Fr~in, S~re~
Ro~oke City Pl~ning Commission
...................................................................................................................
Please run in newspaper on Thursday, February 17,
Please bill:
James F. Douthat, Attorney
Woods, Rogers & Hazlegrove
P. O. Box 14125
Roanoke, VA 24038
Please send affidavit of publication to:
1994, and Tuesday, February22, 1994.
Office of Community Planning
Room 162, Municipal Building
215 Church Avenue, S.W.
Roanoke, VA 24011
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
May 2, 1994
The Honorable 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: {?03) 981-2541
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy City Clerk
May 6, 1994
File #77-137
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of a communication from Mayor David A. Bowers requesting input
from the City Manager as to the necessary steps to be followed to ensure that an
interstate connector will be built to link Interstate 581 to Interstate 73, southwest
of the City, which communication was before the Council of the City of Roanoke at
a regular meeting held on Monday, May 2, 1994.
On motion, duly seconded and unanimously adopted, the matter was referred to you
for appropriate response within 90 days.
Sincerely, ~~
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP: sm
Eric.
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
April 28, 1994
The Honorable Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen:
First, I want to take this opportunity to personally commend all of Roanoke City
Council and the administration of our City for taking the early lead last fall in
advocating the routing of the proposed Interstate 73 at, near, or through the
Roanoke Valley.
I was very pleased, as I am sure you all were, that the Virginia Department of
Transportation (VDOT) and the majority of our Virginia Congressional delegation
have now joined with Governor Allen in proposing that the route come through
Montgomery County, along the proposed Smart Road, and then southward through
Franklin County to the Martinsville area to connect with the route in North Carolina.
This is a very good route and it will mean that Roanoke will be, at least, very near
to a north/south interstate running from Detroit to Myrtle Beach. This is what the
citizens of our City want.
I would like to point out to you that the route will be several miles outside of the City
of Roanoke. Accordingly, I believe it is appropriate to begin the process to make
sure that an interstate connector be built from Interstate 581 to Interstate 73
southwest of the City. In the spirit of "valley cooperation" and "regionalism," I
wanted us, at Roanoke City Council, to ask our administration for their advice as to
how to proceed in dealing with our neighboring jurisdictions, VDOT, and others
concerned about how we can best proceed to make sure that there is this direct link
between the City and the proposed Interstate 73 route southwest of Roanoke.
I respectfully request that this letter be placed on the Consent Agenda for the next
regular meeting of Roanoke City Council on Monday, May 2, 1994, and thereafter be
referred to the administration for appropriate response back to Council within 90
days.
Best personal regards to each of you.
Sincerely,
Mayor
DAB :jas
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
May 6, 1994
File #60-467
James D. Grisso
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Grisso:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31963-050294 amending and reordaining certain
sections of the 1993-94 School Fund Appropriations, providing for the close out of
61 school grants that have been completed, resulting in a net reduction of
$462,329.00. Ordinance No. 31963-050294 was adopted by the Council of the City of
Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, May 2, 1994.
Sincerely,
City Clerk
MFP: sm
Enc.
pc:
Charles W. Day, Chairperson, Roanoke City School Board, 1830 Grayson
Avenue, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24012
E. Wayne Harris, Superintendent of Roanoke City Public Schools
Richard L. Kelley, Executive for Business Affairs, Roanoke City Public
Schools
June S. Nolley, Clerk of the Roanoke City School Board
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Diane S. Akers, Budget Administrator, Office of Management and
Budget
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 2nd day of May, 1994.
No. 31963-050294.
VIRGINIA
Government of the
exist.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
1993-94 School Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
WHEREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal
City of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of
Roanoke that certain sections of the 1993-94 School Fund
Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and reordained
to read as follows, in part:
Appropriations
Education
Chapter I Pre-K Expansion 1992-93 (1) ..........
Eisenhower Math/Science Title II 1991-92 (2) ...
Chapter II 1991-92 (3) .........................
Chapter II 1992-93 (4) .........................
Eisenhower Math/Science Title II 1992-93 (5) ...
Alternative Education Computer Equipment (6) ...
Title II-A OK (7) ...............................
Title III Word Perfect Class (8) ...................
Summer Youth Employment 1993 (9) ...................
Summer School Without Walls 1993 (10) ............
Transitional-Vocational Evaluation (11) .......
Child Development Clinic 1992-93 (12) .........
Child Specialty Services 1992-93 (13) .........
Juvenile Detention Home 1992-93 (14) ..........
Preschool Incentive Program 1992-93 (15) ......
Special Education Tuition 1992-93 (16) ........
Parent Resource Center 1991-1992 (17) .........
Special Education Tuition 1991-92 (18) ........
Special Education Inservice 1991-92 (19) ..........
Transitional Services 1991-92 (20) ................
Preschool Incentive Program (21) ..................
Perkins Act 1991-92 (22) ..........................
Specialist for Occupational Transition 1992-93(23)
Apprenticeship 1992-93 (24) .......................
$95,370,697
38,173
30,131
152,840
143,795
50,248
8,010
2,638
1,076
40,987
60,462
673
50 928
63 682
85 098
60 114
271 431
3 773
168 449
2 517
8 413
70 184
226,793
45,338
104,857
Adult Basic Education 1992-93 (25) .................
GED Testing 1992-93 (26) ...........................
Regional Adult Education Specialist 1992-93 (27)...
Perkins Act 1992-93 (28) ...........................
Regional Adult Literacy and Basic Education
1992-93 (29) ....................................
Fishburn Park Environmental Mini-Grant (30) .......
Aviation Magnet School 1992-93 (31) ...............
Adolescent Health Summer Partnership (32) .......
Environmental Education Mini-Grant 1991-92 (33)
Adopt-A-Book 1991-92 (34) .....................
Student Assistance Program 1991-92 (35) .......
Drug Free Schools 1991-92 (36) ................
Environmental Education Grant 1992-93 (37) ....
Student Assistance Program 1992-93 (38) .......
SAT Preparation 1992-93 (39) ..................
Let's Talk 1992-93 (40) ..........................
Revenue
Education
Chapter I Pre-K Expansion 1992-93 (41) ........
Eisenhower Math/Science Title II 1991-92 (42).
Chapter II 1991-92 (43-44) ....................
Chapter II 1992-93 (45) .......................
Eisenhower Math/Science Title II 1992-93 (46).
Alternative Education Computer Equipment (47).
Title II-A OK (48) ................................
Title III Word Perfect Class (49) .................
Summer Youth Employment 1993 (50) .................
Summer School Without Walls 1993 (51-52) ..........
Transitional-Vocational Evaluation (53) ...........
Child Development Clinic 1992-93 (54) .............
Child Specialty Services 1992-93 (55) .............
Juvenile Detention Home 1992-93 (56) ..............
Preschool Incentive Program 1992-93 (57) ..........
Special Education Tuition 1992-93 (58) ............
Parent Resource Center 1991-1992 (59) .............
Special Education Tuition 1991-92 (60) .............
Special Education Inservice 1991-92 (61) ...........
Transitional Services 1991-92 (62) ................
Preschool Incentive Program (63) ..................
Perkins Act 1991-92 (64) ..........................
Specialist for Occupational Transition 1992-93(65)
Apprenticeship 1992-93 (66) .......................
Adult Basic Education 1992-93 (67) .......
GED Testing 1992-93 (68) ....... --- i..i.iii.~ii..[.
Regional Adult Education Specialist 1992-93 (69)
Perkins Act 1992-93 (70) ........................ ~
Regional Adult Literacy and Basic Education
1992-93 (71) .....................................
Fishburn Park Environmental Mini-Grant (72) ........
Aviation Magnet School 1992-93 (73) ................
Adolescent Health Summer Partnership (74) ..........
$ 157,307
7,321
30,582
322,300
73,054
4,431
19,957
22,707
2,045
253
64,891
155,018
334
29,031
2,215
1,049
$95,370,697
38 173
30 131
152 840
143 795
50 248
8 010
2 638
1 076
40 987
60,462
673
50,928
63,682
85,098
60,114
271,431
3,773
168,449
2517
8 413
70 184
226 793
45 338
104 857
157 307
7 321
30 582
322 300
73,054
4,431
19,957
22,707
Environmental Education Mini-Grant
Adopt-A-Book 1991-92 (76) ....................
Student Assistance Program 1991-92 (77) ......
Drug Free Schools 1991-92 (78) ...............
Environmental Education Grant 1992-93 (79)...
Student Assistance Program 1992-93 (80) ......
SAT Preparation 1992-93 (81) .................
Let's Talk 1992-93 (82) ......................
1991-92 (75)..
.. $
2,045
253
64,891
155,018
334
29,031
2,215
1,049
1) Printing
2) In Service
3 Director
4 Counselor
5 Equipment
6 Equipment
7 Teachers
8 Teachers
9 Supplements
030-060-6138-6200-0351)
030-060-6230-6311-0129)
030-060-6231-6665-0114)
'030-060-6232-6231-0123)
'030-060-6233-6311-0821)
~030-060-6435-6100-0821)
030-060-6438-6334-0121)
030-060-6439-6336-0121)
030-060-6440-6549-0129)
10)
11)
Teachers 030-060-6441-6449-0121)
Instructional
Materials (030-060-6501-6222-0614)
(030-060-6502-6554-0138)
(030-060-6503-6554-0138)
(030-060-6504-6554-0138)
(030-060-6507-6553-0124)
12) Coordinator
13) Consultant
14) Consultant
15) Supervisor
16) Tuition
17) Professional
Services
18) Tuition
19) Inservice
20) Instruc-
tional
Materials
21) Health
Services
22) Equipment
23) Social
Security
24) Professional
Services
25) Social
(030-060-6508-6329-0312)
030-060-6591-6329-0313)
030-060-6596-6329-0312)
030-060-6597-6229-0587)
030-060-6598-6553-0614)
(030-060-6599-6553-0311)
(030-060-6750-6136-0821)
(030-060-6752-6333-0201)
(030-060-6753-6138-0313)
Security (030-060-6754-6450-0201)
26) Teachers (030-060-6755-6550-0121)
27) Specialist (030-060-6756-6351-0124)
28) Equipment (030-060-6757-6138-0821)
29) Professional
Services (030-060-6758-6450-0313
30) Instruc-
tional
Materials
31) Instruc-
tional
Materials
(030-060-6903-6200-0614)
(030-060-6906-6307-0614)
$( 1,827)
( 4,077)
(13,053)
7,408
4,851)
10
54
539)
1,234)
14,100
2)
3,006)
3,238)
4,501
341)
78,569)
227)
(156,551)
3,310)
1,379)
25,470)
58,260)
524)
63,564)
1,288
4,051)
4,581)
8,186
899)
43)
32) Nurses
33) Instruc-
tional
Materials
34) Library
Books
35) Teachers
36) Social
Security
37) Instruc-
tional
Materials
38) Teachers
39) Teachers
40) Field
Trips
41) Federal
Grant
Receipts
42) Federal
Grant
Receipts
43) Federal
Grant
Receipts
44) Local Match
45) Local Match
46) Federal
Grant
Receipts
47) Local Match
48) Local Match
49) Federal
Grant
Receipts
50) Federal
Grant
Receipts
51) Local Match
52) Federal
Grant
Receipts
53) Federal
Grant
Receipts
54) State Grant
Receipts
55) State Grant
Receipts
56) State Grant
Receipts
57)
(030-060-6907-6672-0131)
(030-060-6970-6100-0614)
(030-060-6976-6204-0613)
(030-060-6981-6100-0121)
(030-060-6983-6306-0201)
(030-060-6989-6200-0614)
(030-060-6992-6100-0121)
(030-060-6996-6447-0121)
(030-060-6999-6000-0583)
(030-060-6138-1102)
(030-060-6230-1102)
(030-060-6231-1102)
(030-060-6231-1101)
(030-060-6232-1101
'030-060-6233-1102)
030-060-6435-1101)
030-060-6438-1101)
030-060-6430-1102)
030-060-6440-1102)
030-060-6441-1101)
(030-060-6441-1102)
(030-060-6501-1102)
(030-060-6502-1100)
(030-060-6503-1100)
(030-060-6504-1100)
Federal Grant
Receipts (030-060-6507-1102)
$ 51,830)
1,455)
4,747)
8,985)
91)
416)
526)
285)
49
1,827)
( 4,077)
( 5,870)
7,183)
7,408
( 4,851)
10
54
( 539)
1,234)
11,100
3,000
2)
3,006)
3,238)
4,501
341)
58) State Grant
Receipts
59) Federal
Grant
Receipts
60) State Grant
Receipts
61) State Grant
Receipts
62) Federal
Grant
Receipts
63) Federal
Grant
Receipts
64) Federal
Grant
Receipts
65) State Grant
Receipts
66) Fees
67) Federal
Grant
Receipts
68) Fees
69) Federal
Grant
Receipts
70) Federal
Grant
Receipts
71) Federal
Grant
Receipts
72) Local Match
73) Federal
Grant
Receipts
74) Fees
75) State Grant
Receipts
76) Donations
77) Federal
Grant
Receipts
78) Federal
Grant
Receipts
79) Donations
80) Federal
Grant
Receipts
81) Fees
82) Local Match
(030-060-6508-1100)
(030-060-6591-1102)
(030-060-6596-1100)
(030-060-6597-1100)
(030-060-6598-1102)
(030-060-6599-1102)
(030-060-6750-1102)
030-060-6752-1100)
030-060-6753-1103)
030-060-6754-1102)
030-060-6755-1103)
030-060-6756-1102)
030-060-6757-1102)
030-060-6758-1102)
030-060-6903-1101)
(030-060-6906-1102)
(030-060-6907-1103)
(030-060-6970-1100)
(030-060-6976-1103)
(030-060-6981-1102)
(030-060-6983-1102)
(030-060-6989-1103)
(030-060-6992-1102)
(030-060-6996-1103)
(030-060-6999-1101)
$( 78,569
( 227)
(156,551)
3,310)
( 1,379)
( 25,470
(58,260)
( 524)
( 63,564)
1,288
4,051)
4,581
8,186
( 899)
6
43)
51,830)
1,455)
4,747)
8,985)
91)
416)
526)
285)
49
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
May 2, 1994
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
James D. Grisso, Director of Finance
School Board Request for Closeout of Grants
I have reviewed the attached request to close out 61 grants for the
School Board. The request to close out grants is necessary since the grant programs
have been completed.
I recommend that you concur with this request of the School Board.
Director of Finance
JDG/pac
attachment
a:$chooLicf
M. Wendy O'Neil, Vice Chairman
Marilyn C. Curtis
/..-Roanoke
City School Board
P.O. Box 13145, Roanoke, Virginia 24031
C. Nelson Harris
Finn D. Pincus
Ouben' G. Poff
James M. Turner. Jr.
E. Wayne Harris, Supenntendent
June S. Nolley, Clerk of the Board
· 703-98t-2381 · Fax: 703-981-2951
April 20, 1994
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 April 19, 1994 meeting, the Board
respectfully requests City Council to close-out 61 school grants that have been completed,
resulting in a net reduction in appropriation of $462,329.
The Board appreciates the approval of this request.
Sincerely,
J6fle S. Nolley, CPS
Clerk of the Board
re
cc:
Mr. Charles W. Day
Mr. E. Wayne Harris
Mr. Richard L. Kelley
Mr. William L. Murray
Mr. Kenneth F. Mundy
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
Mr. Wilbum C. Dibling
v~Ir. James D. Grisso
s. Ha Farriss (with accounting details)
Excellence in Education
ROANOKE CITY SCBOOL BOARD
Roanoke, Virginia
REOUEST TO CLOSE GRANTS
The sixty one grants listed below have been completed and should be closed. A
net reduction in appropriation of $462,329 results mainly from reduced
activity in the Special Education Tuition accounts due to a change in the
State's method of payment to localities, as well as reduced activity in the
Chapter II, Preschool Incentive, Perkins Act, Apprenticeship and Adolescent
Health Partnership programs. In order that appropriations, revenues and
expenditures for each grant may be equal, the net decrease in appropriation is
necessary.
GRANT
NUMBER DESCRIPTION
INCREASE PAGE
DECREASE) NUMBER
030-060-6137
030-060-6138
030-060-6139
030-060-6140
030-060-6230
030-060-6231
030-060-6232
030-060-6233
030-060-6435
030-060-6436
030-060-6438
030-060-6439
030-060-6440
030-060-6441
030-060-6500
030-060-6501
030-060-6502
030-060-6503
030-060-6504
030-060-6506
030-060-6507
030-060-6508
030-060-6509
030-060-6591
030-060-6596
030-060-6597
030-060-6598
030-060-6599
030-060-6750
030-060-6752
Chapter I Winter 124-93-1
Pre-K Expansion Program
Chapter I Summer 124-93-2
Chapter I Carryover 124-93-3
Eisenhower Math Science 92
Chapter II 91-92
Chapter II 92-93
Eisenhower Math/Science 93
Alternative Education Computer Equip.
Vocational Education Teen Mothers 93
Title II-A OK
Title II Word Perfect
Summer Youth Employment
Summer School Without Walls
Special Educ. Interpreter Training
Transitional-Vocational Evaluation
Child Development Clinic 92-93
Child Specialty Services 92-93
Juvenile Detention Home 92-93
Special Education Jail 92-93
Preschool Incentive 92-93
Special Education Tuition 92-93
Early Intervention Home 92-93
Parent Resource Center 91-92
Special Education Tuition 91-92
Special Education Inservice 91-92
Transitional Services 91-92
Preschool Incentive 91-92
Perkins Act 91-92
Specialist for Occupational Transition
1,827.00)
4,077.00)
13,053.00)
7,408.00
4,851.00)
10.00
54.00
539.00)
1,234.00)
14,100.00
2.00)
3,006.00)
3,238.00)
4,501.00
341.00)
78,569.00)
227.00)
(156,551.00)
(3,310.00)
( 1,379.00)
(25,470.00)
(58,260.00)
( 524.00)
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
April 19, 1994 Page
ROANOKE CITY SCBOOL BOARD
Roanoke, Virginia
REQUEST TO CLOSE GP~Pr$
GRANT
030-060-6753
030-060-6754
030-060-6755
030-060-6756
030-060-6757
030-060-6758
030-060-6816
030-060-6900
030-060-6901
030-060-6903
030-060-6905
030-060-6906
030-060-6907
030-060-6970
030-060-6976
030-060-6980
030-060-6981
030-060-6982
030-060-6983
030-060-6985
030-060-6987
030-060-6989
030-060-6990
030-060-6991
030-060-6992
030-060-6993
030-060-6994
030-060-6996
030-060-6997
030-060-6998
030-060-6999
Net Decrease
DESCRIPTION
Apprenticeship 92-93
Adult Basic Education 92-93
GED Testing 92-93
Regional Adult Education Specialist
Perkins Act 92-93
Regional Adult Literacy & Basic Educ.
Artist In Education 92-93
Project YES 92-93
Hurt Park Tutorial 92-93
Fishburn Park Environmental Minigrant
Chess Program 92-93
Aviation Magnet School 92-93
Adolescent Health Summer Partnership
Environmental Education Minigrant 91-92
Adopt-A-Book 91-92
Magnet Schools 91-92
Student Assistance Program 91-92
Mentor-Teacher Program 91-92
Drug Free Schools 91-92
Impact Aid 91-92
Grants Management 91-92
Environmental Education Grant 92-93
Governor's School 92-93
Magnet Schools 92-93
Student Assistance Program 92-93
Family ERA Program 92-93
Hurt Park Early Childhood 92-93
SAT Preparation 92-93
Impact Aid 92-93
Audio Visual Program 92-93
Let's Talk 92-93
INCREASE
(DECREASE)
63,564.00)
1,288.00
4,051.00)
4,581.00)
8,186.00
899.00)
6.00
43.00)
51,830.00)
1,455.00)
4,747.00)
8,985.00)
91.00)
416.00)
526.00)
285.00)
49.00
s
PAGE
NUMBER
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
6O
61
62
63
April 19, 1994 Page 2
(iT"~
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Roanoke, Virginia
May 2, 1994
Dear Members of Council:
Subject-.
Briefing on the Proposed Fiscal Year 1994-1995
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program
and Budget
I. Background:
City of Roanoke receives an annual 9rant of funds from
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) based on a formula which considers age of housing,
poverty levels and other "distress" factors.
The amount of this Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) is closely related to how much the U.S. Congress
appropriates nationwide, rather than anything that
Roanoke does.
Since 1974, the City of Roanoke has received
approximately $37 million in CDBG funds which have been
used on numerous projects in housing, economic
development, community services, and public
improvements.
II. Current Situation:
Roanoke's CDBG entitlement will be $2,276,000 for fiscal
year beginning July 1, 1994, a $200,000 increase over FY
1994. To that will be added $603,100 in program income
generated by the grant program from previous years.
The new HUD CDBG funds, added to $681,851 unspent from
previous years, will leverage an estimated $3,002,439 in
additional monies from federal, state, local and private
sources, for a total program scope of $6,563,390.
Citizen hearings and workshops have been held February
1, and April 21, 1994 in order to obtain citizens'
recommendations and to identify community needs for the
coming year, and to present the first draft of the 1994-
1995 CDBG Statement of Objectives.
Public hearing results from the February 1 workshop were
that citizens are concerned about activities for youth,
adequate housing, economic development, neighborhood and
elderly issues as the primary problems facing this
community.
Ee
A second draft Statement of Community Development
Objectives was prepared as a result of the April 21,
1994 public hearing that will more effectively address
the needs expressed by the community. (Please see
Attachment A - Summary of citizens' comments)
Proposals for 47 projects and 4 administrative budgetm
were received totalling $3,715,576. Additionally, there
are 2 section 108 Loan payments and 2 other 1994-95
contractual obligations totalling $1,186,724 New and
transferred funding available for allocation totals
$2,374t227.
III. Program Objectives:
Fourteen (14) new projects are being recommended for funding,
and 32 previously funded projects are recommended. Ten (10)
projects were submitted which are not being recommended for
funding at this time.
With 46 individual projects and activities funded in whole or
in part with CDBG funds, the FY 1995 program has been
designed to accomplish the following: (Please see Attachment
B, Draft Statement of Community Development Objectives)
A. Provide Adequate Housinq:
2.
3.
4.
Rehabilitate or repair 141 houses and rental units.
Assist 2 families to purchase homes.
Support new construction of 7 affordable houses.
Prevent 550 families/i,375 persons from becoming
homeless through eviction and utility cut-off.
Promote housing rehabilitation and marketing.
Provide adequate jobs/employment:
2.
3.
4.
Assist with neighborhood business development,
creating/retaining 100 jobs.
Provide loans to small and micro businesses,
creating 37 jobs.
Provide job training and education for 235 persons,
resulting in 159 job placements.
Improve industrial sites for commercial
development, creating 185 jobs.
Reduce instances of crime and drug abuse:
1. Youth Activities:
Provide drug/alcohol free after school
activities, recreational activities, and summer
activities for 895 youth.
2. Provide staff for a coordinated, inter-agency
approach to fighting back against drugs in Roanoke.
2
3. Provide incentives for 2 police officer families to
purchase homes in at-risk neighborhoods.
D. Maintain and improve city infrastructure:
Restore 2,200 square feet of historic brick
sidewalk in West End neighborhood.
Empower citizens
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
and neighborhood organizations:
25 neighborhood organizations will be provided with
technical assistance and staff support.
10 Mini-grants will be awarded to neighborhoods.
3 Neighborhood Development Grants will be awarded
to neighborhoods.
52 families will be assisted in becoming self-
sufficient.
65 pregnant teens will be assisted in having
healthy babies and learning parenting skills.
15 adolescent mothers will be provided with day
care so that they can continue their education.
40 teens will be assisted with pregnancy prevention
and drop out prevention activities.
Compliance with federal laws and regulations:
oversight will be provided to the CDBG program to
ensure compliance with applicable federal
regulations.
G. Promote community pride:
4 houses which contribute to the historic character
of the Gainsboro neighborhood will be moved instead
of demolished.
Make public improvements to the Henry Street area.
Facades of 4 downtown buildings will be
rehabilitated.
18 houses will be painted.
210 unsafe buildings will be condemned or brought
in compliance with code.
28 vacant and dilapidated structures will be
demolished.
Of the $1,988,585 in CDBG funds, from all ~rant years,
available for projects in the FY 1995 budget, $1,471,949 or
74% are expected to benefit low and moderate income persons.
IV. Conclusion:
The proposed CDBG budget and program is responsive to the
stated concerns of the citizens of Roanoke, as well as
meeting the regulatory requirements of HUD. It provides for
housing improvement, activities for youth, business
3
development, the creation of new job opportunities, human
development, the strengthening of our neighborhood
organizations and adequate administrative oversight for the
entire program. It will allow us to build upon the successes
of the past and to meet some urgent critical needs.
This CDBG program is submitted for Council's review. On
May 9, 1994 City Council has scheduled an evening public
hearing to receive citizens' com~ents. At that time, Council
will be requested to authorize the City Manager to submit the
1994-1995 Statement of Objectives to the Richmond Office of
the Department of Housing and Urban Development for their
review.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH:CAH
Attachment
Assistant City Manager
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
Director of Human Development
Economic Development Specialist
Chief of Community Planning
Building Commissioner
City Engineer
Administrator FDETC
Assistant to the City Manager for Community Relations
Acting Grants Monitoring Administrator
B:BRIEFING.RPT
4
Attachment A
Page 1
General Issues Raised
at the
CDBG Public Hearing
April 21, 1994
Issues raised:
TAP's training program not receiving CDBG funds.
TAP's Micro-Enterprise Loan Fund not receiving CDBG
funds.
West End Center not receiving the CDBG funds requested.
Youth is top issue, yet, it's not receiving highest level
of funding.
HUD mandate concerning the 15% cap on public service
activities.
Explanation as to why a particular proposal was not
recommended for funding.
Procedure for selecting projects for funding.
city Council procedures to approve a budget.
Having the draft budget changed before council approves
it.
Teen Outreach Program needs CDBG funds for their project.
Attachment A
Page 2
COI~ENTS BY THOSE #~O WISHED TO SPF~K
~prll 21, 1994
Annette Lewis, Director of TAP's Employment Training Services
Regarding their proposals for funding the Entrepreneur Training
Program and the Micro Enterprise Loan Fund to support low-income
residents of the community. TAP has provided comprehensive
services to low-income community residents for 30 years and has
taken the lead in addressing the needs of the low-income members of
the community.
Entrepreneur Training Program
Main Points:
At town meetings held by the Enterprise Community Planning
Committee, the Economic Development sub-committee has found
that the citizens express a need for entrepreneurs in the
community. Citizens want to be directly involved in the
growth and sufficiency of their community. Also, through a
survey, the need for this service was evident. Day care was
one type of business desired to begin. A detailed curriculum
was attached showing how comprehensive the training would be.
Curriculum designed by a man who is in his own business. The
curriculum has been reviewed by a professor at Virginia Tech,
who has agreed to serve as the Dean to the program. The
program is designed to assist entrepreneurs in starting their
own business.
Micro-Enterprise Loan Fund
Main Points:
Five hundred dollars ($500) to $1,000 can surely help someone
start up their own business, as a member of their Advisory
Committee has done. Research was done to show that small
loans of $500, $1,000 were recommended by several agencies
around the country. First Union Bank, as well as others, have
expressed an interest in supporting such a project.
Connie Krisha - (prospective trainee)
own business, but does not know how.
could benefit her and the community.
Interested in starting her
Says this training program
GinGer Stewart - (citizen) Also agrees that there is a need for
this type of program. She feels she has a talent that could help
the community if she was taught how to get started in her own
business.
Betty Allard - (citizen) Very happy to see Customized Job Training
in the draft budget. Supports and praises TAP for all they have
done for her and explains how she would not be where she is if it
weren't for TAP and their support.
Attachment A
Page 3
Ted Edlich - (TAP) Feels CDBG monies for administration is too
high. Funding should go directly to the poor neighborhoods and
poor people. Fund the administration with other monies.
Cheri Hartman - (TOP) On behalf of the Teen Outreach Program,
would like to go back to the drawing board and see if there is
anyway to access the $19,000 of service money left under the cap;
anything left to "squeeze out of the stone" and help the curtain go
up for this program with CDBG funding for the teens she works with.
Matching monies will be lost without CDBG funding.
Suzanne Bell - (Case Manager for Self-Sufficiency and Operation
Bootstrap) Thank you for funding Operation Bootstrap. On behalf
of the Entrepreneur Program expresses disappointment, because she
has people looking forward to participating in the program and they
will in turn be disappointed. Asks for the committee to take
another look at the program.
Sylvia Wade - (Committee member for the Entrepreneur Advisory
Committee) Feels this training program could help the community
and feels that $500 to $1,000 could be sufficient to start a
business. Feels it would promote positive attitudes and good self-
esteem. Hopes committee will reconsider decision.
John Bell - (President of Bell Service) On behalf of the
Entrepreneur program, feels that the training is comprehensive and
complete.
Bill Leach - (Secretary of the West End Center Board) Thanked the
City for the allocation for the West End Center that is in the
draft budget. West End Center is trying to meet with a tripling
demand for services. His concern is that this request is for a
construction, one-time project and that if they receive only
partial funding in lieu of the full request, the second phase of
construction won't be completed and the program may have to be
stopped. Although they are predominantly a youth facility, they
also come under some of the other HUD categories; asked for
reconsideration.
Karen Ramsey - (representing West End Center) Her concern is with
the overcrowding situation. There are 15 children on the waiting
list to be tutored. This is a program that is proven to work, But
the overcrowding is inconvenient. They need to be able to spread
out to work more efficiently. She feels they are losing some of
their tutors because of the crowded situation. West End Center is
listed under the 03 category and not under the public service
category; she hoped that the entire project would be funded to
benefit the children in the West End Area.
John Shumate - (on behalf of West End Center) Request is for
structural consideration and to complete the project in one shot,
otherwise the building will have to sit and wait for the next
allocation. The tutors could do a better job if there was more
room available for the program.
Attachment A
Page 4
Ren Heard - Addressing two different projects.
#1-West End Center He feels that this is the most important
program in the City. This program has driven out drug dealers and
removed the kids from the street giving them a place to go where
they can feel safe. The Center is crowded and the funds are needed
to provide that physical space for the Center to work.
#2-West End Association This association submitted a request for
sidewalks and public improvements in their area. There is a
dramatic need for these improvements in this area so he believes
they came up short when they were only given $10,000.
His biggest issue of concern was the amount of money being spent
for administration. He suggested that over half of the $740,000
going to RRHA be cut and given to the smaller agencies that will be
much more effective managing and in controlling the use of the
money. He believes that contractors are doing very well on
programs such as Operation Paintbrush and Quick Response and that
the people who actually benefit are few for the amount of money
spent. With reference to the money for training workers for Hotel
Roanoke, he said Hotel Roanoke has dominated the CDBG money for the
last 3 or 4 years. He suggested letting Hotel Roanoke operators
pay for training their employees. He also feels that money to pay
for CDBG administration shouldn't come from CDBG, it should come
from the general fund. Less than 25% of the money in this budget
comes from City administration, instead admin costs come out of the
program where it is designed to help people.
Ozawa Skipper - (on behalf of the Entrepreneurial Program) She has
spent the last 5 or 6 years on numerous programs and at least four
of those programs she didn't get to complete because the funding
ran out. Money from Operation Bootstrap and Self-Sufficiency
allowed her to buy equipment to start a business but she did not
know how to set up and run a business. The Entrepreneurial Program
is important because you have to teach the people how to set up a
business, where to go to get money, what to do with the money and
how to spend and budget.
Mike Cammack - (youth on behalf of West End Center) Referred to
talk of violence and putting the ones that can't be helped in jail.
The West End Center is there to help, and they can help 100%, and
for the people that they can't help at least everyone knows they
tried their best.
Millard Bolden - (on behalf of the YMCA Family Center) Thanked the
committee for funding the After-School Drop In program last year
and for increasing the funding for this year. Encouraged those
that did not get funded to not give up. Referring to comments to
"go back to the table" asked that the committee not take any money
away from the youth programs.
CDBG BRIEFING SUMMARY
I. FY 94-95 Estimated Revenno
FY 94-95 Entitlement
Program Income
Carryover/Transfer
Total Estimated Revenue
Coca-Cola 108 Loan Payment
Hotel Roanoke 108 Loan Payment
Western Va. Revolving Loan Fund
Arts Place At Old First
Total Contractual Obligations
Total Available For Allocation
$2,276,000
$ 603,100
$ 681.8~1
$3,560,951
$ 529,873
$ 525,000
$ 85,751
$ 46.100
$1,186,724
$2,374,227
Bo
Bo
Do
Public Hearin~
The top five (5) community development issues identified by the citizens at the February 1, 1994
public hearing:
1. YOUTH
2. HOUSING
3. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
4. NEIGBRORHOOD ISSUES
ELDERLY ISSUES
Admini~rative l~:hli~ Flt,~r~l~ . CDBG Draft ~11~-~~-~
IH. PROPOSAL/FUNDING OVERVIEW
51 Proposals Received Totaling $3,715,S76
Funding Available - $2,374,227
Recommended Proposals Funded - 40 CDBG/1 Home Inveahuent Partnership Program Funds
Proposals Not Funded - 10
2
IV. FUNDING ALLOCATION OVERVIEW
A. YOUTH - $173,380
* 45% increase in the funding aflocation for youth.
· Increase the number of youth served from 718 to 1.055.
West End Center Construction $ 76,250 $ 45,000 $ 20,905
0pportuni ty Knocks 18,380 18,380 25,000
Job Training Camp 20,000 20,000 N/A
Star Light Youth Program 33,000 20,000 N/A
Resource Mothers 56,550 37,500 37,543
Day Care II 17,633 7,500 N/A
Top Gun Summer Day Cam~) '30,000 20,000 14,000
Teen Outreach Program 11,250 5,000 N/A
B. ~ - $416,042
· Increase the u-tuber of houses/rental ,,ni~ rehabilitated or repaired from 98 to 141.
· Continue to prevent ~ from becomln~ homeless as the result of eviction or utility
cut-off by providing f'mancial assistance.
Vacan~ Lot Homesteadin~ $ 24,500 $ 24,500 $ 60,000
Emergency Assist~ce ~d 55,000 49,500 45,000
Operation Bootstra~ 8,198' 8,198 10,939
Empowering Individual s 30,000 21,440 N/A
With Disabilities
~ick Response To 150,000 125,000 176,340
Emergencies
~BG Support For HOME N/A 155,669 N/A
Investment Partnership
Program
Housing Marketing 10,000 6,000 10,475
3
Community Police 52,500 25,735 45,735
Homeownershi~
Gainsboro Rehab. 70,150 70,150 N/A
ROME
Funds
C. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - $~19,454
· Increase the o,,mber of persons receiving job training from 1~0 to 2~. Increase the number
of job placements from ~ to 1~9.
· Continue to provide development assistance and loans to small businesses creating/retaining
10~ jobs.
· Improve industrial sites for commercial development, creating 185 jobs.
Hotel Roanoke Employment $179,140 $110,411 N/A
Trainin~
Customized Job Training 39,984 25,000 25,000
Deanwood Industrial Park 112,298 124,298 11,796
Shaffers Crossin~ 8,775 16,775 N/A
Gainsboro Professional 146,327 160,327 148,000
Park
Henry Street Maintenance N/A 8,000 7,783
Parkin~ Lot Management
Hotel Roanoke Redevelopment N/A 6,000 7,769
Economic Development 100,000 106,143 110,000
Investment Fund
Micro-Business Revolving 50,000 30,000 30,000
Loan Fund
Entrepreneurial Loan Fund 20,000 20,000 N/A
Neighborhood Business 45,000 12,500 12,500
Development Program
4
D. NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUES - $207,426
· Enable the Roanoke Neighborhood Partnership to continue to address neighborhood
development and improvement issues.
· Continue neighborhood development grants.
Neighborhood Partnership $139,923 $135,423 $128,921
Operation Paintbrush 64,000 52,003 69,150
Mini-Grant 10,000 10,000 10,000
Neighborhood Development Grant 20,000 10,000 18,000
~ - $125,000
· Increase from $40,000 allocation in current CDBG budget.
Quick Response For The Elderly $150,000 $125,000 $ 40,000
F. CODE ENFORCEMENT/DEMOLITIQN. $~38,484
· lncxease the m-nher of umafe buHdin~ condemned or brought ~to compliance with code
from 200 to 210.
· Increase the re,tuber of vacant and dilapidated structures demolished from 20 to 28.
Code Enforcement $145,213 [ $ 75,519 $ 71,923
Demolition 150,000. 162,965 $ 90,000
85,000
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS - $110,500
* Allow Henry Street Revival Committee to develop a formal plan and begin improvements to
the area.
· Restore brick sidewalk in the West End neighborhood.
Henry Street Improvements $200,000 $100,000 N/A
West End Sidewalks $ 38,500 10,500 4,000
H. mSTORIC PRESERVATI~ON - $100,000
Downtown Historic Facade $ 40,000 $ 20,000 $ 45,000
Improvement
Gainsboro Enl%ancement II 70,000 80,000 91,290
I. DRUG and ALCOHOL ABIJ,qi¢, - $26,000
J. ~ - $357,941
· Provide CDBG program oversight to emure compliance with federal regulations.
~.~-. ~ ...... ~i:i:~i~ii~,~ ~i!~ ~ ::~: :~':: ' '~" ~ f:~:::~:~~ ~ ~::':~:::::::: ~:
~BO A~inistration $233,601 ] $226,024 $218,820
Housing Development 93,804~ 56,917 54,327
A~inistration
Roanoke Redevelopment and 145,821 75,000 73,772
Housing Authority
Admini s trat ion
6
V. PROPOSALS NOT FUNDEr}
Ao
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
Stars Come Out At Night ($10,100 Requested)
GED Program ($37,122 Requested)
Youth Exploring Science ($25,000 Requested)
Home Care Aide Project ($49,956 Requested)
Inner-City Martial Arts Program ($38,200 Requested)
Entrepreneurial Training Program ($38,373 Requested)
Rental Rehabilitation Project ($75,000 Requested)
Kellog Ave. 1994 Building Project ($56,000 Requested)
Residential Infill Design Competition ($35,000 Requested)
Enterprise Communities Coordinator ($38,000 Requested)
7
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
May 6, 1994
File #60-72-304-467
James D. Grisso
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Grisso:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31964-050294 amending and reordaining certain
sections of the 1993-94 General Fund Appropriations, providing for appropriation
of additional Comprehensive Services Act funds, in the amount of $14,164.00, to
cover the cost of services for targeted at-risk youth and their families. Ordinance
No. 31964-050294 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular
meeting held on Monday, May 2, 1994.
Sincerely, /?.~x~
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP: sm
Enc.
pc:
Charles W. Day, Chairperson, Roanoke City School Board, 1830 Grayson
Avenue, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24012
E. Wayne Harris, Superintendent of Roanoke City Public Schools
Richard L. Kelley, Executive for Business Affairs, Roanoke City Public
Schools
June S. Nolley, Clerk of the Roanoke City School Board
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Glenn D. Radcliffe, Director, Human Development
Corinne B. Gott, Manager, Social Services
Marion V. Crenshaw, Youth Planner
Diane S. Akers, Budget Administrator, Office of Management and
Budget
1993-94
emergency.
WHEREAS,
Government of the
exist.
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
The 2nd day of May, 1994.
No. 31964-050294.
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
City of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of
Roanoke that certain sections of the 1993-94 General Fund
Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and reordained
to read as follows, in part:
A ro riatlons
Health and Welfare
Comprehensive Services Act
Nondepartmental
Contingency - General Fund
(2) ....................
$ 17,091,201
4,326,472
46,106,008
399,129
Revenue
Grants-in-Aid Commonwealth Welfare (3) .......................................
28,440,681
11,789,678
1) Residential,
Public, Mandated
2) CSA Contingency
3) CSA State
Supplemental
(001-054-5410-3170)
(001-002-9410-2244)
$ 14,164
( 3,929)
(001-020-1234-0692) 10,235
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
May 2, 1994
Roanoke, '~c~i~'~ ~a
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mayor Bowers and Members of Council:
SUBJECT: APPROPRIATION OF ADDITIONAL COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES ACT FUNDS
The ~sive ~ Act [CSA) for At-Risk Youth and
a iF_~ ~ effective July 1~ 1993. ~ Pool of state
funds to be expended for public or private non-residential or
residential services for the targeted population of troubled
youth and families.
The CSA ~ services for foster care children and for
children whose Individualized Education Plan mandates specialized
private day or residential educational programs.
C. The ~ services Act C A~ Funds P~I ~
for Roanoke City for July 1, 1993 - June 30, 1994 is.
State Wands:
Local Funds:
$1,983,352
1.218.835
TOTAL AT.TF~.ATION: ~
The Roanoke ~ o~9_uP_~=~!=_ ~ bv City ~
Resolution #31301-011193 to man,ge the State Funds Pool,
~ that in ~ to the afo eme tion state Funds
Pool ~ ue~_~p~_~/k~_~ funds in the amount of $1,110,121
would be needed for the period of July 1, 1993 - June 30, 1994·
State Funds:
Local Funds:
$802,852
307.269
TOTAL AT,T~3CATION: ~
On June 28. 1993, City ~ ~ f~ds for the
aforementioned CSA initial State Funds Pool Allocation and for
the projected Supplemental Allocation:
State Funds: $2,786,204
Local Funds: $1.526.104
CURRENT BUDGETED FUNDS:
Page 2
II. CURRENT SITUATION
A. The cost of services for the taraeted at-risk youth and their
families was eres 'mated by $14,164 for FY 1993-94:
State Funds: $10,235
Local Funds: 3,929
1. The State Department of Education, the State fiscal agent for
the CSA, will reimburse $10.235 of this amount.
2. Roanoke City is required to provide ~ local cash match of
$3,929.
III. ISSUES
A. Funding
B. Leoal
IV.
ALTERNATIVES
ae
City Council approve this ree~_D_~_~ and authorize the Director of
Finance to increase the revenue estimate by $10,235 and
appropriate $14,164 to the CSA account in the General Fund.
There will be a $3,929 local cash match.
Funding - Funding of $14,164 in additional program costs will
be provided with a local cash match for $3,929 from the CSA
Contingency account and the remaining $10,235 to be made
available by the State Department of Education.
Legal - Foster care services and specialized private
day/residential educational programs mandated by State and
Federal laws can be provided.
B. Do not approve this request to transfer $3.929 from CSA
Contingency account.
1. Funding - Not an issue.
2e
Legal - Foster care and specialized private education
day/residential programs mandated by State and Federal laws
cannot be provided.
v. RECO~
Page 3
A. City Council concur in Alternative A and authorize the Director
of Finance to:
Increase the revenue estimate in account #OO1-020-1234-0692
by $10,235 and increase the appropriations in account #001-
054-5410-3170 by $10,235.
Transfer $3,929 from the CSA ContinQenc¥ account #001-002-
9410-2244 to the CSA Expenditure account #001-054-5410-3170.
Respectfully submitted.
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Wilburn C. Dibling, City Attorney
James D. Grisso, Director of Finance
Glenn D. Radcliffe, Director of Human Development and
Chairperson, Roanoke Interagency Council
Corrine B. Gott, Superintendent, Department of Social
Services
E. Wayne Harris, Superintendent, Roanoke City Public Schools
Diane S. Akers, Budget Administrator
MARY F. PARKER
City CLerk"
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Chnreh Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Telephone: (703) 981-2541
SANDRA H. EAKIN
D~put y City Clerk
May 6, 1994
File #45-60-183-188-262-270-472
James D. Grisso
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Grisso:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31965-050294 amending and reordaining certain
sections of the 1993-94 General Fund Appropriations, providing for appropriation
of $21,665.00 from the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program, in
connection with procurement of certain equipment to ensure that the City has a
back-up 9-1-1 communications facility to provide continued public safety services.
Ordinance No. 31965-050294 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting held on Monday, May 2, 1994.
MFP: sm
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
Enc.
pc:
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
George C. Snead, Jr., Director, Public Safety
Robert J. Agnor, Manager, Communications
Wanda B. Reed, Manager, Emergency Services
William F. Clark, Director, Public Works
Nelson M. Jackson, Manager, Building Maintenance and Custodial Services
Diane S. Akers, Budget Administrator, Office of Management and
Budget
Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations
D. Darwin Roupe, Manager, General Services
1993-94
emergency.
WHEREAS,
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
The 2nd day of May, 1994.
No. 31965-050294.
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 Council of the City of
Roanoke that certain sections of the 1993-94 General Fund
Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and reordained
to read as follows, in part:
A ro riations
Public Works
Building Maintenance (1) ..........................
Communication (2-3) ..............................
$ 20,312,884
3,003,119
1,784,843
Fund Balance
CMERP - City - Unappropriated (4) $
919,559
1) Maintenance
2) Other
Equipment
3) Project
Supplies
4) CMERP - City -
Unappropriated
(001-052-4330-3050) $ 500
(001-050-4130-9015) 8,423
(001-050-4130-3005) 12,742
(001-3323) (21,665)
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
{ X ;::
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
May 2, 1994
Honorable Mayor and City
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
BACK-UP 9-1-1 FACILITY
A®
Ce
Capital Maintenance and EauiDment Replacement - needs
have been identified for the Communications Department.
' ' ' e - are necessary to insure that the City
of Roanoke has a back-up 9-1-1 Communications facility to
provide continued public safety services to citizens.
Should evacuation from the primary Emergency Center be
necessary due to fire, natural gas leak or hazardous
material spill there would be no means of dispatching
police, fire or ems units to emergencies. Equipment will
be used daily to support Public Works Dispatch function.
~ - is a listing of those identified items
that are anticipated to cost less than $15.000 per single
item.
De
Sinqle purchases - will be procured
small purchase procedures which
solicitation of bids.
in accordance with
uses competitive
II. CUI~/~ENT SITUATION
Ae
Council's appropriation of funds are necessary to provide
for the purchase of those items as listed on Attachment
III. ~SUES
A. Need
C. Fund Availability
Council aD~Drouriatq ~,
appropriate procurement of the
Equipment Replacement items as
of this report.
to provide for the
Capital Maintenance and
listed on Attacb~ment "A"
PAGE 2
HONO~AmLE ~AYOI~ AND CITY COUNCIL
~u~D APPI~OPRIATION
Ve
CC:
Need - Items requested are
performance of essential
CommuniGations.
necessary for continued
9-1-1 and Public Works
T~ess - Requested items can be procured in the
most timely fashion with this Alternative.
Fund Availability - Designated Funds are available
in the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement
Program.
B. Do not appropriate fun~
me
Need - Basic essential 9-1-1 services and Public
Works communications would be jeopardized possibly
creating liability.
2. ~ - Would not be a factor in this
alternative.
Fund availability - Designated Funds would not be
exDended under this alternative.
City Council concur with Alternative "A" appropriate $21,665
from Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program to
the various accounts as follows:
$500 to Building Department Account - 001-052-4330-3050.
S8.423 to Communications Department Account -
001-050-4130-9015.
~2.742 to Comm~l~ications
001-050-4130-3005.
Department
Account
Respectfully Submitted
W. Robert Herbert,
City Manager
Mr. James Grisso, Director, Finance
Mr. Wilburn Dibling, City Attorney
Mr. Barry Key, Manager, Management and Budget
Mr. George C. Snead, Director, Public Safety
Text Telephone 287
(3) Progressive Time Stamps 1,912
Upholster Chairs 960
Building Maintenance (refurbishing) 500
Dispatch Work Stations (Furniture) 3,904
Dispatch Console Labels 672
Electronic modules/boards 10,032
Personal Computer 1,998
Laser Printer 609
dBase III Plus Software 319
Wordperfect 151
Twenty four hour wall clock 23
Marker Board 297
$21,664
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Telephone: (703) 981-2541
May 6, 1994
File #207-405-468-514
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy City Clerk
Donald Dye
Vice-President
J. P. Turner and Bros., Inc.
800 8th Street
Salem, Virginia 23153
Dear Mr. Dye:
I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 31966-050294 approving the City Manager's
issuance of Change Order No. 1 to the City's contract with J. P. Turner and
Brothers, Inc., for the Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology Water and
Access Road, in the amount of $13,452.12, for a total contract amount, including
Change Order No. 1, of $184,488.62. Ordinance No. 31966-050294 was adopted by
the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, May 2, 1994.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP: sm
EDC.
pc:
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
James D. Grisso, Director of Finance
Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations
M. Craig Sluss, Manager, Water Department
William F. Clark, Director, Public Works
Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Philip C. Schirmer, Project Manager
Diane S. Akers, Budget Administrator, Office of Management and
Budget
Dolores C. Daniels, Assistant to the City Manager for Community
Relations
PhiIlip F. Sparks, Acting Chief, Economic Development
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 2nd day of May, 1994.
No. 31966-050294.
AN ORDINANCE approving the City Manager's issuance of Change
Order No. 1 to the City's contract with J.p. Turner and Brothers,
Incorporated for the Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology
Water and Access Road; and providing for an emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that:
1. The City Manager or the Assistant City Manager is
authorized and empowered to issue, for and on behalf of the City,
upon form approved by the City Attorney, Change Order No. 1 to the
City's contract with J.P. Turner and Brothers, Incorporated
related to the Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology Water and
Access Road.
2. Such Change Order shall provide for the following changes
in the work to be performed:
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT
CHANGE ORDER NO. ]:
$ 171,036.50
Remove the unsuitable soil material,
provide for adequate drainage,
and stabilize the area with
crushed stone
CONTRACT AMOUNT INCLUDING
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
13~452.12
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.
Roanoke, Virginia
May 2, 1994
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of City Council:
SUBJECT: CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
RCIT WATER & ACCESS ROAD
I. Background:
Acceptance of a bid submitted by J. P. Turner and
Brothers, Incorporated, for the Roanoke Centre for
Industry and Technology (RCIT) Water & Access Road was
made by City Council on March 7, 1994.
B. Work was started on the project as of April 4, 1994.
II. Current Situation:
The project extends a water main from Blue Hills Circle
to the proposed water tank site in RCIT. The proposed
road alignment crosses a low lying wet weather stream
approximately 850 feet north of Blue Hills Drive. The
foundation conditions at this location are very poor and
unsuitable for support of the proposed access roadway.
In order to accommodate groundwater drainage and improve
the foundation conditions, it is necessary to remove the
unsuitable soil material, provide for adequate drainage,
and stabilize the area with crushed stone. Change Order
No. 1 provides for this work. The proposed corrective
action has been reviewed and accepted by the consulting
engineer, the contractor and City staff.
Current funds are encumbered in the amount of
$171~036.50 for this contract. The original contract
award provided for a $18,963.50 contingency fund for this
project. Approximately $1~000.00 of this contingency is
obligated for previously incurred advertising expenses.
1. Original Contract Amount
$171,036.50
2. Amount of Change Order No. 1 $ 13,452.12
3. New Contract amount $184,488.62
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
RCIT WATER & ACCESS ROAD
May 2, 1994
Page 2
III.
Issues in Order of Importance:
A. Funds
B. Cost
C. Need
D. Engineering concerns
IV. Alternatives:
Approve Change Order No. 1 to the contract with J. P.
Turner and Brothers, Incorporated, in the amount of
$13~452.12.
1. Funds are available in the project contingency fund
in account number 002-056-8378-9065.
2. Cost is reasonable and reflects current market
conditions.
3. Need for the payment of a contract obligation is
met.
Engineerinq concerns to provide a properly
constructed and durable access roadway are
satisfied.
Do not approve Change Order No. 1 to the contract with J.
P. Turner and Brothers, Incorporated, in the amount of
$13~452.12.
1. Funds remain available in the project contingency
fund.
2. Cost is not an issue.
3. Need for the payment of a contract obligation is not
met.
Engineering concerns to provide a properly
constructed roadway are not met. Future maintenance
problems may result.
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
RCIT WATER & ACCESS ROAD
May 2, 1994
Page 3
Recommendation:
City Council approve Alternative "A" thereby authorizing
the execution of Change Order No. 1 in the amount of
$13~452.12 to the contract with J. P. Turner and
Brothers, Incorporated.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH/PCS/fm
cc:
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
Director of Utilities & Operations
Manager, Management and Budget
City Engineer
Construction Cost Technician
Accountant, Contracts & Fixed Assets
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) 951-2541
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy City Clerk
May 6, 1994
File #27-57-514
David R. Conner
Vice President
E. C. Pace Company, Inc.
P. O. Box 12685
Roanoke, Virginia 24027
Dear Mr. Conner:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31968-050294 approving the City Manager's
issuance of Change Order No. 1 to the City's contract with E. C. Pace Co., Inc., for
the Liberty Road Sanitary Sewer Replacement project, in the amount of $10,745.00,
for a total contract amount, including Change Order No. 1, of $31,265.00.
Ordinance No. 31968-050294 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting held on Monday, May 2, 1994.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CM~
City Clerk
MFP: s m
Erie.
pc:
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
James D. Grisso, Director of Finance
William F. Clark, Director, Public Works
Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Philip C. Schirmer, Project Manager
Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations
Steven L. Walker, Manager, Water Pollution Control Plant
Jesse H. Perdue, Jr., Manager, Utility Line Services
Diane S. Akers, Budget Administrator, Office of Management and
Budget
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 2nd day of May, 1994.
No. 31968-050294.
AN ORDINANCE approving the City Manager's issuance of Change
Order No. 1 to the City's contract with E.C. Pace Company, Inc.,
for the Liberty Road Sanitary Sewer Replacement; and providing for
an emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that:
1. The City Manager or the Assistant City Manager is
authorized and empowered to issue, for and on behalf of the City,
upon form approved by the City Attorney, Change Order No. 1 to the
City's contract with E.C. Pace Company, Inc., dated August 9, 1993,
related to the Liberty Road Sanitary Sewer Replacement.
2. Such Change Order shall provide for the following changes
in the work to be performed:
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $ 20,520.00
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1:
Install additional curb and
sidewalk in connection with
Liberty Road Sanitary Sewer
Replacement 10t745.00
CONTRACT AMOUNT INCLUDING
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 ~ 31~265.00
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.
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room ,*56
Roanoke, Virginia 2~011
Telephone: (703) 981-2541
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy City Clerk
May 6, 1994
File #27-57-60-514
James D. Grisso
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Grisso:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31967-050294 amending and reordaining certain
sections of the 1993-94 Sewage Fund Appropriations, providing for the transfer of
$7,999.00, in connection with Change Order No. 1 to the City's contract with E. C.
Pace Co., Inc., for the Liberty Road sanitary sewer replacement project. Ordinance
No. 31967-050294 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular
meeting held on Monday, May 2, 1994.
Sincerely, ~..~__~
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP: sm
Enc.
pc:
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
William F. Clark, Director, Public Works
Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Philip C. Schirmer, Project Manager
Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations
Steven L. Walker, Manager, Water Pollution Control Plant
Jesse H. Perdue, Jr., Manager, Utility Line Services
Diane S. Akers, Budget Administrator, Office of Management and
Budget
~N THE COUNCIL OF THE C~TY OF ROANOKE, V~R~N~
The 2nd day of May, 1994.
No. 31967-050294.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
1993-94 Sewage 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
Roanoke that certain sections of
Appropriations, be,
to read as follows,
the Council of the City of
the 1993-94 Sewage Fund
and the same are hereby, amended and reordained
in part:
A ro riat'ons
Capital Outlay
Liberty Road Sanitary Sewer
(1) ...................
$ 1,498,582
31,519
Retained Earnings
Retained Earnings - Unrestricted (2) ..............
15,699,089
1) Appropriated
from General
Revenue (003-056-8462-9003) $ 7,999
2) Retained
Earnings -
Unrestricted (003-3336) ( 7,999)
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
[;ST'" '
'94 ?/il 27
Roanoke, Virginia
May 2, 1994
Honorable Mayor, and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of City Council:
SUBJECT: LIBERTY ROAD SANITARY SEWER - CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
I. Background:
Acceptance of a bid submitted by E. C. Pace Company, Inc.
for the Liberty Road Sanitary Sewer Replacement was made
by City Council on August 9, 1993.
B. Work was started on the project as of September 18, 1993.
II.
Current Situation:
The sewer replacement was at a depth in excess of twenty
feet. It was expected that some of the curb and sidewalk
in the immediate area of the work would be disturbed in
order to perform an excavation of the necessary depth.
Contract prices for curbing and sidewalk were established
with the bid for a small quantity for each item. During
the execution of the work it was necessary to remove and
replace more curb and sidewalk than anticipated. The
additional funds requested will pay the cost of
installing the additional curb and sidewalk.
Current funds are encumbered in the amount of $20~520.00
for this contract. The original contract award provided
for a $3~000.00 contingency fund for this project.
Approximately $254.00 of this contingency is obligated
for previously incurred advertising expenses.
Original Contract Amount
Amount of Change Order No.
Advertising Expense
New Project Amount
$20,520.00
10,745.00
254.00
III.
Issues in Order of
A. Funds
B. Cost
Importance:
C. Need
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
LIBERTY ROAD SANITARY SEWER
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
May 2, 1994
Page 2
IV.
Alternatives:
A. Approve Change Order No. 1 to the contract with E. C.
Pace Company, Inc., in the amount of $10~745.00.
1. Funds are available in the Sewer Fund Retained
Earnings account.
Cost is based upon a unit price that was reduced from
the bid price established in the contract. This
revised unit price was negotiated with the contractor
in consideration of the increased volume of work.
3. Need for the payment of a contract obligation is met.
B. Do not approve Change Order No. 1 to the contract with
E. C. Pace Company, Inc., in the amount of $10~745.00.
1. Funds remain available in the Sewer Fund Retained
Earnings account.
2. Cost is not an issue.
3. Need for the payment of a contract obligation is not
met.
V. Recommendation:
City Council approve Alternative "A", thereby authorizing
the execution of Change Order No. 1 in the amount of
$10~745.00 to the contract with E. C. Pace Company, Inc.
Appropriate an additional $ 7,999.00 from Sewer Fund
Retained Earnings to the Liberty Road Sanitary Sewer
Replacement account (003-056-8462-9065).
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH/PCS/kh
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
LIBERTY ROAD SANITARY SEWER
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
May 2, 1994
Page 3
cc:
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
Director of Utilities and Operations
Assistant to City Manager for Community Relations
City Engineer
Construction Cost Technician
Accountant, Contracts and Fixed Assets
Budget Administrator
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 2~O11
Telephone: (703) 981-2541
SANDRA H. EAION
Deputy City Clerk
May 6, 1994
File #67-122-304
Danny L. Beamer
Executive Director
Roanoke Valley Youth Soccer
Club, Inc.
P. O. Box 21848
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Dear Mr. Beamer:
I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 31969-050294 awarding concession privileges
to Roanoke Valiey Youth Soccer Club, Inc., to sell soccer related merchandise at the
River's Edge Sports Complex during four separate soccer tournaments to be held on
May 7 and 8, May 28 and 29, July 6 and 7, and November 19 and 20, 1994, upon
certain terms and conditions; and authorizing execution of a limited concession
agreement. Ordinance No. 31969-050294 was adopted by the Council of the City of
Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, May 2, 1994.
Sincerely, ~5~.~
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP: s m
EDC.
pc:
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
James D. Grisso, Director of Finance
Deborah J. Moses, Chief of Billings and Coliections
William F. Clark, Director, Public Works
John W. Coates, Manager, Parks, Recreation and Grounds Maintenance
Owen M. Grogan, Superintendent, Recreation
Dolores C. Daniels, Assistant to the City Manager for Community
Relations
Diane S. Akers, Budget Administrator, Office of Management and
Budget
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 2nd day of May, 1994.
No. 31969-050294.
AN ORDINANCE awarding concession privileges at River's Edge
Sports Complex, upon certain terms and conditions; authorizing the
execution of a limited concession agreement; and providing for an
emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that:
1. Roanoke Valley Youth Soccer Club, Inc., is hereby awarded
concession privileges to sell soccer related merchandise at River's
Edge Sports Complex during four separate soccer tournaments to be
held on May 7 and 8, May 28 and 29, July 6 and 7, and November 19
and 20, 1994, as more particularly set forth in the report to this
Council dated May 2, 1994. Concession fees to the City are hereby
waived.
2. The City Manager, or his representative, and the City
Clerk, are hereby authorized, for and on behalf of the City, to
enter into and execute, and attest, respectively, a limited
concession agreement with Roanoke Valley Youth Soccer Club, Inc.,
the form of such agreement to be approved by the City Attorney.
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 lts passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Roanoke, Virginia
May 2, 1994
Honorable Mayor David A. Bowers
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mayor and Members of Council:
SURJECT~
Request from Roanoke Valley Youth Soccer Club, Inc.
to sell soccer related merchandise at River's Edge
Sports Complex during four (4) soccer tournaments.
BACKGROUND~
Roanoke Valley Youth Soccer Club. Inc. has conducted a
variety of youth soccer tournaments in the Roanoke Valley
for eight (8) consecutive years attracting teams from
Virginia and surrounding states.
Be
Parks and Recreation Department has worked closely with
Roanoke Valley Youth Soccer Club, Inc. in coordinating
and scheduling the use of existing facilities in an
effort to advance the quality of local youth soccer
programs and to enhance the economic benefits derived
from these tournaments.
C. 1994 Soccer Tournaments and Date~ are:
2.
3.
4.
Virginia Youth Soccer Association State Cup - May 7
and 8;
Crestar Festival Soccer Tournament - May 28 and 29;
Roanoke International Soccer Tournament - July 6
and 7;
First Virginia Bank Fall Classic - November 19 and
20.
II. CURRENT SITUATIONI
City has been requested by Roanoke Valley Youth Soccer
Club, Inc. to permit the sale of soccer related
merchandise during four (4) soccer tournaments. Refer to
attached letter.
City Code states, in Section 24-5, Concessions, that only
City Council may award concession privileges without
public advertisement and receipt of sealed bids.
Contract Concessionairm deals primarily with the sale of
food and beverage items at events.
Mayor and Members of Council
May 2, 1994
Page 2
ZZZ. ZSSUESl
A. Comnliance with City Cod~
B. Concession fees
C. Service
D. Revenue
IV. ALTERNATIVES:
Grant concession Drivi~ege~ to Roanoke Valley Youth
Soccer Club, Inc. to sell soccer related merchandise at
River's Edge Sports Complex during four (4) requested
soccer tournaments.
1. Compliance with City Code would be met.
2. once s' n would be waived.
Service would be provided that is not currently
offered by contract concessionaire.
Revenue to City may increase due to sales tax on
any merchandise sold.
Deny concession Drivileqes to Roanoke Valley Youth Soccer
Club, Inc. to sell soccer related merchandise at River's
Edge Sports Complex during four (4) requested soccer
tournaments.
1. Compliance with City Code would require
advertisement for bids.
an
2. Conces ion ees would not be an issue at this time.
3. Service would probably not be provided on such
limited basis.
4. Revenue to the City would be unknown.
Mayor and Members of Council
May 2, 1994
Page 3
RECOMMENDATIONs City Council concur with Alternative "A".
ae
Grant concession Drivileaes to Roanoke Valley Youth
Soccer Club, Inc. to sell soccer related merchandise at
River's Edge Sports Complex during the four (4) requested
soccer tournaments.
Be
Authoriz~ City Manager to execute a limited concession
agreement with Roanoke Valley Youth Soccer Club, Inc. in
a form as approved by City Attorney.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH/OMG/jj
Attachment
cc:
Mr. Danny L. Beamer, Executive Director
Roanoke Valley Youth Soccer Club, Inc.
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
Manager, Management and Budget
Manager, Parks & Recreation/Grounds Maintenance
Citizen Request for Services
Chief, Billings and Collections
Superintendent of Recreation
03/15/1994 14:05 7037723872 ROANOKE V$OCCER CLUB PAGE 02
Roanoke Valley Youth Socce:r Club, lnc,
P.O. Box 21848
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
~arch 15, 1994
Ms. Rulh Wilkinson
Roanoke City Pat~s & ~n
210 Reserve Avenue, S.W,
Roanoke, Vtr~ia 24018
Dear Ms. Wilkinso~
The l~aanoke Val~ Ymdh Soccer (3ub will hold it~ 9th annual Cres~' Fem~al S(x~cr
Tournament ot~ Mny 28 & 29, 1994. Also wa will be ht~ng tl~ Vj~nin Youth S4xx~r A..._a~ltion State
Cup on May 7 &Il, 1994, ~ lntematiollal Socc~ Tournament ot~ ~uly 6 & 7, 1994, andThe Firsl
ViqOnia Bank Fall CJn .a+4_'¢ on Novembex 19 & 20, 1994. Th~ tournaments n~ r~luesfing peflntasiofl to
sell non-food [tens ~u~h as t0m'~Jlncnt l-shirtt ~ soc(~r lr~lmndi~ at ]~s Edg~ ls~k,
R'you hav~ any ques6~ns p~ase feel ft~ to call the club office at 772-3871.
Danny L l~am~r
E~ Dir~mr
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 2~11
Telephone: (703) 981-2541
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy City Clerk
May 6, 1994
File #20-29-66-77-200-247-258-264-330-514
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
! am attaching copy of Resolution No. 31971-050294 requesting the Virginia
Department of Transportation to have utility lines relocated underground as a part
of the widening and realignment of Wells Avenue, N. E., and authorizing execution
of an agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation and Appalachian
Power Company relating to the underground relocation of utility lines in connection
with the widening and realignment of Wells Avenue, N. E. Resolution No. 31971-
050294 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held
on Monday, May 2, 1994.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:sm
Enc.
pc;
M. Scott Hollis, Urban Engineer, Virginia Department of Transportation,
1401 East Broad Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219
Russell M. Wise, Staff Engineer, Appalachian Power Company, P. O. Box
2021, Roanoke, Virginia 24022
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
James D. Grisso, Director of Finance
Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations
William F. Clark, Director, Public Works
William L. Stuart, Manager, Streets and Traffic
Robert K. Bengtson, Traffic Engineer
Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
John R. Marlles, Chief, Planning and Community Development
Diane S. Akers, Budget Administrator, Office of Management and
Budget
Phillip F. Sparks, Acting Chief, Economic Development
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
The 2nd day of May, 1994.
No. 31971-050294.
A RESOLUTION requesting the Virginia Department of
Transportation to have utility lines relocated underground as a
part of the widening and realignment of Wells Avenue, N.E. and
authorizing the execution of an agreement with the Virginia
Department of Transportation and Appalachian Power Company relating
to the underground relocation of utility lines in connection with
the widening and realignment of Wells Avenue, N.E.
WHEREAS, this Council is by appropriation ordinance
simultaneously appropriating a sufficient sum of money to pay the
City's share of the cost of underground
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the
Roanoke that:
1. The City requests that the
facilities;
Council of the City of
Virginia Department of
Transportation ("VDOT") have utility relocations placed underground
as a part of the widening and realignment of Wells Avenue, N.E. in
accordance with the City's policy established by this Council
pursuant to Ordinance No. 22055, dated February 3, 1975 and in
accordance with VDOT Policy on Placing Utility Facilities
Underground, dated April 15, 1993.
2. 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 the Virginia
Department of Transportation and Appalachian Power Company for the
underground relocation of utility lines in connection with the
widening and realignment of Wells Avenue, N.E., upon such terms and
conditions as are deemed appropriate by the City Manager and in
accordance with the recommendations contained in the report of the
City Manager dated May 2, 1994 and approved as to form 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
May 6, 1994
File #29-60-77-200-330-514
James D. Grisso
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Grisso:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31970-050294 amending and reordaining certain
sections of the 1993-94 Capita] Fund Appropriations, providing for appropriation of
$73,600.00, in connection with execution of a three-party agreement with the
Virginia Department of Transportation and Appalachian Power Company for
adjustment of electric utilities required in conjunction with the Wells Avenue roadway
project. Ordinance No. 31970-050294 was adopted by the Council of the City of
Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, May 2, 1994.
Sincerely, ~O..~/~.~--.~
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP: sm
Enc.
pc:
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations
William F. Clark, Director, Public Works
William L. Stuart, Manager, Streets and Traffic
Robert K. Bengtson, Traffic Engineer
Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
John R. Marlles, Chief, Planning and Community Development
Diane S. Akers, Budget Administrator, Office of Management and
Budget
Phillip F. Sparks, Acting Chief, Economic Development
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
1993-94
emergency.
WHEREAS,
Government of the
exist.
The 2nd day of May, 1994.
No. 31970-050294.
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 Council of the City of
Roanoke that certain sections of the 1993-94 Capital Fund
Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and reordained
to read as follows, in part:
A ro riations
Streets & Bridges
2nd Street / Gainsboro Rd / Wells Ave (1) ..........
7,579,420
5,450,869
1)
Appropriated
from General
Revenue
(008-052-9547-9003) $ 73,600
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing,
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
this
City Clerk.
Roanoke, Virginia
Nay 2, 1994
Honorable David A. Bowers, Mayor
and Members of Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mayor Bowers and Members of Council:
SUBJECT: Wells Avenue Utilities - Special Agreement
Backqround:
City Council approved the location and major design
features of the realignment of Wells Avenue from
Williamson Road, N.E. to First Street, N.W. (Resolution
No. 31622-080993).
II.
Be
Appalachian Power Company (APCO) power lines along this
segment of Wells Avenue will be relocated from overhead
to underground. This is in accordance with Ordinance No.
22055 dated February 3, 1975 which requires underground
utility installation in the Gainsboro Neighborhood
Development Project.
Current Situation:
Three-party utility agreement between Virginia Department
of Transportation (VDOT), APCO, and the City of Roanoke
has been prepared and requires prompt execution by the
City to maintain the accelerated project schedule. A
fully-executed agreement will enable APCO to proceed with
the acquisition of all materials needed for the
underground utility lines.
BJ
VDOT's Policy for Placing Utility Facilities Underground"
requires that City Council provide VDOTwith a resolution
requesting that these utilities be placed underground as
a part of the project. This resolution also needs to
assure that future utility facilities shall not be
permitted overhead along the project limits, and that the
local governing body has the financial resources
available to pay its share of the costs to place these
facilities underground. The
City's share to place the utilities underground for this
project is estimated in the three-party agreement at
$73~600. This cost represents the City's 50% share (VDOT
pays the other 50%) of nonbetterment costs for the
placement of these APCO utilities underground, in
accordance with VDOT policy.
Members of City Council
Page 2
III. Issues:
IV.
A. Funding
B. Timing
Alternatives:
Authorize the City Manager to execute, on behalf of the
City, the three-party agreement for the adjustment of
electric utilities on the Wells Avenue Project~ and to
furnish a resolution to VDOT requesting that these
utilities be placed underground as a part of the project,
further assuring VDOT that future utility facilities
shall not be permitted overhead along the project limits,
and that the City has available its ~73t600 share of the
costs related to this effort.
Funding is available in the Transfers to Capital
Projects Fund Account No. 001-004-9310-9508 in the
amount of }73t600 for payment to VDOT. Funds need
to be appropriated to the Wells Avenue Account No.
008-052-9547-9003.
Timing is critical. Three-party agreement needs to
be quickly executed to maintain accelerated project
schedule.
Do not authorize the City Manager to execute, on behalf
of the City, the three-party agreement for the adjustment
of electric utilities on the Wells Avenue Project.
1. Funding is not spent·
2. Timing for accelerated schedule on Wells Avenue is
Jeopardized.
Recommendation:
Authorize the City Manager to execute, on behalf of the
City, the three-party agreement with VDOT and APCO for
the adjustment of electric utilities required in
conjunction with the Wells Avenue roadway Project.
B. Approve a resolution requesting that the VDOT have the
utility relocations placed underground as a part of the
Members of City Council
Page 3
Wells Avenue roadway project, indicating that Ordinance
No. 22055 for underground utility installations in the
Gainsboro Neighborhood Development Project is effective
within the limits of the Wells Avenue roadway project.
Resolution shall also assure that future utility
facilities required for any proposed improvement,
including street lighting, shall not be permitted to be
placed overhead within any section of the Wells Avenue
roadway project where the utility facility was placed
underground; and further assure that the City of Roanoke
has the financial resources available to pay its ~73~600
share of the costs to place facilities underground as
defined in VDOT's policy.
C. Appropriate ~73~600 to Wells Avenue Account No. 008-052-
9547-9003.
WRH:RKB:Jrm
copy:
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
City Traffic Engineer
Office of Management & Budget
Construction Cost Technician
Accountant, Contracts & Fixed Assets
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
May 6, 1994
File //24-192-247-322-450
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31972-050294 amending and reordaining
subsection (b) of Section 26, Rates for use and terms, of the Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, to provide that one-half of the rent for use of the Civic
Center shall be deposited with the City six months in advance of the event, rather
than one year in advance of the event. Ordinance No. 31972-050294 was adopted by
the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, May 2, 1994.
Sincerely, ~_~
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP: sm
Eno.
pc:
The Honorable Kenneth E. Trabue, Chief Judge, Circuit Court
The Honorable G. O. Clemens, Judge, Circuit Court
The Honorable Roy B. Willett, Judge, Circuit Court
The Honorable Diane M. Strickland, Judge, Circuit Court
The Honorable Clifford R. Weckstein, Judge, Circuit Court
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 John B. Ferguson, Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations
District Court
W. Robert Herbert
May 6, 1994
Page 2
pc:
The Honorable Edward S. Kidd, Jr., Chief Judge, General District Court
The Honorable Julian H. Raney, Jr., Judge, Genera! District Court
The Honorable Richard Co Pattisall, Judge, General District Court
The Honorable Donald S. Caldwell, Commonwealth's Attorney
The Honorable Arthur B. Crush, III, Clerk, Circuit Court
The Honorable Gordon Eo Peters, City Treasurer
Patsy Bussey, Clerk, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court
Ronald S. Albright, Clerk, General District Court
Bobby D. Casey, Office of the Magistrate
Clayne M. Calhoun, Law Librarian
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
James D. Grisso, Director of Finance
Deborah J. Moses, Chief of Billings and Collections
Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations
Vernon M. Danielsen, Chairperson, Roanoke Civic Center Commission, 3260
White Oak Road, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24014
Bobby E. Chapman, Manager, Civic Center Facilities
Raymond F. Leven, Public Defender, Suite 4B, Southwest Virginia
Building, Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Evelyn Jefferson, Vice President - Supplements, Municipa! Code
Corporation, P. O. Box 2235, Tallahassee, Florida 32304
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 2nd day of May, 1994.
No. 31972-050294.
VIRGINIA,
AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining subsection (b) of S24-
26. Rates for use and terms, of the Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, to provide that one-half of the rent for use of
the Civic Center shall be deposited with the City six months in
advance of the event, rather than one year in advance of the event,
and providing for an emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that:
1. Subsection (b) of S24-26, Rates for use and terms, of the
Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, is amended and
reordained as follows:
Sec. 24-26 Rates for use and terms.
(b)
A cash deposit or certified check equal to
one-half of the rent shall be deposited with
the city six months in advance of the event or
with the return of the contract, whichever is
later. The balance of the rent shall be paid
upon completion of the event unless otherwise
agreed. In the case of a public ticket sale
where monies from ticket sales on deposit in
the civic center box office would equal or
exceed the balance of the rent, this
requirement may be waived by the civic center
manager. In negotiating contracts for use of
the civic center, the civic center manager
may, with the written approval of the city
manager and for good cause appearing to the
city manager, reduce, waive or enlarge any of
the requirements set forth in this
subparagraph.
2. In order to provide for the usual daily operation of the
municipal government,
ordinance shall be in
an emergency is deemed to exist, and this
full force and effect upon its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
May 2, 1994
The Honorable Mayor David A. Bowers
and Members, Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mayor and Members of Council:
SUBJECT: Requested Amendments to City Code Section 24-26(b)
Deposit Schedule for Civic Center Events
The Civic Center Commission considered the attached staff
report on April 25, 1994. The Commission recommends that Council
amend City Code Section 24-26(b) to provide for the following:
(b) A cash deposit or certified check equal to one-
half of the rent shall be deposited with the city six
months in advance of the event or with the return of
the contract, whichever is later. The balance of the
rent shall be paid upon completion of the event unless
otherwise agreed. In the case of a public ticket sale
where monies from ticket sales on deposit in the civic
center box office would equal or exceed the balance of
the rent, this requirement may be waived by the civic
center manager. In negotiating contracts for use of
the civic center, the civic center manager may, with
the written approval of the city manager and for good
cause appearing to the city manager, reduce, waive or
enlarge any of the requirements set forth in this
subparagraph.
The Civic Center Manager may authorize adjustments of this
scheduling as required to provide for proper utilization of the
Civic Center facilities in keeping with Civic Center scheduling
policies in general.
Respectfully subm~'~h
Vernon M. Danielsen, Chairman
Civic Center Commission
cc:
City Manager
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Civic Center Manager
M E M 0 R A N D U M
DATE:
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
April 25, 1994
Chairman Danielsen and Members of Roanoke Civic-Center
. iss' ·
irector of Utilities and Operations
Bob~Chapman, Manager, Civic Center
SUBJECT: Revised Scheduling Policy
I. BACKGROUND:
Current schedulinq policy was adopted February 16,
1988, as Section IV of the Civic Center Marketing Plan.
Revisions are needed in the scheduling policy to
address current scheduling issues, challenges, hold
sequences, and appropriate deposits.
Co
City Code Section 24-26(b) requires a deposit equal to
one-half (½) of the rent one year before the event or
upon execution of an event contract.
Both City Code Section 24-26(b) and current schedulinq
policy need amendments to provide for a different
scheduling policy.
II. CURRENT SITUATION:
Chanqes in the entertainment and convention market,
primarily the imminent re-opening of Hotel Roanoke and
III.
the need to hold block dates for professional sporting
events create the need to make changes in our
scheduling policy.
B. Seven (7) other venue schedulinq policies have been
reviewed during the consideration of needed changes in
our policy.
RECOMMENDATION: Civic Center Commission take the following
action:
Delete the current Civic Center scheduling policy,
known as the Booking Policy, from the existing
marketing plan.
also
Bo
Concur in the attached proposed event scheduling policy
to apply to all events upon City Council approval of an
amendment to City Code Section 24-26(b).
Recommend to City Council that City Code Section 24-
26(b) be amended to provide for the fifty percent (50%)
deposit to be deposited with the city six months in
advance of the event.
KBK/hw
cc: City Manager
Legal Counsel
Secretary
EVENT SCHEDULING POLICY
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
The purpose of this scheduling policy is to establish priorities to
maximize revenues and facility usage, while balancing the economic
effect on the City of Roanoke.
SCHEDULING PRIORITIES
FIRST PRIORITY
First priority for the scheduling of facilities in the Roanoke
Civic Center is to make dates available to national promoters and
tour directors and amateur and professional sports officials to
promote top revenue producing arena events and to make dates
available to national, regional, and state conventions which
generate significant economic impact for the City of Roanoke.
Facility and space commitments for first priority events and
activities may be made as far in advance as is necessary or
appropriate and may supersede requests by second priority events
and activities scheduled more than 12 months from the event date.
For activities which are considered to be competing for the
same audience and/or ticket buyers (i. e., concerts, ice shows,
tractor-pulls, circuses, etc.), the Civic Center management may
maintain a waiting period before and after an existing event
competing for essentially the same patrons. The waiting period
should be established according to acceptable industry standards
depending on the event. Furthermore, Civic Center management may
1
at its own discretion, limit the number of competing activities
presented during any given period.
The Civic Center reserves the right to block dates to allow
sufficient time to schedule first priority events.
SECOND PRIORITY
Second priority for the scheduling of facilities in the
Roanoke Civic Center is to make dates available to consumer or
public exhibitions, tradeshows, corporate meetings, special events,
banquets, business meetings, dances and other activities.
Facility and date scheduling commitments for second priority
events and activities made more than twelve (12) months in advance
are subject to change to accommodate first priority events.
However, events that meet the following criteria will be
treated as first priority events:
1. Event must have been held in civic Center a minimum of
five consecutive years prior to the date of this booking
policy.
2. Event must have used a minimum of 35,000 square feet.
Events that meet these criteria are exempted because of their
proven record of success and significant economic impact. Should
any of these events not renew their dates in any given year, the
event will then be treated as a second priority event.
License agreements
issued more than twelve
the event.
for second priority events will not be
(12) months in advance of the date(s) of
For activities which are considered to be competing for
specialized consumer shows (i. e., boat shows, automobile shows,
antique shows, flea markets, business equipment shows, etc.), the
civic Center management may use discretion in maintaining a waiting
period prior to and after an existing event competing for
essentially the same special market. Furthermore, the Civic Center
management may limit the number of competing activities presented
during a given twelve month period.
SCHEDULING
In order to hold a date(s), the lessee must indicate the exact
name of the act/activity involved. Substitutions of acts/activi-
ties for a date(s) voids the hold.
In the process of scheduling facilities and dates, the
following terms and definitions shall apply to scheduling
commitments:
TENTATIVE
First Option - Requests for tentative dates that are made
inside twelve (12) months of the event are held for two (2) weeks,
after which time the Roanoke Civic Center management reserves the
right to book another event on the date(s) being held, without
notification to the potential lessee. Those desiring date(s) to be
held more than two (2) weeks without an executed license agreement
should make a request to the civic Center management and with
management's approval, will be granted up to a two (2) week
extension.
Potential lessees shall not assign or transfer any right or
interest in tentative hold dates, including, without limitation,
the right to receive any payment, without city's approval of such
assignment. Any such assignment without approval of City shall be
null and void.
When a license agreement is fully executed and appropriate
deposit is received, tentative dates then receive the status of
confirmed.
Second Option - Facilities and dates reserved on a second
option are held pending execution of a license agreement or the
release of first option hold dates. In the event the first option
hold dates are released, second option hold dates receive first
option status upon notification to the second option holder.
Challenqes - If a potential lessee makes a request for a
tentative date being held by another party, they will be given a
second option. If the second option holder wants to challenge the
date(s), Civic Center management will give the first option holder
written notice of the challenge and the first option holder will
have seventy-two (72) hours to make a non-refundable deposit
pursuant to the deposit schedule. Upon payment of the deposit, the
first option holder will be granted the date and will have fourteen
(14) days from the date of receipt of the deposit to sign and
return a license agreement. If the executed license agreement is
not received by the Civic Center within 14 days, the date will then
be made available to the second option holder. The second option
holder will have 72 hours from his receipt of written notice of the
availability of the date to make a non-refundable deposit of 50% of
the basic facility fee and sign a license agreement.
First priority events may challenge other first priority
events unless a license agreement has been executed.
First priority events may challenge second priority events
scheduled less than 12 months out unless a license agreement has
been executed.
Second priority events may challenge first priority events
scheduled less than 12 months out unless a license agreement has
been executed.
Hold Sequences - When two (2) potential lessees are vying for
the same act, the promoter who signs the contract with the act
receives the license agreement for the date(s) regardless of the
hold sequence.
CONFIRMED
Facilities and dates are considered confirmed only upon
execution of a Roanoke civic Center License Agreement (including
appropriate deposit) by the event sponsor and the Civic Center
Manager specifying all details of the commitment.
Upon preparation of the license agreement, the original and
one copy indicating the portion of the civic Center to be leased
and a cover letter detailing instructions will be mailed to the
event sponsor. From the date of the cover letter, the Civic Center
will continue holding the date(s) without a properly executed
license agreement for fourteen (14) days. If the properly executed
license agreement is not returned within this time limit, the Civic
5
Center may contract with other parties for the use of the space on
the same date(s) without notification to the potential lessee. The
original as well as the copy must be signed and returned to the
civic Center along with the required deposit. The civic Center
Manager will then sign and return the fully executed copy to the
licensee.
The properly executed
insurance certificate must be
license agreement, deposits and
in the office of the civic Center
manager seven (7) working days prior to the event or the civic
Center reserves the unqualified right to cancel the event. Persons
booking events less than seven days out must provide the
aforementioned materials upon booking the date.
No variance from the civic Center's license agreement may be
made in any case except upon prior written approval of the civic
Center Manager. All requests for changes to license agreement must
be received at least 14 days prior to event.
DEPOSIT SCHEDULES
Deposits are required for all activities upon execution of the
license agreement. Licensee shall pay to city the initial required
deposit in form acceptable to city as per the following schedule:
DATE EVENT BOOKED
DEPOSIT AMOUNT
0 6 Months
Out
50% of required basic facility fee with
the return of the license agreement.
6 - 12 Months
Out
10% of required basic facility fee with
the return of the license agreement. An
additional 40% deposit will be due six
months from the first day of the event.
6
12 + Months
Out
10% of required basic facility fee with
the return the license agreement. An
additional 40% deposit will be due six
months from the first day of the event.
Challenged Date
Challenger pays 50% of required basic
facility fee immediately upon securing
the date(s) challenged.
The balance of the rent shall be paid upon completion of the
event unless otherwise agreed.
Deposits not conforming to the above schedule shall cause the
lessee to forfeit any initial deposit made and the release of all
date(s) for the event.
License agreements will be issued one year in advance of the
event or immediately if the event is booked less than twelve (12)
months from the requested date.
7