Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Actions 03-05-90REGULAR WEEKLY Garland (29953) SESSION ...... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL March 5, 1990 2:00 p.m. AGENDA FOR THE COUNCIL Call to Order -- Roll Call. Mayor Taylor and Mrs. Bowles were absent. The invocation will be delivered by The Reverend Charles To Green, Chaplain, Roanoke Memorial Hospitals. Present. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America will be led by Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr. C-2 CONSENT AGENDA (Approved 5-0) ALL ViATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION IN THE FORM LISTED BELOW. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DIS- CUSSION OF THESE ITEMS. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. A communication from Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., requesting an Executive Session to discuss personnel mat- ters relating to vacancies on various authorities, boards, com- missions 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 personnel mat- ters relating to vacancies on various authorities, boards, commissions and com- mittees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.1-344 (a) (1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. WITHDRAWN A list of February 26, 1990. RECOMMENDED ACTION: items pending from Receive and file. July 10, 1978, through (1) e REGULAR AGENDA Hearing of Citizens Upon Public Matters: Petitions and Communications: None. None, Reports of Officers: a. City Manager: Briefings: None. Items Recommended for Action: I. A report with regard to selection of a for the Peters Creek Road Extension. Adopted Resolution No. 29953-3590 and 29954-3590. (5-0) preferred Resolution o route No. A report concurring in a report of a bid committee with regard to the purchase of traffic paint. Adopted Ordinance No. 29955-3590. (5-0) A report concurring in a report of a bid committee recommending acceptance of the bid submitted by Pomoco Ford, Inc., for one new seven passenger mini-van, in the total amount of $12,898.00; and appropriation of funds therefor. Adopted Ordinance No. 29956 and Ordinance No. 29957 on first reading. (5-0) City Attorney: A report with regard to the question of whether a spe- cial tax on consumers of local telephone service is applicable to purchasers of said service who have party line service. Concurred in the report. A report recommending adoption of a measure to provide for certain changes in the City's procurement code. Adopted Ordinance No. 29958-3590. (5-0) Reports of Committees: a. A report of the committee appointed to tabulate bids received for improvements to play areas at Jackson, Norwich (2) d o and Wasena Parks, recommending award of a contract to Breakell, Inc., in the total amount of $109,064.00; and appropriation of funds therefor. Council Member Robert A. Garland, Chairman. No. 29959-3590 and Ordinance No. Adopted Ordinance 29960-3590. (5-0) A report of the Water Resources Committee recommending authorization to acquire property located at the intersec- tion of Carlisle Avenue and Bennington Street, S. E., from Mr. David S. Ayers, Jr., in the amount of $6,000.00. Council Member Howard E. Musser, Vice-Chairman. Adopted Ordinance No. 29961-3590. (5-0) A report of the Water Resources Committee recommending authorization to relocate a portion of a public utility easement on property owned by Zane Mae Operating Partners, L.P., located at Crossroads Consumer Mall, 5002 Airport Road, N. W. Council Member Howard E. Musser, Vice-Chairman. Adopted Ordinance No. 29962 on first reading. (5-0) A report of the Water Resources Committee recommending that no changes be made in the allocated capacities of the par- ticipating jurisdictions for use of the Roanoke Regional Sewage Treatment Plant. Council Member Howard E. Musser, Vice-Chairman. Received and filed. A report of the Water Resources Committee with regard to compliance with the Virginia Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit which establishes the parameters and sets the level of treatment for the Roanoke Regional Sewage Treatment Plant· Council Member Howard E. Musser, Vice-Chairman. Received and filed. A report of the Water Resources Committee recommending authorization for a one year extension of the lease with the Virginia Division of Historic Landmarks, Department of Conservation and Historic Resources, for office space in the Buena Vista Recreation Center. Council Member Howard E. Musser, Vice-Chairman. Adopted Ordinance No. 29963 on first reading. (5-0) 7. Unfinished Business: None. (3) 10. Introduction and Consideration of Ordinances and Resolutions: None. Motions and Miscellaneous Business: a. Inquiries and/or comments by the City Council. Vice-Mayor and ~embers of Vacancies on various authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council. Other Hearings of Citizens: (4) Office of the Council March 5~ 1990 The Honorable Members of Roanoke City Council Roanoke~ Virginia Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen: I wish to request an Executive Session to discuss personnel matters relating to vacancies on various authoritiest boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council~ pursuant to Section 2.1-344 (a) (1)~ Code of Virginia (1950)~ as amended. Vi ce-Mayor Jr. BTFj r: se Room 456 Municipal Building 215 C~urch Avenue, S.W. Roonoke, Virginia 2401 t (703) 981-2541 Pending Items from July 10~ 1978~ through February 26, 1990. Referral Date Referred To Item 7/10/78 City Manager Recommendation No. 11 con- tained in the Mayor's 1978 State of the City Message. (Development of Mill Moun- tain - hotel.) 2/23/87 Regional Cable Television Committee Request of Cox Cable Roanoke for a renewal of their fran- chise agreement in order to simplify and clarify langu- age, make certain additions and deletions, and extend the term. 6/20/88 Regional Cable Television Committee Corr~unication advising of Cox Cable Roanoke's intent to seek renewal of the Cable Television Franchise in the City of Roanoke. 1/9/89 City Manager Matter with regard to speed- ing on Hemlock Road~ N. W. 8/14/89 City Manager Mayor's 1989 State of the City Recommendation No. 1 - permitting each City employee to receive his or her birth- day as a holiday~ in such instances where the calendar and work experience will per- mit. 8/14/89 City Manager Mayor's 1989 State of the City Recommendation No. 2 - establish details and cri- teria for an "Employee of the Year" Program for par- ticipation by Roanoke City employees. 8/14/89 City of Roanoke Transportation Safety Cor~nission Mayor's 1989 State of the City Recommendation No. 3 - that the "Star City" become the safest place to live in Virginia by striving to have Virginia's highest highway compliance rate for buckling up. -i- Pending Items from July 10~ 1978~ Referral Date Referred To 8/14/89 City Manager 8114/89 City Manager Trade and Convention Center Corr~nittee 11/13/89 City Manager 12/18/89 City Attorney through February 26~ 1990. Item Mayor's 1989 State of the City Recommendation No. 10 establish linear parks with flowerse street scenes~ benches and walkways at the proper points on both sides of the railroad. Mayor's 1989 State of the City Recommendation No. 12 consider the conversion of the former Railway Passenger Station into a visitor's center if the property is made available to the City in the future. Communication from Council Member David A. Bowers recom- mending the formulation of a "visitation school" to help divorced parents learn how to deal with the problems of coordinating visitation with their children. Communication from Mr. L. Elwood Norris~ Chairman~ Board of Zoning Appeals~ requesting an amendment of Section 62(8),. Zoning~ of the City Charter to provide that the terms of members of the Board of Zoning Appeals shall be staggered so that no more than two members will be eli- gible for reappointment at any given time. -2- Pending Items Referral Date 12/26/89 1/8/90 1/16/90 from July I0, 1978~ through February 26, 1990. Referred To Item Director of Finance The matter of including school teachers in the City of Roanoke Pension Plan was referred to the Director of Finance for the purpose of conferring with appropriate school officials, and report to Council accordingly. In the event that State law precludes such participation, the matter was also referred to the City Attorney to be included in the City's 1991 Legislative Program for con- sideration by the City's delegation to the General Assembly of Virginia. City Attorney Requested to conduct a review of the City's Zoning Ordi- nance to determine if stronger regulations and management procedures are in order for certain zoning mat- ters. R. A. Garland~ Chairman William F. Clark James D. Ritchie Bids for asbestos abatement at 118 through 124 Campbell Avenue, S. W.~ and the Knights of Pythias Building. -3- Office of the City Clerk ~larch 7, 1990 File #514-20 Mr. ~. Robert Herbert CiTy Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 29954-3590 requesting the Virginia Department of Transportation to program a project for the widening of Brandon Avenue, S. W., between the West Corporate Limits and Edgewood Street, S. W., for prelimiaary engineering, right-of-way acquisition amd construction. Resolution No. 29954-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, March 5, 1990. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, C~tC/AAE City Clerk MFP:ra pc: Mr. Mr. Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works Charles ~. Huffine, City Engineer Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations Room 456 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S. W Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2541 Office of the City Clerk March 12, 1990 File #514-20 Mr. B. ~. Sumpter District Engineer Virginia Department of P. O. Box 3071 Salem, Virginia 24153 Transportation Dear Mr. Sumpter: I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 29954-3590 requesting the Virginia Department of Transportation to program a project for the widening of Brandon Avenue, S. W., between the West Corporate Limits and Edgewood Street, S. ~., for preliminary engineering, right-of-way acquisition and construction. Resolution No. 29954-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, March 5, 1990. Sincerely, ,,/~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP:ra Eric. Room456 MunicipalBu~lding 215Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703)981-2541 Office of the City Clerk ~arch 7, 1990 File #514-20 Mr. M. S. ~ollis Urban Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation 1401 East Broad Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 Dear Mr. Hollis: I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 29954-3590 requesting the Virginia Department of Transportation to program a project for the widening of Brandon Avenue, S. W., between the West Corporate Limits and Edge~ood Street, S. ~., for preliminary engineering, right-of-way acquisition and construction. Resolution No. 29954-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, ~arch 5, 1990. Sincerely, ~ Mary F. Parker, C~C/AAE City Clerk MFP:ra Enc. Room4S6 MunicipalBuilding 215Church Avenu=,S.W Roanoke. Virginia 24011 (703)981 2541 IN TRE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, The 5th day of March, 1990. No. 29954-3590. A RESOLUTION requesting the Virginia Department of Transportation to program a project for the widening of Brandon Avenue, S. W., between the West Corporate Limits and Edgewood Street, S. W., for preliminary engineering, right-of-way acquisition and construction. WHEREAS, it is necessary that a request by Council resolution be made in order that the Virginia Department of Transportation initiate an urban highway project in the City of Roanoke; and WHEREAS, the widening of Brandon Avenue, S. W., between the West Corporate Limits and Edgewood Street, S. W., will provide efficient and rapid movement of traffic and greater access to business and industrial areas; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that: 1. requests ject for the improvement of Brandon Avenue widening from West Corpo- rate Limits to Edgewood Street, S. W., a distance of approximately This is a priority project for the City and the City hereby the Virginia Department of Transportation to establish a pro- the City of Roanoke hereby agrees to pay its for preliminary engineering, right-of-way and construction of this project in accordance with $33.1-44 of the Code of Virginia, as amended, and that, if the City of Roanoke sub- 1.3 miles. 2. The Council of share of the total cost sequently elects to stop or cancel this project, the City of Roanoke hereby agrees to reimburse the Virginia Department of Transportation for the total amount of the costs expended by the Department through the date the Department is notified of such suspension or cancella- tion. 2. The City Clerk is directed to forward an attested copy of this resolution to the appropriate persons at the Virginia Department of Transportation. ATTEST: City Clerk. Office of the City C~erk March 7, 1990 File #514-20 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear ~r. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 29953-3590 approving the location of a proposed project involving the extension of Peters Creek Road from Melrose Avenue, N. W. to Brandon Avenue, S. ~., identified as Alternate 1 (excepting the northernmost end of the Project where Alternative 2 is desired for an approximate distance of 1,500 feet). Resolution No. 29953-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on ~onday, ~areh 5, 1990. ~ary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP:ra Enc. pc: Mr. Jonathan Rogers, Co-President, Greater 5eyerle Neighborhood Association, 3734 Lake Drive, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24018 ~r. Jim Ellison, Co-President, Greater Deyerle Neighborhood Association, 2030 Knollwood Drive, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24018 ~r. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works ~r. Charles ~. Huffine, City Engineer Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations Room 456 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue,$.W Roanol~e, Virginia 24011 (703) 981 2541 IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, The 5th day of March, 1990. No. 29953-3590. VIRGINIA, A RESOLUTION approving the location of a proposed project involving the extension of Peters Creek Road from Melrose Avenue, N. W. to Brandon Avenue, S. W., identified as Alternate 1 (excepting the northernmost end of the Project where Alternative 2 is desired for an approximate distance of 1,500 feet). WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on December 14, 1988, in the City of Roanoke by representatives of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Transportation, after due and proper notice, for the purpose of considering the proposed location of the Peters Creek Road Extension Project between Melrose Avenue and Brandon Avenue, S. W, in the City of Roanoke, at which hearing aerial photographs, drawings and other pertinent information were ~%de available for public inspection in accordance with State and Federal requirements; WHEREAS, all persons and parties in attendance were afforded full opportunity to participate in said public hearing; WHEREAS, the Council has previously requested the Virginia Department of Transportation to program this Project; and WHEREAS, representatives of the City of Roanoke were present and participated in said hearing; and WHEREAS, the Council has considered all such m~tters, includ- ing those outlined in the City Manager's report dated March 5, 1990. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that this Council hereby approves Alternate 1 (excepting the northernmost end of the Project where Alternate 2 is desired for an approximate distance of 1,500 feet) as the location for the proposed Project, which Alternate was one of several build alternatives presented at the public hearing. ATTEST: City Clerk. ,~ Roanoke, Virginia ~,~-~ March 5, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Subject: Peters Creek Road Extension - Selection of Preferred Route Dear Members of Council: I. Background: Peters Creek Road Extension has been in the Roanoke Valley Area Transportation Plan since 1963, and was most recently endorsed in Roanoke Vision, the City's Comprehensive Development Plan for 1985- 2005. The alternative alignments (Attachment A) which range from 2.5 to 3.0 miles in length, connect two (2) primary highways -- Route 460 (Melrose Avenue, N. W.) and Route 11 (Brandon Avenue, S. W.). The new roadway would create a four-lane divided highway (16-foot wide raised median). B. The Virqinia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has programmed this project in its Six-Year Improvement Program in accordance with City Council's request on June 17, 1985 (Resolution No. 27613). Of the $20,215,000 that VDOT has estimated for this project in the Six-Year Program (for engineering, right-of-way and construction), $8,795,000 has been funded by VDOTthrough Fiscal Year 1989-90. The remaining funds are projected to be allocated during the next several years. C. Pur__g_Ep_9~ of this project is to provide for the efficient and rapid movement og~traffic between the north and south ends of the western half of the City Roanoke. It will provide the only crossing of the Roanoke River and Norfolk Southern Railway between Route 419 and Schaffer's Crossing. The improved access would enhance mobility for emergency vehicles, City services, economic development (as well as redevelopment) and the general public. The project also creates an opportunity to consolidate Fire Department services provided by Station No. 4 (Aerial Way Drive) and Station No. 12 (Salem Turnpike) into one permanent station. D. Location public hearinq was held on December 14, 1988, at Fairview Elementary School. The hearing, after due and proper not ce for the purpose of considering the proposed location of the project, included aerial photographs, drawings and other pertinent information available for public inspection in accordance with State and Federal requirements. All persons and parties in attendance were afforded full opportunity to participate. II. Current Situation: A. Evaluation of information received at the public hearing led the City to seek VDOT's assistance in employing an individual to lead a conflict resolution process consisting of representatives from the Greater Deyerle Neighborhood Association, VDOT and the City. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Page 2 B. Conflict resolution process recently concluded with participants agreeing to the attached document titled, "Censensus Response to the Proposed Peters Creek Road Construction" (Attachment B). C. Environmental considerations such as Strauss Park and Peters Creek have been reviewed. North of the Roanoke River, Alternative 1 passes through the western half of Strauss Park which consists of steeply sloping terrain. This is preferrable to Alternative 2 which would entail the acquisition of one section of Spanish Trace apartments and the relocation of 98 families living in that section. South of Melrose Avenue, Alternative 2 passes through the western edge of the parking lot at the Plaza of Roanoke-Salem fora distance of approximately 1,500 feet. Although this requires two (2) additional bridges over Peters Creek, this is preferrable to Alternative 1 which would entail considerable rechannelization of Peters Creek. Alternative 2 can also be made compatible with the Peters Creek Flood Reduction Project. D. Resolution from City Council approving a location (alignment) of the proposed project will enable the Commonwealth Transportation Board to also act upon the project. Approval by Council and the Board would enable VDOTto begin engineering the project. A second resolution from City Council is needed to request VDOT to program improvements to Brandon Avenue between the City limits and Edgewood Street. III. Issues: A. Traffic movement B. Neiqhborhoodconcerns C. Cost D. Time IV. Alternatives: A. City Council approve Alternative 1, which was one of several build alternatives presented at the public hearing, for the location of the proposed project (excepting the northernmost end of the project where Alternative 2 is desired for an approximate distance of 1,500 feet). City Council also request by Resolution that the Virginia Department of Transportation program a project for roadway widening on Brandon Avenue, S. W., between the West Corporation Limits and Edgewood Street. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Page 3 Traffic movement is best served by this alignment due to the location of its intersection with Brandon Avenue. VDOT traffic projections indicate that a majority of the 31,800 to 33,100 daily motorists (forecast year 2010) that desire to make use of a roadway in this corridor have origins and destinations toward the City of Roanoke rather than the City of Salem. Hence, this easternmost alignment most directly serves this demand. Neicthborhood concerns have been addressed during the recently concluded conflict resolution process. The leadership of the Greater Deyerle Neighborhood Association has accepted this alternative if the measures listed on Attachment B are instituted. One of these measures provides for the widening of Brandon Avenue between the City limits and Edgewood Street (1.3 miles) before or by the completion ot~ Peters Creek Road. Cost of Alternative 1 is estimated at $15,000,000. This is $5,215,000 less t~ the $20,215,000 currently programmed for this project in VDOT's Six-Year Improvement Program. This difference could be used for the proposed Brandon Avenue Widening Project which is estimated to cost $7,000,000. 4. Time for construction project would tentatively be as follows: Phases Action Date I. VDOTApproval II. Engineering III. Right-of-Way Acquisition IV. Construction V. Completion April- May, 1990 Fa11,1990 Spring, 1993 January, 1995 December, 1997 B. City Council approve either Alternat ve 2 or 3, wh ch were two of several build alternatives presented at the public hearing, for the location of the proposed project. Traffic movement for either of these alignments is not well served due to the location of its intersection with Brandon Avenue. VDOT traffic projections indicate that a majority of the 31,800 to 33,100 daily motorists (forecast year 2010) that des re to make use of a roadway in this corridor have origins and destinations toward the City of Roanoke rather than the City of Salem. Consequently, these vehicles would have greater travel times and distances when compared to Alternative 1. Neiqhborhood concerns could be addressed, however, the leadership of the Greater Deyerle Neighborhood Association did not recommend either of these alternative routes as a result of the conflict resolution process. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Page 4 3. Cost of Alternatives 2 and 3 are estimated at $20,200,000 and 2~,000,000, respectively. These are approximately equal to the amount currently programmed for this project in VDOT's Six-Year Improvement Program. Consequently, no Peters Creek Road funds could be used for the proposed Brandon Avenue Widening Project. 4. Time by which construction could start is expected to be no earlier than January, 1996, with completion no earlier than December, 1998. C. City Council approve Alternative 4, which was one of several build alternatives presented at the public hearing, for the location of the proposed project. 1. Traffic movement for this alignment is not well served due to the location of its intersection with Brandon Avenue. VDOT traffic projections indicate that a majority of the 31,800 to 33,100 daily motorists (forecast year 2010) that desire to make use of a roadway in this corridor have origins and destinations toward the City of Roanoke rather than the City of Salem. Consequently, these vehicles would have greater travel times and distances when compared to other alternatives. Additionally, Salem City Council, at its meeting on December 12, 1988, indicated that it is unequivocally opposed to this alternative due to anticipated traffic impact in Salem. 2. Neiqhborhood concerns could only part a ly be addressed and the leadership of the Greater Deyerle Neighborhood Association did not recommend this alternative route upon learning that VDOTwould not proceed with the project over Salem's opposition. 3. Cost of Alternative 4 is estimated at $22,200000. This is nearly 2~0.00,000 more than the amount currenty programmed for this project in VDOT's Six-Year Improvement Program. Consequently, no Peters Creek Road funds could be used for the proposed Brandon Avenue Widening Project. 4. Time by which construction could start is expected to be no earlier than January, 1996, with completion no earlier than December, 1998. D. City Council not appr,o, ve an aliqnment for the location of the proposed project and select the 'No Build" Alternative. 1. Traffic movement is poorly served. VDOT traffic projections indicate that that the 31,800 to 33,100 daily motorists (forecast year 2010) that desire to make use of a roadway in this corridor would continue to use existing roadways. 2. Nei.qhborhood concerns would not necessarily be addressed by this alternative. 3. Cost is zero. 4. Time is not an issue. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Page 5 V. Recommendation is that City Council approve Alternative "A" and: Approve Alternative 1, which was one of several build alternatives presented at the public hearing on December 14, 1988, for the location of the proposed project (excepting the northernmost end of the project where Alternative 2 is desired for an approximately distance of 1,500 feet). B. Request by Resolution that the Virginia Department of Transportation program a project for roadway wic]ening on Brandon Avenue, S. W., between the West Corporate Limits and Edgewood Street for preliminary engineering, right-of-way acquisition and construction. C. Indicate that, if the City cancels this project n the future for any reason, the City would pay 100 percent of a costs associated with any work completed on the cancelled project between t me of programming and the cancellation notice. (This type of statement is usual and typical of all highway project programming requests made by municipalities throughout Virginia.) D. Approval of this Brandon Avenue recommendation by City Council will necessitate the provision of local share funding, in the form of a Capital Improvement Program, at the time of project construction. WRH:RKB:mds Respectfully submitted, City Manager Attachment: A - Alternatives Location Map B - Consensus Response CC: Director of Finance City Attorney Director of Public Works Director of Utilities & Operations City Engineer Z · ! ATTACHMENT B Consensus Response to the Proposed Peters Creek Road Construction We recognize the construction of Peters Creek Road will have an impact on the Greater Deyerle Neighborhood, particularly as it relates to increased volumes of traffic. We wish to preserve the natural beauty and rural atmosphere of the neighborhood, and support this cormmunity's values and objectives. Therefore, we accept the construction of Alternative I if the following measures are instituted: Brandon Avenue widened between City limits and Edgewood before or by the completion of Peters Creek Road. Four-way Stop signs installed at the intersection of Mud Lick Road and Deyerle Road. No left turn from Brandon Avenue onto Deyerle Road during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, Monday through Friday. No left turn from Deyerle onto Brandon Avenue during the a.m., peak hours. No left turn from Grandin Road onto Mud Lick during the a.m., peak hours, Monday through Friday. No entrance or exit (one or the other, not both) at Circle Drive and Grandin Road, subject to the City obtaining 75 percent agreement from residents of Circle-Windsor-Eastview-Pineland- Deyerle (eastern end)-Brymoor-Barnhill Lane. There will be annual reports from the City to the Neighborhood Association to inform them of the traffic volumes on Keagy Road, Cravens Creek Road, Mud Lick Road, Circle Drive, and Deyerle Road. W~en there is a 25 percent increase in traffic volumes in comparison with 1989 volumes on any street, the City will initiate a process with the neighborhood to seek mutually acceptable mitigating measures to preserve the rural-residential character of the neighborhood. The City agrees, when requested by Salem, to recommend that VDOT seek a solution to the traffic problems at the intersection of Apperson Drive and Route 419. The Neighborhood Plan will be completed and distributed by April 20, 1990. This plan will include recommendations for the land uses of Ellet Farm that are compatible with the preservation of the neighborhood. A~ACHMENT B ( cont. ) 10. The City will make every effort possible to enforce the present and proposed traffic control measures, i.e...speed limits and turn prohibitions. In addition to the above mitigating measures, the City acknowledges that there are no current plans to widen Mud Lick Road. Participants: Fred Altizer, Jr. Kim Battista Bob Bengtson Glen Bolt Larry Caldwell Doug Chittum Bill Clark Chris Decker Glenn Dunville 3im Ellison Stephanie Fowler Paul Glassbrenner Herman Hollis 3ohn Marlles Hugh Meagher 3onathan Moore Bob Morris Patsy Napier Jim Phillips Rawleigh Quarles Danielle Rand William 3. Rand III 3onathan Rogers 3ack Stuart B. W. Sumpter Marvin Tart Michael Waldvogel Prepared by: Susan H. Yoder, facilitator February 20, 1990 Office of the Mayor March 5, 1990 Honorable Vice Mayor and Members Roanoke City Council Roanoke, Virginia Re: Peters Creek Road extension Gentlemen: I regret that I am unable to be with you for today's Council meeting due to my attendance at the meetings of the National League of Cities in Washington, D.C. I do, however, want to express my support for the City Manager's recommendations, as set out in his report on the agenda of Council today, with respect to the extension of Peters Creek Road. Knowing of my support for the City Manager's recommendations, I trust that Council will not delay consideration of the two resolutions which are necessary to expedite this important project. I wish you a very successful Council meeting. Sincerely yours ay~r~ Noel C. Taylor, M NCT:shm cc: Mary F. Parker, City Clerk Room 452 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 240t t ]703) 98'~-2~4 Office of the Council March 5, 1990 Honorable Vice Mayor and Members Roanoke City Council Roanoke, Virginia Re: Peters Creek Road extension Gentlemen: I regret that I am unable to be with you for today's Council meeting due to my attendance at the meetings of the National League of Cities in Washington, D.C. I do, however, want to express my support for the City Manager's recommendations, as set out in his report on the agenda of Council today, with respect to the extension of Peters Creek Road. Knowing of my support for the City Manager's recommendations, I trust that Council will not delay consideration of the two resolutions which are necessary to expedite this important project. I wish you a very successful Council meeting. Sincerely yours, Elizabeth T. Bowles ETB:shm cc: Mary F. Parker, City Clerk Room 456 MunicJl:~i Building 2t,5 Church Avenue, SW. Roonoke, 'virginia 2401 t (703) 981-2541 Office of the City Clerk March 7, 1990 File #20 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29955-3590 accepting the bid of Linear Dynamics, Inc., for furnishing and delivering 5,700 gallons of traffic paint, in the total amount of $32,127.00. Ordinance No. 29955-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, March 5, 1990. Sincerely, ~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/~AE City Clerk MFP:ra Enc. Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public ~orks Mr. William L. Stuart, ~anager, Street Maintenance Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director of Administration Public Safety Mr. D. Darwin Roupe, Manager, General Services and Office of the City Clerk March 7, 1990 File #20 Ms. Cynthia M. Beck Assistant Secretary Linear Dynamics, Inc. 400 Lanidex Plaza Parsippany, New Jersey 07054 Dear ,Us. Beck: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 29955-3590 accepting the bid of Linear Dynamics, Inc., for furnishing and delivering 5,700 gallons of traffic paint, in the total amount of $32,127.0~. Ordinance No. 29955-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, March 5, 1990. Sincerely, '~ ~ary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk ,~FP:ra Enc. Room4S6 MunicipaJBuilding 215Church Avenue, S W Roahoke. Virginia 2~t011 (703)981 2541 Office of the City Clerk ~1arch 7, 1990 File #20 ~r. Vincent J. Civitarese ~arket ~anager Baltimore Paint & Chemical 2325 Hollins Ferry Road Baltimore, Maryland 21230 Company Dear Mr. Civitarese: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 29955-3590 accepting the bid of Linear Dynamics, Inc., for furnishing and delivering 5,700 gallons of traffic paint, in the total amount of $32,127.00. Ordinance No. 29955-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on ~onday, ~arch 5, 1990. On behalf of the ~ayor and Members of City Council, I would li~e to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the above- ~escribed item. Sincerely, ~f~ V Nary F. Parker, C~4C/.RAE City Clerk MFP:ra Enc. Room456 Municipatl~uildincj 215Church Avenue.$ W Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703)981.2541 Office of the City Clerk March 7, 1990 File #20 ~r. ~ennie Russell Manager Metro Paint Supply, Inc. 3719 Brambleton Avenue, S. Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Dear Mr. Russell: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 29955-3590 accepting the bid of Linear Dynamics, Inc., for furnishing and delivering 5,700 gallons of traffic paint, in the total amount of $32,127.00. Ordinance No. 29955-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, March 5, 1990. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the above- described item. Sincerely, ~, ~ary F. Par~er, CMC/~AE City Clerk MFP:ra Enc. Room 456 MunicipalSuilding 215 Church Avenue, S. W Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2541 IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, The 5th day of March, 1990. No. 29955-3590. AN ORDINANCE accepting the bid of Linear Dynamics, VIRGINIA, Inc., made to the City for furnishing and delivering 5,700 gallons of traf- fic paint; rejecting all other bids made to the City; and pro- viding for an emergency. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that: 1. The bid of Linear Dynamics, Inc., made to the City, offering to supply 5,700 gallons of traffic paint, meeting all of the City's specifications and requirements therefor, for the total bid price of $32,127.00, which bid is on file in the Office of the City Clerk, be and is hereby ACCEPTED. 2. The City's ~anaEer of General Services is hereby authorized and directed to issue the requisite purchase order therefor, incorporating into said tions, the terms of said bidder's visions of this ordinance. order the City's specifica- proposal and the terms and pro- 3. Any and all other bids made to the City for the afore- said equipment are hereby REJECTED, and the City Clerk is directed to notify each such bidder and to express to each the City's appreciation for such bid. 4. 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 March 5, 1990 Honorable Mayor and City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of City Council: SUBJECT: BIDS TO PURCHASE TRAFFIC PAINT, BID NUMBER, 90-1-53 I concur with the recommendation of the Bid Committee relative to the above subject and recommend it to you for appropriate action. W. Robert Herbert City Manager DDR/klm c: City Attorney Director of Fi.nance Roanoke, Virginia March 5, 1990 Honorable Mayor and City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of City Council: SUBJECT: BID TO PURCHASE TRAFFIC PAINT, BID NUMBER, 90-1-55 I. Backaround: Traffic Paint is necessary to properly mark city streets. January 1990, specifications were developed and along with request for quotations, were sent to Nine (9) vendors currently listed on the City's bid list. A public advertisement was also published in the Roanoke Times and World News on January 28, 1990. Bids were received, publicly opened and read, after due and proper advertisement, in the Office of the Manager of General Services, at 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday, February 7, 1990. II. Current Situation: Three (3) bid responses were received. tabulation is attached. Bid All bid responses were evaluated in a consistent manner by representations of Street Maintenance and General Services. The lowest bid, submitted by Linear Dynamics, Inc. represents a cost reduction of .32 per gallon on yellow paint and .23 per gallon on white paint, below last years prices. III. Issues: A. Need B. Compliance with specifications C. Fund availability IV. Alternatives: Page 2 Bid Number 90-1-53 Council accept the lowest responsible bid, to provide 5,700 gallons of traffic paint, as submitted by Linear Dynamics, Inc. for the total cost of $32,127.00. 1. Need - Traffic paint is necessary to continue the City's annual street marking program. Compliance with Specifications - The bid recommended by this alternative meets all required specifications· Fund Availability - Funds are available in Street l~aintenance account 001-0§2-4110-3005 to provide for this purchase. B. Reject all bids. Need - The City's annual street marking program could not be continued. Compliance with Specifications would not be an issue in this alternative· Fund Availability - Budgeted funds would not be expended for the purpose for which they were intended. V. Recommendation: Council concur with Alternative "A" - accept the lowest responsible bid for 5,700 gallons of Traffic Paint as submitted by Linear Dynamics, Inc., for the total cost of $32,127.00. B. Reject all other bids. Page 3 Bid number 90-1-53 Respectfully submitted, William F. Clark am L. Stuart D. Darwin Roupe ~ DDR/klm c: City Attorney Director of Finance WILBURN C. DIBLING, JR. CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY :~TTORNEY 464 MUNICIPAL BUILDtNG ROANOKE VIRGINIA 2407-1595 'fELEPHONE March 5, 1990 WILLIAM X PARSONS MARK ALLAN WILLIAMS KATHERINE HOWE JONES STEVEN J. TALEVl ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEYS The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Re: Special tax on consumers of local telephone service Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen: At the Council meeting of February 5, 1990, the Honorable Robert A. Garland, Member of City Council, advised that Mr. E. C. Baldwin had complained to him that he (Mr. Baldwin) should not be billed by the C&P Telephone Company for the special tax on con- sumers of local telephone service because he has four-party line service. City Council referred this matter to the City Attorney with the request that I render my official opinion as to the applicability of such tax to Mr. Baldwin. I am pleased to provide my opinion as requested. QUESTION PRESENTED Is the special tax on consumers of local telephone service applicable to purchasers of local telephone service who have party line service? ANSWER Yes. FACTS City Council has adopted a special tax on consumers of tele- phone service in the amount of $.46 per month. Proceeds of the tax have been used to pay the initial capital, installation and maintenance costs of the E-911 telephone system. The system has been installed and is fully operational and available to all telephone customers in the City. The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council March 5, 1990 Page 2 Mr. Baldwin is a consumer of local telephone service who has four-party line service, rather than individual line service. Individual line service is available to Mr. Baldwin and all telephone customers in the City. Although party line telephone consumers have the advantage of 911 dialing, when a party line consumer dials 911, there is no name information or location in- formation associated with the call at the dispatching center. Accordingly, Mr. Baldwin contends that the special tax on con- sumers of local telephone service should not be applicable to him since he does not have full benefit of the enhanced 911 sys- tem and that he should be refunded for previous payments of this tax. According to C&P Telephone Company, all party line service will be phased out on a statewide basis in the upcoming months. All party line subscribers will be transferred to individual line service which will make full 911 Emergency services (enhanced 911) applicable to these customers. Notice of the Company's intent to phase out party line service was given to all customers by letter of June 29, 1989, a copy of which is attached. More recently, officials of the Company have advised City staff that all party line services in the City will be phased out by the end of the first quarter of 1990. DISCUSSION OF LAW The special tax on consumers of local telephone service was adopted by City Council on March 23, 1987. See $$32-275 through 32-282, Code of the City of Roanoke (197)~, as amended ("City Code"). The operative language of this tax ordinance is set out in $32-276 of the City Code which provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "There is hereby imposed and levied by the City upon every purchaser of local telephone service a tax in the amount of forty-six cents ($.46) per month per telephone line. This tax shall be paid by the pur- chaser to the seller of local telephone service for the use of the City to pay the initial capital in- stallation and maintenance costs of the E-911 system." (Emphasis added.) Section 32-275 defines "purchaser" as "...every person who purchases local telephone service." The term "local telephone service" is de- fined as "...switched local exchange access service". See $32-275. Mr. Baldwin is, therefore, a "purchaser of local telephone service." The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council March 5, 1990 Page 3 "Seller" is defined as "...every person...who sells or furnishes local telephone service". C&P Telephone Company is, of course, a "seller". The language of the City Code is clear and unambiguous in its applicability to Mr. Baldwin. The tax in the amount of $.46 per month, which has been levied against Mr. Baldwin as a "purchaser of local telephone service", has been used by the City to pay for the initial capital installation and maintenance costs of the E-911 system. The E-911 system is full operational, and all features of the system are available to purchases of individual line telephone service. Individual line telephone service is available to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Baldwin, as a voluntary party line telephone consumer, seeks an exemption from the clear and unambiguous terms of $32-276 which require the Telephone Company to collect $.46 per month from him as a "purchaser of local telephone service." The special tax on consumers of local telephone service ($$32-275 through 32-282 of the City Code) clearly provides no exemption, express or implied, for party line customers. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the tax is properly being levied against and collected from Mr. Baldwin, and he is not entitled to any refund. I might add that a determination whether a citizen partakes of or utilizes a particular governmental service has never been a legal criterion in considering applicability of taxes supporting such services. I trust that this opinion is fully responsive to your request. With kindest personal regards, I am WCDJr:fcf Attachment Sincerely yours, Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr. City Attorney cc: W. Robert Herbert, City Manager George C. Snead, Jr., Director, Administration and Public Safety William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Alfred Beckley, Manager, Communications Department C&P Telephone A BllAfllnti~ Company 5415 Airport Road, N.W. P. O. Box 12020 Roanoke, Virginia 24022 Telephone (703) 982;4111 June 29, 1989 Mt. A1 Beckley Communications Manager City of Roanoke 215 Church Street Roanoke, VA 24011 Dear Al: With regards to Party Line service and how it interacts with 9-1-1E emergency service, attached please find the letter which 'C&P Telephone Company has sent to all residential customers who subscribe to Party Line service. Currently, any Party Line customer who dials 9-1-1 for assistance will be routed to the Roanoke City PSAP as the default. ' There is no ANI or ALI information associated with a 4-party line. As the letter states, C&P Telephone Company will be phasing out all Party Line service within Virginia in the upcoming months. Since all Party Line subscribers will be transferring to Individual Line Service the problems associated with unidentified ANI and ALI sent to the default PSAP will no longer be an issue. With Individual Line Service the ANI and ALI information will be identified and sent to the serving PSAP where 9-1-1E services are available. If you should have further questions please feel free to contact me on 982-4428. Sincerely, Fred Walters Account Executive cc: Mr. Eugene Fortner Mr, Don Reid June27, lgli~... Dear Party Line Customer: In the coming months, C&P Tole?hone will phase out Party Line service throughout Virginia. Before we begin, the Vh'ginia State Corporation Commission (gCC) requh'es that we provide nil affected customers with the attached notice. Please take a few moments to read both the notice and this letter c~'efully. Ir'yon have already upgraded to individual line service, pleMe disregard this letter. in days bygone, C&P customers had to share a line among two, four, eight, and even ten different pan, es. This was to ensure that as many customers as possible had access to b~sic telephone service. With today's modem telephone equipment, and with Universal Telephone Service a reality, it is no longer practical or economical to provide Pn~y Line service. In fact, C&P has not offesed Pa~'y Line service to new customers since 1983 whenever Individual Line service~ is available. Individual Line services ~re now available vil'tunlly everywhere C&P provides telephone service. Where Individual Line servic~ is not available, it soon will be. For many, Individual Li~te service will mean access to the direct dialing long distance network fo~' the first time. No longer will your telephone set need modification to accom- modate Party Line service. (Telephone sets requiring modification for Individual Line service will be modified, assuming modification is possible, at no charge.) And, many' In. dividual Line usage sensm · services are less expensive than thc Party Line service to which you now subscribe. Excitir. g services like Call Waiting, Call Forwarding and Three. Way Calling will also be available in almost all places we serve. And, of course, you will have the security of know- lng that your calls ~re made in private. In addition to these, the change to Individual Line service will give all users access to emergency 911 service whe~ it is available. If you would ~ to up~tde to Individual Line service now, please call your local business office and place your order. If not, we will provide you with more details about this change as we approach the conversion date for your ~rea. Sincerely, C&P Telephone Office,of the City Clerk March 7, 1990 File #497-183 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29958-3590 amending and reordaining subsection (b) of §23.1-18, Alternative forms of security_, and §23.1-22, Legal actions, and adding a new 2~.I-19.1, Deposit of certain retained funds on certain contracts, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, to authorize certain forms of security to be used in public contracts, to establish certain terms and conditions for legal challenges to procurement decisions and to permit retainage on certain city contracts to be held in escrow. ©rdiaance No. 29958-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular ~eeting held on Monday, March 5, 1990. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, C~C/.4AE City Clerk MFP:ra En¢. pc: The Honorable Roy B. Willett, Chief Judge, Circuit Court The Honorable Clifford R. ~eckstein, Judge, Circuit Court The Honorable Diane McQ. Strickland, Judge, Circuit Court The Honorable Kenneth E. Trabue, Judge, Circuit Court 305 East Main Street, Salem, Virginia 24153 The Honorable G. 0. Clemens, Judge, Circuit Court, P. 0. Sox 1016, Salem, Virginia 24153 The Honorable Philip Trompeter, Chief Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court Room 456 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S W Roanoke. Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2541 ,Ur. W. Robert Herbert March 7, 1990 Page 2 The Honorable Fred L. Hoback, Jr., Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court The Honorable Joseph H. Clarke, II, Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court The Honorable Edward S. Kidd, Jr., Chief Judge, General District Court The Honorable Julian H. Raney, Jr., Judge, General District Court The Honorable Richard C. Pattisal, Judge, General District Court The ~onorable Patsy Testerman, Clerk, Circuit Court Ms. Patsy Bussey, Clerk, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court Mr. Ronald Albright, Clerk, General District Court Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney The Honorable Donald S. Caldwell, Commonwealth's Attorney Mr. Raymond F. Leven, Public Defender, Suite 4B, Southwest Virginia Building, Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Hr. Bobby Do Casey, Office of the Hagistrate, P. 0. Box 13867, Roanoke, Virginia 24037 Hs. Clayne H. Calhoun, Law Librarian Mro Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public ~orks Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations Hr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director of Administration and Public Safety Mr. D. Darwin Roupe, Hanager, General Services Mr. James D. Ritchie, Director of Human Resources Hr. Robert L. Laslie, Vice President - Supplements, Municipal Code Corporation, Po 0. Box 2235, Tallahassee, Florida 32304 IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, The 5th day of March, 1990. No. 29958-3590. AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining subsection (b) of $23.1-18, Alternative forms of security, and $23.1-22, Legal actions, and adding a new $23.1-19.1, Deposit of certain retained funds on certain contracts, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, to authorize certain forms of security to be used in public contracts, to establish certain terms and conditions for legal challenges to procurement deci- sions and to permit retainage on certain city contracts to be held in escrow; and providing for an emergency. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of 1. Section (b) of $23.1-18, Alternative forms of of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and reordained as follows: the City of Roanoke that: security, is amended $23.1-18. Alternative forms of security. (b) If approved by the city attorney, a bidder may furnish a personal bond, property bond, or bank or saving and loan association's letter of credit on cer- tain designated funds in the face amount required for the bid, payment or performance bond. Approval shall be granted only upon a determination that the alternative form of security proffered affords protection to the city equivalent to a corporate surety's bond. 2. Section 23.1-22, Legal actions, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, is amended and reordained as follows: (a) A bidder or offeror, actual or prospective, who is refused permission or disqualified from participation in bidding shall be notified in writing. Such notice shall state the reasons for the action taken. This decision shall be final unless the bidder or offeror appeals within thirty days of receipt of such notice by insti- tuting legal action as provided in $11-70 of the Code of Virginia. If, upon appeal, it is determined that the action taken was arbitrary or capricious, or not in accor- dance with the Constitution of Virginia, statutes or regulations, the sole relief shall be restoration of eligibility. (b) Any bidder who, despite being the apparent low bidder, is determined not to be a responsible bidder for a particular contract shall be notified in writing. Such notice shall state the basis for the determination, which shall be final unless the bidder appeals the deci- sion within ten days by instituting legal action as pro- vided in $11-70 of the Code of Virginia. If, upon appeal, it is determined that the decision was arbitrary or capricious, and the award of the contract in question has not been made, the sole relief shall be a finding that the bidder is a responsible bidder for the contract in question. If it is determined that the decision of the public body was arbitrary or capricious, the relief shall be as set forth in $11-86.B. of the Code of Virginia. A bidder contesting a determination that he is not a responsible bidder for a particular contract shall proceed under this subsection and may not protest the award or proposed award under subsection (d) below. (c) A decision denying withdrawal of bid under the provisions of $11-54 of the Code of Virginia shall be final and conclusive unless the bidder appeals the deci- sion within ten days after receipt of the decision by instituting legal action as provided in $11-70 of the Code of Virginia. If no bid bond was posted, a bidder refused withdrawal of a bid under the provisions of $11-54 of the Code of Virginia, prior to appealing, shall deliver to the public body a certified check or cash bond in the amount of the difference between the bid sought to be withdrawn and the next low bid. Such security shall be released only upon a final determina- tion that the bidder was entitled to withdraw the bid. If, upon appeal, it is determined that the decision refusing withdrawal of the bid was arbitrary or capri- cious, the sole relief shall be withdrawal of the bid. (d) Any bidder or offeror who desires to protest the award or decision to award a contract shall submit such protest in writing to the city manager no later than ten - 2 - days after the award or the announcement of the decision to award, whichever occurs first. Any potential bidder or offeror on a contract negotiated on a sole source or emergency basis who desires to protest the award or the decision to award such contract shall submit such pro- test in the same manner no later than ten days after posting or publication of the notice of such contract. However, if the protest of any actual or potential bidder or offeror depends in whole or in part upon information contained in public records pertaining to the procurement transaction which are subject to inspec- tion under $11-52, Code of Virginia, then the time within which the protest must be submitted shall expire ten days after those records are available for inspec- tion by such bidder or offeror under $11-52, Code of Virginia, or at such later time as provided in this sec- tion. No protest shall lie for a claim that the selected bidder or offeror is not a responsible bidder or offeror. The written protest shall include the basis for the protest and the relief sought. The City Manager or his designee shall issue a decision in writing within ten days stating the reasons for the action taken. This decision shall be final unless the bidder or offeror appeals within ten days of the written deci- sion by instituting legal action as provided in $11-70, Code of Virginia. (e) If prior to an award it is determined that the decision to award is arbitrary or capricious, then the sole relief shall be a finding to that effect. The public body shall cancel the proposed award or revise it to comply with the law. If, after an award, it is determined that an award of a contract was arbitrary or capricious, then the sole relief shall be as hereinafter provided. Where the award has been made but performance has not begun, the performance of the contract may be enjoined. Where the award has been made and performance has begun the public body may declare the contract void upon a finding that this action is in the best interest of the public. Where a contract is declared void, the performing contractor shall be compensated for the cost of performance up to the time of such declaration. In no event shall the performing contractor be entitled to lost profits. (f) Where the City Manager or his designee determines, after a hearing held following reasonable notice to all bidders, that there is probable cause to believe that a decision to award was based on fraud or corruption or on an act in violation of Article 4 of Title 11, Code of Virginia, the City Manager or his designee may enjoin the award of the contract to a particular bidder. - 3 - (g) If injunctive relief is granted, the court, upon request of the City, shall require the posting of reason- able security to protect the City. (h) A contractor may bring an action involving a contract dispute with the City in the appropriate cir- cuit court. (l) Nothing herein shall be construed to prevent the City from instituting legal action against a contractor. 3. The Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, amended and reordained by the addition of the following new $23.1-19.1. Deposit of certain retained contracts. is section: funds on certain (a) When the city contracts directly with a contractor for a public contract of $200,000 or more for construc- tion of highways, roads, streets, bridges, parking lots, demolition, clearing, grading, excavating, paving, pile driving, miscellaneous drainage structures, and the installation of water, gas, sewer lines and pumping sta- tions, where portions of the contract price are to be retained, the contractor may elect to use an escrow account procedure by so indicating in the space provided in the bid documents. In the event the contractor elects to use the escrow account procedure, the escrow agreement form included in the bid proposal and contract shall be fully executed and submitted to the city within fifteen calendar days after notification of the award of bid. If the executed escrow agreement form is not sub- mitted within such fifteen-day period, the contractor shall forfeit his rights to the use of the escrow account procedure. (b) In order to have retained funds paid to an escrow agent, the contractor, the escrow agent, and the surety shall execute the escrow agreement form. The contrac- tor's escrow agent shall be a trust company, bank or savings institution with its principal office located in the Commonwealth. (c) This section shall not apply to public contracts for construction for railroads, public transit systems, runways, dams, foundations, installation or maintenance of power systems for the generation and primary and secondary distribution of electric current ahead of the customer's meter, the installation or maintenance of telephone, telegraph or signal systems for public utili- ties and the construction or maintenance of solid waste or recycling facilities and treatment plants. - 4 - 4. In municipal government, ordinance shall be in order to provide for the usual daily operation of the an emergency is deemed to exist, and this full force and effect upon its passage. Attest: City Clerk. WILBURN C. DIBLING, JR. CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY~''~ 464 MUNICIPAL BUILDING ROANOKE, V~RGINIA 24011-1595 March 5, 1990 WILLIAM X PARSONS MARK ALLAN WILLIAMS KATHERINE HOWE JONES STEVEN J. TALEVI ASSISTAhlT CITY AITORNEY S The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Re: Procurement Code changes Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen: This letter pertains to certain changes in the City's procurement code which I wish to propose for Council's consideration. As you know, in 1982, the City adopted a procurement code which applies to the pro- curement of goods and services by the City. This code was similar in many respects to the State procurement code, and many of our local re- quirements are mandated by the State. Two of the changes which I am recommending at this time are required by State legislation. One requirement applies to contracts of $200,000 or more for certain enumerated categories of construction contracts, including contracts for clearing, grading, excavating, miscellaneous drainage structures and certain other facilities, but not including buildings. See §11-56.1, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. By virtue of this amendment to the State Code, a contractor on one of the enumerated categories of projects may elect to have the contract retainage held in an escrow account rather than retained by the public body. The contractor must execute an escrow agreement form with the City and the escrow agent which may be a trust company, bank or savings institution. The State Code has also been amended to require municipalities to permit contractors, under certain circumstances, to use alternative forms of security in lleu of the required payment or performance bonds with corporate surety. See $11-61, Code of Virginia. These alter- natives include personal~nd, property bond, or bank or savings and loan association letter of credit. An alternative form of security may only be utilized if the City Attorney has determined that the security adequately protects the public body. (Formerly, these alter- native forms of security could only be used in place of bid bonds.) The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council March 5, 1990 Page 2 I also recommend that the City Code be tain time limitations for unsuccessful bidders and others who wish protest a procurement decision to institute an action against the City. Throughout the State, there have been several instances in which public bodies have been sued because of certain procurement decisions. In several cases of which I am aware, time limitations such as the ones which I am proposing have been successfully inter- posed as a defense by the public bodies. The proposed time limita- tions are consistent with State limitations and should benefit the City by requiring that protests be filed and resolved in a timely fashion. I am also recommending that the City Manager be designated by Council to receive such protests and to respond on behalf of the City. amended to incorporate cer- to I have prepared for Council's consideration the enclosed ordinance which ineorporates the changes described above. I will be pleased to respond to any questions which members of Council may have about this matter. With kindest personal regards, I am Sincerely yours, Wilb ; /' ~g, Jr. City Attorney WCDj/WXP:ps Enclosure cc: W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Joel M. Schlanger, Director, Finance William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Office of the City Clerk March 7, 1990 Fi le #67 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Rerbert: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29960-3590 accepting the bid of Breakell, Inc., for improvements to play areas at Jackson, Norwich and Wasena Parks, upon certain terms and conditions, in the total amount of $109,064.00. Ordinance No. 29960-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on ~onday, March 5, 1990. Sincerely, ~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/A. AE City Clerk MFP:ra Enc. pc: Hr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director of Administration and Public Safety Mr. Gary N. Fenton, Manager, Parks and Recreation/Grounds Maintenance Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Ns. Sarah E. Fitton, Construction Cost Technician Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget Ms. Arcelia B. Raston, Junior Accountant, Office of ~anagement and Budget Room~156 MunicipalRuilding 215Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703)981-2541 Office of the City Clerk ,~arch 7, 1990 File #67 ~r. Stanley G. Breakell President Breakell, Inc. P. O. Box 6414 Roanoke, Virginia 24017-0414 Dear Mr. Breakell: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 29960-3590 accepting the bid of Breakell, Inc., for improvements to play areas at Jackson, Norwich and ~asena Parks, upon certain terms and conditions, in the total amount of $109,064.00. Ordinance No. 29960-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, March 5, 1990. Sincerely, ,Wary F. Parker, CMC/hAE City Clerk MFP:ra Enc. Room456 MunicipalBuilding 215Chu[ch Avenue,$ W I~oanoke, Virginia 24011 (703)981.2541 Office of the City Clerk March 7, 1990 File #67 Mr. Charles C. Smith Project Manager Gardner-Smith, Inc. P. 0. Box 866 Salem, Virginia 24153 Dear Mr. Smith: [ am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 29960-3590 acceptiag the bid of Breakell, Inc., for improvements to play areas at Jackson, Norwich and ~asena Parks, upon certain terms and conditions, in the total amount of $109,064.00. Ordinance No. 29960-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, March 5, 1990. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the above- described project. Sincerely, rJ Nary F. Parker, C~C/4AE City Clerk MFP:ra Enc. Office of the City Clerk March 7, 1990 File #67 Mr. Lawrence D. Johnson, Jr. President Construction Services of Roanoke, 3812 Bunker Hill Drive, S. ~. Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Inc. Dear Mr. Johnson: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 29960-3590 accepting the bid of Breakell, Inc., for improvements to play areas at Jackson, Norwich and Wasena Parks, upon certain terms and conditions, in the total amount of $109,064.00. Ordinance No. 29960-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, March 5, 1990. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the above- described project. Sincerely, ~' ~,lary F. Parker, C~IC/4AE C~ty Clerk MFP:ra Enc. Room 456 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue,$ W Roanoke. Virginia 24011 (703)981-2541 Office of the City Clerk March 7, 1990 File #67 ~r. J. ~. Christenbury, Jr. President Acorn Construction, Ltd. P. O. Box 625 Troutville, Virginia 24175 Dear ,Mr. Christenbury: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 29960-3590 accepting the bid of Breakell, Inc., for improvements to play areas at Jackson. Norwich and ~asena Parks, upon certain terms and conditions, in the total amount of $109,064.00. Ordinance No. 29960-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, March 5, 1990. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the above- described project. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker City Clerk CMC/AA E MFP:ra Enc. Room 456 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue,$ W Roanoke. Virginia 2a011 (703) 981-2541 Office of the City Clerk ,~4arch ~', 1990 Fi le #67 Mr. John E. Hammer President Martin Brothers Contractors, Inc. 2213 Patterson Avenue, S. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24016 Dear Mr. Hammer: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 29960-3590 accepting the bid of Breakell, Inc., for improvements to play areas at Jackson, Norwich and ~asena Parks, upon certain terms and conditions, in the total amount of $109,064.00. Ordinance No. 29960-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, March 5, 1990. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the above- described project. Sincerely, ~4ary F. Parker, C~C/AAE City Clerk MFP:ra Enc. Room456 ~lu~,icipall3uilding 215Church Avenu~.S ~A/ Roanoke, Virgin,a 24011 (70])98~ 2541 Office of the City Cler~< ~arch 7, 1990 File #6? Mr. Michael Hayden Project Supervisor Brown Brothers Construction Route 1 ~ionville, North Carolina 28698 Dear ~r. gayden: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 29960-3590 accepting the bid of Breakell, Inc., for improvements to play areas at Jackson, Norwich and Wasena Parks~ upon certain terms and conditions, in the total amount of $109,064.00. Ordinance Mo. 29960-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, March 5, 1990. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the above- described project. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/~AE City Clerk MFP:ra Enc. Office of the City Clerk March 7, 1990 File #67 Mr. J. Barry Hall, Sr. President Halls Construction Corporation P. 0. Box 347 ghawsville, Virginia 24162 Dear ~r. Hall: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 29960-3590 accepting the bid of Breakell, Inc., for improvements to play areas at Jackson, Norwich and ~dsena Parks, upon certain terms and conditions, in the total amount of $109,064.00. Qrdinance No. 29960-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on ~onday, ~arch 5, 1990. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the above- described project. Sincerely, f Nary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP:ra Enc. Room 456 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S. W Roanoke. Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2541 Office of the City Clerk Harch 7, 1990 File #67 Hr. Terry L. Austin President Austin Electrical Construction, Inc. P. 0. ~ox 398 Buchanan, Virginia 24066 Dear Hr. Austin: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 29960-3590 accepting the bid of Breakell, Inc., for improvements to play areas at Jackson, Norwich and Wasena Parks, upon certain terms and conditions, in the total amount of $109,064.00. Ordinance No. 29960-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Honday, Hatch 5, 1990. On behalf of the Mayor and Hembers of City Council, I would ~ike to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the above- described project. Sincerely, Hary F. Parker City Clerk CMC/~AE MFP:ra Enc. Room 456 N1unJcipal Building 215 Church Avenue, $.W Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2541 Office of the City Clerk March 7, 1990 File #67 Mr. William D. Gee Vice-President H & S Construction Company P. O. Box 6226 Roanoke, Virginia 24017 Dear Mr. Gee: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 29960-3590 accepting the bid of Breakell, Inc., for improvements to play areas at Jackson, Norwich and Wasena Parks, upon certain terms and conditions, in the total amount of $109,064.00. Ordinance No. 29960-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, March 5, 1990. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I woula liae to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the above- described project. Sincerely, -~ ~ary F. Parker, CMC/~iAE City Clerk MFP:ra Enc. Room 456 Municipal Building 215Church Avenue, S.W Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2541 IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, The 5th day of March, 1990. No. 29960-3590. AN ORDINtNCE accepting the bid of Breakell, Inc., for improvements to play areas at Jackson, Norwich and Wasena Parks, upon certain terms and conditions, and awarding a contract therefor; authorizing the proper City officials to execute the requisite contract for such work; rejecting all other bids made to the City for the work; and providing for an emergency. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as follows: 1. The bid of Breakell, Inc., made to the City in the total amount of $109,064.00, for improvements to play areas at Jackson, Norwich and Wasena Parks including Alternates Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, such bid being in full compliance with the City's plans and specifica- tions made therefor and as provided in the contract documents offered said bidder, which bid is on file in the Office of the City Clerk, be and is hereby ACCEPTED. 2. The City Manager or the Assistant City Manager and the City Clerk are hereby authorized on behalf of the City to execute and attest, respectively, the requisite contract with the successful bidder, based on its proposal made therefor and the City's specifica- tions made therefor, said contract to be in such form as is approved by the City Attorney, and the cost of said work to be paid for out of funds heretofore or simultaneously appropriated by Council, execution of such contract to be subject to approval of the appropriate sup- porting documents. 3. Any and all other bids made to the City for the aforesaid work are hereby REJECTED, and the City Clerk is directed to notify each such bidder and to express to each the City's appreciation for such bid. 4. In order to provide for the usual daily operation of the municipal government, an emergency is deemed to exist, and this ordi- nance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage. ATTEST: City Clerk. Office of the City Clerk March 7, 1990 File #60-67 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger Director of Finance Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Schlanger: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29959-3590 amending and reordaining certain sections of the 1989-90 Capital Fund Appropriations, providing for the transfer of $120,000.00 from the Capital Improvement Reserve and Park Improvements, Wasena, Washington and Eureka, to Jackson, Norwich, Wasena Improvements, in connection with award of a contract to Breakell, Inc., for improvements to play areas at Jackson, Norwich and Wasena Parks. Ordinance No. 29959-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, March 5, 1990. Sincerely, ) Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP:ra Enc. pc: Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director of Administration and Public Safety Mr. Gary N. Fenton, Manager, Parks and Recreation/Grounds Maintenance Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Ms. Sarah E. Fitton, Construction Cost Technician Hr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget ~s. Arcelia B. ~aston, Junior Accountant, Office of ~anagement and Budget Room~,56 Mu~licipaiBuilding 215Church Avenue. S W Roanoke. Virginia 2~,011 (703)§81-2541 IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA The 5th day of March, 1990. No. 29959-3590. AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the 1989-90 Capital Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency. WHEREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal Government of the City of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to exist. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that certain sections of the 1989-90 Capital Fund Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and reordained to read as follows, in part: Appropriations Recreation Jackson, Norwich, Wasena Improvements (1-2) ...... Park Improvements, Wasena, Washington, Eureka(3). Capital Improvement Reserve Public Improvement Bonds - Series 1988 (4) ....... 1) Appropriations from State Grant Fund 2) Appropriations from General Revenue 3) Appropriations from State Grant Fund 4) Parks (008-050-9634-9007 (008-050-9634-9003 (008-052-9546-9007 (008-052-9603-9180 $ 721,617 120,000 4,270,576 1,977,588 $60,000 60,000 (60,0O0) (60,000) BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage. ATTEST: this City Clerk. BID TABULATION FORM IMPROVEMENTS TO PLAY AREAS AT JACKSON, NORWICH AND WASENA PARKS Bids publicly opened and read before Roanoke City Council on Tuesday, February 20, 1990, at the 2:00 p.m. meeting in Council Chambers. BIDDERS Acorn Construction, Ltd. Breakell, Inc. Construction Services of Roanoke H & S Construction Hall's Construction Corp. Martin Brothers Construction BID ITEM NO. 1~ BASE BID $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Project Estimate: $140,000.00 Committee Chairperson Committee Member Committee Member Office of the City Clerk ~4arch 7, 1990 File #2-2? Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear ,~1r. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29961-3590 accepting the offer of David S. Ayers, Jr., to sell and convey to the City por- tions of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, Eastover Place, Official Tax No. 4340212, in the City of Roanoke, for the cash sum of $6,000.00. Ordinance No. 29961-3590 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on ~onday, ~arch 5, 1990. Sincerely, ~/ Mary F. Parker, CMC/_~L4E City Clerk MFP:ra pc: Mr. Jack Scaggs, Coldwell Banker Valley-Wide Realtors, 2302 Colonial Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24015 Mr. 4oel ~. Schlanger, Director of Finance ~r. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works Mr. Charles ~. Huffine, City Engineer Ur. Richard V. Hamilton, Real Estate Agent ~r. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations Ur. Steven L. Wal~er, Manager, Sewage Treatment Plant Room456 MunicipalBuilding 215Church Avenue, S W Roanoke, virginia 24011 {703)981-2541 IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, The 5th day of March, 1990. No. 29961-3590. AN ORDINANCE providing for the City's acquisition of portions of Lots 1,2 & 3, Block 1, Eastover Place, bearing Official Tax No. 4340212, in the City of Roanoke; and providing for an emergency. BE 1. The offer of David S. Ayers, Jr., the City portions of Lots 1, 2 & 3, Block bearing Official Tax No. 4340212, for the be and is hereby ACCEPTED. IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that: to sell and convey to 1, Eastover Place, cash sum of $6,000.00, 2. Upon delivery to the City of a good and sufficient deed of conveyance granting and conveying to the City the fee simple title to the aforesaid land, free and clear of all encumbrances and material title and modern English said deed to be in City officials shall be and are hereby authorized to deliver to objections, and containing General warranty covenants of title on behalf of the grantors, form approved by the City Attorney, the proper the City Attorney to price hereinabove said grantor as taxes. such person or persons, as are certified by be entitled thereto, the $6,000.00 purchase provided, less any amount due to be paid by 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 March 5, 1990 Honorable Mayor and City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: Subject: Land Acquisition - Water Pollution Control Plant Flood Plain - Carlisle Avenue & Bennington Street, S.E. - Official Tax No. 4340212 The attached staff report was considered by the Water Resources Committee at its meeting on February 26, 1990. The Committee recommends that Council authorize the acquisition of the property from Mr. David $. Ayers, Jr., for $6,000.00 in accordance with conditions stated in the attached report. Respectfully submitted, Water Resources Committee ETB:KBK:afm Attachment CC: City Manager City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Utilities & Operations Real Estate Agent Manager, Sewage Treatment Plant City Engineer Jack Scaggs, Coldwell Banker Valley-Wide Realtors, Inc. INTERDEPARTHENTAL COMHUNICATION DATE: TO: FROM: RE: February 26, 1990 MembeNs, Water Resourc~s Committee ,~'Mr.~ Kiser thru Mr. Herbert Land Acquisition Water Pollution Control PlantFlood Plain Carlisle Avenue and Bennington Street, SE Official Tax No. 4340212 I. Background: Need for land for possible future expansion of Sewage Treatment Plant (S.T.P.) always exists. City policy has been to try to acquire prop- erty which becomes available, subject to the usual considerations of price and funding availability. Acquisition of subject property~ located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Carlisle Avenue and Bennington Street, SE, adjoins S.T.P. property, and provides the ability to clean and maintain the entire embankment along the southerly approach to the bridge. (See map attached). Property~ owned by David S. Ayers, Jr., contains no structures. Property is located in the floodplain of the river, and was advertised for sale at $8~950.00. II, Current Situation: A. City Administration has negotiated a price of $6~000.00 for the lot, per the attached purchase contract. B. Office of Real Estate Valuation has indicated that the negotiated price is reasonable. III. Issues: A. Need B. Funding C. Timing TO: Members, Water Resources Committee FROM: K. Kiser thru Mr. Herbert DATE: 2/26/90 PAGE TWO IV. Alternatives: Recommend to City Council that it authorize the acquisition of por- tions of Lots 1,2, & 3, Block 1, Eastover Place, Official Tax No. 4340212, from Mr. David S. Ayers, Jr., for $6~000.00, Seller to provide the necessary legal documentation to accomplish the sale in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, contingent upon final deter- mination of appropriateness by the City Manager. 1. Need by City to acquire buffer properties at S.T.P., and remove private property from flood prone area is met. 2. Fundin~ is available in Account No. 003-056-8420-9050 in the Sewer Fund. 3. Timin8 to acquire property within time constraints of agreement with owner is met. B. Do not recommend to City Council that it authorize this purchase. 1. Need by City for property not met. 2. Fundin8 is moot 3. Timin$ to meet time constraints of purchase agreement is not met. V. Recommendation: Committee recommend to City Council that it authorize the acquisition of the property in accordance with Alternative "A". WRH/KBK/RVH/eam Attachments City Attorney Director of Finance Manager, STP City Engineer Jack Scaggs, Coldwell Banker Valley-Wide Realtors, Inc. 2302 Colonial Avenue, SW Roanoke, VA 24015 VALLEY-WIDE, REALTORS 2302 C~,entai Ave., $.W., Reanokl, VA 2401S · (703) 982-22~4 Smith Mountain Lake RL 5 Box 317 Monet~ VA 24121 · (/03) 7214303 ! ! Office of the City Clerk ~4arch 7, 1990 File #27 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: ~ report of the ~ater Resources Committee recommending that no changes be made in the allocated capacities of the participating jurisdictions for use of the Roanoke Regional gewage Treatment Plant, was before the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, Hatch 5, 1990. On motion, duly seconded and adopted, the report was received and filed. Sincerely, } Hary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP : ra Eric. pC: Mr. John B. Williamson, III~ Botetourt County Administrator, P. 0. Box 279, Fincastle, Virginia 24090 Hr. George W. Nester, Vinton Town Hanager, 311 South Pollard Street, Vinton, Virginia 24179 Hr. Randolph H. Smith, City ~anager, City of Salem, P. ©. ~ox 869, Roanoke, Virginia 24153 Mr. John R. Hubbard, Assistant County Administrator for Public Facilities, P. 0. ~ox 29800, Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798 Mr. Kit ~. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations Hr. Steven L. Walker, Manager, Sewage Treatment Plant Room456 MunicipalBuilding 215Church Avenue,$.W Roarloke~Virginia 24011 (703)981-2541 Roanoke, Virginia March 5, 1990 Honorable Mayor and City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: Subject: Capacity Allocation - Roanoke Regional Sewage Treatment Plant The attached staff report was considered by the Water Resources Committee at its meeting on February 26, 1990. The Co~nittee recommends that Council receive and file this report. Respectfully submitted, ~ ~ ~' Chairman EliZabeth T. Bowles,~~ Water Resources Committee ETB:KBK:afm Attachment CC: City Manager City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Utilities & Operations Mr. Randolph M. Smith, Salem City Manager Mr. John B. Williamson, III, Botetourt County Administrator Mr. George W. Nester, Vinton Town Manager Mr. John R. Hubbard, Assistant County Administrator for Public Facilities, Roanoke County I~r~d~DEPARTM~T CO~4D~CATION DATI~: TO: FROM: February 26, 1990 Chairman and Members, Water Res uo~q~s Committee ~'. ~. K~?~er* thru W. Robert Her e~rt~-~ S%]]~JECT: Capacity Allocation - Roanoke Regional Sewage Treatment Plant I. Background: Ao 1972 sewage treatment contracts assisned the following allocated capacities: 1. Roanoke County - 9.50 million gallons per day (MGD). 2. City of Salem - 6.65 million gallons per day (MGD). 3. Botetourt County - 1.90 million gallons per day (MGD). 4. Town of Vinton - 1.12 million gallons per day (MGD). Meetin~ every third year~ beginning in February, 1975, is required of representatives of the jurisdictions that are parties to the 1972 contracts, to determine if there is justification and agreement to reallocate capacities as originally assigned by the 1972 contracts. One ad.iustment has been made during the life of the 1972 contract. That adjustment reduced the allocated capacity of Roanoke County by 0.5 MGD, (from 9.5 to 9.00 MGD), and increased the allocated capacity of the Town of Vinton by 0.5 MGD, (from 1.12 to 1.62 MGD). II. Current Situation: Representatives of the jurisdictions who are parties to the 1972 contract met on February 12, 1990, to determine if there was justification and agreement to reallocate capacity. Attached is a listing of persons who attended the meeting. III. Conclusion: Ao None of the .iurisdictions desired to reduce their current allocated capacity. Representatives of the jurisdictions agreed not to recommend any changes in the allocated capacities. Chairman and Members, Water Resources Committee February 26, 1990 Page 2 IV. Recommendation: Committee recommend that City Council receive and file this report. KBK:afm Attachment CC: Mr. Randolph M. Smith, Salem City Manager Mr. John B. Williamson, III, Botetourt County Administrator Mr. George W. Nester, Vinton Town Manager Mr. John R. Hubbard, Assistant County Administrator for Public Facilities, Roanoke County February 12, 1990 Swage Treatment Plant Allocation Capacity Meetin$ Attendees W. Robert Herbert Kit B. Kiser John B. Williamson, III Bonnie L. Johnson John R. Hubbard Clifford Craig Randolph M. Smith Forest G. Jones J. Wesley Graham John D. Abbott Represemting City of Roanoke City of Roanoke Botetourt County Botetourt County Roanoke County Roanoke County City of Salem City of Salem City of Salem City of Salem George W. Nester Town of Vinton Robert W. Benninger Town of Vinton Office of the City Clerk March 7, 1990 File #27 ~r. W. Robert Herbert City Manager ~oanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: A report of the Water Resources Committee with regard to compliance with the Virginia Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit which establishes the parameters and sets the level of treatment for the Roanoke Regional Sewage Treatment Plant, was before the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, March 5, 1990. On motion, duly seconded and adopted, the report was received and filed. Since re ly, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP:ra Enc. pc: Mr. Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Steven L. ~alker, Manager, Utilities and Operations Sewage Treatment Plant Room456 Municipal0uilding 215Churc:h Avenue,S.W Roanoke. Virginia 24011 (703)98~-254~ Roanoke, Virginia March 5, 1990 Honorable Mayor and City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: Subject: Virginia Water Control Board "95%" Letter, Sewage Discharge Parameters vs. Permit The attached staff report was considered by the Water Resources Committe~ at its meeting on February 26, 1990. The Committee recommends that Council receive and file this report. ETB:KBK:afm Attachment cc: City Manager City Attorney Elizabeth T. Bowles, Chairman Water Resources Committee Director of Finance Director of Utilities & Operations I~r~xOEPAR~4ENT CO~IONICATIO~ DATE: TO: FROM: February 26, 1990 Chairman and Members, Water Resources Co~ittee SUBJECT: Virginia Water Control Board "95%" Letter, Sewage Discharge Parameters vs. Permit I. Background: Permit for discharge into State waters, Virginia Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit (¥PDES Permit) establishes the parameters and sets the level of treatment for the Roanoke Regional Sewage Treatment Plant. 95% letter, a letter requiring the City to submit a plan of action to ensure compliance with permit conditions, was received on February 5, 1990. Attached is a copy of the letter. As noted in the letter, the sewage plant experienced several permit infractions for specific months during 1989. Rainfall plays a very important part in the volume of sewage flow at our Sewage Treatment Plant. Basement drains, sump pumps and foundation drains generally connect to building sewer laterals. Also, infiltration and inflow from high water table and surface water can add to the flow in the sewer lines. Infiltration can be through cracks in sewer pipes and manholes. Inflow can be through the vent holes in the tops of sewer manholes as well as breaks in the sewer system. Record rainfall occurred in 1989. The attached article calls 1989 the fourth wettest year on record since 1893 and certainly the wettest since the VPDES Permit System came into use. Conversely, 1988 was classified as the fourth driest since record keeping began. Comparison sheet is attached. This sheet compares the monthly discharge parameters for 1988 and 1989 with the VPDES Permit parameters. Annual average discharge for 1989 met all discharge parameters. However, the plant's performance is judged on monthly average discharge parameters. Page 2 II. Current Situation: 20 year Wastewater Facility Plan was developed by Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. in 1987 under contract with the City. This plan was approved by Council on June 1, 1987. Following approval of the plan, City representatives met with representatives of other jurisdictions to evaluate whether the parties to the 1972 sewage treatment contracts were prepared to fund the improvements outlined in the 20 year facilities plan, which improvements were estimated to cost $32,000,000. Ail local jurisdictions have undertaken or have planned improvements since 1989. These improvements deal with the abatement of infiltration and inflow (I/I). Example of improvements funded by the City of Roanoke are: FY 89 Sewer line maintenance, repairs and misc. const. $ 947,437.00 Sewer replacement projects obligated or finished in FY 89, in Williamson Road area, Mudlick, and Norwich $2,180,197.70 1st 6 Months of FY 90 Sewer line maintenance, repairs and misc. const. $ 431,626.74 Other major expenditures identifie~ by the 20 year facility plan but which do not relate to I/I abatement include: Comminutor replacement with Fine Mesh Screens $ 544,050.00 #7 Blower Engine Replacement $ 828,000.00 Dechlorination Facility construction $ 433,440.00 III. Intended course of action: Respond to the Virginia Water Control Board outlining the I/I abatement projects and efforts that have occurred in 1989 or are being initiated in 1989 by all local jurisdictions and point out unusual circumstances of rainfall amount while stressing that the annual average did meet permit parameters. Continue to discuss with other ~urisdictions the need for all jurisdictions to cox~it substantial capital expenditures for treatment plant and interceptor capacity expansions. Page 3 IV. Recommendation: Cox~ittee submit this report to Council with the request that the report be received and filed. KBK:afm Attachments ROANOEE REGIONAL S~NAGE TREA~i~r~ PLANT 1988 & 1989 Permit Conditions vs. Actual Discharges Permitted 662 1989 Actual Date Rainfall (In.) ss Phos 35.00 331 27 530/265 1989 54.44 34.33 57 274 22 173/215 1988 Actual December 1.28 25.21 November 2.42 23.62 October 1.25 24.49 September 3.01 26.00 August 4.30 22.72 3uly 3.75 23.40 3une 3.66 24.88 May 2.76 25.07 April 3.40 25.61 March 0.88 23.77 February 1.07 26.19 3anuary 1.87 31.96 55 89 12 63/ 86 73 17 66/ 67 69 16 73/ 89 65 12 / 93 92 61 12 / 73 57 58 15 / 69 85 76 18 / 84 95 74 13 /181 177 104 13 / 85 119 178 16 133/ 272 182 19 210/ 300 108 17 408/ 1988 29.65 25.24 125 95 15 159/98 Avg./88 & 89 42.05 29.79 91 185 19 166/157 * - Daily Averages ** - Winter/Summer Additional Information: Januar~ 1990 2.33 41.90 215 137 15 364/ December 2.60 35.00 70 254 27 230/ November 3.86 35.00 118 311 20 298/ October 4.13 39.19 65 847 28 243/ September 8.94 38.30 53 414 27 /185 August 1.65 34.62 29 200 21 /260 3uly 10.09 49.00 88 492 33 /308 June 7.78 38.62 53 274 29 /281 May 6.46 36.24 41 200 15 /164 April 2.54 26.12 28 74 15 / 94 March 2.94 29.15 31 84 15 105/ February 2.04 25.66 52 65 16 99/ January 1.31 25.06 56 68 17 63/ COMMONWEALTH o[ VIRGINIA ST.4TE IVATER CONTROL BOARD 2111 N. Hamilton Street FEB. 12 1990 P 1.20 791 899 RECEIVED City Manager's Office Roanoke, VA BOARD MEMBERS William T Clements Henry O Hollimon, Jr Ronald M Plotkin Velma M. Smith Patrick L Standing W Bidgood Wall Jr This letter will inform l~u that the city of ~oanoke (hereinafter referred to as "Roanoke") has been referred to the State Water C~rol Boazd's office of Enforcement for c~tic overflows and a clu.~ of V[~ES permit effluent limitation violatior~ in the Fall of 1989. In ~-~ition, ~ur recu~ds indicate that Roanoke's b-ru has e~c~~4 95% of its ~ign flow for the m0~chs of May ~ December 1989. ~e a~x~ flow~ are: May - 36.24 MGD, J%ale - 38.62 [~GD, J~ly - 49.05 MC~, August - 34.64 ~[~D, Se~~.~ - 38.3 i~D, Oct__~h~T - 39.19 ~J~D, Noveatber - 35.0 and Dec~mt~r - 35.0 t~D. ~he ~ign ~city of the plant is 35.0 ~D. In accordance with VR 680-14-01, secti~ 4.1 of the Board Permit l~gulations, you are rec~=t__~_ to _~,~it to .th/s office, within 90 days of the receipt of this letter, a plan of actic~ for ensuring cc~cim~ .'--.~.liance with the terms of ~ permit No. VA0025020. ~le plan shall include the neoessary stege and a p~t schedule of impl~mmltatic~l for ocrttrolling any cu~ or l~ebly anticipatable If you have any questicr~ cor~ the oc~ce~:s of this letter pl~e cc~tact Charles R. Stitzer, the e~fc=~e~e~t ~e~cative fo~ the Board's We~t Central Regional Office, at (804) 367-6771. Steven L. Walker West Central Regional Office Jim Smith, SWCB, DE/CA, WC~O (~lArles R. Stitzer, DE/CA ~ Sawyer, S~D, Ri~ S~D, Lexingtc~ 1%sgic~al office you for your attenti~ to~ matter. , .? /') U //' v.  ~fi~ of ~~