HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Actions 02-08-88· ~ ~ Garland
- 128976)
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION ...... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
February 8, 1988
7:30 p.m.
AGENDA FOR THE COUNCIL
Call to Order -- Roll Call. All present.
The invocation will be delivered by The Reverend Ralph
Brown, Pastor, The Antioch Church. Present.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States
of America will be led by Mayor Noel C. Taylor.
BID OPENINGS
C-1
C-2
Bids for replacement of existing comminutors with
mechanical bar screens at the Water Pollution Control
Facility. Three bids. were referred to a committee composed
of Messrs. Garland, Chairman, Kiser and Clark.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Public hearing on the request of Dormark Construction,
Inc., that a tract of land containing .22 acre, more or
less, located at 1019 Hanover Avenue, N. W., described
as the eastern one-half of Lots 11 and 12, Block 12,
Map of Melrose Land Company, Official Tax No. 2120111,
be rezoned from RM-1, Residential Multi-Family Low
Density District, to RM-2, Residential Multi-Family
Medit~ Density District, subject to certain proffered
conditions. Mr. Don R. Davis, Spokesman. Adopted
Ordinance No. 28976 on first reading. (7-0)
CONSENT AGENDA {Approved 7-0)
ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED
TO BE ROUTINE BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE
MOTION IN THE FORM LISTED BELOW. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DIS-
CUSSION OF THESE ITEMS. I~ DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL
BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA ~¥D CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.
Minutes of the redular meeting of Council held on Monday,
January 19, 1988.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Dispense with the reading thereof and
approve as recorded.
A report of the City Manager with regard to the status of
the Peters Creek Road Extension.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file.
(1)
C-3
C-4
A communication from Mayor Noel C. Taylor requesting an
Executive Session to discuss personnel matters 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.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Concur in request for Council to convene in
Executive Session to discuss personnel mat-
ters relating to vacancies on various
authorities, boards, corr~nissions and com-
mittees appointed by Council, pursuant to
Section 2.l-344 (a) (1), Code of Virginia
(1950), as amended.
Qualification of John R. Marlles as a member of the Fifth
Planning District Commission to fill the unexpired term of
David ti. Woodbury, deceased, ending June 30, 1988.
RECOMmeNDED ACTION: Receive and file·
Report of the City Manager requesting an
discuss the disposition of publicly held
REGULAR AGENDA
Executive Session to
property.
3. Hearing of Citizens Upon Public Matters: None.
4. Petitions and Communications:
a. A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting appropriation of $18,936.00 in anticipated pro-
ceeds from the capital bond referendum approved in
November, 1987, said funds to be used to install fire
suppression equipment in nine elementary school kitchens
and William Fleming High School; and transfer of $8,640.00
from the Schools' share of the Capital Equipment Reserve,
said funds to be used for the replacement of an overage
gasoline tanker truck. Adopted Ordinance No. 28977.
$. Reports of Officers:
a. City ,~anager:
Briefings~
2.
Items
A report with regard to the status of State-mandated
educational programs. No action.
A report with rejard to modifications in the Wastewater
Treatment Plant NPDES Permit. Received and filed.
Recomme~e~_~o. Action:
A report recommending appropriation of $6,140.00 from
the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement
Program to provide for the replacement of a security
gate at the City Jail. Adopted Ordinance No. 28978
4. A report concurring in a report of the Bid Committee
recommending acceptance of the bid submitted by
Richmond Machinery and Equipment Company, Inc., to
supply four new ice control spreaders, in the total
amount of $14,089.00; and appropriation of funds
therefor. Adopted Ordinance No. 28979 and Ordinance No.
28980. (7-0)
5. A joint report of the City Manager and the Director of
Finance with regard to the Trade and Convention Center,
Concurred in recommendation.
6. Report of Committees: None.
7. Unfinished Business: None.
Introduction and Consideration of Ordinances and Resolutions:
None.
9. Motions and Miscellaneous Business:
Inquiries and/or comments by the Mayor and members of City
Council.
b. Vacancies on various authorities, boards, commissions and
committees appointed by Council.
10· Other Hearings of Citizens:
5.a.6. Adopted Resolution No. 28981. urging appropriation of Virginia
Housing Partnership Fund moneys as recommended by Governor
Baliles in the Commonwealth's 1988-90 Biennial Budget.
9.a. Statement by Mr. Trout with regard to a study of improvements
which have taken place in one of the annexed areas.
10. Mr. Robert G. Jones, 632 Second Street, S. W., addressed the
matters of incineration of
and installation
refuse, issuance of surplus cheese,
of a cable to Mill Mountain.
Appointed Alphonso McCain to the Citizens' Services Committee.
(3)
MINUTES CONSIDERED AT THIS COUNCIL MEETING
MAY BE REVIEWED ON LINE IN THE "OFFICIAL MINUTES" FOLDER~
OR AT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
O~e o~ fne Ci~ ~e~
February 10, 1988
File #77
Mr. W. ~obert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
Your report with regard to the status of the Peters Creek Road
Extension, was before the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular ~eeting held on ^~onday, February 8, 1988.
On motion, duly seconded and unanimously adopted, the report was
received and filed.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
Ms. Danielle M. Rand, President, Greater Deyerle Neighborhood
Association, 3571 Mualic~ Road, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia
24018
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Room456 MunicipalBuilding 21§C]~urchAvenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virg~nio24~111 (703) 981-2541
RECC!\ED
CSTY Ci~k~ ~!-~'i~L Roanoke, Virginia
February 8, 1988
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject: Peters Creek Road Extension
Status Report
I. Background on this subject is:
Peters Creek Road Extension has been zn the City's Transportation
Plan for nearly 25 years. The 2.3 mile long, preliminary alignment
connects two (2) primary highways - Route 460 (Melrose Avenue,
N.W.) and Route 11 (Brandon Avenue, $.W.). This new highway would
create a four-lane divided highway (16-foot wide raised median).
The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has programmed
this project ia its Six-Year Improvement Program (at the City's
request). The preliminary cost estimate is $16~570~000 (for engi-
neering, right-of-way, and construction). Of this total,
$4~879~000 has already been funded in VDOT highway allocations
through and including the current fiscal year.
Purpose of this project is to provide for the efficient and rapid
movement of traffic between the north and south ends of the western
half of the City of Roanoke. It will provide the only crossing of
the Roanoke River and Norfolk Southern Railway between Route 419
and Schaffer's Crossing. It will greatly improve access to and
from the Blue Ridge Industrial Park.
II. Current situation of this subject is:
Public Information Meeting was held on Wednesday, July 29, 1987, at
Fairview Elementary School to provide the public with information
on this project, as well as to receive comments and concerns from
those affected by the project. Three alternatives were available
for review (see attached map).
Council discussion, at its August 10, 1987 regular meeting, cen-
tered around the high cost of the project versus the possible need
to move ahead on other highway projects which may be of similar
urgency. Council also discussed the issue of how this project
could effect the Greater Deyerle neighborhood based upon the con-
ceptual road alignments which were being considered by VDOT at that
time.
Page 2
VDOT, based upon comments received from the public, has proceeded
with the environmentl analysis of the three alternatives. A loca-
tion public hearing later this year will make VDOT's findings
available. VDOT will also entertain other questions, comments,
suggestions regarding these and any other suggested roadway align-
ments at this hearing. Target date for starting construction is
early to mid-1992.
Meeting was held on December 13, 1987, between Greater Deyerle
Neighborhood Association representatives and City staff to review
traffic impact that the three alternative routes could have on
their neighborhood. While traffic volumes would increase on
Deyerle Road, Mud Lick Road, and Keagy Road as a result of Peters
Creek Road Extension, the number of vehicles should still be within
each roadway's acceptable traffic carrying capacity. The possibi-
lity of another alignment was raised by the neighborhood represen-
tatives. This alternative would align the southern end of Peters
Creek Road Extension with existing Keagy Road, thereby providing a
direct connection to Route 419.
VDOT has agreed to look at this new alternative (noted as
Alternative "4" on the attached map) to determine if it is viable.
This evaluation will require approximately two to three months to
complete.
City Administration, following VDOT's review, will be in a better
position to recommend a preferred alignment to City Council for its
consideration and endorsement.
III. Recommendation is that City Council receive and file this report.
Respectfully,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH/RKB/hw
cc:
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
City Engineer
Ms. Danielle Rand, President, Greater Deyerle Neighborhood Association
!
!
I
I
I
Office of the Mayor
February 8, 1988
Honorable Vice Mayor and 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 authorities, boards,
commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to
Section 2.1-344 (a) (1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
NCT:ra
Sincerely,
Noel C. Taylq~~
Mayor
Room 452 Municipal Building 2t 5 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2444
Office of the City Cle~
February 10, 1988
File #15-200
Mr. Charles R. Hill, Chairman
Fifth Planning District Commission
622 Olney Road
Vinton, Virginia 24179
Dear Mr. Hill:
This is to advise you
memOer of the Fifth
ending June 30, 1988.
that John R. Marlles has qualified as a
Planning District Commission for a term
Sincerely, ~~
~ary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc: Mr. Wayne
Planning
Virginia
G. Strickland, Acting Executive Director, Fifth
District Cow~ission, P. 0. Box 2569, Roanoke,
24010
Room456 MuniclpalBuilding 215 Church Ave~ue, S.W. Roonoke, VIrg~nla240~l (703)981-2541
Office of the CJi/Oen~
January 12, 1988
File #15-200
Mr. John R. Mariie$
2451Avenet Avenue, S. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24015
Dear Mr. Marlles:
At a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke held
on Monday, January 11, 1988, you were elected as a member of the
Fifth Planning District Commission to fill the unexpired term of
David H. Woodbury, ending June 30, 1988.
Enclosed you wilt find a certificate of your election and an Oath
or Affirmation of Office which may be administered by the Clerk
of the Circuit Court of the City of Roanoke, located on the third
floor of the Roanoke City Courts Facility, 315 Church Avenue,
$o Wo
Please return one copy of the Oath of Office to Room 456 in the
Municipal Building prior to serving i~ the capacity to which you
were elected.
Sincerely,~ ~/' ~
~fary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
Enc,
pc:
Mr. Charles R. Hill. Chairman, Fifth PLanning District
Corrlmission, 622 Olney Road, Vinton, Virginia 24179
Mr. Wayne G. Strickland, Acting Executive ~irector, Fifth
Planning District Commission, P. O. Box 2569, Roanoke,
Virginia 24010
Room 456 Municipal Building 215 O~urc~ Avenue, S.W. Roonc~, Virginia 24011 (703) 98t-2541
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
C I TY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the
Council of the City of Roanoke and keeper of the records thereof,
do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council held on
the 11th day of January, 1988, JOHN R. MARLLES was elected as a
member of the Fifth Planning District
unexpired term of David H. Woodbury,
Given under my hand and the Seal
12th day of January, 1988.
Commission, to fill the
ending June 30, 1988.
of the City of Roanoke this
City Clerk
February 8, 1988
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mayor and Members of Council:
Please reserve space on Monday's agenda for an executive session to discuss
a matter pertaining to the disposition of publicly held property, pursuant to
Section 2.1-344(a)(2), Code of Virginia (1950) as amended.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH/a
Office of
February 10, 1988
File #60-467
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia~
Dear ~r. Schlanger:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 28977, amending and reor-
daining certain sections of the 1987-88 General and Capital Funds
Appropriations, providing for the appropriation of $18,936.00 in
anticipated proceeds from the capital bond referendum approved in
November, 1987, to be used to install fire suppression equipment
in nine elementary school kitchens and William Fleming High
School; and transferring $8,640.00 from the General Fund
Equipment Replacement Contingency to be used for the replacement
of a gasoline tanker truca, which Ordinance was adopted by the
Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on
Monday, February 8, 1988.
Sincerely, _~~
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enco
pc: Mr. W. Nobert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. Edwin R. Feinour, Chairman, Roanoke City School Board,
3711Peakwood Drive, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24014
Dr. Frank P. Tota, Superintendent of Schools, P. 0. Box 13145,
Roanoke, Virginia 24031
Mr. Richard L. Kelley, Executive for Business Affairs and
Clerk of the Board, P. 0. Box 13105, Roanoke, Virginia 24031
Room 456 Municipal Building 2t5 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virg~nta 24011 (703) 981-2541
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 8th day of February, 1988.
No. 28977.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
1987-88 General and Capital Funds 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 1987-88 General and Capital
Funds Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and
reordained, to read as follows, in part:
General Fund
Appropriations
Education
Capital Outlay (1) ..................................
Non-Departmental
Contingency (2) .....................................
Capital Fund
Appropriations
Education
Fire Suppression Equipment (3) ......................
Capital Improvement Reserve
Public Improvement Bonds - Series 1988 (4) .......... (
$ 3,883,717
18,936
44,677,444
18,936)
$55,418,712
822,601
10,076,288
536,527
1) Support Vehicles (001-060-6010-6085-0509) $ 8,640
2) Equip. Replacement (001-002-9410-2202) ( 8,640)
3) Appr. from Bonds (008-060-6062-6085-9001) 18,936
4) Schools (008-052-9594-9182) (18,936)
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
DEPARTM[NT OF FINANCE
February 8, 1988
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
School Board Request for Appropriations of Funds
The attached correspondence from the School Board
requests Council to appropriate $18,936 of
proceeds from the bond issue approved in the
referendum. These funds will be used to install
equipment in City schools. This will be
of the anticipated bond proceeds.
the anticipated
November, 1987
fire suppression
the first appropriation
Additionally, the School Board is requesting a transfer
of $8,640 from the General Fund Equipment Replacement Contingency
to replace a gasoline tanker truck.
I recommend you concur in the School Board's request.
Director of Fi~
JMS/kp
~tI ('d~ln R. ~ino~, Cflalm~n
U,Allk3m IJJhlte, Sr., Vice
Donald gartol
City School 13oc
P. OI~ 13105. Roanc~, Wg~n~a 24031 ·
Sollve T. Colemon
LoVerrm 8. Dillon
David K. Usk
703-981-2381
January 27, 1988
James NL Turner, Jr.
F~'onk P. Tm:o, Sup~trV:enden~
RIchord L Kell~y. CIm~ of [~e I~mi'd
The Honorable Noel C. Taylor, Mayor
and Members of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, VA 24011
Dear Members of Council:
As the result of official School Board action at its meeting of
January 26, 1988, the School Board respectfully requests City
Council to appropriate $18,936.00 of the anticipated proceeds from
the capital bond referendum approved in November, 1987. The
funds will be used to install fire suppression equipment in nine
elementary school kitchens and William Fleming High School.
The Board further requests the transfer of $8,640.00 from the
Schools' share of the Capital Equipment Reserve. The funds will be
used for the replacement of an overage gasoline tanker truck.
Sincerely,
Executive for Business Affairs
rg
cc: Mr. Edwin R. Feinour
Dr. Frank P. Tota
Mr. William L. Murray, Jr.
Mr. Kenneth F. Mundy, Jr.
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling
v/Mr. Joel M. Schlanger (with accounting details)
Excellence in Education
ROANO[E CITY SCHOOL BOARD
Roanoke, YirHinia
APPROPRIATION RHOBNST
1988 Capital Bond Issue
Fire Suppreeaion Hquipeent
008-060-6062-6085-0510
Appropriation Unit ZNL
Fire Suppression Equipment $ 18,936.00
The above appropriation represents the £iret request ~or anticipated proceeds
From the capital bond referendum approved in November, 1987. As part of the
requirements of the Virginia Public Building Safety Improveeente Act, fized
~ire ezttnguishing systems and related controls sill be installed in nine
elementary school kitchens at a cost of $15,239. A fire suppression system is
being installed at Hilliam Fleming Uigh School at a cost of $3,69T. A balance
of $306,06# o~ anticipated proceeds ~rom the capital bond referendum approved
in November, 1987 remains as unappropriated funds allocated £or building
safety improvements.
January 26, 1988
ROANOKB CXTY 3CBOOL BO&RD
Roanoke, Virginia
Capital equipnent Reeerve
Support Yahiolea
001-060-6010-b085-0509
~ppropriation Unit
~upport Vehicles
$ 8, h#O. O0
The above transfer represents the final portion of the Schools' share of the
Capital Equipeent Reserve. These funds will be used for the replaceeent of an
overage ~aaoline tanker truck at the Transportation Department.
January 26, 1988
CITY
February 8, 1988
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mayor and Members of Council:
Please reserve space on Monday's agenda for a briefing on the status of the
State's mandated educational programs.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH/a
Office a~ ~ City Qe~k
February 10, 1988
File #27
~lr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
Your report with regard to modifications in the Wastewater
Treatment Plant NPDES permit, was before the Council of the City
of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, February 8, 1988.
On motion, duly seconded and unanimously adopted, the report was
received and filed.
Sincerely, ~
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc: Mr.
Mr.
Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Steven L. Walker, ~fanager, Sewage Treatment Plani
P, oo~n456 MuniclpalBuilding 215 Church Ave~ue, S.W. Roono~e, Vlrglnla24011 (7C)3)981-2541
Roanoke, Virginia
February 8, 1988
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject: Briefing - Modification in the Wastewater Treatment
Plant NPDES Permit
I. Background:
NPDES Permit is the means by which the Virginia Water
Pollution Control Board regulates what is discharged into
receiving streams from point sources.
Bo
Point Sources are sewage treatment plants, industrial
treatment plants or other sources of pollution discharging
from a given point.
Permit Modifications have been proposed by the Virginia Water
Pollution Control Board. (See Attachment "A"). The proposed
modifications are:
Dechlorination requirements - remove chlorine after
disinfection.
Toxic Management Pro~ram - perform in depth analysis on
one hundred twenty nine (129) EPA priority pollutants.
Pretreatment Pro,ram Requirements - regulate industrial
discharges.
Seasonal adjustment of TKN (Nitrogen~ limits - relax
nitrogen limits during winter months.
Thirty days notice has been given by the Virginia Water
Pollution Control Board beginning January 25, 1988. This time
period allows for cormnents to be submitted to the Board by the
City of Roanoke. No comments are proposed at this time.
II. Issues in order of importance:
A. Cost
B. Compliance
Page 2
C. Benefit
D. Timing
III. Co~ents on Issues:
A. Cost:
Dechlorination cost has been estimated in a preliminary
engineering report submitted to the State by Clean Water
Engineers, Inc. The report listed three (3) alternatives
for dechlorination with the lowest being $375~000.00 in
initial capital cost plus $60t000.00 in annual operating
costs.
o
Toxic Management Program costs have been given at
$18t000.00 per year by Olver, Inc. The program cost can
increase with possible future permit modifications.
Pretreatment Program cost is presently ongoing, increases
in plant operating costs are not expected.
TKN (Nitrogen) limits relaxed during winter months will
save energy costs. A total savings of $40~000.00 is
estimated.
B. Compliance:
Dechlorination will be necessary to maintain permit
compliance and also as a result of adopted State
regulations.
Toxic Management will be necessary to maintain permit
compliance. This program may place an additional burden
on future compliance in regard to potential problems with
toxics.
Pretreatment program has been implemented and now will be
part of permit compliance.
TKN limit reduction will aid in permit compliance during
difficult winter months.
C. Benefit:
Dechlorination is intended to benefit the receiving
stream. This is questionable in regard to the Roanoke
River as there is no indication of adverse effects due to
chlorine.
Toxic Management is also intended to benefit the
receiving stream. Prior toxicity tests indicate the
plant discharge to be non-toxic.
Page 3
Pretreatment Program may benefit the plant by preventing
toxic industrial discharges. Permit requirements may be
easier to comply with, especially in regard to the
proposed toxic management requirements.
TKN (Nitrogen) permit relaxation will benefit the City by
reduced operating costs and the ability to maintain
permit compliance during winter months.
D. Timing:
Dechlorination must be in compliance within nine (9)
months of plan approval by the State.
Toxic Management program must be implemented as soon as
the permit is modified.
Pretreatment Program has been implemented and timing is a
moot issue.
TKN (Nitrogen) permit relaxation will occur during winter
months which is good timing for the City.
IV.
Council action is not needed at this time. This report is for your
information. These proposed modifications will place increased
capital and operating cost burdens on the treatment plant, but the
TKN limit relaxation is needed.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH:SLW:afm
Attachment
cc:
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Utilities & Operations
STP Manager
Richard N. Burton
Executl~ Di~cter
COMMONWEALTS of V RC3LW IA
ST tTE 11.4T£'R (,£~ThOL BO IRD
2111 llamiltoti Street
Post Office Box 11143
Richmond, Virginia 23230-1143
(8O4) 257-0056
Permit No.: VA0025020
Effective Date: February 5, 1984
Modification Date:
Expiration Date: February 5, 1989
AUTHOP~ZATION TO DISC~{A~GE UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DIS(/~RGE ELTM]2NATION SYST~I~
In cc~t~liance with the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act and pursuant to the State Water Control Law and
regulations adopted pursuant thereto, the City of Roanoke
is authorized to discharge frc~ a facility located at the Roanoke
37R~,i=o,~n~,,S__e~.g.e Tr?..t~en~t Slant (Point Source 001, Latitude
, ko uu an~ ~ongl~uc~e 79 54'39") to receiving waters na~
Roanoke River, Roanoke River Basin, Roanoke River Subbasin, Section
6, Class IV, Special Standards: pH 6.5-9.5, in accordance with the
effluent limitations, monitoring rec~,~,~nts, and other conditions
set forth in this permit.
2. Design and operation of facilities and/or treatment works and
disposal of all wastes shall be in accordance with the application
filed with the State Water Control Board and in conformity with the
conceptual design, or the plans, specifications and/or other
supporting data approved by the Board. ~ne facilities shall be
operated in aocordance with the conditions of the permit.
3. The approval of the treatment works conceptual design or the plans
and specifications does not relieve the permittee of the responsi-
bility of designing and operating the facility in a reliable and
consistent manner to meet the facility performance require~nents in
the permit. If facility deficiencies, design and/or operational,
are identified in the future which could affect the facility
performance or reliability, it is the responsibility of the
permittee to correct such deficiencies.
Executive Director, State Water Control Board
Date
Permit No. VA0025020
Page 2 of tl
PARTI
Inter/m Chlorine Effluent Limitations and Monitoring
Requ~ ~ents
During the period beginning with the permit,s
modification date and lasting until the ach/evement of
c~uliance with the final Total Residual (b/orine (TRC)
and/or Fecal Coliform limitations in Part I D, in
aocordance with the schedule of c~liance contained in
this permit Part I C, the permittee is authorized to
discharge fr~, outfall(s) serial number(s) Point Source
001.
Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the
permittee as specified below:
No more than 90 of all total chlorine residual
analyses shall be outside the range 1.0 through 2.0
milligrams per liter for any one calendar month.
Any 3 consecutive test results not within the range
0.5 through 3.5 milligz~ms per liter shall be
immaliately reported in accordance' With paragraph
A(7) (a) of Part II.
c. No single chlorine residual analysis shall exceed
4.0 mg/1 at any time.
Permit No. VA0025020
Page 3 of 11
PARTI
Schedule of
The permittee shall achieve c~,%uliance with the final Total
Residual Chlorine (TRC) and/or Fecal Coliform limitations
specified in this permit in acoordance with the following
schedule:
Select engineering firm for
desig~ of facilities
Submit Plans to the Virginia
Health Department and
Board
within 60 days after the
modification date of the
Within 120 days from #1
C~m~nce Construction
60 days after approval of
final plans
C~ulete Construction
With/n 180 days of #3
Achieve C~,~liance with
Effluent Limitations
30 days after cc~letion of
construction
No later than 14 calendar days following a date identified in the
above schedule of c~liance, the permittee shall submit to the
Board, either a report of progress or, in the case of specific
actions being required by identified dates, a written notice of
c~,~uliance or nonc~uliance. In the latter case, the notice shall
include the cause of nonc~,~liance, any remedial actions taken,
and the probability of meeting the next scheduled requirement.
Patti
Permit No. VA0025020
Page 4 of 11
Final
C~lorine Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
The Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) concentration after the
chlorine contact time and prior to dechlorination shall be
greater than or equal to 1.0 rog/1. %"his TRC concentration may
be l=wered where the permittee has demonstrated adequate
disinfection.
The TRC concentration in the final effluent after de-
chlorination fro~, this facility shall be non-detectable. This
concentration shall be measured using one of the following
procedures:
a. DPD Titration
b. DPD Colorimetric
c. Iodate Back Titration (Starch)
d. Ampei-~tric Direct Titration
e. Any proven and EPA accepted method that can reach
an equal level of detection.
The permittee sb~ll notify the appropriate Regional Office of
the Boamd of the selected procedure within 30 days of the
modification date of this permit.
When the TRC concentration in the final effluent results in a
detec~ble measurement, the permittee shall take immediate
steps to ach/eve a non-detectable concentration. Where the
TRC is within the limit of (4.), the permittee shall also take
up to two additional grab samples within one hour of the
original sample. The first of these additional samples shall
be taken within 45 minutes after the original sample. Should
this TRC sample measurement indicate a non-detect, hie
concentration, then the original sample shall be considered as
being in c~liance with the permit limit in (2.). Should
this TRC sample measurement indicate a detect-hie concen-
tration within the limit of (4.), then a second additional
sample shall be taken within 15 minutes after the first
additional sample, but within one hour of the original sample.
Permit No. VA0025020
Page 5 of 11
If the seoond of these additional sample measurements
indicates a n~n-detectable concentration, then
the original and the fi~t additional sample shall be considered as
beir~3 in c~uliance with the permit limitation in (2.). Should this
second additional sample meast~nt indicate a detect-hie
concentration, then the original sa~ole will be considered as
exceeding the permit limitation in (2.). Should more than one
sample be collected, only the original sample shall be considered
for permit violation.
The permittee shall report all results of the above monitoring
scheme with the monthly Discharge Monitoring Report (EI~R).
The instantaneous maximum TRC concentration in the final effluent
shall not exceed 1.0 rog/1.
The permittee shall operate the dechlorination facilities in a
manner which will ensure continuous c~liance with the TRC
concentration in (2.), but not to the extent that will result in
violations of other permitted effluent characteristics, or the Water
Quality Standards.
In the event that an alternative to chlorine as a disinfection
method is chosen, the fecal coliform parameter shall be lir~ited and
monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Discharge Limitations
Fecal Coliform
(n/10~)
200 400
Monitorir~ Re~uit ~_ntm
3 per week @ Grab
48 hoLtr
intervals
(Between lO am
a~d 4 ~.
The above recm.~!~_mente, if applim~ble, shall substitute for the chlorine
requirements delineated in Part I, Section D (1)-(5).
Permit No. VA0025020
Page 6 of 11
Suspended Solids - Special Conditions
Suspended Solids in the effluent shall meet the following:
~ne average concentration in 90% of the samples shall be 2.5 rog/1 or
less. The average quantity in 90% of the samples shall be 331 kg/d
(730 lbs./d) or less.
The average of the re~aining 10% of the samples shall be less than
or equal to 5.0 rog/1 with a corresponding average quantity limit of
662 ~g/d (1460 lbs/d) or less.
Permit No. VA0025020
Page 7 of 11
F. TOXIC MAN~/~SMENT PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
During the period beginning with the permit's inclusion of a toxic
management program and lasting until the permit's expiration data, the
discharge fr~. outfall(s) serial number(s) 001 shall be monitored as
specified below:
a. EFFLUENT PARA~i,~
MONITORING REOUIREMENTS
Frequency Sa~pl e T~oe
MINIMUM DETECTION
LEVEL
Total Chromium 1/Month 24 Hr. Cu~. 1 ug/1
Total Cyanide 1/Month 24 Hr. C.~',LL~. 1 ug/1
Total Recoverable
Copper 1/Month 24 Hr. Comp. 1 ug/1
Total Recoverable
Nickel I/Month 24 Hr. Co~. 1 ug/1
Total Recoverable
T~d 1/Month 24 Hr. C~. 1 ug/1
Total Recoverable
Mercury 1/Month 24 Hr. Co~,~. 1 ug/1
TOtal Recoverable
Cadmium i/Month 24 Hr. C~. 1 ug/1
Total Recoverable
Zinc 1/Month 24 Hr. Conap. 1 ug/1
b. Chemical sample collection and analysis shall conform to the
requirement as specified in Part II of this permit and any analysis
not addressed by Part II of this permit shall be analyzed and
reported in accordance with Standard Methods (EPA approved Edition).
The metal analysis should be collected at the time of the bioassay.
c. Within 90 days of the modification data of this permit, Outfall 001
shall be monitored monthly for total ch~u~,~um, total cyanide, total
recover-~ble copper, total recoverable nickel, total recoverable lead,
total reooverable mercury, total recoverable cadmium, and total
recoverable zinc.
d. One year prior to NPDES Permit No. VA0025020 reissuance, the
permittee shall collect a 24 Hour Cu~osite sample (except for
volatile organic sampling where separ~ta grab samples must be
collected), and analyze for priority pollutant and non-priority
pollutant extractable and volatile ol~nics using EPA's gas
chku2~tography-mass spectroscopy methods 624 and 625. The permittee
shall report all priority pollutant organics present at the method
detection levels established in methods 624 and 625; however, the
permittee is not required to report priority pollutants present at
concentrations less than 10 ug/1. Additionally, a priority pollutant
metal scan shall include total recoverable antimony, total
recoverable arsenic, total recoverable beryllium, total recoverable
cadmium, total chlu~um, total recoverable copper, total recoverable
lead, total recoverable mercury, total reooverable nickel, total
recoverable seleni~, total recoverable thallium, total recoverable
zinc, and total recoverable silver. Where possible the permittee
shall report all non-priority pollutant organics at concentrations of
10 ug/1 or greater.
2. BIOLOGICAL MONITORING
Permit No. VA0025020
Page 8 of 11
PartI
Chronic toxicity tests shall be conducted semi-annually on 0utfall
001 using the 7-day Ceriodaphnia reproduction test and the 7-day
larval fathead minnow growth test. Test sa~les shall be 24-hour
c~osites of effluent f~um 0utfall 001. The goal of these tests
shall be to deter~ the "no observed effect concentration,, (NOEC)
for survival, growth, or reproduction. If the NOEC for survival,
growth, or reproduction in any test is less than the instream waste
concentration (IWC), 78% effluent, then further toxicity testing may
be r~. ~ed. Technical assistance in developing the procedures for
these tests may be provided by State Water Control Board staff. Test
protocol shall be approved by SWCB staff prior to initiation of
testing.
All data frc~ this toxics program shall be reported as soon as
possible, but no later than with the Discharge Monitoring
Report (E~R) ending the quarter in which the data were
received.
be
The Toxic Management Program may be modified if the
Board,s review of the results of the Toxic Management
Program indicates that a toxicity potential exists or if
the Board adopts a further policy to control pollutants
into wastewater treatment systems that interfere with the
operation of the syst~ or contaminated sludge or which
will pass through the system inadequately treated or
otherwise be incompatible with the treatment system.
If the results of this Toxics Management Progl-am indicate
that the wastewaters are disc~ed in toxic amounts or
contain bioaccumulative pollutants, the permittee shall
submit a toxicity control plan and an accompanying
implementation schedule within 90 days of the
notification of such a determination by the State Water
Control Board staff. This plan shall be to evaluate
toxicity and assure that no toxic substances are released
into State waters in concentrations that will affect
survival, growth or reproduction of any species which
would reasonably inhabit those waters.
The control plan shall include appropriate measures, both
i~ediate and long range, such as additional waste
treatment or changes in the o~eration of the facility to
reduce the toxicity of the wastewater discharge to
acceptable levels. Upon c~,~letion of the review of the
plan, the permit may be modified or alternatively revoked
and reissued in order to reflect appropriate permit
conditions and a co~L~uliance schedule.
Permit No. VA0025020
Page 9 of 11
PARdi
G. Pretreatment
The permittee,s pretreatment progk~m has been approved. %he prc~=om
is an enforceable condition of this permit.
~ne permittee shall operate an industrial pretreatment proq=~m
in accordance with CWA and in accordance with the approved POIW
pretrea~m~nt pruw=~m submitted by the permittee.
%he permittee shall sukmtit to the approval authority, an annual
report that describes the permittee,s program activities over
the previous twelve months. Tne anm~] report shall be
submitted no later than January 15 of each year and shall
include:
(1) An updated list of the PO1W's industrial users showing the
categorical standards or local limits applicable to each.
(2)
A sunm~ry of the c~L~liance status for those industries
affected by final Categorical Pretreatment Standards and/or
local pretreatment standards.
(3) A su~nary of the number and type of industrial user
inspections performed by the POTW.
(4)
Ail information concerning any interference, upset, or
permit violations experienced at the POTW directly
attributable to industrial users, and actions taken to
alleviate said events.
(5) A description of any significant changes in operating the
program fr~,l the original sukm~ssion.
(6) A description of all enforcement actions taken against
non~liant industrial users.
Pernhlt No. 1rA0025020
Page 10 of 11
PARTI
o
The approval authority retains the right to recp~re the PCqW to
institute changes to its local pretreatment pro~z=m:
If the program is not implemented in a way satisfying the
requ. re~ente of C~A;
If problems such as interference, pass through or sludge
contamination develop or continue; or
If other Federal, Steate or local requ~re~aents (i.e., water
quality standards) change.
3. Industrial Waste Survey
(*)
Immediately upon issuanoe of this permit, the permitt~e shall
establish and implement a procedure to obtain f~u all major
contributing industries specific information of the quality and
quantity of effluents introduced by such industrial users. A
es~r..lptlon of each m]or contributing industrv* discha_ruirm to ~h~
municipal system should be prepared by completing the VWCB ~trial
Waste Survey Form. This information shall be reported to the Water
Control Board within 180 days of the permit issuance.
A major contributing industry is one that: (a) bas a nondcmestic flow
of 25,000 gallons or more per average workday; (b) contributes a
nondcmestic wastestream which makes up 5 percent or more of the
average dry weather hydraulic or o~nic capacity of the POTW; (c)
has in its w-~ste a toxic pollutant in toxic amounts as defined in
standards issued under Section 307(a) of the Act; or (d) has
significant ir~pact, either singularly or in combination with other
contributing industries, on the treatment works or the quality of its
effluent.
Attac/m~_nt A
Permit No. VA0025020
Page 11 of 11
Discharge Discharge
Serial No. Name
Discharge
Location
002 Main P%m~p
Station Overfl~
003 Stormwater Basi~
004 Jefferson Street
Pump Station
Jefferson Street
Roanoke River
Roanoke River
Roanoke River
Permit No. VA0025020
Page 7 of 11
F. TOXIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM RE~
During the period beginning with the permit's inclusion of a toxic
management pz~zmm and lasting until the permit's expJ_~ation data, the
discharge frc~ outfall(s) serial ntmlber(s) 001 shall be monitored as
specified below:
Total C~-~,,~um 1/Month 24 Hr.
To~al Cyanide 1/Month 24 Hr.
Total Recoverable
Copper 1/Month 24 Hr.
Total R~mooverable
Nickel 1/Month 24 Hr.
Total Recoverable
Lead i/Month 24 Hr.
Tof~l Recoverable
Mercury 1/Month 24 Hr.
TOtal B~coverable
Cmdmiu~ I/Month 24 Hr.
Total Recovermble
1 ug/1
1 ug/1
C~. 1 ug/1
Cu~. i ug/1
C~. 1 ug/1
C~i~. 1 ug/1
C~L%~. 1 Ug/1
Zinc 1/Month 24 Hr. C~. 1 ug/1
~emical sample collection and analysis shall conform to the
requ/~ant as specified in Part II of this permit and any analysis
not addressed by Part II of this permit shall be analyzed and
reported in accordance with St~d Methods (EPA approved Edition).
~he metal analysis should be collected at the time of the bioassay.
Within 90 days of the modification data of this permit, Outfall 001
shall be monitored montb_ly for total chz-~,~, total cyanide, total
recoverable c~, total recoverable nickel, total recoverable lead,
total recovermble mercury, total rgc~vermble cadmium, and total
recovermble zinc.
One year prior to NPDES Permit No. VA0025020 reissuance, the
permittee shall collect a 24 Hour C~osite sample (except for
volatile organic sampling where separmta wz=b samples ~t be
collected), and analyze for priority pollutant and non-priority
pollutant extractable and volatile o£~3ctnics using EPA's gas
ch~,~tow~phy-mass spec~ r~ethods 624 and 625. ~ne pezl~itte~
shall report all priority pollutant organics present at the method
detection levels established in methods 624 and 625; however, the
permittee is not required to report priority pollutanta present at
concentrations less than 10 ug/1. Additionally, a priority pollut~
metal scan shall include total recovermble antimony, total
recoverable arsenic, total r~cover~ble beryllium, total recovermble
~dmium, total ch~,.~um, total recx~ver~ble copper, total reccwerabl~
lead, to~al recoverable mercury, total recoverable nickel, total
reoover~ble selenium, total recoverable thallium, total recoverable
zinc, and total recoverable silver. Where possible the permittee
shall report all non-priority pollutant organics at concentrmtions ¢
10 ug/1 or greater.
Permit No. VA0025020
Page 9 of 11
PATTI
G. Pretreat~e~t Prc~a ~
~ne permittee's pretreatm~_nt p~a~m ha~ been approved. ~ne pro~£~m
is an enforceable condition of this permit.
The permite~ shall operate an industrial pretreatment prc~£=m
in a~oo~rdance with C~A and in aocordance with the approved
pretreatment program s~k~itt~d by the permittee.
The permittee shall suhnit to the approval authority, an annual
report that describes the permit~e's prc~=m activities over
the previous twelve months. ~he annual report shall be
submitted no later than January 15 of each year and shall
include:
(1) An upd~t~ list of the POTW's industrial users sh~wing the
cat~gorical standards or local limits applicable to each.
(2)
A sun~mal~ of the c~liance status for those industries
affec~ by fi_hal C~t~3orical Pretreatment Starry-ds and/or
local pretreat~_nt standards.
(3) A su~m~ry of the number and type of industrial user
inspections ~rfon~U by the ~orw.
(4)
All information concerning any interference, upset, or
permit violations experienoedatthe POTWd~ctly
attributable to industrial users, and actions taken to
alleviate said events.
(5) A description of anysignificant changes in operating the
prog=~m fr~,~the original suk~ission.
(6) A description of all enforcement actions taken against
nonc~,~liant industrial users.
P~_r~it No. VA0025020
Page 10 of 11
PATTI
The approval authority retains the right to rec~.Hre the POl14 to
institute changes to its local pretreatment piug~am:
If the pro~=m is not implemented in a way satisfying the
rec~L~nts of C~A;
If problems such as interference, pass thr~ or sludge
contamination develop or continue; or
If other Federal, State or local requ~;~_nts (i.e., water
quality states-ds) change.
3. Industrial Waste Survey
(*)
Immediately upon issuance of this permit, the permit~e shall
ese~hlish and implement a procedure to obtain f~u all major
contributing industries specific information of the quality and
quantity of effluents introduced by such ~ial users. A
description of each major contributing ir~ disc/larging to the
Waste Survey Form. This information sh~lI be reported to the Water
Control Board within 180 days of the permit issuance.
A major contributing industry is one that: (a) has a nondc~estic fl~
of 25,000 gallons or more per average workday; (b) contributes a
nondcm~_~tic wastestream which makes up 5 percent or more of the
average dry weather hydraulic or o~9~nic capacity of the POIW; (c)
has in its waste a toxic pollutant in toxic amounts as defined in
star~ards issued under Section 307(a) of the Act; or (d) has
significant ir~0act, either singularly or in oc~bination with other
contributing industries, on the treatment works or the quality of its
effluent.
Office of the Oty Cle~
February 10, 1988
File #60-123
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger
Director of Finance
RoanoKe, Virginia
Dear Mr. Schlanger:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 28978, amending and reor-
daining certain sections of the 1987-88 General Fund
Appropriations, providing for the transfer of $6,140.00 from
Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program to Jail
Account No. 001-024-3310-9015, in connection with the replace-
ment of a security gate at the City Jail, which Ordinance was
adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular
meeting held on Monday, February 8, 1988.
Sincerely, ~
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
pc: Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. ~. Alvin Hudson, City Sheriff
Room 456 Municipal Building 215 Chur~'h Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 98%2541
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 8th day of February, ]988.
No. 28978.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
1987-88 General Fund Appropriations, and providing for an
emergency.
WHEREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal
Government of the City of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to
exist.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of
Roanoke that certain sections of the 1987-88 General Fund
Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and
reordained, to read as follows, in part:
Appropriations
Public Safety $22,581,703
Jail (1) ............................................ 3,121,083
Fund Balance
Capital Maintenance & Equipment Replacement Program-
City Unappropriated (2) ............................ $ 1,916,629
1) Other Equipment
2) CMERP - City
(001-024-3310-9015) $ 6,140
(001-3332) (6,140)
BE
Ordinance
IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this
shall be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Roanoke, Virginia
February 8, 1988
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of City Council:
SUBJECT: FUND APPROPRIATION - CAPITAL MAIB'£~ANCE AND
EQUIPMENT~mDLACE~ENTPROGRAM
I. BACKGROUND
ae
November 9, 1987 - City Council approved a Capital
Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program.
Be
Council designated funds, in the Capital Maintenance and
Equipment Replacement Program, to replace the security gate
at Roanoke Jail.
Ce
Council's approval is required for single purchases whose
cost exceeds $10,000.00, as stated in the Code of the City
of Roanoke, Chapter 23.1, Procurement, Code (1979), as
amended.
II. CU~'~E/ff SITUATION
ae
Competitive bids have been secured for the replacement of
this security door at the City Jail.
B. Bids received are as follows:
1. The Door Doctor - $6,140.00
2. The Dock Doctor - $5,845.00
3. Overhead Door Co. of Roanoke - $6,200.00
Ce
The low bid submitted by the Dock Doctor took exceptions in
proper gear speed.
De
The low bid meeting specifications was submitted by The Door
Doctor for the total amount of $6,140.00.
Ee
Appropriation of funds by City Council is necessary to
provide for the purchase of a security gate at the City
Jail.
III. ISSUBS
A. Need
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Page 2
III. ISSUES - continued
B. Timeliness
C. Fund Availability
IV. ALT~KNATIVES
City Council approve this request to appropriate $6,140.00
from Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program
to Jail account 001-024-3310-9015 to allow for the purchase
of the necessary security gate.
Need - requested equipment is necessary to provide the
appropriate security at Roanoke City Jail.
Timeliness - purchase of item which costs less than
$10,000.00 can be obtained in the most expedient
manner.
e
Fund Availability - funds are designated in the Capital
Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program to
provide for this purchase.
Council does not approve this request to appropriate funds
to purchase jail security gate.
Need - security at City Jail could not be maintained as
required.
2. Timeliness - would not be met.
e
Fund Availability - designated funds would not be
expended.
V. RECOmmENDATION
City Council approve Alternative "A" - appropriate $6,140.00
from Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program
to Jail account 001-024-3310-9015 to provide for the
replacement of a security gate at the Roanoke City Jail.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH/DDR/ms
cc: City Attorney
Director of Finance
C~ce of ~e Ci~, Cler~
February 10, 1988
File #410-472
Richmond Machinery and
Equipment Company
P. 0. Box 1278
Lynchburg, Virginia 24505
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 28980, accepting your bid
for four new ice control spreaders, in the amount of $14,089.00,
which Ordinance was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke
at a regular meeting held on ~onday, February 8, 1988.
S i ncere ly,/~//~l~l,~l~.-
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
pc: Mr.
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. Wilburn Co Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
~lr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Mr. William Fo Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. William Lo Stuart, Superintendent, Street Maintenance
Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director of Administration
Public Safety
Mr. D. Darwin Roupe, Manager, General Services
and
Room 456 Municipal Building 21§ Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2541
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 8th day of February, 1988.
No. 28980.
VIRGINIA,
AN ORDINANCE providing for the purchase of four (4) new ice
control spreaders for use by the City, upon certain terms and con-
ditions, by accepting a bid made to the City for furnishing and deli-
vering such equipment; and rejecting the other bids made to the City;
and providing for an emergency.
BE
1.
the City offering to furnish and deliver to the City, f.o.b.,
Virginia, four (4) new ice control spreaders, for the sum of
$14,089.00, is hereby ACCEPTED.
2. The City's Manager of General Services is authorized and
directed to issue the requisite purchase order therefor, incorporating
into said order the City's specifications, the terms of said bidder's
proposal, and the terms and provisions of this ordinance.
IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that:
The bid of Richmond Machinery and Equipment Co. Inc., made to
Roanoke,
3. The other bids made to the City for
ment are hereby REJECTED, and the City Clerk
such other bidders and to express the City's
bids.
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:
the supply of such equip-
is directed to notify
appreciation for such
City Clerk.
Office cfi the City Cle~
February 10, 1988
File #60-410-472
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Schlanger:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 28979, amending and reor-
daining certain sections of the 1987-88 General Fund
Appropriations, providing for the transfer of $14,089.00 from
Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program to Snow and
Ice Removal, to provide funds in connection with the purchase of
four new ice control spreaders, which Ordinance was adopted by
the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on
Monday, February 8, 1988.
Sincerely, ~
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
~iFP: ra
E~C ·
pC: Mr.
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. William L. Stuart, Superintendent, Street Maintenance
Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director of Administration
Public Safety
Mr. D. Darwin Roupe, Manager, General Services
and
Room 456 Munici~x~l Building 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-254t
Office of the City Clen~
February 10, 1988
File #410-472
Mountcastle Ford Tractor Sales,
301 11th Street, S. E.
Roanoke, Virginia 24013
McIlhany Equipment Company
P. 0. Box 12728
Roanoke, Virginia 24028
Cavalier Equipment Company
P. 0. Box 12507
Roanoke, Virginia 24026
MSC Equipment
1823 North Hamilton Street
Ricb~mond, Virginia 23230
Bemiss Equipment Corporation
P. 0. Box 712
Salem, Virginia 24153
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 28980, accepting the bid of
Richmond Machinery and Equipment Company for four new ice control
spreaders, in the amount of $14,089.00, which Ordinance was
adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular
meeting held on Monday, February 8, 1988.
On behalf of the .Council, I would like to express appreciation
for submitting your bia on the abovedescribed equipment.
Sincerely, ~
!,;ary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
Eric.
Room 456 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S,W. Roanoke. ¥1rglnia 2401 t (703) 981-2541
5A 4
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
lhe 8th day of February, ]988.
No. 28979.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections
1987-88 General Fund Appropriations, and providing for an
emergency.
of the
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 1987-88 General Fund
Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and
reordained, to read as follows, in part:
Appropriations
Public Works
Snow and Ice Removal
Fund Balance
Capital Maintenance &
City Unappropriated
1) Other Equipment
2) CMERP - City
(1) ............................
Equipment Replacement Program-
(2) ............................
(001-052-4140-9015) $ 14,089
(001-3332) (14,089)
$16,808,897
601,286
$16,780,719
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
RECEIVE[
'88 FFS ' '"
Roanoke, Virginia
February 8, 1988
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of City Council:
SUBJECT:
BIDS TO PURC~A%SE NEW ICE
CONTROL SPREADERS
BID NUMBER 87-12-90
I concur with the recommendation of the bid committee
relative to the above subject and recommend it to you for
appropriate action.
WRH/DDR/ms
cc: City Attorney
Director of Finance
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
February 8, 1988
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
SUBJECT: BIDS TO PURC~%SE ICE CON'£KOL SPREADERS,
BID NUMBER 87-12-90
I. BACKGROUND
November 9, 1987, City Council designated funds in
the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement
Program to purchase ice control spreaders to be
used for Snow and Ice Removal Program.
Bid Request were sent specifically to seventeen
(17) vendors that are currently listed on the
City's bid list. A public advertisement was also
published in the Roanoke Times and World News on
December 29, 1987.
Ce
Bids were received, after due and proper adver-
tisement, and were publicly opened and read at
2:00 p.m., on January 12, 1988, in the Office of
Manager of General Services.
II. CURRENT SITUATION
ae
Six (6) bid responses were received. A bid tab-
ulation is attached.
Ail bids received were evaluated in a consistent
manner by representatives of Street Maintenance
and General Services Departments.
Ce
The lowest bid submitted by Richmond Machinery and
Equipment Co. Inc., took exception to number of
teeth on sprocket and shaft size. Both exceptions
have been determined to be informalities as
defined in Section 23.1-3 of the Code of the City
of Roanoke, 1979, as amended.
De
Fund designated in the Capital Maintenance and
Equipment Replacement Program will allow for the
purchase of four (4) units at the cost of
$3,522.25 per unit.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Page 2
III. ISSUES
A. Need
B. Compliance with Specifications
C. Fund Availability
IV. ALTEi~NATI~S
ae
Council accept the lowest bid as submitted by
Richmond Machinery and Equipment Co. Inc., to
supply and deliver four (4) new ice control
spreaders, for the total amount of $14,089.00.
Need - requested equipment is necessary to
continue to accomplish a successful Snow and
Ice Removal Program.
Compliance with Specifications - Bid recom-
mended in this alternative took exceptions in
number of teeth on sprocket and shaft size.
Both exceptions have been determined infor-
malities which "does not substantially affect
the price, quality, quantity or delivery".
Fund Availability - funds are designated in
the Capital Maintenance and Equipment
Replacement Program to provide for this
purchase.
B. Reject all bids.
Need - Snow and Ice Removal Program could not
be accomplished in the most timely fashion.
Compliance with Specifications - would not be
a factor in this alternative.
Fund Availability - designated funds would
not be expended.
RECO~ENDATION
Council concur with Alternative "A" - accept the
lowest bid, with exceptions, as submitted by
Richmond Machinery and Equipment Co. Inc., to
supply four (4) new ice control spreaders for the
total cost of $14,089.00 and reject all other
bids.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Page 3
V. REC~ATION - continued
ADDropriate $14,089.00 from Capital Maintenance
and Equipment Replacement Program to Snow and Ice
Removal account 001-052-4140-9015 to provide for
this purchase.
Committee: ~~ff__~
William F. Clark
William L. S~
D. Darwin Roupe
WFC/DDR/ms
cc: City Attorney
Director of Finance
0
rd
0
0
Office of ~e City Cle~
February 10, 1988
File #247
Mr. W. Robert Herbert Mr. Joel M. Schlanger
City Manager Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Your report with regard to the Trade and Convention Center, was
before the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting
held on Monday, February 8, 1988.
On motion, duly seconcled and unanimously adopted, Council
curred in the recommendations.
Sincerely, ~~
!?.ary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
con-
MFP:ra
Room 456 Municl~;x~l Building 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 240t I (703) 981-2541
'88 FEB -4
February 8, 1988
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mayor and Members of Council:
At the January 4, 1988 Council meeting, you received a report from
Laventhal and Horwath on the feasibility of a new Trade and Convention
Center in Roanoke. The Laventhal and Horwath report was very positive
about the potential success of a Trade and Convention Center in Roanoke.
Their report projected that such a facility would generate $1
million in new, local taxes and over $2 million in State taxes. The
current Civic Center and a new Trade and Convention Center would
generate 800 jobs. This study was a feasibility study only and more
detailed analysis is needed on subjects such as site, financing, and
timing. City Council asked that the City Manager and the Director of
Finance report back to Council within 30 days on how these issues would
be addressed.
AS we have discussed on numerous occasions, the City of Roanoke,
with its 43 square miles, rolling terrain and a river flowing through
the middle, has limited capacity for future developments requiring large
land areas. Certainly, as long as the City is prohibited from
annexation, this will continue. Therefore, in addition to pursuing
industrial development alternatives, Council asked us (with the
authorization of the feasibility study) to look at the Trade and
Convention Center industry as a long-range development opportunity for
the City.
AS pointed out by Laventhal and Horwath, given the beauty of the
area, the very competitive cost comparisons with other metropolitan
governments and the large regional area that Roanoke serves, there is a
tremendous opportunity for Roanoke in the trade and convention area.
However, as the consultants also pointed out, building a facility alone
will not suffice. There must be an accompanying competitive marketing
program which will require a substantial ongoing annual investment on
the part of the City. Inherent in this entire discussion is the fact
that if we in the long run choose not to do anything about facilities,
not only is there a lost opportunity but there is a loss in current
business as highlighted by a number of our major hotels and facility
users.
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
February 8, 1988
Page 2
Specifically, City Council, on January 4, 1988, asked that the City
Manager and Director of Finance make recommendations on how to pursue
location, financing, and operations questions on the Trade Center and
report on a time frame for review. Given both the complexity and the
potential opportunity facing the City of Roanoke on these issues, it is
our recommendation that any analysis of these areas should include the
private sector. There is a wealth of energy, talent and expertise in
our private sector, that if brought to bear on this project, can result
in the best solutions.
Our recommendations to City Council are as follows:
That the City Manager appoint a committee made up of private
citizens with Council Members and City staff to pursue the
feasibility of the Trade and Convention Center.
That the committee would report to Council during the month of
August 1988.
That the Committee would be divided into the following four
subcommittees:
Se
Location - This subcommittee would make a recommendation on a
sites.
Finance - This group would identify and work towards
implementation on all potential funding sources.
Building Program and Operations - This group would make a
recommendation on size, mix, quality of a facility as well as
parking and any ancillary or surrounding developments which
might enhance the economic benefits of the project. They
would also look at the administration of the operation of the
facility; who and how, p~blic or privately run, and questions
such as booking policies, and operations of profit centers.
Marketing - This s~bcommittee would develop marketing
strategies and implementation procedures.
The charge of the committee is to make recommendations to City
Council in these four areas and with Council approval test the
practicality of implementation of the recommendations.
5. Funding is required for the items listed below:
a. Architectural and engineering fees for design concepts
b. project cost estimates
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
February 8, 1988
Page 3
c. operational strategies
d. training and development
e. Bond Attorney's and financial advisor's
Funding sources include General Assembly appropriation or limited
local funding.
It is important that City Council and the public understand what
will be delivered at the end of this six-month time period. We will
have interim recommendations on all of these subjects, as well as the
testing of their feasibility. We will not necessarily be in a position
August 1, 1988 to present a plan that Council can proceed on immediately
but one that the City can pursue during the next several months or
years, depending upon financing.
This project is analogous to the new airport facility in that
during the process we pursued the plans for the new airport facility,
refined concepts and cost estimates, but did not have total financing
sources. We identified the categories of funds to pursue. This is our
position with the Convention Center project. For example, if a State
program should be adopted by next year's General Assembly, like with the
airport terminal on the new funding program for airports, the City of
Roanoke will be ready and prepared to proceed. We want to be in a
position to take advantage of any opportunity.
The individuals on the Committee, which the City Manager will
announce, will be people who have specific skills and/or expertise which
allow the City to test the feasibility of all its options.
WP~/JMS:kds
Sincerely,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Joel M. Schlanger
Director of Finance
Office of nhe City Oerk
February 9, 1988
File #137-173
The Honorable Clifton A. Woodrum, Ill
Member, House of Delegates
Room 810, General Assembly Building
910 Capitol Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
Dear Delegate Woodrum:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 28981, urging appropriation
of Virginia Housing Partnershi~ Fund moneys as recommended by
Governor Baliles in the Corr~onwealth's 1953-99 ~iennial Budget,
which Resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of
Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, February 8, 1988.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
Eric,
Room456 MuniclpalBuildlng 2tS(3~urahAvenue, S.W. Roanc~e, Vlrginla24011 (703)981-2541
Office of the City Cler~
February 9, 1988
File #137~175
The Honorable A. Victor Thomas
Member, House of Delejates
Room 814, General Assembly ~uilding
910 Capitol Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
Dear Delegate Thomas:
I am enclosing copy of Resolutioa No. 28981, urging appropriation
of Virginia Ho~sing Partnership Fund moneys as recommended by
Governor Baliles in the Commonwealth's 1988-90 Biennial Budget,
which Resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of
Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, February 8, 1988.
Sincerely, ~
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
Room 456 Municil:~al Building 215 C~urch Avenue, S.W. Roanoke. Virginia 24011 (703) 98t-2541
C~ce of ~e City Clerk
February 9, 1988
File #137-178
The Honorable J. Granger Macfarlane
Member, Senate of Virginia
Room 382, General Asse;nbly Building
910 Capitol Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
Dear Senator Macfarlane:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 28981, urging appropriation
of Virffinia Housing Partnership Fund moneys as recommended by
Governor Baliles in the Commonwealth's 1988-90 Biennial Budget,
which Resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of
Roanoke at a regula, meeting held on Monday, February 8, 1988.
Sincerely, ~
~4ary F. Parker, CMC
City Cler~
MFP:ra
Enc.
Room 456 Munk:ipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 2401 t (703) 981-254'~
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 8th day of February, 1988.
No. 28981.
VIRGINIA,
A RESOLUTION urging appropriation of the Virginia Housing Partner-
ship Fund moneys as recommended by Governor Baliles in the Commonwealth's
1988-90 Biennial Budget.
WHEREAS, the Virginia Housing Study Commission in its 1987 Annual
Report to the Governor and the General Assembly of Virginia identified
and evaluated the housing needs confronting the Commonwealth and recom-
mended effective programs to address these needs;
WHEREAS, the Commission and its subcommittees conducted work ses-
sions and public hearings throughout the Commonwealth to receive com-
ments and information on housing conditions and needs in Virginia's
communities;
WHEREAS, as a result of the recommendations of the Commission,
the Honorable Gerald L. Baliles, Governor, has included a total of
$45,000,000 for new housing programs in Virginia in his 1988-1990
Biennial Budget;
WHEREAS, the Governor's recommendations include $18,000,000 for
low interest loans for improvement of 1800 units of low-income rental
property, $12,000,000 for winterization and plumbing grants or loans
to 1200 low-income homeowners and $8,500,000 for loans for construction
of 850 new homes and apartments for low-income families, as well as
additional funding for homeless shelters and congregate living facili-
ties for the elderly and disabled; and
THEREFORE, BE IT
as follows:
1. This Council endorses enactment of
nership Fund as recommended by Governor Baliles,
Assembly to adopt this portion of the Governor's
in the amount of $45,000,000.
2. The Clerk is directed
resolution to the Honorable J.
WHEREAS, appropriation of the funds recommended by the Governor
would eliminate a number of substandard housing units in this City and
increase the number of affordable decent housing units in the City;
RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke
the Virginia Housing Part-
and urges the General
budget with funding
to forward an attested copy of this
Granger Macfarlane, Member, Senate of
Virginia, the Honorable A. Victor Thomas, Member House of Delegates,
and the Honorable Clifton A. Woodrum, Member House of Delegates.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Roanoke, Virginia
February 8, 1988
Honorable Mayor and Members of Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject: Resolution Regarding Proposed Virginia Housing Initiative
I. Background:
Ao
Virginia Housing Stud>' Commission was reactivated by the General
Assembly in 1987, to study housing issues and needs across the
Commonwealth.
Commission issued its report to the Governor and the General Assembly
in January. Among its maior recommendations were the establishment
of the "Virginia Housing Partnership Fund" to assist the financing of
various housing programs around the State.
Pursuant to the Commission's recommendations, Governor Baliles
included in his budget to the General Assembly in January, $#5 million
for various "Housing Initiatives" over the next two years. Of this $45
million, $10 million would come from funds paid to the Commonwealth due
to oil overcharges in the past. The remaining $35 million is proposed
to come from tax revenue.
D. Principal uses of the State funds are proposed to include:
1. Low-interest loans for improvement of 1800 units of low-income ren-
tal property ($18 million)
2. Loans for construction of 850 new homes and apartments for low-
income families ($8.5 million)
3. Winterization and plumbing grants or loans to 1200 low-income
homeowners ($12 million)
4. 170 additional shelter beds or units for the homeless ($2 million)
5. Seed money for establishment of or assistance to 20 local non-profit
housing organizations ($675,000)
Low-interest or deferred payment loans to create 300 additional
spaces in limited care facilities for elderly and disabled ($2.25
million)
7. Grants for emergency repairs to 1000 homes of elderly or disabled
persons ($500,000)
8. Low-interest loans and grants for 100 housing units for migrant
farm workers ($500,000)
Page 2
February 8, I988
II.
Current Situation:
A.
Federal funding of various housing programs has declined dramatically
since 1980. Virginia receives approximately $112 million less each
year now for housing than in 1980.
B. More active involvement by the State in housing would lessen effect
of federal reduction of support.
C. The General Assembly, which is considering the Governor's budget
request, needs to know the position of the City on this issue.
III. Issues:
A. Effect upon housing opportunities and conditions in Roanoke.
B. Cost to the City.
C. Timing.
IV. Alternatives:
he
Adopt and forward to the General Assembly and our local legislators, a
resolution supporting funding for the Housing Initiatives recommended
by the Governor.
Effect on housing opportunities and conditions in Roanoke would be
positive. Although it is unclear at this time how the funds are
to be administered if appropriated~ Roanoke is likely to get
significant funds to supplement our housing development and
rehabilitation activities. The number of substandard housing
units and the affordability of decent housing in Roanoke would
be improved.
Cost to the City may include matching funds in order to get a
portion of the Virginia funds. Such matching funds could be paid
from the City's Community Development Block Grant allocation.
However, to the extent that housing stock is improved in Roanoke,
the City's tax-base would also be increased.
Timing is such that resolution from City Council must be forwarded
to the General Assembly immediately. Various subcommittees of
both houses of the General Assembly are meeting the week of
February 8 to examine the budget proposals.
Page 3
February 8~ 1988
B. Do not forward a resolution of support of the proposed Housing
Initiatives and funding for them to the General Assembly.
Effect on housing opportunities and conditions in Roanoke may be
negative. There appears to be some reluctance on the part of
Virginia legislators to expand the State's role in housing for
low and moderate income people. The proposed Initiatives may not
be accepted or fully funded by the General Assembly.
Cost to the City may increase if the Initiatives are not funded.
Continued improvement of housing opportunities may not be possible
without supplemental funding, either from the federal government,
City General Fund~ or from private sources~ all of which are
very questionable.
3. Timing is not critical if no message is to be sent to the General
Assembly.
V. Recommendation:
Concur in Alternative A~ thereby adopting a resolution in support of
the proposed Housing Initiatives and funding for them, and forwarding such
resolution immediately to local legislators and the General Assembly.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
W RH:HDP:cmh
CC:
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
Director of Human Resources
Building Commissioner
Grants Monitoring Administrator
Housing Development Coordinator
Office of the City Cienk
February 10, 1988
File #15-318
Mr. Alphonso ~{cCain
839 Grayson Avenue, N. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24016
Dear Mr. McCain:
At the regular meeting of the Council of the City of ~oanoke held
on Monday, February 8, 1988, you were elected as a member of the
Citizens' Services Committee for a term ending June 30, 1988.
Sincerely, ~
~,~ary F. Parker, CIVIC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
pc: Mr. James D. Ritchie, Chairman, Citizens' Services Committee
Room456 MunlcipalBuildlng 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanohe, Vlrg~nla24011 (703) 981-254t