HomeMy WebLinkAboutReel 35 (11/06/1972 - 07/23/73)COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday. November 6. 1972,
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the Council
;hamber in the Municipat Building, Monday. November 6, 1972, at 2 p,m.. the
regular meeting hour, with Mayor Roy L. Webber presiding,
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, Nlliiam S. Nubnr~. David K. Lisk,
Noel C. Taylor, Hampton W. Thomas, James On Trout and Mayor Roy L. Webber .... 7.
ABSENT: None .......................................................... O,
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr, Julian F. Hlrst, City Manager; Mr. Nilliam F. Clark.
Assistant City Menager; Mr. James N. Eincanon, City Attorney; and Mr. A. N. Gib-
son, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend Homer P.
Carper, Pastor, Trinity Methodist Church.
MINUTES: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday. October
23. 1972, having been furnished each member of Council, on motion of Mr, Trout,
seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof was dispensed
with and the minutes approved as recorded.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
SEWERS AND STOMR DRAINS: Mr. Hampton W. Thomas, Chairman of the Sewer Com-
mittee, verbally reported that the plans and specifications for upgrading the
Sewage Treatment Plant have been transmitted and are presently in the hands of the
staff of the State Water Control Board, that the City of Rganoke has been informed
that the staff of the State Rater Control Board has forwarded a letter ballot
to the members of the State Mater Control Boardrecommending that the sewer ban
be lifted in response to all governmental jurisdictions within the valley with
the exception of the Town of Vinton and advised that certain representatives of
the Town of ¥iuton were present to comment on the matter.
In this connection, Mr. C. Richard Cranwell, Vinton Town Attorney, appeared
before the body and requested that the City of Roanoke agree to treat the daily
sewage flow from the Town of Vinton in excess of 600,000 gallons per day,
advising that this seems to be the only course of action that the State Water
Control Board has left open to be followed.
Mr. Donald Smith, Vinton Town Manager , and Mr. Norman C. Dowdy, Member of
the Vinton Town Council, appeared before the body in support of the request.
Mr, Thomas advised that the City of Roanoke joins with the Town of Vinton
in their concern over this matter, that the City of Roanoke wants to cooperate
as much as possible and that it is the recommendation of the Sewer Committee that
a measure be prepared whereby the City o£ Roanoke will agree to treat the daily
sewage flow from the Town of Vlnton in excess of 600,000 gallo}s, per day and
that the State Rater Control Board be requested, should the Board approve the
city's acceptance and treatment of wastes of the Town of ~inton, to review
end revise accordingly effluent and other requirements, limitations and standards
now applicable to the operation of the City of Roanoke Senage Treatment Plant.
Mr, Thomas then moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
Semer Committee and that t~e City Attorney be directed to prepare the proper
measure carrying out the recommendations of the Semer Committee. The motion
mas seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the follomlng vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Nubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber .....................
NAYS: None ........... O.
Later during the meeting, Mr. Thomas offered the following emergency Ordi-
nancerelating to the transmission and treatment by the City of Roanoke of cer-
tain domestic and commercial mastes of the Tomn of Vinton upon certain terms and
conditions:
(m20529) AN ORDINANCE relating to.the City*s transmission and treatment of
and conditions; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Dook u37. page 231.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Huhard and adopted by the follouing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hobard~ Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber .....................
NAYS: None ........... O.
PENSIONS: Mr. B. N. Akers, President of the Roanoke Firefighters Associa-
tion. appeared before Council and presented a report on the Employees' Pension
Plan as compiled by the Edward H. Friend Company of Washington. D. C.. advising
that the report contains comments and questions pertaining to the pensicn plan
which he feels are vitally important when consideration is being given to lib-
eralizing the benefits within the Employees* Pensio~ Plan.
In this connection, Mr. Akers also presented the following prepared state-
ment In connection with the matter, urging that Council actively seek the
Roanoke FirefJghters Association strongly feels that the answers to these
questions along with the comments contained in the report will he Of great
significance in attempting to liberalize the benefits of their pension and
suggesting that if Council is impressed with the report, that consideration be
given to the idea Of consultation with a representative of the Edward H. Friend
Company by certain officials of the city administration:
-n/6/72
l's like to say first of nil that I have no axe to grind
with the Firm of C George Buck Consulting Actuaries of New
actuary that is handling an account as big as Roanoke's
Pension Plan. A plae that is worth well in excess of
lg,O00,O00 dollars.
the 19.000,000 dollars, and that is the concern for the
hundreds of people that are being served by this pension
Very few people being served by this plan have the ebility
to know whether or not their money is buying them all that
it should, or could in the uny of pension benefits . . .
To further explain my reasons for being here, and the reason
for having Edmurd H. Friend G Company to evaluate our pen-
sion plan, allom me to call your attention to page J of
Mr. Friends report. He speaks of a rule of thumb that
suggests that "each 1% addition to the long range rate
of investment return may be expected to reduce costs by
approximately 20-2S~ or enable benefit liberalization to
like value , . .
Gentlemen, Mr. Friend has said to me that when evaluating
a pension plan such as ours the single most important ele-
ment in the incite equation is 1HVESTRERT PERFORMANCE. and
in most cases, this unfortunately happens to be the one area
that is most often overlooked by management . .
Now in determining if this is the case with our I plan,
lets consider that the Roanoke pension plan is based on an
investment return of 4%. and I think that you will find that
prior to 1970 the investment return mas based at 3%.
Lets also consider that of our 19.000,000 dollars it
appears that me have close to 2.000,000 dollars in Govern-
ment Bonds, we have about 9.000,000 dollars in corporate
bonds, und only about ?,000,000 dollars in common stock . . .
Lets also consider that most non-professional money managers
mill direct more money to corporate bonds and other similar
fixed incomes securities because they are reluctant to
commit more money to common stock because of the legitimate
fear that there may be u bare market, but also because of
their lack of confidence of hain9 able to pick the right
securities at the right time. However, I have learned
to my satisfaction, that most professional managers today
generally agree that more of a pension funds money should
be in common stock than in debt investment as a means of
a hedge against inflation . . it is not uncommon to find
some org. that have 100% of their pension fund money in
common stock in order to realize a higher rate of return
than what can be realized un fixed income investments . . .
At this point I think the biggest question that me have to
face, and one that is not covered in Hr. Friends report, is
should Roanoke consider the services of a Professional
Money Manager. fund. It would seem to me, that the men on
our pension committee, as learned, and as educated and as
sincere as they may be, are probably no match for a pro-
fessional money manager . . . I would ask you Gentlemen
of the council to 9ire strong consideration to such a
change.. . As to the remainder of the report. I would
urge this council to actively seek the answers to the 26
questions posed by Mr. Friend. The Roanoke Fire Fighters
Assoc. strongly feels that the answers to these questions
along with the comments contained in the report mill be of
great significance in attempting to liberalize the benefits
of our pension. We would also suggest that if you gentle-
men are impressed with the Friend Report, that consideration
should be given to the idea of consultation with a repre-
sentative of the Edward H. Friend Co. by certain officials
of our city administration.
I would like to express my appreciation to each of you for
the opportunity to come before you today and I trust that
any and all of my comments have been taken in good faith . ..
I am very optimistic when I look forward to improved bene-
fits for the dedicated men of the Fire and Police depart-
ments who are willing to lay it on the line for the citizens
of Roanoke 365 days a year . . . Thank you .
Mr. Trout moved that the report be referred to the Board of Trustees
of the Eaployees' Retirement System composed of Messrs. William R, Battle, Chair-
man, S. M. Hudson, Buford R. Howell, Donald W. Graham, Julian F. Hirst, A. N.
Gibson and Roy L. Webber for study, report and recommendation to Council. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
CITY MANAGER: Mr. Garland presented the folloming 'commuelcetion
transmitting certain recommendations for consideration and concurrence by
Council with r~gar~ to filling the position of City Manager:
"30 October 1972
Mayor Roy L. Mebber and
Members of Roanoke City Council
Gentlemen:
This communication mas prompted by the appearance of
editorialn la both Roanoke newspapers concerning the proce-
dure used in the appointment of a successor to Julian
Hirst. Quite naturally 1 do not always agree with the
findings nnd/or the conclusions reached by the Nems Media.
Homever. it mould be fair to state that all of us are some-
what influenced by their opinions and are mindful of the
fact that they have a very keen insight into matters of
government that none of us possess. This can be attributed
to the fact that me are all part time politicians and by
virtue of economics must have other sources of income before
we can serve in this capacity. I do believe that the
newspapers have helped us back on the right track when we
have floundered. I think that they have been kind and gen-
erous to us on most questions just as I feel that the
Municipal Reporters usually give us the benefit of the doubt
and generally give very accurate reporting,
The selection and the appointment of the individual to
succeed Julian Hirst will be the most important decision
that this Council will ever undertake. It is a decision
that we should not take lightly or without an abundance of
careful thought and utmost consideration. It should not be
done hurriedly nor should it be conducted in a aura of
any transaction that might suggest, even if only remotely,
any impropriety on the part of the City Council as has
been charged in this instant. I would be one of the first to
defend the now famous Thursday morning meeting, 'By The
Dawn*s Early Light' as it has been so aptly described by
one of our very 9end newspaper friends. At first thought
with the intent or purpose of The Freedom of Information
Act although I am personally convinced that the City Coun-
cil acted in good faith but perhaps improperly if not
inadvertently. Our problem #as compounded due to the fact
that one of the applicants interviewed mas presently
employed by another city. It is the type of information,
knowledge for in the event that he was not selected for
this position, could possibly jeopardize his job with his
present employer, In retrospect, although this meeting
that it should have been handled in a somewhat different
blame and criticism.
That be as it may, it does appear from the remarks made thus
far that the majority of Council feel that the choice for
this position should be narrowed down to two men, Mr, Byron
Hamer and Mr, Milldam Clark. I cannot tahe direct author-
ship for this position although as 1 recall, this was my
initial recommendation to the Council, that consideration
be confined to these two men. I felt that me had ample
justification for this position in view of the fact that
both of these men had been appointed Assistant City Manager
and felt that either of them mould be acceptable to the
present Counci!. Had neither been capable of fulfilling
in the first place. This approach mill be consider parochial
editorial eluded to this.
Although I still feel that first end foremost consldera- '
tiaa should be given to either Mr. Clark or Mr. Hamer., it
perhaps would in the best interest of all concerned
t o open the field of applicants by a solicitation in
various mnnlclpal periodicals. Me can then compare the
applicants mltb what me hnow of these tmo men*s ability.
Me should always try to get the best man for the job but
with all other factors equal, we should give preference
n/ways to the Incumbent assistant. As one member of the
Council, I make no apologies for this position as I have
always been and will continue to be a strong advocate for
promoting mithin the ranks mhen me have a person that is
capable and qualified to fill the v~cnncy. It is only
proper and fair that me remard their dedication and
loyality wheu a better Job becomes available. To do other-
wise will create morale problems with those remaining or
who intend to stay in the employ of the City. If each
time we circumvent those who have been with us and go
elsewhere to fill these better Jobs. it does not give those
remaining much to look forward to.
Math these thoughts in mind and the fact of the matter is
that there is nothing to compell us to act immediately or
in an urgent manner. I would suggest that we delay any
action at all until me have made a very careful examination
of the facts. To repeat an oft quoted and familiar saying.
*He who hesitates is sometimes saved.* This apprnach
would allow things to simmer down and give the Conncil
plenty of time to make this appointment without undue
duress and would help to dispel the notion of any official
action taken at the filleted meeting at the Hotel Roanoke.
To be sure. the City will continue to operate regardless
of what action or inaction this Council might take.
Accordingly. the following recommendations are respect-
fully submitted for your consideration and hopefully for
your concurence:
1. That advertisements be inserted in the more prominent
municipal journals soliciting applications for this posi-
tion of City Manager. This should be done at once but even
still could not be run until the December issue of these
magazines.
2. Inasmuch that the City Council has had the opportunity
to observe Hr. Haner's handling of that office for five
years, it would only seem fair that the incumbent Assis-
tant City Manager be afforded an equal opportunity by
watching him under pressure with the day to day operation
of the City. This can be done without doing harm to
anyone's position because it is my understanding that even
though Mr. Hirst's resignation becomes effective December
31. 1972, that he has accumulated a considerable amount of
leave that is properly due him arid probably will be away
from the job much of the month of December.
3. Appoint Mr. Clark Acting City Manager effective Jan-
uary l, 1973, with the complete understanding that this is
an interim appointment and is not to be interpreted as a
flat endorsement of his candidacy but only a means to
observe him under close scrutiny.
4. That after ample time and consideration (I suggest
April 1, 1973). a careful analysis be made of what we know
of Mr. Haner*s ability during his five year term of that
office, of Mr. Clark*s performance since March i9~2 but
particularly after Mr. Hirst*s departure and compare these
two men with the other applications mhich we will undoubtedly
receive and then make the final determination and selection
based on past performance, education, knowledge of Munici-
pal government, efficiency, ability and the capacity to 9et
things accomplished.
This seems to me an intelligent approach and one that would
be free of any criticism or accusation of impropriety.
S/ Robert A. Garland
Robert A. Garland"
Mr. Garland then moved that Mr. Milliam F, Clark be appointed as Act-
in9 City Manager, effective Jaeuary 1, 1973, and that he serve at the discretion
of Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas.
Mr. Thomas advised that although he seconded the motion, he is not
Jn complete accord with everything c~nteined in the communication from Mr.
Garland and that it appears to him that the motion will accomplish no more than
that mhich is already provided for in the City Code.
Mr. Llsk offered e substitute motion that the communication be taken
under advisement and referred to Council acting as a Committee of the Mhole. The
motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber .......................... 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
GARBAGE REMOVAL: A motion made by the Roanoke County Board of Super-
visors at its meeting held on Tuesday, October 24, 1972. in connection with a
regional disposal facility for organic and inorganic solid waste, requesting
that Roanoke City Council name a lave-man committee iron the southeast area of
the City of Roanoke to participate in the selection and determination o£ a site
for a regional landfill facility, to report to the Regional Landfill Committee
and to receive and distribute information therefrom to its concerned citizens,
was before the body.
Mr. Trout moved that the matter be referred to the Regional Landfill
Committee representin9 the City of Roanoke composed of Messrs. Ja~es O. Trout,
Chairman, David K. Lisk and Julian F. llirst for study, report and recommenda-
tion to Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
VIRGINIA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE: A communication from Mr. Clinton Slasher,
Mayor. City of Salem. calling to the attention of the members of Council that
the City of Salem is hosting the Regional Meeting of the Virginia Municipal
League for this area, that abe meeting will be held at the Sheraton Motor Inn
on Wednesday, November B, 19T2. starting with a luncheon at 12:00 noon and
ending in aid-afternoon and adrising that the meeting is designed to give every-
one an opportunity to express their needs and concerns for local government to
their elected representatives in the General Assembly, was before Council.
Mr. Lisk moved that the City Attorney be requested to officially repre-
sent the City of Roanoke at said luncheon. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Hubard and unanimously adopted.
STATE COMPENSATION BOARD--COMMONMEALTH' S ATTORNEY: Copy of a communica-
tion addressed to Mr. Richard Lee Lawrence, Commonwealth's Attorney. from the
State Compensation Board in connection with his September. 1972, expense voucher,
advising that the state's part of claim for Vol. 212 VA. Reports. in the amount
of $o.og and $33.93 service connection charge paid in error' on the July tele-
phone bill has been disallowed by the Compensation Board because the state does
not share in the cost of such'an expense, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion mas seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
STATE COMPENSATION BOARD-CITY TREASURER: Copy of a communication from
the State Compensation Board addressed to Mr, J. fl. Johnson, City Treasurer,
in connection with his September, 1972, expense voucher, advising that the
stotets part Of claim for service connection charge On his July telephone bill,
in the amount of $33.93 paid in error on the July voucher has been disallomed
becadse the state does not share in the cost of such expense, mos before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion mas seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
S~REETS AND ALLEYS-HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: A communication from Mr.
Allen W. Staples, Attorney, representing the City of Roanohc Redevelopment and
Bousing Authority, requesting that certain streets, avenues and alleys mithin OF
bordering the area of the Eimball Redevelopment Project VA. R-4b in the north-
east section of the City of Roanoke, pursuant to the Cooperation Agreement
entered into between the City of Roanoke and the City Of Roanoke Redevelopment
and Rousing Authority at the time the Eimball Redevelopment Plan was approved,
be vacated, discontinued and closed, was before Council.
Mr. Lisk offered the following Resolution appointing viewers in
connection with vacating, discontinuing and closing the streets, avenues and
alleys:
(~20530) A RESOLUTION relating to permanent vacation, discontinuance
and closing of certain streets, avenues and alleys within the boundary of OF
bordering the Eimball Redevelopment Project VA R-46 of the City of Roanoke
Redevelopment and Bousin9 Authority as hereafter more fully described, oppointin9
viewers in the premises, and referring the proposed closing to the City Planning
Commission.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book #37, page 233.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Rubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Rubard. Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber .........................?.
NAYS: None ...........O.
Mr. Lisk then moved that the request for vacating, discontinuing and
closing the streets, avenues and alleys be referred to the Citl Planning Commis-
sion for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
REPORT5 OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET-POLICE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted the folloming
report in connection with the clothing allowance ~hich is designated to members
of the Police Department who are not required and who do not wear uniforms in
the discharge of their police duties, recommending that said allowance be increas-
ed from $100.O0 per year to $200.00 per year, said allowance to be paid said
officers in equal monthly installments along mith the regular salaries paid such
officers:
'November 6, 1972
Honorable Mayor nad City Council
Roanohe, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Police Personnel - Non-Uniform Clothing Allowance
In the submission of the 1972-73 budget, it had been
intended that the clothing ullouance for non-uniform person-
riel mithin the Police Department be increased from $100 to
· $200 per year. Calculations indicated that this increase
could be accomplished within the appropriate request of
$23.475. The total increase in that account was $75 over
the 1071-72 appropriation.
Math the approval of the budget for the requested
amount me had proceeded w~th the assumption that the Increased
clothing allowance had been approved at some point. How-
ever, in reflection we found that the Council did not
specifically at any one point allocate funds in that
amount and for that purpose. It is believed that past
procedures ~ould indicate that this would have to have the
specific approval of the City Council.
The increase is Justifiable in order to enable non-
uniform personnel to reasonably well be able to provide
themselves ~ith the type of clothin9 required in the perfor-
mance of their duties. The justification for the City
underwriting civilian or non-uniform clothing for police
officers assigned in that category is that the duty require-
ments and work performance consistently goes beyond that
which would be normally expected of employees of business
Suits.
It is recommended that the City Council by ordinance
authorize this increase effective retroactive to July
1972.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F, Hirst
Julian F. Rirst
City Manager"
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution:
(u20531) A RESOLIrflON authorizing payment of an annual uniform allo
to members of the Police Department who are not required to wear uniforms in tho
discharge of their duty.
(For full text of Resolution, see as recorded in Ordinance Hook
~37, page 23b.)
Mr. LAsh moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Robber ...................
NAYS: None ........... O.
AMBULANCES-ROANOKE VALLEY REGIONAL HEALTH SERVICES PLANNING COUNCIL,
INCORPORAYED: Council, at its meeting on Monday, October 23, 1972, having defer
red action on the adoption of an Ordinance ~hich would apply certain regulations
to the operation of ambulances within the City of Roanoke until the City Manager
and the City Attorney could confer on the wording of such an Ordinance, the
matter was again before the body.
In this connection, the City Manager submitted the following report
advising that the City Attorney has prepared n revised Ordinance proposing
a new chapter of the City Code for ambulance service, based on recommendations
of the Roanoke Valley Regional Health Services Planning Council, Incorporated,
that he has discussed the extent of the modifications uith Mr. Frank H. Mays,
Executive Director of the Regiooal Health Services Planning Council and Mr.
Mays indicated no objection to said revised Ordinance:
*November 6, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Emergency Medical Services - Ambulance Ordinance
At your meeting on Monday, October 23, certain informa-
tion was submitted to Council with respect to the proposed
regulations for the operation of ambulances within the City
of Roanoke, The matter was deferred two weeks in order for
the City Manager and the City Attorney to confer with
regard to the proper wording for an ordinance to be con-
sidered for adoption.
The City Attoroey*s office has now prepared a revised ordi-
nance proposing a new chapter of City Code for ambulance
service, based on recommendations of the Roanoke
Valley Regional Health Services Planning Council and incor-
porating certain recommendations previously reported to
Council by the City Manager on October 23. The extent of
these modifications has been briefly discussed mJtb Mr.
Frank Mays. Executive Director of the Regional Health
Services Council, who indicated no objection. Copies of
the proposed ordinance have been submitted to Mr. Mays and
Mr, Byron Hicks, President of the Health Services Coun-
cil.
The attached ordinance herewith is submitted.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Dirst
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas then moved the ~doptlon of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor.
Mr. M. G. Creamy, Attorney, representing certain life saving crews in
the Roanoke area, appeared before Council and requested that the life saving
crews be exempted from the proposed Ordinance. advising that this Ordinance
designed to protect the commercial firms, that his clients are not Jn the same
cateoory aa ambulance operators, that the life savin9 crews have sometimes
stepped on the toes of these commercial firms, that the life saving crems have
been in exiatence for years while the commercial companies come and go and that
it would be difficult for his clients to operate under the proposed Ordinance.
Mr. So A. Long, representing a local life saving crew, appeared before
the body and advised that the Ordinance which is now before Council is not the
same Ordinance which was discussed with Mr. Mays at the time of their meeting and
expressed the opinion that the new Ordinance needs further study.
Approximately ten representatives of local life saving crews were
in attendance at the meeting.
Hr. Franh H. Hays. £xecutive Director of the Regional Health Services
Planning Council. appeared before the body to ansuer various question~ in con-
nection mith the matter.
Hr. Thomas offered a substitute motion that the City Reneger and the
City Attorney be di. rected to review the proposed ambulance Ordinsnce uith Hr.
W. G..Creasy, Attorney, representing certain life saving crams fa the area, the
Roanoke Valley Regional Health Services Planning Council, Xncorporated, and any
uther Interested parties, and to submit a further report to Council at its
meeting on Monday, November 20. 1972, The motion was seconded by Hr. Trout
and unanimously adopted.
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: Council having deferred action on the adoption
of an Ordinance engaging the firm of Ken Wilson and Associates to undertake the
Mill Mountain development study, the City Homager submitted the following
report recommending that the Ordinance be favorably enacted.upon by Council:
"November 6. 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Hill Mountain Study
At your last ~eeting on October 30, I asked the delay
for one week on action to authorize the ordinance which would
engage the firm of Ken Wilson and Associates to undertake
the Mill Mountain development study. This was requested
because a question had come to me several days prior as to
the engaging of a firm outside of the City to do such o
study in the possibility that there may be one or more
local firms in the business of traveler services, facilities
and accommodations mbich firm or firms would have more
local connection and who on their own or through affiliated
organizations might undertake the study. This is a com-
pletely logical question and I wanted the opportunity to
formulate a reply for my Dun satisfaction and to such
assjstantce as it might be to the City Council should it
be raised otherwise or later.
The possibility of one or more local establishments or
their affiliated organizations doing such mark was taken '
into consideration in judgin9 the recommendation of Ken
Wilson and Associates.
I have no absolute or unequivocal reasoning inch0osin9
one firm or organization against another in such a particular
situation as this and I don*t think that there could be
any absolute points of positive determination. The outline
of the stody project in proposal form as prepared by the
Ken Nilson and Associates firm, in conjunction with the
Mill Mountain Committee. is a custom proposal in a custom
situation. That is to say that Mill Mountain and its cir-
cumstances are unique unto themselves. At the same time
such a study is unique in the sense that I know of no firm
and fast Ruidelinos of any other situation elsewhere that
would apply in total to bow one would go about a study
of the Mill Mountain situation. Thus the custom approach
to a custom situation.
.Organizations such as American Motor Inns, Hotel
Roanoke, Howard Johnsonso Oowntomnero Ramada Inns, Quality
Courts. Sheraton Hotels. Travel Lodge, and others have
within themselves or within affiliated organizations
excellent services for the analyses, study and development
of traveler facilities. This Is their bosJness. Ken
Milson and Associates has certain facility affiliations,
particularly the Ground Hog Mountain project, south of
Roanoke on the Blue Ridge Parkway.
~here are other points to the matter of the selection
of someone to bundle this study, but for this letter I hold
to only the matter of the question of the locally situated
firm or facility, One of the major objectives of this
study, end this objective shouldemphatically be held in
mind when the study is received, is that it be of the form
and quality that the City would be in a position to take it
and if the City wished to proceed with secaring proposals
for uny development or facility establishment, la whole
or impart, the report would be usable on a broad scope by
any.interested parties or rims, To identify this stu4y
with a local firm or establishment would seem to open the
possibility of identifying the project, not so much as an
Independent study, but rather as a prospect of an affilia-
tion between the City and that local firm for development
or construction on Mill Rountain. This, in a sense, is a
difficult point to pin down, bat it seems to place some
merit in the thought that was given to there being an advan-
tage in selecting a firm or study group outside of the City
and without strong local identification, This approach
is somemhat unusual in contrast to the usual objective of
seeking in-City individuals or firms for City work.
It would seem that this approach would enable the City
to have broader base within which to work at the later date
should the City wish to proceed with any of the development
and invite bids, proposals or whatever might be the form of
approach.
Mhile I recognize that the question on this would not
directly come to the CitI Council, I feel some clarifica-
tion or explanation is in order for reasons abovestatcd.
Accordlngly, it is recommended that the ordinance be
favorably enacted on as is before you.
ReSpectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Birst'
City Manager~
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the followin9 emergency Ordinance authorizing employment of
the firm of Res Wilson Associates for certain special professional consulting
services in connection with the preparation of a comprehensive Development Plan
for the Mill Mountain property, upon certain terms and conditions, ut a cost not
to exceed $12,500.00:
(u20532) AN ORDINANCE authorizing employment of certain special pro-
fessional consulting services in connection mith the preparation Of a comprehensivel
Development Plan for the City's Mill Mountain property, upon certain terms and
conditions, at a cost not to exceed $12,500,00; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 237.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .........................7.
NAYS: None .......... O.
Mr. M. Carl Andrews, Chairman of the Mill Mountain Development Committee
appeared before the body and advised that Ken Wilson Associates can begin the
study within two weeks after the City Manager enters into the agreement.
NORFOLK AND MESTERN RAILMAY COMPANY: The City Manager submitted the
following report advising that he has been contacted by representatives of the
Norfolk and Mestern Railway Company in regard to the ~roposal to replace the
existing manually operated gates at the Second Street grade crossing mlth ~ore
up to date and fully automatic flashing lights, signals and half roadway gates,
use this crossing that pedestrian gates should be included in the installation,
that be bas oom been advised by the Chief Engineer of the Company that their
matter:
"November 6. 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, ¥irginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Second Street Railroad Grade Crossing
Earlier this year, we here contacted by representatives
of the Norfolk and Mestern Railway Company in regard to the
company's proposal to replace the existing manually operated
gates at the Second Street grade crossieg with more up to
date and fully automatic flashing light signals and half
roadway gates. This contact resulted in a meetin9 in my
office on Ray 0. 1972. with representatives of the railway
company and the City. The proposal of the representatives
of the railway company was reviewed and He considered it to
be both satisfactory and desirable. It Has suggested to the
company that, since a large number of pedestrians use this
crossing, pedestrian gates should be included in the instal-
lation.
Since that time, we are now advised by the Chief
Engineer of the Company that their plans have now progressed
to the point that they desire to schedule this crossing
improvement in their eork program. Yhey additionally advise
that the suggested pedestrian gates will be incladed. The
company has furnished the City copies of a plan showing the
proposed installation.
#e thus far have not been able to find that there is
any written agreement between the City and the Norfolk and
Mestern as to particular facilities at this location. Thus,
I am not certain as to whether approval for this change may
be made by the City Manager or should properly be a decision
of City Council. 1 submit this matter Should the City Coun-
cil wish to act upon the matter and mould recommend approval.
If we can furnish additional information or present
copies of the plans, we ~ould be glad to do so.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian Fo Hirst
City Manager~
Mr. Lisk moved that the report be received and filed and referred to
the City Attorney for preparation of the proper measure. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
ROANOKE VALLEY: Council having referred to the City Manager for study,
report and'recommendation the question of requesting the Fifth Planning District
Commission to have the United States Army Corps of Engineers bring the citizens
of the Roanoke Valley up to date on future plans for flood control and that repre-
sentatives of the Roanoke Valley ask Congress for necessary funds to implement
these flood control plans, the Assistant City #anager submitted the follomlng
report in connection with flood control measures along the Roanoke River, trans-
mitting three plans of action mhich mould be appropriate for the consideration
of Council and recommending that Council refer to the City Planning Commission
the matter of a possible flood control management plan for adoption in the City
of Roanoke, that Council invite the Mllmlngton District Corps of Engineers to
consider implementation of a flood control project along Tinker Creek in the City
of Roanoke and that Council urge the Congressional delegation from this area to
support adequate funding of the Corps of Engineers flood control study on the
upper basin of Roanoke River:
*November 6, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Geotlemen:
Subject: Flood Control Measures
At several previous City Council meetings, there have
been discussions concerning flood control measures along the
Roanoke River. As a result of the June flooding from the
Hurricane Agnes emergency, a group of businessmen appeared
before City Council and requested that action be taken in
this regard. The City Manaqer's office mas requested, and
has been pursuing studies of the various alternatives that
might be available or which could be taken.
In coordination mith the Fifth Planning District Com-
mission, me have identified three plans of action which we
believe would he appropriate for City Council's considera-
tion.
Plan 1. Mithin the City of Roanoke there is presently
little or no control over development in flood plains. Such
development can have an affect on future flooding as well
as lead to extensive damage to properties which may be
developed in such flood plains. The U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers has a document entitled, 'Guidelines for Reducing
Flood Damages.' It in recommended that this subject be
referred to the Planning Commission for their consideration
and for the development of ordinances for flood plain man-
agement to be suggested for implementation. This can include
zoning enactments. The Milmington District Corps of Engi-
neers has offered to provide technical assistance upon re-
quest. Re would like to formard alsoto each member of the
City Council a copy of the guidelines.
Plan 2. Several of the smaller streams in the Roanoke
Valley mhich are tributary to the Roanoke River have pre-
viously been studied by the Corps of Engineers. There is
now a potential for flood control projects to be initiated
on these tributary streams up to $1 million. The City of
Roanoke recently used such a project as the means for in-
proving the Lick Run Channel along Campbell Avenue, S. E.
There is some uncertainty as to the meaningful affect on
flood control in the Roanoke'River mhich would result from
flood control projects along these tributary streams. How-
ever, such improvement projects could be helpful to properties
abutting those tributary streams. Of the areas wherein the
Corps of Engineers has completed studies, the City of Roanoke
would be most affected by flooding along Tinker Creek. It
is recommended that the City submit a request for a study-
plan to the Milmingtoo District Corps of Engineers tomard
the possibility of initiating a flood control project along
Tinker Creek.
The principal influence on flooding in the'Rooaoke
metropolitan area is the major matershed area Meat of Roanok~
The Wilmington District Corps of Engineers bus reported that
plans for flood control of the main channel will be based
on a flood control study mom underway for the upper basin
o[ the Roanoke Rirer. The coal.estimate for tbJs stud7 is
$450,000 uhile tbs U. S. Congress has to date appropriated
only $34,000 for this effort. The step appropriate at this
. time would be for the City to encourage its Congressional
representatives to expedite the funding which must be com-
pleted before any meaningful flood control efforts along
Roanoke River can be Implemented,
Plan 3, This involves the federally-assisted flood
insurance program, We have been corresponding with and
obtaining information from the U, S, Department of
Roguing and Urban Developmeht concerning the National Flood
Insurance Act, This is a rather involved matter and mould
seemingly have both desirable and questionable features,
At this tlme ue feel that there should be further investi-
gation. Me m~uld like to keep this subject under study and
discuss it with representatives of the insurance industry
locally, along mith some of the businessmen who might be
affected by such a program, At a later date we mould anti-
cipate returning to Council with a recommendation concerning
participation in this federally-assisted insurance program,
In summary, it would be recommended that City Council
take the following steps at this time:
1, Refer to the City Planning Commission the matter
of a possible flood control management plan for
adoption in the City of Roanohe,
2, Invite the Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
to consider implementation of a flood control pro-
ject along Tinker Creek in the City of Roanoke,
3, Urge the Congressional delegation from this area to
support adequate funding of the Corps of Engineers
flood control study on the upper basin of Roanoke
River.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ William F. Clark
Rilliam F, Clark
Assistant City Manager"
Mr, Garland moved that the report be referred to the City Planning
Commission to consider the po. ssi.bility of a flood control management plan for
adoption in the City of Roanoke and that the City Attorney be directed to pre-
pare the proper measure urging the Congressional delegation from this area to
support adequate funding of'the Corps of Engineers flood control study on the
upper basin of the Roanoke River, The motion was was seconded hY Mr. Thomas
and unanimously adopted,
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted a written report
reserving space on the agend for a report concerning the bids received for
Contract R, Primary Equipment, at the Sewage Treatment Plant, advising that at
the time of the writing of this report the bids are being reviewed by Alvord,
Burdick and Dowson, Consulting Engineers.
Ia this connection, the Cit~ Manager verbally reported that a fee
more days are needed for review of the bids and that he hopes to be in a posi-
tion to report to Council at tis next regular meeting on Monday, November
1972.
Mr. LiSk moved that action on the matter be deferred until the next
regular meeting of Council on Monday, November 13, 1972. The motion was second-
ed by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a written report request-
ing to include an item on the agenda pertaining to personnel.
In this connection, the City Manager verbally requested permission to
witbdrnM the report.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the verbal request of the City
Manager. The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted,
SCHOOLS-TRAFFIC: The City Manager submitted the follouin9 report in
connection with the school crossing safety, advising that o~ Monday, October 30,
1972o several persons appeared before Council requesting an ad~lt police school
crossing guard at the Milliamson Road crossing in front of the Oakland Elementary
School, that they made a particular point of substantiating their request on the
basis of a child having been struch by a vehicle on April 12, 1971, and trans-
mitting certain comments in clarification of the incident:
*November 6. 1972
Ronorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: School Crossing Safety
At the end of each of the past four completed school
years I have made n point of noting to the City Council the
continuing excellent record over that period of time Of the
absence of an injury to a school child in a school crossing
situation. It is believed that the City has enjoyed an
outstanding record in this regard uhen all factors of move-
ment areas, number of children, number of intersections,
etc** are taken into account. It has been felt that this
record merited a special note to the City Council with a
parallel objective of expressing appreciation to the many
people uho have been involved.
Last Monday, October 30, when the several persons came
before the City Council requesting an adult police school
crossing guard at the Milliamson Road crossing in front of
the Oakland School, they made particular point of substan-
tiating their request on the basis of a child havin9 been
struck by a vehicle last April 12.
To those who may have recalled these emphases at the
end of the school year on the safety record including the
end of the 1971-72 year, there nay occur the thought of
some inconsistency uith the four-year claim and the report
of the Oakalnd School group.
The situation on April 12, 1972, involved the follow-
ing circumstances. As Council members are aware, there is a
protective railing along the outer edge of the sidewalk
on the east side of Milliamson Road in the school area. At
the particular time there ~as a school boy patro~ officer
on duty and at the moment the school patrol was holding up
and not permitting students to enter the street. The child
involved, either because of a signal from the parent or
because of sighting the parent, crawled under the protec-
tive railing and rushed across the street to a parent on
the other side. The driver went through a red light prior
to hitting the child. The ualk light at this location is
activated by pushing a button and the school boy patrol is
considered efficient in uniting until all traffic is stop-
ped before permitting students to enter the intersection
and this ~as the situation at that particular time.
This type of situation is similar to one whica ~ccurred
about three years ago when a child nas struck returning home
from school and had moved across the street outside of the
controlled intersection area.
This particular type of situation is not considered to
he one caused or occurring ufthfn the immediate control or
supervised Bret of the crossing guards, school guards or
established crossing signtls. Therefore it is not regarded
es churgeubl~ against the surety performance record ~of these
persons or equipment.
Thus me did and continue to report on the excellent
record of those supervising crossing and I felt that this'
explanation might be in order for any question on the credi-
tability of the record.
Respectfully submitted.
S! Julian F. HJrst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
Mr. Hubard waved that the report be received and filed. The notion
uts seconded by Dr. Taylor and unaninously adopted.
MATER DEPARTRENT: The City Ranager submitted the follouing report advis
lng that the Mater Department has started construction of the proposed new 16-
inch trunk line which uill eventually extend iron the Crystal Springs punping
Station to the Cave Spring area, that work uts started in October at Avenham
Avenue and 2~th Street, $. W.. that the current project is extending south
along Avenham Avenue touard Franklin Road and that it ts the scheduled plan
that this line will be completed over a period of the next four years, will
replace sane segments of smaller lines and supplenent the capacity of the exist-
in9 12-inch trunk line which is becoming inadequate due to increasing water use
requirements in the area:
~Novenber 6, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Geutlemen:
Subject: Southwest Mater Trunk Line
For the information of the City Council. this is to
advise that the City's Nater Department has started construc-
tion of the proposed new 16-inch trunk line which mill even-
tually extend from the Crystal Springs Pumping Station to
the Cave Spring area. Work uts started earlier this month
of October at Avenham Avenue nod 2Otb Street. S. M.. and
the current project is extending south along Avenham Avenue
tabard Franklin Road.
Seventy-five thousand dollars is budgeted for this year
for materials and street restoration. Construction is
being performed by tho Mater Department personnel as other
work permits.
It is the scheduled plan that this line will be completed
over a period of the next four years and will replace some
segnents of smaller lines and supplement the capacity of the
existing 12-inch trunk line uhich is becoming inadequate
due to increasing water use requirements in the area.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
Or. Tnylor moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
nas seconded by Mr. Lisk and unsnlmous'ly adopted.
PLANNING-POLICE DEPARTMENT: The City ~anoger submitted a mritten report
advising that Council, by Resolution No. 204?2, approved the establishment of
the Mestern Virginia Hurenu of Forensic Science and the appointment of certain
persons to the Board of Directors, , that it mac agreed that the City of Roanoke
would be the grantee for funds from the State Division of Justice and Crime Pre-
vention for this project, that the city has now been asked to enter into a con-
tract math the Consolidated Laboratory Services Operational Hoard to cover the
handling of funds and the creation of the Laboratory and recommending the adoptic~t
of a Resolution mhich would approve his signature to such a contract.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and that the City Attorney be directed to prepare the proper measure
accordingly. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
TAXES-AIRPORT-LEGISLATION: Council having directed the City Attorney
to prepare the proper measure umeoding the airplane boarders* use and service
charge Ordinance, broadenin9 application of such use and service charge to extend
to passengers on non-scheduled, charter and air-taxi aircraft, tho City Attorney
submitted the followin9 report recommendin9 the adoption of an Ordinance which
would amend Chapter 5.1 of Title VII1 in its entirety, advising that such amend-
mens would not change the basic concept OF provisions of Ordinance No. 20343 first
adopted by Council but would include provisions for the broader base of charge
and would include, also, additional definitions and refinement of words and lan-
guage employed in the Ordinance first adopted by Council, all of the same being
still well within the scope of the U. S. Supreme Court's recent decision rendered
in cases involving similar Ordinances and statutes:
~November 6, 1972
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
At the meeting of the Council held October 30. 1972,'
the undersigned was directed to present an ordinance which,
by being made to apply to fare-paying passengers boarding
non-scheduled, charter and air-taxi aircraft at the Munici-
pal Airport, would broaden the base and make more uniform
and equal the use and service charge heretofore provided to
be paid by certain other passengers enplaning on commercial
scheduled aircraft at the Municipal Airport; and was further
requested to furnish opinion as to the requirement of payment
and as to provision made for the responsibility of air car-
riers to collect and remit such service and use charges.
Accordingly, there are herewith presented for the
Council's consideration the following:
A. An ordinance which, by amendment of Sec. I and
Sec. 5.. only. of the existing ordinance, mould broaden the
base of the aforesaid, service and use charge, making the
same applicable, also, to fare-paying passengers boarding
non-scheduled, charter and air-taxi aircraft, as well as
those boarding scheduled aircraft. Additionally. and for
more specificity, words have been added to Sec. I which pur-
port to place on the passenger the duty of paying the prescrib-
ed charge prior to boarding, or being allowed to board any such
plane; and enlargement of Sec. 5. has been made to define the
terms *air carrier* and * commerclal air carrier' as those
terms ore elsewhere employed in the basic ordinance.
B, An ordinance shich, by amendment of Chapter S.I ·
in its entirety would amend Seca. I and 5 ua ontllaed
above and would amend and reordsin'certalo other'sections
of the basic ordinance. As stated, this ordinance, would,
os would the first, broaden the base of the original ordi-
nance but, in addition, would clarify and make more speci-
fic and certain other of the sections of the basic ordi-
nance as they now relate to the duty and responsibility of
air carriers to collect and remit to the City the service
and use charge fixed by the original ordinance. As hereto-
fore decided upon by the Council, payment end collection
of all such charges would, by each aforesaid ordinance, com-
mence on November ISth.
I recommend to the Council adoption of the ordi-
nance referred to in paragraph R** above, amending Chapter
5.1 of Tital VIII in its entirety. Such amendment would
not change the basic concept or provisions of Ordinance
No. 20343 first adopted by the Council but mould include
provisions for the broader base of charge and would include,
also. additional definitions and refinement of words and
language employed in the ordinance first adopted by the
Council, all of the same being still nell within the scope
of the U. S. Supreme Court's recent decision rendered in
cases involving similar ordinances and statuteS,
Expressing opinion on the questions directed to me,
Sec. I in each of the ahoy*mentioned ordinances would
expressly require payment of the $1.00 charge by the passen-
ger. and would provide that no passenger on ahem the charge
is imposed shall board or be allowed to board his aircraft
until the charge be paid. Requirement that the airline
carrying the passenger collect and remit such charge has
been held by the U, S. Supreme Court not to be an unreason-
able burden on such carrier. Specific provision is node in
the ordinance referred to in paragraph B., above, for
the carrier's collection and remittance to the CiaI of oil
such charges as are imposed by the Ordinance. Further, such
carriers are prohibited by Sec. I of the Chapter. as would
be amended, from allowing a passenger by whom such charge
is required to be paid to board its aircraft without havin9
paid the service charge; and provision would be made in the
amended chapter that charges not collected by carriers
might be collected bI the City Iron such carrier, as a
debt. i.e., by civil action against the carrier.
Summarizing, it is recommended that the ordinance
referred to in paragraph B., above, amendin9 Chapter 5.1 in
its entirety, be now adopted by the Council, so that the
time intervenin9 until November 15th be made available
to firm up administrative procedures necessary to conform
to the requirements of the ordinance.
Respectfully,
S/ J. N. Kincanon
J. N. Kincanon"
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the report of the City Attorney
and offered the foil*win9 emergency Ordinance amending and reordainin9 Chapter
5.1. Title VIII. of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956. as amended, establish
lng and fixing a use and service charge for certain enplaning passengers uti-
lizing premises or facilities at Roanoke Municipal (We.drum) Airport:
(u20533) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining Chapter 5.1 of Title
VIII. of the Code of the City of Roanoke. 1956, as amended, establishing and
fixing a use and service charge for certain enplaning passengers utilizing pre-
mimes or facilities at Roanoke Municipal (No*drum) Airport;and providing
for the effective date of this ordinance; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book #3?. page 237.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was second-
ed by Mr. Trout and adopted by the foil*ming vote:
AVES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Rayor
Mebber ....................... 7.
NAYS: None ..........O.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: The City Attorney submitted the following report
in connection with fees to viewers in street smd wiley closing proceedings.
advising that it would seem to be best. in nil cases, that the amount of fee
for any particular viewing services be fixed by Council and set out in the Ordi-
nance by which the street or alley is closed or vacated, s~ggesting that each
such street or alley closing O~dinance contain as a concluding provision a cer-
tain paragraph, as outlined in his report, and that to guide Council in fixing
such allowances, the form of viewers report to Council could be adopted so as
to contain a statement from the viewers as to what amount, in their Judgement,
should be awarded for their services rendered in the proceedings:
"November 6, 1972.
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanohe, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Some attention has been called in recent weeks to the
matter of the fees paid to viewers appointed by the Council
who serve in street and alley closing proceedings conducted
by the Council and this letter is to suggest one additional
provision to be routinely incorporated into each ordinance
of the Council which effects such closing,
Until July 1, 1972, the general law of the State had
for some years provided that the *governing body may allow
such viewers not exceeding ten dollars each for their ser-
vices. The sum allowed shall be paid by the person making
the application to alter or vacate the street or alley.*
That provision was amended by the 1972 General Assembly so
as to now provide that the *governing body may allow such
viewers not exceeding fifty dollars each for their services.
The sum allowed shall be paid by the person making the appli-
cation to alter or vacate the street or alley.*
Except in rare instances, the Council has seldom fixed
such fee and, as has been indicated to the Council, in some
instances applicants may have been displeased with the fee
proposed by the Council-appointed viewers and in other in-
stances viewers may have been dissatisfied with the amount of
the fee made available by such applicant. It would seem to
the undersigned that it would be best. in all cases, that the
amount of fee for any particular viewing services be fixed by
the Council and set out in the ordinance by which the street
or alley is closed or vacated.
I would suggest that each such street closing ordi-
nance contain as a concluding provision words to the follow-
lng effect:
'BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that a fee of dollars
be and is awarded to each of the viewers hereto-
fore appointed and who have served as such in the
within proceeding, such fees to be paid said
viewers by the applicant for the aforesaid closing.*
The Council. considering the extent of the duty performed by
such viewers in each case, could award such fee, not exceed-
lng fifty dollars, as would appear proper under the circum-
stances.
To guide the Council in fixin9 such allowances! the form
of viewers' report to the Council could be adapted so as to
contain a statement f~om the viewers as to what amount, in
their judgment, should be awarded for their services rend-
ered in the proceedings.
In those instances where street closing proceedings are
instituted but are not concluded so as to effect the actual
closing of a street or alley, but wherein the proceedings,
viewers huve been uppolnted und here discharged their duties
us yle~eruf tbs Council sbould, by resolution duly adopted,
fix the fees or the vieuers mbo may have served in Jech pro-
ceeding with similar provision for pnymeut of the same by tbs
applicant for the street closing.
I see no need for formal action by the Council on the
within recommendation, other than that of concurrence or
disapproval. If concurrence be forthcoming, this office
can assure that such additional provision be contained In
later street closing ordinances and can assist in prepar-
ing additional wording In the reports of the viewers.
Respectfully.
S! J, N. Kincanon
J. N. Kincanon"
Mr, Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Link and unanimously adopted.
CITY ATTORNEY-SALE OF PROPERTY: The City Attorney submitted a written
report requesting an Executive Session for the purpose of discussing a real
estate matter.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the request of the City Attor-
ney. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
SALE OF PROPERTY-CITY PRO~RT~ Council having referred to the City
Planning Department a communication from Councilman William S, Dubard recommend-
ing that the City Planning Department make an inventory of city-owned realty,
identifying each such parcel as to its current use, its best use by the city,
whether or not such real estate should be retained by the city. and an indica-
tion of the time of disposal of any real estate mhich the Department mould sug-
gent that the city dispose of, such an inventory to exclude the 105 parcels
shown on the list dated June 9. 1971, mhich has been identified by Council OS
surplus city real estate to be sold, the City Planning Department submitted
the following report transmitting an inventory of all city-owned properties.
advising that the evaluation of these properties mas based on information
gathered from a similar study completed in 1967, data provided by the Engineer-
ing Department and the Assessor*s Office, the 1985 Thoroughfare Plan. the City
of Roanoke Community Facilities plan and a recent field survey conducted by the
Planning Department:
"October 31. 1972
The Honorable Roy L. Mebber. Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On July 19, 1972, the City Council requested the'Plan-
ning Department to compile an inventory of ell City-owned
properties. A total of 515 properties located both within
and beyond the City limits were examined. The evaluation
of these properties mas based in the main on information
gathered from e similar study completed in 19677 data pro-
vided by the Engineering Department and the Assessor*s
* In August, 1967, all City-owned properties were evaluated
by the Real Estate Assessor's Office, the Planning Department.
the Public Morks Department, the Eugineoring Department and
other affected departments for the purpose of determining
their best future use. An inventory was then established
which has been utilized as a guide to the disposition of
municipal property for the past five yeurs.
Office, the 1965 Thoroughfore Plan, the City of Rosnoke Com-
munity Facilities Plan end o recent field survey conducted
by the Planning Department.
For purposes or this study, the City-owned properties
were divided into three major groups os follows:
1. City-owned DFODeFties recommended bv the Plaaaino
Department to be retained for new public use. 86 properties
ere Included here to be retained for inclusion In the perk
system, for future street uidening end other public uses.
2. City-owned orooertfes unproved bv City Council for
sale. 103 City properties have been approved for sale by City
Council, Resolution Nos. 19887 end 20227, dated September 27,
1971 end Hay 1, 1972, respectively. (As yet, only 4 of these
properties hare been sold.)
left out of the 103 City properties approved by Council for
publi~ use.
for the purpose of ~s~lng In orderly and legal disposal of these ~fundn,
Audit Committee recomneuds that ssid funds be appropriated to the
Capital Improvement Fund nad be reserved for use fa the building of a nam jell
whether it be regional or local ia concept:
~November bo 1972'
Honorable Hnyor end City Council
Hoanoke, Virginia
Oentlemen:
The City of Roanoke mill receive $2.H00.000.00 in the
next three months as Its share from the recently passed
Federal Revenue Sharing Act. la order to bring this matter
before the Council fur the purpose of making an orderly and
legal disposal of these funds, your Audit Committee has
decided to make a recommendation that these funds be appro~
printed to the City's Capital Improvement Fund and be re-
served for use in the building of the new jail. whether it
be regional or local in concept.
Attached to this report is a special letter from the
Virginia Municipal League which gives the amount of the funds
being distributed to the various political subdivisions in
Virginia and a very limited amount of information concerning
the proper uses to which these funds may be applied, and
other pertinent details. You will find underlined in the
fourth paragraph a sentence to the effect that unlimited
use for capital expenditures may be made.
Your Audit Committee recommends that the City Attorney
be instructed to prepare the necessary ordinances to effect
this proposal.
Respectfully submitted.
$/ William S. Hubard/as
William S. Rubard,
Chairman"
Mr, Ilubard moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure earmarking these funds. The mot'ion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted,
'TAXES-CITy TREASURER-LICENSES: Council having referred back to a
committee composed of Messrs. A. N. Gibson, Chairman, James N. Kincanon. J. S.
Howard. Jr.. and J. H o Johnson for further study, report and recommendation
property tax and the sale of automobile decals, the committee submitted the
following report recommending the adoption of an Ordinance previously submitted
to Council but with an iffective date to be advanced from Hay 15, 1973. to
April 1, 1973o and recommending continuation of the committee:
*November 6. 1972
The Honorsble Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
At your meeting of October 30. 19T2. you referred
of local tangible personal property taxes and license taxes
Ail of the undersigned committee members have met and
conferred again, and have discussed ahem theurious propo-
sals sad suggestions which have'been made as to amendment
of local ordinances in order to provide the moat convenient
and orderly method of report, assessment and payment of the
two types of taxes nnd, in so doing, all members of the com-
mittee have again approached the matter from both the stand-
point of the taxpayer and the standpoint of the assessing
and collecting officers and within the framework of the
law us it now exists.
All members of the committee agree that the amendatory
ordinance submitted with a committee report made October 30,
1972, should be adopted, except that its effective date
should be advanced from May 15, 1973, to April 1, 1973,
Ruch way be accomplished by the Council during the proceedings
taken on ordinance, should the Council be agreeable to its
adoption. The ordinance, itself, would provide what all
committee members agree is necessary, i.e., a longer
interval of time between the final date fixed for payment
of tangible personal property taxes and the last date by
which motor vehicles may be operated without payment of
the current annual license tax on the vehicle,
Mechanical problems mhich are peculiar to e ach office
and most of which seemed to have been generated by the
recent changes in requirements for filing of returns
and payment of tangible personal property taxes prior to
payment of motor vehicle license taxes are generally
agreed to be such as can hereafter be overcome, particu-
larly with the experience now had in handling the assess-
neat and paymeot of most of the current year*s taxes on
those subjects under the present ordinances. All members
of the committee agreee, however, that continued study
into further improvements and, if necessary, of further
amendment of the ordinances concerned should be made end,
for that purpose, the undersigned committee should be co,-
tinned.
Respectfully,
S/ Jerome S. Howard, Jr.
$/ J. H. Johnson
S/ J. N. Kincanon
$/ A. N. Gibson, Chairman*
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the com-
uittee and that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(~20534) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain subparagraph (6). Motor
carriers, etc., of Sec. 2fl, City license -- Amount of tax, Sec. 31. City licen;~ -
Period for which olat~s, taus. or decals may be used, Sec. 33. City license -
Proration. and Sec. 35. City license - Expiration: renewal, of Chapter 1. Traffic.
[Code, Title l¥1II, Motor Vehicles and Traffic, of the Code of the City of
toanoke, 1956, as amended, so as to provide for a more orderly and convenient
:ethod of purchase of certain City motor vehicle licenses; and providing for
the effective date of this ordinance,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that subparagraph
(8). Motor carriers, g~c,, of Sec, 28. City license - Amount of tqN, Sec. 31.
City license -- Period for which plates, taqs, or decals may be qs~d, Sec. 33. City
license - Proration, and Sec. 35. City license - Expiration; renewal, of Chapter
1. Traffic Code, Title IVIII, Motor Vehicles and Traffic, of the code of the City
~f Roanoke, 1956, as amended, be and said sections are hereby amended and reor-
lained to read and provide as follows:
Sec. 28, City license - Amount of tnx,
6. Motor carriers, etc. Every common carrier by
motor vehicle, every restricted common carrier by motor
vehicle, every contract carrier by motor vehicle and every
household goods carrier shall psy n tax of 1/5 cent per
mile for each mile operated mithin~ the city by any vehicle
of such person ewighieg five thousand pounds or less; 2/5
cent per mile for each mile so operated by a vehicle weighing
more than five thousind pounds but less than fifteen thousand
pounds; and 3/5 cent per mile for each bile so operated by
any vehicle neighing more than fifteen thousand pounds; pro-
vfded, homerer, tbnt this section sbsll not apply to any
such person, form or corporntien paying n tnx to the city on
all tangible personal property, machinery, tools and equip-
ment owned by such person. No common carrier by motor
vehicle, restricted common carrier by motor vehicle, con-
tract carrier by motor vehicle, or household goods carrier
shall operate in the city until such carrier has paid the
tax prescribed by this section, mhich said tax shall be
due and payable on the first day of June, of each year, and
shall bare secured the approval of the council of the city
OS to the route, or routes, over mhich said carrier desires
to operate.
Sec. 31. Same - Period for which slates, tans. or
decals may he used.
Number plates, tags or decals issued pursuant to section
29 of this chapter, for a succeeding license year may be used
without penalty on and after May fifteenth of the calendar
year in which such license year begins; number plates, tags
or decals issued under section 29 of this chapter for a pre-
ceding year may be used without penalty during the first
fifteen days of a current license year.
Sec. 33. Same -- Proration.
Licenses issued under subsections 3 and 4, Of section
28. of this chapter may be prorated, in which case Of
proration one-half of the annual license tax required to be
paid by the Owner of a motor vehicle, trailer or semitrailer.
shall-be collected whenever such license is issued during
the period beginning on the first day of December in any year,
and ending on the first day of March in the same license year.
and one-third of such tax shall he collected whenever s~ch
license is ~sued after the first day of March in the same license
year.
No other licenses issued hereunder shall be prorated,
necessary will be, uelcowed and considered at the regular meeting of Council
on #ondsyo November 6, 1972, the matter mos again before the body.
· lth reference to the matter, the City Homager submitted the following
report transmitting general and specific comments on the Bousina Avotlabilit~
Ordinance and advising that his office will be glad to continue to assist Coun-
cil in its deliberations on this proposed Ordinance:
"November 6. 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: HouSing Availability Ordinance
The City Council on October 23, 19T2o received a pro-
posal of a housing availability ordinance and referred the
same to the undersigned and others to report back by November
6, 1972, with stated intention of adopting an ordinance at
that date. I submit my comments as folloms in the form of
General Comments and Specific Comments.
General Comments
1. The time of ten days between the proposal of the ordi-
nance and the indicated date of receipt of reports and
adoption presents some limitations as to the ability of
ail concerned to completely review an ordinance as ex-
tensive as this in content and to subject it to that
which it is felt would be disired; namely, the similar
reasonable analysis as is given to all of the codes and
ordinances. The City Council may wish to take this into
consideration in its procedures in regard to the ordi-
nance.
2. The input of the Real Estate Board would be valuable
as has been suggested and this should be taken into
account prior to any adoption in view of the direct
expertise which that Board and its membership has in
matters of the handling of property, etc.
$. Over recent times several ordinances having an affect
upon the public and bearing upon matters of broad
graphical significance have been approached as to their
being submitted to each of the gcverning bodies within
the Valley to determine if comparable rules and proce-
dures can be adopted in all of the jurisdictions in
order that there might be like standards in effect
throughout the region, it would appear that such an
ordinance as this under consideration would merit some
thought in this regard mith the thought that either by
interested parties or by the Fifth Planning District
Commission that simultaneous approaches might he made to
the other governing bodies.
4. The City Council may wish to consider, in connection with
this ordinance, a discussion on general policy content
in order that those charged with reviewing the legal
administrative, etc., details could have the benefit
of any policy approaches that the Council might suggest
or wish to adhere to.
Soecific Comments
1. Section 1. Policy. The first and fourth sentences
this section would appear to fully set forth the policy
intention of the ordinance and for brevity this section
could be satisfactorily limited to those two sentences.
2. Section 3.A.Io a. and b. Stipulation should be made
that the housing in question is available for sale,
lease, etc., and that there is a business condition
wherein there would be available for sale. lease, etc.,
housing.
3. Section 3.A,2o'C,' The first portion of this subsection
should be reviewed as to whether it adequatelT defines that
which would be enforceable.
4. Section 4.B,I. (top of page 5). This could inrolve some
considerations as to the measure or that which might
5. Section $. It is to be noted that the propose~ ordi-
nance provides the entitlement that members of the Board
may receive compensation.
There fs the proposal that the Dlrector may be a person
otherwise employed by the City and this should be re-
viewed for policy discussion as to whether the ordinance
should so stipulate.
T. Section S. The latter part of this section states
that *the City Council shall authorize the Board to
employ such additional staff personnel.* The word-
ing of this to conform with the general procedure should
perhaps be "the Board may employ such additional staff
personnel as mould be authorized by the City Council.*
8. Section 6. Conduct of Board. As would be proper, the
proposed ordinance specifies that three members of the
Hoard would constitute a quorum. There should additional-
ly be a provision of assuring notification to all members
of the Board of any meeting of said Hoard and a provi-
ed members of the Board to each meeting and that there
would not continue over an extended period of time
functioning of either only a portion of the Board or
less than five appointed members.
9. Section 6.1.1. (page 6). It is presumed from the wording
in the third sentence of this subsection that the release
of confidence would require the approval of both the
complaintant and the person complained against. If
this is applicable and desired then several additional
words would assure this.
10. The title 'Administrator' is suggested as perhaps a more
apt description of the duties of the individual who
serves the Board than that of 'Execotive Director.'
11. Section 6.A.2. The question noted above as to the agree-
=eat of parties to release of confidence to the public
would also be somenhat applicable ia the last sentence .
of this subsection.
12. Section 6.A.3. The matter of the conciliation agreement
and in turn the consent order becoming a basis of viola-
tion of the ordinance in subparagraph 4 should bare
further study. It may be satisfactory as drafted but
I think that additional thocght of assurance should be
.given.
13. It is to be noted that in the administration of the ordi-
nance, the Executive Director and/or the Board have the
authority to determine or measure whether or not a vio-
lation of the ordinance has occurred. This is made as
point of note.
14. Section 6.A.6. A minor point but in the very last part
of that paragraph the cost of the proceeding should be
in accordance with an established scale.
15. Section 9. Judicial Review. The reading of the
third sentence does not offer the option of the Commou-
wealtb*s Attorney but the judgment of that office upon
the sufficiency of the matter which can carry a patti-
cai decision upon the Commonmealth*s Attorney as to
whether or not his office should represent the case.
16. Section 9. Judicail Review. (top of page 9). The fifth
sentence prescribes that 'the findings of the Board
shall be accepted by the Court.' This would not appear'
to be o matter that the City Council couldu*t prescribe
· by ordinance as the court would be in its own discretion.
17. Section 10. Enforcement by tbs Court. Several provisions
In this paragraph should be reviewed ns to the specific
requirement placed upon the Commonwealthos Attorney to
bring action and the specific requirement upon the
Coart to tahe certain action and to accept the findings
of the Hoard *as conclusive**
10. Section 12. Notice. In specifying the 'last known
address* it is suggested that this should be the last
bm,mn address of other records than just necessarily
those of the Board.
19. Section 13. Ti'me Limitation. In the fourth and fifth
line of that section, it is. suggested that the provision
of 'additional time' could conceivably open to the Hoard
an unending period of time for consideration or for
bringing up a situation on the matter. It is suggested
that this provision should be limited to the go days.
20. There perhaps may be other matters that should be
studied mJthin the ordinance based on review by various
parties. It is also to be noted that there is Federal
and State legislation in this field and the adequacy
therein, in mb,la or in pnFto tO the purpose intended of
this ordinance may merit study end account.
This office mill be glad to continue to assist the City
Council in its deliberations on this proposed ordinance.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager*
Also math reference to the matter, the City Attorney submitted the
lowing report advising that the housing availability laws and regulations in
the form of federal and state statutes on the same general subject are not
novel and. already, there appear to be rather comprehensive statutes of both such
~ther jurisdictions on substantially the sam~ matter, although appearing in
the statutes under differing appellations, that this gives rise to question as
to the necessity of further legislation on the subject if it he considered,
in the first instance, that necessity for local legislation on the subject
~xists within the jurisdiction of the local governing body and that with federal
tnd state statutes already enacted on substantially the same general subject
matter and math an Executive Order applicable to federal agencies and lending
institutions ns beneficiaries of federally-supported programs, he questions the
idvisability of further local legislation on the same subject, and unless such
)e accomplished by the same and concerted action on the part Of all governing
),dies in the Roanoke Valley area:
*November 6, 1972
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
6entlemen:
At the Council*s meeting on October 23, 1972. a pro-
posed Housing Availability Ordinance and its supporting
material were referred to the undersigned and others for
study, with report to be made back to the Council at its
nesting this date. The time element allo~ed being coneid-
ered, the full,Ming comments are not, necessarily, the
result of timely research or study of the proposal made
to the Council.
'-28
Housing availability laws and regulations, in the fora ·
of Federal and State stututea on the same general subject
are not novel and,' already, there appear to be rather cow-
prehen~ive statutes of bath such,other Jurisdictions on sub-
stantially the same matter, although appearing in the
statutes under differing appellations.~ Therein gives rise
to question as to the necessity of further legislation on
the subject Ir it be considered, in the first Instance, that
necessity for local legislation on the subject exists within
the Jurisdiction of the local governing body,
The Congress of the United States enacted legislation
on the subject in 1968, Public Lam 90-284 being now popularly
known as the Fair Housing Act. ~hile.not purporting to
preempt the field of law on the subject of housing regula-
tions, it is to be noted that the provisions of that act are
sade applicable nation-aide, give federal jurisdiction, to
the subject of the act and provide what may be considered
adequate senna for enforcement of the provisions of that
act, either by aggrieved individuals or by the office of
the Attorney General of the United States through District
Attorneys, and violations of the Federal Fair Housing Act
are made unlawful offenses against the Federal lam,
Prior to Federal enactment of the Fair Housing Act,
§19H2 U,S.C,A. (R.S. 19?O} guaranteed to all citizens the
same right to purchase, lease, sell, hold and convey real
and p~rsonal property and Executive Order No, 11063 issued
November 20. 1962. entitled Equal Opportunity in Housing.
had been made effective, applicable to ail offices and
agencies of the Federal Government. A copy of the chapter
index of the Federal Fair Housing Act and a copy of §1982
U.S.C.A. and of Executive Order Ho. 11063 are attached, in
order to indicate the extent to which the Congress and
Federal officials have legislated or acted on the same
genera] subject.
Approved as Chapter 591 of the 1972 Acts of the Gen-
eral Assembly of Virginia is the Virginia Fair Housing Law
dealing, generally, with the same subject as in the proposed
local ordinance. Again, acts defined as unfair or-discrimin-
atory housing practices are made unlawful offenses against
the State law, and aggrieved individuals and the Attorney
General of the State are provided means for enforcement of
the provisions of that act. A copy of Uhapter 591 of the
1972 Acts of Assembly of Virginia is attached, for purposes
of comparison with the Federal statutes abovementioned and
with the proposed local ordinance.
With Federal and State statutes already enacted on
substantially the same general subject matter and with the
abovesentioned Executive Order applicable to Federal
agencies and lending institutions as beneficiaries of Federally-
supported programs, I question the advisability of further
local legislation on the same subject, and unless such be
accomplished by the same and concerted action on the part
of all governing bodies in the Roanoke Valley area.
Respectfully,
S/ J. N. Klncanon
J. N. Kincaoon"
fir. Taylor presented the following prepared statement Jn connection
with the H~Usino Availability Ordinance welcoming any additons, deletions or
corrections that are needed in said Ordinance and requesting the favorable
consideration of Council toward adopting such an Ordinance:
~Novembe~ 3, 1972
~he ~oeorable Hayor Roy Lo ~ebber
amd Members of the City Council
Hunicipal Building
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen=
Two ~eeks ago I recommended your consideration of a
Housing Availability Ordinance ~hich I submitted to the
Members of this Council, the City Attorney, the City Manager,
and the Roanoke Valley Hoard of Realtors. Your favorable
action on this Ordinance will provide an equal opportunity
for every individual, corporation, partnership, etc. to
purchase or rent adequate housing facilities of their choice
without regard to color, race, religion. OF national origin.
In many instances, Individuals from minority groups have
spent months, and in some instances, years, finding a house
of their choice because there was no anti-discrimination
law in effect. The typical response is *me have to think
about it* or *I*11 hare to speak to my husband - and then
I*11 call you back** But, the promised calls never come.
If you have not gone through it yourself, you cannot know
what it is like.
Many cases of housing discrimination are disguised in such a
way that the minority family does not realize that it is
being deceived. This is particularly true for rental
housing. The resistance to integrated housing, based on
the fear that it will lead to interracial marriages, stems
more from the emotional hostility of large elements of the
white population to intermarriage than from any statistical
frequency. In the United States. only about one marriage
in a thousand involves people of different races according
to Paul H. Jacobson*s book entitled, 'American Marriage and
Divorce**
The low Fate of inter-marriage is caused by the tendency
of most people to marry within their own race. In part,
this is a matter of personal preference, but it is also a
consequence of the intense disapproval of inter-racial
marriages by a great majority of Americans, including those
in minority groups.
Simply stated, we, as a race, do not monk to be forced
into ghettoes or excluded from communities and denied
the right to purchase homes where our money can buy. But,
1 do not advocate a complete separation from my own people as the
way of democratic fulfillment. We are related by ties of
blood and by nature's laws for which I offer no apologies
and for which I am not ashamed, but justly proud.
I know bom long we have been pressed down together by
the curse of segregation. I know how long we have waited
and grown together for deliverance from the shackles of
discrimination. I, too, found my place with other troubled
spirits of my race at the wailing moll of history from which
the cries of anguish have gone up and with other black
sisters and brothers, I have asked the question, *How long?*
But, this does not mean that I dislike our racial together-
ness or long to be separated completely from my peopel.
It simply means 1 am weary of the burden and tires of
the hindering shadows that afflict us all. I am one with my
people and I do not request to be divorced from my brothers
in black, for my people are my people. Their destiny is
my destiny; their hope is my hope; their struggle is my
struggle; their journey is my journey, and we travel the
highway of progress together, whatever the cost. I am
simply endeavoring today to bring all minority ~roup$ into
the main stream of the life of our City, so that all of ns
may live together, work together, and progress together as
one united human family under God.
Many whites are not aware of the extent to which Open Hous-
ing is supported by other whites. Whereas, in 1942, only
about one-third of the whites in a national sample said it
would make no difference to them if a black family of the
same education and income moved onto their block. By
1955, about two-thirds of a similar sample voiced no objection,
according to Mildred A. Schwartz in her report entitled,
*Trends in White Attitudes Towards ~egroes*.
Of course, the effectiveness of the Ordinance which I
have submitted will he largely determined by the role of
the Fair Housing Hoard. The major role of the Fair Housing
Hoard should be to check when discrimination is suspected
and, if verified, to remove the barrier.' The Fair Housing
Board should never directly attempt to invluence the area
in mhich a family seeks housing, the sale price or rental
it is willing to pay, or the particular house it selects.
The Fair Housing Board should differ from most other organi-
zations in that it's basic objective should be to become
obsolete. It*s success in achieving this objective depeuds
primarily on the effectlveuess of long range educational
programs.
Two public relution tactics uppear, psrticulorly effective
in changing attitudes end achieving · greater ucceptsnce
rev Open Housing, The first ls to publicize public heuvings
and court proceedings which show that Fair Housing laws
ute being enforced. The other iJ to publicize success
stories. The succes~ of stubllizing nemly integrated
neig'hborhoods uill be influenced by the effectiveness of
Fair Housing efforts, If our Fair Housing Hoard does it*s
Job well, mhites will not panic ut the initial entry of a
minority family and perhsps, most ~mportant of all, minority
groups should have u variety of neighborhoods from which to
choose housing.
However, this is os far os the Fair Housing Board should
go. The fundamental objective of a Fair Housing Hoard
should be that housing be open to all - not that neighbor-
hoods be racially balanced. If we are successful in our
efforts to establish Open BousJog, it will decreas~ the
percentage of students being bussed and help you re-
establish the neighborhood school concept.
I uelcome any additions, deletions, OF corrections that are
needed in this Ordinance and respectfully request your
favorable consi'deration. Again. I suggest that the pro-
visions of the Housing Availability Ordinance shall
become effective on January 1, 1973.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Noel C. Taylor
Noel C. Taylor"
DF. Taylor moved that the proposed [Iovsina Availability Ordinance
be referre~ toCouncil acting as a Committee Of the Whole to meet with the
City Manager, the City Attorney and representatives of the Roanoke Valley Hoard
of Realtors for the purpose of studying and making adjustments to said Ordi-
nance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
DF. Taylor further moved that the proposed Ordinance be referred to
the Fifth Planning District Commission for study and comment to Council. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously 5dopted.
Dr. Taylor further moved that a public hearing be held at 7:50 pom**
Tuesday, December 26, 19T2, in the Council Chamber. to consider the Housing
Availability Ordinm ce. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously
adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
ZONING: Ordinance No. 20515, r~zoning property facing the 1500 block
of Baldwin Avenue and Keswick Avenue, N. £.. described as Lots 12 - 16. inclusive
Section 5. Map of Jackson Park. Official Tax Nos. 3210912 - 3210916. inclusive,
from LM. Light Manufacturing District. to RG-I, General Residential District,
having previously been before Council for its first reading, read and lald over,
was again before the body. Mr. Garland offering the following for its second
readin9 and final adoption:
(~20515) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV. Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet Ho. 321, Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
(For full text of Ordinance, see as recorded in Ordinance
~7. page 224.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconde~
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, TaTlor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor Mebber ......
NAYS: bessrs. Rubard end Lisk ......................................2.
ZONING: Ordinance No. ROSIG. res,ming 9.13 acres of land situate on
the ~rth side of Rutrough Road. S. E., west of Brookside Lane. S. E.. des-
erlbed as Official Tax No. 4450106° from RD, Duplex Residential Oistrict, to
RG-I, General Residential District. having previously been before Council for
its first reading, read and laid over. was again her,re the body, Mr. Trout
offering the following for its second readino and final adoption:
{~20516) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title X¥, Chapter 4.1, Seciont 2. of
the Code of the City of Roanoke. 1956. as amended, and Sheet No. 445, Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke. in relation to Zoning.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book ~37. page 225.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber .......................... ?.
NAYS: Nose ...........O.
ZONING: Ordinonce No. 20S17, rezoning property located on the west side
of Ridgefield Street, N. E., described as Lot 9, Official Tax No. 3131104, £.
Parker Map, from RD, Duplex Residential District, to RG-2. General Residential
District. having previously been before Council for its first reading, read and
laid over, was again before the body, Mr. Th,nas offering the folloulng for its
second reading and final adoption:
(=20517) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XY, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet No. 313, Sectlonal
19h6 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance ~ook ua?, page 226.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber ......................
NAYS: None ...........O.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Ordinance No. 20518, vacatin9, discontinuing and
closing that portion of a 15 foot alley liing between Lots 1, 2, and 3, and Lots
12, 13 and 14, Block H, Map of Eenwood Subdivision, having previously been before
Council for its first reading, read and laid 'over, was again before the body, Mr.
Thomas offering the following for its second reading and final adoption:
(n20516) AN ORDINANCE permanently abandoning, discontinuing and clos-
ing a portion of a 15 ft. alley lying between Lots 1, 2 and 3 and Lots 12, 13 and
14, Block B, Mop of Kenwood Subdivision, and also being shown on Tax Sheet No.
332 of the Tax Appraisal Map of thc City of Roanoke, Virginia.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 227.)
Mr. Thomas m~ved the adeptlpn of the Ordinance. The motion mas seconde
by Mr, Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: #essrs, Garland, Bubard, Lish. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Yebber ....................... T.
NAYS: None~ .......
SALE'OF PROPERTY: Ordinance No. 20527, authorizing and directing the
sale and conveyance by the City of Roanohe to Mr. William Keaney a~. othmrsof
a trinngualr shaped parcel of land containing 484 square feet. more or less.
situate at the southwest corner of Elm Avenue. S. E.. and Fourth Street. S. E.,
being the southerly residue of Ofticlal Tax No. 4020319. upon certain terms and
conditions, having previously been before Council for its first reading, read end
laid over, was again before the body. Hr. Lisk offering the following for its
second reading and final adoption:
· (z20§27) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and directing the City's sale and
conveyance to Nilliam Renney end others of a triangular shaped parcel of land
containing 464 square feet, sore or less, situate at the Southwest corner of
E.m Avenue, S. E.. and Fourth Street, 5. E., being the ssutherly residue of
Official No. 4020319. upon certain terns and conditions.
(For full text Of Ordinance. see Ordinaoce Book ~37. page
Rrs. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion was seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the fo]lowing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard. Lisk. Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O.
ZONING: Council having referred to the City Attorney for necessary
corrections an Ordinance rezoning property located in the 3500 block of Barberry
Avenue. N. M., described as all of Lots 3 and 4, Olock 3, Revised Map of Mas[wood
Annex, Official Tax No. 2630610 and port of 2630604, from RS-3, Single-Family
Residential District, to RG-I, General Residential District. he presented same;
whereupon, Mr. Lisk moved that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first
reading:
(z20535) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Cho~ter 4.10 Section 2. of
the Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956. asamended, and Sheet No. 253, Sectional
1966 Zone Rap, City of Roanoke. in relation to Zoning.
#HEREAS. application has been made to the Council of the City of
Roanoke to have property located in the 3500 block of Barberry Avenue, N.
and described as all of Lots 3 and 4, Block 3. Revised Map of Mestwood Annex,
Official Tax No. 2630610 and part of 2630604. rezoned from RS-3, Single-Family
Residential District, to RG-1. General Residential District; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission has recommended that the herein-
after described land be rezoned from RS-3, Single-Famii~ Residential District,
to'RG-1, General Residential District; and
WHEREAS.'the written notice and the posted sign required to be pub-
lished a~d posted, respectively, by Seetioo ?1, Chapter 4.1, Title XV. of The
Code of the City of Roanohe, 1956o ns amended, relating to Zoning, have been
published and posted as required and for the time provided by said section; and
WHEREAS, the hearing as provided for in said notice was held on the
30th day of October, 1972, at 7:30 p,m** before the Council of the City of
Roanoke, at uhich hearing oil parties, in interest end citizens mere given an
opportunity to be heard, both for and against the proposed rezonlng; and
MHEREAS, this Council. after considering the evidence as herein provided
is of the opinion that the hereinafter described land should be rezoned.
THEREFORE, BE XT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
Title XV. Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as
amended, relating to Zoning, and Sheet No. 263 of the Sectional 1965 Zone Rap,
City of Roanoke, be amended in the following particular and no other, viz:
Property located in'the 3500 Block of Barberry Avenue, N. N., and
described as all of Lots 3 and 4, Block 3. Revised Map of Mestwood Annex, Offi-
cial Tax No. 2630610 and part of 2630604. be, and is hereby, changed from RS-3,
Single-Family Residential District. to RG-I. General Residential District, and
that Sheet No. 263 of the aforesaid nap be changed in this respect.
The motion mas seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the followin9 vote:
AYES: ~ Messrs. Garland, tlubard. Lisk. Taylor. Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................... 7.
NAYS: Noee ...........Oo
SCIIOOLS: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure requesting the consent of the State Highway Commissioner to the
leasing of airspace over Colonial Avenue, S. N., by the City of Roanoke to
Virginia Mestern Community College. he presented same; whereupon, Mr. Lisk
offered the following Resolution:
(~20536) A RESOLUTION requesting the consent of the State Highway
Commissioner to the leasing of airspace over Colonial Avenue, S. M., by the City
of Roanoke, to Virginia Western Community College.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~37. page 241.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion sas seconded
byMr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
~ebber .......................
NAYS: None ...........O.
MUNICIPAL BUILDING-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM: Council having directed
the City Attorney to prepare the proper measure approving generally certain plans
and specifications for remodeling and renovating the city's Third Street, S. M.,
building designated for use of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and the
city*s Police Department; approving certain encroachments to be allowed in the
set back area on the westside of Third Street, S. W., and into the right of way
of Zhird Street. S. W.. and authorizing advertisement for bids on the aforesaid
remodeling improvements, he presented same; whereupon, Mr. Trout offered the
following Resolution:
(s20537) A RESOLUTION approving generally certain plans Dad specifi-
cations for remodeling and renovating the City*s Third Street, S, W., building
designated for use or the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and the City*s
Police Department: approving certain encroacbments to be allowed in the set boch
area on the west side of Third Street. S. W.. and Jato the right-of-way of Third
Street, S. W.. end authorizing udvertisnent for bids on the aforesaid remodeling
improvements.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance nook ~37, page
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Ressrs. Garland. Hubord, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Royor
Webber ..........................
NAYS: Nooe ........... O.
In this connection, the City Manager submitted the folloming report
in connection with the plans and specifications for the remodeling of the Third
Street Duilding, advising that several questions mere raised by Council as to
the absence Of City Council involvement in the development of these plans and
that he had perhaps proceeded without appropriate consultation with Council, tha
he does not want to place on this project, or on any project for that matter,
any feeling that he administratively proceeded outside of authority or direc-
tion or that he might have intentionally or unintentionally acted in the develop-
meat of plans and neglected to properly confer with Council, that Bis point in
writing this report is to assure Council, to the fullest extent possible, that
he in no way wanted to or intended to circumvent Council in its role or in its
function and responsibilities, and that he will be most happy to bare the adver-
tisement and invitation for bids held up to afford the opportunity of meeting
with Council and going over in detail the plans and the intended designin
occupancy arrangements on thi~ building:
~November 6, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Third Street Duildin9
As will be recalled, at the City Council ~eeting on
October 30, 1972, when we submitted the plans and specifica-
tions for the remodeling of the Third Street Buildio9 (Reid
and Cutshall), several questions were raised by the City
Council as to the absence of City Council involvement ia
the development of these plans and that we had perhaps
proceeded without appropriate consultation with the City
Council. I do not want to place on this project, or on any
project for that matter, any feeling with the Council that
we administratively have proceeded outside of your autho-
rity and direction or that we might have intentionally or
unintentionally acted in the development of plans and
neglected to properly confer with the City Council.
In this particular situation we had been proceeding
under two somewhat guidelines. One was that we administra-
tively and with the various offices involved and architects
and engineers would proceed to develop that which we might
recommend to City Council and then the Council in its
judgment would determine how to proceed farther. The
other factor was feeling that the last time the matterof
buildings had come up, we had been asked to.proceed to
prepare the plans and to return to Council.
My point In writing is to assure the City Council, to
the fullest extent that I can, that we in no may wanted to
or intend to circumvent the Council in its role, in'its
function and responsibilities, Likewise I want to avoid
to every ~xtent possible any shadom of feeling that in
this particular building, or in anyother projects, it
has been hacdled without proper coordination.
I usuld be most happy to have the advertisement and
invitation for bids held up to afford the opportunity of
sitting domn with the Council and going over in detail
the plans and the intended design in occupancy arrangements
on this building. I would much rather have this step
taken than to create for the present or future with
respect to this building any feeling that its planning has
been brought about outside of the bounds of proper procedure.
Your advice wilJ be follomed as yon might suggest.
Respectfully submitted,
$/ Julian F. flirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
Mr. Lisk moved that the report be received and filed. Yhe Motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-POLICE DEPARTMENT-SCHOOLS: Council having directed the City
Attorney to prepare the proper measure appropriating $?00o00 to Personal Services
and $250.00 to Clothing and Personal Supplies under Section m45, *Police Depart-
ment," of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for a school corssin9 guard to
be placed at the intersection of 10th Street and Willinmson Road, N. W., Mr.
Lisk offered the followin9 emergency Ordinance:
(m20536) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~45, ~Police
Department,~ of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an omar-
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 243.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lash. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ........................
NAYS: None ...........O.
At this point, Mr. Trout left the meeting.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
COUNCIL-4~XTY MANAGER: Mr. Bubard moved that Counci! meet in Execu-
committees. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following
Webber .........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
3§
JL~YENILE AND DOMESTIC RELATIONS COURT: The City Clerk reported that
Mr. Regionold E. Davis has qualified os · member of the Youth Commission for a
term of tho years ending April 30, lg?4.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and ~flled. The motion
mas seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
INOUSTRIES: The City Clerk reported that Mr. C. £. Bunter, Jr** has
qnnlifJed as n Director of the Industrial Development Authority of the City of
Roanoke, Virginia, to fill the unexpired term of Mr. Benton O. Dillard, deceased.
ending October 20, 1973.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be recoJred and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Llsk and unanimously adopted.
There being no further business, Mayor Mebber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTE ST:
Deputy City Clerk
Mayor
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday, November 13, 1972.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Building Monday. November 15, 1972. at 2 p.m.,
the regular meeting hour, uith Mayor Roy L. Mebber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, David K. Lisk, Noel C. Taylor,
Hampton M. Thomas. James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L. Mebber ........
ABSENT: Councilman Milliam S. Hubard ...................1.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Julian F. flirst. City Manager; Hr. Milliam
Clark, Assistant City Manager; Mr. A. N. Gibson, City Auditor; and Mr. James
Klncanon, City Attorney.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened math a prayer by the Reverend
James A. Allison, Pastor, Raleigh Court Presbyterian Church.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATYERS:
AIRPORT: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids on the construc-
tion of a fuel service building at Roanoke Municipal (Moodrum) Airport. said
proposals to be received by the City Clerk until 2 p.m., Monday, November 13,
1972, and to be opened at that hour before Council, Mayor Mebber asked if any-
one had any questions about the advertisement, and no representative present
raising any question, the Mayor instructed the City Clerk to proceed with the
opening of the bids; mhereupon, the City Clerk opened and read the following bids:i!
Bidder Buildino Comolete Alternate 1
Hodges Lumber Corporation $ 24.474.00 $ 23.574.00
ThAt, Incorporated 24,D22.00 24.022.00
Southwest Const/uction, Inca 25,300.00 24,500.00
Frye Building Company 27.250.00 26.750.00
Mr. Thomas moved that the bids be referred to a committee to he
po~nted by the Mayor for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council, the
City Attorney to prepare the proper measure or measures in accordance with the
recommendation of the committee. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and
unanimously adopted.
Mayor Mebber appointed Messrs, William F. Clark, Chairman, Marshall L.
Harris and Bueford B. Thompson as members of the committee.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
STREET LIGHTS: Copy of a communication from the Appalachian Power
Company transmitting a list of street lights installed and/or removed during the
month of October, 1972, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that the communication and list be received and filed.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
BONOS-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM-SCHOOLS: The following Certificate
of the Electoral Board on the results of the special election held pursuant to
Ordinance No. 20461 on the question of issuance of ten million dollars of bonds
for public improvements, advising that 15,300 votes were cast YES and ?,?§B votes
were cast NO, was before Council:
"~RTIFICATE DF ELECTORAL BOARD
We, the nndersigned, members of the Electoral Board
of the Clty of Bounokeo pursuant to an Ordinance adopted
by the Council of the City of Boauoke, Vlrginino en the
2Bth day of September, 1972o to tuke the sense of the
qualified voters of the ~Jty as therein provided, said
Ordinance being Ordinance No. 20481 and entitled:
*AN ORDINANCE directing and providing for the
holding of an election.in the City Of Roanoke, Vir-
ginia, to determine whether the qualified voters of
the City of Roanoke will approve an ordinance, No.
20460, duly adopted by the Council of the City of
Roanoke on September 26, 1972, providing for the
issue of certain bonds of the City of Roanoke; and
providing for an emergency,*
do hereby certify that at an.election held on the Ttb
day of November. 1972, votes were cast as follows:
QUESTION: Shall Ordinauc~ NO. ~04§0, adopted by
the Council of the City of Roanoke on September
28, 1972, entitled, 'AN ORDINANCE to provide for
the issue of bonds of the City of Roanoke not to
exceed Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000.00) to
provide funds to defray the cost to the City of needed
permanent public improvements, to-wit: for its
public schools and for certain other permanent
public improvements including additions,
betterments, extensions and improvements of and to
its municipal airport, its public buildings, includ-
ing its municipal courthouse building, libraries and
fire stations, its systems of storm sewers, storm
drains and sanitary sewers, its public streets.
highways and bridges, a local bus transportation
system to operate on regular svhedules, and its parks
and other recreational purposes; and providing for
YES were cast_FIFTEEN TDOUSARO TRREE HUNDRED votes (15,300)
NO were cast SEVEN TIIOUSAND SEVEN BUNDREO FIFTY-EIGHT
votes (~,?5O)
GIVEN under our hands this 9th day of November, 1972:
$/ Andrew H. Thomuson .
Andrew H~ Thompson, Chairman
ATTEST:
Sf B, A. Gruhbs
Secretary of the Electoral
Board of the City of Roanoke
James H. Evans
James N. Evana. Member
S/ B, ~- Grubbs
B. A. Grubbs, Secretary
Members of the Electoral Board
' of the City of Roanoke, Virginia
CERTIFIED to the COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
VIRGINIA L. SHAM, CITY CLERK.
S! B. A. Grubbs .
Secretary of the Electoral
(Seal) Board of the City of Roanoke"
Hr, Trout moved that the ~ertificate be received and filed and be
made a part of the minutes of Council and that Ordinance No. 20480 adopted
September 20, 1972, be declared az having been approved by the qualified voters
of the city. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
STATE COMPENSATION BOARD-SHERIFF: Copy of a communication ;from the
State Compensation Board addressed to Mr. Paul J. Puckett, Sheriff, advising
thst the Compensation 8oard approved on anneal rate of $6,200.00 for the employ-
ment of a replacement for Miss Virginia Shomelter who uJll retire as of November
30, 1972, said annual rate to be effective on November I or aa the date of
employment, uaw before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that ~he communication he received end filed. The
motion was seconded by DF. Taylor and unanimously'adopted.
PLARNIRG: A communication .from Mr. Co M. Lemon, Jr** tendering his
resignation as a member of the City Planning Commission effective December 31,
1972, mas before Council.
Mr. Lish m~ved that the communication be received and filed with regret
The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
ROANOKE VALLEY: The followin9 communication from the members of the
Southwest Section of the Virginia Chapter of the American Institute of Archi-
tects, in connection with the physical environment of the Roanoke Valley, list-
ing certain problems which exist in the valley and transmitting certain recom-
mendations in connection mith the existing problems was before Council:
*Mayor Webber and Council Members, City of Roanoke, Virginia
Mayor Slumber ned Council Members, City of Salem. Viroinia
Chairman Engleby and Board of Sspervisors, Roanoke County. Virginia
Mayor Nicks and Council Rembers, Town of Vinton, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Me, the members of the Southwest Section of the
Virginia Chapter ~ the American Institute of Architects,
comprised of nearly 60 area architects and associate mem-
bers, are greatly concerned with the physical environment
of the Roanoke Valley. Because our profession deals with
the esthetics, practicality, and economics of building design
and construction, we are deeply committed to our local
environment from the standpoints of both coping mith and
contributing to it and of course, we, like you. live here.
Unfortunately, our profession too often deals with one tree
at a time while the forest 9oas wanting for attention. It
is the overview or valleymide scale of assessment with which
we concern ourselves here.
Me believe that the upgrading of the environment begins
at home. Effective environmental pr.otection is essentially
a regional concept that recognizably must come from State
and Federal levels of enforcement, but environmental aware-
ness is everyone*s business.
The desire for a clean, attractive, more satisfyln9
atmosphere in which to live has to be generated by indivi-
duals. The realization of that 9eel depends on maximum
cooperation between groups of individuals who respect their
physical surroundings.
tar§er urban areas in America today are in trouble.
Many of their problems are physical ones and are identically
those mhlch face us in the valley. Mhile the larger areas
have allowed their problems to mature to their inevitable
depressin0 conclusions, we are still creating ours. Since
we are primarily concerned with physical envoronment, al-
though not to the exclusion of other contributing areas of
influence, we feel that shortsighted attitudes are respon-
sible for many of todayes problems an~ can be summed up
simply as a lack of overall planning.
Although some solutions are being sought, the problems
do exist in our valley.. Me list some of them here:
arterial roads continua and discontinue from political
subdivision to political subdivision with illogical
Junctions·
street planting is discontlnnous with no evident pattern.
street lighting Is erratic·
billboards abound Indiscriminately. usually ia areas of
scenic importance.
mixed use zoning exists in its worst form mith Incom-
patible land uses side by side.
zoning is discontinuous at transitions from one political
subdivision to the next·
depressed areas are aligned to fall into decay.
condemned structures are allowed to stand, constituting
firehazards, health hazards, crime havens, eyesores.
signs seem inadequately controlled os to size, type.
location, thus creating a major source of visual poilu-
the Roanoke River and other natural assets are neglected·
most zoning questions seem to neet with negative public
land fill location problems continue.
water pollution continues.
there is widespread concern over regional jail location.
· we understand that operational feasibility of 2 civic
renters is now questionable, after the fact.
there is an apparent lack of control of land cuts and
excavation soil erosion, tree stripping and water run-off·
unscreened, unplanted, inadequate, off-street parkin9
areas seem to be the rule.
green areas are fast diminishing.
overhead utilities exist in profusion contributing to the
negative visual scene.
there are few indentifiable neighborhood amenities such
flood plain construction apparently is allowed.
strip commercial development in lleu of planned clusters
seems to be a fact of life.
unscreened junk yards and abandoned cars are allowed to
presist.
no valley regulations require adequate residential and
commerical insulation, thus more fuel consumption, more
power generation, more pollution.
there is no effective valleymtde transit system to help
relieve the growing automobile congestion.
. noise continues to increase.
AS mentioned earlier· we share most of these problems
with other urban areas. In many instances me monder why
these problems exist and, more importantly, what can be done
about them. As a groopi we have attempted over the past'.
year and a half to address ourselves to these two questions
in a surface analysis of cause, effect, and possible solution·
Me have observed existing conditions. Me have read local
ordinances and noted conflicting (often nonexistent) regula-
tions. Me have met and discussed local environment with
professors, planners, and building officials. Limited by
time, we realize that we have only scratched the surface, but
our exploration to date has shown us the following conditions:
PLANNING
1. The only local governmental planntng agency staffed
by professionals is the Planning Department of the City
of Roanoke mhlch affects less than half of the valley
residents. This agency has proposed many good plans,
particularly for the downtown area, but mlth leu tangible
results. Example: The Kirk Avenue Mall project nhlch
mould give domntonn merchants n shopping center 'focus*
to compete with suburban centers.
R. Roanoke County. has no professional planning staff.
3. The City of Salem has no professional planning staff.
4. The Town of Vinton has no professional planning staff.
5. The Fifth Planning District Commission has done excel-
lent uork on n regional basis. Because this work is on
a regional scale, however, the.results have had little
local impact bacause there are no local means for
implementation.
Planning problems common to all valley goveru=ents are
not approached cooperatively but remain unresolved
apparently through an attitude of disinterest and/or
political competition.
ZONING
1. As a direct result of the lack of planning capabilities,
zoning appears to be ineffectual, sometimes haphazard,
and generally uncoordinated between political entities.
2. Because of inadequate planning, save the Fifth Planning
District Commission overview, Roanoke County zoning
is not plan related and seems cursory in view of the
resorting demand.
3. Mith an inadequate plan for reference, rezoning is not
based on planned projection, seldom on hardship, but
seems much more often based oB speculative appeal for
increased land value through zoning change.
4. In short the valley zoning procedure seems mare remedial
than constructive. Mithout planning, the effect seems
to be that of fire fighting rather than fire prevention.
CONSTRUCTION
1. Building code regulations vary from area to area. All
areas have adopted the Southern Building Code, but some
have modified versions of it. Although all use the
National Electrical Code. three different plumbing codes
are used.
2. Enforcement of building regulations varies widely. This
is also true of zoning regulations enforcement for which
the respective Building Officials are responsible. In
our opinion, and considering the population and construc-
tion volume, the buildln9 departments of Salem and
Roanoke County are understaffed - Roanoke has a staff of
8. Roanoke County has 3, and Salem has but 1 man.
3. Contractors are not required to control land erosion
during construction.
4. There appears to be no effective prohibition of flood
plain construction.
5. There is no apparent regulation of site uso such as
relationship of cut, excavation, and fill to adjoining
properties; drainage patterns; preservation of such
natural features as tree cover, river banks, etc.
There are insufficient noise control regulations for
land use or exterior mechanical equipment.
7. There are insufficient landscaping requirements for
general or specific effect.
Contractor*s examinations differ from area to area and
there in no reciprocity.
g. Generally speaking, there appears to be leas building
code enforcement then necessary in the valley which
results in warglnnl construction which in one way or
another detracts from the environmental whole.
ORDINANCES
Time has not allowed u thorough investigatio~ of the
various ordinances thor do nnd do not exist ahd we can
only comment on the apparent conditions. We are not
certain in many cases whether or not on ordinonceo or
enforcement of it, OF a luck of both is the problem,
but we notice many undesirable effects. Signs ore a
particular eyesore. Condewned buildings remain
standing where · bulldozer end ague grass seed might
provide a much needed playground. Vacant property ts not
kept clean and noise abatement seems to be a concept of
the future.
PARKS
Another area of cursory Judgement concerns public land,
Parks planning seems to exist but only In a patchwork
pattern. Coordination and control seems inconsistent.
In some cases parks have been usurped to include park
provisions in their subdivisions? Should certain
thoroughfares be planted? Nould a city or county
opera~ed nursery be logical? ~e sense that several of
these aspects are due reassessment.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Professional planning aid be acquired by Roanoke County
and City of Salem to either -
a. Establish respective planning departments - partial
funds are available from State but local funding is
recommended to assure local interest.
b. Or establish a valley planning council supported by
the four subdivisions but staffed by professionals,
not elected laymen subject to political pressures.
In this effort, the present Planning Department of
City of Roanoke might discontinue as a municipal
department and become the nucleus of the valley
planning agency. This agency would support the
Fifth Plannin9 District Commission on a local scale.
2. Through cooperative effort in the case of (a) above or
as a concentrated effort in the case of (b). the entire
urban portion of the valley should be masterolanned
immediately not only to begin resolution of short range
problems but to establish long range goals. Goals
include planned traffic circulation and utilities
distribution in the process of properly plannin9 resi-
dential and commercial areas.
3. Coordination of zonin9 in all portions of the urban
area should be natural outgrowth of an overall plan.
Zoning would then have logical meaning and zonin9
change would revert to its proper role of adjustment
within an overall framework, rather than its present
negative approach.
4. Coordination of effort to effect uniformity of construc-
tion codes and criteria for licensing of contractors.
Once a single set of construction'codes is adopted and
examinations have been standardized emphasis can be placed
on enforcement.
5. Uniformity of enforcement of statilized reguIations. Ade-
quate staffing is essential. In many instances, controls
and plans exist but seem not to be adopted or, where
adopted, enforced. Scenic easements are feasible,
thoroughfare plans have been proposed, flood plain
studies have been made, etc., etc. Assessment. agree-
ment, and implementation should be undertaken now.
6. Masterplannieg as the only method to bring about logical,
economical growth.
Progress is a positive work and an upward direction. Aa
practicing architects concerned with the future of this '
valley we strongly urge your serious consideration of these
recommendations. The present course on noncooperative
growth cannot continue.
If the concept of consolidation cannot be brought about
in ruct is must be achieved In effect. It is possible for
pride lo extend beyond corporate lJwJt$, It Jsposslble to
cooperate for the common good, It is possible to plan
ahead. We wast stop wasting time, money, and effort through
duplication, competition, and perversity. Re earnestly
solicit your serious examination of these existing conditions
end respectfully request that immediate efforts be made to
correct them.
Sincerely,
SOUTHWEST SECTION - VIRGINIA CHAPTER
THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS
S! John A. Rarfleet - President
S/ John P, Cone, Jr. - Vice-President
S/ Robert F. Sherertz - Secretary-Treasurer
S! Grady P. Gregory, Jr. - Director
S/ William R. Ervin-Director"
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be referred to the City Plan-
ning Commission for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET-BUILDING DEPARTRENT-ELECTR1CAL INSPECTOR: The City Banoger sub-
mitted the following report recommending that $4B0,00 be appropriated to Auto-
mobile Allomonce under Section n48, "Department of Buildings." of the 1972-73
budget to provide funds for a travel allowance for the new electrical inspector
in the Building Deportment:
"November 13, 1972
Honorable Nayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Request for Funds - Department of Buildings
Council will recall that in connection with the new
city budget, an additional electrical inspector was autho-
rized within the Deportment of Buildings. This position has
recently been filled and ue feel that the City is most
fortunate to have obtained the services of a mature indivi-
dual with considerable experience in the electrical con-
structJon business.
Apparently overlooked at the time of budget adoption
was the need for transportation in order that this new
inspector might operate effectively. The majority of
inspectors within the Building Department receive an allouance
for use of their personal vehicle and we believe that for
the remainder of the current year such an arra~gement would
be satisfactory for the new inspector. A $60 per month
allowance would be comparable.to that being received by the
other electrical inspector and would total $4B0 for the
remainder of the fiscal year. Unexpended funds in other
portions of the Building Commissioner's budget will more
than offset the additional money for th~s purpose.
It is recommended that $480 be appropriated to Account
48~290 to provide a travel allowance for the new electrical
inspector.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F, Hlrst
Julian F. Nirst
City Manager"
· '43
744'
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendatlon of the City
Manager end offered the folloming emergency Ordinance:
(e20539) AN ORDINANCE to emend end reordoin Section n48, 'Department
of Duildings,' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For fall text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Dook m37, page
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas second-
ed by Hr. Trout and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: aessrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trou~ and Mayor
~ebber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: The City Manager submitted a written report
advising that within the current budget the sum of $4,OOO.OO l$ appropriated
for replacement and upgrading of the plumbing fixtures within the restrooms at
Naseua Park, that in this connection, there is a need to replace an undersized
water line so us to provide adequate water pressure for the
type of plumbing fixtures to be installed which will require passing under the
Norfolk and Nestern Railuay Company track in the vicinity of Winchester Avenue.
S. M.. pointing out tbat he has obtained from the N ~ W Railway Company a pro-
posed license for this pipeline facility to be provided at no cost to the city
and recommending that Council authorize the execution of this license in order
that city forces may proceed mlth installation of this water line.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommemdatioo of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordimance:
(#20540) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City's execution of a written
license agreement math Norfolk ~ Nestern Railway Company provldin9 a right to the
City to construct, maintain and operate an underground water line under and
across said Company*s property to serve the restroom facilities at Was.nd Park;
and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =37, page 247.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the followiog vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .........................
NAYS: Noue ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
BUDGET-MUNICIPAL COURT: The City Manager submitted a mritten report
advising that on October 9, 1972, Council made an appropriation within the
Municipal Court budget account to the total effect of providing local funds in
the amount of $2,396.00 as city matching funds for the purchase of certain
eguipaent for the Municipal Court, that be is nam advised that the Virginia
Council on Criminal Justice has approved the allocation of State monies in the
total sum of $7.109.00 to the City of Roanoke }or this purpose, which will
make a total program appropriation of $9,47D.00, and that it is now in order to
recommend that Council increase the appropriation already made of $2,396.00 to
$9,478.00 with revenue to be reflected in the amount of $?,109.00.
Br. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Homager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(a20541) AN ORDINANCE to amend end reordain Section aR0, "Municipal
Court,' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, end providinq for un emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #37, page 246.)
Mr. Tr.out moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Bubard absent)
AIRPORT: The City Manager submitted a mritten report submitting plans
for the expansion of the Airport Terminal Building at Roanoke Municipal (Noodrum)
Airport, as prepared by Sherertz and Franklin, Architects, in coordination with
numerous other parties, advising that these plans are for the review of Council
and that upon completioo of the review by Council he will be in a position to
proceed to advertise the project for construction bids.
in this connection, Mr. J. Stuart Franklin appeared before Council
and verbally explained the proposed plans for the expansion of the Terminal
Building.
Mr. James O. Trout. Chairman of the Airport Advisory Commission.
advised that the Commission has approved the proposed plans in detail and recom-
mends that Council advertise for bids on the project.
Mr. Trout then moved that Council approve the plans as submitted and
that the City Ranager be authorized to advertise for bids on the project. The
motion was seconded by Br. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Nebber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
Mr. Thomas then moved that the bids be opened before Council at its
meeting on Monday, December lO, 1972, in the Council Chamber. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
AIRPORT: The City Manager submitted the following report in connection
with airport security, advising of o meeting with representatives of the Federal
Aviation Administration Security Unit on November 7, 1972, regarding a program
to be implemented at Roanoke Municipal (Moodrum) Airport which will require the
installation of surveillance equipment on all boarding passengers, pointing out
that of particular note will be the necessity of having a police officer or
other authorized security officer on duty at the Terminal Building seven days a
week whenever passengers are hoarding and the rearrangement in'boarding and
ticket taking routes to the extent of using a part of the lobby and pointing out
that this will require an increase in police personnel and a reduction in avail-
able passenger area:
'Novembar 13, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roonohe, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Airport Security
The ~ity Council is aware of the increased security
being applied to the major airports across the country.
On November ? two representatives of the Federal Aviation
Administration Security Unit met with #r. Clarh, Hr. Harris,
Capt. Ktser, Mr. Ben Jones and me regarding a program to
be implemented nt Roanoke Municipal Airport. They consider
the significance of this field to be such now as to require
the installation of surveillance equipment on ali boarding
passengers.
Ne can go into detail with City Council more later;
however, of particular note will be the necessity of having
police or other authorized security officer on duty at the
terminal seven days a week whenever passengers are boarding
end rearrangement in boardfn§ and ticket taking routes
to the extent of using a part of the lobby. This will
require un increase in police personnel and a reduction in
available passenger area. He will summarize this as to
cost. etc. and report back to you. This is a requirement
on the City.
Respectfully submitted,
$/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hlrst
City Manager*
After a discussion of the matter, Mr. Thomas moved that the report
be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously
adopted.
TAXES-AIRPORT: The City Manager submitted the following report advis-
ing that on November 7. 1972, representatives of the city met with representa-
tives of Piedmont Airlines and the operators of two charter or local area flight
companies on the implementation of the airport use fee. generally referred to
as the boarding fee, that arrangements were made for collection procedures, notic~
signs, indoctrination of personnel and other elements, subject to some further
refinement of details, that while Piedmont representatives restated that their
Company did not favor the fen, they indicated that Piedmont and its personnel
would cooperate to the fullest to make the program work and function smoothly:
'November la, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Airport Use Fee
On November 7. 1972. representatives of the City met
with representatives of Piedmont Airlines and the operators
of two charter or local area flight companies on the imple-
mentation of the Airport Use Fee. generally referred to as
the boarding fee, The system is to go into effect November
15, 1972.
Arrangements were made for collection procedures, notice
signs, indoctrination of personneland other elements, sub-
ject to some further refinement of details.
Attending for the City mere Councilman and Airport Commit-
tee Chairman Trout. City Auditor Gibson. Airport Manager
Harris, Assistant City Attorney Jones. Assistant City Manager
Clark end the City Manager,
NhJle the Piedmont representatives restated that ·
their Company did not favor the fee, they Indicated that Pied-
mont and its personnel mould cooperate to the fullest to
make the program moth and function smoothly.
It is to be noted that the Ordinance adopted by City
Council levying the fee makes only two exemptions in contrast
to the procedure in several airports elsemhere where a pass-
enger may decline payment by signing a slip. This means
that the operators of the airlines or air companies will be
expected to decline boarding to a passenger refusing to pay
or the airline or company mill make up and pay to the City
the unpaid fee of the passenger.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Birst
Julian Fo Hlrst
City Manager'
Hr, Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
MISCELLANEOUS-PARKS AND PLAYCROUNDS: The City Manager submitted the
following report advising that a 45 nile section of the Blue Ridge Parkway near
Roanoke will be closed from 7 p.m., to 7 a.m.. nightly, effective November 10.
1972. for an indefinite period, pointing out that Parkway Superintendent Granville!i
B. Liles advises that this closing is due to an increase in illegal activities on
the Parkmay at night iu the Roanoke area and that it is most unfortunate that
this certain segment within present society has digressed to the point where such
actions as this become necessary:
· November 13. 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Viroinia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Blue Ridge Parkway Closin9
As has been previously reported in the local news-
papers, the Blue Ridge Parkway bas given notice that they
are closing a 45-mile section of the Parkway near Roanoke
from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. nightly effective November 10 for an
indefinite period. Parkmay Superintendent Granville B.
Liles has advised that this closing is due to an increase in
illegal activities on the Parkway at night in the Roanoke
area. The section involved mill be from Mile Post Ho. 91
(Bearmallow Gap, Virginia Route 43) to Mile Post 136
(Adney Gap, U. S. Route 221). which includes the entire.
section through the Roanoke area. The Roanoke Mountain
Campground in the Chestnut Ridge area is now closed for the
winter.
The Parkway will remain open during the daytime, and
it is most unfortunate that a certain segment within pre-
sent society has digressed to the point where such actions
as this become necessary.
Respectfully submitted. _
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager*
Or. Taylor moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
wes seconded by Mr. Thomas and 'unanimously adopted.
CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager'submitted the follouing report
proposing that the City of Roanoke undertake, with the University of Virginia
Extension Office, n program of supervisory training which would be directed at
supervision in such fashion that developmental training be given to the superin-
tendents and immediate related supervisory positions, that the cost of such
training would be $3,600.00 with the city expected to pay tea per cent or
$3b0.00, that funds for the c;ty*s share would be available within the education
budgets of the several departments who would participate and requesting that
authorization be given to the submission of a grant application for Intergovern-
mental Personnel Act funds so os to participate in this desirable training
program for city personnel:
*November 13. 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Supervisory Training
For sometime it has been felt that there was need for a
formalized training effort for supervisory personnel of the
City of Roanoke. The Citl Personnel Department has been
investigating programs which could be funded through the
Intergovernmental Personnel Act established by the Federal
government for just such purposes. Such funds are
administered through thc State Division of Planning and
Community Affairs.
Me are now proposin9 that the City of Roanoke undertake
with the University of Virginia Extension Office a program
of supervisory training which would be directed at supervi-
sion in such fashion that developmental training be 9ivan to
the superintendents and immediate related supervisory posi-
tions. Secondary efforts based on available funding would
be aimed at f rst-line supervision and those positions
immediately above. This style of directed training can be
accomplished within the capability of UVA extension person-
nel. It is proposed that one unit of 20 superintendents and
senior supervisors he trained and based upon funding two
units of 20 first-line supervisors (40 persons) be sub-
mitted to a program redirected to their particualr area.
The cost of such training mould be $3500 mith the City
expected to pay 10 percent or $360. Funds for the City's
share would be available within the education budgets of
the several departments who would participate.
The City has been requested to submit a letter of .
intent to the State Division of Planning by November 15,
1972. It is requested that authorization be given to the
submission of a 9rant application for IPA funds so as to
participate in this desirable training program for City
personnel.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the report of the City
Manager. The motion was seconded by Hr. Lisk and unanimously, adopted.
/
TRAFFIC: The City Manager submitted the follouln9 report in connection
with the downtoun traffic signals, advising that by Resolution No. 20443 Council
requested the Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Highways, to program e
study of the domntown traffic signal system, that he has been advised by the
Highway Department that they are in a position to program this project bnt would
like a commitment for its implementation, that since the bond referendum has
successfully passed, the city has its share of the fnnds for this project and it
would seem appropriate that the city commit itself to the implementation phase
of the project, pointing out that the Highway Department has requested that
Council, by Resolution, request not only a study but the preparation of plans,
right of way acquisition and construction of this new traffic signal system and
recommending that Conncil indicate its intent that the Highway Department proceed
with this project:
*November 13, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Downtomn Traffic Signals - TOPICS
One of the projects included in the recently success-
ful Capital Improvements Bond Referendum is proposed to
provide a modern, coordinated traffic signal system in
downtown Roanoke. The bond referendum program included
the City*s estimated 15 percent share of the cost of this
project. Hy Resolution No. 20443 City Council has previously
requested the Commonwealth of Virginia, DepartMent of
Highways to program a study of this downtown traffic signal
system. Me have been advised by the Highway DepartMent
that they are in a position to program this project but would
like a commitment for its implementation. Now that the
bond referendum has successfully passed, the City does have
its shore of the funds and it would seem oppropriate that
we commit ourselves to the implementation phase of tho pro-
ject. The Highway Department has requested that Council
by resolution request not only a study but the preparation
of plans, right of way acquisition, and construction of this
new traffic signal system.
It is recommended that the City Council indicate its
intent that the Highway Department proceed with this project.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Rirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager#
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution:
(~20542) A RESOLUTION relating to provision of a modern coordinated
traffic signal system in downtown Roanoke, to be accomplished under the TOPICS
program.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Hook sS?, page 249.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thowas, Trout end Mayor
Webber ........
NAYS: None .....~ ...... O~ (Mr. Nabsrd absent)
CITIZENS* ADVISORY COMMITTEE-STATE HIGBNAYS: The City Manager submit-
ted a written status report on the R~ute 115 - 116 Project, advising tbnt he does
not have a report on this project as it relates to the Sewage Treatment Plant
property at Buzzard Bock Ford Bridge since he has not had sufficient time to
evaluate the plan projections received from Alvord, Burdick ~ Bowson, Consulting
Eagineers, but that it does appear that the front of the plant area will be
needed and that he will assimilate this material and confer with State Dighway
Department personnel during the week of November 13, 1972.
Mr. Thomas moved that the status report be received and filed, The
motion Was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted the following
report requesting to submit the plans and specifications prepared by Alvord.
Burdick and Howson, Consulting Engineers. for the major expansion phase and
tertiary treatment project at the Sewage Treatment Plant, advising that these
plans and specifications were delivered to the State Mater Control Board on
November 6, 1972, which is the deadline date that was set by the Board:
"November 13, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Baste Mater Treatment Plant
We wish to submit before City Council the plans and
specifications prepared by Alvord, Burdick and Henson,
Consulting Engineers for the major expansion phase and terti-
ary treatment project at the City*s Waste Mater Treatment
Plant.
These plans and specifications'were delivered to the
State Water Control Board on November 6, 1972. the deadline
date set by the Board, Other copies were forwarded to
the numerous other agencies and individuals as directed by
the Board and others.
We will be glad to accommodate any procedures the City
Council might wish to follow in its consideration'of these
plans and specifications, including the recommendation that
representatives of the consultants, wheo convenient ~o the
Council, go over the plans and project with the City Council.
The accomplishment of these plans and specifications by
the consultants within the prescribed period, of time has
been a rather amazing job. Obviously review time will be
necessary here and with the Water Control Board and the
many others who will be involved or will wish to be involved.
As has been previously stated, this will be a unique plant
in waste water treatment and undoubtedly some time will be
necessary for the reviewing agencies to be informed, via the
plans, on the nature, intent and processes of the facility.
It is to be hoped that the Board can move forward with the
funding for the project.
Respectfully s~bmitted.
S/ Julian F. Birst
Julian F. Dirst
City Manager"
In this connection, the City Manager presented n brief description of
the plans and specifications as prepared by Alvord, Burdick ~ Homso~,
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be rnceived and file~ The motion
mas seconded by Mr. Trout nnd unanimously adopted.
VIRGINIA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE: The City Manager submitted the following
report pointing out that he has been advised by the Virginia Monicfpal League
that the Virginia Advisory Legislative Council Committee to Study Land Use
Policies mill hold a meeting at 11:00 dom** November 15, 1972, at the Sheraton
Motor inn to discnss views on problems and proposals relating to land use plannin~
and transmitting a schedule of meetings and hearings of various committees, com-
missions or conferences which may be of interest to local government or local
government officials:
*November 13, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Legislative Committee ileariogs
Me are advised as follows from the Virginia Municipal
League:
*Delegate D. French Slaughter. Jr.. of Culpeper, Chair-
nan of the Virginia Advisory Legislative Council Committee
to Study Land Use Policies, announced today that his Com-
mittee will hold three public hearings in various parts of
the Commonwealth. The hearings will be held at the fol-
lowing times and places.
November IS, 1972, at 11:00 a.m. - Sheraton Motor Inn
at Exit 41 of Interstate HI in Sales.
The Committee seeks your views on problems and any
proposald relating to laod use planning. Some genGral areas
of consideration relative to this subject are economic
and population growth; preservation and protection of'the
natural environment; preservation of prime agricultural
lands; and plannin9 and zoning laws and practices.
(See House Joint Resolution - 44)
If you wish to appear at the public hearings, please
notify Mr. Courtney R. Frazier, Division of Statutory
Research and Drafting, State Capitol, P. O. Box 3-AD,
Richmond, Virginia 23208. The Committee requests that a
prepared statement be submitted to the Committee by the
speaker**
Me also are informed as to the schedule of meetings and
hearings of various committees, commissions or conferences
that may have some interest to local government or local
government officials and a copy of that listing is attached.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
Mayor Webber advised that he has requested that Vice Mayor Oavid K.
Lisk represent the City of Roanoke at this meeting.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
COUnCIL-CITY GOVEgNMENT: Cooncil having previously appropriated funds
for a Report to the Citizens, the City Manager submitted the following report
transmitting, for ~e official record of Council, a copy of the 1971-72 City of
Roanoke Report to the Citizens which uss published and distributed With the
Sunday issue of the Roanoke Times on October 22, 1972:
'November 13, 1972
Honorable Mayor end City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Report to Citizens
For the official record of the City, I am filing, by
this letter, with the Clerk of the Council. a copy of the
1971-72 City of Roanoke Report to Citizens mhich mas pub-
lished and distributed with the Sunday issue of the Roanoke
Times of October 22. 1972.
This inaugural edition, after many years, mas prepared
by the City Planning Department in coordination with the
beads of the various units and departments of the City and
the advertising staff of the Roanoke Times. Credit for it
production should go to Mr. Lothar Mermelstein and his
associates in the Plunnin9 Department. Particular credit
note is made for the cover which was drawn by a staff
member of the department.
The cooperation of the public school system is noted
and appreciated in their preparation of a page of the report.
Ideas of content and format develop out Of the preparation
of the first issue for consideration in future reports should
the City Council wish to continue this annual presentation.
Comments from time to time would be welcomed from the Mayor
and members of the City Council and the citizens ns to
both the edition which bas been printed us well as for any
future publications.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Julian F. tlirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
"November 13. 1972
Roanoke, Virginia
This date extends beyond the dates of December I or ·
15 as I originally stated. This is done for several rea-
sons.
1. To perhaps nfl.rd more transition time for City Council
to the benefit of a successor or such other arrange-
ments as the Council may make.
2. To hopefully enable me to get several matters, pro-
grams and projects handled fn which I have an especial
interest.
3.To get Jn u few days of vacation from that amount that
I seem to lose as unused each year.
4. My family and I would like to be in Roanoke this
Christmas,
Should the City Council wish the earlier dates that 1
had originally indicated adhered to, then I would be
guided by your determination.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the rep. Fa of the City Man-
ager. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lish and unanimously adopted.
TAXES: Council having taken under advisement a communication from
Mrs. John A. Moses requesting relief from a problem she has encountered in
regard to payment of her third quarter real estate taxes, the City Attorney
submitted the following report transmitting a proposed Ordinance mhich would
provide regulations whereby certain penalties assessed for non-payment in time
of installments of current real estate taxes may, Jn certain instances of nail
payment, be abated by the City Auditor:
· November 13, 1972
~he HOW.Fable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The Council recently took under consideration
certain direct requests to the Council for abatement of
penalties assessed on certain Third Quarter Real Estate
Tax installments, mailed payments for which were not
received within the time fixed by ordinance and. at the
same time, directed the undersigned to give study to
provisions of a general ordinance which would provide re-
lief in certain genuine situations were penalties are nec-
essarily assessed but through no fault on the part of the
taxpayer making payment by mail.
There is enclosed herewith an ordinance which, as
an additional provision to Chapter 1, Title VI, of the ·
City Code, would authorize the City Auditor, under the
circumstances set Out in the uaw section, to abate the
10~ penalty assessed on certain real estate payments made
by mail but which do not bear an official postmark on or
prior to the required date for payment. The details of
the ordinance have been discussed with the City Auditor
and the City Treasurer, each of whom, with the undersigned,
believe those proposed provisions to be workable. Those
two and the undersigned sill be present at the Council
meeting to further elaborate on the provisions of the pro-
posed ordinance.
Respectfully,
S/ J. N. Klncanon
J. N. Kincanon*
Mr. Lisk expressed the opinion that by adopting the proposed Ordinance
Council mill be giving the citiaens the righ~ to procrastinate and that he is
concerned as to mhether this will solve the matter or compound the problem of
procrastination.
Mr. Garland expressed the.opinion that he does not see how'the proposed
Ordinance will correct the situation at nil.
Mr. Thomas expressed ~he opinion that citizens hare to abide by federal
and state tax deadlines and that once the door is opened'for this type of
request, it will cause an endless amount of problems.
Mr. Thomas then moved that the matter be tabled. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Llsk and adopted by the follouing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Trout--6.
N~YS: Nayor ~ebber ............................................. O.
Mr. J. L. Gardner appeared before Council and advised that he has
been paying the Boxley taxes for 27 years, that payments on these taxes have
never been late. that this year he mailed the checks on September $, that
later he received u penalty assessment bill for late filing from the City
Treasurer'S Office. in the amount of approximately $1,200o00, that upon check-
ing with the Cit! Treasurer he found that the envelop nas postmarked September
O and why this date of September 0 was stamped on the envelop when it was mailed
on September 5. he does not know.
BUDGET-CITY ENGINEER-#ORKMEN'S COHPENSATION: The Assistant City
Attorney submitted a mritten report advising that on April 24° 1972, Council
adopted Resolution No. 20226 ~hich concurred in the city's payment of ~orhmen's
Compensation heoefits to Mary OutrUn, widow of Gerald S. Currun. a former
employee of the city who was fatally injured in the course of his employment.
that Council also, oo that date, adopted an Ordinance appropriutin~
to the Morkmen's Compeosation Account for paymeet of this claim, that since this
matter was not resolved by the Industrial Commission prior to June 30° 1972. the
appropriation lapsed, that the City Attorney's Office is now in receipt of
final Order from the Industrial Commission of Virginia ordering the city to pay
the sum of $15,500.00 to Mrs. Curran and recommending that Council reapproprlatl
this $15.500.00 to ~orkmen's Compensation in order for this matter to be finall
concluded:
Hr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
Assistant City Attorney and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(=20543) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section =91, "Non-
Departmental,' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book zST. page 249.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The'motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: #essrs. GarlaEd, Nuburd, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas. Trout and Nuyor
~ebber ...... ~ ................... ?.
NAYS: None ......... O.
ZONING: The Assistant City Attorney submitted a written report advis-
ing that the proposed amendment of certain provisions of Section 67 of the Zoning
Ordinance which uaw previously referred to the City Planning Commission will be
considered by that body at its regular meeting on November 15, 1972, that in
order for Council to consider the matter at the earliest possible time, it is
recommended that Council, at its meeting on November 13, 1972. set the question
of said amendment for public hearing before Council on Monday, December 4. 1972,
at2p.m.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
Assistant City Attorney and that a public hearing on the question of amending
Section 67 of the Zoning Ordinance be held at 2 p.m.. Ronday. December 4, 1972.
in the Council Chamber. The motion was seconded by Nr. Garland and unanimously
adopted.
PENSIONS: Council having referred a report of the City Auditor back
to him for further study, report and recommendation in coneection with a request
from mrs. Ethel A. Osborne that members of the Employees* Retirement System be
considered for an increase in their pensions commensurate with the increase given
to members of the Police and Fire Pension System, effective July 1, 1972, the
City Auditor having previously transmitted a suggestion from George B. Ouck,
Consulting Actuaries. Incorporated. that one method which could be used to
create a supplemental benefit for the retired employees would be to increase the
pensions for those people retired prior to February 1, 1970. by ten per cent and
to apply the same formula to the employees retiring since February 1, 1970. by
reducing the ten per cent maximumby one per cent for each three month period
elapsing since February 1, lg70. the City Auditor submitted the following report
advising that he has again conferred with George B. Buck. Consulting Actuaries,
Incorporated, and transmitting copy of their reply, pointln9 out that it is
possible to provide increases by any number of procedures but it would probably
be a better method to use cost of living increases because the use of such a
procedure mould be in keeping with methods used in other systems, notably the
Social Security System a~d that he is presentiug this method as a possible solu-
tion to the problem which has been brought before Council:
"November 13, 1972
Ronorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
You have referred a report prepared for the City Council
concerning cost-of-living increases for employees retired
under the Employees* Retirement System of the City of
Roanoke back to the City Auditor for the purpose of analyzing
and preparing a method which mould, as an eud result, give
the effect of providing more than the 10% in cost-of-living
increases, which was recommended in the report.
I have conferred with George B. Buck. Consulting
Actuaries, Inc., and there is attached to this report a
copy of their reply.
In data published by the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statis,
tfcs. the cost-of-living rose 60~ during the past 20 years.
If Council should decide to use this percent, the net effect
on the persons retired since 1952 would be an increase of
40~. that being the 60~ increase less. the-20~ granted in
1970.
It Is possible to prorlde lucreusms by any uumber of
procedures bnt It would probably he u better wethod to use
cost-cf-liviug increases because the.use of such a procedure
would be Im heepiug With methoda used Im uther systems,
uotubly tho $oclul Security System.
I am presenting this method as a possible solution to
the problem which has been brought before the Council.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ A. N. Gibson
City Auditor"
Mr. Garland moved that the report he referred back to the .City Auditor
for a calculation as to the coats Jnrolred in the proposal and as to the amount
of funds which will bare to be appropriated by Council for said proposal. The
motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
AUDITS: The City Auditor submitted a wrfttefl report transmitting the
monthly financial report of the City of Roanoke for the month of October, 1972.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE: The City Auditor submitted a
monthly statement of expenditures for public welfare for the month ended October
31, 1972.
Dr. Taylor moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF COUMITTEES:
SALE OF PROPERTY: The Real Estate Committee submitted the following
report recommending that the offer of Mr. #. G. Blevins to purchase 9,?00
square feet. more or less, of city-owned land adjacent to the rear of his
property at 3B55 Colony Lane, $. B.. be accepted, with the consideration that the
city release all right, title and interest in that twelve foot wide easement
lying on the easterly side of Lot 8, Block 5, Map of Green Valleys, and further
recommending that a recordable nam nap of Lot B be drawn at the expense of the
purchaser to include the abovementioned Fa rcel of land to be done with the
approval of the city and County Planning Departments and to be recorded by the
purchaser simultaneously with recordation Of the city's deed:
'November 13, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
SUBJECT: Sale of City-Owned Property
With the purchase of several small private water com-
panies, the CitI acquired a fem scattered lots which are
unneeded by the City und have been placed on the surplus list
of City lots. Because of the particula~ location of some of
these, they mere purposely left off the list or surplus
propertfes to be sold'by auction, Instead, the Real Estate-
Committee deemed it' advisable to negotiate for the sale of
the parcels mith the ouoere uhose land they mould tend to
become a natural part when sold.
Following negotiations, the Committee now has in hand
firm offer of $600.00 from Mr. M. G, Blevlns to purchase one
of those lots adjacent to the rear of this property located
at 3B§S Colony Lane, S. l., Roanoke County, which lot mas
acquired by the purchase of the Cave Spring Mater Company.
At a meeting of the Real Estate Committee held October
16, 1972. it uas unanimously agreed to recommend to the City
Council that it accept the offer of $600,00 made by Mr.
Blevins for the irregularly shaped parcel of land contain-
In9 9,700 square feet, nora or tess, together math the
further consideration that the City release all right, title.
and interest in that tmelve foot wide easement lying on the
easterly side of Lot 8. Block 5. Bop of Green Valleys, said
map being of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit
Court of Roanoke County in Plat Book 3. at page
It is further recommended that a recordable new map of
Lot O be drawn at the expense of the purchaser said map to
include the ahoY,mentioned parcel, this to be done with the
approval of City and County Planning Departments and to be
recorded by the purchaser simultaneously with recordation
of the City's deed.
This is submitted with a copy to the City Attorney for
the preparation of the necessary papers inviting the City
Council*s approval.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ David K. Lisk, Chairman
S/ Julian F. Birst
S/ A. N. Gibson
S/ James N. Rinconon"
Mr. Llsk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the Real
Estate Committee and that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first read-
lng:
(m20544) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and providing for the City's sale
and conveyance of a parcel of land containing g.?O0 square feet. more or less.
and consisting of a former well lot. and release of the City's rights to a cer-
tain easement in Lot 9. Block 5. as shown on the Map of Green Valleys. in the
County of Roanoke. and being a portion of the properties and rights acquired by
the City from the Cave Sprin9 Mater Company. upon certain terms and conditions.
MHEREAS, M. G. Blevins, ouner of adjoining Lot 8, Block 5, as shown on
the Map of Green Valleys, in Roanoke County. has offered to the City. tbrouth
the City*s Real Estate Committee, to purchase and acquire from the City a parcel
of land, containing approximately 9,?00 square feet, moreor less, and consisting
of a portion of a former well lot adjoining a rear portion of aforesaid Lot 0,
for the sum of $600.00. cash, asking, also that the City release and quitclaim its
easement in a 12=foot wide strip of land in Lot B, running from Colony Lane to said
former well lot; and
MHEREAS, the Council*s Real Estate Committee has recommended to the Coun-
cil that the sale of said parcel be approved and ordered and that said easement be
,58
released, ell on the terms and provisions herein provided, in uhich recommendetio]
the Council concurs.
THEREFORE, HE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
the offer of M. G. Blevlns to purchase .and acquire from the City that certain
parcel of land containing 9,?00 square feet, more or less, situate in Roanohe
County, Virginia, and adjoining an 'easterly portion of the Line of Lot B, Block
5, ns shown on the Map of Green Valleys, and ~o~sistJng of a former mell lot
together mlth a release of the City's right, title and interest in and to a
certain easement and rlght-of~wsy through Lot B, aforesaid extending from said
well lot to Colony Lane, fur a consideration of $600.00. cash, to be paid to the
City upon delivery of the City*s deed of conveyance made upon the following
express terms and provisions be, and said offer is hereby ACCEPTED; the terms
and provisions, other than the cash consideration hereJnabove provided, being as
follows, namely that the purchasers from the City cause to be made available for
recorder on simultaneously with the City*s deed of conveyance a replatting of
Lot B, Block $, aforesaid, amd of said
said 9.700 square foot parcel is and becomes part of Lot B, aforesaid, so that
no part of said 9.?00 square foot parcel remains as a separate lot of land, such
replatting to conform to the ~and subdivision requirements of the County of
Roanoke and of said City of Roanoke.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that. upon payment to the City of the sum of
$600.00, cash. as aforesaid, the Mayor be, and he is hereby authorized, empowered
and directed to execute, for and on behalf of the City, the City's deed of con-
veyance and release to the aforesaid land and easement, drawn upon such form as
is prepared and approved by the City Attorney. granting and conveyin9 to the
City*s aforesaid purchasers, math Special Narranty of title, title to the above
described 9,700 square £oot parcel of land and releasing said City*s right, title
and interest in and to the easement and right-of-may extending from the
Southeasterly line of Colony Lone to the northerly line of said 9,700 square
foot parcel of land; and that the City Clerk be, and is hereby authorized amd
directed to affix to the aforesaid deed of conveyance the City's seal, and to
attest the same, the signatures of the Mayor and the City Clerk to be acknowledge~
by each of them as provided bY law.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Robber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O.
GARBAGE REMOVAL: The Site Selection Subcommittee of the Regional Land-
fill Committee composed of Messrs. James O. Trout, J. E. Tyler. T. D. Steele,
Clyde C. Dickens and Calverne L. Lyke submitted u mritten report in connection
59
with the engineering studies end evaluations currently underway with regard to
the M. S. Thomas property situated in southeast Roanoke County. advising that the
consultant who is evaluating the site. Thompson and Litton, Incorporated. is still
awaiting some additional information from Law Engineering Company, who has per-
formed the core drillings end seismic investigation of the site. however, based
upon information available to date, the committee is advised that the site is con-
sidered to be better than average with no critical situations encountered
beyond what normally would be anticipated, that the general information obtained
from the soil borings indicates some very 9sod depth of corer material ut certain
locations on the site, that as mitb uny true sanitary landfill, there mill be
need for proper engineering design to control drainage conditions and to establish
the proper operating procedures and systematic use of the site so as to conform
with all requirements of the State Health Department, that this is only a pre-
lininary report and does not represent the final conclusions and recommendations
of the consultant, however, it was considered desirable to keep the 9orernlng
bodies apprised as the study progresses, and as additional information is ob-
rained it will be forwarded to the governing bo~ es for their information°
Mr. Garland moved that the report of the Sub-Committee be received and
filed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
FIRE DEPARTHENT: Council having referred u report of a committee com-
posed of Messrs. Robert E. Mullah, Jr.. Chairman. Julian F. Hirst and A. K.
Hughson in connection with the location of the southwest fire station back to
the committee for the purpose of exploring the concept of the proposed location
of the southwest fire station at the southwest corner of the intersection of
Overland Road and Colonial Avenue, S. N., with the Roanoke City School Board,
officials of Virginia Western Community College and the State Five Marshall,
takin9 into consideration certain points made by Hr. Jack B. Coulter, Attorney,
representing citizens opposed to said location, the matter was again before the
body,
In this connection, the City Manager verbally requested that the com-
mittee be permitted to submit its report to Council at the next regular meeting
of the body on Bonday, November 20, lg?2.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the verbal request of the
City Manager and that the committee be requested to submit its report at the
next regular meeting of Council on Monday; November 20, lg?2. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopte&
SEMERS AND STORM DRAINS: Council having requested that a committee
composed of Messrs. Julian F. Hirst, Chairman, Milliam F. Clark, Samuel H.
McChee, III, Hampton M. Thomas, D. E. Eckmann and L. R. Howson submit its recom-
mendations with reference to bids received'by the City of Roanoke at its meeting
on Eondoy, October 30, 1972, on the Sewsge Treatment Plant Addition, (Contract
Item I, Commlnuting Equipment; Item II, Grit Basin Equipment; Item Ill, Primary
Settling Basin Equipment; and Item I¥, Raw Sewage Pumping Equipment, the matter
mss again be'fo~e the body.
In this connection, the City Homager presented the following communica-
tion from the City Engineer addressed to the members of the Semer Committee in
connection with Contract B - Primary Equipment for the Semage Treatment plant,
formarding copy of the following commnnication fFom AIvord, Burdich and flomson,
Consulting Engineers, transmitting their recommendations with respect to the bids
received, the city Engtneer recommending that the recommendations of Alvord, Bur~
and Bowmen that Item I - CommJnuting Equipment, be readvertised for bids on
November 19, 1972, with bids to be received on December 11, be accepted; that
with reference to Item II - Grit Basin Equipment, that the bid.of Dorr-?liver
Company, in the amount of $27,b$§.00. be accepted: that with reference to Item
III - Primary Basin Equipment, that the bid Of Rex Chainbelt, Incorporated, be
rejected, and that item to be readvertised in the same manner as Item I; and
that with reference to Item lV - Raw Sewage pumping Equipment, that the high bid
of North American Engineering Company. be accepted, in the amount of $276.000.00:
'November 13,
Mr. Hampton i. Thomas, Chairman. Sewer Committee
Mr. William S. Hubard
Mr. Julian F. Birst
Gentlemen:
After proper advertisements bids were received by City
Council at their meeting on Monday. October 30, 1972. for
Contract H - Primary Equipment for the Sewage Treatment
Plant.
I have received the attached letter dated November 10. 1972,
from Mr. L. R. ~owson. of A1vord, Burdich end Howson trans-
mitting their recommendations with respect to the bids re-
ceived.
It is our ~ecommendatioa that the recommendations of Alvord,
Burdick and Bowgon be accepted as follows:
Item I - Comminuting Equipment - no bids weve received; this
item should be readvertised on November lq,
with bids to be received on Oecember 11, 1972.
Item II - Grit basin Equipment - one bid was received from
Dorr-Oliver Company in the amount of $27,655. It
is recommended that this bid be accepted and that
the payment terms gu99ested by Doff-Oliver be
accepted, reducing their bid $1,000 for a contract
amount of $26,655.
Item III - Primary Basin Equipment - one bid was received from
Rex Chainbelt Inc.. in the amount of $b8,337o It
' is recommended that this bid be rejected a~d this
item be readvertised in the same manner as Item I.
Item IV - Raw Sewage Pumping Equipment - two bids were
received: Colt Industries, Inc., in the amount
of $230,800 and North American Engineering Com-
pany in the amount of $276°000; It is recommended
that the high bid of North American Engineering
Compiny'be accepted and that the bid'submitted by
Colt be rejected.
Due to Just receiving this information in the morning mall,
me do not bare a complete committee report or a resolution
available to submit for your approval nt this time. Me mill
have them ready for the next City Council meeting on November
20, 1972.
Me mould appreciate your concurrence in our proceeding to
readvertlse Item I and Item III as recommended,
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Sam H, McGhee,
Sam H. McGhee, 11I
City Engineer#
· The City Manager advised that a committee report and necessary measures
will be submitted to Council at the next regular meeting on Monday, Sorember
1972.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication from the City Engineer and the
communication from Alvord, Burdick and Howson, Consulting Engineers. be received
and filed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
In connection with the matter of semage treatment, Mr. Thomas offered
the following Resolution respectfully requesting the members of the State Mater
Control Board to revoke or lift the imposition of Requirement No. I of said
Board, imposed on the City of Roanoke and Other governmental units in the Roanoke
Valley area by Sepcial Order dated March 17, 1972, by affirmative action of each
said member on letter ballots understood to have been recently forwarded by the
Staff of said Board and assuring the State Mater Control Board of the city's
intent to mo'va forward with all diligence in its program of water pollution abate-
ment in the Roanoke Valley area:
(~20545) A RESOLUTION addressed to the State Mater Control Board.
relating to said Boatd*s invocation of Requirement No. I on the City of Roanoke
and other Roanoke Valley governmental units on March 17. 1972.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book #37, page 250 1/2.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption Of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the' following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Webber ...................... 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIBS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
TAXES-CITY TREASURER-LICENSES: Ordinance No. 20534, amendin9 and reor-
daining subparagraph (8), Motor carriers, etc., Section 28. City license - Amount
of tax, Section 31. City license - Period for which plates, tags. or decals may
be used. Section 33, City license - Proration, and Section 35, City license -
Expiration; renewal. Chapter 1. Traffic Code, Title XVIII, Motor Vehicles and
Traffic, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 195b, as amended, so as to provide
for a more orderly and couveninet method of purchase of certain city motor vehicle
licenses, having previously been before Council for its first reading, read and
laid over, was again before the body, Mr. Garland offering the folloming for its
second reading and final adoption:
(a20534) AB ORDINANCE to amend end reordnin subparagraph (8). Motor
Traffic ¢9d~ Title l¥II'I, Motor Vehicles-and Traffic, of the Code of the City
~ebber ..........................
readin 9 and finnl adoption:
pedestrian gates of fully automatic deslga, to be maintained and operated at
the expense of said Company.
(For fall text of Resolution. see Ordinance B,oh aa?. page 2~0.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Bobard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Mubard. Lisk. Taylor. Trout and Mayor
Mebber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Thomas mas not in the Council Chamber
during the roll call on this Resolution.)
BONDS-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM-SCHOOLS: Mr. Trout offered the f,l-
lowing Resolution commending the citizens, committees, or,ups and organizations
and local news media responsible for the overmhelming approval given the ten
million dollar capital improvements bond issue at the November ?. 1972. Special
Election:
(~20547)- A RESOLUTION commending the citizens, committees, groups and
organizations and local news media responsible for the overuhelming approval
given the ten million dollar capital improvements bond issue at the November 7.
1972. Special Election.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book ~37. page 251.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard. Lisk. Taylor. Trout and Mayor
Mebber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr.' Thomas was not in the Council Chamber
during the roll call on this Resolution.)
ZONING: According to the notes taken by the City Clerk at the regular
meeting of Council on Monday, October 30, 1972, the City Attorney was instructed
to prepare the proper measure extending the period to time for obtaining non-
conforming certificates of occupancy in connection with a request from Dr. Nard
¥. Stevens for a certificate of occupancy in order for him to continue the use
ufa buildin9 located at 2744 Jefferson Street, S. E., for apartment purposes,
the Assistant City Attorney submitted the following report advising that there
seems to be some difference of understanding by the City Attorney, the City Cle~
and the Planning Director as to the specific manner by which Council wishes to
~andle this and other such requests and transmitting three alternative Resolutions
for the consideration of Council:
"November 13, 1972
The Honorable Rayor and Members
of the Roanoke City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Geatlemen:
At your meetin9 on October ~0. 1972. the request od Dr. Mard
M. Stevens for a certificate of occupancy for nonconforming
use for · portion of his premises it 2~44 South Jefferson
Street. was referred to therCity Attorney. Difference of
understanding by the undersigned, the City Clerh end the
Plsnning Director as to the specific msnner by which the
· Council unshed to handl® this and uther such requests, hsvi~g
arisen, the undersigned has prepared alternstive resolutions
as follows:
u.) A Resolution which would direct the Issuance
certificate of occupsncy to
this measure would immediately grant the pkesent appli-
cant's request but mould not involve general amendment
or the zoning regulations.
b.) A Resolution mhich would again extend the time within
which all omners or occupants of uses made nonconform-
ing by the sdoption ot the Comprehensive Zoning Ordi-
nance In 19bb, may apply to the Zoning Administrator
for certificates of occupancy.
c.) A resolution by which the Council, upon its oma notion,
might initiate amendment of Section 49 of the Compre-
hensive Zoning Ordinance-19bb, so as to requir~ owners
or occupants of nonconforming uses to apply directly
to the City Council ~or certificates or occupancy, and
would refer the matter of such amendment to the City
Planning Commission for study, report and recommenda-
tion.
Should the Council desire to accommodate Or. Stevens by
adoption of (a), above. Jt may. at the same time. consider
approval of either or both or the other two resolutions.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ 11. Ben Jones, Jr.
H. Ben Jones, Jr.,
Assistant City Attorney"
Mr. Trout offered the folloming Resolution authorizing the issuance to
Dr. ~ard [. Stevens of a pernit to authorize continuance of nonconforming use of
premises located at 2?44 South Jefferson Street. Official Tax No. 408050b:
(m20548) A RESOLUTION authorizing the issuance of a permit to authori~
continuance of nonconforming use of premises located at 2744 South Jefferson
Official Tax No.
Street,
(For full'text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 252.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconde¢
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Rnbard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Nebber ........................
NAYS: None ...........
BUDGET-PLANNING-JAIL-POLICE DEPARTMENT-MUNICIPAL BUILDING-CAPITAL
IMPROYEMENTS PROGRAM: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure committing funds to be received as the share of the City of
Roanoke to be distributed to localities under the Federal Revenue 5hating Act
to be appropriated to the city*s Capital Improvements Fund, for use in provision
of a new jail, he presented same.
Mr, Nubard mored that the matter be referred back ta the Audit Commit-
tee for further consideration in view of certain conversation:~held with the
City Auditor pertaining to the matter. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and
unanimously adopted.
MOTIONS ANO MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
BONOS-CAPIT&L IRPROYERENTS FROGRAR-SCHO~LS: Mr. Hubard presented the
following communication requesting that the City Manager furnish the members of
Council with a priority order for capital improvements which will show not only
priorities but approximate dates of completion:
"November 8. 1972
Mr. Julian F. Hirst,
City Nanager.
Roanoke, Virginia.
Dear Julian:
! am sure that all of us are most pleased that our ten
million dollar bond referendum received a favorable vote
of nearly two to one by Roanoke citizens today.
This authorization gives us due opportunity, through
much needed physical improvements~ to make our city an
even better place to live. Ilowerer, in order for these
provements to be accomplished, together with previous
capital improvements authorized under the 1967 bond refer-
endum, it occurs to me that it would be most helpful to
Council to have your office furnish a current priority order
for the city*s capital improvements for which bond monies
are available, therefore. I will ask Council at its meet-
ing on Monday, November 13 to join with me in formally
requesting you to furnish Council with n priority order*for
capital improvements which will show not only priorities
but approximate dates of completion.
It will be my suggestion that priorities be set by category
rather than inmussie. The priority list could be set by
No. 1. schools, No. 2. buildings, and No. 3, parks, etc.
Sincerely,
S/ Rilliam S. Hubard mp
Rilliam S. Hubard"
In this connection, the City Manager submitted the following report in
connection with the status Of the 1972 bond issue projects:
"STATUS OF 1972 BOND ISSUE PROJECTS
Airport
(1) Terminal Buildin9 Expansion
The plans for specifica~ons for this project are 99
percent complete. It is planned to advertise this
project within one month.
(2) Pavement Overlay - Runway Five
Surveys and plans and specifications must be prepared.
An application for FAA Grant moneys must be prepared.
Request for approval for this project must be submitted
to the Fifth Planning District and the State Clearing-
house.
Buildings
(1) Courthouse Renovation
The CJty*s consultant has prepared preliminary plans
which are considered to be 95 percent complete. There
needs to be a decision and a committment on whether or
not n new jail is to be regional and then a decision
on the size and location of this facility, after which
construction plans and specifications for the court-
house renovation cnn be prepared.
(2) ' Melrose Library
In cooperation with the Library Board, a site for this
facility must be obtained. An architect and architect's
services must be contracted for. Plans and specifications
'66
for the project must be prepared. State library funds
must be obtained,
(3) Northwest Fire Station Signals
This signal system will he coorg:noted with the construc-
tion of the new Northmest Fire Station et the airport.
It Is possible et this time to begin preparing the plans
and specifications for this project since the Northwest
Fire Station site hem been finalized.
(4) Southwest Fire Station Signals
These signals mill be coordinated with the construction
et the new Southwest Fire Station. ~e cannot begin to
prepare the plans and specifications for this project
until the site rev the Southmost Fire Station bas been
determined.
(1) Riverlond Park
The PiannJn9 Department has already prepared a develop-
merit plan for this park. ~e need to obtain field surreys
and then prepare plans and specifications for the con-
StFoction of playing fields, picnic areas, and roadway
improvementS.
(2) ~ashington Park
The Plsunin9 Department needs to prepare a park develop-
ment plan after which we can obtain the necessary field
survey and cau prepare plans and specifications for the
construction of the desired improvements. This work
will be coordinated with the construction of the Mashing-
ton Park box culvert and the Washington Park seeding,
both of mhich were included in the 1972-73 Capital Pro-
jects Dudget.
Sanitary Sewers
(1} Huff Lane
The design for this sanitary sewer will be based on the
requirements for serving the entire area. Field sur-
veys, plans and specifications, plats, and right-of-uny
acquisition mill be accomplished in order to extend
this sanitary sewer to the Huff Lone Elementary School
(2) Murray Run Interceptor
Work has already begun on the required preliminary
engineering report. Federal 9rant applications must be
submitted for approval. Field surveys and the prepara-
tion of plans and specifications must be accomplished.
This entire project must be coordinated with the Roanoke
County Public Service Authority under the terms of the
new contract for sanitary semer service. Right-of-way
needs to be acquired.
(3) Campbell Avenue Sewer Replacement
Construction plans hare already been prepared for this
project. The Downtown Trunk Sewer Study needs to be
completed in order to ascertain whether or not these
plans need to be revised. No right-of-way needs to be
acquired.
(4) Downtown Trunk Sewer Study
The City needs to obtain a consultant to analyze the
sanitary sewer system in the downtowu area and to make
recommendations with respect to the adequacy or inade-
quacy of the system based on proposed high-rise office
developments in the downtown area. This study could
affect the siam of the proposed Campbell Arenue sewer
replacement.
(5) General Replacement - Sewer Lines
First stage: Analysis of lines needing replacement
based on current lists and capital outlay list submitted
to City Council May lg?2. Thirty-three locations have
been preliminarily identified. Determination on projects
to he done in priority within funds. Need topo, plans/
specs. Some right-of-uny requirement anticipated.
(1) Walnut Avenue Outfall
This project is already under construction in conjunction
with the Virginia Department of Highways' Southwest
Expressway Project;
(2) Walnut Avenue Stars Drain Extension
Plans have been prepared but need to be updated based on
the as-built plans for the Walnut Avenue outfoll. Spe-
cifications need to be prepared. No right-of-way needs
(3) Jefferson Street at Elm Avenue
Field ourveys have been completed. Plans and specifica-
tions are being prepared. No right-of-way needs to
be acquired.
(4) Springhill Drive, N. W.
Plans and specifications are approximately 90 percent
complete. Right-of-way plats bare been prepared.
Approximately five easements most be obtained.
(5) Dandy Road, S. E.
Plans are approximately 99 percent complete, Specifica-
tions must be completed. Right-of-way plats are completm
Approximately eight easements must be obtained.
(6) Koorman Road, N. W.
Plans are being prepared. Specifications and right-of-
way plats need to be prepared. Approximately four ease-
(?) Lick Run ~all
Field surveys must be obtained and plans and specifica-
tions must be prepared. An agreement between the City
and the Norfolk and Western Railway might be required
in order to accomplish thio project.
(O) Patrick llenry (Kimball Avenue) Storm Drain
Field surveys need to be obtained, and plans and
specifications and right-of-way plats need to be prepared.
Approximately eight easements need to be obtained,
(9) lhitmore Street
Field surveys have been completed for two possible loca-
tions for this facility. The final location will be
determined in conjunction with the new Jefferson Street
Bridge over the Norfolk and Western Railway and the river.
Final plans and specifications must be prepared. De-
between the City and the Norfolk and Western Railway
might be required.
(1) Salem Turnpike Bridge
Need City Council Resolution to Virginia Department of
Highways formally reqnestlug this project. The Virginia
Department of Highways is already preparing plans and
tentatively plans to advertise in January 1973.
(2) Shenandoah Avenue Bridge
Need City Council Resolution to Virginia Department of
Highways formally requesting this project. The Virginia
Department of Highways is already preparing plans and
tentatively plans to advertise in December 1973.
(3) Garden City Boulevard
Pland and specifications complete. Funds supplement
present appropriation. Project pending acquisition one
parcel. With City Attorney.
(4) lwenty-fourth Street
The Virginia Department of Highways has already started
preparing plans for thio project. No advertisement date
has been established.
(5) Jefferson Street Bridge over Norfolk and Nestern Railway
and Roanoke River
The Virginia Department of Highways has already started
preparation for the plans for this project. Some
'¸67
coordination will be required mith respect to the.location
of the Whltmore Street storm drain. An agreement between the
City, the Virginia Department of Highways, and the Norfolk
end Western Railway mill be required.
(6) Jefferson Street Pedestrian Overpass
Among other interests in this project, Norfolk end
Western has stated interest. Initial review of concept
with H ~ W and downtown Roanoke Interests. Planning
Department has preliminary models. Consultant possibly
needed for study o~ alternatives and refining costs.
(T) Oomntonn Traffic Signals
City Council by resolution has previously requested
that a study be made by the Virginia Department of
Highways of the Clty*s downtown traffic signals. An
additional resolution by City Council is required re-
questing that the appropriate service, plans and spe-
cifications preparation, and construction of the recom-
mended improvements be implemented.
Transportation
(1) Study underway by City Council Committee. Funds to be
geared to Committee and City Council program decisions."
'Mr. Lisk moved that the status report be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Habsrd and unanimously adopted.
COUNCIL-SALE OF PROPERTY-COMMITtEES-CITY MANAGER: Mr. Hubard moved
that Council meet in Executive Session on a real estate matter; possible
appointments to certain boards, committees, commissions and authorities; and a
possible appointment of a replacement for the City Manager. The motion uss
seconded by Br. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Mebber .........................
NAYS: None ...........O.
BUSES-SALE OF PROPERTY-CITY MANAGER: Mr. Garland moved that Council
meet in Executive Session to discuss a real estate matter pertaining to Roanoke
C~ty Lines, Incorporated. and as to a possible successor to the City Manager.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the ~ollowJng vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................... 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: Dr. Taylor presented the following communica-
tion suggesting an ~pen meeting of Roanoke City Council, as a Committee of the
Whole, following the regular meeting of Council on Monday, November 20, 1972, for
the purpose of discussing and finalizing the Bousino Availability Ordinance and
further suggesting that this meeting include the City Manager. the City Attorney
and representatives of the Roanok~ Valley Board of Realtors:
"November 10, 1972
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayor
and Members of Roanoke City Council
Municipal Building
215 Church Avenue, S. R.
Roanoke. Virginia
Centlemen:
I wish to suggest an open meetln9 of the Roanoke City
Council. meeti~9 as a Committee of the Mhole. following our
regular meeting on Monday, November 20, lg?2, for the purpose
or 'discussing ~and finalizing the Housing Availability Ordi-
nance. I, further, suggest that this meeting uJll include
the City Reneger, City Attorney and representatives of the
Roanoke Valley Hoard of Realtors, The meeting. I believe.
should be open to the neus media and other individuals who
may be interested in addressing comments to the Council con-
cerning the Housing Availsbility Ordinance before the final
draft is printed.
In brief, this action mill enable the citizens who
attend the public hearing on Tuesday. December 26. 1972, to
make comments on the Ordinance in its final form.
Finally. if the Ordinance receives the favorable vote
of this Council, 1 would purpose that we ask the other
governments in the Roanoke Valley to consider adoptin~
comparable ordinances.
Respectfully submitted,
S! Noel C. Taylor
Noel C. Taylor"
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the communication. The motion
was seconded bI Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
VIRGINIA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE: Mr. Trout presented copy of a communication
from Rt. Harold I. Baumes, Executive Director of the Virginia Runicipal League,
with reference to League Legislative Committee appointments, transmitting a
list of the members of the League's Legislative Committee for the coming year,
and requestin9 that Councilman James O. Trout serve as a member of this Com-
mittee.
Mr. Trout moved that the communication be received and filed~ The motion
was seconded by Mr. Li'sk and unanimously adopted.
At this point, Mayor Webber recessed the meeting until Council could
meet in Executive Session on certain real estate matters; appointments to certain
boards, committees, commissions and authorities; and discussion as to a possible
successor to the City Ranager.
After the Executive Session, Mayor Webber again called the meeting to
order with all seven members of Council present.
SCHOOLS: Mayor Webber called to the attention of Council that there is
a vacancy on the Roanoke City School Board created by the resignation of Mr.
William C. Pittman on June 30. 1972, and called for nominations to fill the
vacancy.
Dr. Taylor placed in nomination the name of Mr. James B. Spurlock, Jr.
There being no furhtev nominations, Mr. James B. Spurlock. Jr.. was
elected os a member of the Roanoke City School Board for a term of three years
ending Jane 30. 1975:
FOR MR. SPURLOCK: Ressrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Rayor Mebber ......................................................
BUILDINGS: Mayor Webber called to the attention of Council that there
is a vacancy on the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, Building Code, for a term
of five years endin9 September 30, 1977, and called for nominations to fill the
vacancy.
Mr. Hubard placed in nomination the name.of Hr. William A. Sowers.
There being no further nominations, Mr. William A. Sowers was elected
as a member of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, Building Code, for a term of
five years ending September 30, 1977, by the Yolluwing v~te:
FOR MR. ~OMERS: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Llsk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout
and Mayor Webber ................ ~ ..................................... 7.
TRAFFIC: Mayor Webber called to the attention of Council that there
is a vacancy on the Roanohe B~ghway Safety Commission to fill the unexpired
tern of Dr. Roy A. Alcorn, resigned, ending October 31, 1974, and called for
nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Trout placed in nomination the name of Captain Henry R. Kiser.
There being no further nominations, Captain Henry R. Kiser vas elected
as a member of the Roanoke Highway Safety Commission to fill the unexpired term
of Dr. Boy A. Alcoru, resigned, ending October 31, 1974, by the following vote:
FOR CAPTAIN K1SER: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trow
and Mayor Mebber
SMORE: Mayor Webber called to the attention of Council thnt there is
a vacancy on the Advisory and Appeal Board, Air Pollution Control. created by
the death of Mr. Thona$ M, Urquhart, ending December 31. 1974. and called for
nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Hubard pluced in nomination the name of Mr. Edmard V. Spurgeon.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Edward V. Spurgeon was elected
as a member of the Advisory and Appeal Board, Air Pollution Control, to fill
the unexpired term of Mr. Thomas ¥. Urquhart, deceased, ending December 31,
1974. by the foilouing vote:
FOR HR. SPURGEON: Messrs. Garland. tlubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas. Trout
and Mayor Webber ....................................................7.
SMOKE: Mayor Webber called to the attention of Council that there is
a further vacancy on the Advisory and Appeal Board, Air Pollution Control. create~
by the resignation of Mr. Winston S. Sharpley for a term of four years ending
December 31, 1915, and called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Hubard placed in nomination the name of Mr. Lucian Y, Grove.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Lucian Y. Grove was elected
as a member of the Advisory and Appeal Board, Air Pollution Control, for a
term of four years ending December 31, 1975, by th'e following vote:
FOR MR. GROVE: Messrs. Garland. Bubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Webber ................................................... 7.
CITY MANAGER: Mayor Webber called to the attention of Council that
effective January 1, 1973, the position of City Manager of the C~ty of Roanoke,
Virginia, will be vacant and called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr, Lisk placed in nomination the name of Mr, Byron E, Hamer,
Br, Garland placed in nomination the name of Mr. lilliam'F, Clark.
There being no further nominations, Mayor Mebber requested that the
Deputy City Clerk call the roll on the two nominations before Council,
FOR HR. HANER: Messrs, Bubard, Lis, Taylor, Trout and Bayor Webber--S,
FOR MR. CLARK:. Messrs. Garland and Thomas ........................... 2.
Pursuant to the above roll call vote of Council, Mr. Byron E. Darter
mas elected as City Manager of t~e City of Roanoke, Virginia, effective January
1, 1973.
Dr. Taylor expressed the opinion that it is the right of every man to
vote for the person of his choice, that be feels every member of Council is
milling to work with the new City Manager and that Council could express its
millingness to mork with Mr. flauer by having a unanimous vote for his appointment;
whereupon, Dr, Taylor moved that Council appoint Mr, Byron £, Darter as City
Manager of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, effective January 1, 1973, by a
unanimous vote of all seven members of Council, The motion was seconded by Mr.
Trout and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber .......................................................................?-
NAYS: None ........................................................O.
MUNICIPAL COURT: The Deputy City Clerk reported.that Mr, James P,
Brice and Mr, Carroll D. Rea have qualified ns Municipal Court Judges for terms
of four years each ending September 30, 1975.
Mr. Lisk moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
There being no further business, Mayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING.
Monday, November 20; 1972.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the Coun-
cil Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, November 20, 1972, ut 2 p.m** the
regular meeting hour, mith Mayor Roy L. Webber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, William S. Hubard. Havid N.
Lisk, Noel C. Taylor, Hampton g. Thomas, James OD Trout and Mayor Roy L.
Webber ................................... 7.
ABSENT: None ..................O.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Julian F. Hirst, City Manager; Mr. William F.
Clark, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Kincanon, City Attorney; and Mr. A. N
Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend
Douglas Heidt. Pastor. First Presbyterian Church.
MINH~ES: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday,
October 30. 1972, having been furnished each member of Council, on motion of
Mr. Trout. seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted, the readin9 thereof was
dispensed with and the minutes approved as recorded.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
SCHOOLS: Mr. Edward S. Allen. District Agent. Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University, appeared before Council and requested that the
City of Roanoke appropriate $10,000.00 of city funds to provide the total City
of Roanoke share needed, on a matching fund basis, to begin a program to expand
the Extension Program in Roanoke City focusing on unreached youth and to
establish a city office, advisin9 that this program will extend from January 1,
1973, through June 30, 1973, that this will complete the last half of this fiscal
year and that these funds will provide part salary for one Extension Agent, four
technicians, one secretary and office space includin~ conference room and tele-
phone.
In this connection, Mrs. Frances Graham, Program Leader Family Resourc-
es. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, appeared before Council
and advised that the proposed program will place emphasis on food and nutrition,
and that the overall purpose of the program is to work with families either
individually or in 9r.ups in an effort to.ach them how to improve their eating
habits.
Mrs. Graham then introduced Mrs. Ruth C. Shepherd, Mrs. Martha L.
Ogden and Mrs. Phyllis S. Gary who presented brief progress reports ondifferent
phases of the program.
After a discussion Of the matter. Mr. Trout moved that the request be
referred to the City Manager for study, report and recommendation to Council. The
motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
rATER DEPARTMENT: Mr, L. S, Nnldrop, Chairman, Rosnoke County Public
Service Authority, appeared 'before Council end represented a communication and
Resolution adopted by the Roanoke County Public Service Authority requesting that
the City of Roanohe sell water, nt bulk rates, to the Authority for distribution
in certain portions of Roanoke County.
In this connection, the City #nnager submitted the folloming report
injecting certain preliminary comments and recommending to City Council the
prevailing Mules and Regulations as set out in his report:
"November 20, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: County Mater Service Request
The City Council has before it today a request from
the Roanoke County Public Service Authority for the City to
sell water to the Authority at bulk rates for various areas
of the County. I do not know the approach the Council
will take to this proposal, either as to procedure or posi-
tion, but I do feel that the outset of this consideration
is of such significance that 1 would, at this early point,
wish to inject these preliminary comments.
Cnder the Rules and Regulations of the Mater Depart-
ment, which are embodied in the Code of the City the procedure
for water service to areas outside of the City is substan-
tially as follows:
1.Request is made to the Nnter Department for a defined
area.
The applicant agrees to and does construct the water
lines under City specifications.
3.The lines are conveyed in ownership to the City and the
City assumes maintenance.
4. The City assumes the supplying of water with each
customer being individually metered and billed.
Thus there is a procedure, water can be made available
and, I believe, the City has been reasonably responsive
to making its water service available. The procedure has
satisfactorily performed to date and much of the development
in Roanoke County is attributable to Roanoke City water.
The question then is not whether the City can, will or
does provide water outside of the City, but rather whether
the procedure shall be changed. The elements of the change
are:
I. Various other ageucieso groups, developers would
establish separate and independent distribution systems.
2, Natet would be sold at a bulk Fate to those separate or
independent systems.
I think the need of public water service tn groming
Roanoke County areas, au an adequate basis is evident. This
seems evident even despite testimony to the contrary by the
Connty government and the Authority in the recent annexation
case.
Involved, as I understand, in this current ma~ter, are
primarily unserved areas thus there is not a problem of
adapting existing service systems.
To break or change the standing procedure and policy
would:
1.Encourage the fragmentation of water distribution systems
in the Valley area.
2.Be contrary to a unified system approach generally
regarded as desirable under regional service criteria.
3.Reduce capability of control over essential standards of
design and operation of a water utility.
4. Open to grounds, founded or not, Of future controversies,
agreements, counter agreements, rate issues, etc.
The point may be mede that the City ham been selling
water to the Tows of ¥luton nt 8 balk rate. That situation
stands as situation that can occur. It is well recalled that
recently the City sought a rate adjustment. This invoked
controversy and hard feelings. Now the Town is moving to
separate itself from the Roanoke suppll end to set up its
sun independent mater supply end system. #hAle it is the
Judgment of the Town, it nevertheless is a direction on their
part that way be questioned in that it produces considerabll
increased capital and operation costs, a duplication 8ad
parallel of water utilities and a fragmentation of water
systems, This development is largely due to the bulk rate
matter. There are other instances of problems attributable
to the bulk rate sale between governments, authorities and
districts: the Hampton Roads area, Northern Virginia area.
etc.
I recommend to the City Council the prevailing Rules
and Regulations are workable and beneficial, that they do
not present ant undue hardship and that there should not be
a significant variance from them of this manner.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Julian F. ~irst
Julian F. HIFSt
City Manager~
ar. Garland expressed the opinion that Council should hold this request
in abeyance until the annexation appeal and the suit over the ownership of sewer
lines in the Jefferson Hills, Edgehill and Jefferson Forest Subdivisions are
settled by the courts and that he is not sure that it is in the best interest of
the City of Roanoke to take on the responsibility of supplying more water out-
side the corporate limits of the City of Roanoke at this time.
Rith reference to the matter. Mr. Hubard sugoested that the name of
the Sewer Committee be changed to the Rater Resources Committ'ee; whereupon,
it was generally agreed by all the members of Council that the name of the Sewer
Committee shall be changed to the Rater Resources Committee.
Rt. Hubard further suggested that it would be of benefit to the later
Resources Committee to enlarge its membership and that the assistance of the
Ranger of the later Department and the City Attorney would be helpful to the Com-
mittee; whereupon, it was generally agreed that the Rsnager of the later Depart-
ment and the City Attorney will serve as additional members of the Rater
Resources Committee.
Rt. Thomas then moved that the request of the Roanoke County Public
Service Authority be taken under advisement and referred to the Rater Resources
Committee for the purpose of meeting mith the valley governing bodies, including
the Town of Yearns, to review the overall water situation ned report back to
Council accordingly. The motion was seconded by Rt. Hubard and unanimously
adopted.
PETITIONS AND CORRUNICATIO~S:
AIRPORT-TAXES-LEGISLATION: Council having adopted Ordinance No.
20533 fixing a use and service charge for certain enplaning passengers utiliz-
ing premises or facilities at Roanoke Runicipal (loodrum) Airport, ~r. Charles
O. Tare, Jr.. President. Tate's 'Greenbrier Airport, Incorporated,' appeared
before Council and presented a communication advising that under Chapter 4.1,
SectJom S of the Ordlnsnce, it appears that the intent is that connecting
passengers (traveling from another point), with no layover of any amount appre-
ciable, not be assessed the use and service charge, that since few of his passen-
gers are ticheted in advance for his service but ave mostly bona fide transfer
or connecting passengers~ his passengers arriving on Piedmont Airlines or East-
eFn Airlines are unduly penalized if they have to pay the charge, whereas, if
they were traveling on Piedmont or Eastern onward, due to being thru ticketed,
they would not have to pay the charge and requesting the consideration of Council
of a slight amendment which mould have the meaning of exempting passengers
legitimately traveling onward on Greenbrier Airlines from immediate connection
off other airlines.
Mr. LiSk moved that the matter be referred to the Airport Advisory
Commission for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: Council having previously referred the pro-
posed Housing Availability Ordinance to the Fifth Planning District Commission
for report and comments, a communication from Hr. Robert M. Shannon, Executive
Director, Fifth Planning District Commission, advising that in the course of
preparing the staff housing report for fiscal year 1972, his staff did consid=
erable research in the area of fair housing, that it was their conclusion that
a local fair housing Ordinance, if effectively written and uniformly administered,
is beneficial to a community for a number of reasons, that its very existence
with provisions for enforcement becomes evidence to the community that the city
or county has accepted a positive and progressive position supporting fair
housing for all of its citizens and that it is felt that the proposed fair
housing Ordinance is well constructed and that its adoption sill further the
attainment of the housing goals adopted by the Fifth Planning District Commis-
sion, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that action on the communication be deferred until
the meeting of Council acting as a Committee of the Whole after the regularly
scheduled Council meeting on Monday, November 20, 1972. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
COMPLA1NTS-COMMON#EALTH'S ATTORNEY: A communication from Mr. #alter
F. Craymer, Acting President, Shenandoah Bible College, advising that the Shenan-
doah Bible College, its faculty, staff and student body, totaling more than
fifty persons, mishes to lodge its opposition to the opening of food and variety
stores on Sunday and requesting the immediateaS~istance of Council in returning
the Roanoke Valley to its former place and position with respect to the law and
for the good of the people, was before Council.
Mr. Garland moved that the communication be referred to the Common-
wezlth*s Attorney for his information in connection w~th his Study of the matter.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
HEALTH DEPARTMENT-GARBAGE REMOVAL: Copy of n communication from
Mr. Jo L. Cross transmitting a communication fram Mr. James M.~ Batten, R. S.
Environmental Health Division of the Roanoke City Health Department, in connec-
tion with the condition of a lot located at 2231Herkley Avenue, S. W., advising
that Council recently adopted an Ordinance requiring all property owners to keep
weeds cut and their property in sanitary condition, that the condition of the
abovementioned lot is a disgrace to the City of Roanoke and requesting that
Council instruct the City Manager to havethe conditions corrected, mas before
the body.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be referred to the City Man-
ager for handling administratively. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and
unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
FIRE DEPARTMENT: Council having referred a report of a committee com-
posed of Messrs. Robert E. Mullen, Jr.. Julian F. Ilirst and A. N. tlughson in
connection #Jth the location of the proposed southwest fire station back to the
committee for the purpose of exploring the concept of the proposed location
at the southwest corner of the intersection of Overland Road and Colonial Avenue,
S. M., with the Roanoke City School Board, officials of Viroinia Mestern Communal
College and the State Fire ~arshall. taking into consideration certain points
made by Mr. Jack D. Coulter, Attorney, representing residents opposed to the
proposed location, the matter was again before the body.
In this connection, the City Manager submitted a written report
transmitting the following communication from Dr. Robert C. Haynes, Clerk of the
Roanoke City School Board, advising that at a special meeting Of the Roanoke
City School Board on #ednesday. November 8. 1972. the School Board unanimously
voted its opposition to the construction of a firehouse for southwest Roanoke at
the intersection of Colonial Avenue and Overland Road, S. M., at the Fishburn
Park Elementary School site:
*November 13. 1972
Mr. Julian Rirst
City Manager
City of Roanoke
Roanoke. Virginia
Dear Mr. Hirst:
At a Special Meeting of the Roanoke City School Board
on Mednesday, November H, 1972, the School Board unani-
mously voted its opposition to the construction of a Fire-
house for Southwest Roanoke at the intersection of Colonial
Avenue and Overland Drive on the Fishburn Park Elementary
School site.
Mould you please inform the City Council of this action?
Very truly yours,
S! Robert C. Haynes
Robert C. Haynes
Clerk of the Board*
Mith reference to the matter, the committee submitted · written report
reaffirming their recommendation for the location of the proposed southwest fire
station et the intersection of Overland Road and Colonial Avenue, S. M., advis-
ing that they contiune to feel the adyuntuges of this location and they ore amore
of the petitions and the position which the Roanoke City School Board has taken
in the matter.
In a discussion of the matter, the City Manager verbally reported that
the committee is recommendin9 that Council act favorably upon their recommendations,
that he has examined, in detail, the petitions mhich were filed with City Coun-
cil at its meeting on Monday, October 23. 1972, in opposition to the proposed
location and that only 103 of the signatures on that petition ute people who are
geographically involved in this matter.
In a discussion, the City Manager advised that there has been comment
from the opposition that the proposed fire station will cause undue noise and
mill be a detriment to the safety of residents in the area, pointing out that
the only time there will be traffic movement will be when the fire trucks are
9oleg to and from emergency calls; that there has been concern that the fire
station will detract from the beauty of the overall area; and that the fire sta-
tion will effect property values in the urea. pointing out that he disputes this
idea because the fire station should be more of an attribute to theneigbborhood
and that the establishment of a fire station in u particular area constitutes
stability and benefit.
Mr. Robert S. Mullah. Chairman of the Fire House Committee. appeared
before Council and advised that it is his opinion that the location recommended
by the committee is the best location for the fire station, that the other sites
mentioned in the report will cost much more money to develop and that Council
charged the committee.with the responsibility of selecting the best possible
site for the location of the southwest fire station and that it is the feeling
of the committee that it has fulfilled this responsibility.
Mr. Jack B. Coulter. Attorney. representing residents in the area
opposed to the proposed location, appeared before Council and pointed out that
the City Manager has obviously paid more attention to the petition than be has,
that the people who signed the petition were school patrons, that he feels the
overall merits should be the persuasive factors, that he still is of the opinion
that to put the fire station ut the southwest corner of the intersection of Over-
land goad and Colonial Avenue would jeopardize the integrity of the area and the
educational needs and that the people.he represents would rather have no fire
station at all than to have a station on that particular corner.
After a long discussion of the matter. Mr. Lisk moved the committee be
requested to prepare u cost development comparison for the site at the intersec-
tion of Overland Road and Colonial Avenue, S. W., versus property located
diagonally across the intersection, said site being a part of the property made
available to Virginia Western Community College. The motion nas seconded by
Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
S~fATE HIGHWAYS: The City Manager submitted a written report advising
that he hopes to be in u position to present u further report on the Route 115-
116 project ns it relates to the crossing of the Roanoke giver in the vicinity
of the Seaage Treatment Plant.
In thin connection, the City Manager verbally reported that he is
still waiting for certain correspondence from the State Highway Department with
regard to the project.
Mr. Lisk moved that the report be received and filed. Yhe motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
SERERS AND S'fORg DRAXNS: The City ganager submitted a mritteu report
officially transmitting copy of the following communication from Mr. Donald
A. Smith. Town Manager, Town of Yinton, regarding the consideration by the
¥inton Town Council of a request to the City of Roanoke mith respect to the
of Council on November 6, 1972:
~October 30, 1972
Mr. Julian liirst
City Ranager
Dear Mr. Hirst:
The Yinton Town Council. at its regular meeting
October 17. 1972. under deadline orders from the State
I. Send all sewage to the Roanoke Plant.
2. Send all sewage in excess of 600.000 G. P. D, to
Jim Ryan called me this morning and stated that the
Tinker Creek interceptor to divert either all flow to
Roanoke, or to divert approximately 300,000 G. P. D. to
the Roanoke Plant.
Your earliest reply will be greatly appreciated.
S/ Donald Ao Smith
Donald A. Smith
filed. Zbe motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
ACTS OF ACKNONLEDGEMENT-PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: Council havin9 adopted
Resolution No. 20322 expressing the appreciation and gratitude Of the City of
Roanoke to various firms, groups and organizations for contributions of money,
labor and equipwent for plantings in Elmwood Park, the City Manager submitted
the following report advising that included in this listing of the various firms,
groups and organizations was the Laburnum Garden Club, that he is now advised by
a representative of the Laburnnm Garden Club that the Laburnum Garden Club did
not contribute to the £1mwood Park project, but rather contributed to the Grandin
Court Recreation Center project, that the Club representative states that they
would like to have tho Resolution corrected for their record and for the purpose
of a contest that they are entering and recommending that Council, by Resolution,
express appreciation to the persons, firms and organizations who participated in
the Grandin Court project:
'November 20, 1972
Honorable Rayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Centlemen:
Subject: Civic Contributions and Participation
On the Agenda of December 6. la71. I brought to the
attention of the City Council, by report, improvements that
had been made to the Grandin Court Recreation Center and its
grounds by various groups and firms uho had contributed time.
funds, interest and materials to the project. Those who
had an active part, according to the best information
available to me at the time, and who were listed in my
report, included: the Laburnum Garden Club through its
Beautification and Civic Improrement Committee, Mrs. C. fl.
Deibel. Chairman; the Deb Council, sponsored by S. H.
Heironimus and directed by Mrs. Polly Ayers; Sears, Roebuck
and Company; Sherwin-Williams Company; K-Mart; Norfolk and
Nestern Railway Company and the City Department of Parks
and Recreation. This report was duly noted and commented
upon by the City Council at your meeting on December '6 and
placed in the records of th~ City.
Then at your meeting on June 12, 1972. 1 submitted a
list of a number of firms, individuals and organizations who
had made contributions of money, labor and equipment for
plantings in Elmuood Park. There were 21 different firms,
groups, and Organizations listed and their names were from
a listing furnished by the Roanoke'Council nf Garden Clubs.
The City Council then by a Resolution No. 20322 expressed its
appreciation and gratitude to all of those listed.
Included in the listing by the Council of Garden Clubs
and in my report to the City Council and, ia turn. in the
Resolution, was the Laburnum Garden Club. Me are now advised,
on November 8, 1972, by the representative of the Laburnum
Garden Club who headed the project for that club. that the
Laburnum Club did not contribute to the Elmwood Park project.
but rather contributed to the Grandin Court Recreation Center
project. As above noted, we had included them in the com-
mendation before City Council on December 6. 1972, as a
participant in the Grandin Court project. ~he club repre-
sentative states that they would lihe to have the Resolution
corYected for their record and for the purpose of a contest
that they are entering. It would appear that the appro-
priate handling for this would be to recommend to the City
Council a resolution expressin9 the appreciation of the
Council and the City to the persons, firms and organizations
who participated in the Grandin Court project andthis would
accomplish the inclusion of the Laburnum Garden Club and would
thereby assist that organization in its recognition f~r its
contest and project.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Julian F. Hirst,
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager*
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur In the recommendation of the Clty
Reneger end offered the following Resolution:
(u20549) A RESOLUTION expressing the City°s appreciation and grati-
tude for contributions of money, lobar and equipment for improvements to the
Drandin Court Recreation Center and its grounds.
(For fall text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book #aT. page 255.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Resolution. The notion was
seconded by Rt. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Ressrs. Garland. Bubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Rayor Mebber .................... ?-
NAYS: None ........... O.
DRUGS: Council having adopted on Ordinance appropriating funds for
the installation and service charges over an experimental period of three
months for a telephone recording devide in the Police Department which could
receive and record confidential information electronically in order to identify
and discourage the users and suppliers of illegal drugs, the C~ty Ronager sub-
mitted a written report advising that the Roanoke Pslice Department special dead
end telephone, frequently referred to as the "Hot Line,' was installed and put
into active operation on November 9. 1972.
Hr. Barry Bausman, General Ranager, WIOY Radio Station, appeared before
Council and urged that Council continue to request that the news media push this
"Hot Line" telephone number,
Dr. Taylor moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Rr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
LIBRARIES: The Citl Ranager submitted a written report transmittln9
the foil*win9 copy ~ a communication from the Roanoke Public Library Board in
connection with a proposal for the designation of the Roanoke Public Library
as a sub-regional branch of the Virginia State Library for the blind and physi-
cally handicapped, advising that this program is directly affiliated with a
pr*gram of similar purpose within the Library of Congress and that he concurs in
the recommendation of the Roanoke Public Library Board which will require waiv-
ing the non-resident fee for these purposes:
'REQUEST OF ROANOKE PUBLIC'LIBRARY BOARD
FOR RAIVER OF NON-RESIDENT FEES IN CITY CODE
FOR LIBRARY SERVICE TO BLIND AND PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED
The members of the Roanoke Public Library Board Ocotber
5, 1972, voted approvaI of the extension of library service
to the blind and physically handicapped by seeking to have
the Roanoke Public Library designated a'sub-reglonal branch
of the Virginia State Library for the Blind and Physically
Handicapped which is the regional branch for Library of
Cohgress, Division of the BIind and Physically Handicapped.
TheRoanoke Public Library would serve as a distribution
center for equipment, such as talking book machines and
cassette players, and materials, usch as r~cordings and
Braille books, supplied without charge bi the Library of
Congress, circulated from library to reader postage free,
and machines repaired by volunteers from the Telephone
Pioneer Association.
Because this service is furnished through Federal foods.
the individual libraries are not permitted to charge any
The Library Board heartily recommends making available
to the certified eligible borromers in the Fifth Planning
District the opportunity to obtain the immeasurable benefits
of the Library of Congress resources for blind and physically
handicapped.
Borromers in the present city library program number
tmenty-five. It is estimated that three hundred are eligible
throughout the Fifth Planning District,
In order to qualify for sub-regional status, the Roanoke
Public Library Board respectfully requests that the Roanoke
City Code Title fl, Chapter 2, Section 10, Bottoming cards
be amended to moire the requirement of a $6.00 annual non-
resident fee for adults and Juveniles above the eighth grade
and $3.00 for juveniles below the eighth 9rode in the case of
blind and physically handicapped residents of the Fifth
Planning District certified eligible to the Library of Con-
gress, Division of the Blind and Physically Dandicapped."
Mr. Llsk moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure. The motion mos seconded by Dr. Taylor and
unanimously adopted.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM-STATE HIGHRAYS-BR1DGES: The City Manager
submitted the following report advising that the city is now in a position to
request that the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Ilighways proceed with
replociog the bridges over Peters Creek on Salem Turnpike and Shenandoah Avenue
at the west corporate limits, that the Highway Ocpartment has requested that the
icity formally request that they proceed with surveys, plans and specifications,
right of way acquisition and construction of these two bridges and indicate the
willingness on the part of the city to participate in the projects end agree to
pay fifteen per cent of the cost thereof and that the City Attorney has been
implement these projects:
*November 20, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Counc'il
Roanoke, ¥irginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Peters Creek Bridge Replacements
Mith the favorable results of the recent capital
provements bond referendum, the City is now in a position
to requeot that the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of
Highways proceed with replacin9 the bridges ever Peters
Creek on Salem Turnpike and Shenandoah Avenue at the west
corporate limits. The bond program includes the sum of
$125,000 estimated to adequately cover the City's 15 percent
share of the cost of these desirable improvement.projects.
The Highway Department. has requested that the City
formally reqeest tha~ they proceed with surveys, plans and
specifications, right of way acquisition and construction
of these two bridges, and indicate our willingness to
participate in the projects and agree to pay 15 percent of
the cost. Of course, the City will have opportunity to
approve each project prior to any contracts being awarded
and based upon the then accurate estimate of the cost to the
City.
The City Attorney's office is being requested to prepare
appropriate resolutions requesting that the State proceed
to implement these projects.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Birst
Julian F. Birst
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur In the report ~f the City Manager
and offered the following Resolution:
(s20550) A RESOLUTION requesting the Commonwealth of Virginia, Depart-
ment or Highways tO initiate a project for and to proceed with surveys, plans
and specifications, right-of-way acquisitions and construction of hem highmay
bridges over Peters Creek on Salem Turnpike and on Shenandoah Avenue, at the
City's Mast corporate limits; and expressing the City*s willingness to participat
in the projects and to agree to pay 15 per cent of the cost thereof.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book uS?o page 255.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Huha~d, Lisk, Taylor; Thomas, TFOUt and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: Hone ........... O.
BUILDINGS-HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: The City Ranager submitted the fol-
lowing report in connection with a petition signed by seventeen residents of
Edgerton Avenue and 16th Street. S. E., requesting that a building located at
1553 Edgerton Avenue be condemned and razed as soon as possible, advising that
the Bnilding Commissioner*s Office has investigated the situation and reports
that the building is an unoccupied frame structure which cannot be used except
by special permission of the Board of Zoning Appeals since the structure does
not conform with the duplex residential zoning of the neighborhood, that neverthe
less. the Building Code requires that any structure be deteriorated beyond fifty
per cent before it can be ordered demolished by the city. that although the
building cannot be occupied, it is not considered to be in such physical condi-
tion that the city can order its razing and that he is in contact with the
owner and he is attempting to persuade her to remove the building since it is
uesless and admittedly a detraction in the neighborhood:
"November 20, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Citizen Petition - Building Condition at
1552 Edgerton Avenue, S. E.,
On Monday. October 23. 1972. City Council received a
petition signed by 17 residents of Edgerton Avenue and 16th
Street. S, E.. requesting that O building located at 1552
Edgerton Avenue be condemned and razed as soon as possible.
This petition was referred to the City Manager's office for
investigation mod report back to Council.
The Building Commissioner's office has investigated
and reports that the building at this location is an unoccupied
wood rome structure which cannot be used except by special
permission of the Board of Zoning Appeals since the structure
does not conform with the residential duplex zoning of the
neighborhood. Nevertheless, the City's Building Code requires
that any structure be deteriorated beyond 50 percent before
it can be ordered demolished by the City. Although the build-
ing cannot be occupied, it is not considered to be in physi-
cal condition that the City can order its razing. Me are in
contact with the owner however and attempting to persuade her
to remove the building since it is useless and admittedly a
detraction in the neighborhood.
Respectfully submitted.
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that the report bo received and filed. The motion
was seconded by #r. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
CITY ENGIN£EM: The City Manager submitted the folloming status report
on the work being performed by ¥osbech ¥osbech Ke~lrich Redinger in connection with
the planning study for the service center, advising that should Council feel
that it wishes to determine the matter or proceeding into the final phase of the
study, he will be glad to arrange a review with the consultants, otherwise, they
will continue to proceed, noting that he feels it would be most advantageous
at a later point or in fact at any Intermediate point from here on that there
he the opportunity for the consultants to review in some detail with Council
that material which they hare developed and upon which they are arriving at
certain decisions and certain bases for development and programming:
~Novenber 20, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Service Center
This is by way Of report on the status of the work
being performed by Vosbeck ¥osbeck Kendrick Redinger ~ho
is performing the planning study for the service center.
Mr. Clark and Mr. Brewer have from time met with representa-
tives of the consultants who are in the program and on
November 8 they, together with me, met with Mr. Motley and
Mr. Conner of that firm for an update appraisal of the
situation.
The City Council may recall that in the outline Of their
work, that was reviewed with the City Council, it was indi-
cated that there would be a preliminary phase of their study
and at the completion of that phase they would informally
report on their status and there would be an analysis as
to proceeding into the second and final and more detailed
phase of developing the study and final presentation. They
have now completed this first phase. This has included
the Overview of the project, the Project Development, the
Analysis of the Data and the Development Program for the
final phase of the study. In our administrative judgment that
which has been performed has been satisfactoryand is a
good and sound approach to the total study.
The next and final overall phase consists of (1)
Alternative Development Plaqs; (2) Test Refinement of a
Master Plan and (3) Final Reviem and Final Report. This
then would be followed by the decision of Council as to
implementation.
This is as report to the City Councilon the status
of the study project which is on schedule. Should the City
Council feel that it would wish to determine the proceedin9
into the final phase of the study, we would be 91ad to
arrange a review mtth the consultants; otherwise, they will
continue to proceed. At the same time, I would note that
1 feel that it would be most advantageous at the later point
or in fact at any intermediate point from here on that there
be the opportunity for the consultants to review in some
detail with City Council that material mhich they have
developed and upon which they are arriving at certain deci-
sions and certain bases for development and.programing. This
can come a little later if your schedule would be more
suitable and it would be hoped that in the presentation of
the final report that this be done in some detail with vis-
ual material that has been prepared by the consultants.
If there should be any questions Jn regard to this or
uny advisubJlity of further clarification Of the ubove
comments, I mould be glad to endeavor to do so.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Rirst
City Reneger'
Mr. Lish moved that Council meet with the City Hanager and the con-
sultants to review the first phase of the study. The motion mas seconded by
Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
In this connection, Mr. Garland raised the question as to whether or
not there will be sufficient facilities to store and repair approximately 100
buses at the proposed hem service center.
The City Manager replied that the consultants are taking into con-
sideration that the city may have to handle a certain number of buses.
The Assistant City Manager replied that the site is adequate for the
operation that is intended to be carried on at that location, that this does
not include fifty to one hundred buses and that provisions are being made
whereby the buses could be serviced at this location but not necessarily stored
at the service center,
DEPARTMENT OF pUBLIC WELFARE-CITY NURSING HOME: The City Manager sub-
mitted the folloming report in connection with converting the City Nursing Hone
into a facility for the aged:
~Hovember 20, 1972
Honorable Rayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: CityNursing Home
In recent past months two matters have been brought
before the Ci~ Council that have a lead in to the follow-
ing situation. These consisted of Our request of the
Council earlier in this calendar year for a special appro-
priation for certain building safety equipment at the City
Nursing Rome and then in several items included or cited in
the 1972-73 budget there were additional safety items. Then
also it will be recalled that your Director of Public Nel-
fare. Miss'Jones. attended a special course over apertod of
time in Richmond in order to become certified as a Nursing
Hone Administrator for the purpose of conform{n9 with new
State regulations.
The State of Virginia promulgated certain rules and
regulations for the operation of nursing homes throughout
the State that were to bo effective July, 1972. Ail persons.
firms, and local governments operating n~rsing homes have had
these rules and regulations emphasized to them over a period
of time as being something to compliance mould have to be
made. The State has actually not pressed for a strict com-
pliance because of various problems in bringing them about
in accomplishment and the State has in effect held up on the
firm enforcement. This, however, could come at any one
particular point and with any stipulated time for compliance.
· There are a number of things involved ranging from the
operation of the Rome to the situation of the physical fac-
ility as they relate to the Roanoke Nursing Home, There is.
in one instance, the requirement of a full-time administra-
tor--that is to say someone who spends 40 hours per week on
duty at the home in serving as the full-time administrator.
Hiss Jones, as-stated, has hsd the training, and of course
has the ability, and is certified to do this. With the scope
of her duties with the City, she is not able to give this
amount of attention to the ~urslng Home and nt the same
time it is e dilution of the requirement of her capabilities
in her other functions. The result is that she is doing
this on s basis of several days a week with all or us hav-
ing the knowledge that uhen the State presses its requirements
there will be the need to employ a fall-time administrator.
These individuals, with proper certificat'ou, are somewhat a
rarity and in the market today we are talking about something
in the range of $12.000 to $14,000.
As you Mill also recall we have had to make arrange-
neats with the accompanying costs for full time availability
of a pharmacist and full-time availability of a physician.
Me are having considerable difficulty with adequate
staffing of licensed nursing personnel. There are a
limited number of licensed nurses available but the parti-
cular pr*blew of the City is that this is a highly com-
petitive market and City with Its nursing hone and the
physical location of that home has a difficult situation being
competitive with the hospitals in the area. He have five
authorized licensed nurses* positions. Me now have only
two people in these five positions. Of these three vacancies,
one is a vacancy of a LPH who left several months a9o and
we have not been able to replace: one has been off duty
since last April with an illness and there has been no
potential of temporary replacemeot: one position has been
vacant for approximately two years. The difficulty here is
not only the shortage of filling the positions but also the
concerning question that there is not a licensed nurse on
duty 24 hours per day which is both a desirable arrangement
bat also a requirement under State rules and re§ulatJons.
Even with five authorized positions, if these sere
filled, there would be a shortage iu 24-hour coverage
especially on weekends and it is considered that there is a
need of seven authorized positions to provide the full
seven day per week 24-hour coverage.
In addition to the above, and several other related mat-
ters, there are certain building regulations that have been
made applicable to nursing homes. Me have been endeavoring
to conform to some of tbs elements of this but there are
certain major factors that will present difficulty. There
is a requirement of two years within which to conform to
these regulations. One example of the situation is the
requirement that no bed be located by a window or by a
radiator or other heating element, lo the Roanoke Nursing
Home situation, to accomplish this would mean the removal
of approximately 20 beds. The Home is licensed for 69 beds.
Up to a year or so ago the Home consisted of 75 beds but
this reduction down to 69 was made in order to conform to
certain preliminary building regulation requirements.
There is also anticipated to be the requirement of a
sprinkler system and certain standby generator equipment.
The summation of all of this is the opinion that the
City ~ould consider a change in purpose of this facility.
In the field of human care there are three classified
levels of care performance.
The first is called skilled care. More and more So-
called homes are going out of business in this regard
because of the extreme complications of requirements on
them and this is being increasln91y relegated entirely
to the hospitals.
The Second descending level is intermediate care. This
is the nursing home type of facility, which the Roan*ia
facility is and this is presenting problems not only to
the Roanoke Home but to a number of others throughout the
State and elsewhere because of much more stringent regula-
tions.
:86
The third level is the home for the aged, This does
not Involve nur~lag care except in certain pavtiomlsr
.circumstances that may arise mith some 6f the patients,
Regulations are much less stringent iud at the sane time
a service is rendered,
It mould be recommended that the~City consider change of
the Roanoke Nursing Home to a facility for the aged, Recog-
nizing both the size of the facility, the requirements being
imposed and the per occupant cost or the specialized per-
sonnel attention and facilities necessary, it is reit that
the City mould be Justified in heading in this direction.
It mould not be recommended that any wholesale movement
of people be initially undertaken but rather that the
approach he, at the first, on the basis of attrition, That
is to say as vacancies eccur in the Home, that patients
requiring nursing care not be taken but rather that these
vacancies be filled by individuals mbo would be in a
category of those going into home for the aged, At the
present time some 20 to 30 of the Home population mould be
in this nursing care category, Then later on if and mhen
the requirements become firm or should other circumstances
develop, any individuals who might hays to be moved out
would be lesser in number and the problem would not be as
difficult.
It would be additionally recommended, and unless Coun-
cil mould otherwise direct, I will accordingly proceed, that
reference of the Licensed Hurse salary situation be referred
to the Director of Personnel for study mith the possibility
of early consideration of upgrading these salaries to a
competitive level with area staadards taking into account
some additional requirement that appears to be applicable to
the City Dome by virtue of its physical location.
As a sidelight to this total situation, the City Coun-
cil may be interested in knomin9 that, commencing just a
few months ago, Miss Jones and the Department of Public
Welfare has done and has in progress a program wherein two
case aides from the Public Welfare Department are going to
the Nursing Home at least one day a week and there work-
ing in an activities program. This consists of some recrea-
tional activ ties, including seming, etc., with other ideas
in mind for development. This has proven very successful
and is opening new avenues of interest and pleasure to many
of the patients and persons at the Home.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
~ulian Fo Hirst
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation Of the proper measure carrying out the recommendations Of the City
Manager. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
ROANOKE VALLEY: The City Manager submitted the following report in
connection with Hurricane Agnes flood emergency funds, recommending that Council
authorize the disbursement of already appropriated flood emergency funds for
justifiable purchases and repairs even though certain of these expenditures mill
not he reimbursed from state and/or federal sources:
"November 20, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
'Roanoke. Virginia
Dentlemeo:
Subject: Hurricane Agnes Flood Emergency Funds
Following the Hurricane Agnes Flood Emergency this
past June, City Council appropriated the sum of $500,000
in order to provide funds which could be drawn upon in order
to proceed with repairs end necessary corrective action, At
that same time n like amount of money was added to the City's
revenue projections in anticipation of reimbursement by
appropriate State and/or Federal agencies.
We did realize at that time. end it mas only through
apparent oversightthat we did not emphasize to Council.
that certain necessary repair items would possibly not be
eligible for State and/or Federal reimbursement. Since.
however, funds mhich were appropriated for the flood emer-
gency anticipated a like amount of reimbursement, me bare
been unable to proceed with necessary repairs and/or replace-
ment of certain destroyed items. These basically Include
park items such as picnic tables, charcoal grills, some
fencing nnd painting, and minor maintenance items. The
amount of money involved is estimated to date at less than
$10.000. It is necessary to proceed with purchase of these
items in order that they be available by next spring when
the porks open.
It is recommended that City Council authorize the dis-
bursement of already appropriated flood emergency funds for
justifiable purchases and repairs even though certain of
these expenditures will not be reimbursed from State and/or
Federal sources.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
Dr. Taylor moved that the report be r~ferred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mt. Lisk and
unanieously adopted.
COL~CIL--CITY ENGINEER-P~CR&SING AGENT: The City Manager submitted the
following report in connection with Resolution No. 19594'appointing specified mem-
bers of the city's administrative staff to a committee for the purpose of
receiving and opening bids made to the City of Roanoke for certain purchases and
concessions, advising that the present Resolution specifies the particular
individuals by name rather than by staff position and recommending that the
staff committee include the perso~s appointed to or serving in an acting capacity
in the following named positions: City Manager, Assistant City Manager, Purchasing
Agent, Director of Public Murks, City Engineer, Director of Parks and Recreation
and Manager of the Mater Department:
"November 20, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
SubJect: Administrative Committee for Did Openings
The City Council has previously adopted Resolution No.
19594 on March 22, 1971, appointing specified members of the
City's admioistrative staff to a committee for the purpose of
publicly receiving and opening bids mede to the City of
Roanoke for certain purchases and concessions. ]his committee
includes seven individuals, any three or more of whom may
sit as a committee for the purpose of opening, reviewing and
making recommendation to City Council in regard to contracts
for the purchase Of supplies and materials.
The present resolutiou referred bereinabove specifies the
particular individuals by name. From time to time with changes
in personnel this has left vacancies on the committee mhlch
cannot be filled without return to City Council for reappoint-
ment of replacements. It would seem that the intent of the
procedure could be as adequately served if the staff positions
could be identified rather thin the individuals by name. It
would further assist the committee In functioning if persons
in tn acting capacity could serve in the interim prior to
permanent replacement of vacant positions.
It is ~commended that the staff committee for the pur-
pose of publicly receiving sad opening certain bids made to
the City for public purchases and concessions include the
persons appointed to or serving an acting capacity in the
following named positions: City Manager, Assistant City
Ranager, Purchasing Agent. Director of Public Works, City
Engineer, Cirector of Parks and Recreation, Homager of the
Water Department*
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager*
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution:
(u20551) A RHSOLtrIION appointing the members of*a committee for the
purpose of publicly receiving and openieg certain bids made to the City for
public purchases and concessions.
(For full text Of Resolution, see Ordinance Hook an?, page 255.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the R~solution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout, and
Mayor Webber .................... ?-
NAYS: None ...........O.
AIRPORT: The City Manager submitted a written report transmitting to
the Mayor the 1971 Air Safety Award which has been given in recognition to the
Roanoke Municipal Airport by the Southeastern Airport Managers' Association,
advising that this award pertains to operations on the airfield and is in recog-
nition, as the award states, of the air safety record that has been achieved and
maintained there.
On behalf of himself and the members of Council, Mayor Webber con-
gratulated Mr. Harshall L. Harris, Manager of Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airporl
and his staff for this award.
AIRPORT: The City Manager submitted a written report advising that n
short time ago Council authorized preparation of an Operations Manual for the
Roanoke Runicipal (Woodrum) Airport by Talbert, Cox and Associates, Incorporated,
said manual to be prepared in coordination with Mr. Marshall L. Harris, Masager
of Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport, pointing out that he would like to
show this manual to the members of Council and that it ~s the first unit of
the City*s compliance with recent FAA requirements.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received nod made a part of the
records of Council. The motion was seconded by Mr, Lisk and unanimously adopted.
MATER DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a written report concur-
ring in the following recommendation of a committee that all bids received for
cleaning and painting the Carroll Avenue Mater Storage Standpipe be rejected
and that this work be considered for funding in the 1973-74 fiscal year budget:
"November 13, 1972
Ilonorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke
Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Bid Opening - Mater Standpipe Painting
Bids wove received in the office of the Purchasing
Agent until 11:00 a.m., October 31, 1972 and publicly
opened by the undersigned committee for cleaning and paint-
ing the interior and/or exterior of Carroll Avenue Mater
Storage Standpipe.
As shomn on the attached tabulation, four bids were
received with L. R. Brown, Sr. Paint Company being low at a
total price of $15,200.00 for painting both the interior and
exterior of the standpipe. The low bidder, however, neg-
lected to include a statement of qualifications and record
of previous similar work as required by the Instruction to
Bidders. Upon request of this information by a number of
the undersigned committee, the low bidder requested that his
bid be rejected. The secofld lowest bid was submitted by
Charlotte Tank Lining Company, Inc., in the total auount
of $22,250.00.
The amount of $12,000.00 is budgeted for this work in
the current budget. It is the recommendation of this com-
mittee that all bids be rejected and this work be considered
for funding in the fiscal year 1973-74 budget.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Milllam F. Clark
S/ B. B. Thompson
S/ Kit B. gi.ser~
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution rejecting all bids received ua the
project:
(a20552) A RESOLUTION rejecting all bids received for cleanin9 and
painting the Carroll Avenue Mater Storage Standpipe.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book a3T, page 257.)
Mr. Trout mnved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ..... -~- ............. 7.
NAYS: Noue ...........
AUDITS-PENSIONS: The City Auditor submitted a written report trans-
mitting an audit of the Employees* Retire=eat System of the City of Roanoke,
Virginia, for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1972, made by the firm of Eennett
and Kennetto Certified Public Accountants.
Mr. Lisk moved that the report and audit be received and filed. The
~ntion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
TRAFFIC-PLANNING: The City ~lonnlng Commission submitted the followin!
report recommending that the City of Roanoke provide each of the Planning
Commission members with necessary parking within u block's radius of the Munici-
pal Building for regularly scheduled City Planning Commission meetings:
"November 16, 1972
The Honorable Roy L. Mebber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
The Planning Commission members have noted the diffi-
culty in finding adequate parking spaces for their regular-
ly scheduled meetings on the first and third Rednosdays of
each month. They pointed out that this problem has
resulted, in many instances, in their late arrival for a
Planning Commission meeting; a resultant situation in which
50 to 100 citizens of Roanoke are kept waiting for a meeting
to begin. Also. it mas painted out by the Planning Commis-
sion members that in a majority of cases, they are forced
to park six or seven blocks away from the Municipal Building.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and unani-
mously approved recommending to City Council that the City
of Roanoke provide each of the Planning Commission members ,
with necessary parking within a block's radius of the Muni-
cipal Build~ng for regularly schedulod Planning Commission
Sincerely,
S/ Creed K. Lemon, Jr., by L~
Creed K. Lemon, Jr.
Mr. Lisk moved that the report be referred to the City Manager for
consideration in connection with his overall study of municipal parking
needs. ~he motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously a~opted.
Mr. Garland further moved that the City Planning Commission members be
Wednesday meetings and for any specially called meeting of the City Planning
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a written report in
connection with the request of Messrs. Harold N. Harris. Jr.. and Rilliam N.
Hall. that property located in the 2500 black of Broadway Avenue and Stephensoa
Avenue, S. M., described as Lots I and 2, Block l, Collehon Addit'on, Official
Tax Nos, 1160109, 1160110 and 1160113, be rezoned from RS-3, Single-Family
Residential District, to C-l, Office and Institutional District, advising that
themselves from the voting, it is the recommendation of the City Planning
Commission that Council receive this resuming petition without an official
recommendation from the City Planning Commission.
Mr. Zhomas expressed the opinion that when Council refers an item to
mendat:on from that body and that the request for resuming should be referred
back to the City Planning Commission for the purpose of making a recommendation.
Mr. Trout moved that u public hearing on the request for rezonlng be
held st 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, December 26, 1972, in the Council Chamber. The
motion mas seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a mrltten report
recommending thus the request of Mr. lllllam ~enney, et al.. that property
fronting on the northerly side of Renorisl Avenue between Cambridge'Avenue and
Deuniston Avenue, So M., and at the southmestern corner of Memorial Avenue and
Dennlston Ar.uae, S. [., described us Lots 5. 6, and 10. Hogan Duilding Company
Dap. Official Tax Nos. 1330118° 153011? and 1330134. and Lots 15 and 14. Block
5, ¥irglnin Heights. Official Tax Nos. 1330303 and 1330302. be rezoned from
C-l, Office and Institutional District, to C-2, General Commercial District, be
denied.
In this connection, the Deputy City Clerk reported that Mr. Jack B.
Coulter, Attorney. representing the petitioners, has advised her office that his
client desires a public hearing on the rezonin9 request.
Mr. Trout moved that a public hearing on the request for rezonin9
be held at 7:30 p.m., Tuesday. December 26, 1972, in the Council Chamber. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted the following report
recommending that the request of Rr. J. Ranter Roberts that property located
in the 500 block of Albemarle Avenue, S. K., described as Lot 14, Block 8.
Roanoke Land ~ Improvement Map. Official Tax No. 402171D. be rezoned from RD.
Duplex Residential District, to RG-2. General Residential District, be denied:
"November 16, 1972
The Donorable Roy L. Webber. Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of November 15.
1972.
Mr. Roberts appeared before the Planning Commission and
stated that this property bas an old dwelling situated on it
which is beyond repair. Re further stated that this rezonlng
request is being made in order to recover as much value with
the land as possible and that he proposes to put n one b~.ldin9
apartment house mith four units on the lot even though it
mould be possible for a six-unit apartment to be built on it.
The Planning Commission members were presented three
letters in opposition to this rezoning by the neighbors of
this area generally stating that the lot would be too small
to accommodate so many apartment units and that there would
be no room left for a play area for the children and they
would have to play in the street or the alley. Mr. Roberts
Stated that there was not enough adequate room for a play
area and that the four units would each have 2 bedrooms.
air conditioning and carpetin9.
After discussion by the Planning Commission members, it
was generally agreed that this request did not represent the
best possible use of the land and represented a clear case Of
spot zoning.
Mr. Coleman disqualified himself from voting because of
a personal interest in the petition.
Acco£dJngly, motion wes made, duly seconded end approved
with a vote of five (5) ayes recommending to City Council
that this request be denied.
Sincerely,
S! Creed K. Lemon, Jr** by LM
Creed K. Lemon, Jr.
Chairman"
In this connection, a communication from Mr. Roberts requesting that
his petition for rezoning be amended to provide for a RC-I, General Residential
District, instead of a RG-2, General Residential District, was also before
Council.
Rt. Trout moved that the amended request of Rt. Roberts be referred
back to the City Planning Commission for study, report and recommendation to
Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted,
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a written report
recommending that the request of Messrs. Elmer R. Cox and Laurence E. Peters
that property located on Redwood Road. S. E., and Dundee Avenue. S. E., descrlb~
as Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 11. 12. 13 and 14, Section 4, Map of Rosewood park Corpor-
ation, Official Tax Nos. 4440722, 4440723, 4440724, 4440725, 4440706, 4440705,
4440?04 and 4440703. be rezoned from RD. Duplex Residential District. to RG-1,
General Residential District. be granted.
Rr. Trout moved that a public hearing on the request for rezontng be
held at ?:30 p.m.. Tuesday. December 26. 1972. in the Council Chamber. The
notion was seconded by Rr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a written report in
connection with the request of Messrs. Donald G. Sink and F. Earl Frith, that
property located in the gO0 block of ¥inton Mill Road, N. E., described as the
westerly 200.0 feet of Lots 1. 2 and 3o according to the subdivision plat of
C. A. Plasters and R. C. Johnson, dated Ray 3, 1952, Official Tax Nos. 3330506
and 3330505, be rezoned from C-l, Office and Institutional District. to C-2,
General Comnerclal District, recommending that the request be granted.
Rt. Trout moved that a public hearing on the request for rezonin9 be
held at 7:50 p.m., Tuesday, December 26, 1972. in the Council Chamber. The
notion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a written report in
connection with the request of Mr. Donald E; Phillips, et ux., that
property located in'the $100 block of Roodbury Street, N. M., described as Lot
16, Block 10, Map of Air Lee Court, Official Tax No. 2190316, be rezoned from
RS-3, Single-Family Residential District. to C-1. Office and Institutional
District, recommending that the request be granted.
Mr. Trout moved that a public.hearing on the request for rezonin9 be
held at 7:90 p.m., Tuesday, December 26. 1972, in the Council Chamber. The
motion mas seconded by Rr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF CORM1TTEES:
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: Mr. #. Carl Andrews. Preaident Of the Mill
Mountain Development Committee, appeared before Council and presented the follomia
report requesting the authorization of Council to proceed with plans for a garden
area on Mill Mountain as a site for the memorial marker for the late J. 0.
Pishburn and that a specific appropriation be made at a later date uhen the City
Engineer has had an opportunity to complete all plans:
*November 20, 1972
To: Hon. Mayor and Members
City Council of Roanoke
Gentlemen:
The purpose of my appearance is to ask for authoriza-
tion to proceed with plans for garden area on Mill Mountain
as a site for the memorial marker for the late J. 6. Flshburn.
7his requires a brief review of past events.
On April 25, 1971, I appeared before you to present
the request of the Mill Mountain Development Committee that
the new road up the north and east faces of the mountaio be
named in honor of Mr. Fishburn and that a suitable bronze
marker be erected on a monument of native stone at some
appropriate point along the said Fishburn Parkway.
Council referred this to City Manager Birst for recom-
On May 3, 1971, reported and set forth tentative plans
for dedication ceremonies. In his haste, mhlch he noted
The same day, May 3, Council adopted an ordinance
designating the name of J. B. Fishburn Parkway, but in the
absence of an~ recommendation, failed to include the
Dedication ceremonies were conducted May 17, 1971, but
On October 25 of this year, Mr. Hirst asked Rex
sunmary of the status of all projects related to the Mountain.
I met with Mr. Mitchell twice in preparing this report.
De then called a meeting of interested parties for Nov. 14,
includin9 Assistant City Manager Clark, City Engineer McGhee,
Blue Ridge Parkway Planner Joe Beer, representatives of the
Mill Mountain and Magic City garden clubs and myself.
Mr. Deer had completed last August a landscaping plan
for the memorial site at the intersection of the Fishburn
Parkway with the Blue Ridge Parkway spur, being paid from
available funds for this service.
The Magic City Garden Club, which approached the Develop-
cost Of planting around the proposed memorial at o cost of
$400 to $500 with possible subsequent beautification.
At the meeting on Nov. 14 it was agreed that Mr.
McGhee would expect to have plans ready by Dec. 31 for
undertaking bids on work for the Mildflower Gardeo pre-
viously approved by Council; it being further agreed that
work such as grading and landfill on the memorial marker
site might well be undertaken at the same time.
was $0,000 but this did not include the cost of designing
and erectin9 the memorial itself.
The consensus uus that the overnll cgst will be betmeen
$8,000 and $10,000 ond I was asked to uppenr before you
today with request thut you authorize us to proceed with ·
planning nnd development of th~ project. We would ask for
the specific appropriation later when the City Englneer*s
office his had opportunity to complete all plans.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ R. Carl Andreus
R. Carl Andrews
Chairman
Rill Rountoin Development Committee"
Hr. Trout moved that Council concur in the request of the Hill Moun-
tain Development Committee. The motion vas seconded by Mr. Garland and
unanimously adopted.
AMBULANCES-ROANOKE VALLEY REGIONAL HEALTH SERVICES PLANNING COUNCIL,
INCORPORATED: Council having previously requested that the City Manager and
the City Attorney review the proposed ambulance Ordinance with Hr. R. G. Creasyo
Attorney, representing certain life saving crews in the Roanoke Valley. and to
submit a further report to Counc:l at its meeting on Honday, November 20,
1972, the matter mas again before the body.
In this connection, the Assistant City Hanager end the City Attorney
submitted the following joint report in connection wlth a conference which was
held math representatives of local life saving crews relative to a proposed -
ambulance services Ordinance, advising ~hat it was tho consensus of those present
at the meeting that additional time should be allowed by Council for
further consideration by the local life satin9 crews of the proposed Ordinance.
it being felt that approximately three weeks may be necessary to develop a
considered position in regard to the matter, accordingly, the committee recom-
mends that Council continue the matter generally until such time as the life
saving crews have advised the committee of their several positions with respect
to the Ordinance:
"November 20, 1972
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
At the Council meeting held November 6th, the proposed
ordinance setting up certain regulations relating to the
operation of ambulances and ambulance services in the City
was referred to the City Manager and the City Attorney with
directions to the latter to meet with representatives of
local life saving crews in an attempt to reconcile any
objections which those groups migh~ have to the proposed
ordinance.
A conference has been held by the undersigned with the
following: William G. Creasy and C. E. Cuddy, Attorneys
representing two of the local life saving crews; Boyd Shaver.
a crew member;'Robert Taylor, representing a local commer-
cial ambulance service; Frank Mays and Dale Dyiugton. of the
Regional Health Services Planning Council; and Willia~ F.
Clark. H. Hen 3ones. Jr., and the undersigned, carrying out
the committee assignment.
A lengthy, frank and, hopefully, productive discussion
of the intended objectives of the proposed ordinance ensued but
did not. at this point, result in full accord as to what. if
any. changes should be made in the provisions of the ordinance
now before the Council, although all of those present did
agree upon one minor change in the penalty section of the
ordinance which would clarify that section with reference to
persons using the voluntary services of local life saving and
first aid crews. That change will be later reported to the
Council in more detail.
Further. it seemed generally agreed that such action
as is taken by' local governing bodies toward prescribing some
regulation of all ambulance services would be better taken If
all or substantially all such localities provide essentially
similar regulations.
Representatives of the local life saving crews pointed out
no specific provision of the proposed ordinance as being
objectionable; rather, at the outset of the conference their
objection was aimed at the overall concept of the proposal,
I.e.. the aim towards a coordination, with some degree of
regulation, of the efforts of all of those agencies, commer-
cial and volunteer, who are engaged in providing emergency
and other ambulance services to the public within the City
and In thom other localities represented bY the Roanoke Valley
Regional Health Services Planning Council.
Believing that the objection stated by sane of the
local life saving crews to any type of local regulatlon over
or coordination of their operation with others may largely'
arise out of a lack of understuudin9 of the reasons
advanced in behalf of the proposed ordinance and of its
applicability to the three local life saving crew organizations.
it was suggested at the conference that each of the three
organizations arrange at their next weekly meeting of their
members to consider in depih the provisions of the afore-
said ordinance and immediately thereafter to advise the under-
signed and the Council, definitively, their position with
respect to the ordinance and, If found to be objectionable
in whole or in part, to specify those provisions which appear
objectionable. Mr. Mays offered to attent the meeting of each
life saving crew, so as to present the views of the Study
Group of the Health Services Planning Council, which developed
the ordinance; and arrangements were made at the conference
for his attendance at the meeting of the Williamson Road Life
Saving Crew. Mr. Clark is contacting each of the other two
local life savin9 crews to ask that such meetinRs be held by
their own groups, at which meetings, Mr. Mays offered to be
present.
It was the consensus cf those present that additional
time should be allowed by the Council for further consideration
by the local life saving crews of the proposed ordinance, it
being felt that approximately three weeks may be necessary to
develop a considered position in regard to the matter.
Accordingly, the undersigned recommend to the Council that
the Council continue the matter generally until such time
as the life savinR crews have advised the undersigned of
their Several positions w/th respect to the ordinance.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ J. N, Kincanon, City Attorney
S/ MiRiam F. Clark, Assistant
City Manager"
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the joint report of the Assis-
tant City Manager and the City Attorney. The motion was seconded by Br. Thomas
and unanimously adopted.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: ~ONE.
INTRODUCTION AND ,CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLLrfIONS:
SALE OFPROPERTY: Ordinance No, 20544, accepting the offer of Mr. W. G.
Blevins to purchase and acquire from the citI that certain parcel of land contain-
ing 9,?00 square feet, more or less, situate in Roanoke County, and adjoining an
:96
easterly portion of the line of Lot 6, Block 5, Bop of Green Valleys, and con-
sisting of a former well lot together with a release of the city's right, title
and interest In end t6 a certain easement and right of way through Lot 6, afore-
said, extending from said well lot to Colony Lane, for a consideration of
$fiO0.O0 cash, having previously been before Council for. Its first reading,
read and laid over, was again before the body, Hr. Trout offering the follow-
ing for its second reading and final adoption:
(a20544) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and providing for the Clty*s sale
and conveyance of a parcel of land containing 9,?00 square feet, wore'or less,
and consisting of a former well lot, and release of the City*s rights to a
certain easement in Lot 8, Bloch 5, as shown on the Map of Green Valleys. in the
County of Roanoke. and bela9 a portion of the properties and rights acquired
by the City from the Care Spring Mater Company, upon certain terms and condi-
tions.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Hook a37, page 253.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Br. Thomas and adopted by the followlng vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Nayor
Mebber ..........................
NAYS: None ........... O.
ROANOKE VALLEY: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare
the proper measure requesting and seeking Congressional support for lundin9 of
the Wilmington Oistrict Corps of Engineers flood control study for the upper
basin of the Roanoke River, he presented same, whereupon, Mr. Trout offered the
following Resolution:
(=20553) A RESOLUTION requesting and seeking Congressional support for
funding of the Nilmington District Corps of Engineers' flood control study for
the upper basin of the Roanoke River.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Hook n37, page 258.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Ta~lor and adopted by the followlng vote:
AYES: Ressrs. Garland, Rubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Rebber .................... 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
Mr. Lisk moved that copy of Resolution No. 20553 be transmitted to the
City of Salem, Town of Vinton and County o~ Roanoke with the request that their
consideration be given toward adopting similar Resolutions. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
ROANOKE VALLEY-FIRE DEPARTMENT: Mrs, Cecil B. McBride, 401 Arbor Avenul
S. E., appeared before Council and advised that her home is located along
Roanoke River, that during the Hurricane Agnes flood in June, 1972, her basement
had sJ~ feet of water, that she mas told by personnel of the City of Roanoke to
telephone the Fire Department and they would send someone to her hone to pump
the water out of her basement, that the Fire Department pumped the water out of
her basement but did not advise her thor there would be a charge for this service,
therefore; this fee was not included in her flood damage claims for federal
relief funds, that a bill in the amount of $50.00 mas sent to her after the flood
damage claims for federal relief had been turned in and that now she has received
a subpoena to appear ia Municipal Court on November 22, 1972, at 2 p.m., for a
judgment in the amount of $50.00 representing the cost of pumping mater from her
basement.
la a discussion of the matter, the City Manager advised that this is a
policy of billing those people to whom equipment has been dispatched, that there
were fifty-eight such situations handled by the Fire Department during the
Ilurrlcane Agnes flood with charges ranging from $10.00 to
Mr. Link advised that he does not question tbe charge but tbe method
of billing these people, that the city should have gotten the bill to the people
in sufficient time to include the bill in their application with other claims
for flood damage and that the city has been somewhat' negligent in not getting
the bill to then in sufficient time.
Dr. ?aylor expressed the opinion that there must be n better way of
handling a situation like this, that it does not put the City of Roanoke in a
very good light when it has to sue its citizens and that he does not think this
is the proper precedure to be followed.
Dr. Taylor then moved that the city withdraw the suit against Mr. and
Rrs. Cecil R. McBride. The motion was seconded by Rr. Thomas.
Mr. Lisk offered a substitute motion that the City Manager he directed
to check into the billing procedure nad method of collecting for various services
rendered by the City of Roanoke and report to Council accordingly. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Br. Thomas further moved that the City Attorney be instructed to take
a non-suit in the pending court case of the City of Roanoke versus Cecil R.
McBride, said case having been scheduled for ~ovember 22, 1972, at 2 p.m., in
the Municipal Court for a judgment in the amount of $50.00 representing the
cost of pumping water from a basement at 40~ Arbor Avenue, S. E. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimouoly adopted.
DL~GET-PARK$ AND PLAYGROUNDS: Mayor Mebber presented the following
communication transmittin9 a communication from Dr. Roscoe D. Hughes advising
that the next step in development of a Museum facility for the Roanoke Valley
area is the preparation of a master plan which would evaluate the entire Rill
Mountain Park area and include such information as the scope of an initial faci-
lity, projectings as to future growth, the relationship of the facility to the
region, estimated operating cost and certain other factors and pointing out that
it seems logical for each region to seek the needed balance of $8.750.~0 from
a fen loc,: -Jtizens who have shown an interest in the Museum facility and that
these funds must be available on or before November 15. 1972. to take advantage.
of the savings noted in the communication:
*November 3. 1972
The Honorable Roy L. Webber
Mayor. City of Roanoke
City Hall
Roanoke, Virginia
It mas a pleasure meeting with yon, the other represen*
tatives from the City of Roanoke, and officials from the
surrounding jurisdictions yesterday. Your kind invitation to
lunch was also most appreciated.
The meeting, I felt. was indeed fruitful, in that all
those present agreed that a Museum facility of the highest
quality should be established in the Roanoke Valley area.
This facility would serve citizens throughout the southwestern
part of the state and elsewhere, with professional programs
dealing with many aspects of science.
To reiterate, the next step in development of a Museum
facility for the Western Division is the preparation of a
master plan which would evaluate the entire Mill Mountain
Park area. as authorized by Roanoke City Council; and include
such information as the scope of an initial facility, projec-
tions as to future growth, the relationship of the facility
to the region, estimated operating cost, and other factors
noted in the material distributed yesterday.
When completed, and approved by the Virginia Art Com-
mission, the master plan would provide the kind of definitive
information needed by the Hoard of Trustees andother state
agencies to make final determinations as to phasing, scope.
nod location 5f the facilities under study. It sill also
be of value in soliciting funds from non-state sources.
For economic and other considerations, it is extreme'ly
important that master planning for all four regions under·
study be done simultaneously. RTKL, Inc.~ our planning con-
sultants, have established a cost of $12,750 per region if
they are planned together; and a cost of up to $15.000 if done
individually.
The Museum Trustees have allocated $4,000 per region,
from State funds, toward a master plan. Since no other State
funds are available at this time, it would seem most logical
for each region to seek'the needed balance of SD,TSO from
a few local citizens who have shown au interest in the Museum
facility under consideration. These funds must be available
on or before November 15 to take advantage-of the savings
noted above.
Such funds would be placed in the Science Museum of
Virginia Foundation, Inc.. for later payment to the consul-
tant. The Fonndation would then serve as the contractural
agent, and in order to proceed with the planning, the capital
outlay funds must be Jn hand. OF a firm commitment secured
from those who pledged that it will be available on request.
The Foundation, i~cidentally, has qualified for non-
private status under the Internal Revenue Service Code, and
contributions are tax deductible accordingly.
As you know, when the master plan is completed, subse-
quent steps con be taken that would hopefully lead to the
Board's recommendation for funding and establishment of a
major facility in the Western Division.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely yours,
S/ Roscoe D. Hughes
Roscoe D. Hughes"
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur In the request of Or. Hughes and
offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating $6,750.00 to Regional
Science Ruseum nuder Section a6g, *Trnnsfers to Capital Imprnvements Fond** of
the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds in connection with the establishment of n
Museum facility for the RoanokeValley area atop Mill Mountain:
(n20554) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section #69**Transfers
to Capital Improvements.' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing
for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook =37, page 259.)
Mr. T~out moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion 'mas seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted hy the folloming vote:
AYES: Hessra. Garland, Hubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Hebber .................... 7.
NAYS:. Hone ...........
COUHCIL; Mr. Hubard moved that Council meet Jn Executive Session for
the purpose of discussing possible appointments to committees, boards and commis-
slows. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas amd adopted by the following yule:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Bubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber .................... 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
MUNICIPAL BUILDING-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM: Mr. Hubard presented
the following communication recommending that the Regional Courthouse Committee
study the concept of a regional courthouse facility for the Roanoke Valley govern-
ments and make a report of their study as soon as practicable, but no later than
January 15, 1973, and that any further work on the plans for remodeling of the
existing courthouse bl deferred until this report is received:
"HEM COI~RTHOUSE FACILITIES FOR THE CiTY OF ROANOKE
November 15, 1972
To: The Honorable Roy L. Webber and
Hembers of Roanoke City Council
Gentlemen. I sense a real feeling of urgency among all
members of Council to proceed with the completion of the
capital improvements approved by our voters, by a near
to-I margin, in ~he $10.O00.000 bond referendum on November
T. 1972. This referendum included a sum of $2,266.000 for
new courthouse facilities.' With current funds of $3000,000
on hand, we have a total of $2,568,000 for this purpose.
As yom know. Council appointed Mr. Link and me to a
Regional Corrections Steering Committee of the Fifth Plan-
ning District. This Committee has endorsed the concept of
a Regional Corrections Program, including a regional jail,
for the Roanoke Valley. You have asked this Committee to
submit to you a draft of a cooperation agreement for such a
Regional Corrections Program. Me are hard at work On this
endeavor and hopefully will have this task completed soon.
In the dellberatio~s of this CommJltee. 'the relation-
ship bets*au the proximity of jail and courthouse facilltes
has been discussed on a number of occasions. By endorsing
the Regional Corrections Program, the Committee has said
that, in its judgment, it is desirable to place a regional
jail at a site removed at least three miles from any of the
Valley Courthouses. Homever, in viem of the fact that
100
(l)-there are obvious advantages to having courthouse
facilities contiguous to Jail facilities--obviates the need
for a sepsrote intake center for one--and"(2) the obvious
inadeqoscies of nil.courthouses in the Valley, it seems
apparent that now is the time to answer the question, 'Is
a regional courthouse feasible for the Roanoke Valley?'
Admitting my lack in experience in this field and a
tendency to oversimplify an obviously very complex pr*holm,
indulge me the temerity of trying to ansmer a much narrower,
though related, question, wis it economically feasible fo~
Roanoke City to participate in a regiona! Jail and courthouse
In a'study entitled 'Courts, Jail and Related Faci-
lities Study," dated September 25, 1970. prepared by Hayes,
Sony, Rattern and Mattern for the City of Roanoke, it was
estimated that new jail facilities for Roanoke alone would
cost $4.375,000. with no estimate shown for land costs, lo
a report from City Manager Hlrst to Council, dated January
24. lg?2, the cost of a new Jail for Roanoke alone mas
estimated to be $3.100,O00, again mJth no land costs shown.
If this facility mere constructed on any site in the immedi-
ate vicinity of our existing courthouse, land costs would be
9250,000 at a minimum. Thus, jail facilities for Roanoke
along, based on Mr. Ilirst's lower estimate, would cost
us $3,350,000.
In Mr. Rirst'a report of January 24, he estimated the
cost of remodeling our existing courthouse to be 92,4OO,OO0.
On the other hand, if we mere to 9o the regional route,
the 'Regional Corrections pr*gram for Roanoke Valley, Virginia."
dated July 1972. by flellmuth, abate and Kassobaum and Wilbur
Smith nad Associates. gives an estimated cost of a regional
corrections facility for Salem. Vinton. Craig County, Roanoke
County, and Roanoke. based upon the concepts espoused there,
to be 92.1OO.O00. This cost does not include the cost of an
intake center. The cost Of this. from the aforementioned
program, is conservatively estimated at 9150.000.
As to the cost of a regional courthouse, on estimate can
he made based upon the Hayes. Seoy Study of September 25,
In that study.an immediate need mas indicated for 47,700
square feet for courthouse space. This includes 17,OOO needed
for four courtrooms which are all the courtrooms needed in a
regional courthouse. This leaves o net of SO,?** square feet
of non-courtroom space needed in the courthouse. Surely no
more than twice this amount of non-courtroom space would be
needed for a regional courthouse. So we may project a need
for 78.400 (17,000 ~ 2 x 30.7OO) square feet needed for a
regional courthouse. Using the estimated cost (excluding
demolition and other non-applicable costs to new construction)
of 95.O40.O00 for a dew Roanoke courthouse (100.O00 square feet)
from the September 25, 1970, study, an estimated cost of
$3,951,360 is generated for a regional courthouse.
An adequate site for this regional jail and courthouse
complex mould cost at least 91,OOO,000.
The aforementioned Regional Corrections Program recommends
that the capital cost of a regional jail be shared by the
participants pro rata on a population basis; Roanoke has
percent of the population of all five participating j~ris-
dictions. If the capital costs *fa regional courthouse
were shared on a similar basis, Craig County mould likely
be excluded, and Roanokets percentage mould be 46.8 percent.
The foil*ming schedule indicates, baaed upon the above,
the relative costs, to the City of Roanoke, of'(l) buildin9
our own jail and courthouse facilities at the site of our
existing courthouse or (2) joining in.the building of a
regional jail and courthouse on an adequate site elsemhere:
Roanoke Regional
Alone (Roanoke's Share)
Jail 93.100,000 $1,035,000
Courthouse 20400,000 1.849,236 (46.8%)
Land .250.000 470,000 (47~)
$5,750.000 $3.354.236
This shows quite clearly that Roanoke could save
92.395.764 by joining in a regional plan,'without any State or
Federal grants. A review of available grants indicates the
possibility of State and Federal 9rants of approximately
91.OOO.0OO if a regional jail is built in the Roanoke Valley.
This would benefit Roanoke to the extent of its 46-percent
interest and reduce its share of the regional jail cost by
$460,000 and increase its potential savings from a regional
approach to $2,B65,Tb4.
Aa previously noted, me have available $2,568,000 for
the courthouse. Also, Council htr indicated that our 1972
Revenue Sharing funds of approximately $2,000.000 mill be used
to provide neu Jail facilities. The total available funds of
$4,$b6,000 are more than sufficient to pay our share of n
regional Jail and courthouse facility.
However important the savings of nearly $3,000.D06 is
to our City, I viem as equally important other obvious bene-
fits: (ii we mould obtain facilities mhich uould havebeen
designed from the ground upa end mould obviously more ade-
quately serve our needs, mith ample adjacent parking, and
(2) they mould have the flexibility to serve the needs of our
Valley for the foreseeable future, regardless of future annex-
ation or consolidation developments.
This Coancil on Hatch 22. 1971, by Resolution 19595
appointed nemhersof a regional courthouse facilities
mittee and charged it to 'study the concept of.a regional
courthouse facility for the Roanoke Valle~ governments and
to make report of its studies and of recommendations based
thereon as soon as is practicable, but not later than June
1, 1971.#
I recommend that Council:
(1) Request this regional facilities committee to report
to CQuncil as to its charge as soon as practicable, but not
later than January 150
(2) Defer any further mork on the plans for remodeling
of the existing courthouse until this report is received.
S/ William S. Hubord
Councilman
*ExteflsJF~ re~odelln~ o~ th~ ~JstJn~ WunJcJ~;! Buildinq.
as ~rooosed in Plan B. ~ould be very expensive due
~ainlv to chanoes reouired to create another Court Of
Record. chan~s reouJred for compliance with State an~d
Local Fire Safety Reou~rements elus
eechapical ~JL~_~j~trical systems. T_~oes could
be expected to exceed~e cost of eo~j~L~.l~t~£~ con-
struction. 'Courts, Jail a~ Related Facilities Study,"
September 25, 1970.~
Mr. Hubard moved that the Regional Courthouse Committee be requested
report to Council on the charqe ~ivea
practicable but not later than January 15, 1973, and that the City Manager be
requested to defer any further ~ork on the plans for remodelin9 of the existln9
and unantaously adopted.
~ith reference to the Regional Courthouse Committee, Mr. Hubard
advised that the present committee is outdated, and moved that the President of
the Roanoke Bar Association be appointed to replace Mr. 3oh~ H. Locke as a ~e~ber
of the ReGional Courthouse Committee and that Mayor ~ebber be requested to
appoint an additional member to this committee. The motion ~as seconded by Dr.
Taylor and unanimously adopted.
Mayor ~ebber the~ appointed the President of the Roanoke Bar Associa-
tion and Mr. ~illiam S. Hubard as additional members of the Regional Courthouse
Committee.
CITY ENGINEER: Mr. Lisk requested that the City ManaGer briefly
advise Council as to the procedure beln9 followed for the collection of leaves
throughout the City of Roanoke.
The Assistont City Manager advised that based upon charts kept in the
Department of'Public Mocks, the leaf collection process'has been completed three
times throughout the city this fall, that o notice appears in the nemspsper
informing citizens when city crews will be in their vicinity in order for them
to get their leaves out to the street and that it takes approximately omo to
three weeks to completely cover the City of Roanoke.
COUNCIL-SALE OF PROPBR~Y: Mr, Lisk moved that Council meet in Execu-
tive Session on a real estate matter. The motion mas seconded by Mr, Hubard and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Dubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Treut and
Mayor Webber .................... Y.
NAYS: None ........... O.
BUDGET-GITV EMpLOYEBSoPAYPLAN: Mr. Thoma~ presented a written com-
munication advising that the 15 member Citizens* Committee met for its Organ-
izational Meeting on Tuesday, November 14. 1972, at which time Mr. James A. Ford
was elected Chairman of the Committee. Mr. Millian R. Reid was elected Vice
Chairman and Mrs. Claudia A. Mhitworth was elected Secretary, that the Commit-
tee has started its mock and it was the general feeling of all those present
that an appropriation of $500.00 should be nude available for their use as
needed.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the request of the Citizens*
Committee for said funds and offered the folloming emergency Ordinance:
(m20555) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section mi, 'Council,"
of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, @age 260,)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AVES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webbez 7.
NAYS: None O.
There being no further business. Mayor Mebber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST: ~,......_~._..._
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Mouday, November 27, 1972,
The Council of the City of Moanohe met in regular meeting in the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, November 2T, 1972, ut 7:30
p,m., with Mayor Roy Lo'lebber presiding,'
PRESENT: Mayor Roy L. lebber .1,
ABSENT: Councilmen Robert'A. Garland,.Mlllium S. Bubard, David
Lisk, Noel C. Taylor, Hampton W. Thomas-and James O. Trout ....................
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Julian F.'Hirst, City Manager; Mr. James
Klocanoo, City Attorney; NFo A. No Gibson, City Auditor; and Miss Virginia
Shaw, City Clerk.
INVOCATION: The'meetin9 was opened with a prayer by Mayor Mebber.
A quorum failing to appear, Mayor Mebber declared the meeting ad-
journed.
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk
APPROVED
Mayor
103
COUNCIL, REGULAR ~EETING,
Wonday, December 4. 1972.
The Council of the Ciky of Ronnohe met in regular meeting in the Coun-
cil Chamber in thq Runicipal flpiidiug, Moodsy. December 4, lg?2, ak 2 p.m.. the
regular meeting hour. nith Mayor Roy L,.Webber presiding.. . .
PRE~I~NT: Councilmen Robert A, Garland! William S. Hubsrd, David
Llsk, Noel C..Taylor,.Hampton #. Thomas (~r. Thomas arrived nt the meeting at
.approximately R:20 p.m.) and.Mayor Roy L. Webber ..........
AHSI~NT: Councilman James O..Trout ............... 1.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Rro Julian F. Rlr~t,.Ci~y Manager~ Mr. Milldam F.
Clark, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Kincanon, City Attorney; Mr. H.
Ben Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorney; and Mr. A. N. Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend
James F. Van Dyke, Pastor, Covenant Presbyterian Church.
KINI~ES: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday,
November bo 1972. having been furnished each member of Council, on notion of
Mr. Lisk, seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof
was dispensed nith and the minutes approved as recorded.
HEARING OF CITIZENS L~ON PUBLIC RATTERS:
SCBOOLS: Council having set a public hearing for 2 p.m.. #onday.
December 4. 1972. on the request of Virginia Western Community College to lease
airspace, upon certain terms and conditions, over the right of way of Colonial
Avenue. S. R., in the City of Roanohe for a term of sixty years for the con-
struction of n building that will join the campuses of said College situate on
either side of Colonial Avenue, the matter nas before the body.
The City Planning Commission submitted the foIloming report recommend-
ing that the request be granted:
"September 7, 1972
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of September
1972.
Dr. Bopper appeared before the Planning Commission and
stated that Virginia Western Community College has ?1 acres,
much of which is hilly and that divided by Colonial Avenue
are two educational buildings, one on the south campus and
the other on the north campus. He further stated that this
problem of tying together the two campuses nas given to
Kinsey* Shone & Associates.
Mr. Roy R. Kinsey appeared before the planning Commis-
sion and one of bis firm*s associates, Mr. Fry, discussed
the use of the 'air-rights* to connect the two structures.
Re presented drowiog$ depicting the connection of the two
campuses from a physical, social, horizontal and vertical
view point. Mr. Fry stated that both campuses are on hills
and that the plan called for I structure of equal height to
connect the two. He further stated that there ere two
wain entrances to the school; one, u stairmay, for the stu-
dents and another, elevator, located on both the south side
and north side of Colonial Avenue. The elevator entrance
providing an entrance for physically handicapped ~ersons.
He noted that uhen Colonial Avenue becomes a four lane
divided highway, it would present 8 problem for the students
using both campuses,
Mr, Lawrence, Planning Commission member, asked ff the
plan allowed for the dividing and widening of Colonial
Avenue and ir the number of elevators mould meqt the needs
of the students.
Mr. Fry ansmered that the setback for the building mas
IlO feet, nlloming more than enough spsce for the future
midening and division of Colonial Avenue. He further answered
that the elevators were provided for the faculty, the handicap-
ped and for maintenance operations, the healthy students
mould use the stairs prorlded on each side of the campus.
Hr. Kinsey stated that the State Art Commission thought
the plan a great concept, and he further noted that this
concept is being practiced in Jacksonville and other cities.
After a general discussion by the Planning Commission
members, it was generally agreed.that this mas a good
concept and mould materially assist in enhancing bgth Virginia
Western Community College and the community.
Accordingly, motion nos made, duly seconded and unani-
mously approved recommending to City Council to grant this
request.
Sincerely,
~/ Creed K. Lemon. Jr** by LM
Creed K. Lemon~ Jr.
Chairman"
In this connection, a communication from Mr. J. E. Harwood, Deputy
Commissioner and Chief Engineer. Department of Highmays. advising that he has been
requested by Commissioner Douglas D. Fugate to look into the request of Virginia
Mestern Community College os outlined in Resolution No. 20536, pointing out that
on previous occasions the Commissioner has requested that he review certain plans,
aud. if satisfactory, so advise him and that upon receipt of certification from
the City cf Roanoke that the city bas held a public hearing after due public
notice and intention to adopt sn Ordinance granting permission to Virginia West-
ern Community College, then the Commissioner of Highways will he in a position to
give his consent, was before Conical.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the communication from the
Department of Highways and offered the foll~wing 8psolution certifying that o
public bearing has been held before the Council of the City of Roanoke on the
matter of leasing airspace oyer Colonial Avenue, S. M.. to Virginia Western Com-
munity College for the purpose of constructing a building over said right of way
and indicating the inten~ion of Council to lease such airspace to Virginia West-
ern Community College upon ~eceipt of approval from the State Highway Commis-
sioner:
(~2055b) A RESOLUTION c~rtifying that a public hearing has been held
before the Council on the matter of leasing airspace over' Colonial Avenue, S. W.,
to Virginia Western Community College for the purpose of constructing a building
over ssid right-of-nay sad indicating Council*s intention to lense such eirspece
to Virginia Western Community College upon receipt of ~pprovnl from the State
Highway Commissioner.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Hook mS?. psge 260.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Dr. Tailor end adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland. Hubsrd, Lisk, Taylor, and Mayor Webber .....
NAYS: None
(Mr. Thomas had not arrived at the meeting) (Mc. Trout absenti
ZONING: Council having set a public hearing for 2 p.m.. Monday.
December 4. 1972. on the question of amending certain of the provisions of Sec-
tion 67 of Chapter 4.1. Title XV. of the Code of the City of Roanoke. 1956. as
amended, dealing with reconsideration by Council of petitions for the rezoning
of properties within one year from the initial consideration thereof, the matter
was before the body.
Since Mr. Trout nas not present at the Council meeting and Mr. Thomas
had not arFived at the nee,lng. Dr. Taylor moved that the public hearing be
continued until the next regular meeting of Council on Monday.'December 11.
1972. The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
At this point. Mr. Thomas entered the ~eeting.
ZONING: Council having set n public bearing for 2 p.m.. Monday.
December 4. 1972. on.the request of Reliance Universal. Incorporated. that a
strip of land 120 feet long on Roanoke Avenue and 360 feet long on the railway
right of way property be rezoned from LM. Light Manufacturing District. and
RG-I. GeneFal Residential. District. to HM. Heavy Manufacturing District. and
that the remainder of the parcel of 13nd be rezoned from HG-1. General Residen-
tial District. to LM. Light Manufacturing* said portion of land rezoned to NM
to be fenced for security and safety measures, the matter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Plannino Commission submitted the fol-
lowing report recommending that the request be granted as amended by the Plannin.
Commission:
"October 19. 1972
The Honorable Roy L. Rebber. Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
The Above cited request wes considered by the City
Planning Commission at both its regular meetings of
September 20. 1972 and October 18. 1972.
At the September 20. 1972 meeting. Mr. Eggleston.
attorney for the petitioner, appeared before the planning
Commission and stated that this company is engaged in the
sale of wood finishing for paneling, plywood and furniture
finishes and is not. in the traditional sense, a paint
manufacturer. Re furtheF noted that Reliance Universal is
rapidly expanding end that there is an existing laboratory
on the tract of land which is presently zoned light manu-
facturing.
Mr. 6ggleston stoted that Bucks Street ia · very nsrrom,
surface-treated, street and that the nasa access is from
Memorial Avenue on to Roanoke Avenue through the Norwich
section of S, ~, In which are presently located many con-
struction companies. Be further stated that there is a
very steep bank at the rear'ef the property and ut the top
of the bank are some high density apartments. The rail-
road, he noted, is a natural boundary of this property. Ad-
ditionally, Mr. £ggleston noted that there are hones on
the other aide of Bucks Street on Berkley, Benniston and
Memorial Avenues and that there is not enough room on the
present property for expansion potential, Be further noted
that Roanoke Avenue is the only really practical access
which is a 60 foot wide street.
MF. Eggleston stated that part Of the main building mas
built in the early lgOO*s and that the neu building would
increase production, efficiency and improve operations.
He further stated that both economy-wise and ecologically-
wise, this plant would be good for rtbe City. Be noted that
the plant will have to move if they can't get the rezonlng
and that the move would not change the character of the
neighborhood, in fact, it would be improving the character
of the neighborhood by improving the property because of
the increase in production and increasing the employment from
1ns people to approximately 13§ people, He further noted
that there will be no smoke stacks of any kind, there mill
be no open fire cookin9, and there will be no coal-fired .
furnaces since they mill be usin9 gas and fuel oil fired
boiler furnaces.
Mr. Eggleston stated that they had intended to ask for
LM but the Buildin9 Commissioner's office had stated that
this type of operation would have to be zoned IIM. He further
stated that no raw materials are beta9 manufactured at this
plant and that this mould not be an obnoxious type of plant
close to residential areas. He noted that all of the plants
throughout the nation'bein9 built now are all located in a
LM designation.
Mr. Earl Yomparto n representative of Reliance Universal,
Incorporated, appeared before the Planning Commission and
stated that his Job is primarily concerned with the safety
practices and regulations of the companies. He further
stated that he mould like to bring out the difference between
the manufacturin9 now and bom it uaw practiced in the past.
He noted that all of the nam facilities being built ace simi-
lar to the proposed plant for Roanoke and that the new mixes
have a water .base and not ns much solvent and oil, He further
noted that they are now a blending, mixing operation and
then the mixture is put into drums or tank trucks and that
because of this, they do not need to put in heavy duty equip-
ment. He further noted that they have a large manufacturing
facility to make resins and that they ave made in very large
modern facilities but that at the Roanoke plant they do not
now cook or manufacture resins. He stated that now they have
a much cleaner operation and that they can handle .things in a
much better way. He further stated that they will bring the
ram materials in the back of the building, process them in the
central part and will pack them in the front of the plant.
Mr. Boynton asked Mr. ¥ompart if they store any materials
outside the building or process any outside of the building.
Mr. Vompart answered that most of the raw materials are stored
inside the plant as most of the base is water. Mr. Boynton
asked Mr. Vompart if they ever put up walls around their plans
when they are close to the residential areas, Mr. Vompart
ansmered that they sometimes do, that this is usually left
up to the plant's discretion. Mr. Boynton asked if the plant
had escaping fumes or gases. Mr. Vompart answered that there
are some solvent losses by evaporation but that this is con-
trolled in the nem equip~ent and that it mould be in very small
amounts. Mr. Boynton asked Mr. ¥ompart if their plants have
any trouble meeting theState Air Pollution Control Regulations.
He ansmered no, that in most cases they do not. He further
noted that they are in compliance in the primary standards
and secondary standards.
Mr. Boynton asked ~hy this type of plant could not be
classified in the Light Manufacturing designation. Hr.
Hjortsberg stated that originally the Building Commis-
sione£*s office had agreed that it would be LM but that Mr.
Leftwich, after having reviemed it, had changed to HM since
.08
.the company would be manufacturing products from ran.materials
end in the ,list or permitted uses hept in his office, this
plant could not come under LM, Mr. Vompart stated that this
plant mould not be mating the ran materials hut .mould be get-
ting the rom materials that have been prQcessed elseuhere end
that this plant mould be only mixing and blending,
Mr. Lauren~e stated that if this property mas resoned .
MM and they did not stay in this location, someone else could
come in iud use it as
Mr. Leftuich appeared before the Planning Commission and
stated that uith the information he had received on the opera-
tion of this nem plant, the property mould have to be rezoned
HM to accommodate it,
Mr, Kenneth Collins, who lives on the corner of Berkley
Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission and stated that
he represented the neighbors in this area that mould be
affected by this.rezoning, He presented the Planning Commis-
sion mJth a petitiop 'containing 92 names of neighbors who are
against the rezontng of this land, He further stated that
their reasons for the objection mere numerous, He noted that
there is an open dump on the present property but because of
the location of the old plant, the neighbors didn*t get too
much of the odor from.the dump area but the new building would
be so close that the neighbors mould get the offensive odor,
Mr, Crisp, manager of the Roanoke plant stated that they had
purchased a dumpster and had installed it, eliminating the
need for the open dump, Mr, Vompart stated that with the nam
equipment to be installed in the plant, the offensive odors
mould be eliminated,
Mr, Lemon then asked Mr, Collins if the neighbors
mouldn*t be better off mith the neu plant rather than the
old one, Mr, Collins answered that they didn*t want the
property rezoned for the nam plant because it would devalue
the property of the neighbors across the street and that any-
one could walk through the land at night and drop a match and
an explosion could occur that could burn all of the homes in
that area, Mr, Collins further stated .that Mr, Eggleston
said that the access to the new plant would be off of Roanoke
Avenue, which the neighbors do not feel mould be true as the
truck drivers use .the little Burks Street non and the plant
does not even adjoin Barks Street at the present,
Mr, Crlsp stated that they could not fence in the old
property because it mas so widely spread but that they would
fence in the new property for security measures, Mr, Colllns
asked why they could not use the land they had purchased near
their old plant for this expansion, Mr, Crisp ansmered that
the land did not lay to suit the purpose of the new plant,
Mr, Vompart stated that his company mould very much like to
have more security at the plant which could not be done at the
old plant site,
Mr. J. L. Stone, mbo resides on Memorial Avenue, appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that the neighbors
of the area mould really have a problem if this land is rezoned
HR.because of the resultant congestion on to the residential
streets, He noted that the area is presently a nice residen-
tial one and they don*t want any dumps
Mr, Alfred Silverstein, President of Dixie Ruilding .
products,.appeared before the Planning Commission and stated
that his company did not object to the LM rexceing bmr did
strenously .object to the HM designation as his Company has
just made a $500,000 investment ia the apartments at the top
of the cliff at the rear of the.proposed 'site, He further
stated that it would be very difficult to rent the apartments
with a heavy manufacturing district beside them.
Mr. Leftmich appeared before the Planning Commission and
stated his reasons for designating this type of plant for HM
zoning, lie stated that BM zoning is for one mbo depends on
ram materials and that from the information given to his
office from the omners and based on that information, it would
not meet the criteria of LM district,
After .discussion by the Planning Commission members, it
mas generally agreed that the biggest problem seemed to rest
on the LM designation versus the HM zoning designation,
Itwas therefore agreed by the Planning Commission members
'thut'thia petition be deferred until the'next regularly sche-
duled Planning Commission meeting so ua to permit the Planning
Department stuff ~0?esolve the issue.
At t6~ October 18,'1972 meeting, Hr. Egglestoa again
appeared before the Planning Commission and stated that the
petitioner has now discussed operation of the plant with the
fire marshall and the zoning administrator and they have
assured hii that they can use u LM designation for the opera-
tion of the plant except fur the storage of the volatile
materials In the storage tanks. H~ further stated that it is
the opinion of the zoning inspector that the petitioner make
an amended request for a HM d~signation for the property along
Roanoke Avenue and down along the Railway right of way property
and a LM designation on the entire remainder of the property.
He noted that Roanoke Avenu~ dead ends at the railroad and
that there mould be no crossing at the tracks by cats or
trucks, He further noted that he mould like to emphasize
again that this plant will be modern and that there mould be
nothing obnoxious. Mr. Eggleston stated that there were two
fires in the last two weeks at the existing plant but that
it was not practical to enclose the old site because there are
three railroad gates, tau gates separated by an alley, He
further stated that this new site mould be ideal for enclosing.
Mr. Boynton inquired about the height of the vertical
tanks that would be used for the storage of flammable materials,
Mr. Crisp answered that the large ones would be shout 30 feet,
Mr. Lawrence asked about the ingress and egress to the
site. Mr. Eggleston answered that the ingress and egress
to the storage tanks would be off of Roanoke Avenue but that
the main 9ate to the plant.would be off of Roanoke Avenue or
Barks Street.
Mr. Kenneth Collins who lives on the corner of Berkley
Avenue and Barks Street appeared before the Planning Con-
mission again stating his opposition to this rezoning ind
further stating that at the old plant there are from 300 to
400 barrels sitting outside and what would the new plant do
with these barrels. Rt. Crisp answered that there will be some
barrels outside the plant because this was necessary for the
operation of the plant. He stated that all of the barrels
may not ~ontain materials, that sene would most likely be empty.
Mr. Egglestonstated that some of the barrels would be stored
inside'the building but that there will be more roan in the
new plant for thingS,such as this.
Mr. Collins stated that the neighbors did not want this
plant at their front door or rear door and felt that'no one
else would. Mr. Eggleston stated that this plant mill be a
modern plant and kill not resemble the old plant at all.
Mr. Boynton asked if it would be possible to screen the barrels
from the residential area. Mr, Crisp answered that this would
be possible as many of the other plants are doing this now.
Mr. Collins stated that the Norfolk ~ Western Railway burns
on the right of way alongside the subject property amd that
the flames reach from SO tobO feet in height and that the
locution asked for for the storage of the flammable materials
would not be a safe one.
Mr. J. L. Stone, who resides on Memorial Avenue, appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated his opposition to
the rezonin9 of this land for uny part HM. He further stated
that all of the past statements of the petitioners-that had
been challenged as being incorrect were all changed and that
how could the people believe the new things they mere telling
now as to the operation of the plant. Mr~ Stone then presented
a petition signed by 108 people who live in the area who
object to this rezoning.
Mr. John R~ Kay. Oxford Avenue, S. i., appearedbefore
the Planning Commission and stated that he also hud a petition
containing over 25 names of persons living on Oxford Avenue
that object to this rezoning.
Mrs. Trout, Memorial Avenue, S. M., appeared before the
Planning Cbmhission stating her opposition to this rezoning.
218
AYES: Nessrso Garland, Hubard. Limbo Taylor, Thorns, Trout, and Mayor
Webber '7.
NAYS: None
PLANNING-TRAFFIC: Council having directed the Giky Attorney to pre-
pare the proper measure approving the Roanohe-Salem Area TOPICS Study, dated iV72
heretofore undertaken as a study for the purpose of reducing traffic congestion
and improving kraffic safety in the Roanoke Valley, he presented same; mhere-
upon, Mr. Trout offered the following aesdution:
(m20603) A RESOLUTION approving the Roanoke-Salem Area TOPICS Study,
dated 1972. heretofore undertaken as a study for the purpose of reducing traffic
congestion and improving traffic safety in the Roanoke Valley.
IFor full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book u37, page 314.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Rayor
Webber ........................ 7.
NAYS: None ..........-0.
SALE OF PROPERTY: Council having directed the City Attorney to pre-
pare the proper measure authorizing and directing the city's sale and conveyance
to the Commonwealth of Virginia of two parcels of land containing a total of
18,544 square feet, more or less, situate on the north side of Hershberger
Road, N. M*, adjacent to its intersection with the airport access road, upon
certain terms and conditions, he presented same; whereupon, Hr, Trout moved
that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(~20604) AN ORDINANCB authorizing and directing the City*s sale and
conveyance to the Commonwealth of Virginia of two parcels of land containin9 a
total of 18,544 square feet, more or less, situate on the north side of Hersh-
berger Road, W, M., adjacent to its intersection with the airport access road,
upon certain'terms and conditions.
RHEREAS, the City is the omner of the parcels of land hereinafter
described mhich, being held as surplus property and not needed for public purpos~
were the subject of un offer to purchase made by the State Highway Department;
and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has reported to the Council and has recom-
mended that said offer, being equivalent to the appraised value of said parcels
of land, should be accepted and that conveyance of the title to said parcels to
the offerer be authoriaed and directed on the terms hereinafter set forth.
THEREFORE, BE 1T ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
the sale andconveyance of the following described parcels of land situate in
the County of Roanoke, viz:
Hr. Boynton stated that if the pleat does not meet the
zoning requirements, the nem plant could be closed down. Mr.
Stone asked who had aukhorJky to do this and who would deter-
mine if they were meeting th~ requirements. Additionally.
Mr. Boynton noted that'the zoning administrator would be khe
one to decide end uc~ld have the authority to clos~ down the
plant,
Mr. Lawrence asked if a strip of land 120 feet wide
along Roanoke Avenue and 360 feet long along the Norfolk ~
Western Railway right of way would be sufficient for the
storage of the tanks, RFc Eggleston answered that this
would allow for enough room fdr storage and he would amend
h~S petition to allow for this.
After much discussion by the Planning Commission nem-
'berso it was generally agreed that · strip 120 feet long along
Roanoke Avenue and 360 feet long along the railway right of
way property be rezoned from Li and RG-I to HM and that the
remainder of the parcel of land be taloned from RG-I to
Accordingly. notion was made. duly seconded and unani-
mously approved recommending to City Council that this
amended request be approved with the stipulation that the
portJo6 rezoned to heavy manufacturing (Hi) be fenCed'for
security and safety measures.
Sincerely,
J, H. Parrott by LR
J, H. Parrott
Acting Chairnan"
Messrs. David Co Hjortsber9 and B. Purnell E991eston, Attorneys,
representing the petitioner, appeared before Council in support of the request
of their client.
No one appearing in opposition to the request for rezoningo
Garland moved that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(a20557) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title'X¥, Chapter 4.1, Section 2. of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet No. 152, Sectional
1966 Zone Map. City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
RHEREAS, application has been node to the Council of'the City of
Roanoke to have a certain tract of land containing 6.146 acres, more or less, ao~
lying at the southwest intersection of Roanoke Avenue and Durks Street, S.
and known as Official Tax No. 1520101, rezoned from HR, Reavy Manufacturing
District, LH, Light Manufacturing District, and RG-1, General Residential Dis-
trict, to HMo HeavyManufacturing District; and
MHEREAS, the City Planning Commission has recommended t~at aportion of
the land which is more particularly hereinafter described be rezoned from LM,
Light Manufacturing District, and RG-I, General Residential District, to HR,
Heavy Manufacturing District, and that th~ balance of said land lying easterly
of Norfolk and Mestern right of way be rezoned from LM, LightRanufacturing
District and RG-1, General Residential District, to LM, Light Manufacturing
District; and
NHEREAS, the written notice and'the posted sign required to be pub-
lished and posted, respectivel~ b~ Section ?1, Chapter,~.l, Title X¥, of The
Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, re.tin9 to Zoning, have been
published and posted as required and for the time provided by said Section; and
MREREASo the hearing as provided for in said notice mas held on the
4th day of December. 1972~,' et 2:00 PoMe, before the Council or the City of
Ronnohe, nt uhich henrJng all parties IS interest and citizens mere given an
opportunity to be heard, both for and against ~he proposed rezoning; and
WHEREAS, this Council, after c~nside~ing the evidence ns herein pro-
vided, is of th~ ~plnion that the hereinafter described land should be rezened,
THEREFORe, DE IT ORDAINED by tie Council of the City of goanohe that
T~tl~ X¥. Chapter 4ol, Section 2. of The Code of the City of Roanohe, 1956, as
amended, relating to Zoning, and Sheet No° 152 of the Sectional 1966 Zone gap,
City of Roanohe~ be amended in the folloming particular and no other, viz:
The property to be affected lies in the city of Roanoke, State of
Viroinia, and i~ more particularly described as follous:
HEGINNING at a point on the east abutment Of the bridge
over Roanoke River on the sooth side of Roanoke Avenue;
thence with said avenue N, H6° 55' E° 542,6 feet to the
southmest corner of Durks Street and Roanoke Avenue;
the'nc* mith Ruths Street, S, 13° 28' Mo 995,6 feet to un
alley; thence mith said alley N, ?60 32'.M. 240 feet to a
point; thence with the line of Lot 10, Dlock J, S, 13o
28* ~. 145 feet to a road; thence with said reed N° 64°
23' ~. 600 feet to a point on Roanoke River; thence uith
said River 9DO feet to the point of [~GINNING; and
EXCEPTING therefrom the right of way of the Norfolh and
Western Railway Company (formerly Virginian Railway Com-
pany); and being Official No, 1520101; and
FURTRER EXCEPTING therefrom all of that certain 3,H54 acre
tract of land conveyed by Southern Varnish Corporation to
Wcstover Development Corporation by deed dated June 17,
1965, of record in the Clerh's Office .or.the Hustings Court
for the City of Roanoke, Virglnia, in Deed Book 1182, page
Property located at the southeasterly intersection of the Norfolk and
~estern right of May end Roanoke Avenue, S, W,, and designated on Sheet 152 of
the Section 1966 Zone Rap, City of Roaeohe, as a part of Official No.
which is more particularly described as follows:
B£OIN~I~G at the intersection of the southerly side o~
Roanoke Avenue, S, M, and the southeasterly side of the
Norfolk and Western right of may (which point is approxi-
mately 324 feet S, 86° 55' M. along the southerly side
of Roanohe Avenue from the letter's intersection with the
westerly side of Duvks Street, S, ~.); thence with
the righter way line of the railroad in a southwesterly
direction 360 feet to a point; thence leaving the right of
why in a southeasterly direction on a llne perpendicular
to the right of way 120 feet to n point; thence in u north-
easterly direction, parallel to the chord Of the railroad
right of way line 472°5 feet, more or less, to the southerly
side of Roanoke Avenue; thence with the same S. 86° 55'
168.75 feet, more or less, to the place of BEGINNING
(49,920 sq. ft., more OF less).
be, and it is hereby, changed from LM, Light Manufacturing District, and RG-1,
General Residential District~ to RM, Heavy Manufacturing District, and that
Sheet No. 152 of the aforesaid map be changed in this repsect; and
The remainder of Official No. 1520101 lying easterly of the Norfolk
and Western right of may be, and it is hereby, changed from LM, Light Manufactur-
ing District, and RG-1, General Residential District, to LM, Light Manufacturing
District, and that Sheet No. 152 of the aforesaid map be changed in this respect.
112
The motion ues seconded by Mr, Lisk end cdopted by tie foll~ouJng vote:
AYES: Meaars, Garland, Msberd, 'L~sk, Taylor, Thomas nad Mayor
lebber
MAYS: Mone O. (Mr. Trout absent)
ZONING: Council having set o public hearing for 2 p.m., Monday, Dec-
ember 4, 1972, gu the request of Roby J, J&rrett and Norman E. Jarrett and the
Jarrett Investment Corporation, that property located on Mountain Avenue, S,
described ns Lot 12, the western one-half of Lot 13, the eastern one-ball of
Lot 13, and Lot 14. Section 13, Lewis ~ddition, Official Tax Nos, 1020613,
1020514 and 1020615, be resound from RG-2, General Residential District, to
C-2, General Commerical District, the ma~ter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follow-
ing report recommending that the request be 9ranted:
'October 19, 1'972
The Honorable Roi L. ~ebber. Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, ~irginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
PlonnJn9 Commission at its regular meeting of October
1972.
Mr. Arthur Crush, attorney for the petitioner, appeared
before toe Planning Commission and stated that Mr. Jarrett is
now operating an electric company at the corner of 5th Street
and Mountain Avenue, S. M. and he would like to expand his
operations to allom for n warehouse to be located on the lot
at the rear of his present building. Mr. Crush further stated
that Mr, Jarrett has torn down an old buildin9 at the back of
his lot which was on eyesore to the neighborhood and planned
to tear down two more Fun down homes beside his present
building.
Mr, Crush noted that there is presently a store across
the street, the Eye Bank is across Elm Avenue and 5th Street,
and he, himself, has his law offices in the 400 Block of Elm
Avenue. Be noted that this area is a transitional one, and
that the neighbors would welcome thenew structure as un asset
to their neighborhood. Additionally, it was pointed out that
the neighbors had not expressed any opposition to this peti-
Mr. Parrott asked what.type of building was proposed ut
the rear of his present. Mr. Crush stated that Mr, Jnrrett
intended to build a warehouse, and that there would be no
combustible supplies stored there; it would be used only for
storage of non-combustible electrical supplies.
After a discussion by the planning commission members, it
was generally.agreed that this addition represented n com-
patible use for this neighborhood.
with a vote of four (4) ayes and one (1) nay recommending to
City Council that this request be approved.
Sincerely,
J. B. Parrott by LM
J. H. Parrot,
Acting Chairman*
Hr, Arthur R. Crush, Attorney. representing the petitioners, appeared
before Council Jn support of the request of his clients.
No one appearing in opposition to the ~equest for rezoning, Mr, Thomas
moved that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first rending:
(=20559) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4,1, Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, ns amended, and Sheet No. 102, Sectional
1966 Zone Rap. City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning,
MHEREAS, application has been made to the Council of the City of Roanoke
to have that property located on Mountain Avenue, s. M. and Pifth Street, S,
described ns Lot 12, the Mestern 1/2 of Lot 13, the Eastern 1/2 of Lot 15. and
Lot 14, Section 53° Lewis Addition, Official Tax Numbers 1020613, 1020614 and
1020615, rezoned from RG-Z, General Residential District, to C-2, General Con-
nerical District; and
RHEREAS, the City Planning Commission has recommended that the herein-
after land be rezoned from RG-2, General Residential District, to C-2, General
Commerical District; and
MHEREAS, the written notice and the posted sign required to be published
and posted, respectively, by Section ?1, Chapter 4.1, Title IV, of The Code of
the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, relating to Zoning, have been published
and posted as required and for the time provided by said section; and
MDEREAS, the hearing as provided for in said notice was held on the
4th day of December, lq?2, at 2:00 p.m., before the Council of the City of
Roanoke, at which hearin9 ali parties in interest and citizens were given an
opportunity to be heard, both for and against the proposed rezoning; and
WHEREAS, this Council, after considering the evidence as herein pro-
vided, is of the opinion that the hereinafter described land should be rezoned.
~HEREFORE, BI~ IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
Title IV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of the Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as
amended, relating to Zoning, and Sheet No. 102 of the Sectional 1966 Zone Map,
City of Roan'aka, b~ amended in the following particular and no other, viz.:
Property located on Mountain Avenue, S. M, and Fifth Street, S. #.,
described as Lot 12, the #astern 1/2 of Lot 13, the Eastern 1/2 of Lot 13, and
Lot 14, S~ction 13, Lewis Addition, designated on Sheet 102 of the Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, as Official Tax Numbers 1020613, 1020514 and
1020615, be, and is hereby, changed from RG-2, General Residential District, to
C-2, General Commerical District, and that Sheet No. 102 of the aforesaid map be
changed in this respect.
The motion was seconded by Mr, Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
Mebber -6.
NAYS: None ~. (Mr. Trout nbsent)
L3.4
ZONING: Council having set a public hearing for. 2 p,m,, Monday,
December 4, 1972. on the request of Mr, #, M, Quick that property located in the
4100 Dlock of Virginia Avenue, No Mo, described ss part of Lot 9 and nil of Lot
I0, Block 4, Map Of Mesa Park, Official Tax No. 2760223, be vezoned from RS-3, Si
gle-Family Residential District, to RD, Duplex Residential District, the matter
was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follow-
ing report recommending that the request be granted: i
'October 19, 1972
The Honorable Roy L. Neb~er, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
6entlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City Plan-
ning Commission at its regular meeting of October 10, 1972o
Mr. Cromwell appeared before the Planning Commi~slon
and stated that Mr° Quick plans to build a duplex on this
specific property. He further stated that property directly
across the street is presently occupied by apartment units
and that he feels that thin RD rezoning would do no great
violence to the neighborhood because of the RD and C-2
zones located nearby,
The Planning Director stated that this RD designation
could serve as u suitable buffer betHeen the C-2 zone and the
RS-3 zones.
After discussion by the Planning Commission members, it
Has generally agreed that this use of the land was com-
patible with the surrounding neighborhood*
Accordingly, motion was ma~e,' duly seconded and unani-
mously approved recommending to City Council that this
request be approved.
Sincerely,
S/ Jo B. Parrott by LM
J. H. Parrot*
Acting Chairman*
No one appearing in opposition to the request for rezoning, Mr. Lisk
moved that the folloming Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(~2055q) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke,. 1956, as amended, and Sheet No. 276, Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
MOEREAS, application has been made to the Council of the City of
Roanoke to have part of Lot 9 and all of Lot 10, Block 4, Map of Mast Park.
Official Tax No. 2760223 rezoned from RS-3, Single-Family Residential District
tO RD, Duplex Residential District; and
MBEREAS, the written notice and the posted sign required to be pub-
lished and posted, respectively, by Section ?1, Chapter 4.1, Title XV. of The
Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, relating to Zoning, have been
published and posted as required and for the time proveded by said section; and
MHER£AS, the hearing as provided for .in said Notice ~as held on the
4th day of December, 1972, at 2:00 p.m., before the Council' of the City of
Roanoke, at which hearing all parties in interest and citizens Here given an
opportunity to be heard, both for and against the proposed rezoning; and
WHER£AS, this Couhcil, after considering the evidence as herein pro-
vided, ia of the opinion that the hereinafter described laud should be rezoned,
Tt[~i£FOR£, BE IT OROAI~EO b, the Council o~ the City of Roanoke that
Title 1¥o Chapter 4;1, Section 2, of the Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, aa
amended, relating to Zoning, and Sheet No. 276 o! the Sectional 1966 Zone Rap,
City of Roanoke, be amended in. the folloming particular and ho other, viz.:
Property located'on part of Lot 9 and all of Lot IO. fllock 4. Rap of
West Park. Of£icful Tax NO. 2760223 designated on Sheet 276 of the Sectional
1966 Zone Hap, City of Roauoke, as Official Tax No. 2760223. be, and Is hereby,
changed from RS-3, Single-Family Residential District, to RD, Duplex Reisdential
District, and that Sheet ~n. 276 of the aforesaid map be changed in this respect.
The motion was seconded by Ur. Garland and adopted by the tallowing vote;
AYES: Messrs. Garland, flubard; Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
Nebber-- 6.
NAYS: None O. (Mr. Trout absent)
STREETS AN0 ALLEYS: Council having set a public hearing for 2
#onday, December 4. 1972. on the request of the Trustees nf the Garden City
dap,is, Church that Moffatt Street and all of David Street, S. E.. and au alley
in the Garden City Subdivision of the City of Roanoke be vacated, discontinued
and closed, the matter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follow-
in9 report recommending that the request be granted:
'0ctObeF lC, 1972
The Honorable Roy L. Rebber, Rayor
and ~embers at City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of October lO,
19T2.
Hr, Riley M. Craft appeared before the Planning Cam-
mission and stated that these two streets and alley were
only paper streets and that most of the neighbors in.the
Garden City area were not even aware at then. He further
stated that the church and the City at Roanoke owned all of
the surrounding land aud that the church people used these
streets as a parking area.
Mr. Craft noted that the Engineering Department had
suggested that he amend his request so as to provide rot
the closure Of all of David Street. He further noted that
it the request was granted and because at the present plans
for the renovation of the church, that the church intended
to attempt lo purchase some of this land from the City of
Roanoke.
At,er u general discussion by the Planniug' Commission
members, it was agreed that the above noted paper streets
and alley be cloned with, however, the proviso that all ag
0avid Street he vacated.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and unani-
mously approved recommending to City Council that the amended
requests to include that street known as Roffett Street and
all of Oavid Street. S. E., and an alley in the Garden City
Subdivision of the City of Roanoke, he vacated, discontinued
aud closed.
Sincerely,
S/ J. Ho Parrot, by LR
J. H. Parrott
Acting Chairmau~
115
,116
The viemers ~ppointed to view the street end alley submitted · mritten
re,oFt advising that they have viemed the street and slley in questio· aa~ the
· eighboring property and they are u·a·imously of the opi·ion that no i·conve·ie·ce
mould result .to any individual or to the public from vacating~ discontinuing and
closing said street and alleY.
Mr. Wiley W. Craft, Attorney. representl·g the petitio·er, appeared
before Council in support of the request of his clie·t.
No one appeari·g in oppositio· to Vacating..discontinuing and closing
said street and al~y, Hr, Llsk.moved that the folloming Ordina·ce be placed ups·
its first readi·g: ..
(·20560) AN ORDINANCE permane·tly vacating,.discontinuing and clos-
ing that street known as Noffett Avenun, ~hnt street knomn as David Street, and
a certain alley located in Block 1, J. M. Liptrap Map, in the Garden City sec-
tion of the City of Roanoke, Virginia,'
WHEREAS° the trustees of Garden City .Baptist Church have heretofore
filed ~heir petition before the Council of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, in
accordance mith lam, requesting the Council to permanently vacate, discontinue and
close tmo street~ and an alley located in the Garden City section of the City of
Roanoke, Virginia, and more particularly described in said petition, of the filing
of which petition due notice was given to the pablic as required by law; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the prayer of said petition, viewers were
appointed by Council gu the llth day of September, 1972, to viem the property
and to report in writing whether in their opinion any inconvenience would result
from permanently vacating, discontinuing and closi·~ those certain streets and
that alley described in the resolution appointing said viewers; and
~H£R~AS. it appears from the written report of the viewers filed with
the City Clerk on October 26, 1972, that no inconvenience would result either to
any individual or to the public from permanently vacating, discontinuing and
closing the hereinafter described streets and alley.
WHEREAS, Council at its meeting on September llth, referred the peti~
tion to the City Planni·g Commission, ~hich Commission by its report filed with
Council on October 23, 1972, racom=ended that the petition as amended by the peti-
tioner at the meeting of the Commission on October 23. 1972, to vacate, discon-
tinue and close the hereinafter described street~ and alley be approved; and
NHEREAS, a public hearing mas held on the question before the Council
at its regular meeting on December 4, 1972, after due and timel~ notice thereof
published in ~he Roanoke World-News, at which hearing all par}les in interest and
citizens were afforded an opportunity to be heard On the questisn; and
WHEREAS, from all of the foregoing, ~ouncil considers that no incon-
venience will result to any individual or to the public from permanently vacat-
ing, discontinuing and closing the hereinafte~ dqscribed streets and alley, as
requested by the petitioner in its amended petition, and tho}, accordingly, the
herein describec streets and alley should be permanently closed.
TN~BEFORE, BE l! ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
Ill of those certain streets and alley located Ia the Garden City section of
Bain.he, Virginia, more particularly described as follaus; to-wit:
fa) BEGINNING at the present northeast corner of Garden
City Boulevard and Moffatt Avenue, S. E.; thence to n point
$ 63° lO* E 245 feet, more or less to the west .line of
David Street, So E.; thence. S. 26° SO' W 30 feet to the
northeast corner of Lot 12 Block 2 of the J. V. Llptrsp
Yap, recorded in Deed Book 115, Page 89, in the clerk's
Office for the Hustings Court of the City of Roanoke, Vir-
ginia; thence N 63° 10' W 245 feet, more or less, to a
pointon the northeast line of Lot 1, Block 2, J. I. Liptrnp
Map; thence, N 26° SOO E 30 feet to the point of beginning;
being all of Moffatt Avenue, S. E.; and,
(b) All of that certain alley running through 81nck I of the J. M. Liptrap
Map recorded in Deed Dnok 115, Page Gg, in the Clerk's Office of the Hastings
Court of the City of Roanoke,'Virginia, the center line of which-is described as
follows:
BEGINNING at, a point which is S 63° 10' E 142.5 feet from
the present northeast corner of Garden City Doulevard and
Moffatt Avenue, S. E.,;-thence In a northeasterly direction
following two courses and distances N 26° 50* E 263.38 feet
to an angle point and N 14° 57' E 50 feet more or less to the
west line of a prep*sad new street as shown on J. M. Llptrap
Map; and
(c) That street ha.un as David Street located in the Garden City sec-
117
tiaa of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, and more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at a point on the southwestern-mots c~rner of Block
3. J. lo Liptrap Map; thence in a northerlI direction, the
following two courses and distances: N 26° 50' E 464.73
feet more or less, to an angle point and N 14° 57' M 273.87
feet, more at less to a point on south line of a proposed
new street; then alan9 same, N 75° 03* M 30 feet to a point
on the east corner of Lot 11, Block 1, of said J. W. Liptrap
Map; thence in a southerly direction the following two
courses and distances, S 14°'57' M 270.?5 feet, more or less,
to an angle psint and S 26° 50* W 321.37 feet, more or less;
thence S 65° 04' i 30 feet to the point of beginning, this
being all of David Street, S. E.
be. and they hereby are, permanently vacated, discontinued and closed; and that
nil right, title and interest of the City of Roanoke and of the public in and to
the same be and is hereby released insofar as the Council Of the City of Roanoke
is empowered so to do; the City of Roanoke, however reserving unto itself an ease-
ment for any water, sewer, or other public utility line or lines, if any, now
existing therein, and the right of ingress and egress for the maintenance and
repair thereof.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the City Engineer be, and he hereby is,
alley on all maps and pl~ts on file ia his office on which said streets and alley
is shown, referring to the book and page of Ordinances and Resolution of the
Council of the City of Roanoke wherein this Ordinance shall be spread.
BE XT FURTHER ORDAXNED that the Clerk of the Council deliver to the
Clerk of the Hustings Court for the City of Roan*he. Virginia, a certified copy
of this Ordinance in order that the Clerk of said Court may make proper notation
on ail maps or plats recorded in his office upon Mhich is ah*un said streets and
alley as provided by law. and that, if so requested by any party in interest, he
may record the same in the Deed Book in his office, indexing the same in the
name of the City of Roanoke as grantor and in the name of any party in interest
who may reqaest it as grantee,
The motion was seconded by Dr, Taylor and adopted by the folloming
vote:
Webber--
AYES: Messrs. Garland, ~ubard, task, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
6.
NAYS: None O. (Mr. Trout absent)
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Dr, Charles M, Cornell appeared before Coun-
cil and requested that Mayor Webber appoint a committee of three to study the
feasibility of. naming a park or something else of an appropriate nature in honor
of the late Denton Oo Dillard, former Mayor and Member of the Council of the
City of Roanoke,
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the request of Dr, Cornell and
that Mayor Webber be requested to appoint such a committee, The motion uss
seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
Mayor WebBer then appointed Dr. Charles M, Cornell, Chairman, Mr,
David K, Llsk and Mr, Hampton W. Thomas as members of said committee,
PETITIONS AND CORMUNICATIONS:
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requestin9 that $3,500.00 be appropriated to Section ~RgO00, *Schools - Certified
Homemaker*s Assistant Training,* of the 1972-73 budget of the ~oanoke City School
Board, to provide funds for a program that uill train fifteen persons for employ-
ment as Certified Homemaker*s Assistants. one hundred per cent of expenditures
for this project to be reimbursed by Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke
Valley, ~as before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that Counci~ c~ncur in the request of the Roanoke City
School Board and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20561) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~89000, *Schools -
Certified Homemaker's Assistant Training.~ of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordi-
nance, and providing for an emergency,
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook #37, page
Dr, Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion mas
seconded by Mr, Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Hubard, task, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber
NAYS: None-- O~ (Mr, Trout absent)
RHDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Hoard
reqaesting 'that $68,~57,50 be appropriated for the purpose of providing free
transportation for all secondary students ~ho qualify, from January 1, 1973,
through the end of 'the school lear, advising that this appropriation is being
requested on the advice of the City Attorney*s Office after much consultation,
mas before Council.
Hr, Llsh moved that Council concur lu the request of the Roanoke City
School Board and offered the follomiog emergency Ordinance:
(a20562) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section aS000, 'Schools -
Pupil Transportation,w of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, end providing for
(Fo~ ~ull text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Snob a37o page 262,)
Mr, Llsk moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion was seconded
by Or, Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:. Messrs. Garland, Bubard, task, Taylor. Thomas and Hayer
Yebber 6.
NAYS: None--O. (Hr. Trout absent)
OVDGHT-SCflOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting that $1.175.S1, be appropriated to Upkeep and Operation of Cafeteria
Trucks under Section ego00, .'Schools - Food Services,' of the 1972-73 budget
of the Roanoke City School Board, to provide funds to repair damaged vehicles
and advising that an i.ns~rance check in this amount will be deposited as revenue
with the City Treasurer, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanoke City
School Hoard and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20563) AN ORDINANCE to amend and veordain Section #9000° 'Schools -
Food Services,* of the 1972-73 Appropr.iation Ordinance, and providing for an
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Hook ~37. page 262.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Yaylor, Thomas and Mayor
~ebber
NAYS: None~ ---0. (Mr. Trout absent)
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke Ci.ty School Hoard
requesting that. $5,463.00 be appropriated to *Manpower Development and Training
Act,* under Section ~21000, of t~e 1972-73 budget of the Roanoke City School
Board, advising that this. program w/Il train 36 welders and 100 per cent of
expenditures, will be reimbursed by the U. S. Department of Labor through the
AFL-CIO Appalachian Council, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that ~ouncil concur in the request of the Roanoke City
School Board and offered the foliouing emergency Ordinance:
(~20564) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section c2100.0. "Schools -
Manpower Development and Training Act,' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance,
and providing for aa emergency. .
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Hook #37, page 263.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. ~he motion was.
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
119
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Hubordo Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber-
NAYS: None ......... O. (Mr. Trout absent)
HEALTH DEPARTMENT: A communication from Mr. E. Frifflth Dodson, Jr.,
Chairman, Mental Health Services Of the Roanoke Valley, advising that the terms
of Miss Dorothy L. Gibboney, the Reverend Charles T, Green end Mrs. Anna L.
Rc¢lung as members.of'the-Mental Health Services Board will expire on December
31, 1972, and that reappointments or neu appointments should be made prior 'to
January 1, 1973, for three year terms to conform to State Lam (i.e. Chapter 10,
Sec. 37.1 - 195 and 37.1 - 196) and Regulations of the Department of Mental
Hygiene and Hospitals, mas before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be received and filed.
motion mas seconded by Mr. Llsk and unanimously adopted. ·
ZONSNG: A communication from Or. Robert RD Rudolph expressing his
opposition to rezoning property fronting on the northerly side of Memorial
Avenue between Cambridge Avenue and Denniston Avenue, S. N., and at the south-
western corner Of Memorial Avenne and Oennlston Avenue from C-l, Office and
Institutional District, to C-2, General Commercial District, advising that if the
property is rezoned for u commercial establishment it will create noise and be a
nuisance, that it mill constitute a traffic hazard and will devalue residential
properties in the area, was before Council.
Mr. Garland moved that the communication be considered at the public
hearing which has been scheduled for 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, December 26, 1972, in
the Council Chamber. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously
adopted.
BONDS-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM-SCHOOLS: A ~ommunicatiou from Mr.
Robert J. Wilkinson, Jr** Secretary, Roanoke Taxpayers Association, requesting
that Council reconsider certain portions of the-recently passed bond issue and
vote to rescind those portions with reference to expending funds to improve the
airport and for improvements to the city jail, was before Council.
Mr. Garland moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr, Lisk and unanimously adopted.
SALE OF PROPERTY: A joint ~o~rmunication from Mr. Walter F. Poff and
Mr. H. M. Clamor offering to purchase a small triangular parcel of city-~wned
land containing approximately one and one third acres in the vicinity of Route
bOl was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be referred to the Real Estate
Committee for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion mas
seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
· LEAGUE OF OLDER AMERICANS, INCORPORATED: A communication from Ms.
Sarah S. Stephenson, Project Director. League of Older Americans, Incorporated,
advising that according to the by-lams of the League of Older Americans. there
is a vacancy for an appointment of a representative from the City of Roanoke to
the Board of Directors of said League and requesting that Mayor Roy L. Yebber
appoint a representative to serve on said Ooard of Directors for n two year
term, oas before Council.
Mr. Llsh moved that Council concur in the request and that Mayor Uebber
be requested to appoint n representative to the Ooard of Directors of the League
of Older Americans, Incorporated. The motion mas seconded by Dr. Taylor and
unanimously adopted.
Mayor Webber then appointed Councilmafl William S. Bubard as the repre-
sentative of the City of aoanuhe to the Board of Directors of the League of Older
Americans. Incorporated.
CITY HANAG£R: A communication from Mrs. Frances B. Carr. Correspond-
ing Secretary. Hill Mountain Garden Club. congratulating the City Manager in his
appointment to the position of Executive Director of the Virginia Municipal
League but at the same time expressing sincere regret on the loss to Roanoke
occasioned by his leaving, advising that Mr. flirst came to Roanoke highly recom-
mended and that he has fulfilled all of the promises mode by those oho recommended
him, was before Council.
Mr. Yhomas moved that Council concur in the communication and that said
communication be received and filed. The notion was seconded by Mr. Garland and
unanimously adopted.
STATK COHPENSATION BOARD-COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE: Copy of a communi-
cation from the State Compensation Board addressed to Mr. J. S. Howard. Jr..
Commissioner of the Revenue, in connection ~ith his October, 19T2, expense
voucher, advising that the state*s part of claim for desk sions, in the total
amount of $7T.62. has been disallowed since the state does not share in the cost
of such expense, ~as before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that the communication be received and filed. The
imotion ~as seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-STATE CORPENSATION BOARD: The followin9 communication from the
State Compensation Board advising of the procedures to be followed should this
locality desire to change the manner of salary reimbursement by the Compensation
Board, was before Council.
'"November 2?, 1972
TO: BOARDS OF SUPERVISORS AND CITY COUNCILS
FROM: John M. Rasnick. Jr., Executive Secretary
SUBJECT: Sections 14.1-63 and 14.1-79 of the Code of Virginia,
as amended by the 1972 Session of the General Assem-
bly, providin9 that the salaries and expenses autho-
rized by the Compensation Board for the offices of
the Attorneys for the Commonwealth, Treasurers,
Commissioners of the Revenue and Sheriffs may be
paid by the respective county or city and that the
county or city may be reimbursed directly by the
State for the State*s part.
Because of the several inquiries we have received and $o
that all localities may be informed, this is to advise of the
procedures to be followed should your l.ocality desire to change
the manner of salary reimbursement by the Compensati'on Board.
L22
Sections 14~1~63 end 14.1-79 mere anended tO retdthet
'Any county or city mhlch elects to do sot may pay the entire
anount of such salaries, expenses and other allowances upon
notification to the Board and if such an election is made,
the State shall ~einburse any'such county er city for the '
Stat,ts proportionate share of such salaries, compensation,
benefits under B 51-111-36, and other ex~ense allowances**
Therefore, the local governing body should first notify
the Compensation Board of its decision and the effective, data
All the Constitutional Officers and their employees· must be
included in this change. The same responsibility will be
placed upon the Constitutional+officers. or the person
designated by the local governing body. for the preparation
of the vouchers and submission of supporting data as has
been followed in the pest.
The following procedures mould be followed with respect
to the prelisted payrolls:
1) The Constitutional Officers, or the person designated
by the locality, mould continue to file the payrolls at
the end of the month and the locality mould be reim-
bursed for the State*s proportionate part on OF before
the tenth of the following month.
2) The Office of the State Comptroller mould continue to
prepare the prelisted payrolls, Comp. Form II-F, com-
plete with State and local distribution on the basis of
amounts certified for payment the preceding month and
mould mail the payrolls to the officers on'or about the
fifteenth of each month.
3) No deductions mill be shown on the prellsted payroll and
columns 6, T. 10 and 11 should be left blank on copies
1, 2 and 3 of Comp. Form II-F, as all deductions from
salaries will be the locality's responsibilJty~entirely*
4) The payrolls should then be verified, changed where
necessary, signed and returned to the Compensation Board
for approval for payment.
5) All corrections or changes on the prelisted payroll must
be made in red where:
(3) Employees have been separated from service by death,
resignation or retirement, or have lost tine for
sickeess or other reasons without pay and are not
entitled to a month's salary.
(b) Employees are promoted (IN CASE OF pROMOTIONS,
OFFICERS MUST SUBMIT NOTICE TO THE COMPENSATION
BOARD ON C. B. FORM 10)
(c) Salary adjustments have been officially approved
(d) New persons are employed in permanent positions
(e) Employees are on leave of absence without pay
6) If changes occur because of resignations or other reasons
between the time the payroll is sent to the Compensation
Board andthe end of the month for which the payroll has
been submitted, the principal officer must notify the
Compensation Board so that the payroll can be changed
accordingly,
Mith respect to expense vouchers nhich have heretofore
been paid directly to the principal officers and employees,
the only change in procedure mould be to insert the name of
the locality entitled to the State payment nod the name.
title and address of the financial official in whose care
the State's check is to be sent in the space provided for the
principal officer on the following vouchers:
Comp. Form II-G - Monthly payroll for Temporary Employees
C.B. Form 3-B - Nileage Voucher for Treasurers and Con-
missioners of the Revenue
C.B. For I-A - Travel Expense Voucher for Sheriffs and
Full Time Deputies
If I can be of any assistance in this matter, please do
not hesitate' to call on me.
S/ John M. Rasnick, Jr.
John M. Rasnick, Jr."
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be referred to 1973-74 budget
study, The motion mas seconded by Mr, Garland and unaninouslT adopted.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC MELFARE: A communication from Mr, Cecil Simmons
complaining about the small amount of money be receives us a recipient of
public welfare, wis before Council,
Mr, Lisk moved 'that the communication be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr, Thomas and unanimon~l! adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITIZENS* ADVISORY COMMITTEE-STATE NIGHMAYS: The City Manager sub-
mitted the following report in connection with the Route 115 - 116 Project,
transmitting the following copy of a communication from Mr. J, O, Ripley, State
Urban Engineer, Virginia Department 'of Highways, tn regard to the matter and
also transmitting the following copy .of a communication written by him to Mr.
Rlpley in reply, advising that for certain reasons outlined in his report he
feels that the original alignment of the Uighway D~partment and as provided for
in the Major Arterial Highway Plan should be followed and that the cost of this
plan, under these circumstances, could and would be proper~y borne by standard
division between the state and the locality:
"December 4, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Route liS-lib Project - Crossing of Roanoke River
and N ~ M at Buzzard Rock Ford
For your information and consideration, I attach a
copy of a letter of November 20, 1972, from Mr. J.
Ripley, State Urban Engineer, Virginia Department of High-
mays in regard to the above matter, Also attached is a copy
of my letter of November 30, 1972, to Mr. Ripley in reply.
I am sorry that the attachments ar of the length that they
are but believe that the correspondence itself is the best
may to inform the Council rather than to attempt to sum-
marize.
"November 20, 1972
Mr. Julian F. Birst
City Manage~
City Hall
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Dear Mr. Hirst:
Thi~ is in reply to your letter of September
1972, concerning the above project near the sew-
age treatment plant. 'Since receiving your letter
I have discussed this matter math yon on two
occasions, the last being November 16, 1972.
Three props~ed alignments for this project have
been studied. They are as follows:
Orioinal Survey Line (Plan AI
This is the alignment shown in the Roanoke Regional
Valley Transportation Study. It crosses the
Roanoke River near the west end of*the existing
Buzzard Rock Ford Bridge and ties directly into
13th Street at Tayloe Avenue. This alignment
is the least desirable from n highwaT engineering
standpoint. The construction alone on this line
is estimated to cost $3,234.000°
.24
~locatlon Survey Line (Plan B) ·
This alignment crosses the Roanoke River east of
the Buzzard Bock Ford Bridge and Is adjacent to
the sewage'treatment plant. The construction
limits on this line are approximately 120 feet
from the'front door of the existing sewage treat-
men* plant, This line ties into 13th Street near
Uontrose Avenue and would require only one struc-
ture to span the river and the railroad. Re esti-
mate the construction cost only on this line to be
approximately $2.034,000,
Qffice Revision Relocation Survey Line (Pisa C)
This alignnent is approximately the same as 'Plan B*
but the construction limits uould be approximately
200 feet from the front door of the existing sewage
treatment plant. Construction on this line mill
encroach upon the normal waterway of the Roanoke
River and mill require heavy rip rap design for
slope protection (east bank). It appears that
it will be necessary to remove material from
the west bank of the river also. to provide an
equal channel for the river. The channel work
on the uest side of the river mill have to be studied
in ~ore detail to determine the cost. It will
present problems during construction because of
sedimentation. Thee~Imated cost of construction
only on this line is $2.434.000 which does not
include any mark on the west bank of the Roanoke
River. The work on the west bank could cost an
additional $400,000 to $S00.000.
At our meeting on November 16. 1972, you requested
that me use 'Plan A'. It is our opinion that
'Plan B* is superior and could be modified so as
not to prevent the expansion of the sewage treat-
ment plant. The proposed exhaust from the blowers
on the plant would have to be modified if 'Plan
B' is used.
Re will develop the plans using 'Plan A' provided
we receive a Council Resolution requesting this
alignnent and agreeing to pay the difference in
cost betmeen 'Plan A* and 'Plan B'; The Council
would agree to pay the initial $1,200,000 of the
cost of the project and the remainder would be
financed 85 percent State and 15 p~cent City
except for Storm sewers, which would be financed
in accordance with Commission Policy.
If the Council chose to request *Plan C*. we would
expect the City to pay the initial $400.000 to
$800,000 and the remainder would be financed 65-
percent State funds and 15 percent City funds
except for storm sewers. Re would expect to fur-
nish you an estimate which would include the work
on the mast bank of the Roanoke River. If the'
Council makes this choice the ad~tional cost
would not be any less than SdO0.O00.
If *Plan B* is chosen by the Council. the project
would be financed in the usual manner which is 95
percent State funds and 15 percent City funds,
except the storm sewers would be financed accord-
ance with Commission Policy.
There are many features of each plan which have been
discussed with you and your staff. I do not
believe it is necessary to repeat them. The Engineer-
ing 5tuff of the Dighway Department cannot justify
the additional expenditure of public.funds if it
will not benefit the traveling public.
The detailed design of this project has been
delayed more than a year in an effort to resolve
the location of this improvement. Re would appre-
ciate a decision on this matter as soon as pos-
sible so we may proceed with this project.
Sincerely,
S/ J. G. gipley
J. G. Ripley
State Urban Engineer'
Richmond, Virginia 23219
Deer Hr. Ripley:
Achnouledgment is given to the receipt of
your letter of November 20, 1972, identified by
subject project which involves the constructfnn
of e new highway for the Route 115 and 116 project
end would essentially connect 13th Street, S. E.
with 8ennington Street here in the City or Roanoke.
We are aware of and have appreciated the very coe-
slderoble amount of time that yon and others with
the Highway Department have devoted to the Study
of plans for this project and your efforst to
mutually work with the City in an effort to
resolve this sltuationo
The City of Roanoke has no desire whatsoever
to effect a controversy with the Department of
HiRhways over the highway location in this area.
Over the past two years, tho City has encountered
with others more than its share of controversy,
valid and otherwise, in the area of the Sewage
Treatment Plant. The relationships between the
Highway Department and the City have always been
excellent and have always been conducted on the
highest plane to the satisfactory accomplishment
of many worthwhile programs.
Your letter of November 20 deli'new the three
alternative plans, A, B, and C, which have become
injected into the question nf the crossing of the
railroad and the river and .e are not, at this
time, in any position to offer question as to the
comparative costs list between the three plans.
Me would acknowledge additionally that many
hours have been spent by the Highway Department
and by the City in an effort to determine if there
may be some other way be which economics and con-
struction situations could be worked out to bene-
fit this particular project. I especially note
the nearly four hour meeting which Mr. McGhee. our
City Enqineero and I bad in your office on Novem-
ber 16. We, with the City, understand the interest
of tho Oepartment in effecting economies on pro-
jects and os highway users and members of the pay-
lng public we command the Department for efforts
in this regard,
It is felt that the need for this project
has been well fouoded and does not require sub-
stantiation or elaboration at this stage, As
further emphasis though, this past week an
engineering analyses pointed the necessity of
further reducing the load limit on the Buzzard
Rock Ford Bridge and this will add additional
strength to the project importance.
There ore two significant factors In the
question of the location of this route that bear
being pointed out, even though statement of then
is in part repetition of previous discussions and
correspondence.
The first point is that Plan A repveseets
the alignment originally proposed and still
included in the Roanoke Valley Regional Highway
Plan. RhJle it is admitted that the specifics
of the Regional Plan can be subject to adjust-
ment, based principally upan determinations at
the time of actual construction study and after
certain established procedures, any change is
customarily and properly the net result of com-
paring the overall benefits of a relocation
against those benefits as would accrue under the
established alignment.
125
].26
Cost ia · factor in relocation decision.. '
However, it is fair to say that cost ia only one
factor and · relocation should not be predica~ed
solely on cost but ts stated, upon meighing ail
elements involved. One other element nam strongly
taken Into account in highway construction, as
uitb other projects, is that of environmental
Impact. The relationship of the highway proJect
math the sewage treatment project, both mssential
facilities, does appear to involve · matter of
environmental impact and this element, with other
reasons, enters determination of Justification of
variance from the origina! highmsy pla·.
· The second significant factor deals mitn the
sewage treatment plant itself. As you ·*ted,
Plan S, mhich mas the alternative alignment sug-
gested by the Highway Department, would come
within approximately 126 feet of the front door
of the main building facility of the existing
plant and mould occupy a major portion of the
area between the plant building and the river.
The highway, so situated would thereby restrict
use and expansion of the treatment facility to
the west which was the way me viewed Jt at the
time the Department suggested the alternative.
On that basis, we did, several months ago, ask
for further study when we the· suggested the De-
partment test a sec*od alter·aLive alignment, now
identified as Pla· C. As you ·ate in your letter.
this shift would cost more than Pla· B but
would be under Plan A by only a few hundred
thousand dollars. There are apparently some
other problems on Plan C which related to the
river itself.
Since our suggestion of study of Plan C.
and as we discussed and reviewed on November lb.
the plans have been completed for the expansion
of the Roanoke Sewage Treatment Plant.
This expansion and upgrading of treatment
levels is currently estimated to cost about $20
million, including work currently under way and
contemplated. This cost far exceeds original
estimates made by the State Mater Control Board
as to the requirements on the City to meet their
stream standards. #hen this cost figure, repre-
senting work to be completed Within the nest year
and one-half, is added to the valuation of the
existing facility, of approximately $9 million,
there should be an onsite physical plant value of
between $28 million and $30 million.
Math*ut going into details, the plant will be
unique in the country. To achieve this, we mill
be using every available and reasonable portion
of the land within the area for the expansion.
The Citl is currently acquiring two blocks of
residential and business property to provide
additionally needed space.
TO give some idea as to what is involved in
the expansion.of this plant, es it affects pro-
perty and the front or west area, of the follow-
ing data is of note. The City has had at the
existing plant site, prior to the commencement
of the expansion program, 59.25 acres of land.
The CitI has acquired mi·him the past year and is
actively engaged in acquiring a total of 37.1 acres
which will bring the total of the site to g7,97
acres.
Prior to the current expansion program, 15.51
acres of the area was utilized by physical ~aci-
lilies and structures as · part of the sewage
treatment plant. Some of the other area has been
used by our sewer department, by the National
Guard, by impounded vehicle storage, etc., how-
ever, this will be eliminated. The plant expan-
sion program will result in the physical utili-
zation of an additional 45.33 acres for a total of
the facilities of 50.94 acres. This latter figure
when compared with the 15,61 acres memos that the
facilities themselves, in the expansion ulll
quadruple in size,' I think thom this.gives some
idea of whet is taking place there in addition to
the dollar amount,
As to the difference between the 60,94
acres and the g?.g? acres, this is nude up Jn
berms, slope births, unusable land due to elevation
changes, required space betmeen facilities and u
narrow strip.along the river mhich must be
retained for normal high water levels,
One other set of data that bears upon the
plant expansion and the highway matters,
relotes to the building facilities on the west
side of the plant, Re have continually referred
to the impact of n highway close to the existing
or proposed mesa or front building, The eixsting
building structure at the plant has a tots1 floor
area of 17,500 square feet, In the expansion,
based on the plans as revleued with you, there
viii be an additional 3§,000 square feet of rigor
area added by new Structure. This mill result in
a total of 55,500 square feet of floor area, This
figure does not include additional laboratory
space and office area which we consider mill yet
hare to be added within the planning, The above
figures also do not take into account any addi-
tional requirements, mhich will be undoubtedly
necessary, for roadmay and parking in front of
the plant and do not recognize other potential
situations In the future.which may necessitate
extension of the building or adjacent treatment
facilities to the west within the snail available
ares,
Our concern as to this factor is over the
elimination of the availability of the samll area
between the building, present and proposed, and
the river and the insertion of the major highway
at this close proximity to a facility of this
character and active development. By the highway
under either Plan B or Plan C, the area would
essentially be eliminated and it is felt that the
above data emphasizes the resultin9 situation,
If a roadway or highway were already across
this area, then that night be one situation.
However, to viem the constricted space to the west
of this building together math the tremendous
involvement of the plant facilities~ both as to
cost and physical layout, and the uncertainties
of the future, it would seem highly questionable
to mom impose a major highmay across this front
consider that the original alignment of the HighJvay
Department snd as provided in tbe Regionnl Highmay
Plan should be followed and that a routing across
plant would be inadvisable,
In your letter of November 20, you spec~fied
that any additional construction costs for an
referring specifically to Plans A and C, would
have to be assumed by the City,
It is the position of the City at tbJs tine
that the necessity of the selection of Plan A is
not the result of an arbitrary decision of the City
the City. Rather Plan A is dictated by circumstances
which customarily and fully bear upon a decision
of a highway alignnent under any and perhaps all
circumstances, Therefore, the factor dictating
Plan A must be.taken.into account in the finding
of the total cost of the project and such cost as
'related to the advisable route would be subject to
the customary division between the State and the
.City.
As to the plant itself, rem semage trent-
went plants'in ¥irglni&, if any, have received as
much attention, as much emphasis and as much ·
assignnent of capital expense aa has the Raaaohe
facility, The City did not establish the water
quality standards for the Roanoke River and the
directives for the upgrading and enlargement of
the plant have their source mith the State end
Federal governments as is mell documented. This
is not to say that the City Is not interested nor
bas It given its attention to adequate waste
treatment, for the contrary is true. The plant is
· valleymide facility and contractually provides
and/or mill provide uaste sanitary treatment for
five political snbdivlsions; Thus there is here
a situation that is not, as previously stated, ·
matter of arbitrary choice by the City, Rather
this concerns the proposed occnpsncy Of a portion
of land by n highway, mherefn such occupancy will,
at the present and faf the future, have an Inad-
visable affect upon a major lntergovernnentnl
service facility in uhlch are directly involved
and participating the Federal and the State govern-
meats and five local governnenta.
· We would submit that there Js justification
for the expenditure of public funds for Plan A.
Re would submit that the benefit of the traveling
public cannot be separated from public benefit
as it relates to other essential functions. Me
submit that the cost differential, taking into
account the total assignment of public funds
within this area, is not sufficient to void
consideration of Plan A. Me submit, finally,
that the cost of Plan A, under these circum-
stances, could and mould be properly borne by
standard division between the state and the.
locality.
Therefore. the City of Roanoke returns to
the Highway Department by this letter and invites
your reconsideration in this matter. In doing
so, we assure you of our contJuued interest in
working with the Department and particularly
assisting in such manner as appropriate to the
resolution of this needed highway improvement.
Sincerely,
Si Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager*
If the City Council has any suggestions or comments,
we would certainly be glad to receive them. At the same
time, should the Council feel to the contrary to that which
I have expressed in my reply to Mr. Ripley, I mould certain
hasten to correct or revise to the Highmay Department.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
In this connection, a communication from Mr. Calvin B. Fulton, Vice-
Chairman, Southeast Executive Committee. endorsingPlan A for the Route 1i5-
116 Project and urgin9 that Council transmit a Resolution to the State Highmay
Department with reference to the matter, was before the body.
After a discussion of the matter, Mr. Lisk moved that the City
Attorney be requested to prepare the proper measure concurring in the communica-
tion from the City Manager addressed to Mr. J. G.'RJpley recommending that the
original alignment of the Highway Department and as provided for the Major
Arterial Highway Plan for the Route I15-I16 ProJect be ful~omed. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
~UDGET-SEMERS AND S'[ORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted the follom-
lng report recommending that $10300.00 be transferred from SapplJes and Materials
Construction to Rentals nnder Section n67, 'Sewer Construction and Maintenance,#
of the 1972o73 budget to provide additional funds in the event that it becomes
necessary to rent other equipment throughout the year:
'December 4, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Hoanohe, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Snbject: Transfer of Funds - Semen Maintenance
During the course of construction on ihe Southmest
Expressmay project, the State Highway Department contractor
nncovered a section of City sanitary sewer line nhich uss
in a deteriorated condition and in need of repair. The
location of this situation was near the intersection of
Albemarle Avenue and Third Street, S. M., involving a portion
of the formerly combined sanitary storm sewer, which has not
become only a sanitary Saner main due to the construction Of
new Storm drains in that area.
Because of the depth of excavation involved, and our
obligation not to delay the highway contractor marking in
the area, it became necessary for us to obtain the use of a
large bachhoe. In effect the City provided the labor and
materials to repair this sewer line and the highway
contractor provided the backhoe and operator at a very rea-
sonable rate since his equipment mas already on the project.
for the rental of equipment but these funds have been
exceeded and it is necessary to have some additional funds
available in the event that other rental becomes necessary
throughout the year.
It is rocommended that the sum of $1,300 be transfeYred
from Account 67-330, Construction, Supplies and Materials,
to Account 67-245, Rentals.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Julian F. Birst
Julian F. Rinse'
City Manager~
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the follosing emergency Ordinance:
(n20565) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section u57, 'Sewer
Construction and Maintenance," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and pro-
viding for an emergency.
(For fall text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 264.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrso Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Mebber 6.
NAYS: None ........... O. (Mr. Trout absent)
BUDGET-STREETS AND ALLEYS-STATE HIGHMAYS: The City Manager submitted
the following report recommending that $20,000.00 be transferred from Maintenance
of Buildings and Propertyunder Section m58, 'Street Construction and Repair,'
129
to 'Traffic Slgnsl st FreakiSh Road and Walnut Avenue, S. W., under Section
*Transfers to Cspita! Improvements Fund,? of 'the '1g72-73 budget, to provide
funds for e truffle signal at Franklin Road and Walnut Avenue, S.
'December 4, 1972
Honorable Hayer and City Council
Roenoket Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Traffic Control. Franklin Road. Moods Avenue
and Walnut Avenue, S. W.
One of the major factors in the planning of the extension
of the Southmost £xpresseay to Franhlin Road was the selec-
tion of traffic routes on that area of the City for vehicles
during construction and after the project .is completed. This
involved the determination of the present system making use
of Walnut Avenue and Woods Avenue mlth the closing of Maple
Avenue. At the time these decisions mere reached, It mas
recognized that there mas strong possibility that traffic
control signals mould' be' needed at Woods Avenue and Walnut
Avenue at their intersections with Franklin Road. In the
proposed budget before City Council for 1972-73, funds were
included for traffic signals at' these tmo intersections;
however, in the final budget cutting process, the funds for
these tmo signals mere removed. We had the obligation of
balancing the budget and me had the expectation that perhaps
the contractor on the Expressmay would not be moving quite as
fast in his construction as he has. This project has moved
moll in its schedule and is ahead of original programming.
Construction project in the closing of Raple Avenue
necessitated going ahead, as has been done, with the one-may
arrangements on Walnut and Woods Avenues. There has now
been time to observe conditions under this street routing.
As may have been noted by City Council me are in the process
of doing some limited street midenin9 improvements in the
area.
I attach a copy Of u report to me from Mr. J. D.
Sink. Superintendent of Traffic Communications Division,
dated November H. Also attached is a copy of a memorandum
from Rs. Woodson of that division of November H on the same
subject. The enclosures which are the detailed data is not
included but would be available for Council*s revlem. They
consist of a number of pages for reporductton.
In summary, it is not considered at this time that a
traffic light is required at Franklin Road and Woods Avenue.
Homever, it is recommended that a light be providedat
Franhlin Road and Walnut Avenue. This intersection meets
the measures by which the need for lights is determined.
This additionally merits consideration because of the num-
bered highmay traffic which moves through this point and
the characteristics of the intersection involve relatively
narrom streets, limited visibility and a large measure of
out-of-town ~nd unfamiliar traffic.
It is recognized that there are other traffic inter-
.section signal requests pending, includin9 one which is
under study, Ninth Street and Riverland Road, S.
homever, this-particular intersection is regarded as carry~
lng a high priority of requirement.
The estimated cost to signalize this intersection is
$20,000. It is felt, weighing all factors, including need,
that these funds can be justiably transferred from the
street surfacing account based on the'estimated program for
that work within the coming year.
It is recommended that the City Council by.budget ordi-
nance amendment provide for the transfer of $20,000 from
Department Code 58. Street Construction and Repair. Object
Code 255. Maintenance of'Buildings and Property ($207,000
for blacktop mork) to a capital account for traffic signal
at Franklin Road and WalnutAvenue.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. H~rst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager*
Mr. Link move~ that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered'the follouing emergency Ordinance:
(n20566) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
1g72-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing Sot an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance,. see Ordinance flook #37. page 264.)
Mr, Link moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr, Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
Mebber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O, (Mr. Trout absent)
EUDGET-SEMERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City ganager submitted the follom-
inn report recommending that $50,000°00 be ppproprinted to Plant Expansion under
Section nS§O, 'Sewage Treatment Capital Improvements Program,' of the 1972-73
budget, to provide funds for the purchase of a spare air bio#er and a spare new
sewage pump e~gine at the Sewage Treatment Plant:
"December 4. 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, ¥irginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Sewage Treatment Plant
Up until the'time, several months ago, when the heavy
press was applied at the plant to meet later Control Board
requirements and to put all facilities in full and maximum
operation, the City malnt~ined n spare air blower. Mith
the step up in operation, this spare was put into use. This
provided a total of five blowers, four gas and one electric,
In mid-October one of the blowers broke down an~ on October
17, 1972, a replacement was ordered. Ne consider it jgsti=
fled that there should be in addition a spare. The estimated
cost is $26,000 plus $2,000 for instaliation or a total
allowance considered advisable of $30,000.
Additionally! it in considered that the City should
pumps, two 9as and one electric, which are in full operation.
which mill replace existing pu~ps of the practicality of a
there should be a spare pump engine. The estimated cost is
$20,000.
$50,000 be appropriated from Sewage Treatment Capital Fund
to authorize requisition of the above two items.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F, Hirst
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance.
(m20567) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section n550, "Sewage
Treatment Capital Improvements Program,' of the 1972-73 Sewage Treatment Fund
Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For fall text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Eooh u37, page 255.)
Mr, Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Huberd and adopted by the follouing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and #slur
Webber 6.
· NAYS: None .......... O, (Mr. Trout absent)
BUDGET-SEEERS AND STORM DRAINS-CITY EMPLOYEES-PAY PLAN: The City
Manager submitted the following report recommending authorization for amendment
to the Pay Plan to provide for five positions to be desighsted as Supervisor at
the Sewage Treatment Plant, recommending that the pay range for these positions
be Range IS. advising teat if this recommendation is authorized and these posi-
tions can be established as of January 1. 1973. the additional funds required
to be appropriated will total $15,750.00 to the remainder of the fiscal year.
that monies are available within the Sewage Treatment Plant account and these
costs will be allocated as other operational costs of the facility:
*December 4, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Sewage Treatment Plant - Shift Supervisors
Over a period of time me have been reviewing the person-
nel operation at the Sewage Treatment Plant, Our situa-
tion has become increasingly apparent as to a need with the
growing size of the plant and the increasing extent of
operations and detail of operations.
The operation of the plant requires operator personnel
on duty, under a shift arrangement, 24 hours per day, 7
days per week. This system necessitates five different
shifts. Each shift is now supervised directly by the
Superintendent himself. This means that on those periods of
the day or week when the Superintendent is not present
the immediate responsibility for supervision of operators
is distributed among the operators themselves. Yhe need
is for a supervisory position oneucbshlft; This would
establish more effective control, reassure responsible
supervision, and would relieve the Superintendent for over-
all plant direction activities. Therrate of growth for the
plant and the rate of activity there is such that it is felt
that this request should be considered by the City Council
prior to waiting for the adoption of a new budget in the
coming year.
It is recommended that there be.authorized by budget
ordinance amendment and by amendment to the City Pay Plan
the five positions tO be designatedus Supervisor at the
Semage Treatment Plant. The recommended pay range for
these positions would be Range 15 ($525 to $674 per month).
This compares with Operators who ore currently rated at
Range 13 ($476-$610 per month). Range 15 would also
equate the Shift Supervisors to the Sewage Plant Mechanic
and the Sewage Plant Meter Mechanic as well as to th~ Labor
Foreman used-throughout other departments and divisions of
the City. If this recommendation would be authorized, and
these positions would be established as of January 1, 1973;
the additional funds required to be appropriated would
total $15,750 to ~he remainder of the fiscal year.
Monies are available mithin the Sewage Treatment Plant
account and these costs would be allocated as other
operational costs of the facility.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager~
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Ressrs. Garland, Hubardo Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Yebber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
BUSES: The City Manager submitted a mrttten report transmitting copy
of the following communication written by him on behalf of the Transportation
Study Committee to Roanoke.City Lines. Incorporated, in connection with the
proposal of Roanoke City Lines outlining arrangements under which they will
agree to continue public bus Service on an interim basis after December 31. 1972,
and until such time as the City of Roanoke may acquire ownership of the Company
and some or all of its assets and thereby initiate bus service under the City of
Roanoke:
"November 27, 1972
Mr. Mlstar Stone
President
Roanoke City Lines, Inc.
12 at Campbell Avenue. S. E.
Roanoke. Virginia 240DB
Dear Mr. Stowe:
This letter is written in response to your proposal
outlining arrangements under which Roanoke City Lines. Inc..
would agree to continue public bus service on an interim
basis after December 31, lg?2. and until such time as the
City of Roanoke may acquire ownership of the company and
some or all of its assets and thereby initiate bus service
under the City. Your proposal, fsrmally presented to the
City Transportation Committee on November B, has been
evaluated by that committee and the committee offers
the followin9 response to your offer.
The committee would be millln9 to propose to the City
Council that the City cover such deficit as may' occur to
Roanoke City Lines, Incorporated. until such tine as the
City might'assUme ownership'of the bus service. This time
is estimated at between three and six months and.would be
primarily dependent upon the length of time for the City to '
obtain, should such he made available, a Mass Transportation
Capital Improvement Grant from the Urban Mass Transporta-
tion Administration of the O. S. Department of Transporta-
tion. Under this arrangement, it mould be recommended to
the City Council that the City pay to the company, asum of
$15.000 per month commencing JanUary 1, 1973, and extending
until any transfer may be effected. At the-conclusion of
the interim period or at six months intervals, whichever
may be the greater, should more time beheaded to complete a
transfer, any difference between that which has been paid by
the City to the company and the actual size of the deficit to
the company, as determined by proper accounting procedures,
wonld be adjusted. For the purpose of this response
proposal, such expenses as may be agreed upon and as Would
be incurred in the operation of the bus system during the
interim period, may be applied against the total cost from
mhich the deficit is determined. It would be proposed that
all insurance costs during the interim period would be born
- by the City which may select the insurance carrier of its
choice.
133
reported
During this period no changes affecting the duy'to day
operation and udninistrntion of the system, or its service
agreement with Continental Trallmuys, Inc., ere proposed.
The committee considers this offer to be fair, in view
of the fact that it would relieve Roanoke City Lines, Inc**
of losses that it would incur through continued nonsubsidized
operation of the system after December 31, 1972. It being
understood that the reasoning for the termination of public
service by the company is attributable to the situation of
this deficit, It must be kept in mind that this recommended
arrangement is intended to be temporary, hopefully lasting
for only n few months at the most with the prospect of it.
being superceded by full acquisition of the bus service by
the City of Roanoke. with one potential arrangement there-
under being a permanent lease and supervisory agreement
between the City and Roanoke City Lines, Inc.
The committee makes this offer to your company and
wishes to recommend such a proposal to the City Council in
light of the fact that an interim agreement is necessary in
order for Roanoke to have sufficient time to obtain
approval of the Mass Transportation Capital Improvement Grant
as is necessary in order to obtain funds to acquire the
assets of your company or to take such other steps as
necessary to assure long range public bus service and to
undertake a program of capital improvements,
As both your company and the City are aware, time is a
significant factor in the situation and we look forward to
your response to this proposal and the committee makes
itself available for a further meeting or such consideration
as nay be beneficial to the matter.
Sincerely yours,
S/ Julian F. Ilicst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager'
Mr. Garland, Chairm of the Transportation Study Committee, verbalyy
that he received a telephone call from Mr. J. WJster Stowe, President
of Roanoke City Lines, Incorporated, on Friday afternoon, December 1, 1972,
advising that the bus company finds the city*s counter-offer unacceptable and
requesting direction from Council as to whether Council would like for the
Transportation Study Committee or the City Manager to continue negotiations
with Roanoke City Lines, Incorporated.
It appearing that the city had not received a written reply from
Roanoke City Lines. Incorporated, mith reference to the counter-offer made by
the City of Roanoke, gr. Thomas moved that the Transportation Study Committee
be requested to report to Council by Monday, December I1, 1972, as to the reply
from Mr. J. Mister Stowe, President of Roanoke City Lines, Incorporated, with
reference to the counter-offer of the City of Roanoke and as to any further
recommendations of the Transportation Study Committee with reference to the
matter. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk~and unanimously adopted.
CITY ENGINEER: The City Manager submitted a written report transmit-
ting copy of the following memorandum from the Acting Director of Public Morks
regardin9 the service center contract and certain drilling and testing work on
the property, advising that this is for the information of Council and for any
adjustment that may later be appropriate:
135
DATE: 'November B, 1972
TO: Br. Hirst'
FROm: Br. Brewer
SUBJECT: Public #orks Service Center Contrac~
When ue talked with the architect and engineers with
regards to our Public Works Service Center area, they
discussed doing some drilling and possibly some seismic
uork when the time arrived in order to determine exactly
what locution and what type of structure should be built.
The.time arrived when me were to need the drilling and
seismic work done. The local firms were tied up and it
mas determined that the architects were interested in a
firm in Washington, D. C., by the name of Law Engineering.
We hud a proposal submitted by this company and it was
agreed that we should go ahead and accept them and have
them prepare to come to Roanoke to do this murk.
At the same time the Regional Landfillarea took a rapid
stepforward and the need for drilling and seismic work
becaneour primary requirement. Knowing that me had this
firm of Law Engineertng on its' way down, we made a deci-
sion to switch priorities. Number one was the Dundee Land-
fill. The result was that we have delayed two weeks the
work on the Public Works Service Center area. The results
of this switch will undoubtedly cause some delay in the
completion of the work by Vosbeck Vosbeck Eendrlck and
Redinger.
This is to inform you that there will be a delay and that
we should be aware aud apprised of the fact that the ordi-
nance and information when Council awarded the contract to
VVKCR had u deadline date of roughly January 11, 1973. With
our delay and sidetracking of their firm that was to do the
drilling, it quite possibly could delay their report. I
think note should be taken and by copy of this memo. I am
sending it to the City Attorney so that he would be aware
of the information and could so note it so that we do not
penalize the architects and engineers for something that we
here in the City made a decision to switch people and
priorities,
Please advise if,you desire additional information.~
Mr. Bubard moved that the report and memorandum be received and filed.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
INTEGRATION-SEGREGATION-CITY MANAGER-CITY EMPLOYEES-PAY PLAN: The City
Manager submitted a written report advising of the appointment of Mr. Harold
Hardy as Assistant to the City Manager. transmitting copy of the folloning news
release prepared on this appointment which will advise Council of the back-
ground of this individual and will hopefully support his feeling that Mr. Hardy
is an excellent selection for this important post:
"NEMS RELEASE
Announcement is made of the appointment to the posi-
tion of Assistant to the City Manager Mr. Harold Hardy. This
will be the first appointment to this position which was
created by the Roanoke City Council in the 1972-73 City budget.
Mr. Hardy was selected from a number of persons who were con-
sidered for the position. This number included 52 applica-
tions for the position plus several others who did not apply
but who were also considered.
The biographical background of Mr. Hardy is as follows.
He was born in Bedford, Virginia, April 12, Ig4D. and is 24
years of age. Presently he resides in New York City.
Mr. Hardy attended London and Harrison Elementary Schools.
He attended Booker T. Washington. Jr., High School and there
was u member of the National Honor Society. He graduated in
1966 from Lucy Addison High School. At Addison he partici-
pated in basketball, the church choir, was a member of the
Student Council and was Sports Editor of the School news-
paper.
L36
In 1965. he was awarded the National Brotherhood Award
and has received other school athletic amerds.
Ne attended Tennessee Stere University and graduated in
1970 with a fl. S. Degree with a major in English and.a minor
in Speech and Drama. At Tennessee State he was a University
Counsellor, Dormitory Connsellor and a member of the School
Senate.
During six summers and other periods of his school year,
he was enployeed by Pun American Norld Airways In various
capacities at ~ennedy International Airport. He also worked
for four months Jn 1960 as a Sales Representative with an
advertising firm in Nashville, Tennessee. He has had addi-
tional employment with United Parcel Company in New York.
In January, 1971, he was employed as a teacher and since
then has taught at Roosevelt Nigh Sob,el of the Hemps,end
Long Island School System. His instruction subjects have
included English and Black Literature.
Mr. Rardy*s wife, Eddie Leu, is a native of Nashville,
Tennessee, and is a graduate of Tennessee State University,
She teaches English in a jnnior high school in New York. His
nether is Mrs. Cleo Hardy, 2126 Staunton Avenue, H.
Roanoke. His father resides in Uedford.
Mr. Hardy will commence his duties in this position on
December 26, 1972, and he will be presented to the City
Council on that evening. Re will terminate his teaching
work in New York to accept this position and it ia tenta-
tively expected that his wife will complete the school year
In commenting on the appointment, City Manager Julian
Hits, states that it si considered the City has acquired a
fine addition to its staff and to its responsibility to the
community. While the duties in the position will be mainly
oriented to community affairs, the Assistant to the City
of the various functions of the City Ranager*s office. Mr.
Hardy brings u blend of background experience and association
which it is felt is valuable to the position. Re has had
good preparation in his school and college work. He has the
combination of a direct and long-time association.with the
parts of the country, particularly New York area with its
heavy problems. He also has the experience of employment
over a period of several years with a large private organiza-
tion and more recently teaching and dealing with young people
in the schools.
An added benefit to the appointment to this particu-
lar employment is that it signifies the bringing back to
Roanoke one of its citizens and a graduate of its school
system who had gone elsewhere to seek the pursuit of his
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
AIRPORT: The City Manager submitted the following report advising of
the appointment amd promotion of Mr. Robert C. Peele to the position of Assis-
tant Manager of Roanoke Municipal (Mo,drum) Airport, effective December 1,
1972:
~Decenber 4, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Subject: Assistant Airport Mannger
This ia to advise the City Council of the appoiutment
and promotion of Mr. Robert C. Peele to.the position of
Assist,n, Manager of the Roanoke Municipal Airport.. This
appointment was effective December 1, 1972.
served in that position to this time. He is a graduate of
Roanoke Catholic High School, attended for one year St.
Andrems Business College and then attended National Busi-
ness College. He aervnd four years in the Korean Mar from
19SO to 1954 ns n member of the Air Arm of the Navy. mitb
this duty including three years of ship assignment and
varying service as an air flight cremman. Mr. Paola is
married.to Katherine H. Poole. They live at 314 Preston
Avenue, No £., and have four children with the oldest
daughter a student at the University of Virginia. He is
a member of the Knights of Columbus, American Legion,
Veterans of Foreign Mar and St. Andreus Church. He has
had special administrative courses within the U. S. Navy
and is currently attending a Fire Science school at
Vlrolnia #estern Community College.
Respectfully submitted,
S! Julian F. H/rst
Julian F. Hirst
City Ranager'
Dr. Taylor moved that the report be.received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
PLAN~ING-POLICE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted the following
report recommending thnt he be authorized to enter into an agreement with the
Consolidated Laboratory Services Operation Board in connection with forensic
laboratory services contemplated in a certain grant from the Division of Justice
and Crime Prevention and to payment of all funds received by the city from said
grant:
"December 4, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:'
Subject: Consolidated Forensic Laboratory
The City Council by Resolution No. 20472 on September
lB, 1972. took action to approve the establishment in the
Fifth Planning District of a ~estern Virginia Bureau of
Forensic Science. The City has further been designated as
the recipient of funds from the Virginia Council on Criminal
Justice, which funds will in turn be payable to the State
Treasurer with the laboratory to be administered by the
Commonwealth of ¥irginia under its division of Consolidated
Laboratory Services,
The State has forwarded a contract for execution
between the City and the Consolidated Laboratory Services
Operational Board to accomplish this purpose.
There is attached a resolution prepared by the City
Attorney which would authorize execution of this contract
and the same is submitted with recommendation for your
concurrence.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F, Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
137
!38
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur In the recommendation of the City
Manager Bud offered the f,Il,wing Resolution:
(u20569) A RESOLUTION authorizing execution of ~ contract between the
City of Roanoke and the Consolidated Laboratory Services Operational Board re-
lated to forensic laboratory services contemplated in a certain grant from the
Division of Justice and Crime Prevention and to payment of all funds received
by the City from said grant.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Rook z37, page 266.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The notion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the £olloniug vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
~ebber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
SCHOOLS-S~REEYS AND ALLEYS: The City Manager submitted a written
report advising that some time ago Council received a request from the Roanoke
City School Hoard for the provision or construction of a roadway across ~ashingto
Park to provide access from Rurrell Street to Addison High School. that this
matter was held in abeyance pending several decisions with respect to the park
and its development, that with the recent approval of the bond referendum which
provides funds for improvement to the upper level of the park. it is felt that
directions have now been set for the upgrading of the park on the upper level
and suggesting that Council continue to hold up on the matter of the roadway
until the plans for the overall final rendering of the upper level of the park
have been completed and reviewed by Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
GARBAGE REMOVAL-STATE HIGHNAYS: The City Manager submitted the follow-
ing report recommending that Council adopt a Resolution to be transmitted to
the State Highway Department supporting the request of Roanoke County for
improvements to Rutrough Road:
"December 4. 1972
R,n,table Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Regional Landfill Access
In anticipation of favorable consultant recommenda-
tion on the proposed regional landfill in southeast Roanoke
County, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors has by
resolution requested the Virginia Department of Highways
to program and implement certain basic improvements includ-
ing widening and straightening, of that portion of Hurt,ugh
Road in Roanoke County. This roadway will undoubtedly be the
principal access to the proposed landfill area. To indicate
the regional significance of this potential development, it
has been suggested that Roanoke City Council consider endors-
ing and supporting the County's request to the State High,ay
Department for improvements to this roadway.
It should be noted that if thin area is selected for
site of the regional landfill the City will similarly have
portion of Rutrough Road ulthln the City limits of Roanoke
including the intersection with Riverlend Road. It is anti-
,clpated that such work can be accomplished by City forces
using funds already appropriated for street maintenance.
It is recommended that City Cooncil adopt a resolu-
tion to the State Highway Department sup'porting the County*s
request for improvements to Rutrough Road.
Respectfully submitted,
$/ Julian F. Rirst
Julian F. Hlrst
City Manager*
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and
unanimously adopted.
Germaine to the matter, Mr. Lfsk presented copy of a draft of a pro-
posed agreement to be entered into between the City of Salem, the City of Roanoke,
the Town of Vintou and the County Of Roanoke. agreeing to acquire real and
personal property for the operation of a regional sanitary landfill and to
establish a Roanoke Bailey Regional Solid Maste Disposal Board for the purpose
of administering and operating a sanitary landfill aa a joint and cooperate
undertaking fat use by all parties, upon certain terms and conditions.
Mr. Lish moved that the draft of the proposed agreement be received
and filed and made a part of the records of Council. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
GARBAGE REMOVAL: The City Manager submitted the following report on
the progress and status 'of the bulk refuse collection fees which were instituted
by Council as a part of the 1972-73 budget, said information having been extracted
from a report furnished to him from the Acting Director of Public Works:
"December 4, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Bulk Refuse Collection Fee
The City Council may be interested in n progress and
status report on the bulk refuse collection fees which were
instituted by the Council as a part of your 1972-73 budget.
The following information is extracted from a very complete
report £urnlsbed to me on November 14, 1972, by Mr. Brewer,
Acting Director of the Department. Ilia detailed report with
.copies of the record sheets applicable to the billing and
collections are available should any of the members of Coun-
cil wish to see them.
#hen the program was approved, a letter was sent by the
Public Marks Department to all businesses, individuals, etc.,
who met the requirements for bulk refuse billing according to
the records of the City, Each business firm or individual
was advised of the fee and the schedule of the fees together
with information as to the number of collections that they
were receiving and together with an attached form on which
they could indicate the number of collections'they wished and
an acceptance of the fee. The answers were returned and in
some instances, it was found that collection records did not
precisely match the City records although there was reasonable
closeness. Thus, throughout the month of Jaly the work was
administratively in reviewing all of the Internal system
records of the City.
When this mas completed the first mouth under the new
records was started in August and the first month billing
period was for the ,last three weeks of August. The bills
were hnndtyped in September snd sent out. Even though con-
tact mas made'with eoch business firm. etc**' some corrections
were then found to be needed.
Beginning with the September bill each billing bas been
a mutter of record through the Clty*S computer system. Various
members of the supervisory and clerical staff of the Public
Works Department and its Sanitation Division concentrated on
this program to assure its accuracy. Excellent cooperation
mss given by the City Auditorts office and the computer division
personnel to the extent that the entire system is now computerized
both aa to monthly notices and also delinquent a~counts.
The computer division has provided the Public Works
Department with a bulk container collection list which is
used to provide information for billing. This listing is
based on the Sanitation Dlvision*s route cumber and shows~
the accounting number used in the billings. This is a very
helpful continuing record which can be printed at anytime
and allows the benefit of indicating the number of weekly
pick ups to each unit of the government affected in the pro-
cess.
There are now approximately 80 firms, corporations,
organizations, etc. that are being billed. Through the
months of August, September and October the revenue has been
approximately $24o000. It would be anticipated that for the
year the amount will exceed $100.000. This is particularly
true as more and more locations are 9oin9 to container method.
There has been considerable adjustment amongst many
businesses and firms to consolidate their collections and to
reduce the internal volume so as to reduce the number of
pickups. This has benefited efficiency both for the firms
as well as for the City and has been a significant side
benefit of the program.
At the same time as volume of refuse is growing more
firms, etc. are adding pick ups and are or will be entering
into the paying category.
There has been only the very minimum of complaint o£
objections to the program and we have been rather impressed
with the acceptance by users of this method and system. The
initiation of this new procedure bas been highly effective
and well operated. I think that the public relations has
been very well handled. I note to the City Council, commen-
dation to Mr. Brewer and the Public Works Department, Mr.
5howalter and the Sanitation Division and Mr. Gibson and Mr.
Lavinder of the Auditor*s office for their success in the
organization of this.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager.
Mr. Garland moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
WATER DEPARTMENT: The Cit~ Manager submitted the following report
with reference to resolving the water situation of the Town of Vinton by brlngin!
its distribution system into the City of Roanoke system and operating them as
one unit, advising that whether this will be by ownership, lease or mutual
agreement is one of the questions that will have to be worked out:
*December 4, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Committee
S=bJeet: Water - ¥inton
In · recent discussion with.me, Mr, Kit B. Riser,
he has been giving thought ·s lo its possibility, I tbinh
that the lde· merits bringing il on to the City Council ·t
this st·ge. I thinh it is · good one in principal even,
though there are obviously · number of der·ils that would
have to be worked OUt,
Re ·re generally fsmJliar with the Vinlon wster dis-
tribution system. This is not bec·use of any special hnow-
ledge or investigation on our port; rather this comes ·bout
as n result of the interrelationships of the two systems over
a number of lears. We also know of the proposition by lhe
Town of Vinton to develop its gun individual source of
water ·nd to seporate from the longstanding City of Roanoke
supply. As we understand by news accoonts the Town is
reapplying for · grant of several million dollars. The
precise points which have led the Town to setting up its
independent water source are not fully known to us. The
inference has been thai it is bccause of rate disagreement
with the City of Roanoke. Rhether it is this or other
factors are not completely known.
The suggestion that has been advanced by Mr. Riser
is one that to my knowledge has never been discussed.
This is whether there would be · possibility of
resolving the water situation for Vinton by bringing its
distribution system into the City of Roanoke system and
operating them as one unit. Whether this would be by
ownership, lease ar'mutual agreement Js one of the ques-
tions that would have to be worked Out.
Essentially, the two systems would be operated as
one. The City would maintain the system. The bulk water
issue would be eliminated. The customers would go on the
regular computer billing system. Rates would be established
under the existing schedule. The Town would be relieved
of the responsibility of a utility operation. The customers
would be afforded the benefit of · larger system, maintenance
resources, equipment availability and purchasing power. A
prime benefit would be in source of water. The capital
expenditure which the Town is considering would be avoided.
With stability of the customers in the Vinton and surround=
lng area certain additions would be justified in the City*s
Falling Creek Reservoir supply operation. Mith the assurance
and stability of Vinton customers and the Falling Creek
supply the.City would be afforded greater flexibility in
its water system both by the City and for the Town.
~his. admittedly, is the extent to which thinking has
gone to this time. We feel.that dollar wise, the VJnton
customers would benefit under this system. If there is
merit to this idea it may be that this is advanced to
generate thinking ·long this line or it may be that the
City Council would wont to offer this proposition to the
Town for discussion and study in greater depth.
Respectfully submitted,
S! Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
Mr. Hub·rd moved that the report be referred to the Water Resources
for stud~, report and recommendation to Council. T~e motion was
seconded by Mr. Llsk and unanimously adopted.
INDUStRIES-STATE HIGHWAYS: The City Manager submitted · written report
advising that hehas been informed that the Virginia Department of Highways is
reodvertising the Industrial Access Road - loth Project for the third time on
December 13, 1972, that previous advertisements have resulted in single bids
being submitted by one firm, that it has been the judgment of the Department that
each time the bid has been considerably higher than the estimate of the Highway
I.'42
Department and that It ia hoped that this third round of bidding will result in
a construction contract being awarded.
Mr. Lash moved that the report be received and filed. The notion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
SALE OF PROPERT¥-S'fATK HIGHMA¥S-MATER DEPARTMENT-HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE
The City Manager submitted the following report in connection with the
Tenth Street Highway Improvement Project, advising that he has received from the
Highway Department n proposed standard form Resolution whereby'the City of
Roanoke is requested to certify that utility adjustments Mill be made so as not
to conflict with the.contractors construction and recommending that Council
approve the necessary Resolution as requested by the Highway Department:
"December 4, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlen~n:
Subject: Tenth Street - Highway Improvement Project
The Virginia Department of Highways has advised the
City that it hopes to advertise the Tenth Street Improve-
ment Project between Patterson Avenue and Gilmer Avenue
within the very near future with bids tentatively to be
received on January 10, 1973. In that regard, certain
utility facilities have been or uill need to be adjusted,
to correspond with the proposed highway construction. It
is standard procedure under such urban highway projects
that the local government is responsible for arranging to
have all utilities relocated or adjusted to as not to con-
flict with the highmay construction.
~ertain otilities have already been adjusted ~nd/or
relocated while other facilities will need to be adjusted
during the construction project. The State's specifica-
tions for the work require that the contractor coordinate
bis efforts with the owners of those utilities which must
be adjusted during construction so as to allow such work to
occur with a minimum interference to all involved, le
have received from the Highway Department a proposed
standard form resolution whereby the City is requested to
certify that utility adjustments will be made so as not to
conflict with'the contractor's construction. As stated
above, the specifications for the project cover those situa-
tions which must be adjusted during the highway construc-
tion.
It is recommended that City Council approve the
necessary resolution as requested by the Highway Department
concerning utilities on this project. The City Attorney*s
office has been furnished necessary details for preparation
of the appropriate resolution.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. HJrst
Julian F. Rirst
City Ranager~
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager
and offered the following Resolution:
(~20570) A RESOLUTION relating to the relocation or adjustment of
utility ~acilities in connection with the Virginia Department of Highways Tenth
Street Project CO00-12R-IOI, C-501, from the intersection of patterson Avenue
to the intersection of Gilmer Avenue.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Rook t37, page 267.)
Mr. Lish moved the.adoption of the Resolution. The motion mas seconded
by Mr. Bubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, flubard, Llsh, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
#ebher .........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (#r. Trout absent)
After a discussion mith reference to underground utilities, Mr,
Garland moved that the City Manager be requested to report to Council on the
feasibility and cost involved in connection with providing underground utilities
for the Tenth Street Highway Improvement Project. The motion was seconded by
Mr, Link and unanimously adopted.
POLICE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a written report advis-
ing that by Resolution No. 20503, Council authorized a second sixty day period
of extended salary to Patrolman Milliam L. Bowling who was injured in the line of
duty on May 27, 1972, that as of November 24, 1972, this sixty day period covering~
Officer Bomllog's salary expired, that Officer Bowling is still disabled and his
return to duty ia not begun at this time and again recommending that Council, by
appropriate measure, authorize payment to Officer Bowling of his salary for on
additional sixty day period, or necessary portion thereof.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution:
(u20571) A RESOLiYflON authorizing and directing that Milliam L.
Oowliag, a member of the Police Department who is unable to performhis regular
duties by reason of personal injury received in line of duty,'he paid his regular
salary for an additional period of sixty (60) days beginning November 24, lg?2.
(For full text of Resolution. s~e Ordinance Book #37, page 2bB.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the followiu9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
Mebber ..........................
NAYS: None .......... O. (Mr. Trout absent)
FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a written report in con-
nection with the southwest fire station, advising that at the last meeting of
Council he was requested to prepare detailed cost analysis comparisons between
two sites at the intersection of Overland Road and Colonial Avenue, S.
advising that he is proceeding on this data, that it will necessitate survey
cross sectioning of the two properties because of the significance of the fill
factor, that this will tahe a couple of weeks to accomplish and that the archi-
tect has been requested to prepare schematics of the station.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
1 43
144
BUILDIN6S: Th~ City MonoMer submitted the following report in con-
auction with 8 duelling at 1716 Edgerton Avenue, S. E.., advising that the
structure hem no~ been demolished ced cleoredo thor this hca been n very involved
situation and its bundling boa been nn example .of the couplicoticns that can
arise in on effort to remove o structure which has been on the borderline us
to Its condition of repair and which has complicated ownership:
"December 4. 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Removal of House
A dwelling structure at 1716 Edgerton Street, S.
has been a subject of discussion for several years. It has
been before the City Council on one or nora occasions, has
been inquired into by numbers of the Council and has been
requested at various times by the Riverdale Civic League.
This is to advise that this structure has now been demolished
and cleared.
This has been a very involved situation and its handling
has been an example of the complications that can arise in an
effort to remove a structure which had been on the borderline
us to its condition of repair and which had complicated
ounershipo
Respectfully'submitted,
S! Julian F. Rirst
Julian F. Hlrst
City Manager'
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted a written report
transmitting copy of a clipping from the September 25, Ir?2, issue of Industry
leek, advising that it is an indication of the Roanoke Sewage Treatment Plant
beginning to get up into the world of recognltton and somehow that recognltion
and acceptance seems appropriate to commence with the use of waste pickle
liquor.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
SALE OF PROPERTY-STATE HIGHWAYS-PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: The City
Attorney submitted the following report advising of the necessity for conveyance
to the Commonwealth of Virginia of land in portion of the right' of way of the
Blue Ridge Parkway Mill Mountain Spur Road and of a lease to the United States
of America of land acquired for Chestnut Ridge and the Roanoke Mountai.n recrea-
tional area and tr unsmi~Ling Ordinances authorizing and directing execution of
such instruments:
'December 4, 1972
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
There ure enclosed herewith proposed ordinances which
would now authorize (u) conveyance to the Cowwonaeslth of
Virginia of approximately 237.5 acres of land now comprised
in the Blue Ridge Pmrkway*s Mill Mountain Spur Road and in
Its Roanoke Mountain Loop Rondo rot 8 cOnsideration of
$74,30g.02o cash, puyuble to the City, end (b) o lease to
the United Staten of Awerico for · term of ninety-nine
years of approximately 613.2 screw of land now developed by
tbs Blue Ridge Parkway end operated by it as the Chestnut
Ridge recreational area end the Roanoke Mountain scenic
a~es In conjunction with the Parkway and with the above-
mentioned spur and loop roads.
The above Will effect u culmination of the Joint
undertaking heretofore entered into between the City, the
Commonwealth of YJrginJa and tbs Government's National Park
Service whereby and in order to provide the now existing
Parkway connection to Mill Mountain Park end the recreational
and scenic areas and road on Roanoke Mountain the Common-
wealth and the City undertooh to acquire oil of the lands
necessary for the project, (the Commoowealth paying the
cost of that acquired for road right-of-way purposes); the
Government undertook to construct and thereafter operate for
ninety-nine years the roadway system and recreational areas;
the City undertaking to acquire the lands necessary for
development of the recreational and scenic areas and to
make them available to the Government under long-term
lease in consideration of such development.
Various miner modifications of the basic agreement have
occurred and been agreed upon by the parties during the
protracted course of acquisition and construction. While it
was first contemplated that the Commonwealth would acquire
all necessary road right-of-uny it ~as later agreed, in
order to avoid payment of double damages in some instances,
that the City acquire such of those properties as were
intended for both roadway and recreational purposes; hence,
the necessity of the current conveyauce to the Commonwealth
as provided in the first of the two ordinances. Some of
the land so acquired by the City was utilized in agreed
improvement of a portion of Yellow Mountain Road, S.
and a very small portion was agreed to be utilized as a
si~e for the Chapel Forest water reservoir which the City
provided to serve the Parkway*s campground area. Another
portion of the land acquired by the City originally contem-
plated as a part of the Parkway development was. later,
agreed to be reserved by the City os the site of future
public park development. All of the above and other matters
are touched upon or covered in the accompanying ordinances
and will be recognized in the deed of conveyance and the
lease which would follow.
It is respectfully recommended that each of the proposed
ordinances be now adopted by the City Council.
Respectfully,
S/ J. N. Kincanon
J. N. Kincanon'
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur ~ the report of the City Attorney
and that the followin9 Ordinance providing for the transfer and conveyance of
title to the,Commonwealth of Virginia of certain lands acquired by the City of
Roanoke for the. purpose of the construction of Spu~ roads from the Blue Ridge
Parkway,(Route 48), to the top of Mill Mountain nod to the top of Roanoke Moun-
tain. (formerly Yellow Mountain). upon certain terms and provisions, and authoriz-
ing and permitting the construction of an overhead bridge across Yellow Mountain
Read, S. E.. as a part of the first Of said spur roods, be placed upon its first
reading:
L46
(n205T2) AN 0R~INANCE providing for the trnnsfe~ and conveyance of
title to the Commonwealth of Virginia of'certain lands acquired by the City rot
the purpose or the construction or spur roads from the Blue Ridge Pathway,
(Route 48), to the top or Bill Bountaln and to the top or Roanohe Mountain,
(formerly Yellow Mountain), upon certain terms end provisions; nad authorizing
and permitting the construction or an overhead bridge across Yellow Mountnin
Road, S. £** ns a part or the first or said spur roads.
Ra£R~A5. pursuant to certnln ordinances and resolutions or the Council
heretofore duly adopted and pursuant to certain written agreements and under-
tubings entered into between the National Path Service or the United States
governmen? and the Department or flighmays or the Commonwealth or Virginia and
the City or Roanoke pursuant to said ordinances and resolutions, the City has
now acquired in its own name by purchase and by condemnation proceedings the rea
simple title to numerous tracts and parcels of land lying matnly in the Gave
Spring Ragisterial District of Roanoke Coonty but a small poFtiou or which is
located within the south corporate limits of the City between said corporate
limits and Yellow Mountain Road, $. E.o a portion of mhich said newly acquired
lands were needed, wanted and acquired for the purpose of the constFUCtiOU of
certain spur roads leading from the ~lue Ridge Pathway to the top of Bill Roan-
rain, in the City, and to the top or Roanoke Mountain, (formerly Yellow Mountain)
in Roanoke County; and
MIIEREAS. it has heretofore been agreed between the City and the
Commonwealth that such of the lauds needed for the right of may for said spur
reads so acquired by the City would, subsequent to such acquisition, be trans-
ferred and conveyed to the Commonwealth upon payment by the Commonwealth to the
City of an agreed proportionate part of the cost of the City*s acquisition of
such lands and it has been determined between said parties that the consideration
$o to be paid by the Commonwealth to the City upon the transfer and conveyance
hereinafter authorized shall be the sum of $74,309.02. exculsive of the
incidental costs of acquisition to the City such as appraisals, court costs.
legal expenses, etc.; and
BHEREAS, in constructing the proposed spur road to Mill Mountain,
and its subsequent maintenance it mas necessary that the Commonwealth or the
government be permitted to construct an overhead bridge across Yellow Mountain
Road, S, E., within the City, said bridge to thereupon become a part of said
spur road system; and to thereafter be maintained by the Commonwealth or the
government; and
MREREAS, the authority herein given and the acts herein directed to
be done carry out the purposes of the former ordinances and resolutions of the
Council in the premises.
THEREFORE. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City or Roanoke as
follows:
1. That the Rayor and the City Clerk be, and they are hereby authoriz-
ed to execute and to attest and seal, respectively, for and on behalf or the
City, a proper deed of conveyance drawn upon such form as is prepared and
approved by the City Attorney. conveying to the Commonwealth of Virginia. acting
by and through her Department of Highways. and to'her successors or assigns, with
general warranty, the fee simple title to-the following described two. (2).
tracts or parcels of land an the same stash,un on a certain map entitled *Section
l-M. Plat of Hill Mountain and Roanoke Mountain Lands* prepared by and for the
Blue Ridge Parkway under date of March 3. 19721o · copy of mhich map is on file
in the office of the City Clerk. viz:
(a) A certain approximate 145.4 acre tract or parcel of
land extending west and south from Yellom Mountain Road.
So E°. ned from the westerly line thereof to the northerly
line of certain land heretofore acquired by the Common-
wealth of Virginia. Departeent uf Highways. as a right-of-
may for the Mill Moon*aim Spur Road leading westerly from
the Blue Ridge Parkmay. (Route 4B). in Roanoke County. to
Mill Mountain. in the City of Roanoke. said 145.4 acre
tract or parcel of land being a central portion of what is
shown on the aforesaid map os a 203.60 acre tract of land.
more OF less. extending from said Blue Ridge Parkway west
and northerly, across Vellow. Mountain Road. S. £.. to the
saddle on Mill Mountain; the major portion of said 145.4
acre tract of land being situate in Roanoke County.
Virginia. but a small portion thereof, along the west side of
Yellow Mountain Road. S. i.. being situate in the City of
Roanoke; and
(b) That certain 92.1 acre tract or parcel of land on
Roanoke Mountain. (formerly Yellow Mountain). in Roanoke
County. Virginia. extending from the easterly right-of-way
line of the Blue Ridge Parkway. (Route 46). at two. (2).
locations up the east and west sides of Roanoke Mountain
and shown on the aforesaid map us the right-of-way for the
· Yellow Mountain Loop RoadN;
for a total consideration of $74.309.02. cash. said deed to convey, further.
all easements of access, light or air incident to the residue lands of the City
abutting upon the aforesaid spur road rights-of-way and/or upon any of its
ramps, loops or connections; to contain a metes and bounds description of the
tracts of land so conveyed; and to be made subject to such easements for
electric power, telephone and telegraph and underground petroleum products
pipeline rights-of-way as may be of record affecting the title to the aforesaid
lands or to any one or more parcels thereof; and thereafter, and upon tender of
the $74.309.02 consideration above mentioned to the City. to delivbr said deed
to the Commonwealth or to her authorized attorneys or agents; and
2. That said CSt7 officials may incorporate in the aforesaid deed of
conveyance or may, by separate writing, duly executed, sealed and achnowledged,
grant and issue, on behalf of the City, to the Commonwealth or Virginia, Depart-
ment Of Highways, or to her designated assignee, a good sufficient irrevocable
grant or permit of the right to construct, maintain and operate as a part of the
aforesaid spur road to Rill Mountain, an overhead bridge across Yellow Hountain
Road, S. £** at the approximate.locatio~ of the same as is shown on the plan
dated Hatch 3, 19?l. aforesaid, within a nonexclus~ive vlght-of-way over and
across said Yellow Mountain Road, S. E., as shown on said map, sufficient for
the proper construction, maintenance and operation of said bridge and for the
landscaping and beautification of said bridge and connecting spur Fond rights-
of-way, the form and sufficiency of any such separate written grant or permit to
be approved by the City Attocney, the plans for the construction and location
of said bridge having heretofore been approved by the Eity Manager and the
Directoc of Public ~orks of the City.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED t~at a certified copy of this ordinance be
transmitted by the City Attorney to the Commonwealth of Virginia, Department
of Highways, through appropriate channels.
The notion was seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
Webber ...........................
NAYS: None ............O. (Mr. Trout absent)
Rro Lisk then moved that the following Ordinance providing for the
lease by the City of Roanoke to the United States Of America of certaiu lands
acquired by the City of Roanoke for public open space, recreational and scenic
area purposes on Chestnut Ridge and on Roanoke Mountain, oa both sides of the
Blue Ridge Parkway in Roanoke County. Virginia, but a small portion of which
is in the City of Roanoke, Virgiuia, for a term of ninety-nine years, upon
certain provisions, be placed upon its first reading:
(~20573) AN ORDINANCE providing for the lease by the City of
Roauoke to the United States of America of certain lands acquired bythe City roi
public open space, recreational and scenic area purposes on Chestnut Ridge and
on-Roanoke Mountain, (formerly Yellow Mountain), on both sides of the Blue Ridge
Parkway, (Route dS), in Roanoke County, Virginia, but a small portion of which is
in the City of Roanoke. Virginia, for a term of ninety-nine (99) years, upon
certain provisions.
WHEREAS, pursuant to certain ordinances and resolutions of the Council
heretofore duly adopted and pursuant to certain written agreements and under-
takings entered into between the National Park Service of the United States
government and the Department of Highways of the Commonwealth of Virginia and
149
the City of Roanoke pursuant to snJd ordinances sad resolutions, the City has
acquired in its own name by purchase and by condemnation proceedings the fee
simple title to numerous tracts sad parcels of land on Chestnut Ridge and on
Roanoke Mountain, (formerly Yellow Mountain), lying mainly in the Cure Spring
Magisterial District of Roanoke Connty but partly located within the south cor-
porate limits of the City between said corporate limits and Yellow Mountain Road,
S. E., n portion of which said nemiy scquJre~ lands were needed, wanted and
acquired for public open space, recreational and scenic area purposes: and
MHEREAS, it has heretofore been agreed betmeen tbs City and the
that such of the lands needed for recreational and scenic area use so acquired
by the City would, subsequent to such acquisition, be leased and demised to the
United States of AeerJca for such purposes, without cost, for a term of ninety-
nine (99) years from the date of such lease, and the authority herein given and
the acts herein directed to be done carry out the purposes of the former ordi-
nances and resolutions of the Council in the premises and the agreements of the
Cltyentered into pursuant thereto.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as
follows:
That the Mayor and the City Clerk be, and they are hereby
authorized to execute and to attest and seal, respectively,
and thereafter to acknowledge, for and on behalf of the City,
a proper indenture of lease drawn upon such form as is pre-
pared and approved by the City Attorney, leasing and demis-
ing to the United States of America and its assigns for a
term of ninety-nine (99) years from the date of such lease,
to be used for public open space, recreational and scenic
purposes, the following described four (4) tracts or parcels
of la~d as the same are shown on a certain map entitled
'Section l-M, Pl~t of Mill Mountain and Roanoke Mountain
Lands~ prepared by 'and for the Blue Ridge Parkway under
date of March 3, 1971, a copy of which map is on filein the
office of the City Clerk, viz:
(a) That certain 153,9 acre, mare or less, parcel
of land shown lying on the west side of the
right-of-way of the Hill Mountain Spur Road
leading from the Blue Ridge Parkway to Mill
Mountain and designated as the 'Chestnut Ridge
Campgreund* area containing 153.90 acres, more
County, Virginia, but a small portion of which,
abutting the west line of Yellow Mountain Road,
So Eo, is situate in the City of Roanoke;
parcel of land shown lying on the east side of the
right-of-way of said Mill Mountain~Spur Road lead-
ing from the Blue Ridge Parkway to Mill Mountain
and designated on the aforesaid map as "Leased
Land Mill Mtn° Spur - 75.30 Acres ~., situate wholly
in Roanoke County; and
(c) That certain 364.20 acre. wore or less, parcel of
lurid shown lying on the east side of the right-of-
way of the Blue. Ridge Parkway on Roanoke Mountain,
(formerly Yellow Rountain) in Roanoke County, and
designated on the aforesaid as "Leased Land
Roanoke mtn, - 364,20 Acres i~ and
(d) That certain 16,BO acre, wore or lesst tract or
parcel of land shown lying on the east side of the
right-of-way of the Blue Ridge Parkway on Roanoke
Mountain, in Roanoke County, end designated on the
aforesaid nap as "Leased Land Roanoke Mtn, Tract
E - 1§.60 Acres ~";
said lease to be made solely upon consideration of the lessee
~avin9 constructed a spur road from the Blue Ridge Parkway,
(Route 48), to Mill Rountain, in the City of Roanoke, and
a loop road from said Blue Ridge Parkway to the top of
Roanoke Rountain (formerly Yellow Rountaln)o in Roanoke
County, and to demise and gr'anto further all easements of
access, light or air incident to residue lands of the City
abuttin9 upon any of the aforesaid tracts or parcels of
land or upon any of lessee's road rights-of-way, ramps, loops
or connections; and to 9rant right to the lessee during the
term of said lease to construct, maintain and operate on the
demised premises such equipment, facilities, structures and
works as it may deem necessary or appropriate in connection
with its use of said property, to carry out on said property
such grading, clearing and construction operations as it may
deem necessary in connection with its use of said property,
to remove and take from said property for its uses and pur-
poses such materials naturally located thereon as it may
desire and. at any time while such lease be in effect and
at its expiration and for a reasonable time thereafter,
remove from the property any and all equipment, facilities,
structures and works, iucluding fences, theretofore con-
structed or installed by it; said lease to be made subject
to such easements for electric power, telephone and tele-
graph and underground petroleum products pipeling rights-of-
way as may be of record affecting the title to the aforesaid
lands or to any one or more parcels thereof and to the City's
right to rental from any of the same, and to reserve the
City's right to continue.to maintain any public water
storage tank site, water tank or reservoir now located on
parcel (a) and (b), abovedescribed; and thereafter,.and upon
execution of the aforesaid indenture of iease by the parties
in duplicate one executed copy thereof shall be delivered to
-said lessee, the other executed.copy to be.filed in the office
of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that a certified copy of this ordinance be
transmitted by the City Attorney to the United States of America through the
Superintendent of its Hlue Ridge Parkway, National Park Service.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
Mebber ........................... ~.
NAYS: None ........... O. (Mr. Trout absent)
DUDGET-CITY ATTORNEY: The City Attorney submitted a written report
recommending that $70.00 be appropriated to Dues, Memberships and Subscriptions
under Section #4, *City Attorney** of the lg72-73 budget, to provide fonds for
a subscription for all printed bills introduced in the General Assembly.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the request of the City
Attorney and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(a20574) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~4, *City Attorney,"
of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #37, page 269.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the f. Il,sing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Dubard, Lish, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Rt. Troutabsent)
PENSIONS: The City Auditor submitted the f,Il,ming report advisin9
that on November 13, 1972, he made a report to Council concerning cost of living
increases benefiting retired members of the Employees' Retirement System of the
City of Roanoke, that thisreport was prepared at the request of'Council and mas
to give cost of living increases shich would be on a higher basis than the ten
per cent mhich had previously been recommended, that this report provided Coun-
cil with a method that would result in an overall cost of living increase of
sixty per cent since the system sas established, the sixty per cent including
the twenty per cent that sas granted in lgTO, that Council referred the proposal
back to him for the purpose of calculating the cost to the Employees' Retire-
ment System and further advising that this calculation indicates that approval
of this proposal will result in an annual increase in pensions received by the
employees of $45,000.00 and compares with a present annual cost of $477,S00o00:
*December 4, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On November 13, 1972. ! made a report to the Council
concerning cost-of-living increases benefiting retired
members of the Employees' Retirement System of the City of
Roanoke. The report sas prepared at Council*s request and
mas to give cost-of-living increases which would be on a
151
higher basis than the 10~ which had previously bee~ recom-
mended,' This report prorlded CooncJl with · method which
would result in on overall cost-of-living increase of
since the system wes established, the 60% including the
20~ which was granted in 1970.
The Council referred the proposal buck to me for the
purpose o£ calculating ihe cost to the Employees' Retirement
System, Thin calculation indicates that approval of this
proposal would result in as annual increase in pensions
received by the employees of $45,000,00 Thio compares
with o present anneal cost of $477,500,00, .
In order thutthere may be no misunderstanding, the
above amount was calculated by giving the effect of a 3~
annual increase from 7-1-72 bark to 7-1-52, less the 20~
already granted, Inasmuch as the calculation proposed will
cost the Employees* Retirement System only $12,000,00, more
that the 10~ increase recommended originally, which wo~ld
have cost approximately $34o000,00, I believe that the City
Council would be well advised to approve the overall 60~
cost-of-living increa·e, as this mill accomplish the Council*s
purpose of granting a larger benefit to those retired employees
and would tend to eliminate thio complaint-in the future.
No appropriation will he required as the increased
benefits will he paid for by the fluctuation of the rate
paid by the City of Roanoke, but the Council will have to
pass an ordinance encompassing these change·,
Res~ectfull? submitted,
S! A. N, Gibson
City Auditor".
Mr. Garland moved · at'the report of the City Auditor be referred to
the City Attorney for preparation of the proper measure.. The motion mas seconded
by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
In this connection, Mrs. Ethel A. Osborne appeared before the Council
and requested that Council make the pension increase retroactive to July 1.
1972.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur iu the request of Mrs. Osborne
~hat the increase be made retroactive to July 1, 1972. The motion was secondrd
by Mr. Lisk and u~animously adopted.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
POLICE DEPARTMENT-MUNICIPAL BUILDING: A committee co~posed of Messrs.
Robert A. Garland, Chairman, Robert H. Turner, Jr., Olin Garrett and William F.
Clark submitted the following report in connection uith private burglar alarns,
advising that the Traffic Engineering and Communications Department has prepared
certain Practices and Procedures for necessary regulation of these prJ'vate
facilities, recommending favorable consideration by Council of the proposed
Parctices and Procedures in order that the staff may proceed to advertise fo~
bids on the oecessary alarm panel and terminating equ.ipment, advising that the.
sum of $25,000.00 is included in the Traffic Engineering and Communications
budget for this proposed purpose and further recommending that the matter be
referred to the City Attorney for preparation of the necessary papers to
'December 40 1972
. Honorable Mayor nn~ City Council
Roanoke; Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Private Durglar Alarms
Council hms previously'considered the subject of privnle
burglar alarm systems connected with the CiW's Communications
Control Center. Discussions over a period of time resulted
in a Council decision to continue as a municipal service the
The Traffic Engineering and Communications Division of
the City's Bepartnent of Public ~orhs has prepared the
attached Practices and Procedures for necessary regulation
of these private facilities. Very thorough study has gone
Jato the development of these specftications Mhicb are now
considered to be ready for adoption by City Council. These
provisions bare been reviewed with representatives of all
companies locally providing burglar alarm services and in
addition to being protective of the City's interest are not
objectionable to the businesses involved.
The City would own the alarm panel and terminating
equipment in the control ~enter and only approved alarm
slstems <ould be permitted to connect thereto. Provision
is nude for an initial $50 connection fee with $25 annual
renewal and $5 per month operating charges. In the event of
a false alarn requiriu9 a response from police personnel a
$25 fee would additionally be charged.. These are the same
fees and charges previously reported to Council by your
connittee recommending continuation of this municipal set~
vice.
Your committee recommends City Council's favorable
consideration of these proposed Practices and Procedures in
order that the staff may proceed to advertise for bids on
the necessary alarn panel and terminating equipment. The Sun
of $25,000 is included in the Traffic and Communications
Division'! budget for this proposed purpose. It is also
ney for preparation of the necessary papers to formalize
the recommended procedures.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Robert A. Garland, Chairman
S/ Robert H. Turner, Jr.
S/ Olin Garrett
S/ Milliam F. Clark'
Mr. Garlahd moved that Council concur in the report of the committee
and offered the following Resolution approving implementation of certain practices
and procedures relative to private burglar alarm service and the city's Communi-
cations Center:
(~20575) A RESOLUTION approving implementation of certain practices
and procedures relative to private burglar alarm service and the City*s Communica-
tions Center.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 270.)
Rt. Garland moved the ndoptio~ of the Resolution. The motion was
?seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
~ebber .......................
NAYS: None ......... mO. (Mr. Trout absent)
153
sEwERS AND STORM DRAINS: Council having referred to o committee
composed of Messrs. Julian F. Hirst, Chairman, William F. Clark, Samuel H.
RcGbee, III, Hampton W. Thomas, Donald E. Eckmann end L. R. Howson for tabula-
tion, report end recommendation bids received on October 30, 1972, for Contract
"H" - Primary Equipment for the Semsge Treatment Plant, the committee submitted
the following report making certain recommendations with regard to each item
under Contract
'December 4, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, ¥Irginla
Gentlemen:
Subject: Report on Bids
The City Council on October 30, 1972, received bids
for Contract B - Primary Equipment for the Sewage Treatment
Plant. These ~ds were referred to the undersigned committee
for review and report. The members of your committee have
so reviemed those bids as received. Your attention is
invited to the attached tabulation of bids, to the signifi-
cance in the bidding of dates of delivery and to the necessity
of earliest advertisement for new bids wherein there were no
bids received or the bids unacceptable.
Accordinglyo your committee recommends as follows:
Item I - Comminuting Equipment - no bids were received;
tMs item should be readvertised on November 19,
19720 with bids to be received on December 110
1972.
Item II - Grit Hasin Equipment - one bid was received from
Dorr-Oliver Company in the amount of $27,655. It
is recommended that this hid be accepted and that
the payment terns suggested by Dorr-Oliver be
accepted, reducing their bid $10000 for a con=
tract amount of $26,655.
Item III - Primary Basin Equipment - one bid was received
from Rex Chainblet. Inc., in the amount of
$6D,337. It is recommended that this bid be
rejected and this item be readvertised in
the sane manner as Item I.
Item IV - Raw Sewage Pumping Equipment - two bids were
received: Colt Industries. Inc., in the amount
of ~230o~00 and North American Engineering Com-
pany in the amount of $276.000. It is recom-
mended that the high bid of North American
Engineering Company be accepted and the bid
submitted by Colt by rejected.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Dirst, Chairman
S/ Milliam F. Clark
S! Sam H. McDhee
S/ Hampton M. Thomas
S! Donald E. Eckmann
S! L. R. Howson"
Mr. Thomas offered the following Resolution rejecting the bid of
Rex Chainbelt, Incorporated, for furnJshin9 primary basi~ equipment and direct-
ing that said matter, together with bids for the comminutin9 equipment, be re-
advertised:
(z20576) A RESOLUTION relenting the bid received for furnishing of
primary basin ~quipment for the City's Semage Treatment Plant, under Contract
R - Primary Equipment; and directing that said matter. ,together with the bids for
commJnutJng equipment, be rendvertised for bids.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Rook a37, page R?I.)
Hr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution, The motion was
seconded by Hr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Ressrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas end Hayer
Webber .........................6.
NAYS: None ..........-0. (Hr. Trout absent)
Hr. Thomas then offered the f,Il,ming emergency Ordinance conditionally
accepting the bids of Door-Oliver Company to furnish and deliver Item II of
Contract "B". being the Grit Basin Equipment. for the total lump sum bid of
$26.655o00; and conditionally accepting the bid of North American Engineering
Company to furnish and deliver Item IV of Contract "R". being the Ran Semage
Pumping Equipment, for the total.lump sum bid of $276.000.00:
(m20577) AN ORDINANCE conditionally accepting a bid awarding a con-
tract, upon receipt of approval by Stote and Federal agencies, for [he furnish-
lng of certain grit ~asin equipment for the City's Semage Treatment Plant. under
Contract "R" - Primary Equipment; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Boob m37. page 271.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption ~f the'Ordinance. ~he motion was
seconded by Dr[ Taylor.
#ith reference to the report of the committee and Ordinance No. 20577,
Mr. Leon Delassus. Sales'Representative. Colt Industries Fairbanks Norse Oivi-
sion..appeared before Council in connection with the bid submitted by his con-
~any on Item IV. of Contract "R*. Raw Sewage Pumping Equipment. advising that
Colt Industries was and is the Ion bidder'on Item IV, Contract "R*, by the con-
siderable sum of $45,200.00, that on two particular occasions Alvord, Burdick
Rowson. Consulting Engineers, indicated to them that if certain revisions were
made by them to the original proposal, the City of Roanoke would look more
favorably upon Colt Industries as the'recipient of said contract and further
advising that it is the request of Colt Industries that Council either accept
their proposal with the revisions which are reflected in their communication
under date of December 1. 1972. addressed to the City Engineer or reject both
the proposals of Colt Industries and North American Engineering Company and
readvertise for bids on Item IV on Contract
Based upon the remarks made by Mr. Delassus. Dr. Taylor moved that
Council amend Ordinance No. 20577 to omit Section b with reference to accept-
lng the proposal of North American Engineering Company to'furnish and deliver
the Raw Semage Pumping Equipm~nt until the remarks made by Mr. Delassus have
been investigated. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas.
155
The City Attorney pointed out that more changes should be made to
Ordinance No, 20577 than Jmst deleting the Section b paragraph dealing mith. the
bid of North American Engineering Company; whereupon, Hr, Thomas offered a
substitute motion that Ordinance No, 20577 be referred to the City Attorney for
necessary corrections as soon os possible, The motion was seconded by Mr, Lish
and unsnimously adopted.
Later during the meeting, Mr. LJsk offered the following emergency
Ordinance, as amended, conditionally accepting the proposal of Doff-Oliver
Incorporated, upon receipt of opproyal of State and Federal agencies, for the
furnishing of certain grit basin equipment for the Semage Treatment Plant, under
Contract "B" - Primary Equipment:
(~20577) AN ORDINANCE conditionally accepting a bid awarding a con-
tract, upon receipt of approval by State and Federal agencies, for the furnish-
lng of certain grit basin equipment for the City*s Sewage Treatment Plant, under
Contract "B" - Primary Equipment; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see as recorded in Ordinance Book
#37, page 271.)
Mr. Llsk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Hr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Robber ........................
NAYS: None ...........O, (Rt. Trout absent)
Br. Thomas then moved that the bids received for Item I¥, Contract
"B", Raw Sewage Pumping Equipment, be referred to the Mater Resources Committee
for further study, report and recommendation to Council. The notion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
AIRPORT: Council having referred to a committee composed of Messrs.
Milliam F. Clark, Chairman, Marshall L. Harris and Bo B. Thompson for tabulation
report and recommendation bids received for the construction of a fuel service
building at Roanoke Municipal (Moodrum) Airport, the committee submitted the
following report recommending that the bids be rejected and that the City
Engineering Department be directed to reconsider the design of the facility
with the intent of readvertisin9 the project for bids as soon as appropriate:
"December 4, 1972
Honorable Mayor and ~ity Councll
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Airport Fuel.Service Building
On Bonday, November 13, 1972, bids were opened before
City Council for construction of a fuel service building at
Roanoke Municipal Airport. As shown on the.attached tabula-
tion of bids, four proposals were received varying between
$24,474 and $27,250. These bids were referred to the com-
mittee named belom for purposes of study, report and recom-
mendation to Council+
Fuel service nt Rosnohe Municipal Airport .is operated
by a concessionaire under contract ultb the City of Rosnohe,
headquartered in n temporary trailer on the-north ramp, The
previous fuel service building usa also a trailer which mas
demolished during high minds ak the Airport in June 1971, The
sum of $12.ooo is included within the Airport budget for the
purposes of providing a modular metal building with suitable
office and malting room urea for the fuel service operations,
The committee has reviemed the proposals submitted
which would seem to be relativel7 competitive in light of
their close proximity to one another. Bomevero it is the
committeets Judgment that this much expense ia not warranted
for the needs to he met bT this proposed facility. There-
fore, It is recommended that all bids be rejected and that
the City Engineering Department be directed to reconsider
the design of the facilitT with the intent of readvertising
the project for bids as soon us appropriate.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ William F. Clark
S/ M. L. Harris
$/ B. B. Thompson'
In this connection, the City Ranager submitted a written report advis-
ing that he concurs in the above recommendation of the committee.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the com-
mittee and that the report be referred to the City Attorney for preparation of
the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Rr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.il
GARBAGE REMOYAL: The Landfill Committee submitted a written report
advising that on November 26, 1972, an application for special' use permit to
operate a regional landfill i~ southeast Roanoke County was submitted to the
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, t~at this was a joint application on the
part of the City of Roanoke and the County Planning Commission and the Board of
Supervisors has been scheduled for Thursday, December 14, 1972, at ?:00 p.m., at
the CountyCourthouse with reference to the matter.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the report of the committee and
offered the followin9 Resolution concurring in the filing on behalf of the City
of Roanoke and the County of Roanoke of an application for a special use permit
(conditional) to use a certain 260-acre tract'of land situate south of the
Roanoke River and east of the Blue Ridge Parkway in the ¥inton Magisterial Dis-
trict of Roanoke CoUnty for the purpose of operating aregional sanitary land-
fill:
(#20578) A RESOLtrIION concurring in the filing on behalf of the City
of Roanoke and the County of Roanoke of an application for a special use permit
(conditional) to use a certain approximate 260-acre tract of land situate south
of the Roanoke River and east of the Blue Ridge Parkway in the ¥inton Magisterial
District of Roanoke County for ~he purpose of operatin9 a regional sanitary land-
fill.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book u37, page 273.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Huhsrd, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber
HAYS: None. .O. (Mr. Trout absent)
UNFINISHED BUSIH£SS:
'FIRE DEPARTMENT-WATER DEPARTMENT-CITY ENGIHEER: Council having pre-
viously deferred action on n report of a committee recommending the purchase of
certain new vehicles for use by various departments of the City of Roanoke, the
matter ma~ again before the body.
Ia this connection, the City Manager submitted a written report advis-
ing that he is in concurrence with the foil,ming report of the committee recom-
mending that the low bids of Fulton Motor Company. Incorporated, Magic City
Motor Corporation. Antrim Motors, Incorporated, and Derglund Chevrolet. Incor-
porated, be accepted:
~Hovember 20. 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On Wednesday, October 25, 1972. bids mere received and opened
before the committee whoso names appear below for automobiles
to be used by various departments of the City.
The attached tabulation will show that four blds were
received. The proposals have been studied by your
committee and the io~ bids as listed belom will meet
all specifications of the City of Roanoke.
A. To fulton Rotor Company, Inc.
Item No. I - (1) Chief of Police automobile
(Chrysler Newport) $3,576.35
E. To Magic City Motor Corporation
Item No. 2 - (9).Police automobiles 30,B50.58
Item Ho. 3 - (1) Fire Department vehicle 3.3TI.24
Item Ho. 4 - (1) Fire Department vehicle
Item Ho. 5 - (2) Mater Department automobiles 5.663.56
Item Ho. 7A (3) Engineering and Streets auto-
mobiles (alternate) 7,453.32
C. To Antrim Rotors, Iuc.
Item No. 6A (3) Refuse and Trafgic Engineering
(alternate) 10.046.00
D. To Berglund Chevrolet
Item Ho. 8 - (1) Maintenance Div. Station Wagon
(alternate) 3,801.45
It is the recommendation of the committee that the Iow bids be ac-
cepted as listed herein. However. inmaking this recommen-
dation the committee feels it should advise that it is the
desire of the Chief of Police to purchase the nine police
cars from the second lowest bidder since automobiles put-
shamed from this supplier in 1970 had far less shoptime
than those purchased from other sources.
The only unit which exceeds the budget appropriation is the
station wagon to be used in the Maintenance of Buildings
and Properties operation. The Iow bid is considered a fair,
competitive proposol for this vehicle and can only be
exploiued os on inadequate estimate. It is recommended
that surplus funds be transferred from the accounts listed
belon to ollom for the purchase of this vehicle.
$102.00 Engineering
$200,00 Traffic Engineering
$500,00 Street
Respectfully nubmitted,
$/ B, B, Thompson
S/ Kit B. Elmer
$/ Rex T. Mitchell, Jr.#
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(u20579) AN ORDINANCE providing for the purchase of twenty-one (21)
new vehicles for use by various departments of the City, upon certain terms and
conditions; accepting certain bids made to the City for furnishing and deliver-
ing said vehicles; rejecting certain otb~r bids made to the City; and providing
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book 337, page 274.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lash and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Nubard, Lash. Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
BUDOET-ROANOKE VALLEY: Council having directed the City Attorney to
prepare the proper measure transferrin9 $10,000o00 from Flood damage reimbursed
to Flood damage not reimbursed under Section ~?0, "Flood ~amage0* of the 1g72-
73 budget, to provide funds in connection with certain purchases and repairs
resulting from damages caused by Hurricane Agnes. Dr. Taylor offered the follow-
(~20580) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~70, *Flood
Damageo' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u37. page 276.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Lash and, adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard0 Lash, Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
Webber ~.
NAYS: None ........... O. (Mr. Trout absent)
SEWERS AND STORM ~RAIN5: Council having directed the City Attorney to
prepare the proper measure approving the issuance by the City Manager of Change
Order No. 2, to the contract with D. R. Allen ~ Son, Incorporated. so as to pro-
vide for a credit to the city of the sum of $25,575.00, representing the daf-
159
so as to provide for payment for variations in the quantities of certain materials
utilized in said construction, in ~o~nection mlth the contract for the construc-
tion of sludge lagoons 'at the Semsge Treatment Plant; he presented same; uhere-
upon. #r. Th,mss offered tbe f,Il,ming Resolution:
(z20581) A RESOLUTION approving the City Manager*s issuance of
Change Order No. 2, in connection with the City*s contract for the construction
of sludge lagoons at the Clty*n Semage Treatment Plant.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book za?, page 27T.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Rubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
Mebber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Rt. Trout absent)
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
COUNCIL: Mayor Mebber presented a communication requesting that
Council meet in Executive Session to discuss a personnel matter~
· Mr. Hubard moved that Council concur in the request of Mayor Mebber.
The motion mas secondedby Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vo~e:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Dabard, Lisk. Taylor. Thomas and Mayor
Webber .........................
NAYS: None ......... -0. (Mr. Troutsbsent)
JAIL: Mr. Hubard advised that the Regional Corrections 5teerlng Com-
mittee will meet on Tuesday, December 5; 1972, at 4 p.m., at the office of the
Fifth Planning District Commission to review the third draft of the proposed
contract for the establishment of a regional corrections facility and program
and pointed out that anyone wishing to attend this meeting will be welcomed.
COUNCIL: Mr. Lisk moved that Council meet in Executive Session to
discuss a personnel matter. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Dabard, Lisk. Taylor. Thomas nad Mayor
Webber~ ......................... 6.
NAYS: None ..........-0. (Mr. Trout ubsent)
POLICE DEPARYMENT-ROANOEE LIFE SAVING AND FIRST AID CRE#, INCORPORATED
Mr. Link presented the following communication in connection with re'cognizing
the three life saving crews within the City of Roanoke and the Roanoke Civilian
Police as being an integral part of the official safety program of the City of
Roanoke, therefore allowing them certain protection under the Line Of Duty Act
which will provide death benefits for immediate* members of their families if
such an accident should occur in the line of their duty:
"December 4,1972
Honorable Nayor and Rembers of
Roanoke City Council,
Roanoke, Virginia,
Gentlemen:
This is in reference to authorization for the city to
recognize the three life saving crews within the City
of Roanoke and the Roanoke Civilian Police as being an
integral Part of the official sofety program of the
City of Roanoke, therefore allowing them certain pro-
tection under the Line of Duty Act. Section 15.1-136.1.
mhlch will provide death benefits for immediate mem-
bers of their families if such an accident would occur
in the line of their duty as provided by the state
statute.
This would be our way of providing some type of protec-
tion to the families of those individuals who have given
their time and services in behalf of the city at no cost
to the city since these death benefits are paid from
state funds. It will,quire the city to recognize these
two organizations by official Ordinance before the State
mill assume the responsibility to make payment to the
beneficiaries of the members of these organizations.who
may lose their lives in the line of duty.
The sun that would be received would not exceed $10.000.00
and it will be payable out of the General Fund of the State
Treasury.
I feel that this would be the way that our City Council
could show our appreciation for the services rendered
by these members by recognizing their contributions in
helping to prov:de this type of protection.
Very truly yours.
S/ David K. Lisk nt
David K. Link.
Vice-Mayor."
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the communication and offered
the following emergency Ordinance recognizing that the Roanoke Civilian Police.
the Roanoke Life Saving and First Aid Crew. Incorporated. the #illiamson Road
Life Saving and First Aid Crew. Incorporated. and the Hunton Life Saving and
First Aid Crew. Incorporated. are an integral part of the official safety pro-
gram of the City of Roanoke:
(~20582) AN ORDINANCE recognizing that the Roanoke Civilian Police.
the Roanoke Life Saving and First Aid Crew. Inc.. the Millfamson Rood Life
Saving and First Aid Crew. Inc.. and the Hunton Life Saving and First Aid
Crew. Incorporated. are an integral part of the official safety program of the
City of Roanoke; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book z37. page 2?9.)
Mr. Lish moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. 6arland. Hubard. Lisk. Taylor. Thomas and Mayor
Mebber ......................
NAYS: None O. (Mr. Trout absent)
261
3.62
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: Dr. Taylor presented the following communica-
tion in connection with the appointment of e Housing Availability Ordinance Com-
mittee and recommending thst the public hearing which bas been officially set
by Council for the Housino Availability Ordissnc~ on Tuesday, December 26. 1972,
be delayed until the Housing Avnilsbility Ordinsnce Committee bas had sufficient
time to meet and compile its report:
"December I. 1972
The HonOrable'Roy L. Webber, Hayer
and Members of Roanoke City Council
Municipal Building
2l$ Church Avenue. S. H.
Roanoke, ~irgfnia
Gentlemen:
I wish to suggest that our Honorable Mayor Roy L.
Webber appoint a Housino Availability Ordinance Committee
for the purpose of studying and making the necessary changes
in the Opening Housing Ordinance that mas previously recom-
mended to Council. When the Roanoke City Council met as a
Committee of the Whole on Monday, November 20, 1972, the
following Committee was suggested:
Mr. Janes N. Kincanon, City Attorney
Mr. Julian F. HJrst. City Manager .
Mr. Hen Morris, Roanoke Valley Hoard of Realtors
Mr. Hob Burchfield, Roanoke Valley Hoard of Realtors
Noel C. Taylor. Roanoke City Councilman
This Committee will continue the research in the area of
fair housing in order to present a document which this
Council may consider for adoption and I trust that the
Roanoke City Council will recommend to the other Roanoke
Valley Governments.
1, further, recommend that the public hearing nhicb
was previously set by Council for Tuesday. December 26,
1972. mill be delayed until the Housing Availability Ordi-
nance Committee bas reported back to Council. Additional.
data has been received and other materials are being col-
lected for use by tbs Committee ut its meeting on December
12, 1972, at 9:00 A. M.
Finally, I want to call the Council*s attention to the
fact that the Fifth Planning District Commission considered
the Housing ArailabJlJty Ordinance, that was proposed by
this Councilman. to be well constructed and felt that its
adoption would furtbnr the attainnent of the housing goals
the CommissZofl had adopted. I trust that the document
agreed upon by the Housing Availability Ordinance Committee
will be effectively mritten and uniformly administered.
Respectfully submitted.
$/ Heel C. Taylor
Heel C. Taylor"
Dr. Taylor moved that Mayor Webber be requested to appoint a Housing
Availability Ordinance Committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and
unanimously adopted.
Mayor Webber then appointed Dr. Noel C. Taylor. Chairman. Mr. Ben
MOrris, Mr. Robert R. Burcbfield, the City Manager and the City Attorney as mem-
Or. Taylor then moved that the public hearing which was originally
scheduled for Tuesday, December 25, 1972, at 7:30 p.m** be deferred until the
Housing Availability Ordinance Committee has reported to Council on the duties
assigned to said Committee. The motion mss seconded by Mr. List and unanimously
adopted.
BUILDINGS: The City Clerk reported thatMr. Milllaw A, Sowers has
qualified as u member of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, Ouilding Code, for
u term of five years ending September 30, 1977.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded ~y Mr. List and unanimously adopted.
.TRAFFIC: The City Clerk reported that Captain Henry R. Kiser has
ualified ns n.member of the Roanoke Highway Safety Commission to fill the unex-
pired tern of Dr. Roy'A. Alcorn, resigned, ending October 31, 1974.
Mr. Thomas moved that.the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
SCHOOLS: The City Clerk reported that Mr. James B.'Spurlock, Jr., has
qualified as a member of the Roanoke City School Board for a term of three years
ending June 30, 1975.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. List and unanimously adopted.
There being no further business, Uayor Webber declared the meeting
Idjourfled.
APEROVED
ATTEST: ~.~..~__'
teputy City Clerk Mayor
163
ARSENT: Councilman Rillinm S, Hubard ..................... 1.
OFFIC£gs PRESENT: Mr, Julian F. Hlrst0 City Manager; Mr. ~llliam F.
Clark, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Mincanon, City Attorney; Mr. R. Ben
Jones, Jr** Assistant City Attorney; and Mr, A. N, Gibson, City Auditor.
IM¥OCATION: The meeting mas opened with a prayer by Father George J.
Gormley, Rector. St. Andreu*s Catholic Church.
MINI~fES: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday,
November 13, 1972, having been furnished each me~ber of Council, on motion of
Mr, Trout, seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof
nas dispensed with and the minutes approved ns recorded.
ACTS OF ACKNONLEOGEMENT: Mr. Llsk advised that during the time Mr.
Eivis Presley was in the City of Roanoke for his appearance at the Roanoke Civic
Center, Mayor Mebber sent aboard his private plane to greet him and his father.
that during the time Mayor Nebber was On the plane photographers were filming
the interview, that a portion of this interview was used in a recent movie
entitled "ElvJs* Southern Tour," and based on this movie, Mr. Lisk presented
Mayor #ebber with an award for his appearance in said film.
Mayor Mebber expressed appreciation for the a~ard as presented by Vice
Mayor Lisk,
Mr. Lisk then presented Mayor ~ebber with a small stuffed toy
elephant, symbolic of the Republican Party.
Mayor Mebber again expressed appreciation for said gift.
REARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids
on Contract ~R," Item I - Comminuting Equipment, and Item llI- Primary Settling
Basin Equipment, at the Sewage Treatment Plant, said proposals to be received
by the City Clerk until 2 p.m., Monday. December 11, 1972,'and to be opened
at that hour before Council, Mayor Mebber asked if anyone present had ~ey ques-
tions about the advertisement for bids and no representative present raisin9 any
questions, the Mayor instructed the City Clerk to proceed with the opening of
the bids; whereupon, the City Clerk opened and read the folloeing bids:
Item I Item II
Comminutlng Primary Settling
Blddg£ Eoul~ment Basin Eouinment
Ecodyne Corporation, Smith
~ Loveless Division $ 41,S69.00
The Jeffrey Manufacturing
Company - $ 62.oos.oo
Rex Chainbelt, Incorporated - 70.U50~00
Kappe Associates, Incorporated 57,183.00 BI,323.00
Mr. Thomas moved that the bids be referred to a committee to be
appointed by the Mayor for tabulation, report amd recommendation to Council. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and ueanimoosly adopted.
Mayor Mebber appointed Messrs. Julian F. Hirat. Chairman, Milliam F.
Clarh, Samuel H. McGhee, III, and Hampton M. Thomas as members of the committee,
MUNICIPAL BUILDING-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM: Pursuant to notice of
advertisement for bids on "Alterations to Third Street Building** said proposals
to be received by the City Clerk until 2 p.m., Monday, December Il, 1972, and
to be opened at that hour before Council, Mayor Mebber asked if anyone present
had any questions about the advertisement for bids and no representative present
raising any question, the Mayor instructed the City Clerk to proceed with the
opening of the bids; whereupon, the City Clerk opened and read the following
bids:
Alternate A Alternate B
Bidder Base Bid Roof Deck Sun Screen
Martin Brothers Con-
tractors, Inc. $783,000.00 $7,800.00 $3,600.00
Matts ~ Hreakell, '
Incorporated 798,000.00 9,000.00 · 3.000.00
Hodges Lumber Corpora-
tion 620,000.00 3,500.00 4,200.00
Frye Building Company 874o000.00 3,000.00 4,000.00
Mr. Thomas moved that the bids be referred to a committee to be
appointed by the Mayor for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Llsk and-unanimously adopted.
Mayor Mebber appointed Messrs. Julian F. Hirst, Chairman, Milliam
F. Clark, Samuel H. McGhee, lll, Milliam A. Sowers and Grady P. Gregory, Jr**
as members of the committee.
ZONING: Council at its last regular meeting on Monday, December 4.
1972, having continued a public hearing on the question of amending certain of
the provisions of Section 67 of Chapter 4.1, Title XV, of The Code of the City of
Roanoke, 1956, as amended, dealing with reconsideration by Council of petitions
for the rezoning of properties mithin one year from the initial consideration
thereof, the matter was again before the body.
In this connection, Mr. Clifton A. Moodrum, III, Attorney, appeared
before Council and presented the following communication advising that the pro-
posed amendment was referred to the City Planning Commission. that after a full
hearing and discussion, the Planning Commission voted four to nothing against
recommending the proposed amendment, that he feels the Planning Commission mas
well advised to vote against such anamendment, requesting that Council concur
in the recommendation of the City Planning Commission and outlining certain points
as to why he feels a change would not be wise:
165
'December 7. i~72
The Honorable Mayor end
Members of the City Council
of t~e City of Roanoke
c/o C~t! Clerh°s Office
Municipal Building
Ronnohe, Virginia 24011
Gentlemen:
On Monday, December 11. 1972, y~u mill hare before you u
proposed amendment to Section 67 of the Roanqhe City Zoning
Ordinance.
As you are probably aware[ this proposed amendment mas
referred to the Roanohe City Planning Commission which held
a public hearing on Wednesday, December 6, 1972, to co~sider
the matter. After u full hearing and discussion, the Planning
Commission voted four to nothing against recommending the
proposed amendment. We feel the Planning Commission mas well
advised to vote against such an amendment and me mould request
that the City Council concur in its Planning Commission*s
recommendation.
As currently written. Section 67 of the Roanoke City
Zoning Ordinance provides, in pertinent part. as follows:
*Having once considered a petition, City Council
will not reconsider substantially the same peti-
tion for one year.*
As we understand the proposed amendment, it would permit
Council, on its own mgtion, to reconsider previously rejected
petitions without regard to the one year prohibition. We
believe that you mill agree that such a change will not be
First, the benefits derived from the existing, lim{ta-
tiqn are obvious. I~ Rives some finality to the actions of
City Council and give the objecting property owner a limited
respite from the continuous onslaughts of rezenJng petition-
ers. Frankly. the proposed amendment would emasculate this
limitation and would subject the objecting property to the
considerable expense and inconvenience of opposing recon-
sideration in many cases after he has already successfull~
opposed the original petition. The basic inequity, ill
feelin9 and distrust that would be generated by such a pro-
cedure is apparent on its face,
Secondly, the increase of the already burdensome time
requirements on members of Cit~ Council would be enormous.
Nearly qvery petitioner can think of additional arRnments
mandating rezoning after th~ hearing has been completed; this
is a normal human condition. In almost every case, the unsuc-
cessful petitioner would seek to persuade members of Council
who voted against his petition originally, hoping that they
would consent to reconsider his proposed rezoning *on their
rezoning matters which are in essence petitions for private
legislation. To permit reconsideration would increase the
already burden of the Council*s agenda.
Thirdly. we all knom that due to the many demands on
his time, it would be seldom that a member of Council would
reach the conclusion that reconsideration is necessary with-
out vigorous lobbying by .the unsuccessful petitioner or some-
one on his behalf. In nearly every case, the *reconsideration'
would actually be the resubmission of.the petition by the peti-
tioner who would have secured agreement by a member of Council
in advance to move for reconsideration. This practice would
be both critical and dangerous in that it mould encourage
private overtures on rezoning matters-~a practice which should
be discouraged wherever possible.
Finally. the proposed amendment would seem to be of
questionable legality. The one year limitation as it mom
exists in Section 67 of the Roanoke City Zoning Ordinance
is taken verbatim from Section 15.1-491 of the Code of
Virginia, as amended. This Section entitled 'Permitted
Provisions and Ordinances; Amendments' enables City Coun-
cil to enact certain provisions in its rezoning ordinance.
Council can enact or refuse to enact any of these permitted
provisions, but we ~ould question whether it can signifi-
cantly change or alter the substance of these provisions.
The proposed amendment would do just that.
We mi~l ntteBpt to be present at the Council meeting on
Monday, December 11, 1972, to answer any questions you may
have concerning this matter,
With hindest regards, ue are
Very truly yOUrS,
OODSON, PENCE,.COULTER, VIAR & YOUNG
S/ Clifton Aa Moodrum, III
Clifton A. Muodrum, III#
Mr. J. Glenuood StrJchler, Attorney, appeared before Council and spoke
in favor of the proposed amendment, advising that after a rezoning request is
denied by Council, new facts could possibly.come to the surface which would
make it desirable to reconsider the request and rezone the property without
uniting for the one year period to end.
At this point, certain members of Council questioned the City Manager
as to his recommendation in connection with the amendment; whereupon, the City
Manager replied that it is his opinion that this provision should be left in
the Zoning Ordinance due to the fact that it will cause developers who may be
considering rezonin9 petitions to give the matter much more serious considern-
tion in an effort to produce a more complete area of concept if they know that
there are time limitations upon the extent to which they can make rezonin9
applications and recommending that Council leave the Zoning Ordinance as it is
After a discussion of the matter. Mr. Garland moved that Section 67 of
the Zoning Ordinance remain as it is presently written. The motion nas
seconded by Mr. Trout.
Mr. Lisk offered a substitute motion that the public hearing be con-
tinued until 2 p.m., Monday, December lB, 1972, in order for a full member-
ship of Council to be present. The motion nas seconded by Dr. Taylor and
unanimously adopted.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
STREET LIGHTS: Copy of a communication from the Appalachian Power
Company transmitting a list of street lights installed and/or removed during
the month of November, 1972, was before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE: A communication from the Reverend O.
Benjamin Sparks tendering his resignation as a member of the Advisory Board of
Public Melfare was before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that the resignation be accepted with regret. The
motion was seconded b~ Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
S~A?E COMPENSATION BOARD-COMMON~EALTH*S ATTORNEY: Copy of a communi-
cation from the State Compensation Board. addressed to Mr. Maiher H. Carter.
'3,68
Jr.. Clerk of the Courts, advising that the Compensation Board hns fixed his
office expenses for the calendar year beginning Jnnusry 1, 1973, nt $105,696.00,
mas before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the commani~atlon be received and filed, The
motion mas seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
OUDOET-RECREATION DEPARTMENT-PARRS AND PLAYGROUNDS: The City Manager
submitted a written report recommending that $190.00 be appropriated to Operat-
ing Supplies end Materials under Section a75. 'Recreation. Parks and Recrea-
tional Areas," of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for trophies for teams
participating in the sandlot football program under the direction of the Depart-
neat of Parks and Recreation, advising that these teams contributed the $190.00
to be used tomard the purchase of the trophies and that this sum has been for-
warded to the City Treasurer for deposit in the General Fund.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the followingemergency Ordinance:
(~20583) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordaln Section ~TS, 'Recreation,
Parks and Recreational Areas,# of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and pro-
viding for an emergency,
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n3?, page 291.')
Rt. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion mas
seconded by Mr, Trout and adopted by the folIowing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Llsk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................... G.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
AUDITOR1UR-COLISEUM: The City Manager submitted a written report
adrising that for ~ome time tbere bas been consideration and discussion as to
the mounting of a plaque at the Roanoke Civic Center which mould bear the
names of the firms and individuals involved in its accomplishment, submittimg
the following list of proposed inclusions on such a plaque, suggesting that the
plaque be installed on the inside wall of the concourse of the Coliseum facing
the plaza and recommending that $325°00 be appropriated from the capital
account o'f the Roanoke Civic Center for this purpose:
ROANOKE CI¥IC CENTER
City Council at Contract
March 20, 1968
Denton O. Dillard
Mayor
John M. Bosnell Frank N. Perkinson. Jr.
Janes E. Joan's Roy R. Pollard. Sr.
David K. Lisk Vincent S. Wheeler
City Council nt Dedication
March 27. 1971
Roy L, Mebber
Mayor
Robert A, Garland Hampton M. Thomas
David K, Lisk James O. Trout
Or. Noel C. Taylor Vincent S, Mheeler
PROJECT COMMITTEE
Robert M. Moody, Chairman James E. Jones
Denton O. Dillard Herman H. Pevler
Robert A. Garland James L. Trinkle
ADVISORV COMMITTEE
Johu A, Kelley, Chairman* Robert M. McLelland'
Horace S. Fitzpatrick Frank H. Perkinson. Jr.
Lawrence H, Hamlar Mrs. Andrew L, Turner, Jr.
Julian F, Hirst, City Manager
DESIGNED BY
Associated Architects ~ Engineers of Roanoke
Smithey and Hoynton Randolph Frantz C John
Chappelear
Thompson and Payen Sowers, Rodef and Mhitescarver
CONTRACTOR
Hello Lo Teer Company
Durham, North Carolina'
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for preparation of
the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
TRAFFIC-STREETS AND ALLEYS: Council having referred to the City Manager
for study, report and recommendation a Resolution adopted by the Towers Mall
Merchants Association requesting that Council provide a lead green light west
bound on Hrandon Avenue, S. M,, into Colonial Avenue and that Colonial Avenue
between 23rd Street and Broadway, S, W., be widened to four lanes at the earliest
possible date and prior to the opening of the Tanglewood Mall, the City Manager
submitted a written report advising that the portion of the request relating to
widening of Colonial Avenue between 23rd Street and Broadway is a considerably
involved matter which is presently in the handu of the Engineering Department,
that such a project would involve the acquisition of right of way, the probable
construction of retaining ~alls due to the elevation of adjacent properties and
would be a relatively expensive construction project; and that with reference to
the traffic signal at Colonial Avenue and Hrandon, it mould be noted that tbe
1972 Roanoke-Salem Area TOPICS Study recommends changes in this existing signal
installation for left turn protection off of Brandon Avenue into Colonial Avenue.
that this would involve the changing of the signal controller from two-phase to
three-phase operation which is not possible with the present equipment, that
his estimate of the cost for a new controller is $H,500o00 and such equipment
would take approximately nine months to acquire and that this intersection has a
TOPICS program priority of three on a scale of one to four and it would be anti-
cipated that such could not be programmed for state funds at this time due to
169
the large number of TOPICS projects already prograomed in the City of Hoenohe,
that he does not disagree mJth the intent of the Tamers Hall Merchants Associa-
tion to expedite the traffic movements at t~e intersection of Colonial Avenue and
Brandon Avenue, nevertheless, funds are not available in the current budget and
he doea not feel that the problem is of such magnitude to warrant recommending
special appropriations.
Mr. Trout moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure appropriating the necessary funds for the
traffic aignal at Hrandon Avenue and Colonial Avenue. S, #. The motion Mas
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
STATE HIGHWAYS: The City Manager submitted the following report in
connection uith the widening of Hershberger Road under the TOPICS Program,
advising that the cia! has previously indicated its intent and willingness to
sell certain properties for the necessary right of may, that this city-owned
property is on the north side of Hershberger Road both east and west of the
intersection with the airport access road. that it includes two parcels of
land making a total of 21,232 square feet and has been appraised by the State
for the sum of $2,966.00, that this transaction has previously been considered
by the Real Estate Committee and the Committee has agreed to recommend that the
city sell these parcels of land to the Commonwealth of Virginia at the appraised
figure and recommending that Council concur in the sale of the tmo described
· parcels of land to the Commonwealth of Virginia for highway right of way purpose1
"December 11, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Subject: Hershberger Road #idening
In connection with the widening of Hershberger Road
under the TOPICS program0 the City has previously indicated
its intent and willingness to sell certain properties for the
necessary right of way. This City-owned property is on the
north side of Rershberger Road both east and west of the
intersection with the airport access road. The two parcels
of land include a total of 21.232 sq. ft. and were appraised
by the State for the sum of $2,966. This transaction has
previously been considered by Council*s Real Estate Commit-
tee which agreed to recommend that the City sell these par-
cels to the Commonwealth of Virginia at the appraised
figure.
It is recommended that City Council concur in the
sale of the two described parcels to the Commonwealth of
Virginia for highway right of way purposes. Copies of the
necessary details have been furnished to the City Attorney
for his use in preparing appropriate documents.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Rirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
Dr. Taylor moved that the report be referred to the City ~ttorney for
preparation of the proper measure. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Garland and
unanimously adopted. '
MUNICIPAL BUILOING-TRAFFIC: The City Manager submitted the following
report in connection mith the feasibilit~ of allowing short-term parking
adjacent to the Municipal Building along Church Avenue. advising that both
the 19B0 Major Arterial Hlghnay Plan and the 1972 TOPICS Plan for the City of
Roanoke recommend that parking not be permitted on the north side of Church
Avenue between Second and Thord Streets in front of the Municipal Building. that
traffic engineering experience suggests that where n short-term parking demand
exists on downtown streets that the problem is best served by short-term park-
ing meters, that although he administratively does not recommend the establish-
ment of short-tern parking adjacent to the Municipal Building along Church
Avenue. there has been prepared a plan whereby nine vehicle spaces could be
accommodated if it be the wish of Council to proceed to' implement this parking
plan; and further advising that he has been actively discussing the possibility
of leasing parking space from Lewis-G31e Hospital uhen they move from domntowo
Roanoke and that while nothing definite has been worked out at this time.
indications are that arrangements will be made soon:
"December 11, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Public Parking Adjacent to the Municipal Building
At the regular City Council meeting on Monday. October
23, Councilman Robert Garland suggested that a study be made
concerning the feasibility of allowing short-term parking
adjacent to the municipal buildin9 along Church Avenue. This
suggestion mas referred to the City Manager for study, report
and recommendation to Council.
Both the 1900 Major Arterial Highway Plan and the 1972
TOPICS plan for Roanoke recommend that parking not be per-
mitted on the north side of Church Avenue between Second and
Third Streets in front of the municipal buildin9. This ban
serves two purposes: It facilitates the circulation of traf-
fic in the vicinity of the post office and provides space
for passenger loading/unloading in front of the municipal
building. Parking in front of the municipal building would
hinder both of these operations.
Both of these plans were detailed comprehensive studies
concernin9 the movement of traffic in the Roanoke metropolitan
area and, while not inviolable, they are based on sound en-
gineering judgment and where possible their recommendations
should be given due consideration. It might well be noted at
this time that there are other recommendations for parking
and traffic restrictions in the downtown area which need to
be implemented for improved traffic movement and safety.
Short-term free parking has previously been instituted
at several locations on downtown streets for financial insti-
tutions, the City Mater Department office on Kirk Avenue, and
the Telephone Company office on Mast Campbell Avenue. Such
free parking was intended to be for the convenience of the
particular business establishments, Contrary to the inten-
tions, however, it has often been found through numerous traf-
fic studies that only a small minority of the people using
these spaces are actually frequenting the businesses for which
the parking mas intended. In the particular instance in ques-
tion, it is probable that a large majority of the persons mbo
mould use these spaces mould truly have business in the U, S.
Post Office Building.
Traffic engineering experience mould suggest that where a
short-term parking demand exists on downtown streets that 'the
problem is best served by short-tern parking waters,. The park-
ing ~etev does a better Job as It will provide a faster turn-
over with revenue consideration being secondary. People mill
pay more attentJontu a parking meter than a free barking
regulation. The meter also poses less of an enforcement pro-
blem for the same reason. In any event appropriate signs
would need to be posted in the sidewalk area and, while it
might be a relatively minor consideration, these would obviously
Municipal Building,
this parking plan.
acquiring and/or leasing additional municipal parking space.
This could be used by the public and City vehicles and the
discussing the possibility of leasing space from Lewis-Gale
$/ Julian F. HiFst
Julian F. Hirst
dedicate a 60 foot right of w~y to the city although only a $0 foot width uill
more suitable for truck vehicles, sad a mider pavement, to similarly occommodete
such larger vehicles, can be plhoned in the initial construction:
'December 11. 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoheo Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Appalachian Power Company - IndustrJul Access Road
Council will recall that the City's previous request to
the Virginia Department of Highways for an industrial access
road project to serve the new Appalachian Power Company
development off of 9th Street, S. R,. in Roanoke Industrial
Center has been denied. Appalachian Power Company has
decided to proceed with the construction of an access road
to their facility under the provisions of the City*s subdi-
vision ordinance, This will involve construction of appro-
ximately 480 feet of roadway westerly from 9th Street to the
Appalachian Power Company property line. with 30 feet wide
pavement and curbs and 9utters along with the related storm
drainage facilities, sanitary sewer and water line. The
cost estimate for the construction of the street improve-
ments, including storm drainage, under the terms of the
City's subdivision ordinance is approximately $14,500,
Appalachian Power Company plans to dedicate a 60 foot right
of way although only a SO foot width would be required by
the subdivision ordinance.
Due to the type of traffic anticipated within an
industrial area. it would be most desirable if the extent
of pavement construction could be greater than that covered
in the City*s subdivision ordinance. Those standards.
basically intended for residential developments, include a
five-inch crushed aggregate base course covered with two
inches of bituminous concrete. The number of vehicles and
heavy trucks using the Appalachian Power Company access road
suggest that a thicker and sider pavement would be appro-
priate in the initial construction. Since Appalachian Power
Company has already indicated an intent to dictate bO feet
of right of way a wider pavement section can readily be
accommodated+
Once this roadway construction is complete, it will
be dedicated to and become the responsibility of the City
for future maintenance. If the standard residential
street section is installed, it can be said with near
certainty that in a short period of time considerable
maintenance and reconstruction will be required due to the
heavy vehicle loads which will be imposed on this roadway.
It would be recommended that the City consider financial
participation in the initial construction in order that a
heavier pavement section, more suitable for truck vehicles,
and a wider pavement, to similarly accommodate such larger
vehicles, can be planned in the initial construction. It
Is estimated that the additional cost would be approximately
$12.600 more than the typical subdivtsionsection which would
otherwise be installed by Appalachian Power Company.
We have received the preliminary plans for this roadway
from Appalachian Power Company and would like to be able to
advise them as to our interest in participatiogiu this pro-
ject. If public funds are involved, it may be desirable that
the City administer the project and obtain assurance from
Appalachian Power Company that they will reimburse the City
to the extent of those items whichwould otherwise be their
responsibility to install. The project could be publicly
advertiaed and awarded as a City contract based on lowest
and best bid received for the work. We respectfully solicit
City Council*s consideration and reaction to this proposal.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager'
175
connection with the Roanoke-Salem area TOPICS Study developed for the Virginia
Department of Highuays in cooperation with the City of Roanoke. the City of
Salem, Roanoke County, the Fifth Planning District Commission and the Federal
Highuny Administration. advising that the study has been completed by Hayes,
Seay, Rattern and #attern, Architects and Engineers, and has been published in
three volumes, the first covering the TOPICS system for tie area, the second
covering the TOPICS plan within the City of Roanoke and the third volume covering
the TOPICS plan for the City of Salem and portions of Roanoke County, pointing
out that he has been requested by the Virginia Department of Dlghmays to indicate,
by Council Resolution. the approval of the Roanoke-Salem Area TOPICS Study, that
other agencies participating in this study have so indicated their approval and
it is recommended that Council similarly concur in the TOPICS study and plan and
that the suggestions for various changes in the traffic regulations of the City
Code be referred to the City Attorney for study, in coordination with the
Superintendent of Police, Superinten'dent of Traffic Engineering and Communications
and others for preparation of appropriate ~rdinances to implement such changes:
"December 11. 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Sabjent: Roanoke - Salem Area TOPICS Study
The Roanoke - Salem area TOPICS Study developed for the
Virginia Department of Highways in cooperation with the City
of. Roanoke, the City of Salem, Roanoke County, the Fifth
Planning District Commission aid the Federal Highway Admini-
stration has been completed by Hayes, Seay, Mattern amd
Rattern. The report has been published in three volumes,
the first, covering the TOPICS system for the area; the
second, covering the TOPICS plan within the City of Roanoke
and the third volume, covering the TOPICS plan for the City
of Salem and portions of Roanoke Connty.
TOPICS is a *Traffic Operations Program to Increase
Capacity and Safety* which mas authorized by Congress through
the Federal Aid Highmay Act of 1968. The purpose of the
TOPICS program is to reduce traffic congestion amd improve
traffic safety in urban areas by improving the efficiency
of existing streets generally within existing rights of
way. It is anticipated that improved efficiency can be .
obtained through selected physical improvements in con-
jnnction with accepted traffic engineering techniques
applied to increase capacity and safety. The TOPICS
plan furnishes a priority rated list of well-defined measures
aimed in meeting the objectives of the TOPICS program. An
example of this type of project which mas implemented during
the completion of the study mas the improvement of Hersh-
bevger Road from Peters Creek Road to Milliamson Road,
tnclndieg widening, channelizatlon and certain new signaliza-
tion,
Volume II of the TOPICS plan is related to t~e City of
Roanoke. It specifically discusses 109 problem intersec-
tions and lO street segments, including an analyses ~f the
problems associated with these locations and makes specific
Bents ere grouped into four priorities. All projects within
the first priority have been requested of the State by the
City and are proceeding in some planning or implementation
stage. These include 24th Street betueen Shellers Crossing
over the Roanoke River and the railroad trachs, end traffic
signals ut Elm Avenue and Interstate 501. All isterial for
this signal installation is now on hand und e contract has
been let for the installation of the equipment. Additionally.
the City bas requested that the State program a project for
TOPICS plan.
still needs to be accomplished. Traffic operations in the
The remaining recommended improvements will need to be pro-
there are also recommended various changes in the traffic regu-
lations of the City Code, City policies, procedures, and
fic Engineering and Communications Division.
Department. If Council would wish to go over the plan in
have been requested by the Virginia Departnent of Highways
TOPICS study and plan. Additionally, it is recommended
S/ Julian F. Rirst
"December 11. 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Council will recall that there is now in force a contract
construction of a storm drni~ facility along Albemarle
Avenue amd portions o~ Jefferson Street. ?bis work baa
been coordinated with the state construction on the
Southwest Expressway and resulted in the s~paratJon of
a former cowbined sanitary sewer stern drain.
Our flora drain project fs now compleke tad we are fn
the process of arriving at final measurements for determina-
tion of as-built qunnltiea, During the course of conatruc-
. ti,n, a City water line ruptured along Albemarle Avenue in
the vicinity of 3 1/2 Street, S. E,, which resulted in the
collapse of considerable pavement area into the storm drain
ditch. It became somewhat difficult to determine the exact
aw,ual of pavement which was damaged by the ruptured water
line. as differentiated from the excavation which tooh place
during the storm drain construction. A certain ~mount of
negotiation was required in an effort to satisfactorily
resolve the method of sharing in the pavement restoration
between the City and the contractor. The following pre-
liminary agreement bas been reached amongst all parties
concerned:
1. The contractor will provide all of the necessary
backfilling of the storm'drain ditch and crushed stone base
for the entire street surface.
2. The City will pay for the paving of the street
3. The City's Water Department will contribute
toward the cost of the pavement surface.
The total cost for this pavement resurfacin9 work ia
estimated at approximately $240§.17 with $500 of this sum
to be covered by the Water Department's normal operating
funds for.pavement resurfacingo It would be recommended
that the balance of $1908.17 be covered by Change Order No.
2 to the contract with Wiley N. Jachson Company which sum .'
is available withla the unexpeaded balance of this contract;
therefore, no additional appropriation would be required.
Respectfully submitted.
S! Julian F. Blest
Julian F. Birst
City Manager'
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the foil,win9 Resolution:
(a20584) A RESOLUTION approving the City Manager's.issuance of
Change Order No. 2 in connection with the City*s contract with Wiley N. Jackson
Company dated December 6. 19TI. for the constructien of the Albemurie Avenue
Storm Drain Project.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordioance Book ~37. page 2~2.)
Wy. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the followi~g vote:
AYES: Wesscs. ~arland. Lisk. Taylor. Thomas. Trou~ and Mayor
Webber .b.
NAYS: No~e ......... O. (Wy. Rubard absent)
INSURANCE-CITY ERPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted the follawing
report recommending that Council favorably consider the request of Blue Cross/
Blue Shield for a yearly contract covering insurance premiums for city employees
and a program with the features of performance rating and coordination of benefit
included:
'December 11, 1972
Honoeable Hayor and City Council
Rosnohe, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Blue Cross/Blue Shield Insurance
Over u period of ~lme, representatives of the City
administration here been meeting with representatives of
Blue Cross/Blue Shield to discuss the Clty*s insurance
coverage. This has resulted from a desire on the part of
Blue Cross/Blue Shield to implement certain chsnges ia our
program and request that a yearly contract be executed.
There are sma prJncipsl matters in this situation
which are interrelated and basically affect premium costs
but could also have an affect on benefits. The first of
these is called 'Experience Rating' and in simplified terms
means that the amount of money annually expended in covering
claims from employees within the Roanoke City group would
provide the basis for determining premiums for the follow-
ing year. Me are advised that the Board of Directors of
Blue Cross/Blue Shield has established a policy whereby all
groups of 500 or more persons must go under an experienced
rating program and the City of Roanoke group is the last to
conform with this policy. The Roanoke City Teachers group
is one that has been under this policy, In determining pre-
mium costs, Blue Cross/Blue Shield would charge an admini-
strative fee of $1.40 per month per contract plus 2% of the
total claims for the year. To these two items would be added
the total of claims and the aggregate cost would be used in
deriving the premium for the succeeding year. In other words,
uhatever it costs for Blue Cross/Blue Shield to administer the
City*s insurance program plus the amount of claims uould be
the basis of premiums.
The other matter also discussed carries the title
'Coordination of Benefits.' Again Blue Cross/Blue Sheild
advises that they already have such an agreement with other
group policies ia the Roanoke area. This would mean that if
a city employee and spouse sere both covered by separate
group policies the benefits would be coordinated such that
full coverage to the policy limits would be afforded the
employee; however, there could not be a profit made on a
claim. This coordination seems to be a most desirable
feature if the City §r~up is to go on a performance rat-
ing for premiums in the future. Mithout such coordination
it has been suggested by Clue Cross/Blue Shield that in the
near future a premium increase wouldhe likely. The present
rates are subject to change on 30 days notice.
Me have recently held two meetings with City employees
where the details of these procedures have been fully
explained. An opportunity for questions and answers sere
afforded to all present in order that a full understanding
of the reasons for these procedures could be understood.
It is the recommendation that City Council favorably
consider the request of Blue Cross/Blue Shield for a yearly
contract coveringJnsurance premiums and program with the
features of performance rating and coordination of benefits
included. This matter will no doubt need to be referred
to the City Attorney for preparation of tee necessary
papers to effect this contract, Representatives of
· Blue Cross/Blue Shield have been invited to attend City
Council meeting to answer any questions which may arise.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Rirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager*
177
Mr, Thomas moved that the report be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure, The motion was seconded by Dr, Taylor and
unanimously adopted,
SMOEE~ The City Manager submitted n written report trnnswitting copy
of u communication from the State Air Pollution Control Board announcing n
public bearing In Richmond, Virginia, on De'ember 18, 1972o in regard to the
question of the restriction of open burning which is now a na~ter of local
regulation but which will become mandatory after June 30, 1974, advising that
it is planned that Mr. I. Jones Keller, Air Pollution Engineer, for the City
of Roanoke. will attend this.hearing,
Dr. Taylor moved that the report be received and filed, The motion
was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
HEIGHTS AND MEASURES-CITY MARKET: The City Manager'submitted a
written report transmitting copy of the November, 1972, monthly report
from Mr. J. R. Cbocklett, Jr., Sealer of Heights and Measures, it connection
with tbe activities of the Heights and Measures Division of the city government.
Mr. Trout moved that the report be 'received and filed, The motion
was seconded by Mr. Tbomag and unanimously adopted,
LIBRARIES: Council having directed th~ City Attorney to prepare tbe
proper measure amending and reordaining Section 10, Borrowing Cards, Chapter
2, Public Libraries, Title VIII. of The Code 'of the City of Roanoke, 1956,
as amended, prescribin9 rules for the issuance of borrowing cards by the
Public Library Department. the Assistant City Attorney submitted a written
report transmitting said Ordinance. advising that tho Ordinance will provide
for the addition of a new subsection providing, free of charge, the use of
public library facilities to all blind and/or physically handicapped persons
residing in the Fifth Planning District of Virg~ia.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the report of the Assistant
City Attorney and offered the followin9 emergency Ordinance:'
(u2oSos) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Sec, 10. Borrowing Cards,
of Chapter 2. Public Libraries, Title VIII of the Code of the City of Roanoke,
195b, as amended, prescribing rules for the issuance of borrowing cards by the
Public Library Department: and, providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, s~e Ordinance Book ~37, page 292.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the follow/no vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, task, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber 6..
NAYS: None O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
PLANNING: The Assistant City Attorney submitted the following report
in connection with applicable state law mud local Ordinances relating to the
an Ordinance which would provide, in addition to the other matters contained in
the present Section 5. Chspter 1. Title XVI0 of the City Code. that no action of
the Commission shall be valid unless otherwise authorized by a majority vote of
those present:
'December 11, 1972
The Honorable Nayor and Hembers
of Roonohe City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
At the request of Council, the undersigned has investigated
the applicable state lam and local ordinances relating to the
number of members necessary to constitute a quorum for a meet-
ing of the Planning Commission. as well as the number of mem-
bers necessary to carry a question at such a meeting.
Section 15.1-440 of tbe lgSO Code of Virginia, provides as
follows:
'A majority of the members shall constitute
a quorum and no 'action of the local commission'
shall be valid unless authorized by a majority vote
of those present**
Section $. of Chapter 1, of Title XVI, of the City Code
provides as follows:
*The commission shall hold at least one regular meeting
each month and such special neetings and public
hearings as deemed necessary or may be called by the
chairman. Four of the seven members of the commis-
sion shall constitute a quorum.'
It is suggested that the matter of the number of members
necessary to carry a question at a meeting of the Plan-
nih9 Commission might be clarified by the addition of
certain of the language contained in the state enabling
legislation in the above section in the City Code.
Accordingly. I have prepared and transmit herewith for
Council*s consideration an o~di'nance which would provide
that, in addition to the other matters contai.ned in the
present Section 5 in the City Code. that no action of the
commission shall be valid unless otherwise authorized by
a majority vote of those present.
Adoption of the attached ordinance would, it is suggested,
provide a method by which the Planning Commission could.
when less than all members are present,' make re'commendation
upon a matter with less than four affirmative votes.
Even with the adoption of the above amendment, there day be
situations arising from time to time wherein the Planning
Commission may have a tie vote on a proposed change in
the zoning regulations. Should this occur, it is the opinion
of the undersigned that Council must consider such a situa-
tion as a negative recommendation, the question failing to
carry by a majority vote of the commission or a majority
vote of those 'present.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ H. Ben Jones, Jr.,
H. Hen J~nes, Jr..
Assistant City Attorney
Hr. Thomas moved that Council concur lathe report of the Assistant
City Attorney and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20§86~ AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Sec. $. Heetinos;
ouorum, of Chapter I. PlannJno Commission. of Title XVI. PlannJno and
Subdivisions, of the Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as emended; lad pro-
viding for on emergency.
(For full text or Ordinance, see Ordinance Dook ua?, page 294.)
Hr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion nas
seconded by Hr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Llsh, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Hayer
Webber .........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Nr. Hubard absent)
BUDGET-DEPARTNENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE: The City Auditor submitted a
monthly statement of expenditures for public welfare for the month ended
November 30, 1972.
Or. Taylor moved that the statement be received and filed. The motion
mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
S~R£ET$ AND ALLEYS: Council having referred to the City Planning
sion for study, report and recommendation the request of the City Of Roanoke Rede-
velopment and Housing Authority that certain streets, avenues and alleys within
or bordering the area of the Kimball Redevelopment Project VA. R-46 in the north-
east section of the City of Roanoke, be vacated, discontinued and closed, the
City Planning Commission submitted a written report recommending that the request
be 9ranted.
Nr. Thomas ~oved that a public hearing on the request .to Vacate, dis-
continue and close the streets, avenues and alleys within or bordering the Kimbal
Redevelopment Project be held at 7:30 p.m.. Monday, January 2g. 1973. The
motion was seconded by Mr.'Lisk and unanimously adopted.
STATE OIGIt~Ays-TRAFFIC: Council having referred to the City Planning
Commission for study, report an~ recommendation the request of Mr. So Douglas
Shackleford, et ux. that the Major Arterial Highway Plan be amended so as to
eliminate the proposed relocation Of Moods Avenue at its intersection with the
west side of Franklin Road, S. M., the City Planning Commission submitted a
written report recommendiog that the request be granted.
Mr. Thomas moved that a public hearing on the request to amend the
Major Arterial Highway Plan be held at 7:30 p.m.. Monday, January 2g. lg73.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a written report in cod
auction with the request of Mr. So Douglas Shackleford, et ux** that property loc t-
ed in the 300 block of Moods Avenue, S. W., described as Lot 10, Olcok 14, Exchange
Official Tax No. 1030910, be rezoned from 8G-2, Ge~-
Building
Investment
Company,
Mr. Thomas moved that a public hearing on the request for rezonin9 be hdld
at ?:30 p.m., Monday, January 29. 1973. The motion was secsnded by Mr. Lish and
unanimously adopted.
REPORTS'OF COMMITTEES:
BUSES: The City Attorney submitted the following report on behalf of
the Transportation Study Committee in connection with the intent of Eoanohe City
I
I
I
Lines, Incorporated, to discontinue bus service, effective December 31, 1972,
advising that Roanoke City Lines is the successor in Interest and obligation of
Safety Motor Transit Company, Safety Motor Transit Corporation and Roanoke Rail-
way and Electric Company under the current uritten contract mith the city entered
into under date of August 1, 1931, that while the Initial term of the contract mas
made to expire on December 31, lgSl, express provision mas made for automatic sac*
cessive renewals of the original term for additional periods of 23 months, each,
the absence of written notice given by one party to the other party at least 11
months prior to the expiration of any such term, that the current 23 month term o
the August 1, 1951, contract.commenced on March 1, 1971, and will expire on Januar~
31, 1973, that had either party desired to terminate the contract on January
1973, written notice of such intent was required by the contract to have been 9ivan
the other party priorto February 26, 1972. that no such notice was given by
either party and representatives of Roanoke City Lines concede that their Septem-
ber 12, 1972, letter notice does not conform to the contract requirement of such
notice and transmitting four recommendations in connection with the matter:
*December 11, 1972
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Centlemen:
This report is being made for and with the full concur-
rence of the Councilts Transportation Study Committee which
has recently had referred to it the letter of Roanoke City Lines.
Inc., dated September 12. 1972, addressed to the City Manager.
At the Council meeting held September 16, 1972. receipt of
Roanoke City Lines, Inc.'s letter of September 12o 19?2,.stating,
in part, *Me herewith serve notice on you and the City of Roa-
noke that we will discontinue our bus service in the City of
Roanoke as of close of business, December 31, lg?2.* was
brought to the attention of Council. By motion duly adopted,
the communication was referred to the Council*s Transportation
Study Committeefor study, report and recommendation to the
Council. Since that time, the members of the Committee have
held several conferences with the representatives of Roanoke
City Lines, loc., the latest of which mas on December 7,
Roanoke City Lines, loc. ia the successor in interest and
obligation of Safety Motor Transit Company, Safety Motor Transit
Corporation and Roanoke Railway and Electric Company under the
current written contract Written contract with the City entered
into under date of August 1, 1951, which had as its object pro-
vision of a public bus transportation system for the City of
Roanoke, extending into areas outside the City of Roanoke. While
the initial term of the contract was made to expire December
31, lgSl. express provision was made for automatic, successive
renewals Of the original term for additional periods of 23 months.
each, in the absence of written notice given by one party to the
other party at least 11 months prior to the expiration of any
such term.
A copy of the abovementioned contract is enclosed herewith
for the information of the Council** attention being expressly
directed to section (15) thereof. There is also enclosed a
copy of Resolution No. 2045H, adopted by the Council on Sept~nb~
11. 1972, (one day prior to the date of Roanoke City Lines, Inc.'s
letter) which, at the behest of Roanoke City Lines, Inc. amemded
the August 1, 1951, contract and, in fact, bears the signature
of Roanoke City Lines, Inc. as of September 19, 1972 (seven
days later than the date of the aforesaid letter.)
The current 23-month tern of the August 1, 1951, contract
commenced on March 1. 1971, and mill expire on January
1973. Had either party desired to terminate the contract on
January 31, 1973, written notice of such intent was required
by the contract to have been given the other party prior to
February 28, 1972. No such notice was given by either party;
and representatives of Roanoke City Lines, Inc. concede that
their September 12, 1972 letter notice does not conform to
the.~contract requirement of such notice. They further advise
the Committee that no approval hms been obtained from service
communities Outside the City of Roanoke by their company*s
trsnsportntion system under certificate of public convenience
and necessity heretofore granted said coupany by that Commis-
sion.
Accordingly. nnd on advice of the City Attorney. the
Councll*s Committee would report and recommend to the Council
as follows:
1. That the letter of Roanoke City Lines. Inc..
September 12. 1972. ab,yemen,ion,do does not effect a termi-
nation of the parties* obligutibns to the other, and of
Roanoke City Lines. Inc**s obligation to the public, as of
December 31. 1972. and that the notice us given should be
rejected by the City;
2. That the current term of the August 1. 1951. con-
tract, ns the same has from tine to time been au,nd,d, will
expire on January 31. 1973. and. in the absence of proper
notice, will and has been automatically renewed or extended
for an additional 23-month term commencing February 1. 1973;
3. That consistent with the intent and express pro-
visions of section (16) of the aforesaid contract, this
Committee be authorized to continue to confer and negotiate
with Roanoke.City Lines. Inc.. anon effort to find a fair
solution to the pr,bi,ns stated to be confronting Roanoke
City Lines, lnc.,in its operation of its local transporta-
tion system, keeping in mind the public necessity for an
adequate local transportation system; and
4. That, pending such solution, your Committee and
the City Attorney be generally authorized and directed to
take such action as is necessary in order to enforce per-
formance of such public duties as are undertaken by the
aforesaid contract.
Respectfully,
S/ J. N. Kincanon
J. N. Kinconon
City Attorney~
Rt. Garland, Chairman of the Transportation Study Conmittee, verbally
advised that he has been notified by arepresentative of Roanoke City Lines.
Incorporated, thatthe Bus Company will accept the offer of the City of Roanoke
whereby the city will pay the amount of their deficit and requested that the
Committee be authorized to continue negotiations with Roanoke'City Lines,
Incorporated, with respect to the matter.
Mr. Garland then moved that the report of the Cit~ Attorney be receive~
and filed. The notion was seconded by Mr. ~homas and unanimously adopted.
Rt. Garland further moved that Council meet in Executive Session to
discuss the matter. ~he motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the
following vote:
AyEs: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas,. Trout and Mayor
Mebber .........................
NAYS: None .......... O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
After the conclusion of th~ Executive Session, Mr. Garland offered
the following Resolution:
(a20567) A RESOLUTION relating to Roanoke City Lines, Incorporated.
successor in interest under a certain written contract with the City of
Roanoke dated August 1. 1951.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Rook #37, page 295.)
Mr, Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution, The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the follomiag rote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ...................... 6.
NAYS: None .......... O. (Mr. Nubard absent)
SEMERS AND S~ORM DRAINS: The Mater Resources Committee submitted a
written report with reference to the following items:
1. A bid of North American Engines for furnishing ram sewage pumping
eq~pment under Contract B at the Semage Treatment Plant, advising that this bid
award was previously questioned before Council by Mr. Leon B. DeLassus, Sales
Representative of Colt Industries, Incorporated, mhose firm submitted a bid of
$230,B00.00, which mas $45,200.00 less than the bid submitted by North American
Engines, pointing out that Mr. DeLassus presented his case before the Committee,
that the Committee noted the variance ia time of delivery as made by Colt Indus-
tries in its bid proposal and the Committee noted that specific time had been
specified in the bid document, that time is of the essence in the bid proposal
and the furnishing of the equipment, and that the Mater Resources Committee
could find no reason to disagree with the recommendation and reasoning of the
committee appointed by Council to tabulate the bids, that the Mater Resources
Committee is in agreement with the appointed committee by Council and recommends
that the matter be referred back to Council for necessary action;
2. That the Committee discussed the consideration before Council of
the Committee also serving as a Mater Resources Committee with the addition of
the City Attorney and the Manager of the Mater Department. that it is the opinion
of the Committee that its effectiveness and the effectiveness of the respective
staff personnel can be best served if the Water Resources Committee is held to
the present committee membership Of two Councilmen and the City Manager with the
City Attorney and the Manager of the Mater Department serving in an advisory
capacity, but not as committee members, as now do various staff personnel;
3. The Committee discussed the matter of the air blowers mhich it
understands through the news media to bo a matter Of specific attention by the
State Mater Control Board and noted that Council authorized a replacement blower
first and. at the meeting of December 4, 1972. authorized the purchase of a
second blowe~ for standby purposes;
4. ~he Committee has instructed the City Manager to writeto the State
Mater Control Board forwarding copies of the Ordinances of Council authorizing
purchase of the air blowers, pump engines and authorizing the additional Sewage
Treatment Plant personnel;
5. The Committee recommends that Council favorably consider and
authorize the employment of Roy F. Meston Company for the survey of industrial
wastes, which matter has previously been before Council and was referred to the
Committee;
6, The City Attorney advised the Committee that a group of representa-
tives Of the City of.Roanoke and the Town of Vlntoo wet on the mltter of connec-
tion of the Vlnton sewerage System across Tinker Creek into the Roanoke City
lime and that on agreement Ia being prepared wbJcb will.be brought to the 9gram.
lng bodies of the two municipalities;
7. The Water Resources Committee recommends that during the year of
1973 and perhaps in connection with other studies, that there be a study of
connection charges to the Roanoke City sewerag~ system.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concor in the report of the Committee
with reference to the b d of North American Engines for furnishing certain
raw sewage pumping.equipment for the Sewage Treatment Plant under Contract
"E* - Primary Equipment:
(u20599) AN ORDINANCE conditionally accepting a bid awarding a con-
tract, upon receipt Of approval by State and Pederal agencies, for the furnish-
ing of certain raw sewage pumping equipment for the City*s Sewage Treatment
Plant, under Contract #R* - Primary Equipment; rejecting a certain other bid
and providing for an emergency.
(For fall text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Oooh a37. page 296.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Ressrso Garland, Lash. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ...................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
Mr.' Thomas further moved that Council concur in the recommendation
of the Committee with r clarence to the employment of the services of Roy F.
form of an industr;al wastewater Ordinance for the City of Roanoke, upon cer-
(~20589) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to employ the
services of Roy F. Resign. Inc., environmental scientists and engineers, of
West Chester, Pennsylvania, to conduct an industrial wastewater survey and to
prepare the form of an industrial wastewater ordinance for the ca'ti of
Roanoke, upon certain terms end conditions; and providing for an emergency~
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 297.)
Mr, Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AY£S: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber 6.
NAYS: None O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
Mr, Thomas further moved that the City Manager be instructed to conduct
a study of connection charges to the City of Roanoke semeroge system and report
to Council accordingly. The motion nas seconded by Mr. Trout and unenimousl7
adopted.
Mr. Thomas further moved that Council concur in the remainder of the
report of ~he Mater Resources Committee. The motion nas seconded by Hr, Trout
and unenimousl! adopted.
L~FINISBED BUSINESS:
CONSID£RATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND O)~SIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
ZONING: Ordinance No, 20557, rezoning that strip of land 120 feet
long on Roanoke 'Avenue and 360 feet long on the Norfolk and Mestern Ratlmay
Company right of ~ay property from LM, Light Manufacturing District, and RG-1.
General Residential District, to DR, Deavy Manufacturing District, and that the
remainder of the parcel of land be rezoned from RG-I, General Residential
Distri~L, to Lb, Light Manufacturing District, said portion of land rezoned to
DM to be fenced fur security and safety measures, having previously been before
Council for its f~rst reading,~ad and laid over. was again before the body
Mr. Trout offering the follouin9 for its second reading and final adoption:
(u20557) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of
the Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956. as amended, and Sheet No. 152, Section
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book n37. page 2DO.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion sas seconded
by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the follosing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Webber ......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O.
ZONING: Ordinance No. 20558, rezonin9 property located on Mountain
Avenue, S. M., described as Lot 12. the uestern one-half of Lot 13, the eastern
one£half of Lot 13, and Lot 14, Section 13. Louis Addition, Official Tax Nos.
1020613. 1020514 and i020blS, from RG-2, General Residential District. to C-2,
General Commerical'District, having previously been before Council for its first
reading, read and laid ~ver, was again before the body, Mr. Trout offering the
following for its second reading and final adoption:
(n20558) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title X¥, Chapter 4.1, S~ction 2. of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet No. 102, Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u37, page 281,)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion ~as seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
't85
: 86
AYES: Messrs. Garland, task, Taylor, Thanes, Trout and M~yor
Webber .............
HAYS: H~ne ...........O. (Hr, Huhsrd absent)
ZONING: Ordinance No. 20559, rezoning property Incited in tb~ 4100
bloch of Virginia Avenues H. M., described as part of Lot 9 and all of Lot 10.
Hlock 4~ Map of West Park, Official Tax Ho. 2Y60223, from BS-3~ Single-Family
Residential District. to RD, Duplex Residential Dlstric~, having previously been
before Council for its first reading, rend and laid over. mas again before the
body, Mr. Thomas offering the folloming for its second reading and finnl adoption:
(n20559) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1o Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke. 1956, as amended, and Sheet Ho. 276. Sectionnl
1966 Zone Map, City of Ronnoke, in relation to Zoning.
(For full text of Ordinnnce. see Ordinnnce Book #37, page 262.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: #easts. Garland. iisi, Taylor. Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Mebber ......................... 6.
HAYS: None ...........O, (Mr. Hnbard absent)
STR£ETS AND ALLEYS: Ordinance No. 20560, vacating, discontinuing and
closing Moffatt Street and all of David Street, S. E., and an alley in the
Garden City Subdivision of the City of Roanoke, having previously been before
Council for its first reading, read and laid over, was agaio before the body.
Mr. Thoma~ offering the folioning for its second reading and final adoption:
(~20560) AN OROINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing
that street known as Moffatt Avenue, that street known as David Street. and a
certain alley located in Block I, J. M. Liptrap Map, in t~e Garden City section
of the City of Roanoke, Virginia.
(For full text of Ordlnnnce, see Ordinance Book n37, page 283.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Or~inance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the follouing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and'Mayor
Webber .........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Habard absent)
SALE OF PROPeRTY-STATE HIGHWAYS-PARRS AND PLAYGROUNDS: Ordinance Ho.
20572. providing for the transfer and conveyance of title to the Commonuealth
of Virginia of certs'in lands acquired by the city for the puspose of the con-
struction of spur roads from the Blue Ridge Par~waY, (Route 48). to the top of
Mill Mountain and to the tab of R~anoke Mountain, (formerly Yellow' Mountain),
upon certain terms and provisions; and authorizing and permitting ~he construc-
tion of an overhead bridge' across Yellow Mountain Road, S. E., as a part of the
first of said spur roads, having previously been before Council for Its first
reading, reed smd laid over, uss again before the body, Mr. Trout ~ffering the
follomlng for its second reading and final adoption~
(n20572) AN ORDINANCE providing for the transfer and conveyance of
ti'tie' to the Conmonmeslth of Virginia of certain lends acquired by the City for
the purpose of the construction of spur roads from the alue Ridge Parkway,
(Route 48). to the top of Mill Mountain and to the top of Roanoke Mountain,
(formerly Yellom Mountain). upon certain terms and provisions; and authorizing
and permitting the construction of an overhead bridge across Vellom Rountain Road,
S. E., as a part of the first of said spur roads.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book a37, page 266.)
Rt. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Ar. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Llsk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Rebber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
SALE OF PROPERTy-STATE HIGHRAYS-PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: Ordinance No.
205T3, providing for the lease by the City of Roanoke to the United States of
America of certain lands acquired by the city for public open space, recreational
and scenic area purposes on Chestnut Ridge and on Roanoke Mountain, (formerly
Yellow #ountain), on both sides of the Blue Ridge Parkway, (Route 40). in the
Roanoke County, Virginia. but a small portion of which is in the City of Roanoke,
Virginia, for a term of ninety-nine years, upon certain provisions, having pre-
viously been before Council for its firs~ reading, read and laid over. was again
before the body, Rt. Trout offering the followin9 for its second reading and final
adoption:
(#20573) AN ORDINANCE providing for the lease by the City of Roanoke to
the United States of America of certain lands acquired by the City for public
open space, recreational and scenic area purposes on Chestnut Ridge and on Roanoke
Mountain. (formerly Yellow Mountain). on both sides of the Blue Ridge Parkway,
(Route 48), in Roanoke County. Virginia, but a small portion of which is in the
City of Roanoke. Virginia, for a term of ninety-nine (gM) years, upon certain
provisions.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Dook ~37, page 268.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Rt. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber 6.
NAYS: None ..........O. (Mr. Hubnrd absent)
SEI~ERSAND STORR DRAINS-STATE RIGBNAYS: Council having directed the
City Attorney. to prepare the proper measure relating to the routing of State
iNighway ProjectUOOO-12D-102. PE-IOI, from 13th Street, S. E., to Bennington
Street. S. E., in the City of Roanoke, and urging the State Highway Commission to
approve the location of said project es originally designed and as shown on the
187
M,an,he Ynlle~ Regional Major Arterial Highmoy Plan of December 1963, he preseete4
same; where,pon. Dr. Taylor offered the following Resolution:
(,2os9o) A RESOLUFION relating to the routing of State Highway Pro-
Ject U000-1~8-102, PE-IOI, from 13th Street, S..~., to eennington Street, S.
in the City of Roan0he, and urging the State Highway Commission to approve the
location of said project as orlginnlly designed end as shown on the R,an,he
Ynlley Regional Major Arterial Highway Plan of December, 1963.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordfunnce 8aah =37, page 2~9.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lash and adopted'by the following vote:
· AYES: HessFs. Garland, Llsh, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ..........................
NAYS: Hone .......... O. (Mr~ Hubord absent)
PENSIOHS: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure amending Section 7, Henefitso o£'Chapter 1, General Pr.visions,
Title Ill Pensions and Retirement, Of The Code*of the City of RQanohe, 19S6o
as amended, by the addition of a new subsection, to be numbered (22) and to con-
sist uf subparagraphs (a). (b), (c). (d) and (e), providing for certain supple-
~ental beneflts to certain persons receiving benefits under said chapter, he
presented same; whereupon, Mr. Trout offered the followln9 e~ergency Ordinance:
(#20591) AH ORDINAHCE amending Sec. 7 Benefits. of Chapter 1, Genera]
Provisions, Title III. Pensions and Retirement, of the Code of the City of
R,an,he, 195h, as amended, by the addition of a new subsection, to be numbered
(22) and to consist of sub-paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e), providin9
for certain supplemental benefits to certain persons receivin9 benefits under
said chapter; and pr,rOdin9 for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance 8oak =37, page 301.)
Mr. Trout noved tho adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas seconded
by Mr. Link and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ......................
HAYS: Hone .......... O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
PAY PLA~-CITy ERPLOYEES-SE~ERS AHD STORM DRAINS: Council having
directed the City, Attorney to prepare the proper measure amending Ordinance
20351, adopted on June 30,' 1972, providing a System of Pay Rates and ~ange$ and
anem Pay Plan. by addin9 to said Pay Plan a new position of Plant Shift Foreman
and authorizing the employment of five persons in said ne~ position, he presented
same; whereupon, Mr. Thomas offered the follomJn~ emergency Ordinance:
(u20592) AN ORDIN~I~CE amendln9 Ordinance ~o. 20351, heretofore adopted
on June 30, 1972, providin9 a System of Pay Rates and Ranges and a new pay Plan,
by adding to said Pay Plan a new position of employment; and authorizing the
employment of five persons in said ne~ position; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book nS7. page 302.)
Hr. Thomas moved the edoptlon of the Ordinance. The motion wis seconded
by Mr. Lln~ ued edopted by the foilomieg vote:
AYES: Messrs. Gnrlnnd, Limb, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ...................... 6.
NATS: None .......... O. (Mr. Eubard absent)
GARBAGE REMOVAL-STATE HIGH#AVa: Council having directed the City
Attorney to prepare the proper measure concurring in and supporting action taken
by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County in requesting the Virginia Depart-
ment of Highways to make certain Improvements to Rutrough Road in Roanoke County
extending in an easterly direction for a distance of approximately 2,6 miles from
the east corporate limits of the city, he presented same; whereupon, Mr. Trout
offered the follouing Resolution:
(u20593) A RESOLUTION concurring in and supporting action taken by
the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County in requestin9 the Virginia Department
of Highways to make certain improvements to Ratrough Road in Roanoke County.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Rook n37, page 303.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The notion was seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber ..........................
NAYS: None -O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
AIRPORT: Council having directed the City Attorfley to 'prepare · e
proper measure rejecting all bids received for the construction of an airport
fuel service building at the Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport, end dJrectin~
that the project be readvertised for bids upon end after reconsideration of
design of the facility by the City Engineering Department, he presented same;
uhereupon. Mr. Trout offered the following Resolution:
(~0594) A RESULUI'XON rejecting all bids received for the construction
of an airport fuel service building at the Roanoke Municipal Airport, and
directing that the project be readvertised for bids upon and after reconsidera-
tion of desion of the facility by the City Engineering Deportment.
(Fur full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book u37, page
Mr. Trout .moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber
NAYS: Non, O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
LEGISLATION-LEAGUE OF VIRGINIA MUNICIPALITIES-DEPOSITORIES: The City
Auditor verbally requested that Council adopt a Resolution establishing a trust
fund for the Revenue Sharing monies.
189
Mr. Llsk moved that Council concur in the request of the City Auditor
and offered the folloeing Resolution establishing a trust fund for the purpose
of administering funds to.be received by the City of Roanoke from the United
States Of America under Title I of Public Lam 92-SIR, approved October 20,
'1972:
(x20595) A RESOLUTION establishing u trust ruud for the purpose of
administering fnnds to be received by the City from the United States of America
uEder Title I of Public Lam 92-512, approved October 20, 1972.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Rook n37, page 304.)
Mr. Llsk moved the'adoption of the Resolution. The notion mas seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (#r. Hubard absent)
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY MANAGER: Mr. Garland offered the follom-
lng Resolution recognizing the very meritorious services rendered this city by
Mr. Julian F. Hirst during his tenure of office as City Manager, congratulatin9
him upon the significant accomplishments of the city made during the period of
bis administration of the nunicipal government, exteediug to h;m and bis wife and
family, on behalf of the members of the Council and of the other citizens of the
city, the city's best wishes to hie upon,his departure from the city and giving t(
him the Council's assurance Of his continued success in the new activities in whic
he ~11 hereafter be engaged:
(u2059b) A RESOLUTION recognizing the services of JULIAN F. HIRST as
City Manager.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book #37, page 305.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by fit. Taylor and adopted by th~ following vote:
AYES~ Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Mebbes 6.
NAYS: None ..........O. (Mr. Bubard absent)
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
LEGISLATION=LEAGUE OF VIRGINIA MUNICIPALITIES; Mr. Trout .presented
the following communication from Mr. Richard L. DeCals, Staff Associate, Virginia
Municipal League, addressed to him advisio9 that at the League Legislative Com-
mittee meeting on November 17, 1972. nucy of the discussion centered around which
localities might be the most appropriate .ones to draft legislation to important
specific portions of the Legislative Program for 1973, nod to get local members
of the General Assembly to introduce such legislation and that according to his
records, Mr. Trout said that the City of Roanoke would attempt to handle certain
items as listed in the communication{
"November 21, 1972
Mr. Janes O. Trout
Councilman
3744 Signal flill Avenue, NM
Roanoke, Virginia 24017
Dear Jim:
As you know, at the League Legisletiv~ Committee meeting of
November 17, much of the discussion centered around which
localities might be the most appropriate ones to draft leges-
· lation to important specific portions of the Legislative
Program for 1973, end to get local members of the General
Assembly to introduce such legislation. According
to our records of the meeting, you said that Roanoke mould
attempt to handle the items listed belom:
Item 10. related to the additional 1~ local ~ption
sales tax. Mhile this wes assigned to Norfolk. me under-
stood that your Council had endorsed this position, and
me have notified John Rome of the Norfolk City Manager's
office that co-patrons for such legislation nay be developed
in the Roanoke area. Re mill be in touch mith you about
this, 1 am sure.
Item 11, related to State ~ssu~ptJon of the balance of
funding for local welfare programs, nay take legislation.
and me understand that you mill check into this and, if
necessary, will arrange for introduction of legislation.
Item 12, related to full State funding of its
share of local and regional Jail and detention home costs
regardless of ownership of the property on mhich such facili-
ties mill be built. As you remember, we suggested that you
see if the Roanoke Planning District Commission members can
generate area-mede support for this from among your legis-
lators. It would be good to have Sat co-sponsored by all
the delegates from your area.
If the above is not correct, please let us knom immediately.
If not. me mould like to request that you send us copies of
all drafted legislation not later than December 15 so that our
legal counsel can study the bills to insure against any
technical errors or omissions.
Thanks for the help. If you need further clarlflcation of
any of the above, please let me know immediately.
Sincerely,
S/ Richard L. DeCeir
Staff Associate"
Mr. Trout moved that Dr. Taylor be requested to bring this communica-
tion to the attention of the Fifth Planning District Commission at its next
meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Trout further moved that Mayor Mebber be requested to call an
informal meeting of Council with the legislators representing the City of
Roanoke in the General Assembly for the purpose of discussing certain proposed
legislative changes. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously
adopted. .-
Mayor Webber then called an informal meeting of Council mith the legis-
lators representing the City of Roanoke in the General Assembly at 9 p.mo,
Tuesday, December 26, 1972, in the Executive Session Conference Room of the City
Council Chamber.
AUDITORIUM-COLISEUM: Mr. Lisk requested that the City Manager furnish
the members of Council with a report relating to the proposed revision of those
Ordinances of the City of Roanoke which relate to the contra~ts and rates for
191
resignation of Miss Oorothy L. Gihbouey and called for nominations to fill the
vacancy.
Mr. Thomas placed in nomination the name of Mrs. John Mo Chaneyo
There being no further nominations. Mrs. John M. Chauey Mas elected
as a member of the Board of Virginia Mestern Cummunity College for a term ending
June 30, 1975, by the follosing vote:
FOR MRS. CHANEY: Messrs. Garland, Llsk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Rehber ....................................6. {Mr. Hubard absent)
INDU~RIE$: Mayor Webber called to the attention of Council that
there is a vacancy on the Industrial Development Authority of the City of
Roanoke, Virginia, created by the resignation of Mr. Roy C. Herrenkohl and called
for nominations to f~ll the vacancy.
Mr. Trout placed in nomination the name of Mr. Robert H. Turner, Jr.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Robert R. Turner. Jr., wan
elected as a Director of the Industrial Development Authority of the City of
Roanoke, Virginia. for a term ending October 20. 1976, by the followin9 vote:
FOR MR. TURNER: Messrs. Garland, Link. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber ................................. 5. (Mr. Hubard absent)
There being no iurther business. Mayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
Deputy City Clerk Ma~,or
COUNCIL, REGULAR REETING,
#oeday, December 16, 1972.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting ia the Coun-
cil Chamber lu the Municipal Ruilding, Roaday, December 18. 1972, at 2 p.m., the
regular meeting hour, with Mayor Roy L..Webber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, lilliam S. Hubard, David M.
Lisk. Noel C. Taylor, Hampton R. Thomas. James O. Trout and MaYor Roy L.
Mebber .......................................
ARSENT: None ........................O.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Julian F. Hirst, City Manager; Mr. Rllliam F.
Clark. Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Klncanon, City Attorney; and Mr.
A. N. Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meetin9 was opened with a prayer by Dr. Noel C. Taylor,
Member of Roanoke City Council.
ACTS OF ACENORLEDGERENT-CITV MANAGER: Mr. Nicholas Taubman, President,
Roanoke Valley Chamber of Commerce, appeared before Council and presented Mr.
Julian F. Rirst, City Manager. with a Resolution which mas unanimously adopted
by the Roanoke Yailey Chamber of Commerce with reference to the serJvces rendered
by Mr. Hirst to the City of Roanoke during his years of service.
BEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC BATTERS:
AIRPORT: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids on alterations
and additions to the Terminal Huilding at Roanoke Municipal (#oodrum) Airport,
said proposals to be received by the City Clerk until 2 p.m., Monday. December
18, 1972,* and to be opened at that hour before Council. Mayor Bebber asked if
anyone present had any questions about the advertisement and no representative
present raisin9 any question, the Mayor instructed the City Clerk to proceed with
the opening of the bids.
The City Clerk reported that a bid mas given to her by a contractor at
2:04 p.m.. and raised the question as to whether or not Council wishes to accept
this bid.
Hr, Garland moved that Council accept the bid as submitted. The motion
was seconded by Mr~ Trout and unanimously adopted.
The City Clerk'then opened and read the following bids:
Combined No. 3
I g (De-
Bidder _~ ~o. 2 2 duct)
Matts 6 Breakell,
Incorporated - $1,094,000.00 $31,000.00 $1,125,000.00 $64,000.00
Acorm Construction
Company, Ltd. - 1,084,000.00 41,133.00 1,125,133.00 ?3,0dO.O0
J. M. Turner G Com-
pany, Inc. - 1.130,000.00 30.000.00 1,160,000.00 57,000.00
Frye Building C~. - 1,144.000.00 39.000.00 1,183,000.00 §4,000.00
Graves Construction
Company, Inc. - 1,188,000.00 32,000.00 1,122,000o00 ?0,000.00
193
Mr, LJsh moved that the bids he referred to a committee to be ap~ointed
by the.Meyorfor tabulation, report and recommendation to Council. The motion
was seconded by Mr, Trout and unanimously adopted,
Mayor lebber appointed Messrs, Julius F. flirsI, Chairmen, James O.
Trout. J, Stuart Franhlin, Jr.,
McGbee, III, us members.of the committee..
ZONING: CQuncil having continued n public hearing On the question of
amending certain of the provisiQns of Section G7.of Chapter 4,1, Title XV, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, dealing with reconsideration
by Council of petitions for the.rea,ming of properties within one year from the
initial consideration thereof, the matter was again before the body.
In this connection, the City Manager.submitted the following report
restating his verbal recommendation uhich was expressed to Coancil at its meeting
on Monday, December 11, 1972. and advising that he questions the advisability
of removing the one year restriction from the Zoning Ordinance:
*December IH,
Honarable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Centlemen:
Subject: Zoning Ordinance
At the City Council meeting on December 11, ~ou had
before the Council the question of amending the Zoning
Ordinance in the matter of the one-year restriction on recon-
sideration of applications for rea,ming. I write this to
restate my recammemdation to the Council as I attempted to
verbally express in response to your question at that meet-
ing. First, amd foremost, this position is in no way related
to the particular fez,ming situation which I understand
brought about the question on this provision of the xomiug
ordinance. I have no opinion one way or another with respect
to that specific matter and my reaction is mot in anyway
influenced by that situation or the parties thereto but is
based solely on the provision within the ordinance which
should be viewed in a broad prospective rather than as it
may relate to a single situation.
Secondly, I do not consider, at least fro~ my stamdpoint.
any judgment on whether or not this provision should stand
would be based on the feeling of whether or not members of
the City Council, individually or collectively, can with-
stand pressure or can ma~e sound judgments. I realize that
these points may have been raiseu by others but they are not
involved in my feeling.
My recommendation is on the following position.
When the curren~ zoning ordinance was adopted.'this
particular provision was given some considerable discussion
both because it was new to Roanoke zoning ordinances and
also because of its overall affect in time ahead. The trend
then as it is now is to attempt when it is possible to
achieve it, to pot suchprovisions in zoning ordinances in
the opinion that more complete thoroughness and better time
of judgment is afforded by their inclusion.
~t is felt that ~itb 'such a p~ovisfon, persons such as
developers, boilders..Jndividuals,.etc., as may be consider-
ing fez,ming applications will give much more serious
thought, will project.their plans more thoroughly and will .
produce a more complete area of concept if they know that
there are time limitations upon the extent to which they can
make fez,ming applications. This has a stal~izia9 affect
· pon rezoning from the standpoint of those who.seeh or would
seeh applications, It also minimizes the 'spur of the moment'
type of rezoning application because.the oppltcsnt, knowing
that if he should not have · nell-prepared case or if he
should fail in his efforts, it is then held for another lear
before he can return ·gain. Thus the applicant tabes u
longer, look and more positively ass·res himself that he has
· bona fide application when he does make a submission,
The City Council and 'the City Planning Commission would
appear to be benefited by such · provision as both bodies
would, os they do, recognize that the handling of · rezoning
situation is one that must be given full and thorough con-
sideration because if it should be rejected then the appli-
cant is restricted in coming back until at least 12 months
have passed, noah the Commission and the Council also have
a benefit in a better balance of time for consideration of
resorting as there is not the frequency of resobnlssions and
a frequency of changes in specific applications that may
not have been successful.
There is also. and this has been said by others, a
matter of the stabilizing of a neighborhood or area. The
general sitoatlon that occurs in an area when citizens or
residents ave concernedo or interested, or involved is
something of a buildup while the rezoning application is
under consideration. Once the decision has been finally
made. there usually follows a settling down whether or not
the decision has been favorable or unfavorable to the
people in the area. #athena such a stipulation of a one Year
and with the resulting prospect that frequent and continuing
revisions or resubmission of applications can be made, there
is a resulting unsettled situation within a community which
would seem to work to the detriment of the area and at the
same time be contrary to the general well being of the public.
Ihile some few developers or individuals may feel
otherwise because of some particular situation, I do not
believe from my observation since the ordinance has been in
effect that there has been uny significant hardship imposed
upon property owners, developers, builders, etc., by virtue
of this condition in the ordinance.
Generally it is difficult to get such a provision as the
one year into u zoning ordinance, but once it Js there and
there is experieoce under itt 1 would rather question the
advisability of removing it.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager~
Mr. C. A. Woodrum, llI. Attorney, appeared before Council and rei-
terated remarks made by him at the regular meeting of Council on Monday,
December Il, 1972.advising that if the Zoning Ordinance is amended to olios for
reconsideration of
rezoning petitions before the one year restriction ia up.
Council will do grave damage to the image that citizens now have of local govern-
meat, that it w:ll do the entire concept of local government no good and urged tho
Council vote against suchan amendment to the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. J. Olenuood Strickler, Attorney, appeared before Council in support
of amendin9 Section 67 of the Zoning Ordinance.
After a discussion of the matter, Mr. Garland moved that the question
of amending Section b? of the Zonin9 Ordinance with reference to the one year
restriction and the report of the City Manager be tabled. .The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and a~opted by the following vote:
195
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Rubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
#ayor Webber ,7.
NAYS: None .........O.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
PENSIONS: A communication from Mr. Leroy Moran. Attorney, represent-
lng employees of the Roanoke City Department of Public Works. advising that
there has been some publicity and a lot of rumors regarding liberalization of
the retirement system but restricting such changes to the benefitof one or
mare particular departments i. e.. the firemen and policemen, that the
employees of the Department of Public Works strongly urge that they be advised
of any such impending changes in order that their viempoint may be heard and
that it is their feeling that any liberalization of the system ~hould cover all
city employees so that an otherwise solvent system may not be jeopardized by
a fragmentation of its operation, was before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that the communication be referred to the City Manager
and the Employees* Retirement System Committee for study and report to Council.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
INDUSTRIES: The following communication from Mr. John D. Copenhaver,
Attorney, representing Highland Company. Incorporated, requesting city contri-
butions to upgrade a road being built by Appalachian Power Company to a hem
facility on gth Street, S. E.. was before Council.
'December 13, 1972
Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayor
Members of the City Council of Roanoke
As attorneys for Highland Company, Inc. (hereafter
called Highland), permission is requested to joim in the
above action in behalf of Highland to approve the request
for a dry contribution to complete the road as requested by
Appalachian Power Co. and/or Franhlin Realty Co. to open
up said industrial road.
Highland owns 6.5 acres, more or less, adjoining the
Franklin Realty 24.151 acres in a westerly direction
bounded by the N 6 M Railway on the North. the Roanoke
River on the South and Franklin Realty on the East. The
only access to the Highland 6.5 acres presently is by means
of a railroad crossing to thetruct from MorrellAvenue,
S. E., or by opening a paper street on block to the East.
Either access involves crossing the Railroad double track.
One track is approximately 1R inches belom the other thus
creating u grading problem.
Highland reqaests an extension of the proposed Franklin
Realty industrial road to its property line which adjoins
the Franklin 25.151 acres which mere transferred from
Appalachian Pomer Company to Franklin Realty on December 12,
1972, for $1,000,000.
The road extension request will allow Highland to
develop the 6°5 acres as an industrial site which will
add a considerable tax base to the City of Roanoke. The
road will allow the acreage to be filled to above flood
level grade. .The fill will turn a land-locked industrial
site into u valuable piece of real estate. Once filled, the
land and industrial buildings erected thereon would
reflect a market value related to Franklin Eealty's
$1,000,000 tract. It is possible that the area, which is
one fourth the size of Franklin Realty would add a tax
base equivalent to one fourth of the Franklin sale value
or $250,000. In its present state, the highland acreage has
a market value of less than $5,000.
It is proposed to fill the Highland land by means of
the extension of the requested Franklin Realty Compsny
ladustrixl acceaa for uhfcb n city contribution Was requested
st the December llth meeting of City Council. '
The position of Highland is to endorse and approve the
Franklin Realty request. Highland farther requests that
the road be extended to its property line. This mill avoid
the necRssity qf eqterl~g the Hluhland property by way of a
railroad croxstng sram morrell AVenue.
Admittedly, any railroad crossino is dangerous to human
life. It is not a desirable uethod of access although there
are many streets in the city which cross railroads. The
solution requested her~in completely eliminates one such
crossing. Highland has. with extreme reluctance, requested
abe Norfolh and Western Railway Coup~any to construct the
~orrell Avenue cros~ing.
As you know, many buildings in Roanoke are being razes.
The request for the Rorrell Avenue crossing was made to
accommodate the filling of the 6.$ acres by demolition con-
tractors.
If the City will grant Highland*s request to contribute
to the Franklin Realty industrial access, it will accomplish
two major conditions of improvement.
1. The Morrell Avenue railroad CFOss'n9 will be elimi-
nated before its construction.
2. Franklin Realty and the city contribution to its
industrial access will be extended to create more
wealth within the city. Land that is presently u
liability alii be turned into marketable industrial
real estate,
3. Today, there exist only three or four industrial
sites within the city that allom for industrial expan-
sion that have railroad siding possibilities. ~ few
lots are along ~imball Avenue, Practically all the
remaining land is in use.
Dy allowing the prayer of your petitioner, the 6.5 acre
site of Highland cae be made into a useable asset. Industrial
sites in the city and around the city are selling in a
'range of from $160500 to $22,500 per care. It is anticipated
that the land value of the Highland tract would.increase to
no leas than $15,000 per acre for six acren or $90,000, if
it can be reached by an industrial access road.
By approving this request, the Franklin Realty
requirements would be met and 6.5 acres of practically
worthless Highland land would be filled and turned into
a valuable industrial site with a market value estimate for
land of $90,000 plus the market value of .thq improvements
to be erected thereon in the future.
Our company position ts to back the endeavor of
Franklin Realty Company. Re approve and endorse the city
contribution to the Franklin Realty Company industrial
access. In return, we believe Franklin Realty Company wll~
give its wholehearted endovsement to Highland*s request
for an extension of the industrial access.
Approximately one third of the tax base of the local
effort of the City of Roanoke comes from industry according
to u recent local nemspaper article. Here is an opportunity
for the City of Roanoke, Franklin Realt~ nnd Highland to
work in concert to add an additional Sqo,o00 in market vnlu~
to the industrial laud tax ¥oll plus the improvements the
6.5 acres will generate,
It is an opportmnity Council should consider before
allowing the Franklin Realty request to be approved in its
present form. The present request of Franklin Realty
apparently mas submitted mithout considering the adverse
lmpace on its neighboring Highland Company property and
the adverse effect the request mould have on the real estat~
tax base of the City.
197
Re ask the City mad Franklin Realty to reconsider the
economic impact of the proposed action. By fnclndimg Highland
in the access road, Job opportunities will open ep to Roanoke
citizens, Business licenses uill inure to the City,
Respectfully,
COPeN~VER C E~TT'
BT: S! John O. Copenhnver'
Mr, Thomas moved that the communication be'referred to the City Manager
for study, report and recommendation to Council, The motion uss seconded by
Mr, flubord and unanimously adopted.
FIRE DEPARTMENT: A communication from Mr, Robert E, Mullen, Jr.,
advising that eight or ten years ago he had the Opportunity to serve on a commit-
tee that recommended the adoption of the National Board of Fire Underuriters
Fire Prevention Code, that this Code uss adopted in 1965 and amended in 1966,
that one of the amendments in 1968 was Section 14,7, dealin9 with the require-
ment of installation of sprinkler systems in high rise buildings, that Council,
in subsequent action durio9 the discussion of the Lee-lngram Building, yielded
to economic pressures and repealed Section 14.7 of the Fire Prevehtion Code,
that in his Judgment there is no economic justification for subjecting members
of the public to loss of life In this manner and ur9ing Council to initiate
inmedlate action to reinstate this section of the code since several high rise
buildings are planned or ore in the early construction stage, uus before
the body,
Mr, Thomas moved that the communication be referred to the City
Manager for study and report to Council, The motion was seconded by Mr, List
and unanimously adopted.
STREET LIGHTS:. Copy of a communication from Mr. Sam C. Kyle, Spokes-
man, Northwest Roanoke Residents, transmitting a petition signed by 63 northwest
Roanoke residents requesting adequate lighting in the follouing residential
areas: from llth Street, N. W., at Fairfax Avenue seat to 13th Street; from
llth Street, at Mo*tmon Road seat to 14th Street; and from 12th Street beginning
at the railroad track, oorth to Orange Avenue, was before Council,
Mr. List moved that the petition be referred to the City Manager for
handling administratively. The motion was seconded by Mr, Trout and unanimously
adopted.
la this connection, Mr. List moved that the Street LightinO Committee
be dissolved, The motion was seconded by Dr, Taylor and unanimously adopted.
JAIL: Copy of a communication from Mr', R. P'. Mason, Jails S~perintenden
Department of Welfare and Institutions, with reference to'a routine inspection
of the Roanoke City Jail on November 29, 1972, was before Cbuncil.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication he received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Dr, Taylor and unanimously adopted,
REPORTS OFOFFICERS:
STATE HIO~MAYS-S'IREETSANO ALLEYS: The City Manager submitted ·
written report in connection with a request from Mr. E. Griffith Oadson, Jr.,
Attorney, representing Mr. S. Douglas Shackleford, et ux., that the Major
Arterial Highway Plan be amended to eliminate · proposal of a ~elocatlon of a
portion of Wood· Avenue ut its intersection with the west side of Franklin Road,
S. W.. the City Manager recoumending that the Major Arterial Highway Plans as
to this immediate area be retained and that there not be a change in the proposal
of the realignment of Moods Avenue on the mest side of Franklin'Road,
Mr, Trout moved that action on the report of the. City Manager be
deferred until the public hearing mbJeh is scheduled for Monday, January 29,
1973, at 7:30 p.m. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
SCHOOLS: The City Manager submitted the following report in connection
with a proposal from Mr. Edward S. Allen, District Agent of the Extension Pro-
gram of Virginia polytechnic Institute and State University, proposing an
expansion of the extension program in the City of Roanoke, advising that his
recommendation from the standpoint of desirability of the program would be that
it be accepted, that on the other hand a recommendation is restricted in view
of the fact that this does constitute on expansion upon the budget and would
require the appropriation of additional funds to the current budget
and that he submits this report as the response to Council with the advice
that if Council feels these funds are available for appropriation that this
expanded program be provided:
'December Iff, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Extension Program
At your meeting on November 20, 1972, you received a
written proposal from Mr. Edward S. Allen. District Agent
6f Virglniu Polytechnic Institute and State University,
proposing an expansion of the extension program in the City
of Roanoke. This presentation of this communication was
enlarged upon by a verbal presentation before Council by
Mr. Allen, Mrs. Frances Graham and members of their
staff who have been working for approximately one and one-
half year· in the City, You referred this matter to me
for review and report,
It is considered that the extension service, in the
program that they have had underway i& Roanoke, has con-
ducted a very fine program and has been beneficial in the
work that t~ey bare done. In other words, it has been a
productive effort.
It ia our opinion based on meetings which Miss Jones,
Oirector of the Department of Public Welfare, and I have
had with Mr, Allen, Mrs. Graham and.their personnel that
the expansion which they propose mould be worthwhile and
would be valuable to the City. As noted by thee,this
expansion would serve a wider range of youth in the com-
munity and would additionally serve a broader scope of all
ages and economic backgrounds.
199
2oo
The financial structure necessary mould be the provi-
sio~ by the City of Moon. he for $10tO00 fn City ronda for
the remaining nix montbs of the curren~ fiscal lent
($20,000 for u total year) and included Within these funds
uould be the prgviqion by the City of office space ~onsisting
of approximately three rooms with telephone, utilities, etc.
The supplementary.money mould come from State and Federal
funds, particularly os to Federal funds mhich have currently
become available. ~ ,~
My recommendation from the standpoint of desirability
of the program mould be that it be accepted. On the other
hand a recommendation is restricted in viem of the fact that
this does constitute an expansion upon the budget and would
require the appropriation of additional funds to the current
budget. I submit this as the response to the City Council
with the advice that if the Council feels these funds are
available for appropriation that this expended program
be provided.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. HOrst
Julian F. HOrst
City Manager"
Mr. Lisk moved that the matter be r~ferred to 'the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure appropriating the necessary funds for said
extension program. The motion mas seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously
adopted,
ALCOHOL: The City Manager submitted the following report advising
that through the work of the Roanoke Valley Mental Health Services Council
there has been dereloped a program with the objective of the establishment
of an alcohoZic detoxlfication ceuter mud ~hort-term residential care facility
in the City of Roanoke. that it is proposed under this program that funds for
this undertaking be provided through the Virginia Council on Criminal Justice
with necessary local funds to come through the Mental Health Services Council
and Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley, transmitting copy of a
grant application which explains in detail the program, the objective and
the funds which are sought and recommending the approval of Council. by
Ordinauce or Resolution. of the application for said grant:
"December IH. 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Alcoholic Detoxiftcation ~nd Residential Care Facility
· Through the work of the Roanoke Valley Rental Health
Services Council there has been developed a program with the
objective of the establishment of an alcoholic detoxifica-
tiaa center and short-term residential care facility here in
the City of Roanoke. Xt is proposed under this program that
funds for this undertaking be provided t~tough the Virginia
Council on Criminal Justice with necessary local funds to
come through the Mental Health Services Council and Total
Action Against Poverty, Mental Health Services has coordi-
nated with the development of this'program mtth TAP and it
is advised that TAP will pro,ida the facility for the pu!-
pose.
I attach a copy of the grant application which explains
in some detail the program, the objective and the funds
which are southt. It will be noted that this application has
the concurrence of the Fifth Planning District Commission.
Half-Way House and the Roanoke Valley Regional Health Services
Planning Council, Inc.
In order to get this into the process, I have signed the
application g~ant and it has been directed on to the Virginia
Council on~riminol Justice. This homever can be mithdraun
should the City Council determine that l~ should be he~d for
further consideration or other action tabes.
This is ~ubmitted ulth the recommendation of the City
Council*s approval by ordinance or resolution of the applica-
tion for · grant. At a.later date, should this he approved
by the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention then there
mould be · return to the City Council for an appropriation
and offsetting revenue of the amount of Criminal Justice
Respectfully submitted.
$/ Julian F. HOrst
SEJ~RS AND S~OR# DRAINS-ROUSING-SLU~ CLEARANCE: The City #anager
~December 16, 1972
Subject: Klnball Renewal Project
engineers, Norfolk and Western Railway Company officials and
of the Kimbal~ Renewal area is southerly and ~asterly such
To dat~ it hasbeen impossible to ascertain with a degree
facilities an~. if need be, design additional outfall lines.
202
Although the.work mill ~e performed ~y the Autbo~ity's
consultnnto the facilities to be investigated ute beyond the
project limits end therefore not eligible for funding under
the Kimball project, The question of possible relief st6rm
drsin.outfnll lines, mbo would Install same nnd mbo mould
pay for same, is not the question mt this time, This englneev-
inglnvestigstlon mould ascertain the ndeqnscy of existing .
storm drain facilities through N & W property to accept the
drainage from the Kimball Renewal project and determine ..
mhether any additional drainage facilites mould In deed
be necessary, .It is considered appropriate that this investi-
gation be made la order that proper planning for the Kimball
Renemal project can proceed and that later necessary decisions
can be made. The cost estimate attached with this proposal
for engineering services is $17,000 which would be based
upon a payroll multiplier times the actual expensesinvolved,
It is recommended that City Council authorize the Redeve-
lopment and Housing Authority to have their engineers perform
this necessary study recognizing the fact that the cost will
be non-eligible for Federal reimbursement under the Kimball
Redevelopment costs.
Respectfully submitted,
S! Julian F. Hirst
Julian F, Hirst
City Manager" .
After a discussion of the report, Mr, Link moved that the matter be
referred to the City Manager and the City Attorney for the purpose of working
out the proper wording for the necessary legal documents. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
PENSIONS: The City Manager submitted a written report in connection
with an Ordinance which was adopted by Council on December 11, 1972, which
enlarged upon the retirement benefit payments to.persons who have retired from
the city prior to the established date for this increase in benefits, advising
that he is in receipt of a telephone inquiry from a former employee of the city
who retired this past October and nba, it is understood, would not be included
because of the date of public retirement in the expanded benefits and inquiring o
Council as to whether it is considered that the position as established by Ordi-
nance should be reconfirmed to that employee and any other employee in similar
circumstances or whether it would be wished to have further consideration or
investigation made.
Hr. Thomas moved that the report be referred to the Employee's Retire-
ment System Committee for study, report and recommendation to Council, The
motion was seconded by Dr, Taylor and unanimously adopted,-
SALE OF PROPERT¥-STA~E HIGHNAYS-MATER DEPARTMENT-HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE:
The City Manager submitted the following report in connection with underground
utilities as they relate to the Zenth Street Bridge Project, the Kimball Rede-
velopment Project, the Gainsbo~o Neighborhood Deyelopm,ent Program and others that
will come forward in the future, advising that with what is pending and what is
coming in the future, there seems to be a major policy situation involved and
suggesting to Council that there may be some advisability in meeting math repre-
sentatives of the power company to discuss the positions of each side to
determine if on a policy basis there can be an agreement reached:
"December IH. 1972'
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Underground Utilities
At the City Council meeting two weeks ago the matter
came up of whether or eot the utilities would be underground
on the Tenth Street Bridge project as to the contrnct relat-
ing to the approaches. Me indicated to the Council.that this
had not been scheduled in this regard inasmuch ss particular
emphasis had not been given to securing underground utilities
on highway projects since the Franklin Road project some
several years ago.
It appears that we are confronting this matter in several
activities and as time progresses it will become more signifi-
cant. There is still pending n resolution of the handling
of utilities in the Kimball Redevelopment Project. The
· last situation on this was the position of the City Council
that these would be underground; however, the question of
financing has not yet been resolved. There is also the
current Tenth Street question. In front of the City is a
decision with respect to the Uainsboro Neighborhood Develop-
ment program where there will be involved extensive utility
considerations. If underground is contemplated to be the.
policy thew there needs to be some decisions, positions and
agreements reached in order that certain planning can go
ahead on the Gainsboro Project. There undoubtedly will be
others that come forward Ju the future.
While much of the telephone company*s installations are
going underground, there has been no firm policy held before
them as to the various areas of the City. In the case of
the Appalachian Power Company, they have indicated a con-
siderable reluctance to going underground as a standard
practice without poyeent by the City or someone other than the
company of those costs that would be involved.
Math what is pending and what is coming in the future,
there seems to be a major policy situation involved and I
would suggest to the City Council that there may be some
advisability in the City Council sitting down with repre-
sentatives of the power company to discuss the positions of
each side to determine if on a policy basis there can be on
agreement reached. Re, administratively, have sore diffi~
culty in-this situation as the moving back and forth between
City Council and the utilities does not appear to be too
successful and is increasingly difficult with the growing
number of projects in which the City feels underground
utilities should be an established factor.
The above suggestion is made and we would he glad to
make any arrangements for such a conference or if the City
Council would have any other thoughts in this regard, wo
would be glad to assist or to advise in any way that we can.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Blrst
City Manager"
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and that Mayor Webber be requested to establish a date for a meeting with the
power company. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Webber then'advised that Council would meet as a Committee of the
Whole with the utility companies after the regular CounCil meeting on Monday,
January 15. 1973. to discuss the possibility of underground utilities.
SE~ERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted a written'report
advisin9 that the city has been notified by ~he State Water Control Board by
letter dated November 27, 1972, of the conditional approval by the Board of the
203
204
plans and specifications for the construction of Contract C at the Sewage
Treatment Plant which is the primary basins; and that the city has been further
notified by letter of December 6, 1972, by the Board that they have conditionally
approved the plans and specifications for Contract D which is the 30 million
gallon holding or retention basin,
Mr, Thomas moved that the report be m ceived and filed, The motion
was seconded by Dr, Taylor and unanimously adopted,
STATE HICHMAYS-SEMABE TREATMENT PLANT-CITIZENS* ADVISORY COMMITTEE:
The City Manager submitted a written report pointing.out that he has been
advised by Mr, J, G, Ripley, State Urban Engineer, by letter of December 8,
1972, in regard to his letter of November 30, 1972, which dealt with the alignmenl
of the Route 115-116 Project in the Sewage Treatment Plant area as follows:
'Your request will be studied and a more detailed reply will be furnished you as
soon as the study is complete.~
Dr. Taylor moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
STATE BIGHRAYS: The City Ranager submitted a written report advising
that he has been informed by the ¥irginia Department of Highmays that the portion
of the Southwest Expressway from Franklin Road. through the city and into Roanoke
County to the intersection with Route 419 and Route 220 South has been approved
for right of way acquisitione however, it should be noted that there is not a
definite indication as to when actual acquisition of properties might commence
nor is there any firm or tentative scheduling available as to the project itself
beyond the above stage.
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
DRUGS: The City Manager submitted a written report advising that
recently Council approved an application to the Division of Justice and Crime
Prevention for funds for the next fiscal year for the operation and expansion
of the Roanoke Area Drug Abuse Control Council program, that nom the city has to
take care of a situation with respect to the current 1971 grant under which the
RADAUC program is being operatedt that with the switch of this program during
the current year from administration and implementation under.the Fifth Planning
District to a local 9overnment it would be proposed that the current year's pro-
gram be assumed by the city inasmuch as the city will be handling the coming
year"s program, that he has an application grant to the Virginia Council on
Criminal Justice for a total program cost of $34,?11.OO of which $25.$55.00 will
be DJCP share and $9,156.O0 will be local share provided by others and recomaendil
that Council authorize submission of this grant and that Council appropriate
$25,555.00 within the current budget to the RADACC program.with an offsetting
amount to be a~ticipated in revenue.
In this connection, the City Auditor questioned the procedure to be
followed in the dispensing of these funds, whereupon, Mr. Thomas moved that the
report be taken under advisement and referred to the City Manager, the City
Attorney and the City Auditor for the purpose of clarifying certain procedural
matters in connection with the grant and report back to Council accordingly. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Llsk and unanimously adopted.
The City Attorney then suggested that it might be wise for Council to
direct his office to prepare the proper, measure authorizing the filing of the
application with the understanding that in the meanwhile the committee will work
with the federal government in an effort to work out the procedural aspects of the
grants.
Mr. Thomas moved that the City Attorney be requested to prepare the
proper measure authorizing filing of the grant. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Ts*ut and unanimously adopted.
MUNICIPAL BUILDING: Council having referred to a-connittee composed of
Messrs. Julian F. Birst, Chairman, William F. Clark, Samuel H. McGhee, III, Brady
P. Gregory and lillimm I. Sonars for tabulation, report and recommendation bids
received for the remodeling of the Third Street Building, the committee submitted
a written report recommending that the low bid of Martin Brothers Contractors,
Incorporated, in the amount of $703,000.00 with Alternate A for $7,B00.00, be
authorized for contract, and further recommending appropriation of
supplemental funds for this purpose.
Mr. Lisk moved that the report be referred to Council acting as a
Committee of the MhoIe for discussion at the end of the Council meeting. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:'
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber ................... 7.
NAys: None .... ~ ..... O.
REYENUE SHARING: The City Manager submitted the following report in
connection with revenue sharing funds, advising that the position taken by the
City Manager in the matter of revenue sharing funds is that Council has indicated
that the prime use to be made of these monies is for the jail or detention facility,
that this opinion was gathered at the timethe decision was made as to the content
of the recent capital improvement bond program, that expanding on that, it has
been construed that until the requirements are determined for the jail or deten-
tion facilities, that all revenue sharing moniesreceived ~ill be allocated and
held for a reasonable or proper time for that purpose, then once that is
resolved and should it be determined that there are revenue sharing monies which
would not be required, then some decisions or programs will be developed for use
of the remainder of the money:
'206
"December 16. 19T2 '
Honorable M~yor Iud City Council
Roanoke, Vlrglnil
Gentle~en:
Subject: Revenue Sharing Funds
At the City Conncil meeting of December Il in considera-
tion of n matter of funds for n revision In a~traffic signal,
when this office advised Council of itu reluctance to recom-
mend the additional traffic signal equipment, it mss questioned
that this office tahe such a position/n viem of the avail-
ability of federal revenue sharing funds.
The position tahen by the City Manager in the matter
of revenue sharing funds is that the City Council has indi-
cated that the prime use to be made of these monies is for the
Jail or detention facility. This opinion was gathered at the
tine that decision was madeas to the content of the recent
capital improvement bond program. Expanding on that it has
been construed that until the requirements are determined
for the jail or detention facilities that all revenue sharing
monies received uould be'allocated and resolved and shoald it
be determined that there are revenue sharing monies that mould
not be required then some decisions or programs would be
developed for the remainder"s use.
In this concept, we therefore have not considered our-
selves to be in a position to eake any recommendations to
the City Council as to a program or as to other expendi-
tures of federal revenue monies. This is not to indicate
any objection whatsoever to the assignment of these monies to
the initial project but rather to inquire that if this
approach or this directive, as it is understood, is not
correct then we would be glad to be guided by Council as
to the allocation of these monies or any other handling in
regard thereto.
Respectfully submitted,
S! Julian F. lfirst
Julian F. flirst
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
In this connection. Mr. Hubard moved that the City Manager be requested
to furnish the members of Council with a priority list of items that he would
llke to include within revenue sharing funds. The motion was seconded-by Mr.
Lisk and unanimously adopted.
AIRPORT: The City Manager submitted the folloming report recommending
that Council authorize preparation of the appropriate instrument to confirm
acceptance of the proposal of MAlay N. Jackson for removal of seem at Roanoke
Municipal (Moodrum) Airport during the 1972-73 winter season:
"December 18, lg72
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Snom Removal at the Airport
This will supplement the item on your Agenda on the
above subject, The handling of snow removal at the Airport
is becoming somewhat more complicated each season. The diffi-
culty is in the commitment of contractors because of the
increasing amount of large construction piojects which they
have and the ability to continue this work through much of
the minter season, An additional difficulty is the rising
cost of equipment and personnel.
We have been able to negotiate with Wiley N. Jnchson
for som~ severnl years nnd they bnve provided excellent
service. It has not been possible to obtain other compnnfes
mite adequate personnel mho would be interested, A number
of these firms have been contacted this year end the only
firm expressing a willingness has been Wiley N. Jackson
Company end considerable negotiations have tares place with
them.
I attach n copy of their prop6sol for the 1972-73
seasom. Also attached is u comparison Of rates of last
year against this year. Xt mill be noted that some of
the rates continue ntthelr previous level mbile some others
increase, plus, this'yea~, a fuel cost and a mobilization
fee, plus a season minimum. The mobilization fee is in the
minimum. .You will note on the second attachment of cost
over a six year period and this.averages out about tee
It is recommended that the'City Council authorize the
preparation of the appropriate instrument enabling the City
Ranager to confirm acceptance of this proposal. Me will
study experience under this arrangement this season,
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
City Manager and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for prepara-
tion of the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mr. Llsh and unanimous-
ly adopted.
CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a written report advising
that in past yeo~s when Saturday or a work day has immediatel~ preceded Christmas
Day, Council has authorized the closing of the offices and Work activities of
the city at 1 p.a.. on the last work day preceding Christmas Day, that
Christmas this year falls on Monday with Friday being the preceding regular
work day and submitting this report to Council for consideration as to whether
Council wishes, in this situation, to apply the I p.m.o arraogement.this year.
In this connection. Mr. Trout offered the following Resolution shorten-
ing the working hours of certain city employees on December 22. 1972:
(~205~?) A RE$OLUflON authorizing a shortening of the working hours
of certain City employees on December 22° 1972.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordioance Book u37, page
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. ~he motion was seconded
by ~r. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garlsnd, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber ...................
NAYS: None.
CITY ENGINEER: The City Manager submitted a written report concurring
ia the following recommendation of a committee that the bid of Adams Construction
Company for s~pp~ying asphalt and tar to the City of Roanoke for the period
beginning January 1, 1973, and ending December 31, 1973, be accepted:
'DeCember 16~~ 1972 ·
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Eonnoke, Virgbln
Gentlemen:
On Wednesday, December 6, 1972. bids mere received end publicly
oepned by the Committee mhose hemes appear belom for supplying
asphalt and tar to the City of Rosnohe for the period begin-
ning January 1, 1973, ned ending December 31~
As*sbonn on the attached tubulntJon, bids were received from
tmo firms, with the low bid being submitted by Adams Construe-
tion Company as folloms:
ITEM NO. I $.2239 per gal
ITEM NO. 2 $.2094 per gal
ITEM NO. 3 $.39 per gui
Purchase orders rill be issued by the City as the material
is needed in the Street Division of the Department of Pub-
lic Marks during the period beginning January 1, 1973, and
ending December 31, 1973.
It is the recommendation of the Committee that the bid of
Adams Construction Company be accepted.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ B. B. Thompson
Bueford B. Thompson
Purchasing Agent
S/ Joseph fl. Bremer
Joseph H. Brewer
Acting Director, Public Works
S/ Kit B. Kiser
Kit B. Kiser
Manager, Water Department~
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance~
(~20598) AN ORDINANCE accepting the proposal of Adams Construction
Company, Inc., for furnishing, heating, hauling and applying certain asphalt
and tar for the period from January 1, lgT3, through December 31, 1973, upon
certain terms and provisions; authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue the
requisite purchase orders therefor; rejecting a certain other bid; and providing
for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 307.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinaoce. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Mes~s. Garland, Nubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ....................... 7.
NAYS: None ........ O.
GASOLINE: The City Manager submitted u written report concurring in
the folloming recommendations of a committee that the bids of The Amerfcan Oil
Company, Rumble Oil G Refining Company and Gulf Oil Company - U. S. for furnish-
ing and delivering automotive gasoline to the City of Roanoke for the period
beginning January 1, 1973, and ending December SI, 1973, be accepted:
"December 16, 1972
Rouorable Mayor nnd City Council
Roanoke,¥1r~ialn
Gentlemen:
On Nednesda~, December 6, 1972, bids mere received and
publicly opened by the committee mhose names appear belon
for furnishing and delivering automotive gasoline to the
City of Roanoke for the period beginning January 1, 1973,
and ending December 31, 1973.
As shown on the attached tabulation, bids were received
from five firms with the low bids being submitted us listed
below.
The American Oil Company for supplying regular gasoline
to the Garage in transport truck deliveries and premium
gasoline to the Fire Department in tank magon deliveries:
Tank Wagon Price Regular (Garage) $.1980 gal.
Less Discount .o725 gal.
Net Price $.1255 ual.
Tank Wagon Price Premium (Fire Dept.) $.2430 9al.
Less Discount .0450 gal.
Net Price $.!9fl0 oal.
Rumble Oil ~ Refining Company for supplying premium gasoline
to the Garage in tank wagon deliveries:
Tank lagon Price Regular (Garage) $.2330 gal.
Less Discount '.0601 gal.
Net Price ~.l?2g gal.
Gulf Oil Company - U. S. for supplying regular gasoline to
the Mater Department in tank wagon deliveries:
Tank Wagon Price R'egular (Garage) $.1970 9a1.
Less Discount .O415 gal.
Net Price $.1555 omi.
The tank wagon prices are based on current "Posted Consumer
Tank Ragon Prices* at Roanoke, Virginia, and are to be
adjusted to any increase or decrease of the *Posted Con-
sumer Tank Nagon Prices' in effect at Roanoke, Virginia, on
day of delivery, but the above discounts will remain un-
changed throughout the contract period..
It is the recommendation of the Committee that the low bids
be accepted as outlined herein.
Respectfully submitted,
S! B. B. Thompson
Dueford B. Thompson
Purchasing Agent
S/ Joseph H. Brewer
Joseph H. Brewer
Acting Director, Public Works
S/ Kit Bo Kiser
-Kit 8. Kiser
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20599) AN ORDINANCE accepting certain proposals for furnishing
regular and premium grade gasoline to the City Garage. for furnishing regular
grade gasoline to the City*s Nater Department, and for furnishing premium garde
gasoline to the City's Fire Department for the calendar year 1973, upon certain
terms and conditions; rejecting certain other bids received for furnishing the
City*s aforesaid gasoline requirements; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Hook naT. page 300,)
Or. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion mss
seconded by Mr. Link and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: #essrs. Garland, Dubard, Link. Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Hayer Webber ............... 7.
NAYS: None ......... -0,
POLICE DEPARTMENT-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted the
follouing report on the status of personnel in the Police Oepart~ent and the Fire
Department as of October 31, 1972:
"December 18, 2972
Ronorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Su~ect:Personnel Changes - Police and Fire Departments
September and October, 1972
Listed bel'om is the status of the Police and the
Fire Department as of October 31, 1972:
~O~ICE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYED RESIGNED OTHER
Officer Frank G. Ronsour Oct..b, 1970 Sept. 9, 1972
Office'r Henry R., Routon Sept. 29,
1969 Sept. 25, 1972
Officer Tommy C. Bradley March 29,
1971 Sept. 25. 1972
Officer 6eorge D. Metheny Oct. 5. 1972
Officer Daniel A. LaPrade Oct. 9. 1972
Officer Hubert A. Long, Jr. Oct. 30, 1969 Oct. 15, 1972
Officer Carlton B. Felty Oct. 17, 1972
Officer Henry E. Routon Oct. 27, 1972
Officer Albert #. Chlldress June 14. 1971 Oct. 29, 1972
Ending October, 1972 (12) vacancies.
Fire Deoartmeflt
Jilliam S. Trent, Jr.. Sept. 2, 1972
Patrick J. Brogan Sept. 25, 1972
Captain W. A. Dodson June 2, 1929 Sept. 29, 1972
Captain H. L. Martin July I, 1936 Sept. 26, 1972
Assistant. Chief Carl A. Cox May 2, 1935 Died Oct. 7. 1972
Ending October, 1972 (2) vacancies.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
Mr. Lisk moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
mas seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
AUDITS: The City Auditor submitted a financial report of the City of
Roanoke for the month of November, 1972.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
BUSES: Mr. Robert A. Garland, Chairman of the City of Roanoke Trans-
portation Study Committee, requested that Council set a date for a public hear-
ing for the purpose of discussing the proposed application ~ the City of Roanoke
for a 9rant of $1,000,000.00 from the Urban Mass Transit Administration, the
purpose of the being to acquire some or all of the assets of Roanoke City Lines.
Incorporated.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the request of Hr. Garland
and that a public hearing bo held at 7:30 p.m,, Monday, January 29, 1973, la the
Council Chamber for sold abovestated purpose. The motion was seconded by Hr.
Thomas and unanimously adopted.
In this connection, the Transportation Study Committee submitted the
follomJng report re~omuending that effective January 1, 1973, that the cash
fare be changed from twenty-six cents to thirty cents, that the School fare
remain ama tokens for thirty-five cents and that the meekly pass be increased to
$4.50; that paragraph (1) of the contract between the City of Roanoke and
Roanoke City Lines. Incorporated. provide for the city's payment of the sum
of $4,000.00 per month beginning January 1, 1973, for a period not exceeding six
months unless such period be extended as provided ~n pa£agrsph (15) as amended;
that paragraph (15) of said contract be amended so as to provide for the termina-
tion of the contract dated August 1. 1951, at midnight on June 30. 1973, provided,
however, that upon written notice given by the city to extend the term of said
contract beyond June 30. 1973. and upon agreement of the city contained in said
notice to pay to Roanoke City Lines, Incorporated, the further sum of $5,000.00,
each. on the first day of July, August and September. 1973, as may be set out in
said city*s notice, then and in such event said contract shall be automatically
extended for such' additional period of not more than three (3) months, as may be
set out in such notice, or until midnight, September 30, 1973, but said contract
shall in no event extend beyond September 30, 1973, except upon express agreement
thereto by both said parties; that the parties recognize that the purpose of
this contract is to provide the ci'tizens of the city with adequate transports=
tJon nod to give to the companies reasonable compensation for the services
performed and to that end it is agreed that, if during the t'erm or any extension
thereof inequities appear, the parties will seek to find a' solution fair both to
the city and to the companies and the City Manager shall have 'authority to
authorize in writing such changes of any bus route or rout'es or of any bus ser-
vice schedule or schedules requested or applied for in writing by s'aid companies
as will, in the opinion of the City Manager, effect economies in the operation of
the company's bus transportation system and which will provide reasonably adequate
transportatioo for the citizens of the city:
"December 18. 1972
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of RoanokeCity Council
Roanoke, Yirginia
Gentlemen:
As stated in an earlier report of this same date, sub-
sequent to the last meeting of the City Council. the Transpor-
tation Study Committee of the Council has, in conformity sith
directives given at that meeting, held several lengthly
conferences with officials of Roanite City Lines. Inc. regard-
ing the above ~utter.
.These conferences have been held Jn light of the provi-
sions of paragraph (16) of the August 1,. 1951, written con-
tract betmeen the parties uhich,.Jn the nards of the written
agreement, provide:
The parties hereto recognize tbut the
purpose of this contract is to provide the.
citizens of the City with udequate transpor-
tation and to give to the companies reasonable
compensation for the services performed, and
to that end It is agreed that, if during the
term or any extension thereof inequities appear,
the parties hereto mill seek to,find u solution
fair both to the City and to the companies.
As a result of the discussions, your Committee has arrived
at certain recommendations mhich it makes to the Council regard-
ing specific amendments of the abovementioned written agree-
ment. as the same has from time to time been here..re amended.
all of such recommendations as non proposed to the Council
having the aggrement of Roanoke City Lines. Inc. Essen-
tially, they consist of certain changes in the company*s
tariff of fares to be charged its passengers; of certain
fixed sums to be paid by the City to the company during
the remainder of the term of the contract; of provision for
termination of the contract at a date earlier than presently
provided for; and for the express authority in the City
Manager to authorize such changes in bus routes and bus
schedules as might tend to effect economies of operation
but at the same time, provide reasonably adequate trnas-
portation for cit:zens of the City.
There are attached hereto on separate writing dated
December 15, 1972, an elaboration upon your Com=ittee's report
and of the further amendments which it now recommends be
made to certain provisions of the written contract Of August
1, 1951, between the City, and Roanoke City Lines, Inc.,
as successor of the companies named in that contract.
The amendments so recommended have been agreed to be accepted
by Roanoke City Lines, Inc.
~here. is further transmitted to the Council a proposed
ordinance, prepared by the City Attorney, which would
effect the amendment of the August 1, 1951, contract as
herein proposed, in the manner heretofore employed for
earlier amendments of that contract.
Respectfully,
S/ Hampton M. Thomas
S/ Julian F. Hirst
S/ A. N, Gibson
S/ Robert A. Garland, Chairman*
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the report of the committee
and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(=20600) AN ORDINANCE conditionally amending paragraphs (1), (5),
(15) and (16) of the contract dated August 1. 1951, between the CitI of
Roanoke and Roanoke Railway ~ Electric Company and Safety Motor Transit Corpor-
ation, relating to public bus transportation, so as to provide for payment by
the City of Roanoke LitI Lines, Inc., of certain sums, monthly, over a period
commencing January 1, 1973, to authorize an increase in the charge for certain
fares, to change the termination date ;f said contract, and to authorize the
City Manager to approve changes in bus routes and schedules in certain instances;
and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n37, page 310.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion
seconded ~y Mr. Thoeas and adopted by the folloming vote: ·
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber ................... 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
Mr. Garland then moved that the City Attorney be requested to prepare
the proper measure appropriating necessary funds to carry out the recommendations
of the committee. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
AIRPORT-TAXES-~ESGILATION: The Airport Advisory Commission submitted
a written report in connection with a request from Mr. Charles O. Tate, Jr**
President, Tate*a "Greenbrier Airport, Incorporated," tha~ his charter and air
taxi service passengers, from Roanoke to the Greenbrier Hotel, be considered
as n connection service and exempt from the boardin9 fee, the Committee advis-
ing that whenever a carrier of passengers by air. using Roanoke Municipal
(Moodrum) Airport, as a terminal or for intermediate stops can demonstrate
conclusively to the Airport Manager that immediate continuation of travel
is the intent of said passenger by interconnectin9 carriers, either scheduled
or nonscheduled, the boarding fee is waived as provided in the 0rdinance~ and
in connection with the alternate proposal of The Airport Parking Company
America wherein they have agreed to supply each airport employee, approved by
the Airport Department, with their first pass key to the automatic parking gate
at no charge, however, ali replacement and additional keys per person mill bear
a $5.00 per key non-refundable charge.
In thi~ connection, Mr. Richard F. Pence, Attorney, representin9 The
Airport Parking Company of America, appeared before Council with reference to
the issuance of keys for the automatic parking gate at the airport and requested
that someone within the city administration be responsible for providing the
record keeping and issuance of these keys since the City of Roanoke is in a
better and more authoritative position to issue the keys.
Mayor Nebber requested that Mr. Pence put his request in mriting and
formard it to the City Manager in order for this aspect of the matter to be
handled by the City Manager.
Mr. Link then moved that Council concur in the report of the Airport
Advisory Commission. The motion mas seconded by Hr. Trout and unanimously
adopted.
PLANNING-POLICE DEPARTMENT-JAIL-MUNICIPAL BUILDING: Mr. Hubard pre-
sented the following report of the Regional Courthouse Committee requesting
that the governing bodie~ of the Cities of Roanoke and Salem and of the County
of Roanoke direct their respective counsel to prepare as promptly aa possible
for the benefit Of the committee recommendations of the sections of the State
Code, the City Charters and the Constitution of Virginia that need to be amended
to permit the use of a regional courthouse and that the Regional Corrections
213
Steering Committee be ~eqnested to best In mind the possibility of a contiguous
regionsl courthouse in making a recowwendntion for a regional correctional
institution:
REGIONAL COURTHOUSE COMMITTEE
Minutes of n Called Meeting Held in the Conference
Room of the Council of the City of Roanoke, Virginia,
on Thursdsy, December 14. 1972, et Two O'clock,
PRESENT: From City ot Salem - None
From City o[ Roanoke - William S. Nubard. David
task, Lothar Hevwelstein, Richard F. Pence and
Frnnk W, Rogers
From Town of Vinton - None
From County of Roanoke - J. Thomas Engleby, III.
Kenneth £. Trnbue and Elizabeth W, Stokea.
Present by invitation were - Judge Ernest R, Ballou, Judge
Tom Stockton Fox and Mayor Roy L. Webber.
Mr, Rogers, as chairman of the committee, presided at the
meeting, A~ secretary of the committee, Mrs, Sto~es kept the
minutes,
The chairman announced that he had been informed by the
heads of the following governments of changes in their
respective representatives on the committee:
City of Salem, City Manager ]iliinm J. Paxton in the
place of Clyde C, Dickens;
City of Roanoke, addition of William S, Hubard as a
new member and replacement of John Locke by Richard F,
Pence;
Roanoke County, replacement by J. Thomas Engleby, III,
and Kenneth £, Trabne of Charles H, Osterhoudt, O,
Foster and ChariSm Glasgow.
The chairman announced receipt of a telephone message
from Mr. Paxton that he would be unable to attend the
meeting because of an appointment with the State Highway
Commission and that Mr. Eades mould be unable to attend
because of sickness, Judge Fox stated that Judge Hoback
was unable to attend becausp of being tngaged in a felony
trial, It was also stated that Mayor Slumber could not
attend because of absence from the city,
The chairman extended a welcome to the new members of
the committee and gave for their benefit a resume of its
previous actions, He stated that although amendments of the
State Cage, the City Charters and possibly to the State
Constitution would be necessary to permit use of a regional
courthouse, he felt that if desired by the local com-
munities these changes could be obtained, He therefore
recommended that the deliberations of the committee proceed
on the assumption that if agrepeent could be reached in
other respects, the legal obstacles in the ~ay of a regional
courthouse could be removed.
In response to the tnvitntion of the chairman, Judges
Ballon and Fox expressed approval of the proposal for a
regJonnl courthouse and agreed with the chairman that the
committee should proceed on the assumption that legal
obstacles could be ~emoved, Judge Fqx added a word.of
caution that no agreement for a regional courthouse could
be obtained unless and until plans for a regional correc- .
tionul institution were accepted,
Mr, Hubard, ns chairman of the committee on a regional
correctiona! institution, was then asked for the progress
thereon, He replied that a revised draft of the plan would
shortly be submitted to the governing bodies Of the four
localities amd that he expected action ~ereon during the
month of January, He added that since no site would be
pinpointed in the draft, further action would be required
to fix a definite location for the institution, Then
followed a general discussion of the desirability of a
~ontiguous regional courthouse. Off the record discussion
Indicated tbat'th~ four localities would p~obably be hble to
agree upon a site for the correctional institution but that
concurrence on the cite for n courthouse might be more
difficult.
Consensue of the meeting moa lnoorporated in the follou-
lng resolutions then adopted:
RESOLVED that the governing bodies of the Cities
of Roanoke end Salem and of the County of RoMnohe be
requested to direct their respective counsel to prepare
as promptly os possible for the benefit'of the commit-
~ee recommendations of the sections of the State Code,
the City Charters and the Constitution Of Virginia that
need be amended to permit the use or a regional court-
house; and
RESOLVED FURTHER that the Regional Corrections
Steering Committee be requested to bear in mind the
possibility of a contiguous regional courthouse in
making a recommendation for a regional correctional
institution.
It appearing that nothing further could be accomplished
at this time, the meeting adjourned at 3:20 P.M. to reconvene
upon call of the chairman after five days' written notice.
S/Frank M, Roq~r~*
(Frank M. Rogers) Cbalrman
$/ Elizabeth #. Stokes
'(Elizabeth M. Stokes) Secretary'
Mr. Dubard moved that the City Attorney be requested to cooperate
with the City of Salem and the County of Roanoke in preparing as promptly as
possible recommendations of the sections of the State Code, City Charter and
Constitution of Virginia which need to be amended in order for the City of
Roanoke to participate with Roanoke County and the City of Salem in a
Regional Courthouse. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously
adopted**
Mr. Lisk then moved that the report be received mod filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Hubard moved that Mayor Jabber be requested to appoint Mr. James
O. Trout as an ndditiooal member of the Council's Legislatlve Advisory Committee.
The motion mas seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Robber then appointed Mr. James O. Trout as an additional member
of the Conncil*s Legislative Advisory Committee.
UNFINISHED DUSINESS:
AUDITORIUM-COLISEUM: Council at its last regular meeting having
deferred action on a report of the City Manager mith refereuce to proposed
revision of those Ordinances of the City of Roanoke which relate to the con-
tracts and rates for operation and use of the Roanoke Civic Center. the matter
was again before the body.
In this connection, the City Manager submitted the following report
"December 11, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Subject: Civic Center Contracts and Rates
Submitted hereuith on your City Council agenda ~
this date is a proposed revision of those ordinances of
215-
the City which relate to the contracts aug rates, for the
operation nnd use of t~e Roanbhe Civic Cente~, As the City
Council alii recall n contract use' and rate structure mis
established prior to the opening of the Civic Center in
early 1971, Based on experience of operation end use of
the facility since that time, the Jtructure of use require-
ments end rates has been consistently monitored with the
idea that when sufficient information was available along'
with experience, that the entire structure would be
studied nnd any revisions considered necessary recommended
to the City Council~ This is what Is being done et this
time,
The attached material has been reviewed by your Civic
Center Advisory Commission and I brlngit to the City
Council with their recoumendatJon, Undoubtedly, the
City Council will wish to study this along math the City
Attorney and City Auditor,
In approaching this matter there were three general
objectives: ~
1, Re-evaluate charges being made and make them
consistent with the general financial capabilities Of Civic
organizations in the Roanoke Valley, realistic in terms of
commercial sponsor*s revenue capabilities, and competitive
mlth other regional public assembly buildings,'
2, Revise language of rate sheets to make them
readily understandable, concise and businesslike,
3, Clearly delineate responsibilities of the Civic
Center and Lessee,
There then were certain specific objectives which are
as follows:
1. TO assure that there was incorporated in the rate
structure reasonable provisions that would be useful to the
public schools for 'various athletic, cultural and ~ducation
programs. This aspect was developed in cooperation with the
Civic Center Committee and the Roanoke City School Board
with ar. C. E. Norris, serving us Chairman of this particular
2. To enable ~ome more reasonable latitude to the
Director of the Civic Center in negotiating for conventions,
multiple-use schedules and multiple athletic events without
losing the integrity of the established rate schedule and
without 'giving the building away.' Attention was given
to special contract terms involving move-in, move-out,
rehearsal fames, and the application of the civic rate.
3. To formalizd of reco~d a system for special contract
provisions wherein the Director of the Civic Center can
negotiate certain term~ with the lessee without unduly long
delays in approval'and still with satisfactory control pro-
tection.
4. To revise the rates particularly of the Auditorium
to a level commensurate with that which has appeared to be
the market foe this portion of the facility and thereby
enabling what is anticipated to be increased use.
5. To more specifically and more clearly d~fine con-
tract terms which relate t6 what the Civic Center will
furnish to tenants, what the Civic Center will furnish for a
charge and which services are specified as the sole
responsibility of the Lessee.
6. To eliminate the previous rate differential
between weekdays and weekends inasmuch as the expenses
between such periods do not vary and the use experience has
shown that such a differential is not justified,
Zhis proposed rate structurewould supersede all
ordinances relative to rates in operation with exception of
those provisions contained in the Code under the heading
*Civic Center Department**
This as forwarded is recommended for adoption with the
determination of an effective date. It would also be
recommended:that, by a separate ordinance, the.Director be
given the authority to renegotlate any contracts mow standing
and mhJeh apply to future use by the.following provision:
°The Lessee may either keep his cootroct et existing rotes or
have a cootract et the new rotes selecting whichever is the
more desirable** Any new contracts or revisions mould be
dul7 filed with the City Auditor.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Herst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager'
Mr. James Mo Campbell, Director, Roanoke Civic Center, appeared before
Council and spoke in favor of revising said rate.
Mr. John A. Melley, Chairman Of the Roanoke CIvic Center AdrJsory
Commission, appeared before Council and recommended that the revised rates be
adopted.
Mr. Lisk moved that the revised rates be referred to the City Attorney
for preparation of the proper measure adjustin~ the rate structure at the
Roanoke Civic Center in accordance with the report of the City Manager. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION ANR CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
INDDS'IR1ES: Rt. Thomas offered the following Resolution appointing
Mr. Robert H. Turner, Jr.. as a Director of the Industrial Development Authority
of the City of Roanoke for a term of four years ending October 20, 19T6:
(=20601) A RESOLUTION appointing a director of the Industrial 'Develop-
ment Authority of the City of Roanoke. Virginia. to fill a vacancy on its board
of directors.
(For full text of Resolutioo, see Ordioance Book #3?, page 313.)
Rt. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolutioo. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. LEak. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .........................?.
NAYS: None---~- ......O.
SCHOOLSJ Mr. Tront offered the following Resolution appointing Ors.
John R. Chaney as a member of the Local Board of ¥1rginia Western Community Col-
lege to fill the unexpired term of Miss Dorothy Lo Gibboney, resigned, ending
June 30, 1975:
(n20602) A RCSOLUTION appointing Mrs. John M. Chaney a member of the
Local Board of Virginia Western Community College t~ fill an unexpired term of
Office on said Local Board. expiring June 30,'1975.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book =37, page 313.)
Mr.-Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. ~homas and adopted by the following vote:
Parcel 1
BEING parcel OOS as ah*mn on Sheet 6 of the plans for Route
101, State Highway Project 0101-126-101, RW-201, and l~ing
on the North (left) side of the survey centerllne and
adjacent to the existing north right of way line of present
Route IOle from a point on the lands of the landowner
opposite approxinte Station 133248.66, to the west existing
right of uny line of con~ectfon Route 1869 opposite appro-
ximate Station 136239; and containing 2,68fl square feet,
more or less, Of land.
Parcel2
BEING parcel 020 as shown on Sheets 6 and ? of the plans ·
for Route 101, State Highway Project 0101-128-101, RW-201.
and lying on the North (left) side of the survey centerline
and being all of the lands of the landowner lying be*seen
the existing north right of may line of present Route 101
and the lands of James O. Andrews. Heirs, from the east
existing right of may line of connection Route 1089 oppo-
site approximate Station 137215, to the lands of said
James 60 Andrews, Heirs, opposite approximate Station
143~62; and containing 15,856 square feet. nora or less.
of land; and
BOTH said parcels being a part of the same lands acquired
by the City of Roanoke from Anna A. Jarrett, et al. by
deed dated March 6, 1964, and recorded in Deed Book T37, at
page 91, in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court
of Roanoke County.
to the Commonwealth of Virginia, for and in consideration of the su~ of $2.966.00.
cash, be, and is hereby authorized and approved, submect to the terms and condi-
tions herein provided, and the City Clerk shall so notify said offeror by trans-
mittal of an attested copy of this ordinance.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the Mayor be, and he is hereby authorized
and empowered, for and on behalf of the City to execute to the aforesaid purchaser
a deed of conveyance drawn by the City Attorney conveying to said purchaser the
fee simple title to the aforesaid parcels, said deed to contain the'City's
Ceneral ~arranty of Title, and Modern English covenants on behalf'of the City,
end the City Clerk be, and is hereby authorized and directed to affix to the afor~
said deed of conveyance the City's corporate seal and to attest the same, both
said officials to thereafter acknomledge their signatures as provided by law.
The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, LARk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber -?.
NAYS: None
INDUSTRIES-APPALACHIAN pOWER COMPANY: Council having directed the City
Attorney to prepare the proper measure directing the City Manager to proceed with
the preparation of plans and specifications for a 60-foot wide public street or
road from gth Street, S. E., to the property line of the Appalachian Pomer Company
in the Roanoke Industrial Center complex, and to proceed'with acquisition of
necessary right of way, and with the advertisement and receipt of bids for said
project, he presented same; whereupon, Rt. Lisk offered the following Resolution:
(n20605) A RESOLUTION directing the City Manager to proceed with the
preparation of plans and specifications for n 60-fool wide public street or
road from 9th Street, $, E,, to the property line of Appalachian Power Company,
in the Roanoke Industrial Center complex, and to proceed wit~ 0cquisition of
necessary right-of-way, ned with the advertisement end receipt of bids for said
project.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Boor c37, page 315.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The m'otion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Rubard, LisR, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Webber ........................ 7.
NAYS: None ..........O.
CIVIC CENTER: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure approving and providing for the installation of a commemorative
plaque at the Roanoke Civic Center {n appreciation of the~forts of certain per-
sons who were instrumental In the planning, design, construction and dedication
of the Roanoke Civic Center, he presented same; whereupon, Or. Taylor offered
the following Resolution:
(u20605) A RESOLUTION approving and providing for the installation
Of a commemorative plaque at the Roanoke Civic Center In appreciation of the
efforst of certain persons who were instrumental In the planning, design, con-
struction and dedication of the Roanoke Civic Center.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book n37. page 3!6.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber ......................
NAYS: None ........ -0.
BUDGET-TRAFFIC-STREETS AND ALLEYS: Council having directed the City
Attorney to prepare the proper measure appropriating $6,~00.00 to Traffic Signal
at Brandon Avenue and Colonial Avenue, S, W.. ~nder Section x89, ~Transfers to
Capital Improvements Fund," of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for the
installation of a traffic signal at Braudon Avenue and Colonial Avenue, S.
Mr. Trout offered th~ following emergency Ordinance:
(n2OhO?) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~89, 'Transfers
to Capital Improvements Fund,~ of the 1972-T3 Appropriation Ordinance, and pro-
viding for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u37, page 316.)
Mr. Troutmoved the adoption qf the Ordi,uance. ,The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: messrs. Garland, Hubardo Llsk, Tayloro Thomas, Trout smd aayor
Webber 7. .
NAYS: ~one .........-0.
NOTIONS AND NI~GELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
CITY MANAGER-COUNCIL: The city Manager submitted a mritten report
requesting that he be given the opportunity of meeting mlth Council in Executive
Session to discuss s.personnel matter.
· Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in.the request of theCity Manager.
The motion mas seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
TAXES-TRAILERS: Mr. Hubard presented a communication advising that
recently considerable interest has been evfdencein the manner in uhich mobile
homes have been subjected to taxation by localities and recommending that Coun-
cll request the Revenue Study Commission to give this matter study and make a
recommendation as to the most appropriate manner for the City of Roanoke to tax
mobile homes in mobile home parks,
Mr. Huburd then moved that the communication be referred to the
Revenue Study Commission for study, report and recommendation to Council. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted..
SALE OF PROPERTY-CO~{CIL: Mr. Trout moved that Council meet in Execu-
tive Session to discuss a real estate matter. The motion was seconded by Mr.
T~mas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout nod Mayor
~ebber ..................... ~-?.
NAYS: None .........
COMMITTEES: Mr, Huburd moved that Couooil meet in Executive Session
to discuss a possible increase in the size of the Real Estate Committee and the
Revenue Study Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Nessrs..Garlsnd, Nubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber
NAYS: None O.
COMMITTEES: Mr. Hubard moved that Council meet in Executive Session
to discuss certain appoiotments to boards, commissioos, committees and authori-
ties. The motion was seconded.by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Nubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout.and Mayor
Mebber
NAYS: None O.
There being no further business, Mayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
222
COUNCIL. BEDULAR MEETING,
Tuesday, December 26, 1972.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the Coun-
cil Chsmber in the Municipal Building, Tuesday, December 26, 1972, at 7:30 p,m.,
mith Mayor Roy L, Webber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A, Garland, fillism S, Bubard, David
Lisk, Noel C. Taylor, Hampton M. Thomas, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy
Webber .......... ~ .............. 7.
ABSENt: None ......... -0,
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Julian F. Birst, City Manager; Mr, William F.
Clark, Assistant City Manager; Mr. Edward A. Natt, Assistant City Attorney; and
Mr. A. N. Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by Father Peter J.
Leventis, Holy Trinity Creek Orthodox Church. .
MINU~ES: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday,
November 20, 1972, having been furnished each member of Council, on motion of Mr.
Trout, seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof was
dispensed with and the minutes approved as recorded,
Mayor webber melcomed Scout Troop 20 from the Fairview Methodis~ Church,
Mr. Garland advised that it mould be appropriate to observe a moment
of silence in honor of the late Harry S. Truman, former President of the United
States who passed away on December 26, 1972.
ACTS OF ACKNORLEDGEMENT: On behalf of the High Street Baptist Church,
Dr. Taylor presented Mr. Julian F. Hirst with an award.as an expression of
appreciation for his accomplishments as City Manager of the City of Roanoke,
Virginia, and extended to Mr. Nirst and his family best wishes for continued
happiness, good health and success as he assumes his post as Executive Direc-
tor of the Virginia Municipal League on January l,
Mr. Nirst expressed appreciation forthe award and advised that he is
honored to receive such an award from the Nigh .Street Baptist Church.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
ZONING: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m.. Tuesday,
December 26, 1972, on the request of Mr. Donald E. Phillips, et ux., that
property located in the 5100 block of Moodbu~y Street, N. W., described as Lot
16. Block 10, Map of Air Lee Court, Official Tax No. 2190315, be rezoned from
RS-3, Single-Family Residential District, to C,I, Office and Institutional Dis-
trict, the matter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follow-
ing report recommending that the request be granted:
223
'November 16, 1972
The Honorable Roy L* lebber, Hayer
and Hembers of City Council
Roanokeo Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request mas considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of November IS.
1972.
. Hr. Willis appeared before the Planning Commission and
stated that Hr. and HFS. Phillips had signed n contract
agreeing to sell the subject lot to Hountain Trust Dank.
He further stated that Uountain Trust Bank plans to build a
branch bank on the two lots adjacent to this subject late
which are already zoned C-I. and requires this lot for park-
lng purposes in connection with the bank. lie noted that ali
of aountain Trust nantes branch offices are very attractive
and add to the neighborhood, particularly the nrambleton
Avenue Hrnnch.
After much discussion by the Planning Commission members.
it mas generally felt that this petition represented an
extension of an existing use and mould not be detrimental
to the surrounding neighborhood.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and approved
with a vote of five (5) ayes and one (1) nay recommending to
City Council that this request, be approved.
Sincerely,
S/ Creed K. Lemon, Jr., by LW
Creed K. Lemon, Jr.
Hr. Itolman W. lillis, Jr., Attorney. representing the petitioners.
appeared before Council in support of the request of his clients.
No one appearing in opposition to the request for rezoning, Mr. Trout
moved that t~e follo~iog Ordinance be placed upon its first readiog:
(~2060D) AN OHDINAHCE to amend Title X¥, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet No. 219. Sectional
1966 Zone Hap, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
WHEREAS, application has been made to the Council of the City of
Roanoke to have that property located in the SIO0 Block of Woodbury Street, N.
described as Lot 16. Block 10, Map of Air Lee Court. Official Tax No. 2190316
rezoned from RS-3e Single-Family Residential District, to C-l, Office and Insti-
tutional District; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission has recommended that the herein-
afterdescribed land be rezoned from RS-3, Single-Family Residential District,
to C-l. Office and Institutional District; and
WDEREAS. the wirtten notice and the posted sign requlred~to be pub-
lashed and posted, respectively, by Section 71, Chapter 4,1, Title XV, of The
Code of the City of Roanoke. 1956, as amended, relating to Zoning. have been
published and posted as required and for the time provided by said section; and
WREREASe the hearing as provided for in said notice was held on the
26th day of December, 1972, at 7:30 p.m., before the Council of the City of
Roanoke, at which hearing all parties in interest and citizens were given an to
be heard, both for and against the proposed rezoning; and
224
MHEREAS, this Council, after considering the evidence.as herein pro-
vided, is of the opinion that the hereinafter described land should be rezoned,
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
Title X¥, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 19SG,r
as amended, relating to Zoning, and Sheet No, 219 of the Sectional 1966 Zone
Rap, City of Roanoke, be amended Jn the foil*ming particular and no other, Viz,:
Property located in the 5100 HI*ch of Moodbury Street, N, M,, des-
cribed as Lot l~, Dlock 10, Rap of Air Lee Cou~t, Officinl Tax HO, 2190316
designated on. Sheet 219 of the Sectional 1966 Zone #ap, City of Roanoke, as
Official Tax Ho. 2190316, be,.and is herebY, changed from RS-3, Single-Family
Residential District, to C-1, Office and Institutional District, and that Sheet
No. 219 of the aforesaid map he changed in this respect.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the foil*ming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ........................
NAYS: None ..... ~----0. (Mr. Hubard not voting)
ZONING: Council having set a public hearing for ?:30 p.m., Tuesday,
December 26, 1972, on the request of Mr. William Kenney, et. al** that property
fronting on the northerly side of Memorial Avenue betmeen Cambridge Avenue and
Dennis,on Avenue. S. I.. and at the southwestern corner of Memorial Avenue and
Dennis,on Avenue. S. W.. described as Lots 5. 6. and 10. Hogan Building Company
Rap, Official Tax Nos. 1330118, 1330117 and 1330134, and Lots 15 and 14, Block
5, Virginia Iteights, Official Tax Nos. 1330303 and 1330302, be rezoned from C-l,
Office and Institutional District, to C-R, General Commerical District, the
matter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follow-
lng report recommending th'at the request be denied:
'November 16, 1972
The Honorable Roy L. Webber. Rayor
~.ud Members of City Council
Roanoke, ¥irgifia.
Centlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of November 15,
1972.
Mr. Coulter appeared b~fore the Planning Commission and
stated that he. represented Mrs. Fleming, Rudy Cox, Inc.,
Realtors, Mr. and Mrs. Moticha and Mr. Kenney. He stated that
Mr. Kennedy had contracted to purchase Lot 5 from Mrs.
Annie C. Jones for the purpose of building a Kenney*s
Bantam Market convenience store on this property and that
he is the only petitioner uith a decided purpose in mind for
this request for a C-2 designation. He further stated that
a cedar fence would be placed in the rear of the proposed
building to protect the adjoining abutting property owners
and that the bnildi'n9 mould be set back at the rear of the
lot ~ith off-street parking in front. Mr. Coulter noted that
there is no convenience store to the north of Memorial Avenue,
the ? - Ii convenience store iervlces the old Raleigh Court
section and residents have to cross busy Streets in order to
reach this convenience store and thin proposed store would
be a safety feature for the people living in the surrounding
area. Mr. Coulter further noted that this property has
been vacant for many'years and It seems ss though it mill not
be built on in its present C-l designation. Hr, Coulter
stated that across Memorial Avenue are the Citgo and Esso
Service Stations, Ideal Laundry pich ups and car wishes. He
further stated that with the general area already being C-I,
this is the time for a change because the City isn't
realizing much frbn these properites, and this request mould
generate more real estate taxes, more business licenses and
a payroll, end that he can see no other use for this property.
Hr, Rndy Cox appeared before the Planning CommiSsion end
stated that he omned tag of the lots in this request, one
had previously been his real estate office and at this time
has been rented to a doctor and a.msnufacturing representa-
tive. He further stated that on the other lot he had remodeled
an old .home and it now contained his new real estate office.
Be noted that this entire area is desirable for apartments
and many older hones have been turned into offices and that
he could see no harm resulting from a convenience store,
Mr. Laurence asked MF~ Cox if he had any plans to use
the C-2 designation on the two lots he owned in this peti-
tion. Mr. Cox stated that he had no plans us his offices
came under the C-1 designation.
Mr. Bill Kenney. owner of the Kenney's Restaurants and
Bantam Markets in the Roanoke Valley, appeared before the
Planning Commission and stated that he had been h business
since 19Sa and that hfs company broutht in thousands of
dollars annually to the City of Roanoke. Be further stated
that they would spend $60,000 to $65,000 for the building.
Re noted that they like to come into a residential neighbor-
hood on a corner lot and build a convenience store for the
neighbors of the area and they felt there was a need for a
store of this type at this location or they wouldn*t place
one there. He further noted that there would be no noise
factor that would be objectionable to the neighbors since
people just come in and 9o right back out again and their
parking lots are kept clean of litter and trash.
Mr. Coulter stated the other petitioners were placed
on the request because it was felt that there would be
opposition to a request for spot zoning but if the Planning
Commission members were against rezoning all five lots to
please treat the request as a singular one for Mr. Kenney.
Mrs. Fina Homer, 1907 Denniston Avenue, appeared before
the Planning Commission and stated that she onned the lot
directly betmeen the two dwellings that are being used as
offices and presented the Planning Commission members with
a petition signed by property owners in the immediate vicinity
of the property being requested for rezoning that are in
opposition to this request. She further stated that the
signatures on the petition represented all owners adjacent to
and across the street from the property, with three excep-
tions they all were property owners and the list represented
29 properties*including the church on Memorial ~venue. Mrs.
Homer noted that this request would increast traffic hazards
and there are a large number of children in the neighborhood.
She further noted that it would devalue the homes in the area
and there is no C-2 commercial zoning on the north side of
Memorial Avenue whatsoever. She stated that most of the resi-
dences are owner-occupied and that they have lived there for
30, 40 and 50 years and they did not want the rezoningo
Mrs. Randolph, 1016 Canbridoe Avenue, appeared before
the Planning Commission and stated that this location mas an
intersection of 5 points around the fire station and that
this commercial designation would add traffic at the very
spot where there is a problem already. She further stated
that her property.adjoins two of the requested lots and the
neighbors mould like to keep this a nice residential area.
Mr. lalter Loebl. a resident of Denniston Avenue,
appeared before the Planning Commission and stated that
there had been 17 different moves to rezone this particular
corner but that Memorial Avenue is the boundary for the
C-2 zoning designations and that there have been very serious
accidents there already and the neighbors uo~ld like to
leave it exactly as it is now.
Reverend Albert Allison. Virginia Heights Baptist
Church~ appeared before the Plonnfog Comwisaion and stated
that there was u convenience stOre Just like the one being
proposed.at a church in linchester that he has Just come
from and that it mas all that they could do to keep the
trash, beer cans. soda bottles end ,they litte~off of the
church property even though the convenience sto~e kept their
lot clean. ~
Hr. Glenn. Cambridge Avenue. appeared before abe Plan-
ning Commission and stated tbat he has lived on.Cambridge
Avenue for43 lears and concurs with the general feeling of
opposition in the neighborhood because of the increase in
traffic on Memorial Avenue.
The Plonning Director stated that there is no question
that the area is predominantly business area and the real
question is mhat is the best use. Be further stated that the
character of the over all neighborhood blends in with the
over all area of business offices. He noted that the traffic
system should be hept down to o basic minimum.
Mr. Bolnton stated that one side of Memorial Avenue con-
taining the C-2 designation mas not up against the residential
area but that on this side the C-2 designation would put the
property owners right up against the zoning.
There mas much discussion by the Planning Commission
members with some members expressing their approval and others
expressing their disapproval.
Accordingly. motion was made. duly seconded and
approved mith a rote of four (4) ayes and two (2) noyes.
recommending to City Council that this request be denied.
Sincerely.
S/ Creed K. Lemon. Jr., by LM
Creed K. Lemon. Jr.
Chairman"
Mrs. Finn Homer. 1907 Denniston Avenue. S. M~. appeared before
Council and presented a petition signed by 46 property owners in the vicinity
of or immediately adjacent to the property in question, advising that they
object to the proposed Fez,ming because it would create traffic congestion at
m location where there has already been one traffJ~ death and would depreciate
the residential property values and requesting that Council maintain this area as
a C-I. Office and Institutional District.
Dr. Robert R. Rudolph, 1816 Cambridge Avenue, S, W., appeared before
Council and advised that the people in the vicinity of abe requested fez.ming do
not wish to have any type of commercial establishment in the neighborhood parti-
cularly on the north side of Memorial Avenue. that the type of business proposed
creates a noise and a nuisance, that it would increase traffic congestion in an
already hazardous area. that there are two bus lines intersecting at this loca-
tion. that there is a fire station across the street from the proposed rezoning
area which has to use this already congested street, that there are already
four stores in the region of Grandin Road and Memorial Avenue and there is
obviously no need for another convenience store at this location, and that it is
obvious that such fez,ming would introduce o target for violence in a primarily
residential neighborhood.
Mr, Jack B, Coulter, Attorney, representing .the petitioners, appeared
before Council in support or the request of hfs clients end advised that with the
recent construction of the Cambridge Manor Apartments, there.is no grocery store
on the north side of Wen*rial Avenue, that the store would blend into the
neighborhood, that there would be abundant afro*treat pnrking,.that there would
be a fence mhich mould separate the store from the houses, that the area in
question Js a relatively old area in the community, that this area is no longer
purely residential, that the facts stated by the opposition are more emotional
than factual and that justification for the request for res*ming outmeights the
points in opposition.
After a discussion of the matter, Hr. 6~rland moved that Council concur
in the recommendation of the City Planning Commission that ~he request for
res*ming be denied. Thegn*tiaa mas seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Trout and Mayor
~ebher ....................... 6.
NAYS: None ......... -0. (Mr. Thomas not voting)
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m.,
Tuesday, December 26, 1972, on the request of Mr. Felix A. Ohe~cbain, et ax..
that Gum Street, N. W., (formerly Pine Street) which is a paper street located
approximately 338.9 feet west of Beech Street between S~enandoah Avenue and
Barberry Avenue (formerly Dogwood Avenue) betmeen Lots 4 and 5 and Reservation
No. 2 and Reservation Bo. 3, according to the Rap of We*tm*od. be vacated,
discontinued and closed, the matter mas'before the bo~y.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follow=
lng report recommending that the request be granted:
*November 2, 1972
The. Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request mas considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of November 1,
1972.
Mr. Jack B. Coulter, attorney for the petitioner,
appeared before the Planning Commission and stated that Mr.
and Mrs. Ob*achaia are the *mn*rs of the Obenchain*s Green-
houses and that they are requesting that Gum Street. N. W..
a paper street, be closed in order that they may enlarge this
greenhouse area. He further noted that part of this paper
street has a graveled entrance off of Shenandoah Avenue but
that it did not go through to the next block; and, additionally,
that u large portion of this paper street is overgromn with
underbrush. Finally, he noted that Mr. and Mrs, Obenchain
own all of the land on either side of the paper street.
After a discussion by the Planning Commission members,
it mas agreed that the closing of Gum Street would not be
detrimental to the community. It mas noted, however, that
there is a sewer line extending from Shenandoah Avenue about
1/2 of the way to Rarberry Avenue and that it ~ould certainly
be necessary to reserve this easement for public utilities.
227
Accordingly, motion was msdeo drily seconded und
ununimously spproved recommending to City Council that this
request be approved.'
Sincerely, '
S/ Creed K, LemontJr.. by
Creed K. Lemon. Jr,
Chairman'
The vieners appointed to view the street in question submitted a
written report advising that they have viewed the street and the neighboring pro-
party und they are uusnimously of the opinion that no inconvenience would
result to any person, firm or corporation from permanently vacating, discon-
tinuing and closing the street.
Mr. Jack O. Coulter, Attorney, representing the petitioners, appeared
before Council in support of the request of his clients.
No one appearing in opposition to the request. Mr, Trout moved that
Council concur in the recommendation of the City planning Commission and that
the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(#20609) AH ORD1NANC£ permanently vacating, discontinuing and
closing that paper street known os Gum Street (formerly Pine Street) located
approximately 338.9 feet west of Beech Street between Shenandoah Avenue and
Barberry Avenue (formerly Dogmood Avenue) between Lots 4 and 5 and Reservations
No. 2 and Reservation No. 3 according to the Map of Westwood recorded in the
Clerk*s Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book
1, page 315.
MHEREAS, Felix A. and Evelyn K. Obeuchain. husband and wife, have
heretofore filed their application before the Council of the City of Roanoke,
Virginia, in accordance with law, requesting the Council to permanently vacate,
discontinue and close Gum Street between Lots 4 and 5 and Reservations No. 2
and Reservation No. 3 according to the Map of #estwood as more particularly
described in said application, of the filing of which application due notice was
given to the public as required by law; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the request of said application, viewers
were appointed by Council on the 16th day of October, 1972, to view the pro-
perty and to report in writing whether in their opinion any inconvenience would
result from permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing said Gum Street us
described in.the resolution appointing said viewers; and
WHEREAS, it appears from the written report of the viewers dated
October 31, 1972, and filed with the City Clerk that no inconvenience would
result either to any individual.or to the public from permanently vacating,
discontinuin9 and closing said Gum Street as hereinafter described; and
WHEREAS, Council at its meeting on October 16, 1972, referred the
application to the City Planning Commission, which Commission by its report
dated November 2, 1972, and filed with Council recommended that said application
to vacate, discontinue and close said Gum Street as described be approved; and
229
WHEREAS, a public bearing was.held on the question before the Council
at its regular meeting on December 26, 1972, after due and timely notice thereof
)ublished in The Roanoke World-News, ut which hearing all.parties in interest
Iand citizens were afforded an opportunity to on the .question; and
be
heard
WHEREAS, from ull of the foregoing, Council considers that no incon-
venience mill result to any individual or to the public from permanently vacating,
discontinuing end closing the hereinafter described Gum Street, as requested by
I the petitioners in their application, and that, accordingly, the herein described
street should be permanently closed,
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
Gum Street (fornerly Pine Street) a paper street located approximately
feet west of Beech Street between Shenandoah Avenue and Barberry Avenue (formerly
Dogwood Avenue) between Lots 4 and S and Reservations No, 2 and Reservation No,
according to the Map of Westwood recorded in the Clerk*s Office of the Circuit
Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 1, page 135. be. and it hereby is.!
permanently vacated, discontinued and closed; and that all right, title and
interest of the City of'Rosa*kc and to the public in and to the same be and is
hereby released insofar as the Council of the City of Roanoke is empowered so to
do; the City of Roanoke~ however, reserving unto itself an easement for any
water, sewer, or other public utility line or lines, if any, nom existing
I therein and the right of ingress and egress for the maintenance and repair
thereof.
HE IT Ft~RTHER ORDAINED that the City Engineer be, and he hereby is,
directed to mark *permanently vacated~ on the above described street on all maps
and plats on file in his office on which said street is shown, referring to the
book and page of Ordinances and Resolutions of the Council of the City of Roanoke
wherein this Ordinance shall be spread.
BE IT FI~THER ORDAINED that the Clerk of the Council deliver to the
Clerk of the Hustings Court for the City of'Roanoke, Virginia, a certified copy
of this Ordinancein orderthat the Clerk of said Court may make proper notation
on all maps or plats recorded in his office upon which is shown said street as
provided by low, and that if so requested by any party in interest he may record
IBook in his office the in the name of the City
the
same
in
the
Deed
indexing
of Roanoke as grantor and in the name of any party in interest who may request
it as gran~ee.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
I AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .......... ~ ........ 7.
NAYS: None ......... O.
ZONING: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m., Tuesday,
December 26, 1972, on the request of Messrs. Elmer M. Cox and Lawrence E. Peters
.230
that property located on Redwood Road, S. E., tad Dundee Avenue, S. E,, described
us Lots 3, 40 50 6, Il, 12. 13 and 14, Section 4, Nap of Rosewood Park Corpora-
toga, Official Tax Nos, 4440722. 4440723. 4440724, 4440725. 4440706, 44407050
4440704 end 4440703, be rezoned from RD, Duplex Residential District, to RG-I,
General Residential District, the matter mas before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the followin
report recommending that tbs request be granted:
'November 16. IRT2
The Nonorable Roy L. Webber, Rayor'
and Rembers of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City plan-
ning Commission at its regular meetings of October 18, 1972,
November l, 1972 and November 15, 1972.
At the October 18, 1972. meeting Mr, Taylor appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that this pro-
perty comprises 4 lots on Redmood Road. S, R,. through to
Dundee Road, S, £. He further stated that the petitioners
plan to build 32 apartment units on this land. four units
per building. Re noted that Dundee Road. S. E., which is
not open in front of these lots will be opened and that
water and sewer lines will be run to the property. Mr~ Taylor
noted that there will be two entrances and two exi~ for the
traffic to flow from these apartment buildings, one on
Redwood Road, S, E.. and one on Dundee Road, Si E. He fur-
ther noted that these apartments will not be government
subsidized and will rent from $110 to $135 per month.
A petition was presented to the Planning Commission members
with signatures from over 40 neighbors in the surrounding
area expressing their opposition to this rezoning petition.
Mrs, Betty Hogan. 1704 Redwood Road. S, E.. appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that her home is
adjacent to the lots in question and that she is opposed
to this retorting petition. She further stated that Redwood
Road, S. E., is 20 feet wide. Catawba Streetis 13 feet
wide, and that the portion of Dundee Road, S. E., that is
opened is only 13 feet wide; and that these streets were
already heavily traveled and that they could not accommodate
any more additional traffic. She noted that the only way
out of this area is by Bennington Street and that the traffic
is so congested there now that it would be impossible to
crowd the streets any more. She further noted that the
people in this area purchased their homes for single-family
residences and that they strongly oppose any rezoning to a
higher designation.
Rr. Lamrence asked Mrs. Hogan if the City would not
widen the streets in this area for the additional
traffic. Mrs. Hogan stated that the City has promised for
years to widen these streets and that it mouldn't be any
different now with the increased traffic load.
Mr. Doynton asked what arrangements mere being made for
a playground area for the children living in the apartments.
Mr. Taylor answered that there were no plans for one as '
there mas room enough only for the buildings and the required
I 1/2 parking spaces per unit.'
MF~ W. M. Trout, 1630 Redwood Road, S. £.', appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that Mr. Taylor
has said that Dundee Road would be extended the same width
past these lots es it was now on Dundee Road nnd that Dundee
Road, from Catawba Street, was only u graveled alley at this
tine which would mean that the new extension would be just a
graveled alley. He further stated that he owned three lots
himself and the subject land was only 50 feet wider and that
it could not possibly be enough room for 32 apartment units
and that there would be no space for the children living in
the apartments to play.
231
'* Nrs,'Beverly Long, 1904 Reduood Road, S, B,, appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that there is mech
building going on now over in this area and that the traffic
is already too congested and that the noise is terrible,
especially from Jamestown Place, another apartment complex,
The Planning Director slated that he uas opposed to this
fez*ming for three basic reasons; one, that this area is
essentially a single-family residential one, two, that the
street system is not adequate to accommodate the Increased
traffic generated by this. new use and, three, that the
topography of this land does not lend itself to this parti-
cular type of use.
AccOrdingly, a vote was taken on this petition on
October 18, 1972, and the vote was three (3) ayes and tun
(2) nay*s, recommending to City Council that this request be
approved. Since a quorum vote could not be mustered, this
matter was again presented at the November 1. 1972, meeting
of the Planning Commission.
At the November 1, 1972. meeting, Mr. Taylor again
appeared before the Planning Commission and stated that the
question of no playground area for the children hod been
brought up at the last City Planning Commission meeting and
that he mould like to point out that there will be provided
15,000 square feet of grass area in this development which
represents a considerable amount of open space. He did
state, however, that in this particular locution, as much
land as possible would be needed for the apartment units
themselves.
Mrs. Betty Hogan, 1704 Redwood Road, S. Eo, again
appeared before the Planning Commission and stated that if
this rezoning petition is approved, it would generate addi-
tional apartment units in this area which is essentially at
present a residential area.
Accordingly, a vote was taken on this petition on
November 1, 1972, and the vote was three (3) ayes and tmo
(2) nay*s, recommending to City Council that this request be
.approved. Since a quorum vote could not be mustered, this
matter was again presented at the November IS, 1972, meeting
of the Planning Commission.
At the November 15, 1972, meeting, the Planning Commis-
sion again considered this petition at some length with some
members expressing their approval of this new petitioner's
use while other members expressed their disapproval.
Accordingly. motion was made, duly seconded and
approved with a vote of five (5) ayes and. one (1) nay,
recommending to City Council that this request be approved.
Sincerely.
S/ Creed K. Lemon, Jr** by LM
Creed K. Lemon, Jr.
Chairman'
Mr. Jerry M. Hogan, 1704 Redwood Road, S. E., appeared before Council
in opposition to.the request for rezoning, advising that Catawba Street and
Dundee Avenue,.S, E.0 mill have to be widened to take care of'the increased traffi'
if this rezonin9 request is approved, that Jamestown Place is only one and one-
half blocks away, that there are many children in the area and the rezonln9 mould
create traffic problems.
Mr. M.'M. Trout. 1638 Redwood Road, S. E., also appea~ed before Council
in opposition to the request for rezoning.
Mr. John M. Taylor, Attoroey. representing the petitioner$,,appenred
before COuncil in support of the request of. his clients, n~vising that nothing
has been done to this land since 1927, pointing out that be has a complete set
of specifications for every building that is proposed to be built m this land
if it is rezoned, that 'he has cost estimates for extending Dundee Avenue, that
there ire adequate parking facilities sad that the land bas remained dormant for
so long thai something must be done to it,
Approximately ten people in opposition to the request for rezoning mere
in attendance at the meeting.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Planning Commission that the request for rezoning be approved.
The motion failed for lack of o second.
Hr. Lash then moved that Council deny the request for vezoning. The
motion mas secomded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the foil.ming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, and Trout ......
NAYS: Mr. Thomas and Mayor Webber ...........................2.
ZONING: Council having set a public hearln9 for 7:30 p.m., Tuesday,
December 26, 1972, on the request of Messrs. Harold W. Harris, Jr., and William
M. Hall, that property located in the 2500 block of Broadmay Avenue and Stephenson[
Avenue, So !o, described as Lots I and 2, Block 1, Gollehon Addition, Official
Tax Nos, 1160109, llbOll~ and 1160113, be rezoned from RS-3, Single-Family
Residential District, to C-I, Office and Institutional District, the matter mas
before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follom-
log report advising that as a quorum vote could not be mustered and since two
members of the Planning Commission disqualified themselves from the voting, that
it is the recommendation of the City Planning Commission that Council receive thit
rezoning petition without an official recommendation from the Planning Commission:
'November ~6, 1972
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia.
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at both its regular meetings of November
1, lg?2, and November 15, 1972.
At the November. l, 1972, meeting Mr. Plunkett appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that this property
is located at the corner of Droudmay Avenue and Stepbenson
Avenue, S. #., and at present, it is occupied by an old
dwelling house which has been there for many years.- He
stated that this property is adjacent to commercial property .'
located on Franklin Road and that Broadway and Stephenson
Avenues are heavily traveled streets and the proposed new
interchange of Route 599 mill come into Broadmay through
the South Roanoke Lumber Company property.
Mr. Plunkett noted that this property faces into u C-2
designation where the laundry and the self-service laundry-
are located and that from the front porch of the present
dwelling, you could look directly down to the laundry. He
stated that the petitioners plan to build a building for
E. L. Rush ~ Son, one of the oldest real estate firms in
Roanoke and that they propose building a structure only
for use by R. L, Rush & Son. Mr. Plunkett presented a dram-
lng depicting the proposed building, the parking and the
landscaping elements noting that the proposed building would
be adequately set back in line with the*other dwellings located
on this street.
Mr, Plunkett noted that R, L. Rush ~ Son employs
approximately 20 people plus secretaries and their hours are
from 0:30 to 3:00 which mould appear to nike it much better
suited for the area thee un apartment use, #r. Plunkett
stated-tbntnore and note businesses are moving into the
County all of the tine but that everyone would like to keep
the businesses in the Roanoke City, Be further stated that
for a tine they hud attempted to rent this home but it only
attracted objectionable people and that this type of house
would not rent to people of the quality living in the Stephenson
Avenue area. He noted that the petitioner is perfectly will-
ing to pet uny .stipulations on the resorting sad that they
would present a plan and would be bound to lt. He further
noted that if the neighbors would like the exterior of the
building changed° they would be happy to change the architec-
tural design of the building and that the petitioner realized
that this was a good area or they nouldn*t uant to be in it.
Mr. Lawrence asked i~ the only access to the property
would be coming off of Broadway Avenue and that the traffic
situation there is very.bad. Mr. Plunkett noted that the
only access would be off of Broadway Avenue aid that there
would be no access off of Stephenson Avenue. Mr, Plunkett
stated that he and the petitioner hud reviewed the traffic
situation at 5:00 p.m. at the proposed location and were
unarm of the problems.
Mr. Joe Bounds, Attorney, appeared before the Planning
Commission and stated that he represented the residents of
Stephenson Avenue. Be further stated that he and Gilbert
Seay had circulated u petition which was signed by 25 indi-
viduals that live on this specific street. He noted that
Stuart Barbour nas the only resident that was in favor of the
rezoning and that everyone else objected very strongly to
this petition. He further noted that this issue bas been a
continuing one on this street which is essentially located
in a residential area and that in the past three years six
families, all young professional people, have moved into
this section because they.found it highly desirable.
Bounds stated that this proposed change in the zoning desig-
nation would devalue all of the homes in the area, open up
Stephenson and Broadway Avenues to additional traffic, He
further stated that a change of the old dwellin9 there now
may be needed but that it would not be for the betterment of
the neighborhood for this particular resuming.
Mr. Burke, 2602 Stephenson Avenue, S. W., appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that he nas con-
cerned about an encroachment of any portion of this.street
for business purposes and that it seemed to him that if this
rezoning is approved, the next rezoning may be a little
farther down the street.
Mrs. Parsons. 2505 Stephenson Avenue, S. M., appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that she was con-
cerned that the bank between her property and the subject
property would be even steeper than at present. Mr. Plunkett
stated that the site would be properly landscaped and that there
would be no steep bank between the two properties and no
bank at ail on Stephenson Avenue.
Mr. Gilbert Seay, 2502 Stephenson Avenue, S.
appeared before the Planning Commission and stated that he
has lived on Stephenson Avenue for 25 years and that this
area has always been a quality residential area. Ne stated
that.the interchange would increase the traffic even nora on
Broadnay Avenue and that this petition would increase the
traffic on Stephenson Avenue and that it would be an extreme
detriment to the safety of the people who use it. .He noted
that he would not like to leave the neighborhood after liv-
Ing there for 25 years and that the people who purchased hones
on this street bought them under a residential designation.
Mr. Lawrence asked about the parking spaces to be pro-
vided for this office use. Mr. Plunkett stated that there
mould be 17 parking spaces, fully complying with the zoning
ordinance.
A vote taken on the petition was a vote of three (3) ayes
and one (1) nay, recommending to City Council that this
~equest be denied. Since u quorum vote could oot he mustered,
this matter was again presented at the November 15, 1972,
meeting of thePlanning Commission.
At the November 15, 19?2~meeting #r. Ploekett nglim .
sppearnd before the Plemoiog Commission nad presented tbe~
members math letters from iodividolls mbo mould llhe to have
their ammos withdrlmn from the orlgimll petition presented
against the rezoning it the November I. 1972, meeting. Br.
Plonkett stated that the proposed building and olso the
parking mould be farther away from Stephenson Avenue than
the present dmelling located on the property non and that
all Ingress end egress mould be from Broadway Avenueo He
further stated thatthere is a traffic problem at this
intersection and the petitioners had no objection to potting
up no parking signs on Stephenson Avenue, Hr, Plunkett
noted that there had been some question os to whether the
petitioner nas providing enough parking spaces for the num-
ber of employees but that not more than B or 10 people on
an average would be at the proposed office at any one time
except on lednesday mornings during the sales meetings and
that the petitioner mould be milling to put some additional
parking in the basement of the building if it was felt by
the Commission members that 17 parking spaces would not be
'adequate, He further'noted.that.#rs, Parsons had shomed
concern about the steep bank at her property and that the
petitioners.planned to fill up to her property and that
there would only be gentle slope there as It is mom and
that there mould be no bank at Stephenson Avenue, Finally,
Mr. Plunkett noted that he was fully aware of the neigh-
bors on Stephenson Avenue being opposed to this request but
that there would be no enroachment on Stephenson Avenue
and that this proposed building would be located on Broadmay
Avenue.
Opposition to.this rezoning petition was expressed by
many of the neighborhood residents,
Mr, Joe Bounds, Attorney, representing the resident of
Stephenson Avenue, again appeared before the Planning Com-
mission and stated that the neighbors agreed that this was
a beautiful building being proposed for this location but
that the.neighbors did not want it.
Br. Gilbert Seay stated that he agreed that something
should.be done to this property but that there were many
other uses better than the one proposed. He noted that the
traffic situation is atrocious mom and it certainly mould
be increased upon completion of the hem 501 interchange and
that it would be increased even more with a commerical
establishment located on this property.
Mrs. Sights, 2530 5tephenson Avenue, stated her opposi-
tion to this request because she wanted the street left as
it mas, residential, Mr. Dale Paul noted that he was a
renter in the neighborhood and mas opposed to this rezoning
since there was no guarantee that this commerical develop-
ment Mould not spread farther up Stephenson Avenue.. Mr.
John Goldsmith, Jr., stated his opposition to the petition
for the rezonin9. Mr. Ben Sights, 2530 Stephenson Avenue,
appeared before the Planning Commission stating his
opposition to this request.
Br. Coleman end Mr. Boynton disqualified themselves
from the voting on this petition because of personal
interests in this petition.
This petition mas discussed by the remaininpPlannin9
Commission members at much length with some members expressing
their approval mhile others expressed their disapproval.
Accordingly, a vote mas taken with tmo (2) ayes and two
(2) nayes.
AS a quorum vote could not be mustered and since two
members had disqualified themselves from the voting, a
motion was made, duly seconded and unanimously approved
recommending that City Council receive this rezoning.peti-
tion without an official recommendation from the Planning
Commission.
Sincerely,
S/ Creed K, Lemon, Jr** by LM
Creed K, Lemon, Jr,
Mr. J, p. Bounds, 2516 5tephensoa Avenue, $, M,, nppesred before Coun-
cil and advised that the residents of 5tephenson Avenue take a greet deal of pride
in their hones end requested that the resuming be denied.
#ro G. L. Sony, 2502 Stepheoson Avenue, S. ~., appeared before Council
in opposition to tbs resuming, and presented the following communication outlin-
icg the reasons for opposition:
"November 20, 1972
The Nonorable Roy L. Mebber, Nnyor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
The above cited request was considered by the City Planning
Commission at both its regular meeting of November I and
November 15, 1972; at which meeting the writer and many of
the residents of 5tephenson Avenue appeared to express their
objection to the requested rezoning, Upon my return to the
City Saturday evening 18 November, I found in the mail a
notice from the City Clerk advising that the matter had been
placedon the agenda for Monday, Movember 10, 1972, at
2:00 pom, I have business comnlttenents out of the City
for Monday, 20 ~ovember and because of the short notice and
the involvement Of many others from out of town, it is not
possible for me to appear before you on Monday,
Submitted here is a brief outline of my reasons for object-
lng to the requested resuming:
I. I have been informed that the present petitioners
were aware of the history of pressure from various commer--
cial interests to extend the commerical resuming along
Franklin Road toward Stephenson Avenue and the resolution
establishing the line between the commercial and the rosA*
dential district established by City Council as a result of
those hearings. It appears therefore, that the present
petitioners are taking the approach of purchasing distress
residential property with the idea of later having it rezoned
to office and institutional classification at considerable
monitory gain to themselves, Usually such monitory gain is
balanced by monitary loss to the owners of residential
property in the vicinity, Often when such rezoning is
approved, the transition or barrier is broked and others
will likely make application for change.
2. I agree with the statement of one of the members
of the Planning Commissioq, *Something needs to be done to
improve this property*. It is unlikely that the existing
residents will attract occupants compatible with the resi-
dents of the neighborhood. It may also be unlikely that the
construction of a.new single family residence would be
economically feasible at this particular location. I would
like to see an improvement at this location and personally
feel that a multi-family structnre mould enhance the neigh-
borhood considerably as an acceptable transition between the
commercial zoning on Franklin Road and the single family
residential zoning on 5tephenson Avenue, This property
fronts the entire 2400 block on $tephenson Avenue which
block is currently zones as multi-family residence. I-
believe many of the residents on Stephenson Avenue would
consider such a multi-family rezonin9 for this particular
property an improvement to the environment of the area, I
am aware that the current request is not for such rezoning,
however, I su§gest it as an alternative for this parcel
of property, Mr. Lothar Mermelstein, Planning Director,
has recommended to the Planning Commission that the request
be denied because of the adverse impact on the environment
of the existing single family residential area.
3, I have lived at 2502 Stephenson Avenue for twenty-
five years and on the adjacent lot between, The referenced
property is located within 150 feet across tbs intersection
of Stephenson Avenue and Twenty-Fifth Street from the front
of my residence, I would consider it very objectionable
to have an office or an institutional operation ia this
236
location. All. but one o! the citlznes o#ning and rosfd- -
lng in the:three or four, blochs of Stephenson Avenue,
except one, have expressed their objection without encour-
agement from the writer end have willingly signed u peti-
tion for your .information and file,
In view of the sbov.e I request that you deny the requested
rezonlng in'the interest of all the citizens of Roanohe tad
especially those who reside in this single family residence
in the urea.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ G. L. Seav
G. L. Sesy
2502 Stephenson Avenue, S. W.
Roanoke. Virginia
(Dictated by me and typed in my absence)"
Approximately fifteen property owners in opposition to the rezoning
request mere in attendance at the meeting.
Mr. T. L. Plunkett, Jr., ~ttorney, representing the petitioners,
appeared before Council in support of the request of his clients, advising that
the house presently on this property is more than sixty years old, that there
will be ample parking, that the property in question faces directly into C-2
property and Mr. PJankett presented a color photo of the building that his
client proposes to erect.
Mr. Lothar Mermelstein. Planning Director, appeared before Council
and advised that the area in question is a very stable and fine neighborhood,
that if a C-I classification is allowed in the area, it will change the character
of the neighborhood, that the best use is for a residential zone and that he
feels a RD, Duplex Residential District, will be the best use for this site.
After a lengthy discussion of the matter. Mr. Rubard moved that Coun-
cil concur in the request for rezoning and thai the following Ordinance be
placed upon its first reading:
(m20610) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1. Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke. 1956, as amended, and Sheet No. 116, Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
MR£REA5, application has been made to the Council of the City of
Roanoke to have property located in the 2500 block of Broadway Avenue and
Stephenson Avenue, S. W., described as Lots I and 2, Block l, Gollehon Addition,
Official Zax Nos. 11~0109~ 1160110 and 1160131, rezoned from RS-3, Single-Family
Residential Districtt to C-l, Office and Institutional District; and
WHEREAS, the City Plannin9 Commission has failed to make a recommenda-
tion in regard to the request; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested a public hearing on the matter;
and,
#HEREAS, the writte.n notice and the posted sign required to be published
and posted, respectively, by Section ?1, Chapter 4.1, Title XV, of The Code of the
City of Roauohe, 1956, as amended, relating ko Zoning. have been published end
posted as required and for the time provided by said section; and
WREREAS, the hearing as provided for in said nokice ma~ held on the
26kb day of December, 1972. at 7:30 p.m** before the Council of the City of
Roanoke, ak which hearing all parties in interest end citizens were given an
opportunity to be heard, both for end against the proposed rezoning; and
MREREA~. this Council~ ufter considering the evidence as herein pro-
vided, is o! the opinion that the hereinafter described land should be rezoned.
THEREFORE. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
Title XV, Chapter 4.1. Section 2, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as
amended, relating to Zoning. and Sheet NO. 116 of the Sectional 1966 Zone Map,
City of Roanoke, be amended in the following particular and no other, viz.:
Property located on the 2500 block of Broadway Avenue and 5tephenson
Avenue, S. M., described as Lots I and Z, Block 1, Gollehon Addition, designated
on Sheet 115 of the Sectional 1965 Zone Map, City of Roanoke. as Official Tax
NOS. 1160109, 1160110 and 1160151, be, and is hereby, changed from RS-3,
Single-Family Residential District to C-l, Office and Institutional District,
and that Sheet No. 116 of the aforesaid map be changed in this respect.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
~;hb ....................~ ....... 6.
NAYS: Hr. Trout ......1.
ZONING: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m.. Tuesday
December 26, 1972, ~on the request of Messrs. Donald G. Sink and F. Earl Frith
that property lo~nted in the 950 block of Vinton Mill Road, N. E** described as
the westerly 200.O feet of ~ots 1. 2 and 3, according to the subdivision plat
of C. A. Plasters and Me C* Jo~n~son dated Ray 3. 1952, Official Tax Nos.
3330506 and 3330505. be rezoned from C-I, Office and Institutional District, to
C-2, General Commercial* District. tho matter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follow-
ing report recommending that the request be granted:.
· November lb, 1972
The Honorable Roy L. ~ebber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at both its regular meetings on November
1, 1972 and Novemben 15, 1972
At ihe Novembe~ 1, 1972, ~eeti~9 Mr. Plac~ app .... d ~efore
the Planning Commission.and stated that he would like to
amend his request to include alt of the tract of land up to
the C-2 designation. He further stated that his petitioner
would like to build a convenience storeon this tract of
land, which he felt, would be an asset to this neighborhood.
He noted that this tract of land has been idle for some time
and that itdid not lend itself to a residential area or for
a C-I zoning designation.
The, Planning Director stated that this parcel of land is
adjacent to Thrasher Park and that · large ·umber of children
ploy in this park area and he did not feel that the proposed
use would be In berm,ny with the ires because of the increased
traffic that would be genernted ·ear the park constituting ·
safety hazard.
· vote was taken on the petition with · vote of three
(3) ayes,and two (2) noyes, reeommendlng to City Council
that this request be approved. Since · quorum vote could
not be mustered, this matter was again presented'at ,the
November 15, 1972, meeting of the Planning Commission,
At the November 15, 1972o meeting. Mr. Place again
appeared before the Planning Commission and stated that the
request had stated the depth of the lots as being 200.0
feet, butactually this measurement was taken from the middle
of Vinton Mill Road and this Js a SO foot right of way,
therefore, the depth 'of the request would be 175,0 .feet.
He further stated that this C-2 designation Mould only be
an extension of the present''adjacent C-2 property.
This petition wls discussed by the Planning Commis-
sion members with some members expressing their approval
while others expressed their disapproval.
Accordingly, a vote was taken with four (4) ayes and~
tm, (2) naves recommending to City Council that this
request be approved.
Sincerely,
S/ Creed K. Lemon, Jr., by LM
Creed K. Lemon. Jr.
Mr. Jack ¥. Place, Attorney, representing the petitioners, appeared
before Council in support of the request of his clients.
No one appearing in opposition to the request for res,ming. Mr.
Trout moved that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(a~O~ll) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2 of
the Code of the City of Roanoke, 195~, as amended, and Sheet No. 333. Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke in relation to Zoning.
RD£REAS, application has been made to the Council of the City of
BEGINNING at a point on the easterly side of Vinton Mill
Road mhich constitutes the beginning of the poiht of curve
of the Vinton Mill Road - Richard ·venue intersection;
thence with the easterly right of say line of the said
Vinton Mill Road the following courses and distances:
N. 19° 21' M., 50.00 feet; N, 22° 53' M., 50.00 feet;
N. 32° 39* M., 50.00 feet; No 50° .24* W., 63.60 feet;
b3~ lC* M., 95.50 feet; N. 55° 27' W., 100.00 feet; N.
42° 25* W., lO0.O0 feet to a point; thence leaving Vinton
Mill Road and with the dividing line of Lots 3 and 4
according to the Plasters and Johnson Map of record in
Plat Book 3 at page g? in the Office of the Clerk of the
Circuit Court of Roanoke County, N. 52° 56' E,, 200.00
feet more or less to the Roanoke County line; thence with
a line 200 feet easterly of and parallel to finton Mill
Road the foil,uSa9 courses and distances: S. 42° 25'
100.00 feet; 5. 55° 27' E., 100.00 Feet; S. 63° lq* E.,
95.50 feet; S. 500 24' E., 83.60 feet; S. 32° 39' E.,
50.00 feet; S. 22° 53' E., 50,00 feet; S. 19° 21'
100.00 feet more or ,less to a point on the northerly side
of Richard ·venue; thence with the northerly side of
Richard Avenue, S. 63° 06' W., 150.00 feet more or less to
a point to curve at the intersection of Richard ·venue and
Vinton Mill Road; thence with a curve to the right whose
radius is 41.D3 feet for an arc distance of 73.13 feet to
the point of BEGINNING; and being the westerly 200.00 feet
of Lots 1, 2 and 3 according to the subdivision plat of
C. I. Plasters and M. C. Johnson dated May 3, 1952, of
record in Plat Book 3 at page 97 in the Office of the Clerk
of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County; and, being desig-
nated as official City Numbers 3330506 and 3330505; and
''t 239
BEING the same property conveyed to Donald G. Sink and F,
Earl Frith by deed deled November 26, 1971, recorded as
instrument number S426 on the 20th day of December, 1971.
in the Office of the Clerh of the flustings Court of the
City of Roanoke,
rezoned from C-I, Office nnd Institutional District, to C-2 General Commercial
District; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission has recommend that the herein-
after described land be rezoned.from C-l, Office and Institutional District.
to C-2, General Commercial Oistrict~ and.
WNEREAS. the written notice and the posted sign required to be pub-
lished and posted, respectively, by Section 71, Chapter 4.1, Title XV, of the
Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, os amended, relating to Zoning, bnve been
published and posted as required and for the time provided by said section; and,
NHEREAS, the hearing as provided for in said notice mos held on the
26th day of December, 1972, at 7:30 p,m., before the Council of the City of
Roanoke, at which hearing all parties in interest and citizens were given an
opportunity to be heard, both for and against the proposed rezoning; and,
MHER£AS, this Council. after considering the evidence as herein pro-
vided, is of the opinion that the hereinafter described land should be rezoned.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED bythe Council of the City at Roanoke that
Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of The Code of The City of Roanoke, 1956, as
amended, relating to Zoning, and Sheet No. 333 of the Sectional 1q66 Zone Map.
City of Roanoke, be amended in the following particular and no other, viz.:
Property located on the easterly side of Vision Mill Road and described
as the westerly 200.00 feet of Lots 1, 2 and 3 according to the subdivision
plat of C. A. Plasters and W, C. Johnson, designated on Sheet 333 of the Sec-
tional 1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, as Official Tax Nos. 3330506 and
3330505, be, and is hereby changed £rom C-l, Office and Institutional District.
to C-2, General Commercial District, and that Sheet No, 333 of the aforesaid
map be changed in this respect.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, LAsh, Taylor, Trout and Mayor
Webber .6.
NAYS: None -0. (Mr. Thomas not voting)
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
MARKET-TRAFFIC-PLANNING: A communication from the Central Roanoke
Development Foundation requesting that Council request the Virginia General
Assembly session convening in January, 1973, to clarify the Public Finance Act
by amendment to further define the authority of municipalities with respect to
mortgages, deeds of trust and liens, in addition to the authority to issue
revenue bonds secured by revenues from the project which, the bonds are used to
finance, and that the General Assembly also be requested to consider such action
as an emergency, was before Council.
:240
Mr, Lisk moved that the connunlcation be received and filed, The
motion uss seconded by Mr, Trout and unanimously adopted.
RUSES: A communication from Hr. Ralph L, Fuller commenting on the
problems or Roanoke City Lines0 Incorporated, advising that Increasing the fares
to serve the inner city is not the answer, that the bus company must serve the
heavy populated county, and that extended service, market stud~ and sales pro-
'motions are the only aesmerso mas before Council,
Hr. Hubard moved that the communication be received and filed and
referred to the Transportation Study Committee for its Information in connection
with its study of the matter. The motion mas seconded by Mr, LJsk and unani-
mously adopted.
HOUSING-SLUR CLEARANCE: A communication from Mr. Alvord M, fleardslee,
Corresponding Secretary, Roanoke Valley Council on Human Relations, advising
that the Roanoke Valley Council on Human.Relations, at its meeting on December
11, 1972, unanimously endorsed the Rousing Availability Ordinance, mas before
the body.
Dr. Taylor moved that the communication be received and referred to
apnblic hearing which will be set at a later date on the Housing Availability
Ordinance. The notion mas seconded by Rr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
SERERS AND STORR DRAINS: A communication from Dor~-Oliver, Incor-
porated, acknowledging receipt of a recent order for Grit Basin Equipment under
Contract B, Item II, at the Sewage Treatment Plant, advising that this order is
accepted with the condition that the equipment to be furnished thereunder
shall be as specified in their proposal of October 30, 1972,.that only the terms
and conditions of sale set forth in said proposal shall govern this.transaction
and that in the meantime they are proceeding on the assumption that the c6n-
tents of this communication will be acceptable, was before Council.
Mr. Garland moved that the communication be referred to the City
Manager for handling administratively. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout
and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES: The City Manager submitted a written report
recommending that funding be authorized toassume the present and currently
authorized grant of the Virginia Council on Criminal Justice for funds to
Bethany Hall, advising that this would be a continuation of their existing
program, that the total project funds are $39,?15.00 with $28,522.00 being State
LEAA money and $11,193.00 being local funds.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be referred to the City Attorney
for preparation of the proper measure. The motion mas seconded by Dr. Taylor
and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-LIBRARIES: The City Manager submitted a written report trans-
mitting the following summary from MIss Nancy E. Hines, Librarian, advising of
an increase of available federal library funds to the state and in turn to the
City of Roanoke and that the city has been allocated, by the State Library Board,
an additional
"SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION TO MATCH STATE AID GRANT
The 1972-73 Budget for Libraries, Department O0, Object
Code 320 Operating Supplies and Materials includes $17,000.00
estimate for State aid grants. Due to increase appropria-
tions from the General Assembly, the State Library Board was
able to raise the final amount to $43,730.00, leaving a
balance of $26,?30,00, 100~ recoverable, not covered by the
current library budget allocatlons,
In order to purchase library materials with these fonds,
a supplemental appropriation (100~ recoverable) is needed as
follows:
Department 80. Libraries
Object Code 320 - Operating Supplies and Materials $25,230.00
395 - Other Equipment - New SO0.O0
Total
In compliance with the State Library Board's purpose in
providing increased funds for innovativeproJects to enrich
individual library collections, $21,500.00 of the additional
funds has been allocated for the purchase of the Microbook
Collection of the Library of American Clvllixation published
only by the Encyclopedia Britannica Corporation.
This program consists of 20,000 important titles relat-
ing to all facets of American civllixation from colonial
ti~2es to 1914. The research materials contained in this
microfiche collection comprise holdings from the Library of
Congress and other outstanding libraries covering valuable
sources generally too rare or expensive for this library to
acquire. Also it can be housed in a cabinet requiring only
four square feet of space.
$452,447.00 Local Funds
17,000o00 Estimated state aid 1972-73 Budget
43,730.00 Actnal amount of state aid
452.447~00.
$496,177.00
$ 43.730.00 State aid grant
17.000.00 Budget estimate
$ 2b.730.00 Supplemental appropriation to Object Code 320
Operating Supplies and Materials (Dept. BO)
100~ RECOVERABLE
The increase is not for additional city funds but con-
cerns state aid."
Dr. Taylor offered the followi~g emergency Ordinaoce appropriating
$2b,230.00 to Operating Supplies and Materials. and 9500.00 to Other Equipment
New under Section ~00, *Libraries,' of the 1972-73 budget:
(#20~12) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section cOO. ~Libraries**
of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 318.)
Dr~ Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. , The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Nessrs. Garland,.Nubard, LisA, Taylor, Thomss, Trout and Mayor
Webbex 7.
NAYS: None
242
~ BUDGET-COMMONMEALTHtS ATTORNEY: The City Manager aubmitted the
folloming report in connection wi. th appropriating $2,630.00 to Fees for Professio:
and Special Services under Section u22, 'Conmonmealth*a Attorney,# of the 1972-
73 budget, to provide funds for the employment of Lam Clerka in the Office of
the Commonwealth's Attorney:
"December 26. 1972
Bonorable Moyor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen: '
Subject: Division'of Justice and Crime Prevention
Grant - Commonmqalth*s Attorney~ Law Clerks
A grant has been filed by the City'a Commonmealth*s
Attorney mbich would provide Law Clerks doing various items
of legal research throughout the school year. These clerks
reportedly have, in fact, been morking for the Commoawealth*s
Attorney since September of 1972,
The grant application bas recently been approved by the
5ivision of Justice and Crime Prevention and a request for
funds has been submitted, The Commonwealth's Attorney has
requested this office to place before City Council his desire
that the sum of $2,630 be appropriated to the appropriate
account for these lam clerks mith a comparable sun to be
anticipated as revenue from the Federal grant.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Birst
City Manager"
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the request of the Common-
wealth's Attorney and offered the follomin9 emergency Ordinanc~ appropriating
(m20613) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~22, "Common-
wealth*s Attorney," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for
(For full text of Ordinance. sea Ordinance Book u37~ page 31g.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. Th~ motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
Rayor Webber ...................7.
NAYS: None* O.
BUDGET-CITY MANAGER-INTEGRATION-SEGREGATION: The City Manager sub-
mitted the following report requesting that $3~5.~0 be appropriated to Commu-
nications, under Section ~3, "City Manager," of the 1972-73 budget, to provide
funds for necessary communication services for the Assistant to the City Manager
"December 26, ~g72
Honorable Rayor aid City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Subject: Communications Account - City Manager*s Office
With the employment of an Assisiant to the City
Manager there has been the need for increased telephone
communications chargeable to the City,Munager*s budget, Hr,
Harold Hardy will bare his office established Jn Room 351
across the hall from the City Manager's office in space
originally assigned to the Air Pollut!~n Control Office and
more recently the Operationa Manager fo~ Public Works.
At the time this position mas created there was some
qaeatlsn ua to the exact location within the Municipal
Building where office space could be available. It mas
therefore difficult to estimate ut the time of budget pre-
paration the affect which necessary telephone communications
would have on the City MaeagerOa accounts. Since this loca-
tion has been determined, it is nam necessary to request of
Council supplemental appropriations to Account No. 3 - 220
in the amount of $3?5 for the remaining portion Of this
fiscal year.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager~
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur Jn the request of the City Manager
and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the necessary rands:
(a20514) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordajn Section ~3, "City Manager."
of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for aa emergent.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book na?o page 320.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Hr. Thomas and adop~ed by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas,.Trout and Mayor
Mebber ....................... ?.
NAYS: None ..........~.
BUDGET-AIRPORT: The City Manager submitted a written report recommend-
ing that $100.00 be transferred from Maintenance of Machinery and Equ{pment to
Operational and Construction Equipment - Nam un'er Section ~65, ~Airport** of
the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for the purchase of an electric bench
grinder..
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendutionof the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the neces-
sary funds:
(~20615) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section.~65, "Airport,*
of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance floo~ =37, page ~20. I
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Ltsk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber ~?.
NAYS: None O.
DRUGS: The ~ity Manager submitted the fo~lowing report with reference
to the RoauoEe Area Drug Abuse Control Council application grants, advising that
244
there ·re three.groat ·ppllcntions or funding progrnms ·pplic·ble to RADACC and
submitting · brief summary of the three applications:
'Becembe~ 26,
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanohe, Virgini·
Gentlemen:'
Subject: RADACC
The folloming mumm·fy hopefully mould orgnnize the situa-
tion of the RAOACC application gr·nts to lead up to the appli-
cation mhich is being placed before you math this,agenda.
There are three gr·nt applications or funding programs
applicable to RADACC.
1. The RADACC program is presently operated under a
grant application approved last August. This is grant No,
?lA-1131 in the a~ount of $90,156, This application .was for
the period of August 3. 1972. to August 2, 1973.
A number of items in that al~lication mere specially desig-.
mated in that because of certain limits of total funds certain
of the items had to be terminated in funding on March 3, 1973,
Thus there is the matter of obtaining continuing funds for
those particular items.
2. The Council had on its agenda December 16,1972,
y~ur last meeting, an application grant mhich is a minor
.revision of one mhich had been approved under the Fifth Plan-
nan9 District Commission but transferred over to the City.
Because of this transferthe grant has come before t~e City.
This grant extends to June 1973. It is 9rant No. 71A-553 and
is in the amount of $34,655.
3. The third application grant is n new one being brought
to you for the first time. RADACC has I~epared an entire hem
grant bearing the number of DJCP72A-1349. The total program
is $34,102, with the Federal share $24,532 and the local share
$9,570.
The purpose of this grant is to continue those items which
were noted in number one above that mill end March 2, 1973, so
that they may be continued for the remaining length of thq
grant listed in Item So. 1 which would be to August 2. 1973.
The onlythin9 new is the inclusion of two YAC (Youth Advisory
Council) supervisors mbo mould come out of local funds.
This is submitted with the recommendation that the third
above listed grant receive the approval of the City Council.
The details of the grant are available and can be advised to
you.
Respectfully submitted.
S! Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the report Of the City Manager
and offered the following Resolution authorizing toe filing of the City of
Roanoke*s application wt~h the Division of JustiCe ~nd Crime Prevention for an
action 9rant of federal funds for implementation of a drug abuse prevention,
treatment and control program in the city:
(~20b16) A RESOLUTION authorizing th~ filing of the City of Ronnoke's
application with the Division of Justice and C{ime Prevention for an action
grant of federal funds for implementation of a drug abuse prevention, treatment
and control program in the City.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~37. page 321.)
245
Hr, Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution, The notion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Ressrs. Garland, Hubsrd, Limb, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .....................
NAYS: None O,
CITY RANAGER-INYEGRATION-SEGREGATION: The City Ranager submitted ·
written report advising that he would like to introduce Mr, Harold Hardy, the new
Assistant to the City Manager, to the members of Council at the meeting on
Tuesday, December 26, 1972, whereupon, the City Ranager introduced Mr. Hardy to
the members of Council,
PENSIONS: The City Manager suhmttted a written report in connection with
a communication which was referred to him and the Employees' Retirement System
Committee from Mr. Leroy Moran, ~ttorney, representing a group of employees in
the Public Rorks Department regarding liberalization of the Employees* Retirement
System, transmitting copy of the following "Notice to Employees' which bas been
issued to all offices and departments in connection with the matter and advising
that further consideration and response will be forthcoming from the Retirement
Committee:
"December 20, Ir?3
NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES
Regarding Employees* Retirement System
On December IH, 1972. a letter came to the Roanoke City
Council from an attorney in the City. The attorney stated that
he represented a 9roup of employees of the City of Roanoke.
He further said that there had been some publicity and rumors
that there were going to be some changes in the City Retire-
ment System for the benefit of certain departments of the
City. He also said that if there were any changes made that
those changes should cover all City employees.
This notice is written to explain the situation to the
employees of the City. Representatives of two departments of
the City came before the City Council a month or so ago asking
for a study of the retirement system and suggesting some
changes in it. The City Council took this under consideration
and referred it to the City Manager and to the Employees'
Retirement System ldvisoty Committee for study. As of this
time there bas not been any opportunity to study the particular
I want to assure the employees of the City, to the
extent that I can, that there has not been activity which
would revise the City retirement system to the favor of one
or more group of employees in opposition to other employees.
This could have been explained to the attorney and to any
employees that he may represent; however, I do not know of
any questions that were asked.
I am sure that it will be the continuing polic~ of the
City to inform all employees of any studies that may be going
on with regard to changes in the retirement system. I am ,
sure also that it will be the continuing objective of the City
to be fair in all respects to all.employees. If there are
any rumors at this time then there is no basis to them.
If any of the personnel of the City have any questions
in regard to this or any other matters relating to the retire-
ment system, it is urged that you contact your supervisor who
has a responsibility of getting the answers for you and of
being sure that you receive u full explanation to your question.
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager*
Hr. Trout moved tbct the report nnd notice be received and .filed. The
motion mas seconded by Mr, Garland and unnnimously adopted.
INDUSTRIES-STATE HIGHWAYS: Council having referred to the City Manager
for study, report and recommendation a communication from Hr. John O. Copenhaver,
Attorney, representing Highland Company, Incorporated, requesting city contribu-
tions to upgrade a road being built by Appalachian Power Company to · new facility
on 9th Street, S. E**.the City Hannger submitted n written report transmitting
copy of the follomi'ng communication written by him to Mr. Copenhaver advising
that he does not know of anything that can be done immediately in regard to the
matter and suggesting that sometime after the first of January that Mr,
Copenhaver get in touch with Mr. Byron E, flaner to discuss the matter with him
for a determination of how to proceed on the request should it appear feasible
that this could be uudertaken:
"December 20, 1972
Mr, John D. Copenhaver
Attorney at Law
Colonial-American National Bank Building
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear John:
Your letter was before the City Council on December lB
as representing Highland Company, Inc., and proposing an
extension of the roadway which is being built by Appalachian
Power Company to their new facility in the Roanoke Industrial
Center area to the west of Ninth Street, S, E. .The City,
Council referred your letter to this office for further
study,
Also at that meeting of December IH, the Council
approved the reading of the ordinance which mould enable
the City of Roanoke and Appalachian Pouer Company to enter
into an agreement for the construction of the roadway as
scheduled to this time to extend from Ninth Street to the
property of the Power Company, #e will be proceeding with
the handling Of.this aspect Of the project,
I do not know of anything that can be immediately done
in regard to your interest, That is to.say that with the
Appalachian Power project going ahead and some little time
before that can get actually under agreement and construction
that time would not be lost with respect to your interest,
I would suggest that simetime after the first of January
that you get in touch with Mr, Byron Hamer, who will succeed
me here and perhaps discuss the matter with him for deter-
minations of how to proceed on your request should it
appear feasible that this could be undertaken,
With best regards of the season,
Sincerely yours,
5/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager~
Mr, Thomas.moved that the report and communication be received and
filed, The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted,
PAY PLaN-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted the following
report in connection with the Management Study, advising that he has interviewed
a total of five firms in an effort to get this project underway, that he has to
admit that based on the interview and material submitted, no firm instantuaeousl
2 47
jumped out as being an immediate end ideal selection, that time has reached the
point where he mast admit that he does not see how it will be possible to get
this consultant study commissioned end contracted for with the preliminary con-
ference that will hare to take place with the consultants to accurately define
this scope of work, that this is something he had wished to be able to bring
about ss he was involved in generating the federal funding for the program and.
under these circumstances, he has no alternative but to apologize to Council and
advise that he will transfer the file to Mr. Byron E. Hamer for his study and
action:
"December 26, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Geotlemen:
Subject: Management Study
On some several occasions I have indicated verbally to
members of Council and others my definite intent to get the
authorized management study commissiou to a consulting firm
and to get the project underway. In the course of time 1
together with several members of our staff have interviewed
a total of five firms. ~ach of these firms has some capa-
bility; however, I would have to admit that based on the
interviews and material submitted no firm instantaneously
jumped OUt as being on immediate and ideal selection.
Several followup inquiries were made from among the group.
Time has reached the point that I must admit thai 1
do not see how it would be possible to get this consultant
study commissioned and contracted for with the preliminary
conferences that would have to take place with the con-
sultant to accurately define this scope of work. This is
something that I had Wished to be able to bring about as I
was considerably involved in generating the Federal fund-
ing for the program.
Under these circumstances I have no alternative but to
apologize to City Council and advise that 1 will transfer
the file over to Mr. Hamer for his study and certain action.
Zhere is one rather definite advantage to this state
of affairs. The new City Manager, in this situation. Mr.
Hamer, is in z much more favorable position as far as follow-
ing the process of the study through and as far as reacting
to the study if he can be in on the selection of a con-
sultant and particularly the development of the scope of
work Of the consultant. It becomes much more effective
for the City Manager to have an involvement in the initial
stages rather than to enter into a mid or after-start point
and have to work against a problem of relating to the back-
ground.
I have discussed this situation with Mr. James Ford,
Who is chairman O~ the appointed citizen committee for the
study of the three Council appointed offices. It is some-
what anticipated, as I would understand and as I believe
should be, that this citizens' committee would serve in an
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Mr. Thomas moved that the Bitter be tabled until the regular meeting
of Council on Monday, February 5, 1973, at which time the City Manager is request~
to submit a status report to Council. The motion wes seconded by Mr. Lisk and
unanimously adopted.
SCHOOLS-BUSES-PLANNING-STATE RIGRMAYS: The City Manager submitted the
following report in connection with ~The Roanoke Valley Area Thoroughfare Plan
(1985).# 'Urban Area Transit Study,* and *Growth and Oevelopnent- A Land Use
Plan for the Fifth Planning District,* advising that he has received correspondenc
from the Fifth Plann~ing District Commission recommending that localities proceed
with steps leading to the adoption of said plans:
*December 26, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Regional Plans
On June 12. 1972, Council received from the Fifth Plan-
ning District Commission certain regional plans which the
Commission requested be approved by the City of Roanoke.
These plans included ~The Roanoke Valley Area Thoroughfare
Plan (1985)*. *Urban Area Transit Study*, and *Growth and
Development - A Land Use Plan for the Fifth Planning
trict** A public hearing on these matters was scheduled
for Ronday, July 10, 1972; however, immediately prior to
that date the City received, further communication from the
Fifth Planning District Commission recommending a delay in
local action on these subjects.
#e have again received communications from the Fifth
Planning District Commission recommending that localities
proceed with steps leading to the adoption of the above-
mentioned regional plans. These plans have already been
considered and approved by the Roanoke City Planning Com-
mission and are otherwise considered by the administrative
staff to be ready for adoption. It would be noted that, as
plans, these documents should be the subject of continual
review for the purpose of considering appropriate changes
necessary to reflect changing local conditions; b~t they are
very worthwhile instrumemts which can guide the growth and
development of the Roanoke Valley area.
The City Attorney*s office has already been forwarded
the necessary information to reschedule public hearing
which was continued at the July 10 Council meeting. It is
recommended that City Council schedule the public hearings
leading to the adoption of these regional plans. Each of
these plans is a rather sizable document which would Dot be
particularly convenient to distribute to each Councilman;
however, copies are available and we would be pie awed to
go to any depth of review and discussion on the subject
which Council would desire.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager*
Mr. Garland moved that Council hold a public hearing on the question
of adoption of 'The Roanoke Valley Area Thoroughfare Plan (1985)," *Urban Area
Transit Study." and *Growth and Development - A Land Use ~lan for the Fifth
Planning District,# at ?:30 p.'m., Monday, January 2g. 1973. 'The motion was
seconded by Mr. Rubard and unanimously adopted.
~EMERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City #nnager submitted u written report
transmitting copy. of the following communication frow Mr, Eugene T. Jansen,
Executive Secretary of the State Mater Control Bosrd, in connection with a meet-
lng held on December 4. 1972, with reference to the review of final plans and
specifications for the expansion of the City of Roanoke Sewage Treatment Plant
facilities and the performance of the city's existing facilities:
'December 11. 1972
Mr. Julian F. Hirat
City Manager
City Of Roanoke
Roanoke, Virginia 24010
Dear Mr. Birst:
At its December 4. 1972, we*ting, the Board received a brief
status report from its staff on the Roanoke Enforcement
Action. This report addressed the review of final plans
and specifications for the expansion of the City of Roanoke
treatment facilities and the performance of the City*s
existing facilities. A copy of the minute from that meet-
ing ia attached.
The staff presentation showed that the City*s sewage treat-
meat facilities had not performed in accordance with the
new certificate for the first 20 days of November. The
Board directed its staff to write a letter to the Roanoke
City Council expressing concern over the past two months,
indicating that the Board may need to take further action
to insure that treatment plant performance during the
interim, before the long=range expansion is complete, be
within the limits of the City*s certificate. The Board
further directed that if, by January 15, 1973, in the judg-
ment of the Board's staff, performance of the City's sewage
treatment facilities does not improve, then the Board will
ask that the Sewer Committee of Roanoke City Council be
present at the next Board meeting to discuss the sJtua-
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do
not hesitate to contact this office.
Very truly yours.
S! Eugene T. Jansen
Eugene T. Jensen
Executive Secretary*
Mr. Thomas moved that the report add communication be received nad
filed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
~TATE HICBMAYS: The City Manager submitted the following report
advising of the completion of the widening and reconstruction of the most
recent section of Orange Avenue from Interstate Route SOl to ~2th Street:
~Decenber 26~ 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Ceatlemen:
Snbject: Orange Avenue - Route 460
This is to advise you of the completion of the midenlng
and reconstruction Of the most recent section Of Orange
Avenue from Interstate aB1 to 12th Street. Some signing
yet remains but this is under a separate contract.
'249
,25
The contractor on the proJact moved in on expeditions
manner and it Is believed that n significant highway improve-
ment has been brought about in the City.
This mss u complicated undertaking for a number of
reasons uhich include the extensive grading required, the
difficulty of continuous traffic maintenance uhich mas
successfully handled; the major storm drainage facility '
which uss built at the same time and the major Orange Avenue
sanitary semer'uhich mas constructed with the project,
The coordination of the storm semer and the sanJtarF
saner mlth the h!ghuay construction had a benefit of
many' dollars over a period of years to the State and to
the City and It is to the credit of the State Highway Depart-
sent, Mr. Sam McGhee, City Engineer, and his staff and the
City Mater Department that all of this uss handled in this
manner.
This completes Orange Avenue in its rebuilding from
Interstate 581 to the east corporate limits.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julain F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager.'
Mr. Garland moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Iluburd and unanimously adopted.
STATE HIGHWAYS-SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: The'City Manager submitted
the folloming report transmitting copy of the following communication from Mr.
Jo G. Ripley, State Crban Engineer. Department of Highways, concerning the pro-
posed Route 115 - lib htghmay project and more particularly the location of that
project as it relates to the Sewage Treatment Plant:
*December 2b, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Roule 115 - 116
For Council*s information. I attach copy of a letter
dated December 19, 1972,'from Mr. J. G. Ripley. State Urban
Engineer, Department of Highways, concerning the proposed
Route 115 - 116 highway project, more particularly the
location of that project as it relates to the City*s Water
Pollution Control Plant.
"December 19, 1972
Mr. Julian F. Hirst
City Manager
City Hall
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Dear Mr. Hirst:
This is in reference to your letter of November 30,
1972, and your Council resolution adopted December
11, 1972, concerning the location of this project
as it relates to the semage treatment plant.
Me have studied the information in your letter and
in the Council resolution very thoroughly. The
Department of Highuays mill acquiesce to the wishes
of the City of Roanoke and proceed with the develop-
ment of the plans for this project on the alignment
as shown in the Roanoke Regional Valley Trans-
portation Study.
You and the City Council are aware of the additional
cost of construction on this alignment. It will
be necessary to defer some other improvement in
our Ten Year Fiscal Plan for the City of Roanoke to
finance this additional cost.
The project will be financed 65 percent State funds and 15
percent City Funds. The storm sewera and utilities Mill be
financed in accordance with Highway Commission Policy. It
may be necessary to request Federal funds on the project, but
this will not change the City*S share.
Me will request the Location and Oeefga Division to develop
the plans as indicated.
Please advise yo~rCcuncil of this decision.
Sincerely,
S/ J. G.~Ripley
J. G. Ripley
State Urban Engineer'
As stated ia Mr. RJpley's letter, the Highway Department bas
agreed to proceed with the design of the project in keeping with the
original alignment shown in the Roanoke Regional Arterial Highway
Plan, which basically' follows 13th Street, S. E.. and Mill remain
away from the front area of the City's treatment plant property.
Obviously. me are pleased that the Highway Department has concurred
lo our recommendation and will now proceed mJth this project.
Although they do not indicate which particular projects might be
affected, it should he noted that the Highway Department estimates
that the projected increase cost for this particular project may
affect the timetable for other highway projects in the City of
Roanoke'.
AS more specific information develops on the timetable for the
Route i15 = lib improvement, we will keep Council advised.
Respectfully submitted,
$] Julian F. Dirst
Julian F. Hirst
City Clerk"
Dr. Taylor moved that the report and communication be received and filed.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimo~ ly adopted.
AIRPORT: The Chairman of the ~irport Advisory Commission and the City
Manager submitted the following report in connection with passenger holding areas
at Roanoke Municipal (Moodrum) Airport. advising of a meeting with officials of
Piedmont Airlines in connection with the matter, pointin9 out that Piedmont Air-
lines has funds available toward such facilities, that it would be anticipated
that the cost of the holding areas would be borne entirely by the airline, that
it was agreed that arrangements will be made by Piedmont Airlines with the
Federal Aviation Administration for a meeting very shortly after January 1,
1973, to be attended by representatives of Piedmont Airlines and the City of
Roanoke and that the purpose of that meeting will be to review the concepts with
the FAA and to meek a positive position from then on what they would authorize and
on any recommendations they would make:
"December 25, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City
Roanoke, Virginia
Uentlemen:
Subject: Airport Terminal
Im connection with the project currently ander consideration
as to the bid~ of the expansion and improvement of the Roanoke
251
252
Municipal Airport Terminal, the ande'raJgned on December 20,
1972, visited with officials of Piedmont Airlines ut their
general' offices in Winston Salem, North Carolina. Parti-
cularly the purpose of the visit was to explore with them
the matter of passenger' holding areas mbich had been'
earlier advanced and considered by the Airlines but which
more recently hud been held in abeyance. ,It was our feel-
ing in talking with them that some determination should
be made in regard to any possibility of such areas ~n con-
Junction mlth the terminal expansion proJect.
Me found the officials to have renemed interest in
such facilities. Along with other matters, there have
been technical details relating to FAA requirements and
the adapting of any such holding facilities Into the
terminal design at the Airport. A new element bas
recently entered the picture and that has to do u i th new
federal security requirements at the Airport.
Piedmont indicated, as we understood, that they have
some funds available toward such facilities. It would be
anticipated by the undersigned that cost of holding areas
would be borne entirely by the Airline. It was agreed that
arrangements mould be made by Piedmont with FAA in Washington
for a meeting very shortly after January 1 to be attended
by representatives of Piedmont and of the City. The purpose
of that meeting mould be to review the concepts with the
FAA and to seek a positive position from them on what they would
authorize and on uny recommendations that they would make.
The City Council and the Airport Commission will be
kept advised on this matter.
Respectfuliy submitted,
$! James O. Trout
Jamns O. Trout
S! Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst*
Mr. Trout' moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
AIRPORT: The City Manager submitted a written report advising that he
now has a proposal from a local firm, Creative Advertising, to undertake and to
handle display advertising in the Airport Terminal Building, transmitting a
summary of the main points within which this company will offer to handle this
work and recommending that Council refer the matter to the City Attorney for
preparation of an agreement.
Mr. Trout moved that the report be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure. The motion nas seconded by Mr. Lisk and
unanimously adopted.
AIRPORT: The City Manager submitted the following report with referenc
to the landing fees applicable to Piedmont Airlines and Eastern Airlines,
advising that all the terms and conditions of the new.agreement have been worked
out including matters such as a reasonable adjustment and increase in rental
rates for square footage of space in the building and on the airfield, that the
debate has been over the preseut ten cents per thousand pouuds on landiug fees,
that the city has proposed and discussed such numbers at 17, 16, 15, etc.. that
Piedmont has been interested in holding at the present ten cents, however, based
on last discussions and recent regina, they have been agreeable to go to 12.5
cents, and suggesting favorable consideration by Council to a three year agree-
ment effective January 1. lg?3, based on 12.5 cents:
'December 26. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Coancil
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
SubJect: Landing Fees
Over a lengthy period of time, ue have been in the
process of negotiating with Piedmont Airlines on the land-
ing fee which would he applicable to Piedmont and to Eastern.
These negotiations becoue intense for a period and then we
bog down on the matter of the basic rate and other easters
occur before we can get back to discussions again. As
Council knows the lending fee contract with Pfedmonto
which was a three-year agreement, has expired sene time
I believe that all of the terms and conditions of the
new agreement have been worked out including matters such
as a reasonable adjustment and increase in rental rate for
square footage of space in the building and on the airfield,
The debate has been over the present 10 cents per
thousand pounds on landing fee. The City has proposed
and discussed such numbers as 17, lb, 15, etc. Piedmont
has been interested in holding at the present 10 cents.
they hare been agreeable to go to 12.5 cents. I feel it
should be higher but do not know that we can obtain it at'
this time.
This is advised to Council and I suggest your
January 1. 1973, based on 12.5 cents. This will provide
some additional revenue for the Airport. This additionally
will establish a basis uf operation with Piedmont and Eastern
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Hirst
City' Manager~
Mr. Trout moved that the report be referred to the Airport' Advisory
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
CITy ENGINEER: The City Manager submitted a written report concurring
in the following recommendation of a committee that the bid of The Tidy Corpora-
tion for seven new refuse bodies, in the amount of $6g,698.00, be accepted:
"December 18, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
On December 12, bids were received and opened be/ore the
The attached tabulation will show that three bids were
received. The proposals have been studied by your com-
mittee and the following information is presented by the
a. The Tidy Co~po~htlon presented u bid 'of $68,698. No
exceptions were'noted to the specifications os written.
The model' that mos offered aaa u Leach 2R - 20 cubic
yard refuse body.
b. The second company that bid was that of Smith Noore Body
Company. Their bid was $§g,lB§. They list one exception
to the bid and this is by means of their sales data letter
in which they state that the Hell Company will not guarantee
minimum pay loads. In essence they hare taken exception to
our requirement of 900 pounds per cubic yard. This companT
also bid a twenty-five cubic yard packer mhich is not
practical as long as me collect from alleys and do not
bare curb side collection.
c. The third bid was from the Sanco Corporation in the
amount of $56,665. They by letter hare taken exception
of the 900 pounds per cubic yard test program that
was written into the specifications. The basis for
their exception was that we currentll hare seven rehicles
now in 'operation from their company.
AfAer reviemin9 these bids, it is the recommendation of the
committee that Council reject the two lom bids and accept the
Tidy Corporation bid.
APPROVED S/ fl. B. Thomnson APPROVED 5! Kit Kiser
Bueford Thompson Kit Kiser
Purchasing Agent Water Department
Manager
APPROVED ~! Joseoh ~. Brewer Joseph Brewer
Acting Director of Public Works~
Mr. Thomas moved that C~uncil concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20617) AN OBDIHANCE providing for the sa~e of the City of seven
(T) refuse packer bodies to be mouuted by 'said supplier on seven (7) new trucks
to be furnished bT another supplier, for use by the Department of Public
Works. bT accepting a certain proposal made therefor; rejecting certain other
bids made to the City for furnishing said equipment; and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Hook m37,~ page 322.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was second~
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, List, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Rebber ................... 7.
NAYS: None ..........O.
BUDGET-CITY ENOINEER: The City Manager submitted a written report
concurring in the following recommendation of a committee that certain bids be
accepted for the purchase of twenty-one new 1973 model trucks to be used by
various departments of the city:
"December 26, lB?2
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On Wednesday, December 6, bids mere received and opehed .
before the committee whose names appear below for twenty-
one new lB?3 model trucks.
the attached tabulation will show that five bids mere
received. The proposals have been studied by your
committee and the low bids as listed below will meet all
specifications of the City of Roanoke.
255
Item No. I (T) Sanitation $ 85,265,89
Item No. 2 (1) Street Construction 6,057.44
Item No, 6 (3) Street Repair, Semer C
Drain 19,694.32
Item No. 8 (1} Sanitation 2,843.01
Item No. 9 (1) Airport 2,712.26
Item No. 10 (l) Parks end Recreation 2.dog.2s
Total $118,982,18
Item No, 3 (2) Mater 12,944.00
Item No. 4 (1) Mater 4,815.00
Item ~o. 5 (1) Garage 5,517,00
Total · $ 23,276.00
Co Antrim Motors
Itrm No, ? (1) Street Signs
Item No, 12 (1) Engineering
Total
d, Berglund Chevrolet, Inc,
Item No. Il (1) Seuage Treatment
4,410,15
3.794.3~
8,204.S1
3,483.b4
Item No. 5. Garage and Item No. 12, Engineerin9 did not have
sufficient funds within the budget estimate, Houever, funds
ore available in the Department of Public Works Street Divi-
sion Account, 58-360, to cover the transfer of funds,
Item No, 11, Semage Treatment plant vehicle would need an
appropriatiom of $283,64 to cover the lam estimate,
It is the recommendation of the committee that the low bids
be accepted as listed herein. There will be an additional
cost in 'a', Item one, delivery charge getting these
vehicles from Fort Wayne, Indiana to the packer body factory.
Sufficient funds are available from within the Department
of Public Works account in our Sanitation Division,
360, for this transfer. Shipping charges will be $64D.75.
APPROVEDS/ B. B. Thompson APPROVED SI Kit Kjser
Bue£ord Thompson Kit Khmer
Purchasing Agent Mater Department
APPROVED SI Joseoh H. Brewer. JF, Joseph H. Brewer, Jr.
Acting Director of Public Marks"
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur .in the recommendation of the ChiI
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance transferring $250.00 from
Vehicular Equipment - Replacement under Section u5B, "Street Construction and
Repair," to Vehicular Equipment - Replacement under Section =55, "Engineering,"
of the 1972-73 budget:
(u20618) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section #58, "Street
Construction and Repair," and Section ~55, "Engineering," of the i972-73 Appro-
priation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book uS?, page 323~)
Dr, Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion was
seconded by Mr, Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebbet ---7.
NAYS: None
256
Nr. Lisk offered the folloming emergency Ordinance appropriating
$283,64 to Capital Outlay rron Revenue under Section ago, "Sewage Treatment
Fund,' of the '1972-73 Semage Treatment Fund Appropriation O~dinance:
(m20~619) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section hq0, 'Semage
Treatment Fund,' of the 1972-73 Sewage Treatment Fond Appropriation Ordinance,
and providing 'for' an emergency.
(FaF full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book n37, page 324,)
Mr. ~ish moved the adoption of the Ordinance. Th'e motion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Bubard. Lisk. Taylor. Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................... 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
Mr. iCorland offered the following emergency Ordln'ance accepting the
proposals of International Harvester Company. Magic City Motor Corporation.
Antrim Motors,. Incorporated, and Berglund Chevrolet, Incorporated, for furnish-
ing twenty-one new model 1973 trucks for. use by various departments of the citl,
upon certain terms and conditions:
(u20620)' AN ORDINANCE providing for the purchase of twenty-one (21)
model 1973 trucks for use by various departments .of the City. ~pon certain terms
and conditions; accepting certain bids made to the City for furnishing and
delivering said vehicles; rejecting certai'n other bids made to the city; and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text ~ Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u37, page 325.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Huhard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .........................7.
NAYS: None ......... O.
· CITY MANAGER: The City Manager submitted the follo~in9 report with
reference to his term as City Manager of the City of Roanoke, Virginia:
"December 26, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Finis
With this letter there is c~osed seven years and two
· and a half months before you and your predecessors as City
Manager. That is not a long period in the span of time nor
in the life of a city. But it has been full and it has bqen
interesting. There are very few subjects that uould concern
a local government that have not passed our way and crowded
into those years.
If you are interested in statistics as to'~hat that
period has represented, I roughed out the following.
The seven years pl~s represents.374 regular Council
meetings. The special meetings I don't dare count. But
at an average of 3 hours per meeting, the total is 1122
hours or forth seven 24-hour days in Council meetings.
For the 3?4 meetlng~, I have lVerlged 9 reports per
meeting or 3,366 reports. Using nn nrernge of 2 pages per
report (which no one wikl believe) it comes to 6,732
lith the reports, there uere Ibomt I l/2 pages of
attachments. This cowea to 5,049 pages of attach.eats which
.hen added to che 6,732 pages of basic reports makes appro-
ximately 11,781 pages of material I Sent to City Council and
City Council has had to read.
To take it one step further each report is reproduced
in et least 12 copies which makes altogether 141,372 pages
generated.
That is a lot of material, a lot of paper and a lot of
words - written and verbal. I wish there was the tine, at
this point, to review nil of the reports to Council, It
should be an interesting reflection of the City's tempo and
growth from the latter sixties into the seventies,
Bat the significance of all of this bears upon another
point.
Each of those many, many reports concluded with *Respect-
fully submitted** In my very early days here those'words were
written in awe as much as anything. As time progressed down
to now, I find the words are written in respect for the
responsibilities nhlch you of the City Council bear and in
admiration for your deep concern and your dedicated diligence
in carrying out the responsibilities.
Yours is an extremely difficult and time consuming
obligation. This a city manager must remember and
respect. If in my humble efforts I have properly responded
and served you in your obligation then 1 have fulfilled my
purpose to you and to the community.
It is with a deep sense of appreciation that I.thank
you for letting me work for you. Me have done much and I
leave with a sense of satisfaction. You have taught me
when I needed teaching, you have guided me when I needed
guidance and you have borne with me when I needed under-
standing and patience.
I wish it could go on, but changes must come, and should
come, tm people and cities, When changes do occur and if
that which bas gone before has been 9amd amd sound, then
nothing is lost. Rather everything is gained for people and
the city.
Especially do I thank you, for myself and for my
family, for your particular courtesies and expressions in
these closing days.
The dinner at the Civic Center on the evening of December
5 was one of those things that a man can dream of but never
imagine happening. Me thoroughly enjoyed it. Me admittedly
and comspicuoosly basked in undeserved glory.
The silver plate, the *Emmy* statue and the Key
(returned) sill be closely held and treasured remembrances
of each and all of you and of the life amd times in
Roanoke we remember.
I had always thought I would never want a Resolution
written about no. But when I heard and read the one that
was adopted--and in which the author exceeded himself--I
quickly changed my mind. Thank yo{ that yom would do-such
a thing.
There is great confidence to ne in knowing I will be
folloued by a very able gentleman. Byron Baner will make
for you and Roanoke an excellent City Manager. He will.
bring a new, interesting and constrnctive approach and this
will be good.
My tribute also goes to Bill Clark. I have thoroughly
enjoyed work/ag with him and you will see a man continue to
grow in his position. In these recent months he has given
me a welcomed opportunity to share tbe load in the big
things and the little things w/th complete confidence.
257
I leave you with many problems, Hut I nas given many
problems when I came so I believe Jtls a fair.exchange.
We have dotted i's and or,shed t*s ~ut we have slain u
lot of dragons el,ag the uny.
Of most thought, I leave you, as I assumed.in 1965
with a great, great group of employees~ Please tsk~ cure
of then, as I know you will, for they are nhat c6unts.
I go not fa~in Job. distance or. thought. X con-
tinue to work for you and I 1oo~ fornard to this new relation-
ship which I hope can build beneficially on all that has
gone before.not only for Roanoke and me but perhaps now
for also others.
So Mayor Webber. #r. Garland, Mr. Hubard, Hr. Lisk.
The Reverend Taylor. Mr. Thomas a~d Hr. T. ro.ut, again I
say thank you.
and I .add
Respectfully subnitted,
Si Julian F. Hirst
Julian F. Rirst
City Manager"
Hr, Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and Unanimously adopted~
AUDITS: The City Auditor submitted a financial report of the City of
Roanoke for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1972.
Mr. Hubard moved that the report be received and filed, The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
ZONING-STREETS AND ALLHTS: Council having referred to the City Plan-
nan9 Commission for study, report and recommendation the question of establish-
in9 a setback line in downtown Roanoke, the City'Planning Commiision submitted
the foil,win9 report recommending that a uniform setback line not be established
in downtown Roanoke:
"December 21, 1972
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayor
and Members Of City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above ~ited was considered by the'City Planning
Commission at bbth its regular meetings of December 6,
1972, and December 20, 1972. The Planning Director pre-
sented a report to the Planning Commission members relating
to uniform building setback lines in the downtown area
(see enclosed).
The Planning Commission members generally noted the
impracticality of this measure· noting that to establish
a nan downtown setback· line would not be ueiessary since
the Kirk Avenue petition represehted a s6mewhat unique
situation. It uas pointed out, howe%er, that in the
future if individual cases of the nature did arise, the
Building and Engineering Departments should then encourag~
the specific developer to provide for a uniform setback
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and
unanimously approved recommending to City Counc'il that
m uniform setback line not be established in Downtown
Roaaoke.
Sincerely,
Si Cr~ed E, Lemon, Jr.. by LM
Chairnan~
Mr. Thomas moved thot the report be received and file~. The motion
seconded by Mr. Trout.
Mr, Hobard offered e substitute motion that the report be referred
bach to the City Planning Commission for the purpose of ascertaining if there ere
ney areas in the C-3 and C-4 Districts wherein they would recommend the establish-
meat of setback lines. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously
adopted.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
PLANHIBGoPOLICE DEPARTMENT-JAIL-MUNICIPAL BDILDIBG~CAPXTAL IMPROVEMENTS
PROGRAM: Messrs. Hubard and Lisk presented the f,Il,wing joint report transmitting
the fifth and final draft of an agreement mhich would establish a Regional Cor-
rections Center, advising that the terms of sa.id agreement hare been unanimously
!agreed to by the ~embers of the Hegionai Corrections Steering Committee, that the
agreement sets out thc basis of representation by the participating jurisdictions
in the financing ~f' such a center and the appointment of a governing Board of
Directors and reque~t!eg that if this agreement is not executed by all five
inegotiating jurisdictions by March 1, 1973, that said be referred back
to the Regional Corrections Steering Committee for such amendments as would make
it acceptable to two or more of the negotiating parties:
"December 26, 1972
The Honorable Roy L. ~ebber and
Members of Roanoke City Council
Gentlemen, as you know, on September 11, 1972, Council
unanimously endorsed generally ~e concept of a regional
corrections center for the Roanoke Valley and requested the
RegionalCorrections Steering Committee to prepare, for
your consideration and that of the other governing bodies
concerned, an agreement mhieh would establish such a center.
Attached is the fifth and final draft of such an
agreement, the terms of Mhich have been unanimously agreed
to by the members of this C~mmittee. This agreement sets
out the basis of representation by the participating juris-
dictions in the financing of such a center and the appoint-
ment of its governing Board of Directors.
This agreement does not set out a specific site but
p~ovides that the Board shall *acqoire suitable real estate'.
You recall that previously this Committee has advised you
that a site in the vicinity of Hershb'erger Road and Inter-
state Spu~ 581 mould be acceptable. Upon the request of
the Regional Courthouse Committee, our Committee unanimously
agreed that if a regional courthouse were to be built con-
tiguou.s to a regional correc.tions facility, then we would be
willing to consider another site. Our committee bas
requested a joint meeting with the Regional Courthouse Com-
mittee to discuss this matter further. ~e shall heap you
advised of any further significant developments in this
regard.
Mr. Lisk and l, your tm, representatives on the
Regional Corrections Steering Committee, strongly urge your
approval of the attached agreement and your authorizing
the appropriate Cit~ officials to execute the same. Similar
requests are being made by the other Commi'ttee members to
their respective jurisdictions, The Committee reques'ts that
if this agreement is not executed by all five negotiating
jurisdictions by March 1, 1973, then this agreement be
referred back to this Committee for such amendments as
could make it acceptable to two or more of the ~egotiating
parties.
Mr, Llsh and I would be pleased to discuss mlth you, in
Executive Session, recommendations for our four representa-
tives on the Regional Corrections Board.
Respeolfully submitted,
S! Wm. S. Hubard
Chairman, Regional Corrections
Steering Committee
~f David g[ Llsh
Member, Regional Corrections
Steering Committee'
Mr. Bubard moved that the communication and draft of agreement be
referred to Council acting aa a Committee of the Whole for the purpose of con-
sidering the agreement, paragraph by paragrapy, in open meeting after the next
regular meeting of Council on Tuesday. January 2, 1973. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Lisk aud unanimously adopted.
SEWER5 AND STORM BRAINS: Council having referred to a committee for
tabulation, report and recommendation bids received on the commuuiting equipment
and primary settling equipment at the Sewage Treatment Plant. the committee
submitted the folloming report recommending that the bid of Kappa Associates, in
the amount of $57,1fl3.00 for Item I, Communiting Equipment, and the bid of
Jeffrey Manufacturing Company, in the amoant of $62,005.00, for Item IIX, Primary
Settling Equipment, be conditionally accepted, subject to necessary state and
federal concurrence:
'December 26, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dentlemen:
On Monday. December 11, bids were opened before City
Council for certain items of equipment to be incorporated
within the upgrading and expansion at the City's Mater
Pollution Control Plant, more particularly Item Ho.
comminuting equipment and Item No. III. primary settling
equipment. Those bids were referred to the committee mhose
names appear below for study, report and recommendation to
Council.
Your committee has reviewed the several bids received
along with a letter of recommendation dated December 15 from
the City*s consulting engineers, Alvord, Burdich and Bowson.
With respect to Item No. 1. the apparent Iow bidder tabes
exception with the stipulated deliverytime which is an
important factor in ail work at the treatment plant. There-
fore the bid of Kappa Associated for comminuting equipment
similar to that already in use within the plant, which
factor will simplify maintenance, is being recommended.
The low bid by the Jeffrey Manufacturing Company for
primary settling equipment meets all City specifications and
is therefore recommended.
In conclusion your committee recommends that a contract
be awarded to Kappa Associated in the amount of $57,103 for
Item I, comminuting equipment, and to the Jeffrey Manufac-
turing Company in the amount of $62,005 for Item III. primary
settling equipment. Both of these bids should be conditionally
awarded, subject to necessary State and Federal concurrence.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Hampton M. Thomas
S/ Julian F. Hirst
S/ William F. Clark
S/ Sam H. McGhee,
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
committee and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(s2o621) AS ORDINANCE conditionnllT accepting bids and awarding
contracts upon receipt of approval by State and Federal agencies, for the furnish-
ing of certain equipment for the Cltyts Sewage Treatment Plant, under Contract
'fl" ~ Primary equipment; rejecting certain other bids for certain of said equip-
ment; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37. page 327.)
MUNICIPAL RDILDING: Council having referred to a committee for tabula-
tion, report and recommendation bids received fac the remodeling of the Third
Street Building. the committee submitted the following report recommending that
the iow bid of Rattan Brothers Contractors, Incorporated, in the amount of
$703,000.00. with Alternate A for the roof deck. in the amount of $?.eO0.O0 be
accepted, and further recommending that Council appropriate $6D,000.00 supple-
mental funds for this purpose:
"December I0, 1972
Ifonorahle Rayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
The following is submitted as the report of the Com-
mittee appointed to review the bids received on December 11.
1972. for the remodeling of the Third Street Building. This
building i$ proposed to accommodate the Juvenile and
Domestic Relations Court and the Police-Department.
The available funds and cost data area as follows:
Total Appropriation $702,497.54
Fees Paid to Date 40.865.62
Available for Expenditure $741,631,92
Estimated ~ost
Low Bid Received $783,000.00
Architect and Engineers fees 5D.725.00
· 841,725.00
Printing costs, Plans and Specs. 920.23
842,645.23
Paid out to Date 40.865.62
Total for Base Bid 801,779.61
Alternate A 7.800.00
Net Expenditure $809.579.61
Summary
Cost $009,579.61
Funds 741.631.92
Sum Required $ 67,947.69
There mill also be necessary certain equipment furnished
for the Court and the Police Department. It is estimated
that the cost of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court
equipment will be approximately $22,000. There is no
immediate estimate of Police Department furnishings. As
the furnishings will not be required until later it is
suggested that these can be included as an equipment item
in the 1972-73 budget with the possibility of Virginia
Council on Criminal Justice monies on a participatin9 basis.
Your committee has reviewed in considerable detail the
bids-and the situation with respect to the remodeling and
design for the building and the relationship of bids with
available funds, as above detailed. As Council has been
previously advised, a great deal of study and consideration
has 9one into the resulting plans upon which the bids were
taken. It is felt that these plans represent a reasonable
261
262
remodeling of the building ullh the'inclusion of essential'
electrical, heating, air conditioning and plumbing work.
ia not felt that there is in the building any excessive
dressings or appointments. The remodeling would reasonably
accowmodate the two units of governments proposed but could
in later years be adaptable to other purposes should
either or both of these units be elseuhere provided rot.
Attached is a copy of a letter of December 12. 1972,
from Sowers, Rhodes and Jhitescarver in which it is noted
that their estimate of the project in the very early part
of this calendar lear was $726.000.. The difference between
then and now is partially made In cost increase, partially
in increase In fee percentages based on the bid and partially
'by several additions which they note that have been added
in the stage review of the plans.
To briefly comment on these particular items:
It was deternined that the elevator would have to be
replaced and this had not been originally anticipated. To
maintain the present elevator would require a continuous
operator. Fire regulations would not permit the public to
use it otherwise. The expense was so hi~ to modify the
present elevator that it was determined to propose an
entirely new unit. This is estimated at $20,000 to
$25~000.
The emergency generator is to provide independent
power source to the Police Department which is considered
desirable.
Changes in hardware for the doors relate to what is
considered to be better units and represents about
Veneer on the entire south wall was felt to benefit
the appearance of the building overall and is estimated at
$10.000.
Th~ parking lot screened for security wall would be
along Thir~ Street, $. W.. at an estinated cost of $5,000
to $6,000.
It was decided in the latter stages to euclose the
loading dock on the rear or west of the buildiog. This
enclosur~ would add approxinatety 620 square feet of space
and would provide needed material storage for the building.
This is estimated at $10,000.
The building contains 32,000 square feet and when the
loading dock enclosure is added there results approximately
32,690 square feet of interior area. Based on the above low
bid the unit cost is approximately $2§.?6 per square foot.
For comparison purposes the engineers estimated by report of
December 15, igTlo one year ago, that the cost of building a
new structure of comparable space and purpose would be
Sg60,OOO'at $30 per square foot plus increase in cost due to
rise in price index of one year plus demolition and clearance
of site. plu~ engineering and architectural expenses, plus
consideration of social security occupancy. It is the
opinion of the committee that this is still a favorable
situatioh. The committee has reviewed the increments of
the proposed remodeling and we do not at this point know of
anything'significant that could ro should be removed. If
award is made of a contract it w~uld be intended to review
in close detail the p~oject with the contractor to ascertain
if there are any areas of materials and the such that could
be revised cost savings.
It i~ regarded that good bidding was received on the
project and that considering,the nature of the job and
other projects elsewhere being bidded on by contractors the
City was fortunate in receiving four reasonable good bids.
W~ do not feel that any gain would be accomplished by
attempting to rebid and, in fact, feel that not as favorable
a low bid would be forthcoming under those circumstanceS.
Incorporation for Alternate A for the roof deck should
be a part of a contract. When the present roof is removed
for replacement it may be found necessary to replace the
metal deck; therefore, this should be anticipated and
vided fat even though it would be later determined if
necessary.
Alternate 8 for the ~un screen czn be foregone,
The recommendation.or the committee to the City Council
is for the acceptance of the Ion bid ot $783,000 es made by
Martin Brothers Contractorst luc.o uith Alternate A for
$7°800 and that the project be authorized for contrnct. The
eonnittee mould further recommend appropriation by the City
Council of $60,000 supplemental funds for. this purpose.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Julian F. Rirst
S/ William F, Clark
S/ Sam Do RcGheeo
S/ Grcdy P. Gregory
S/ William A. Sowers"
Rr, Trout moved that Council concur ia the recommendation of the coz-
mittee and offered the folloming emergency Ordinance appropriating $62,000.00 to
Courthouse Annex ~nder Section #89, 'Transfers to Capital Improvements Fund,' of
the 1972-73 budget:
(n20622) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~Rg. 'Transfers
to Capital Improvements Fund,# of the 1g72-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and pro-
viding for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n37, page 32D.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas seconded
by Br. Garland and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Webber ........................ T.
NAYS: None ........... O,
M'r. Hubard pointed out that he agrees with the members of'Council that
the conditions in the Police Department end the Juvenile and Domestic Relations
Court are deplorable but thn't he feels douncil could have provided them with
temporary quarters and looked at this matter on a long range basis and that he
wonders if the other governing bodies mill look at this as an act against a
regional courthouse facility.
Mr° Lisk offered the folloming emergency Ordinance accepting the pro-
posal of Martin Brothers Contractors, Incorporated:
(n20523) AN ORDINANCE accepting a certain bid and awarding a certain
contract for remodelin9 the Yhird Street Building at 3rd Street and Campbell
Avenue. S. R., in Roanoke, Virginia. upon certain terms and conditions; reject-
ing other bids made therefor; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n37, page 329.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lish, Taylor, Thomas. T~out and Mayor
Mebber 7.
NAYS: None O.
Hr. Raherd then moved that the City Planning Director be requested to
conduct c study of the future office needs of the City of Roanoke for the next
five or ten lears and give, counc, ll the benefit of his Judgment ns to what mould
be the most feasible approach to the location for the city courthouse facilities
by then for the sole benefit of the City of Rosnohe or on · regional basis. The
motion was seconded by Mr. LJsk and unanimously adopted.
I~FINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
CONSIDERATION OF CLA1RS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND EONSIDERATXON OF ORDINANCES AND ~ESOLUTIONS:
SALE OF PROPERTY-~fATE HICH[ATS: Ordinance No. 20604. authorizing
and directing the sale and conveyance by the City of Roanoke to the Eomnonmealth
of Virginia of two parcels of land containing a total of 10,S44 square feet,
more or less, situate on the north side of Hershberger Road, N. M., adjacent to
its intersection with the airport access road. upon certain terms and conditions,
having previously been before Council for its first reading, read and laid over,
mas again before the body, Mr. Trout offering the following for its second rend-
in9 and final adoption:
(~20604) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and directing the City's sale and
conveyance to the Commonwealth of Virginia of two parcels of land containing n
total of 16,544 square feet, more or less. situate on the north side of Hershber-
get Road. N. M.. adjacent to its intersection mith the airport access road, upon
certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Dook n37, page 317.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the followin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Dubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................... 7.
NAYS: None ..........O.
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES: Council having directed the City Attorney to pre-
pare the proper measure authorizing the filing of the City of Roanoke's applica-
tion with the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention for an action grant of
federal funds for implementation of a community-based correctional program and
services for adults, for increased effectiveness of correction and rehabilitation
he presented same; whereupon, Mr. Lisk offered the following Resolution:
(#20624) A RESOLUTION authorizing the filing of the City of
Roanoke's application with the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention for an
action grant of federal funds for implementation of a community-based corrections
program and services for adults, for increased effectiveness of correction and
rehabilitation.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Dook =37, page
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Ha bard. Llsk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ..................... 7.
NAYS: None ......... -0,
AIRPORT: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper ~eosure approving arrangements and plans proposed by the City Manager to
bare Wiley N. Jackson Company. General Contractor. provide and maintain certain
motorized equipment at Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport during the 1972-73
winter season and provide operating personnel for the use of said equipment to
perform necessary removal of snow at said airport, he presented same; whereupon,
Dr. Taylor offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(n20625) AN ORDINANCE approving arrangements and plans proposed by
the City Ranager to accomplish necessary removal of snom at Roanoke Municipal
Airport for the 1972-73 season; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book c37. page 331.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance; The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, tlubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Mebber .........................7.
NAYS: None .........
B~DGET-SCHOOLS: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare
the proper measure approvin9 and concurring in the expansion of the Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University Extension Program in the City of
Roanoke. he presented same; whereupon. Mr. Lisk offered the foil,win9 Resolution:
(#20626) A RESOLUTION approving and concurring in the expansion of the
¥irginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Extension Program in the
City of Roanoke.
(For full text Of Resolution, see Ordinance Book #37, page 333.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adoptedhy the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk; Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
~ebber .......................... 7.
NAYS: None ......... O.
Mr. Lisk then offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
$10,000,00 to Fees for Professional and Special Services under Section
*Food Distribution,* of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for the extension
program:
(~20627) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~40. *Food
Distribution,* of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #37, page 334.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. ?he motion was seconded
by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:. Messrs, Garland. Bubnrd,'Lish, Taylor, T~omas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .............
NAYS: None ........ --0.
BUSES: Council having directed the City AttOrney to prepare the
proper measure appropriating $24,000.00 to Fees for Professional and Special
Services under Section n96, 'Transportation,' of the 1972-73 budget, .to provide
funds for payment by the City of Roanoke to Roanoke City Lines, Incorporated,
of certain sums monthly, over o period commencing January 1, 1973, Mr. Garland
offered the follomlng emergency Ordinance:
(u20628) AN ORDINANCE to amendand reordain Section n96[ 'Transport.a-
riga,= of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for on emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book u37, page 334.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr, Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Bubard. LaRk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber .........................7.
NAYS: None ..........-0.
PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOYEES-CITY MANAGER-CITY ATTORNEY: Dr. Taylor
offered the following emergency Ordinance fixing the salaries of Hr. Byron E.
Boner. City homager; Hr. James N. Kincanon, City Attorney; ~r. H. Ben Jones. Jr.,
Assistant City Attorney; Mr. Edward A. Matt. Assistant City Attorney; and
James E. Buchholtz, Assistant City Attorney:
(=20629) AN ORDINANCE to amend Ordinance NO, 20348, adopted June 26,
1972. fixing the annual compensation of certain unclassified officials and
employees of the City; and providing for an*emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n37, page S35.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and .adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, LaRk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
~ebber .....................
NAYS: None ........ -0.
BUDGET: Mr. Garland offered the following emergency Ordinance amend-
ing and reordaintng Section =B9, ~Transfers to Capital Improvements Fund,~ of
the 1972-73 budget:
(u20630) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section u89, "Transfers
to Capital Improvements Fund.~ of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and pro-
viding for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ns?, page.336.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded.by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:*
AYES: Nessra, Garland, Hubard, Llah, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and #8yor
Webber ........................7.
NAYS: None ..........O.
M~TIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
PLANNING: Mayor Webber called to the attention of Council that the
four year terms of Messrs. Henry .H. B~ynton. Aylett B. Coleman and C. K. Lemon.
Jr.. as members of the City Planning Commission mill expire on December 31. 1972.
that Messrs. John L. Wentworth and Aylett B. Coleman have declined t.o serve
another term and called for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Mr.-Hubard placed in nomination the name of Mr. John P. Bradshaw. Jr..
to replace Mr. John L. Wentworth. resigned, for a term of four years ending
December 31. 1976.
There being no further nominations. Mr. John P. Hradshaw, Jr** mas
elected as a member of the City Planning Commission for a term of four years
ending December 31. 1976. by the foil*ming vote:
FOR HR. BRADSHAM: Messrs. Garland. Hubard. Lash. Taylor. Thomas Trout
and Mayor Webber ...............7.
HEALTH DEPARTMENT: Mayor Webber called to the attention of Council
that the terms of Miss Dorothy L. Glbhooey. the Reverend Charles T. Green and
Mrs. Anna L. McClnng as At Large Members of the Mental Health Services Board
will expire on January 1. 1973. that Reverend Green has declined to serve
another term and called for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Mr. Hubard placed in nomination the names Of Miss Dorothy L. Gibbon,y.
Mrs. Anna L. HcClnng and Mr. Charles W. Day to replace the Reverend Charles T.
Green.
There beiug no further nominations, Miss D~rothy L. Gibboney, Mrs.
Anna L. McClung and Hr. Charles ~. Day were elected as At Large Members of
the Mental Health Services Board for terms of three years each ending December
31, 1975, by the following vote:
FOR MISS GIBBONEY, MRS. MCCLUNG AND MR. DAy: Messrs. Garlaod, Hubard,
Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor Webber---7o
There being no further business. Mayor Webber declared the meeting
iadjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST: ' ~
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
COUNCI£, REGULAR MEETING.
Tuesday, January 2, 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the Coun-
cil Chamber in the Municipal Building. Tuesday. January 2. 1973. at 2 pom..
the regular meeting hour. ,ith Mayor Roy L. Webber presiding.
pRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland. William S. flubardo David E.
Lisk. Noel C. Taylor. Hampton W. Thomas. James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L.
Mebber ......................... 7.
ABSENT: None ........
OFFICERS pRESENT: Mr. Byron Eo Hamer, City Manag'er; Mr. Milliam F.
Clark, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Kincanon, CitF Attorney; and Mr.
A. N. Gibson, City Auditer,
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend
Rolen C. Oailey, pastor, Cave Spring Baptist Church.
RINUZES: Copy of minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday, Novem-
ber 27. 1972, having been furnished each member of Council, on motion of Mr.
Trout, seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof was
dispensed with'and the minutes approved as recorded.
REARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: NO~.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
STATE HIGHMAY$: Mr~ Fred C, Ellis, president, Truck Sales, Incorporated
308 Orange Avenue, N. E., appeared before the body and requested the considera-
tion of Council of a left turn opening on Orange Avenue to 9o north oK Courtland
Road.
In this connection, Mr° Trout presented the following communication
transmitting copy of a committee report and Resolution which was forwarded to
the Righway Department dated June 3, 1953, advising the Department of Highways
of the Commonwealth of Virginia and the Bureau of Public Roads of the United
States of the decision of the Council of the City of Noonoke to reject said
Bureau's proposal to construct, at no cost to the city, requisite facilities on
Orange Avenue from Interstate Route 501 to Williamson Road, provided that no
opening in the proposed median strip on Orange at its intersection with Courtland
Road shall be made. advising tho*it seems to him that the action is of the
Righway Department is contrary to the Resolution forwarded to the Highway Depart-
men* and that he cannot remember, in his term on Council, having received any
plans or voted for the closing of Courtland Road:
"December 26, 1972,
Ronorable Mayor and
Members of Roanoke City Council,
Roanoke, Virginia,
Gentlemen:
I am enclosing, for your information and review, the committee
report and the Resolution forwarded to the Highway Department
dated June 3. 1963.
Frankly, I am quite em·zed that this construction took place
at a time mhen we have a great Investment in · site study. It
is quite obvious th~t~once again we bare the horse before the
c·rt es far as the Public Service Building goes,
Under the present arrangement, it is necessary for ·Il traffic
going to the proposed site to~·vel through a housing project
past · much used school building end also the traffic is
required to pass the badly located intersection at the
ap·rtm~nts located Just meat of the Interstate,
It seems to me that this action is contrary to the Resolution
formarded to the Highm·y Department. I cannot remember,
in my term on Council. having reviewed any plans By voted for
the closing of Coortlsnd Road.
I think Council should be in complete sympathy and have
understanding for the businesses located in this area.
Sincerely.
S/ James O. Trout
Hr. Trout then moved that the matter be referred to the City Hanager
Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: A communication from the Condo Corporation advisin9 that it is
their intention to build a twenty-family luxury apartment building on the northwest
corner of Jefferson Street and Twenty-third Street, that it appears they can meet
all of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance with two exceptions and request-
ing that a variance be granted to the Zoning Ordinance in order for them to
construct a building four stories high and not exceed fifty feet in height and
that they be given permission to use the whole 240 feet at the rear of the build-
in9 for parking, advising that this will be parking on the twenty-five foot
setback li~e off of Twenty-third Street. was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved'that the request be referred to the City Planning Cam-
by Dr. Taylor and unanimously a~opted.
WATER D£PARTRENT: A Resolution adopted by the Roanoke Valley Chamber
mater system of the City of Roanoke, advising that the Board of Directors of the
Roanoke Valley Chamber of Commerce has long advocated such regional cooperation
and heartily endorses the concept provided any plan adopted does not impose undue
hardships or restrictions on either political subdivision and urging the Council
of the City of Roanoke and the C~uncil of the Town of ¥inton to work as speedily
as possible tomard the accomplishment of this worthuhile goal. was before Council.
iComnittee for its information in connection with its study of the matter. The
SHERIFF: Copy of an Order and Bond reflecting the qualification of Mr.
Paul J. Puckett upon his election ns Sheriff of the City of Roanoke for the tern
ending December 31, 1973, was before Council.
269'
Dr, Toylor moved that the Order and Bond be received and filed, The
motion wes s~conded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted,
REPORTS OF O~FICERS:
CITY EMPLOYEE$-INSL~IANCB: Council having referred to the City Attorney
for preparation of the proper measure o report of the City Manager recommending
that Council favorably c~n[ider the request of Blue Cross/Blue Shield for a yearly
contract covering insurance premiums for city employees and n program with the
features of performance rating and coordination of benefits included, the
Assistant City Manager submitted the following report transmitting copy of the
proposed contract'for these services, advising that the effective date of the
proposed contract is January l, 1973o and the term will be for a period of eighteE
months and annually thereafter:
'January 2, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Centlemen:
Subject: Blue Cross/Blue Shield Insurance
On Monday, December 11, City Council received a report
with recommendation concerning a proposal by Blue Cross/Blue
Shield for an annual contract covering the City*s medical
and hospital insurance program. This matter was referred
to the City Attorney's office, mbo, in cooperation with the
City Manager*s office, was requested to prepare the appro-
priate resolutions and ordinances for the adoption of this
proposal. For Council*s information there is attached
herewith copy of the proposed contract for these services
and the City Attorney*s office indicated that it will have
prepared the papers necessary for authorization of this
contract.
The effective date of the proposed contract is
January 1, ~g73, and the term mill be for a period of
lB months and annually thereafter. The premium rates mill
be those which are now in effect for the existing Blue .
Corns/Blue Shield insurance program, There are no decreased
benefits included in the proposed contract ip comparison
with those already available, Actually, the contract has
been modified to increase the allomable hospital stay from
?0 to 120 days and to cover unmarried dependent children up
'to age 23 rather than 19. The former,provision will affect
very few persons since the average hospital stay is well under
this limit; however, this does provide coverage for the
extreme illness situation. The age provision does provide
additional coverage for those employees whose dependent
children may be college students. These benefits bring the
policy more closely in line with that presently available
for the City school teachers.
Under the terns of the proposed contract, the experience
of the City employees as a group-would be a determining factor
in establishing.future premium charges. Such future premiums
would be determined from hospital and physician charges for
claims from the City employees group, an administrative cost
of $1,40 per month per employee covered, and a 2 percent fee
times the aforementioned two items held for plan reserves,
Prior to April 1, 1974, if there is any indication that the
premium charges may need changing, the City would receive
notice mhich mould allow taking account of that fact into
the upcoming budget for that year. Throughout the term of
the contract, t~e City will receive monthly pr.intouts from a
computer showing all costs charged to our employee group.
The feature of coordination of benefits which takes into
account other group policies which the employee or his
spouse may otherwise have is also taken into account within
the proposed contract.
William F. Clark
Assistant City Manager"
Nr. Thomas moved that Council concur fn the report of the Assistant
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(n20631) AN OROINAHCE authorizing a certain contract to be entered
into with Blue Cross of Southwestern Virginia and Blue Shield of Southwestern
Virginia to provide medical and health services for employees of the City and
members of thei~ families; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 342.)
Mtn Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Hr. Bubard and adopted by the followin9 vote:
AY£S: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber ..................... 7.
NAYS: None O.
ALCOHOLIC HEVERAOHS-DRCGS: The City Attorney submitted the following
interim report on several items recently referred to him relating to proposed
grants of'f~deral funds to the city for implementation of various programs funded
in part by federal funds administered by the Division of Justice and Crime Pre-
vention and more specifically as it relates to those proposed to be administered
by the Rental Health Services of Roanoke Valley. the Roanoke Area Drug Abuse
Control Council, Bethany Hall, Offender Aid and Restoration of Virginia, and.
perhaps, others, advising that at such tine as each particular set of circum-
stances is worked,out to the approval of the Division of Justice and Crime
Preventioa, the matters will be brought back to Council for such action as is
then in order:
~January 2. 1973
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
items recently referred to this office relating to proposed
grants of Federal funds to the City for implementation of
various programs funded in part by Federal funds administered
by the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention, Specifically,
it relates to those proposed to be administered by the Mental
Health Services of Roanoke Valley, the Roanoke Area Drug
Abuse Control Council, Dethany Hall, Offender Aid and Resto-
ration of Virginia and, perhaps, others.
272
Since the last Council weetlng. Mr. Gibson. the
mriter, and Mr. Hsmllt6n have been in ~lwost daily contact
math various of the agencies affected, trying to work out with
those agencies formal agreewents which m,~ld provide for
the proper administration of the services ~nvolved and which
would, nt the same tlmee meet with the conditions Of and have
prior approval of the Division.of Justice and Crime Pr*yen=
tion. from whoa oil such grants are to be received by the
City. In making application for each such grant, the City
has made certain very definite commitments to the Division
respecting the control of and accounting for funds received
under each such grant nod all separate agreements made with
the local agencies must recognize those obligations or mast,
uith the approval of the Division, be transferred to and
assumed by those agencies.
At such time as each particular set of circumstances is
worhed out to the approval of the DivlsJdn of Justice and
Crime Prevention, the matters will be brought back to the
Councll*s attention for such action as is then in order.
Respectfully.
S/ J. N. Kincunon
J. N. Kincanon"
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received and filed. Zhe motion
was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
PENSIONS: The Assistant City Attorney submitted a written report
advising that a bill of complaint filed in the Circuit Court of the City of
Roanoke on January 14, 1971. by retired firemen Sidney M.' Vaughan, Ralph L.
Smith, Luther C. King*fy, John B. Hrown and Daniel P. Flora, against the City
of Roanoke, whereby, the above named plaintiffs sought certain alternative relief
in the nature of a return of contributions in the old Police and Firemen*$
Pension System or benefits under both said old Pension System as well as the
newer Employees' Retirement System was, following protracted litigation, ordered
dismissed by said Court on December 2H, 1972, that in the final order dismissing
the case at the cost of the plaintiffs, the Court fixed and awarded a sun of
$1,200.00 for the services of the Commissioner in Chancery in the matter and
further ordered payment of such fee to be made one-half by the plaintiffs and
one-half by the defendants.
Mr. Garland moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
APPALACHIAN POMER COMPANY-TAXES: The Assistant City Attorney submitted
the following report officially bringing to the attention of Council a recent
decision of the State Corporation Commission in the case of Application of
Virginia Electric Power Company for a Declaratory Judgment, Case No. 19176,
advising that the holding of this case should be in interest to Council by
reason of the fact that it could well mean many thousands of dollars of the city*~
tax funds mould be used for the payment of charges for providing electric service
to the city:
*January 2, 1973
Zhe Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
I take this opportunity to bring to your official
attention a recent decision of the State Corporation Commission
in the case of'Apolicatlan of Vlrainla Electric Power Cam-
Deny for · Declaratory Judament, Case NO. 19176. The hold-
ing in this case should be of interest lo this Council by
reason of the fact that it could well mean many thousands
of dollars of the Clkyts tax funds mould be used for the
payment of charges for providing electric service to the
At the present time, the city of Roanoke contracts
with the local electric pouer company mith respect to the
rates charged the City for electric service. This rate
is quite lan with respect to'rates charged lo ordinary con-
sumers. The State Corporation Commission is understood to
have, in effect, ruled in the recent case that such con-
tractual rates charged'municipalities, the Federal govern-
men, and the State Ore discriminatory and that essentially
the same rates must be charged governmental entities as
are charged the ordinary consumer. At this point there is
no indication the local porter company is or was a party
to this proceeding, however, the effect of the ruling, if
allomed to stand, mould appear to be the sane as to it as
it mould be to VEPCO.
It is understood that at least some of the parties
before the State Corporation.Commission intend to appeal to
the Supreme Court of Virginia the decision of the State
Corporation Commission; the parties to uhom I refer being
the Commonwealth of Virginia. the Federal government, the
City of Richmond. the City of Portsmouth, the City of
Virginia Beach, the County of Chesterfield, the County of
Henrico, the Virginia Association of Counties and the
Virginia Municipal League, At this time, me have been
unable to determine how vigorously the appeal of these
parties mill be prosecuted.
The purpose of this report is to point out to the
Council the concern of this office regarding this matter
and to advise the Council that the City of Roanoke might
certainly be adversely affected by the recent ruling,
therefore, would ask Council's guidance as to whether or oat
it feels the City should attempt to protect its interests
by filing a brief amicus curiae in the Supreme Court of
Virginia, if an appeal is awarded such other parties,
Reapectfully submitted,
S/ James E. Buchholtz,
James E. Buchholtz.
Assistant City Attorney~
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed and that the
matter be left under the discretion of the City Attorney*s Office for any future
action. The motion mas seconded by Mr, Lisk amd unanimously adopted,
BIJDCET-AIRPORT: The City Auditor submitted a written report advising
that during the budget studies in June of thi~ year.,..Coungil indicated an interest
in separating the accounting for the Municipal Airport operation of the City o£
Roanoke, transmitting a budget and au Ordinance mhich will accomplish this pur~
pose and advising that the accounting will be to a large extent on the same basis
as the accounting for the Mater Department, Sewage Treatment Department and
Civic Center,
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the report of the City Auditor
and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(n20532) AN ORDINANCE makin9 appropriations from the Airport Fund of
the City of Ronnoke for the balance of the fiscal year,beginning January 2, 1973,
and ending June 30, 1973; and declaring the existence of an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n37, page 343.)
by Mr, Thomas aed edop~ed by Lbe follouiog vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Llsh, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
]ebber ?*
NAYS: None O.
BUDGKT-REVENI~ SHARING: The City Auditor submitted the following repot
in connection with Revenue Sharing monies received by the city of Roanoke for the
calendar year 19?R, in the amount of $R.O19.703.52. advising that after several
meetings of the Audit Committee It mas decided that this money should be
incorporated in the city*s operatingbudget end expended in accordance with the
priority items as established by the Treasury Department of the United States:
"January 2, 1973 '
Honorable Mayer and UJty Council
Roanoke, ¥irgJnia .....
Gentlemen:
After several meetings of the Audit Committee, it was
decided to recommend to Couacll that the Revenue Sharing
moneys received by the City of Roanoke for the calendar year
1972, said sam uhich included interest earned to be
$2,019o?03.52. should be incorporated in the city's
operating budget and expended inaccovdance with the
priority i[ems es established by the Treasury Department
of the United States.
The Audit Committee decided that the simplest and best
method to accomplish this purpose mould be to unappropriate
general fund appropriations to personal services in the
following departments: Police. Fire, Street Construction
and Repair and Refuse Colection ned Disposal, and, at the
Fund to accommodate the resulting deficit. This procedure
would bare the twofold porpose of properly expending the
fends received under the Revenue Sharing Funds made
available by the United States Treasury in a timely fashion
and to mare available a li[e sum of aoeey in the general
fund for expenditure by the City Council for Capital Improve-
Respectfully submitted.
S! A. N. Gibson
~[ty Auditor"
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the report of the City Auditor
and offered the following emergency Ordinm ce decreasing the personal Services
account under Section s45, "Police Department," by $669,?03.52, decreasing the
Personal Services account under Section n47, "Fire Department," by $750.000o00,
decreasing the Personal Services account under Section nSGt "Street Construction
and Repair," by $175.000o00 and decreasing the Personal Services account under
Section =69, "Refuse Collection and Disposal," by $405,000°00:
(=20633) AN ORDIHANCE to amend and reovdain certain sect'ions of the
1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =37, page 344.)
Mr. Lfsk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Tho'mas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Nessra. Garlandt Hebard, Llsk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ................. ?.
NAYS: None O.
Mr. Garland then offered the folloming emergency Ordinance decreasing
the Revenue Sharing Trust Fund by $2,01%705.52. increasing the Personal
S~rvlces account under Section n4S. 'Police Department." by $669,703.52, increas-
ing the Personal Services account under Section n4T. 'Fire Department,' by
$750,000.00, increasing the Personal Services account under Section u56, 'Street
Construction and Repair.' by $175,000.00 and increasing the Personal Services
account under Section n69, 'Refuse Collection and Disposal.' by $405,000.00:
(a20634) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
19V2-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for au emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see as recorded in office of
City Clerk in Ordinance Book n37. page 345.)
Hr. Garland moved the adoption Of the Ordinance. The notion
was seconded by Dr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Rubord, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout, and Mayor
Mebber ........................
MAYS: Moue ..........O.
REPORTS OF COMB1TTEES: NONE.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
PLANNING-POLICE DEPARTRENT-JA1L-MU~ICIPAL BUILDING-CAPITAL IMPROYEMEMTS
PROGRAM: Council having referred a joint communication from Nessrs. William S.
Bubard and David K. Lisk transmitting the fifth and final draft of an agreement
~hich would establish a Regional Corrections Center to Council acting as a
Committee of the Whole for the purpose of considering the agreement, paragraph
by paragraph, in open meeting after the next regular meeting of Council on
Tuesday, January 2, 1973, the matter was before the body.
Mr. Hubard moved that Council discuss the draft of agreement in open
meeting in the Executive Session Conference Room after the conclusion of the
regular Council meetlng. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously
adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
IMTRODUCTIOM AND CONSIDERATIOM OF ORDINANCES ANO RESOLL~IONS:
ZONING: Ordinance Mo, 20608, rezonin9 property located in the 5100
block of Roodbury Street. N. W.. described as Lot 16, Block 10. Map of Air Lee
Court, Official Tax No, 2190316, from RS-3, Sinole-Family Residential District,
to C-l, Office and Institutional District, having previously been before Council
for its first reading, read and laid over. mas again before the body, Mr. Trout
offering the following for its second reading and final adoption:
(~20608) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1. Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet No. 219, Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 337.)
275-
,276
Mr. Trout moved .the adoption o.f the Ordinance.. The motion mas seconded
by Mr, Garland end adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Webber ......................
NAYS: None ........ O. .(Mr. Hubard not voting)
S~EETS AND ALLEYS: Ordinance No. 20609. vacating, discontinuing and
closing Gum Street, N. W** (formerly Pine Street) which is a paper street
located approximately 330°9 feet west of Beech Street betmeen Shenandoa~ Avenue
and Barberry Avenue (formerly Dogwood Aven~e) between Lots 4 and 5, and Reserva-
tion No. 2 and Reservation No. 3, according to the Map of Mestmood, having pre-
viously been before Council for its first reading, read and laid over, was
again before the .body, Mr. Thonas offering the following for its second read-
lng and final adoption:
(a20609) AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and clos-
ing that paper street known as Gum Street (formerly Pine Street) located approxi-
nately 336.9 feet west of Death Street between Shenandoah Avenue and Barberry
Avenue (formerly Dogwood Avenue) between Lots 4 and S and Reservations No. 2 and
Reservation No. 3 according to the Map of Westwood recorded in the Clerk's
Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia. in Plat Book 1, page
315.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book naT, page 336.)
Mr. Thonas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard. Lisk. Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Mobber .................... 7.
NAYS: None ..........-0.
ZONING: Ordinance No, 20010. rezonin9 property located in the 2500
block of Broadway Avenue and Stephenson Avenue. S. M., described as Lots I and
2, Block 1, Gollehoo Addition, Official Tax Nos. 1160109, 1160110 and 1160113,
from RS-3, Single-Family Residential. District, to C-I, Office and Institutional
District, having previously been before Council for its first reading, read and
laid over, mas again before the body, Mr. Lisk offering the following for ~ts
second reading and final adoption:
(#20610) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet N~. 116, Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke. in relation to. Zoning.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
Jebber
NAYS: 'Mr. Trcut---l.
ZONIWO: Ordinance Wo.' 20611, rezonJng property located in ~e 900
block of ¥inton Hill Road, H. Ego described as the uesterly 200,0 feet of Lots
1. 2 and 3, according to the subdivision plat of C. Ag Plasters and Ho C. Johnson,
dated Hay 3, 1952. Official Tax ~os, 3330506 and 3330505, from C-I, Office and
Institutional District, to C-2, General Commercial District, having previously
been before Couficli for its first reading, read and laid over, mas again before
the body, Mr.' Hubard offering the following for its second reading and final
adoption:
(a20611) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2 of
the Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet No. 333, Sectional
1966-Zone Map, City Of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Hook mS?, page 341.)
MFo Hubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion uss seconded
by Mr. Lisk snd adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Hessrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Trout and Mayor
Hebber .........................6.
NAYS: None O. (Mr. Thomas not voting)
ACTS OF ACKNOMLEDGEM£NT: Mr. Trout offered the following Resolution
stating and recording the genuine sorrow of the members of the Council and of
the citizens of the City of Roanoke. Virginia, at the passing of former Presi-
dent Harry S Truman on the twenty-sixth day of Oecember, 19T2. and expressing
and extending to Mrs. Truman the sincere sympathy and consolation Of this body
and of the citizens of this city in her great bereavement:
(~20635) A RESOLUTION honoring the late HARRY S TRUMAN, former Presi-
dent of the United States of America.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book =37. page 345.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the ResolutiOn. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ............. 7.
NAYS: None O.
LEGtSLATION: Mr. Trout offered the follouing Resolution requesting
support of the members of the 1973 General Assembly of Virginla towards enact-
ment of certain items of legislation:
(~20636) A RESOLUTION requesting support of the members of the 1973
Ceneral Assembly of Virginia towards enactment of certain items of legislation.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Rook =37~ page 346.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motioa was seconded
by Hr. Llsk and adopted by the following vote:
'AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor,'Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ............ 7.
NAYS: None* .0o
277-
'278
STATE NIGHIIA¥S-SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: Dr. Taylor offered the follow-
lng Resolution expressing appreciation to the Vi r.gl~ia Department of Highways
upon its decision concernin~ the location of the Route 115 - 116 Highway ProJect
as it relates to the Sewage Treatment Plant:
(n20637) A RESOLUTION expressing appreciation to the Virginia Depart-
ment of Highways upon its decision concerning the location of project D000-
128-102, P£-IOI, as it relates to the Clty*s Sewage Treatment Plant.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Rook n37, page 34H.}
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................
NAYS: None .......... O.
BUDGET-CITY MANAGER-CITY ATTORNEy: Mr, Thomas offered the ~ollowin9
emergency Ordinance decreasing by $2.844.00 Personal Services under Section u3.
"City Manager." and increasing by $3.651.00 Personal Services under Section n4,
"CAtI Attorney," of the 1972-73 budget:
(=20638) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Boob =37, page 34g.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
~: seconded by Rt. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard. Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber .....................
NAYS: None .0.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
pENSIONS: Rt. D. Watson Brown appeared before Council and advised that
he retired from the Fire Department on Ray 1, 1953, after having served twenty-
nine years and eight months, and pointed out that those city employees who did
not participate in the recent pension adjustmen? granted to retired firemen
and policemen feel that they have been discriminated against and requesting that
his group be given comparable consideration to that given other firemen and
policemen or that Council ~ve consideration toward qranting them a cost-of-
living increase.
Mr. Lisk moved that the request be referred to the Employees' Retire-
ment System Committee.for study, report and recommendation tn Council. The moran
was seconded byDr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
PUBLIC MELFARE: Mayor Webber called to the attention of Council that
there are a number of vacancies on the Advisory Board of Public Welfare created
by the resignations of Mr. Andrem R. Thompson, Mr. Herbert H. Roore, Jr., the
Reverend O. Benjamin Sparhs and the verbal resignation of Mrs. John M. Hudgins,
Jr., fur terms of three years each ending November 7, 1974, and called for
nominations to fill the vacancies.
CITIZENS* ADVISORY COMMITTEE: Mayor Mebber called to the attention of
Council that there is a vacancy on the Citizens* Advisory Committee created by
the resignation of Mr. T. H. Kemper for a term ending April 14, 1974, and
called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Li~t placed in nomination the name of Mr. Douglas N. Ragsdale.
There being no further nominations. Mr. Douglas No Ragsdale was
elected ns a member of the Citizens* Advisory Committee to fill the unexpired
term of Mr. Z, H. Kemper, resigned, ending April 14, 1974, by the following
vote:
FOR MR. RAGSDALK: Messrs. 0arland, Ilubard. Lisk. Taylor, Thomas,
Trout and Mayor Webber .........................
SMOKE: Mayor Webber called to the attention of Council that the term
of Mr. Fred K. Presser as a member of the Advisory and Appeal Hoard, Air Pollu-
tion Control, expired on December 31, 1972. and called for nominations to fill
the vacancy.
Mr. Trout placed in nomination the name of Mr. Fred K. Prosser.
There being no further nominations. Mr. Fred K. Presser was reelected
as a member of the Advisory and Appeal Hoard, Air Pollution Control, for a term
of four years ending December 31, 1975, by the following vote:
FOR MR. PRO$SER: Messrs. Garland, Ilubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas. Trout
and Mayor Mebber 7.
PLANNING: Mayor Mebber called to the attention of Council that the
terms of Messrs. Henry H. Boynton, Aylett B. Coleman and C, K. Lemon, Jr., as
members of the City Planning Commission e~pired on December 31o 1972, that
Mr. C. Ko Lemofl. Jr., has declined to serve another term and called for nominations
to fill the vacancies.
Mr. Hubard placed in nomination the name of Mr. Henry H. Doynton.
Mr. Trout placed in nomination the name of Mr. Aylett H. Coleman.
Dr. Taylor placed in nomination the name of Mr. James M. Durks, Jr.
There being no further nominations, Messrs. Henry B. Hoynton and
A~lett H. Coleman were reelected and Mr. James W. Hurks, Jr** was elected ns
members of the City Planning Commission for terms of four years each ending
December 31. 197~. by the following vote:
FOR MESSRS. BOYMTON, COLEMAN ANO BLTRKS: Messrs. Garland, .Rubsrd,
Link, Taylor,.Thomns, Trout and Hnyor Webber ....
There being.no further business, Rayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned,
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk
APPROVED
Mayor
COUNCIL. REGULAR MEZTING.
Monday, January 0. 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the Coun-
cil Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, January G, 1973, at 2 p.m., the
regular meeting hour, mith Mayor Roy L. Webber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland. William S. Hubard. David K.
Lisk, Noel C, Taylor, Hampton Me Thomas, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L.
Webber ............................... ?.
ABSENT: None ...............-0.
OFFICERS pRESENT: Mr. Byron E. Hamer. City Manager; Mr. Mllliam F.
Clark, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Elncanon, City Attorney; and Mr.
A. N. Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend
Robert L. Watts, Pastor, Highland Park United Methodist Church.
MINUTES: Copy of the minutes Of the regular meeting held on Monday,
December 4, 1972, having been furnished each member of Council. on motion of Mr.
Lisk, seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof was
dispensed with and the minutes approved as recorded.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: Pursuant to not,ce of advertisement for bids
for the construction Of a caretaker's house On Mill Mountain, said proposals to
be received by the City Clerk until R p.m., Monday, January 8, 1973, and to be
opened at that hour before Council, Mayor Webber asked if anyone present had any
question about the advertisement for bids and no representative present raising
any question, the Mayor instructed the Deputy City Clerk to proceed with the
opening of the bids; whereupon, the Deputy City Clerk opened and read the one
bid received from Nationwide Roues in the amount of $14.900.00.
Mr. Lisk moved that the bid be referred to a committee to be appointed
by the Mayor for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Webber appointed Messrs. Byron E. Namer, Chairman, William F.
Clark and Samuel H. McUhee, III', as members of the committee.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
ROUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: A communication from Mr. Russell R. Henley,
Executive Director, City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, request-
ing official action by Council approving Amendment No. 5 to the Kimball Redevelop-
ment Project, Project No. VA. R-46, advising that said amendment entails changing
the land use category to one uniform designation Of High-way Commercial and
Light Industrial Use and that the change is being mode in an effort to allom
maximum flexibility in the development of the Kimball Project, was before Council.
281
_)82
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted a written
report recommending that the request be approved.
With reference to the matter, the City Attorney verbally requested
that Conncil withhold any official action on this request for at least one or
two weeks to enable him to further check into the matter with regard to the
handling of utilities.
After a discussion of the matter, Mr, Lisk moved that Council defer
action On the request until the regular meeting of the body on Monday, January
22, 1973. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted,
S~REET LIGHTS: Copy of a communication from the Appalachian Power
Company transmitting a list of street lights installed and/or removed during
the month of December, 1972, was before Council,
Or, Taylor moved that the communication and llst be received and
filed. The notion was seconded by Mr, Thomas and unanimously adopted,
ROANOKE CAS COMPANY: A communication from Mr, A, W, Buckley,.Presi-
dent, Roanoke Gas Company, advising that the franchise of the Roanoke Cas Com-
pany.expires on September 1, 1973. and that he will be pleased to meet with
Council or the Franchise Study Committee to discuss this matter, mas before the
body.
Rt. Thomas moved that the matter be referred to the Franchise Study
Committee for study, report and recommendatiou to Council, The notion was
seconded by Mr, Lisk and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
APPALACHIAN pOWER COMPANY: The City Manager submitted the following
report, transmitting for the review and consideration of Council, copy of the
final draft of a street lighting contract between the City of Roanoke and
Appalachian Power Company, pointing out that officials of Appalachian Power
Company have indicated their approval of this document and representatives of
the city staff similarly recommend the approval Of Councilt
"January 9, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Street Lighting Contract
Over a considerable period of time, but rather concert-
edly over the past three or four months, representatives of
the City and Appalachian Power Company have been negotiating
on a street lighting contract. The City's former contract·
for such facilities expired June 30, 1970, and since that
time we have been operating without a contract on a coopera-
tive basis only. This has also affected the City's costs
since we have failed to obtain from Appalachian Pomer Com-
pany former special financial arrangements since the expira-
tion of the contract.
*For Council*s review and consideration there is
attached herewith a copy of the final draft recommended for
upprovul. Officials of Appalachian Pomer Coapsny hove JudO-
cried their upprovsl to this document und repretentotives or
the City scoff similorly recommend Council*$ approvii. If
there ore toy questions concerning aspects of the contract
tives of Appuluchian Power Coapsny hove been asted to be
present at Council's meeting for similar purpose.
It is recommended thus the City Attorney's office be
authorized to prepare necessary ordinance or resolution
unthorizing execution of this contract.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E, Bauer
Dyron E. Hamer
City Manager~
In this connection, the City ~anager verbally requested that he be
allowed to wJthdram this item or that it be referred to the Franchise Study
Committee,
Mr. Bubacd moved that the report be referred to the Franchise Study
seconded by Mr, Lisk and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC ~ELFARE: The City Manager submitted the
following report recommending that $1D,O00.O0 be appropriated to General Relief
under Section ~37, *Public Assistance,* of the 1972-73 budget, to provide neces-
sary funds for this account for One more month while auaiting action Of the
General Assembly with respect to the State Department Of Welfare and Institutions'
request for an additional appropriation:
*January 6, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Subject: Appropriation for General Relief
The Public Assistance budget for fiscal year 1972-73 as
approved by City Council contained $144,?77 in General
Relief funds. This amount was appropriated in lieu of the
$269,5d0 requested when the State Department of Welfare was
unable to appropriate their fair share or 52.5% of the
$289,540 requested. Several efforts have been made to
request the Department of Welfare and Institutions to pro-
vide additional funds for General Relief as the $144,777
appropriated by City Council was only enough money to cover
the first six or seven months of operation. That department
has indicated that they could not allocate additional funds
at this time; however, they suggested that City Council
appropriate additional funds and possibly the State could
reimburse at a later date. The Department of Welfare and
Institutions will request the General Assembly to appro-
priate additional funds ~or General Relief. In contingent
upon this additional appropriation they will allot additional
funds to the various localities. There exists a balance of
$4.B94.50 in the General Relief account. It is anticipated
and our experience during his fiscal year has shown this to
be true that $22.000 per month is needed.
It would be recommended that City Council by budget
ordinance appropriate an additional $16,000 to the General
Relief account to fuod this account for one more month while
we await action of the General Assembly with respect to
the State Department of Welfare and Institutions request for
an additional appropriation. Should the General Assembly
appropriate the additional money for General Relief. it would
be necessary that me come bach to City Council and request an
additional appropriation for the remainder of the year based
on the ~tute 62.5~ and the local 37.$~. If the General
Assembly does not appropriate any additional funds, then
City Council would be asked to make a decision cs to whether
they mould desire to ruud the General Relief account on a
100~ City basis or to discontinue the program.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron Eo Haoer
Byron E. Bauer
City Manager~
Mr. Yhomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20639) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~37, "Public
Assistance," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ua?, page · 349.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the follosing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ........................ 7.
NAYS: Bone ..........Oo
MUNICIPAL BUILDING-POLICE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted the
following report recommending that Council approve a one year lease with renewal
option, with Lewis Gale Hospital for their parking area at Fourth Street and
Church Avenue. for the sum of $500.00 per month, and that $3,000.00 be appro-
priated to Rentals under Section z63. "Municipal Building** of the 1972-73
budget, for the balance of the fiscal year:
· January 8, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Municipal Parking
It has previously been reported to Council that in
connection with the remodeling of the former Reid and Cutshall
Building into offices for the Juvenile Court and the Police
Department there will he a requirement to make certain
changes in the existing municipal parking lot at Third Street
and Church Avenue. This is necessitated by the fact that
the contractor has been assured the use of the area along
the southerly side of the building for the storage of his
materials and equipment. This mill involve the displace-
ment of two rows of parking on the municipal lot.
Me have been negotiating, with Mr. David Williamson of
Lewis Gale Hospital for the use of portions of their former
parking lots. We can obtain a one-year lease on one-half of
the LamAs Gale property which is located on the east side of
Fourth Street, S. W., between Church Avenue and Luck Avenue.
The charge for this space would be $500 per month and would
park approximately 70 vehicles. This will provide ipace
for those City officials and employees who of necessity
must move from the Third Street municipal lot and additionally
allows us to provide some area for parking by police officers
who must attend the various courts in the Municipal Boilding
on their off--duty hours. The existing municipal lot at
Third Street will be used by the Police Department, by certain
Melfare vehicles due to the fact that they rennin on the lot
overnight, by City Council and the Planning Commission, lad
for some metered public parking. All Other City officials
and employees who have used this lot have been advised of
their need to relocate at the Fourth Street lot, assuming
City Council approves this arrangement,
In the final analysis, it would still appear that the
City has a need for additional permanent parhing even after
the remodeling of the former Reid and Cutshall Hullding. At
that time, there mill be a need for certain vehicles used by
Juvenile Court personnel to be assigned space as well ss the
continuing need by the Police Departmeet for parking space,
There is a possibility, if Leuis Gale Hospital does not con-
clude a pendiug .transaction for sale of their entire hold-
ings in this area. they would be willing to dispose of their
property near Fourth Street to the City. This possibility
mill be pursued throughout the coming months if City Council
deems it desirable.
Of additional concern is the need for temporary quarters
to house those aspects of the Police Department operations
which are now in the former Reid and Cutshall building. These
include property storage, locker and assembly areas for the
uniform division amd the entire training academy. These
facilities must be moved in order for the contractor to pro-
. ceed with remodeling of the building; however, we have
thirty to sixty days to find a solution before the con-
txactor*s preliminary work will conflict with our activities.
blem we will return to Council on this aspect,
It is recommended tbut City Council approve a one year
lease with reneual option, with Lewis Gale on their parking
area at Fourth Street and Church Avenue for the sum of
$500 per month and appropriate $3,000 to Account 63, Munici-
pal Building, Object Code 245. Rentals, for the balance of
this fiscal year.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager"
Mr. Bubord maved that the matter be discussed in Executive Session.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
Later during the meeting, Mr. Lisk offered the following emergency Ordi-
nance authorizing and providin9 for the lease to the City of Roanoke from Law-Gay
Corporation of certain property at the southeast intersection of Church Avenue
and Fourth Street, S. M., being the northerly one-half, more or less, of Official
Tax Nos. 1012004, 1012005. 1012006 and all of Official Tax No. 1012001. for
municipal parking purposes, upon certain terms and conditions:
(#20640) AN ORDINANCE authorizin9 and providing for the lease to the
City of certain property at the southeast intersection of Church Avenue and
Fourth Street, S.. M.,, from Lew-Gay Corporation; upon certain terms and condi-
tions; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book u37, page 350.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Hr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:.
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber .............. 7.
NAYS: None ,0.
~86
Mr. Link then offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
$3,000.00 to Rentals under Section nb3, 'Municipal Building** of the 1g72-73
budget, to provide funds in connection math leasing said property:
(n20641) AN ORDINANC[ to amend end reordsin Section nb3, 'Municipal
Building,' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emer-
gency.
(~or full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Oook nS?, page SSI.)
Mr. Link moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Ilubard, Link. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Yebber
NAYS: None .......... O.
PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOYE£S-SBWER'S ANO STORM BRAINS: The City Manager sub-
mitted the following report recommending that Council amend Ordinance No. 20351
dated June 30, 1972, to provide for the classifying of the Sewage Treatment
Plant Chemist at Range 2~ in the Pay Plan:
'January 6, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Yirginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Se~age Treatment Plant - Personnel
Mithin the 1972-73 budget for the Sewage Treutment Pla~,
there is provided the position of a Chemist, partly in recog-
nition of the increasing complexity of the plant requirements
and future processes. The classification for this position
requires a college graduate level of education and experience
and capability to manage and supervise the plant laboratory.
This individual mill he charged with developing systems and
methods to better accomplish the chemical and biological
treatment functions of the facility. While we were somewhat
uncertain as to the salary range, appropriate for the educa-
tional training and experience deemed desirable, this
classification was added to the City's Pay Plan at Range
20 with monthly salary ranging from $674 to $860.
Investigation of the market for personnel with the
required background and training has determined that con-
ditions have changed since the position was originally
authorized and that a minimum level of Range 23 ($780 -
Sggb) is more appropriate for this position. This matter
has been reviewed by the City's Personnel Board which is
in agreement with the relative location in the Classifica-
tion Plan.
It is hereby recommended that City Council amend
Ordinance No. 20351 dated June 30, 1972, to provide
for the classifying of the Sewage Plant Chemist at Range
23 in the City of Roanoke Pay Plan. Since the position has
unfilled during the first half of the fiscal year, funds are
available mithin the personal services acconot of the Sewage
· Treatment fund to provide for the employment of an individual
in this higher classification mithout requiring additional
appropriation.
Respectfully submitted,
S! Ryron E. Haner
Byron E. Haner
City Manager'
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the folloming emergency Ordinance amending Ordinance No,
20351, providing n System of Pay Rates and Ranges for the employees of the City
of Roanoke. by raising the pay range for the existing position of Sewage Treat-
ment Plant Chemist:
(u20§42} AN ORDINANCE to amend Ordinance No. 20351, providing a
System of Pay Rates and Ranges for the employees of the City of Roanoke, by
raising the pay range for an existing position of employment; and providing for
an emergency.
(FOr full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Sank ~aTo page
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Ilubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Rubber ..........................
NAYS: None ........... O.
BUILDINGS: The City Manager submitted a written report transmittio9
th~ following copy of a report from the Commissioner of Buildings in connection
with the program of demolition of condemned buildings throughout the City of
Roanoke during the 1972 calendar year and a summary of the major activity which
has occurred under this program back to January 1, lgTO:
"January 6,
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Sunject: Demolition of Buildings
At a meeting of City Council during December, 1972. a
request mas made that the administration periodically advise
Council as to the status of our program Of demolition Of
condemned buildings throughout the City of Roanoke. For
City Council*s information, I attach copy of a reportdated
January 2, 1973, from Mr. Lewis G. Leftwic~. Commissioner of
Buildings, in regards to this program during the 1972 calendar
year and a summary of the major activity which has occurred
under this program back to January 1, lq?O. I believe that
the City*s effort in this area of activity has been note-
morthy and that considerable accomplishments have been made.
There has also been considerable activity by private property
owners in removing condemned buildings or otherwise repairing
to meet Code requirements.
cil periodically of the progress being made in this regard.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Honer
City Manager"
Mr. Garland moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by fir. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
CITY ENGINEER-MATER DEPARYRENT: The City Manager submitted a written
287
Baker Brothers. Incorporated, in the amount of $14,992,00, for a new trsctor with
loader sad backhoe attachment to be used by the Water Department. be accepted:
"January 8, 1973
Honorable Hayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On Tuesday, December 12, 1972, bids were received and
publicly opened by the committee whose names appear below
for furnishing and delivering a new tractov with loader and
backhoe attachment to the Water Department. One bid was
received from Baker BFotheFSo Inc. as follows:
Model D580B-PS-CK, w/
Case Model 35 Loader
~ Case Model 35 Backhoe $19,890.00
Less trade'in for 1962
Case Tractor 4.898.00
Net After Trade-Jrt $14,992.00
The specifications for the tractor specified that the
successful bidder would be required to 'furnish free of
charge a back-up unit of comparable type to the City of
Roanoke during the first five years should the unit pur-
chased be inoperable for more than five (5) calendar days
from the date notified by the City of Roanoke Mater Depart-
ment of any malfunction.* The Water Department feels that
due to the importance of the backhoe in the daily operation
of the Department. a back-up unit is necessary to keep abreast
with its work load, Should the supplier be able to service
and repair the unit, as is further specified by the speci-
fications, it is felt by the undersigned committee that
five (5) days doun time before requiring a back-up unit is
a reasonable time limit for both the supplier and the City.
It is felt that other suppliers could have met the
specifications, but elected not to bid since they were not
sure a back-up unit of comparable type could be furnished.
as required, in case of malfunction of the new equipment.
The unit as bid meets all specifications and the bid is
within the appropriation.
It is the recommendation of the committee that the bid
of Baker Brothers. Inc. be approved.
Respectfully,
S/ K. B. KiSer
K. B. Kiser, Manager
Mater Department
S! Joseoh N. Brewer, Acting Director
Public Works
SI B. B. ThomosoR
Purchasing Agent"
Rt. Bubard moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(n20643) AN ORDINANCE providin9 for the City's purchase of a new
tractor with backhoe and loader for use by the City's Water Department, by
accepting a certain proposal of flaker Brothers, Inc., made therefor; and provid-
ing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u37, page 352.)
Mr. Bubard moved the ~doption of the Ordinance, The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
289
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lish, Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
aoyor Webber ............... 7.
NAYS: None ......... -0o
CITY ENGINEER: The Cit~ Manager submitted a written report concurring
in the follnmlng recommendation of a committee that the bid of Carter Machinery
Company for a neu combination loader to be used by the Street Department, in
the amount of $24,292.00. be accepted:
'January H, 1913
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On Tuesday. December 12. bids were received and opened
before the committee whose mamas appear below for one new
combination loader,
The proposals have been studied bi your committee and the
only bid listed will meet all s~ecifications of the City of
Roanoke,
Carter Machinery Company $24,292.00
Nineteen request for bids were sent out. Carter Machinery
mas the only one mhd submitted a bid. It is apparent that
the other bidders were not interested or are not distri-
butors for this type of equipment, The committee does not
feel that there should be a readvertisement for bids as
this model mas in conformance to the model used by the State
Highway Department.
It ia the recommendation of the committee that the bid be
accepted as herein listed. Funds are available within the
Street Repair budget account 58, object code 360.
APPROVED S! B. B. Thomoson APPROVED $! Kit Kaset
Bueford Yhompson Kit Kiser
Purch~g Agent Mater Department Manager
APPROVED $/ Jqseoh H. Rrewer. Jr. Joseph II, Brewer, Jr.
Acting Director of Public Marks"
Mr. Yhomas moved that the report be referred to the City Attorney
for preparation of the proper measure. The notion was seconded by Mr. Lisk
and unanimously adopted.
CITY ENGINEER: The City Manager submitted a written report concurring
in the following recommendation of a committee that the bid of A. E. Finley
~ Associates for a street sweeper to be used by the Sanitatiom Division. in
the amount of $20,128.00. be accepted:
"January 8, 1973
Honorable Mayor and titI Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On Tuesday, December 12, bids were received and opened before
the committee whose names appear below for a street sweeper.
The attached tabulation will show that two bids were received.
The proposals have been studied by your committee and the only
bid that meets all of the specifications of the City of
Roanoke is that of A. E. Finley in the amount of $20.728.
A. E. Finley is the higher bidder. Yhe 1om bid was rejected
because it did not meet the specification for a diesel
290
engine that uss requested. This also provides.the City
with tmo mobile brooms and will aid in the standardization
of parts, '''
It i~ the recommendation of the committee that the high bid
be accepted. Sufficient funds ire available within the
Sanitation Division budget, account 690 object code 360.
APPROVED S/ B. 8. Thonnson APPROVED ~! ~it Riser
Bueford Thompson Kit Klser, Manager
Purchasing Agent MaterOepartment
APPROVED S! Joseeh D. Drew~r. Jr.
Joseph B. Brewer, Jr,
Acting Director of Public Works*
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Lisk and
unanimously adopted.
CITY ENGINEER: The City Manager submitted a written report concurring
in the folloming reconnendation of a committee that the bid of Baker Brothers,
Incorporated, for one new crawler type excavator to be used by the Street Repair
Division, in the amount of $25,999.00, be accepted:
"January B, 1973
Bonorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On Tuesday, December 12, bids were received and opened
before the committee whose names appear below for one
nam crawler type excavator.
The attached tabulation will show the other bids that mere
received. The proposals have been studied by your committee
and the low bid submitted by Baker Brothers, Inc., in the
amount of $25,999.00, will meet all specifications of the
City of Roanoke.
It is the recommendation of the committee to accept the low
bid as listed herein. Funds are available within the Street
Repair budget account 59, object code 360.
APPROVED ~! Bt B. Thomoson APPROVED S! Kit Kaset
Bueford Thompson Kit Kiser, Manaoer
Purchasing Agent Mater Department
APPROVED S/ JosephHo Brewer. Jr. ·
Joseph B. Drawer, Jr.
Acting Director of Public Murks~
Mr. Lisk moved that the report be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and
unanimously adopted.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted the
following report on the status of personnel in the Police Department and the
Fire Department as of November 30, 1972:
~January 8, 1973
Bonorable Mayor and City CounciX
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Fire and Police Departments - PersonneX Changes
Listed below is the.status of the Fire and the Police
Department as of November 30, 1972:
291
*Fire Department
Employed Transferred
'Robert C. Poole February 16, 1955 November 30, 1972
'At the end of November 1972, there were 3 vacancies in the
Fire Department,'
*Police Department
Employed Resioned
'Daniel Edmard NcKeever November 13, 1972
Alal G. Graham Batch 27, 1972 November 28, 1972
"Ending November, 1972 (12) vacancies,'
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron Eo Hamer
Byron Eo Haner
City Manager*
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted,
'POLICE DEPARTMENT: The Assistant City Attorney submitted a written
report in connection with the filing of a motion for judgment in the'Court of
Law and Chancery in the City of Roanoke by Michael C. Culbreatb against N. E.
Richardson, a member of the Police Department, for personal injuries allegedly
sustained by Culbreath from certain actions taken by Officer Richardson in the
course of his police duties, said motion for judgment having sought compensatory
damages in the amount of $100,000,00, advising that on January 4, 1973, judgment
was entered in said Court that the action be abated and dismissed from the
docket.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
ZONIHG: Council having referred to the City Planning Commission for
study, report and recommendation the request of Mr. J. Hunter Roberts that pro-
*perry located in the 500 block of Albemarle Avenue, S. E., described as Lot 14,
Block B, Roanoke Land 7 Improvement Map, Official Tax No. 4021719. be rezoned
from RD, Duplex Residential District. to RG-I, General Residential District.
the City Planning Commission submitted a written report recommending that the
request be denied.
In this connection, the Deputy City Clerk reported that Mx Roberts
would like for Council to defer action on this ieport until the next regular
meeting of the body on Monday, January 15, 1973.
Mr, Lisk moved that Council concur in the request of Mr. Roberts and
that action On the matter be deferred until the next regular meeting of Council
on Monday, January IS, 1973, The motisn was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously
adopted.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
BUDGET-PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOyEES-AUDITS: Mr. William S. Hubard, Chair-
man Of the Audit Committee. verbally advised that the City Of Roanoke bas not
had its accounts audited since 1934 and recommended that the City of Roanoke
employ the firm of Andrews. Burket ~ Company, Certified Public Accountants, to
make a study of the organizational structure of certain operating funds and/or
divisions of the city and an evaluation of systems of internal control thereof
292 ~
and that the necessary funds be appropriated by Council for this put-
Mr. Bubnrd then offered the following emergency Ordinance authoriz-
ing the execution by the City of Roanoke of an agreement with Andrews, Bucket
~ Company, Certified Public Accountants, providing for a reviem of the organiza-
tional structure of certain operating funds and/oF divisions of'the city nnd
an evaluation of systems of internal control thereof:
(u2064d) AN GRBINANCE authorizing the City*s execution of an agreement
with Andrews, Bucket ~ Co** Certified Public Accountants, providing for a
review of the organizational structure of certain operating funds nnd/oF
divisions of the City, and an evaluation Of systems of internal cOnLFOI theFeof,
upon certain terms and conditions: and providing for an emergency..
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ma?, page 3S3.)
Mr. flubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion uss
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Ilubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Mebber .........................
NAYS: None ........... O.
Mr. Garland offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
$?,000.00 to Fees for Professional and Special Services under Section
"Independent Auditing Services," of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds
in connection with said agreement with Andrems, Burket ~ Company, Certified
Public Accountants:
(~20645) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section :12, "Independent
Auditing Services," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for
an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37. page 355.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ?.
NAYS: None .......... O.
AIRPORT: A committee composed of Messrs. Byron E. Hamer. Chairman·
Samuel H. McGhee, III. James O. Trout· Marshall L. Harris and J. S. Franklin.
Jr.. submitted the following report recommending that the bid of Watts and Breakel
Incorporated, be accepted, for the alteration and addition to the Ter miami
Building at Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport and that Council appropriate an
additional $500,000.00 for this purpose:
'January H0 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Construction Of Airport Terminal Extension
After due 'and proper advertising, bids were received'
and opened before City Council on December IH, 1972, for the
alteration and addition to the Terminal Duilding et Roanoke
Municipal Airport. Five bids mere received with the bid
of Matts and Break*Il, Inc., of Roanoke, Virglgln, being
the low complete bid in the amount o~
The basic bid for the alterations and additions to the
terminal mas $1,094.000 uitb an alternate of $31,000 to con-
struct a canopy in front of the main building. An additional
alternate to deduct enclosing of (he ccncurses would result
in a reduction of $64,000 to the combined bid. Tour committee
is of the unanimous opinion that these improvements are
necessary and that the City should make every effort to pro-
ceed with this construction.
As Piedmont Airlines is proposing to construct passenger
holding areas in each concourse, it mould be recommended that
City Council at this time accept the alternate bid No. 3 and
deduct the enclosing of the concourses in proceeding with
the construction. This would reduce the basic bid to
$1,061,000. A portion of this overall cost will be offset
through the concessionaire reimbursing the City ~r the
cost of the food service equipment included in the kitchen.
If the City would extend the current contract so that there
would be a full five years remaining, this savings would
amount to $73,497. Additionally it may be anticipated that
the cost of the majority of the second floor portion of this
construction may be offset over a period of time through
revenues obtained by renting this area to either the FAA or
other parties. Additional revenues are also possible through
advertising contracts with advertising firms.
The City Auditor reports that there exists $784.$0D in
the account for construction of this addition. Including the
cost for architectural fees and a small contingency, it is
anticipated that an additional $500,000 will be needed to
proceed with this construction. It is the feeling of your
committee that'this would be an excellent use for revenue'
sharing funds which are available within the General Fund.
It mould be the recommendation of your committee that
City Council appropriate $500,000 for this purpose. Pre
dicated on the assumption that City Council might want to
take this action, the Auditor has be~n asked to prepare an
ordinance for this purpose.
Respectfully submitted,
S! Byron E. Hamer
S/ Sam H. McGhee,
$! James O. Trout
S! Marshall L. Harris
$/.J. S, Franklio, Jr.'
Mr, Lisk moved that the report, be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure in accordance with the recommendation of the
committee. The motion mas seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted..
Mr. Trout then offered the foil*ming emergencyOrdinance appropriating
$500,000.00 to Airport Terminal Building under Section =Hg, 'Transfers to
Capital Improvements Fund," of the 1972-73 budget:
(m20646) AN ORDINANCE to amend sad reordnin Section' #89, "Transfers
to Capital Improvements Fund,# of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, nnd pro-
viding for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book a37, page 355.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mss seconded
by Hr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Nessrs. Garland, Duburd, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Nayor
Webber ............... ~ .......... 7.
NAYS: None .........-*-0.
UNFINXSHED BUSINESS: NONE.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: Council having directed the City Attorney to
prepare the proper measure concurring in the employment by the City of Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority of the services of engineering consultants
to study certain details of the Kimball Urban Renewal Project, and, if necessary,
to prepare plans and specifications for work indicated by such study, he presentel
same; whereupon, Mr. Lisk offeredthe following Resolution:
(a20547) A RESOLUTION concurring in the employment by the City of
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority of the services of engineering con-
sultants to study certain'details of the Kimball Urban Renewal Project and, if
necessary, to prepare plans and specifications for'work indicated by such study.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book n3?, page 35B.)
Mr. LiNk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .........................7.
NAYS: None ..........O.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
CELEBRATIONS: Council at its meeting on Monday, August 23, 1971, hag-
lng requested the Mayor to appoint members to a Bicentennial Planning Committee
to work in connection with the observance of the 200th anniversary of our
national independence, Mayor Webber advised that he has appointed Messrs.
William B. Poll, Chairman, M. Carl Andrews. Co-Chairman and James. N. Kincanon,
Co-Chairman as members of the committee.
Mr. Garland then offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriatin
$1,000.00 to Dues, Memberships and Subscriptions under Section FI, "Council,' of
the 1972-73 budget to provide funds for use of the Independence Bicentennial
Commission:
(~20648) AN ORDINANCE to amend and veordaln Section al, "Council,'
of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency,
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 357.)
295
Hr, Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Or. Tnylor end ndopted by the following vote:
AYES: #essrs, Gorlnnd, Nubsrd. Lisho Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ...................... 7.
NAYS: None ..........O.
CORRONWEALTfl*S ATTORNEY: Rt. Thomas presented the following prepared
statement requesting that the City Attorney prepare a Resolution encouraging the
General Assembly to review the matter of salaries in the Office of the Conmon-
wealth*s Attorney of the City of Roanoke and that said Resolution be forwarded
to the other governing bodies in the Roanoke Valley area requesting that they
ask for a similar review for their governmental'jurisdiction:
*TO: MAYOR AND MEMI~ERS OF COUNCIL January 8, 1973
FROM: HAMPTON W. TNOMAS
The matter of securing adequate personnel to serve ns
Assistant Commonwealth Attorneys for the City of Roanoke and
other governmental bodies in the Valley has become of critical
importance. The City of Roanoke has been unable to retain
qualified Assistant Commonwealth Attorneys for any period
of time, and in each case the departing individual listed
the extremely low salaries authorized for these offices as a
reason for leaving.
Recently the City Of Roanoke has experienced a similar
situation in the City Attorney*s Office and, to its credit,
moved to increase salaries of the professional personnel in
the City Attorney*s Office to a level comparable to the
private practice of low. It appears to me that the entire
matter of salary structure for the City Commonneolth*s
Attorney*s Office should be reviewed at once.
Realizing that the salaries for the subject offices are
set by the Commonwealth of Virginia, it is my thought that
the City Council should request the City Attorney to pre-
pare a resolution encouraging the General Assembly to reviem
the matter of salaries in the City Commonwealth*s Attorney*s
Office of the City of Roanoke and that said resolution be
forwarded to other governing bodies in the Roanoke Valley
area requesting that they ask for a similar review for their
governmental jurisdiction. It would be my hope that the
review would sufficiently impress upon the General Assembly
our concern that the safety and protection of our citizens
not be hampered by inadequate administration of Court matters
which will surely happen unless adequate personnel is avail-
able to do the job in a timely fashion.*
Mr; Thomas then moved that the matter be referred to th~ City Attorney
for preparation of the proper measure to be forwarded to the other governing
bodies in the Roanoke Valley requesting that they ask for a similar ~eview for
their governmental jurisdiction. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and
unanimously adopted.
There being no further business, Mayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST: ~ '
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEET. lNG,
M?nday, January 15,. 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the Coun-
cil Chamber in the Municipal Rutlding. #onday, ~anuary 15, 1973, at 2 p.m** the
regular meeting hour. uith Mayor Roy L, Webber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garlsnd, William S. Bubard, David E,
LJsh. Noel C. Taylor, Hampton W. Thomas and Mayor Roy L. Webber--b.
ABSENT: Councilman James O. Trout ................... 1.
OFFICERS pRESENT: Mr. Byron E. Honer, City Manager; Mr. William F.
Clark, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Einconon, City Attorney; and Mr.
A. N. Gibson, City Auditor,
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend E.
T, Burton, Pastor, Sueet Union Baptist Church.
MINUTES: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday,
December 11. 1972. having been furnished each member of Council, ou motion of
Dr. Taylor. seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof
was dispensed with and the minutes approved as recorded.
BEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC RATTERS: NONE.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
SCHOOLS-BUSES: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
transmitting a Resolution unanimously adopted by the School Board at its meet-
ing on January 9, 1973, requesting that Council 9rant permission for the purchase
of thirty-seven sixty-six passenger school buses, two twelve-passenger carryalls
and supportiog facilities, for a total of $379,000.00 sas before the body.
In this connection, Mr. Samuel P. McNeil. Chairman of the Roanoke City
School Board. appeared before Council and advised that the School Board is of the
opinion that they need these school buses in order to have o safe transit program
for school students.
Mr. M. Donald Pack, Superintendent of Roanoke City Schools, appeared
before Council and stated various reasons as to why the School Board feels it
will be more feasible for it to own its own school buses and requested the per-
mission of Council to order these buses as soon os possible and that Council make
the necessary financial arraogements.
Upon questioning from certain members of Council with regard to the
uses for these school buses, Dr. pack replied that ~oder state las, school buses
canuot be used for any municipal purpose other thao for the transportation of
school children.
Dr. Taylor expressed the opinion that Council is committed to provide
quality transportation for the children of the Cityof Roanoke, that Council
should address itself to this matter os soon as possible and moved that the
request be referred to the Transportation Study Committee for study, report and
recommendation as soon as possible. The motion nas seconded by Mr. Lisk and
unanimously adopted.
Mr, Lisk then moved that the City Attorney be instructed to prepare
the proper measure to be formsrded to the city*s representatives in the General
Assembly and to the Secretary of Education urging the support .of legislation
which mould amend the Code of Virginia so as t~ allow certain buses used for the
transportation of pupils to and from schools in the City of Roanoke to be used
for other municipal purposes, The motion was seconded by Mr, Garland and unani-
mously adopted,
SCHOOLS: A communication from Mr, Douglas B, Fugateo Commissioner,
Department of Highmays, in connection with the matter of leasing airspace over
Colonial Avenue, S, W** to Virginia Western Community College for the purpose of
constructing a building over said right of may, advising that the Chief Engineer
of the Department of Highmays has reviewed the plans for the proposed structure
and finds them satisfactory, and, therefore, he gives formal consent to the
posed structure and to the adoption of an Ordinance granting suoh ai.r rights as
provided for by Section 15.1-376.1 of the Code of Virginia, was before Council.
Mr, Lisk moved that the communication be referred to the City Attorney
for preporation of the proper measure, The motion was seconded by #r. Garland
and unanimously adopted,
TRAFFIC-AIRPORT: The following communication from Rro Ricky S. High
in connection mith the parking arrangements for employees at Roanoke gudcipol (Woo
rum) Airport. mas before Council:
I am an employee of Piedmont Airlines at Woodrum Air-
port and have been so for 4~ years. When I first came to
work at Woodrum Airport the employees mere allowed to park
up next to the terminal in the pay parking ~t. This park-
ing was paid for by the company. This mas then done away
with by the city of Roanoke. We were then allowed to park
in the samll lots at the end and beside the pay parking lot.
These 2 lots are marked 2 & 3 on the diagram I have drawn.
Me were being moved farther away from the terminal. Then
one day I came to work and there were barriers blocking lot
no. 3 on the drawing. No one knew why the hell this had
taken place. Later there was dirt spread there and grass
was planted. I have yet to understand why they moated to
run us out of there and plant grass. They then put in on
employee parking lot approximately ~ mile from the terminal,
this lot being no. 4 on the drawing. I went i~to work
Friday and sam that they had blocked off lot no. 2 and were
putting in u curb and planting Drams. Now you tell me what
it would hurt to leave that little lot there. Everyone now
has to park in lot no 4. This is one of the most stupid
things I have ever seen. The women who work at the airport
are afraid to walk to the parking lot by themselves. I
for onecannot blame them considering there has been 2
attempts to steel the mheels off my car in the ~ast 6 months.
There have also been various items stolen from cars in the
lot.
This whole thing sounds like another dumb blunder by
the city of Roanoke. I am sorry to say things like this
about you but you have given me no reasoo to think other-
wise. I also know nothing will ever come of this
Thank you for your time
Ricky S* High
125 Bush Dr. Apt. 3
Vinton, Va. 24179"
298
Hr. Thomas moved that the commonJcation be referred to the Airport
AdvisorF Commission for studyo'report end rec~omuendstion to Council'. The motion
mas seconded by Hr. Link and unanimously adopted,
BUILDINGS: Hr. Frank G, Roupas ·ppeared before Council and presented
· communication advising that on September 22, 1972, he purchased a house end
lot located in the City of Roanoke at 707 Gilmer Avenue, N. W.. that the build-
ing mss vacant end he planned to make all necessary repairs and upon approval
of all repairs by the Health Deportment. to rent it for $90.00 per month, that
on Yednesdsy, December 27, 1972, he discovered that the house had been torn domn
that he discussed the matter mith Mr. L. G. Leftwich and received no sympathy
mhatsoever, pointing out that he received no notification that the building had
been condemned and requesting that Council make some arrangements for the
replacement of a house on his lot. mas before the body.
Hr. Thomas moved that the matter be referred to the City #nudger and
the City Attorney for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET-JAIL: The City Ranager submitted a mritten report recommend-
ing that $525.00 be appropriated to Other Equipment - New under Section
"Jail." of the 1972-73 budget, in connection with the installation of two-way
telephone communication facilities in the city jail, said amount having been
received by the City of Roanoke throu9h a federal grant program.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Ronager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(m20649) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~26. "Jail," of
the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book m37. page 357.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk0 Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
~ebber- 6.
NAYS: None O. (Mr. Trout absent)
BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a written report
recommending that $125.00 be transferred from Operating Supplies and Materials
to Dues, Memberships and Subscriptions under Section m47, "Fire Department," of
the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for certain memberships normally held in
various firefighting associations.
Hr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manage
and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(m20650) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section m47, *Fire
Department," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for an
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book ~37, page
299
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of.the Ordinsnce. The motion mss
seconded by Hr. Lisk sad adopted by the follomlng vote:
AYES: Ressrs. Garland. Hubsrd, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas sad Mayor
Webber 6.
NAYS: None ......... O. (Hr. Trout absent)
CELEBRATIONS: The City ffsnsger submitted n written report transmitting
n request of the Roanoke Jaycees to place a banner across Jefferson Street.
either et CanpbellAvenue or Salem Avenue, for the period from January 21, 1973,
to January 27, 1973, tn be used in the promotion of Jaycee Week.
In this connection, the City Hauager advised that he has received a
telephone call from the Roanoke Jnycees requesting that this item be withdrawn
from the agenda of Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanoke
Jaycees that the item he withdrawn. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and
unanimously adopted.
BUILDINGS-FIRE DEPARTRENT: Council having referred to the City Ranager
for study, report and recommendation o communication from Mr..Robert K. Mullah,
Jr., advising that eight or ten years ago he had the opportunity to serve
on a committee that recommended the adoption of the National Board of Fire
Underwriters Fire Prevention Code. that this Code was adopted in 196S and amended
in 1968, that one of the amendments in 1968 was Section 14,7, dealin9 with the
requirement of installation of sprinkler systems in high rise buildings, that
Council, in a subsequent action during the discussion of tbe Lee-lngram Building,
yielded to economic pressures and repealed Section 14.? of the Fire Prevention
Code, that in his ~dgment there is no economic justification for subjectln9 mem-
bers of the public to loss of life in this manner and urgin9 Council to initiate
immediate action to reinstate this section of the code since several high rise
buildings are planned or are in the early construction stage, the City Manager
submitted the following report advising that it would seen desirable at this
time to defer action on this subject until it is known what provisions for
sprinkler systems in high rise buildings will be required by the new state build-
ing code:
"January 15, 1973
Honorable Nayov and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Installation of Sprinkler Systems in High Rise
Buildings
At your meeting on Monday, December 18, 1972, City
Council received n communication from Mr. Robert E. Rullen,
Jr., dealing with the requirement for installation of sprinkler
systems in high rise buildings, Hr. Mullen offered the
opinion that such a requirement Should be reinstated within
the provisions of the City*s Building and Fire Prevention
Codes. This question was referred to the City Rannger*s
office for study, report and recommend'arSon to City Council.
3OO
On January 2, 1913, Hr. Hnllen reiterated this feelimg
to me in a letter. The Southern Building Code, mhich Is the
enforcement document of the City in dealing with residential
buildings, business, school and institutional occupancy
allows the construction of fire resistive buildings np to
a height of BO feet. Generally this Is approximately seven
stories, When on~ goes above BO feet It is necessary to
construct fire-pfaff rncilities or to install sprinhlev
systees, It is my understanding, however, that the sprinkler
91 feet and anything above that requires fireproof construc-
tion uhich does not require sprinhler systems.
The City's Building Commissioner and Fire Chief met to
discuss this matter. They note that the Conmonmeatth of
Virginia is presently in the process of public hearings
leading to a proposed statemide building code to be effect
later in lg?3. It is anticipated that no political subdi-
vision mill be allomed to make amendments to their municipal
codes controlling the construction of the buildings uhich
will be in conflict with the proposed statemide code, At the
present time it mould appear that the new statemide code
mould go into effect approximately in September. Therefore,
it mould seem desirable at this time to defer action on this
subject until it is known what provisions for sprinkler
systems in high rise buildings mill be required by the hem
state building code.
Respectfully submitted,
$! Byron E. Baner
Byron E,.Baner
City Manager"
Mr. Robert E. Mullen, Jr,, appeared before Council and expressed the
opinion that the. only may to protect citizens is through the use of an auto-
matic sprinkler system, that many large cities have this system as a part of
their fire prevention codes and that plans are presently undermay for the con-
struction of tmo or three buildings mhich should have this system installed,
In a discussion of the matter, Mr. Link expressed the opinion that
certain guidelines must be set, that he feels the City Manager and the Fire
Prevention Committee should reviem this matter once again and study the question
as to whether it would be in the best interest of the citizens of the City of
Roanoke if Council considers the feasibility of a more stringent low.
Mr. Lick then moved that the report be referred back to the City
Ranager to be discussed with the Fire Prevention Committee and the Chief of the
Fire Department for further study, report and recommendation to Council, The
motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
CITY ENGINEER: The City Manager submitted a written report in con-
nection with a study of the proposed service center by Vosbeck Vosbeck Kendrick
and Redinger, advising that prior to submitting the final report to Council he
has been informed by representatives of that firm that they would like to brief
Council on the various aspects of their study and suggesting that Council meet
mith them in a mark session following the regular meeting of Council on Monday,
January 22, 1973, .
Mr, Thomas moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
The motion was seconded by Mr. Bubard end unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-MUNICIPAL BUILDING-POLICE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager sub-
mitted the following report advising that at its last regular meeting Council
Council approved · measure leasing porhing spoce from Lemis Gale Hospital for
certain city vehicles and other city officials during the remodeling of the former
Reid and Cutshull Building, abet within his report to Council, it was acknouledged
that It would also be necesssry to return to Council in the near future concern-
ing the need for space to accommodate certain operations now being conducted in
the Reid and Cutsholl Building which include the Police Department Uniform Divi-
sion, Property storage and Training Academy, recommending that Council enter into
a lease agreement with Mrs. Anita Bo Lee, owner of the former Grand Piano Furni-
ture Company building on Second Street, for the sun of 913.230.O0'per year for
space to accommodate the abovedescribed operations end further recommending that
Council appropriate 96.625.00 to the Bunicipal Building Rental Account to pro-
vide necessary funds for the remaining half of this fiscal year:
'January 15, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Temporary Quarters - Roanoke Police Department Uniform
Division, Property Storage und Training Academy
At last Monday's City Council meeting a report was sub-
mitted, and ultimately approved, recommending that the City
lease parking space for certain City vehicles and other City
officials during the remodeling of the former Reid and Cut-
shall building to be occupied by the Roanoke Juvenile and
Domestic Relations Court and the City*s Police Department.
Nathan that report, it was acknowledged that it wouldalso be
necessary to ~eturn to Council in the near future concerning
the need for space to accommodate certain operations now
being conducted in that building which include the Police
Department Uniform Division, Property storage and training
academy. It is necessary that these functions and operations
be removed from the building in order that the contractor can
accomplish the proposed remodeling.
Me have investigated several possibilities for office
space, both public and privately owned. It is our conclusion
that the City does not already own space which could be used
for these purposes, particularly over the period of approxi-
mately one year that the remodeling project will extend.
Ne have negotiated with Mrs. Anita D, Lee, owner of the former
Grand Piano Furniture Company building on Second Street,
across from the Municipal Building and which space has pre-
viously been leased by the City for temporary office space,
what we believe to be a satisfactory agreement. The City can
lease the basement of that building for 91 per square foot
and such space will accommodate the Uniform Division and
property storage. Additionally, we can lease a portion
(3.000 square feet) of the first floor for 92.75 per square
foot uhich will accommodate the Police Academy Training
Unit. AIl of this under a one year lease is available to
the City for the sum of 913,250 including electricity and
heat with the City to furnish water and janitorial service.
The space is adequate to the City's needs and the proximity
with the Municipal Building and courts is advantageous. We
believe the arrangements to be fair and reasonable and
recommend that City Council authorize a lease with Mrs. Lee.
It will also be necessary for Council to appropriate 9b,625
to the Municipal Building Rental Account, Ho. 53 -245. to
provide necessary funds for the remaining half of the fiscal
year.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Haner
Byron E. Haner
City Manager"
302
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendations of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
necessary fonds:
(u20651} AN ORDINANCE to amend nnd reordain Section w63, "Municipal
Building," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, nad providing for nn emer-
gency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #3?, page 359.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk nnd adopted by the £o~loning vote:
AYES: #essrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk. Taylor. Thomas and Rnyor
Webber 7.
NAYS: None .......... -0. (Mr, Trout absent)
Mr. Llsk then offered the following emergency Ordinance authorizing
and providing for the lease to the City of Roanoke from Henry Lee and Anita
Durham Lee of certain property at the southeast intersection of Kirk Avenue and
Second Street, S. N.. being the northerly portion of Official Tax No. 1011601,
for the temporary accommodation of the Police Department Uniform Division,
Property Storage and Training Academy, upon certain terms and conditions:
(a20652) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and providing for the lease to the
City of certain property on the southeast intersection of Kirk Avenue and
Second Street. S. W., from Henry Lee and Anita Durham Lee; upon certain terns
and conditions; and providing for an emergency,
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ua?. page 359,)
Mr, Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas and Rayor
Rebber .......................... $,
NAYS~ None ..........-0. (Nra Trout absent)
BUILDINGS: The City Nanager submitted a written report transmitting
copy of a memo from the State Board of Housing with regard to a public hearing
to be held in Richmond, Virginia, at 10 a.m., on January 29, 1973, with refer-
ence to the adoption of the Building Officials and Code Administrators Inter-
national, Incorporated Code (BOCA) with amendment as a state-wide uniform
building co~eo advising that the city presently operates under the Southern
Standard Building Code, that it is still the feeling of the City administration
that the SOuthern Standard Building Code is more suited for the city*s use. pro-
posing that the Commissioner of Builidings or his assistant attend this public
hearing to express the city's preference of the Southern Standard Building Code
and that it would be helpful if Council could adopt n Resolution expressing the
city's preference for the Southern Standard Bailding Code in order for the city*s
representative to present this Resolution at the public hearing.
Mr. Thowas moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and offered the following Resolution:
(u20653) A RESOLUTION urging end requesting the State Ooard of Bous-
lng to adopt us n state-wide uniform building code for the Cummonmeulth of
Virginia the Southern Stsndnrd Building Code instead of the Building Officials
end Code Administrators International, Inc. (BOCA) Code.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance nook naT, page SbO.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion nas
seconded by Hr. LJsk and adopted by the follomJng vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lish, Taylor. Thomas, and Mayor
Webber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
Upon questioning from certain members of Council as to the main dif-
ference between the Southern Standard Ruilding Code and the BOCA Code. Mr.
L. B. Leftwich, Commissioner of Buildings, stated that the main difference is
the uny in which the BOCA Code is put together, that it is an extremely hard code
to administer and that no matter which code is adopted, the state is taking
away the powers of local 9overning bodies to amend said codes after they have been
formally adopted, by the state.
In a discussion of the matter, Mr. Lisk expressed the opinion that it
is mrna9 for the state to adopt a code which will prohibit the localities from
adopting more restrictive provisions if it is deemed necessary and moved that the
City Attorney be requested to report to Council as to whether or not the local
governing bodies may make changes in their building codes after the promulgation
by the State Board of Bousin9 of a Uniform Stateside Building Code. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
CITY ENGINEER: The City Manager submitted a written report concurring
loader, recommending that the bids be rejected and that the specifications be
~January 15, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
On Tuesday, December 12, bids were received and opened before
The attached tabulation will show the bids that were received.
The proposals have been studied by your committee and the
bid submitted by Baker Brothers, Inc., will not meet specifi-
'cations of the City of Roanoke.
· The low bid exceeds the amount of money listed in the divi-
sion's budget, and does not meet specifications. The next
bid is higher and it is felt that the additional cost does'
303
It is the recommendation of the committee that the bids be
rejected and the specifications be remritten end re~dvertf'sed.
APPROVED S! B. B. Thompson APPROVED ~! Kit Elmer
Dueford Thompson Kit Klter, Manager
Purchasing Agent Mater Department
APPROVED ~f Joseoh B. Brewer. Jr. Joseph H, Brewer, Jr,
Acting Director of Public Works#
Mro LIsk moved %hat Council ~oncur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance rejecting all bids
received:
(n20654) A RESOLUTION rejecting all bids received for o~e oeo front
end loader, and directing that the specifications be rewritten and the matter
resdvertised.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book #37. page 361.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. 7he motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Dubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber .......................... 6..
NAYS: None ...........0,' (Mr. Trout absent)
CI~¥ ENGINEER: The City Manager submitted o written report concurring
in the folloming recommendation of a committee tbntull bids received for one
new 6=12 too roller be rejected and readvertised for bids:
"January 15, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
before the committee whose names appear below for one new
6-12 ton roller.
The attached tabulation will show the bids that mere received.
The proposals have been studied by your committee and none
of the bids will completely neet all of the specifications
of the City of Roanoke.
It is the recommeodation of the committee that the bids as
listed herein, be rejected and readvertised.
APPROVED SI B. B. Thomoson APPROVED ~f Wit Wiser
Bueford Thompson Kit Kiser, Manager
Purchasing Agent Mater Deportment
AppRovED SI Josenh H. Brewer. Jr.
Joseph Ho Brewer, Jr.
Acting Director of Public Morks"
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following Resolution rejecting all bids received:
(m20655) A RESOLUTION rejecting all bids received for one new self-
propelled roller and directing that the matter be readvertised for bids.
(For fuli t'ext of Resolution, see Ordinance Rook m37, page 362.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Bubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
Webber .......................... b,
NAYS: None ......... -0. (Mr. Trout absent)
CITY ENGINEER: The City Manager submitted n written report concurring
in the following recommendation of a committee that the bid of Seihel Brothers.
Incorporated, in the amount of $8,200.92, for Industrial tractors mith side
mowers to be used by the Street Division. be accepted:
'January 15. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
On Tuesday, December 12, bids were received and opened
industrial tractors uith side mowers furnished.
The attached tabulation mill show the other bids that
were received. The proposals have been studied by your com-
mittee and the lam bid submitted by s.abel Bras. Inc., in
the amount of $B,200.92, will meet all specifications of
the City of Roanoke.
It is the recommendation Of the committee to accept the low
bid as listed herein. Sufficient funds are available within
the Street Repair budget, account 56-365.
APPROVED S/ B. B. Thompso~ APPROVED S/ Kit Kiser
Bueford Thompson Kit Kiser, Manager
Purchasing Agent Mater Department
APPROVED S/ J.s,oh H, Brewer. Jr.
Joseph I1. Brewer, Jr.
Acting Director of Public Works'
D~. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(#20656) AN ORDINANCE pro?iding for the purchase of two (2) new
accepting a ~ertain bid made to the City for furnishing and delivering said
~qnipment; rejecting certain other bids made to the City; and providing for an
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book n37, page 363.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor. Thomas and Mayor
Nebber .......................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
CITY ENGINEER: The City Manager submitted a written report concurring
in the f. Il.win9 recommendation of a committee that the bid of The Tidy Corpora-
tion, in the amount of $53,748.00, for two new 24 cubic yard dumpmaster vehicles
~ith cab and chassis to be used by the Sanitation Division, be accepted:
· 'January 15.'1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke; Virginia
Gentlemen:
On Tuesday, December 12, bids were received and opened before
the committee mbose names appear below for two hem 24 cubic
yard dumpmaster vehicles mitb cab and chassis.
The attached tlbulation ulll show'the other bids that were
received. The proposals have been studied by yonr committee
and the only bid that will meet the specifications is the
Tidy Corporation bid in the amount of $$3,740. In
accepting their bid ue have rejected the two alternate
bids as not adequately meeting the specifications.
It is the recommendation of this committee that the
$53,74B bid by the Tidy Corporation be accepted as listed
herein. Funds are available and within the budget figure
listed in the Sanitation Division 69-3B$ account.
APPROFED $/_B. B. Thomoson APPROVED $! Kit Ki~er
Dueford Thompson Kit Kiser, Manager
Purchasing Agent Mater Department
AppROVED ~/ Joseoh B. Brewer. Jr. Joseph H. Brewer. Jr.
Acting Director of Public Morks"
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the follgwing emergency Ordinance:
(#20557) AN ORDINANC£~providing for the purchase of two (2) uew
refuse compaction units uponcertuin terms and conditions; accepting a certain
bid made to the City for furnishing and delivering said equipment; rejecting
certain other bids made to the City; and providing for an emergency,
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book m37, page 364.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion mas seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AVES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Mebber .........................6.
NAYS: None .......... O. (Mr. Trout absent)
POLICE DEPARTMENT-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Ranager submitted the
following report on the status of personnel in the Police Department and the
Fire Department as of December 31, 1972:
"January 15, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Subject: Fire and Police Departments
Personnel Changes
Listed below is the status of the Fire and the Police
Department as of December 31, 1972:
"Fire Department
"At the end of December Ir?2, there were 3 vacancies in the
Fire Department."
~Police Department
Emoloved Reslaned
'Danny Ray Routon Dee. 11, 1972
Alan P, White Nay 1. 1970 Dec. 31. 1972
*Ending December, 1972 (10) vacancies.#
Respectfully submitted,
S! Eyron E. Bauer
Byron £. Boner
City Nanager'
Mr. Lisk moved that the report be received and filed. The motion uss
seconded by HF. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
AUDITS: The city AuditoF submitted a financial report of the City of
Roanoke for the month of December'. 1972.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Or. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC ~ELFARE: The City Auditor submitted a
monthly statement of expenditures for Public Welfare for the month ended
December 31, 1972.
Mr. Thomas moved that the statement be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
With reference to public welfare, Mr. Lisk moved that the City Attor-
ney be requested to prepare the proper measure urging support by the city's
representatives in the General Assembly of Virginia of legislation by which
additional funds would be appropriated for the remainder of the fiscal year in
the 1972-73 general relief category of public Welfare and that said measure also
be transmitted to the State Department of Welfare and Institutions. The motion
mas seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS: An annual report of the Board of Zoning
Appeals for the year 1972 was before Council.
Mr. Garland moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
mas seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
BUSES: The Transportation Study Committee submitted the follomin9
report advising that it is the opinion of the Committee that the agreement
approved by Councilwhich made a cash contribution to Roanoke City Lines, Incor-
porated, of $24,000.00 for the first six months of the calendar year should be
apportioned between the various political subdivisions beiog serviced by Roanoke
City Lines, such apportionment being calculated on the basis of miles traveled
in the particular political subdivision and recommending that Council. by Reso-
lution, transmit n request to each of the affected areas for their share of this
cost based on these calculations:
3O8
'Jannnzy 15. ~9T3
flunorsble #alor and Cltl Council
Ronnohe, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The agreement approved b7 the Council which made a cash
contribution to the Roanoke City Lines of $24,000.00 rev the
first 6 months or the calendar Tear should be, in the opinion
or the committee, apportioned between the various political
subdivisions bein0 serviced by the Roanoke City Lines. Such
apportionment being calculated on the basis of miles traveled
in the particular politicsi subdivision.
The committee met and decided to request of Hr. J. Wlstar
Stome, President of Roanoke City Lines, a tabulation shaming
the precentagea or mileage operated in the political subdivi-
sions effected. You uill find attached to this report a
schedule of miles traveled in 19T2 by the Roanoke CitT Lines
and the percentages applicable to each effected area. In
applying the percentages, ue were able to determine on this
basis the mount of money that each of the political subdi-
visions should contribute for their share of the 6 months
Supplement being paid to the Roanoke Citl Lines by the City
or Roanoke.
Council, by resolution, transmit a request to each of the
effected areas for their share of thls cost based on the
Respectfully submitted,
$/ Robert A. Garland, Chairman
S/ Ilampton ¥. Thomas
S/ ~ron E. limner
S/ A. N. Gibson"
Mr. Garland moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper ~easuFe. The notion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and
unanimously adopted.
With reference to bus schedules. Ir. Lisk expressed the opinion that
he hopes in the future when bus schedules are changes that they will be discussed
AUOIT$: IF. Hubard presented the following outline for review or the
organizational structure and evaluation of internal control of the Cit~ of
Roanoke as prepared by Andrews, Burket and Company. CeFtlfied Public Accountants.
in connection with a review or the organizational structure of selected operat-
ing Funds and/or divisions of the City of Roanoke and preparatio~ of an evalua-
tion of the system of internal control to establish a basis for reliance thereon
in considering improvements in the nature, extent and timing or audit procedures
of the financial records of the city:
~Outline rev Review of
the Organizational Structure
and Evaluation of Internal
Control for the City or
Roanoke, Virginia
January 15. 1973
CertiFied Public ~ccoentaots Roanoke, Virginia
Introduction
In an effort to eld the City Audit Committee Ja fmpror-
lng the audit procedures of the financial records of the City,
Andrems, Rurket G Co,, has entered into aa agreement nith the
City of Roanoke to:
,,,,, conduct n reviem or the organizational structure
of selected operating rands and/or divisions of the City of
Roanoke and prepare an evaluation or the. system or internal
control to establish a basis for reliance thereon in con-
sidering improvements in the nature, extent end timing of
audit procedures or the financial records of the City,
As a result or serving as consultants to the City
Auditor*s office over the past years in annexation eases,
school board audits, budget preparation and other special
studies and reviews, a great deal or the information necessary
to accouplish our task is on rile in our office, however, to
form a recoemended plan for improving the audit procedures
of the financial records of the City, certain procedures .
relating'to over all City activity must be performed. The
outline on the following pages indicates our approach to ac-
quiring the information necessary for the formulation of
recommendations.
Outline of Aooroach and Procedures to be
EmDlovod in Each DeDartmen~
and/or Division
A. Review or organizational structure by interview with the
department or division head and other selected personnel,
B, Flowchart organizational structure and data flow of
selected departments or divisions and prepare the related
flowchart narrative,
Co Prepare the internal control and compliance questionnaire
as it applies to the particular department or division,.
D, After review of the organizational structure, preparation
or flowcharts and flowchart narratives and the internal
control and compliance questionnaire,, a final review with
the department or division head will be held to determine
the accuracy of the interpretation of the information .
previously assembled.
E. Prepsrae an evaluation or the information assembled
noting recommendations for improving internal control and
applicable audit procedures.
F, Preparation or our report to the City Audit Committee will
include procedures employed in our review, flndings us
in9 audit procedures rot the City as a whole.
The information gathered and results of our analysis
including recommendations will be held in strict confidence
and made available only. to the City Audit Committee,
The anticipated order of review is as folloms, although
City Treasurer's office
Civic Center
Municipal Court
City Anditor*s office
City Attorney's office.
City Manager*s office
City Clerk's of£ice
Purchasing Department
Public Morks
Public Melfare
City Market
City Airport
Sanitation Department
City Auditor's office
309
extend our reriem to other departments or divisions.
Certain areas nnd funds of the City are being uudited by
independent certified public accounting firms, Commonueulth
audi t~or, and Federal auditors.
These nreus~nnd funds of'the'City ore being audited by inde-
pendent~certlfJed'Public'.iccnunting flrmso~Commoneenlth auditors
and Federal unditovso
These areas mill not require an indepth reviem' but mill
be couafdered, Including the:
City School Board
Library Board
City Supplemental Retirement System
Commonwealth Funds Collected on
behalf of the Commonwealth of Yfrglmfn.'
#r. Hubard moved that the Outline as prepared by Andrews. Burket and
Company be received and'filed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unani-
mously adopted.
UNFINISRED BUSINESS:
RUN1CIPAL BUILDING-JAIL: Council having previously requested that
the Regional Courthouse Committee submit a report on the charge 9ivan it by
Resolution No. 19595 ns soon as practicable but no later than January IS, 1973.
the matter Was before the body.
la this connection, ~r. Hubard verbally advised that Mr. Frank W.
Rogers, Sir., Chairman of the Regional Courthouse Committee has requested that
action on this matter be deferred untio Council takes*definite action on the
Regional Corrections Facility.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the request of Mr. Rogers. The
motion was seconded by Rr, Thomas and unanimously adopted.
'ZONING: Council having deferred action on a report of the City
Planning Commission recommendiu9 that the request of Mr. J. Hunter Roberts that
property located ie the 500 block of Albemarle Avenue, S. E., described as Lot
14. Block 8. Roanoke Land ~ Improvement Map. Official Tax No.- 4021718. be rezone~
from RD, Duplex Residential District. to RG-I, General Residential District,
be denied, the matter was again before the body.
In this connection, the City Clerk verbally reported that Mr. Roberts
desires a public hearing on the request for rezoning.
Dr. Taylor moved that a public hearing on the request for rezouiug
be held at 7:30 p.m., Monday, February 2b, 1973. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCYlON AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
PAY PLAN-CITY ERPLOYEES-CORRONREALTH*S ATTORNEy: Council having
directed the City Attorney to prepare the proper measure urging the support of
the city*s representatives in the General Assembly of legislation relating to
the salaries of professional personnel in the Office of the Attorney for the
Commonwealth of the City of Roanoke, he presented same; whereupon, Hr, Th6mas
offered the following Resolution:
(n20§Sfl) A RESOLUTION urging the support of the City's representatives
in the General Assembly of legislation relating to the salaries or professional
personnel In the Office of the Attorney for the Commonuealth or the City of
Roanoke,
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book a3T, page 365,)
Hr, Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution, The motion was
seconded by Dr..Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Hessrs, Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Rayor
Webber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
In this connection, Mr. Richard Lee Lawrence, Commonwealth's Attorney,
appeared before Council and requested emergency relief by supplementing the
salaries of the Assistants in his office, namely, Mr. Robert C. McLaughlin and
Hr. Bobby R. Osborne for at least seven.months or until the State Compensation
Board and/or a three-judge court can made the necessary adjustments in their
salaries, pointing out that his interpretation of the Code of Virginia, 1950,
as amended and supplemented, is that City Council don supplement the salaries
of his assistants and further requesting that the city supplement Mr. Osborne's
)resent salary in the amount of $3,000.00 per annum which would increase his
salary from $9.500.00 per annum to $12.500.00 per annum and that Council supple-
meat Mr. #cLaughlin's present salary in the amount of $2~00.00 'per annum which
would increase his salary from $11,900.00 per annum to $14,500.00 per annum.
Mayor ~ebber requested that Mr. Lawrence put his verbal request in
writin~ and place it on a regular agenda of Council in order for it to be
discussed by Council at that time.
AIRPORT: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure accepting the proposal of'Natts and Breakell, Incorporated,.for
alterations and additions to the Terminal Building at the Roanoke Runicipal
(Noodrum) Airport and authorizing the proper city officials to execute the con-
tract, he presented same; whereupon. Dr. Taylor offered the following emergency
)rdinance:
(~20659) AN ORDINANCE accepting the proposal of Natts and Breakell,
Inc.. for alterations and additions to the Terminal Building at the Roanoke
Municipal Airport; authorizing the proper City officials to execute the requisite
contract, rejecting certain other bids made to the City; and providing for an
emergency.
{For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
secondedby #ro Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
312
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Llsk. Taylor, Thomss. und Mayor
Webber .... ~ ................. 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout sbsent)
CITY ENGINEER: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare
the proper measure providing for the purchase of one hem crauler-type excavator
upon certain terms and oonditions, he presented same; uhereupon, Mr. Lisk offered
the folloming emergency Ordinance:
(u20660) AN ORDINANCE providing for the purchase of one new cramler-
type excavutorupon cectain terms and conditions; accepting a certain bid made
to the City for furnishing and delivering said equipment; rejecting other bids
made to the City; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u37. page 368.)
Mr. Llsk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas seconded
by Hr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote~
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
Webber ........... ~ .............. 6.
NAYS: None ............O. (Rt. Trout absent)
CITY ENGINEER: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare
the proper measure providing for the ~urchase of one nam 4-mheel dual control
street sueeper for use by the Department of Public Morks upon certain terms and
conditions, he presented same. whereupon. Mr. Lisk offered the follouing
emergency Ordinance:
(#20661) AN ORDINANCE providing for the purchase of one (1) new
4~wheel. dnal control, street sweeper for use by the City's Department of
Public Morks upon certain terms and conditiona; accepting n certain bid made to
the City for furnishing and delivering said equipment; rejecting another bid
made to the City; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book ~37. page 369.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the folIoming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
CITY ENGINEER: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare
the proper measure providing for the purchase of one new combination loader
upon certain terms and conditions, he presented same; whereupon. Mr. Lisk
offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(u20h62) AN ORDINANCE providing for the purchase Of one acm combina-
tion loader upon certain terms mud conditions; accepting u certain bid made to
the City. for furnishing and delivering said equipment; and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book ~37, page 370o)
Mr. Llsk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion.mas seconded
by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
Webber .........................6.
NAYS; None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: Dr. Taylor presented the folloming report of
theHous~n9 Availability Ordinance Committee recommending that a public hearing
be held at 7:30 p,m.. Monday, February 26, 1973, in the Council Chamber, on the
question of adoption of a Housing Availa~iBty Ordinance:
"January 12, 1973
The Honorable Mayor Roy L. Webber
and Members of the Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Geetlemen:
The Housing Availability Ordinance Committee racom- .
mends for your consideration the amended and revised version
of the Housing Availability Ordinance. It is our belief
that City Council should take every proper and legal action
to prevent discrimination in the sale or rental of housing
facilities. It is neither proper nor equitable that our
citizens should be denied the benefits of housing on the
basis of their race, color, creed or national origin.
To exclude individuals from equal opportunities in
housing because of their race, color, creed or national
origin is unfair, unjust, and inconsistent math the public
policy of the United States. as manifested in its Consti-
tution and laws, Discriminatory policies and practices
result in segregated patterns of housing and produce other
forms of discrimination and segregation mhich deprive many
Americans of equal opportunity in the exercise of their
unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness.
Therefore, the members of the Bousing Availability
Ordinance Committee suggest that each member of Council
will carefully consider the Ordinance which me submit
today and we further recommend that a Public Hearing mill
be set for February 26th, 1973, at 7:30 p.m.. at which time
our citizens and the members of Council mill have an oppor-
tunity to express their opinions concerning the establish-
ment of an Open Housing Policy in the City of Roanoke.
Respectfully submitted,
HOUSING AVAILABILITY ORDINANCE COMMITTEE
S/ Noel C. Taylor
Noel C. Taylor. Chairman
Mr. Byron Haner
Mr. James N. Kincanon
Mr. Ben MOrris- ~
Mr. R. R. Burchfield*
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the report of the Committee
and that a public hearing be held on the question of adoption of the Housing
Ordinance at 7:30 p,m., in the Council Chambers, Monday, February t
Availability
26, 1973. The motion was seconded by M.r. Hubard and unanimously adopted. I
HEALTH DEPARTMENT: Mayor Mebber called'to the attention of Council i
that the terms of Messrs. A. Byron Smith and Grady P~ Gregory, Jr., as members of ~
the Board of Housing and Hygiene will expire on January 31, 1973, that Mr. Smith ~
has declined to serve another term and called for nominations to fill the vacancies.
35.4
Mr. Llsk placed-in nomination the name ur Mr. Grady P. Gregory, Jr.
There being no further nominations, Hr. Geady P. Gregory. Jr** mas
elected as a member of the Hoard of Housing and Hygiene for 8 term Of tun years
ending January 31, 1975. by the follouing vote:
FOR MR. GREGORY: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Llsk, Taylor, Thomas and
Mayor Webber ................... 6. (Hr. Trout absent)
CITY MANAGER: The City Clerk reported that Mr. Byron E. Honer has
qualified as City Manager of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, effective January
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion ma!
seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
INGUSTRI'ES: The Cit'y ~lerkreport~d'that Mr. Robert H.-Turner, Jr.,
has qualified as a Director of the Imdustrial Gevelopment Authority of the City
of Roanoke. Virginia, for a term of four years ending October 20, 1976.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
nas seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
TRAFFIC: The City Clerk reported that Messrs. James D. Sink and David
K. Lisk and Mrs. Alice P. Tice have qualified as members of the Roanoke Highway
Safety Commission for terms of four years each ending October 31, 1974, and that
Mr. R. P. Via has qualified as a member of the Roanoke Highway Safety Commission
to fill the unexpired term of Mr. Philip E. Hantano, resigned, ending October
31. 1974.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
adjourned.
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday. January 22, 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, January 22, 1973. at 2 p.m.,
the regular meeting hour, uith Mayor Roy L, Webber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland. William S, Hubard, David K.
Lisk. Noel C. Taylor, Hampton #. Thomas, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L.
Webber ..................... ' ......... 7.
ABSENT: None ..............O.
OFFICERS pRESENT: Mr. Byron E. limner, City Manager: Mr. William F,
Clark, Assistant City Manager: MF. JamesN. Kincanon, City Attorney: and Mr.
A. N. Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting mas opened with a prayer by the Reverend
Jack E. Chulmers, Pastor, South Roanoke Baptist Church.
HEARING OF CITIZENS ~ON PUBLIC UATTERS:
ANIMALS-DOGS-COMPLAINTS: Mr. R. P. Barnes appeared before Council and
presented a communication from the Palmer Chemical ~ Equipment Company, Incorpor-
ated, advising of a training course offered for selected animal control officers
at Palmer Village, Douglasville, Georgia, advising that the emphasis of the
course is on the immobilization of dogs and cats, but all phases of immobiliza-
tion are covered.
Mr. Lisk moved that the matter be referred to the City Man,gar for
study and report to Council. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unani-
mously adopted.
LANDMARKS: Mr, R. P. Barnes appeared before Council and verbally made
reference to a drinking fountain which was given to the City of Roanoke in 1907
in honor of the late Frederick J. Kimball and requested that the city donate the
fountain to the Roanoke Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals if said
fountain is not going to be mounted in an appropriate place by the city and
further called attention to the disgraceful condition of a fountain in Highland
Park.
After a discussion of the matter, Mr, Hubard moved that the verbal
remarks made by Mr. Barnes be referred to the City Manager for report to Council
at its meeting on Monday, February 2b. 1973. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Trout and unanimously adopted.
PETXTIONS AND COUMUNICATIONS:.
BUDGET-PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOYEES-COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY: A communicatio~
from Mr. Richard Lee LaWrence, Commonwealth's Attorney, requesting that he be
given immediate emergency relief by supplementing the salaries of the assistants
in his office, was before Council.
316
HFs Thomas moved that the matter be discussed in Executive Session
follouiag the regulur meeting of Council since it involves a personnel matter
and tbnt Mr. Lumreuce be Invited to attend this Executive Session. The motion
mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
CITIZENS' ADYISORY COMMITTEE-STATE HIGHMAYS: A communication from
Hr. Douglus B. Frigate achnomledgin9 receipt of Resolution No. 20637 regarding the
Route 115 - ll6*ProJect, adrfsfng that the Ten Year Fiscal Plan mbJcb was
opproved.by the Highway Commission includes a 'Preliminary Projects Listing'
mhich shoms the anticipated funds for each locality and that fa t. he event a pre-
ject costs more than is shomn in the plan.it mill be necessary to defer other
projects in that locality to finance the additional costs, mas before Council.
DF. Taylor moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion mos seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
MATER DEPARTMENT: A communication from Mr. Paul C. Bufcrd, Jr.. advis-
in~ that his home at 3710 Bosmorth Drive. S. N.. in a subdivision known as
Edgehill Estates, as well as the location of his former residence at 3142 Nest
Ridge Road. S. N** is at an elevation at which a study by the city determined
that additional water should be made available iu the event of a fire. that
several years ago Council outhorized the city administration to proceed mith the
construction of a water storage tank to be installed in the vicinity of the
3400 block of Test Ridge Road, S. M.. that this extra storage was to insure that
adequate .ater mould be available Jn the event of au uncontrolled fire in this
area, that as far as he has been able to determine the construction of this
storage facility has not been done and that while there is no question that
adequate water pressure exists in these higher elevations, there is a serious
question as to mhether there is sufficient water avalIab]e in the event of an
water is available or if it is not, sas before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that the communication be referred to the City Manager
fur study and report to Council. The motion was secouded by Mr. Thomas and
unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager subaitted a written report
recommending that $10,000.00 be appropriated to Zerminal Leave under Section
#97, 'Terminal Leave." of the 1972-T3 budget, to provide funds in anticipation
of needs for the remainder of the current fiscal year.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20bb3) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section 397. -Terminal
Leave." of the 19~2-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 371.)
Mr. Link moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion nas seconded
by Mr, Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: #essrs. Garland, Hmbard, Lisk. Taylor. Thomas, Trout, and Mayor
Webber .......................... T. .
NAYS: None ........... Oo
BUDGET-DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS: The City Manager submitted a uritten
report recommending that $300°00 be appropriated to Printing and Office Supplies
under Section n4O, "Department of Buildings** of the 1972-73 budget, to provide
necessary funds for the remainder of the fiscal year.
Dr, Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(z20664) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section n4O, "Department
of Buildings,* of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance~ see Ordinance Book n37. page 372.1
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk. Taylor. Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Mebber .........................
NAYS: None .........~-0.
BUDGET-DRUGS: The City Manager submitted the following report recom-
mending that $300.00 be appropriated to Communications under Section n45, "Police
Department,- of the 197~-73 budget, to allow for continuation of the "BDt Line*
facilities for the remainder of the fiscal year:
"January 22. 1973
Bonorable Rayor and City Uouncll
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Police Department Budget-
Confidential Telephone Line
Council will recall the previous discussions with regard
to an experimental installation of a drug "hot line* includ-
ing a telephone receiving and recording device to provide a
method for citizens in the community to submit confidential
information on illegal activities. On gonday. September II,
1972. Council appropriated $146.50 to provide for the installa-
tion of the necessary equipment on a three-month experimental
basis. The *hot line* became operational on November 9 Dad an
interim report was previously submitted to Council on November
20, 1972.
During the three-month experimental period, the "hot
line" has resulted in 165 calls providing valid information
on criminal activity within the community and surrounding
areas. There have also been 64 calls that could be classi-
theless it is our opinion that the 165 valid calls have
justified the retention of the "hot line." This system pro-
vides the average citizen a means to relay information to
the Police Department that he might otherwise not divulge.
The information is closely guarded and closely investigated
before action is taken and, in some instances probable cause
has been established, valid arrests made and criminal acti-
vity retarded us a result of these citizens* cooperation.
317
318
~ben the.'hot line' uss tirst established tends.mere.not
available for an advertising cenpafge to disseminate the
phone nunber. The only advertising promotion that'the nun-
bet received was the public service cooperation of local
news media. Mhlle the nons media cooperation his been
good, it is felt that results could be much better if another
torn of advertising mere available. Creative'Displays.
incorporated, has volunteered to conduct a promotion through
television'spot announcement and billboard advertising to be
sponsored by local business organizations for a one-month
period. This program should result in much greater citizen
participation, end this community service offer is commendable.
It is recommended that $300 be appropriated to Account
45-220 to allow for the continuation of the "hot line"
facilities for the remainder of the fiscal year.
Respectfully submitted.
S! Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager"
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation at the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
· (=20665) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section =45, "Police
Department." of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emer-
gency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book 337, page
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. 7he motion was seconde(
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk. Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........
BUDGET-CITY ENGINEER: The City Manager submitted a written report
advising that on December 26. 1972, Council approved a comoittee report
concerning bids for 21 new trucks to be used by various departments of the city.
that on page 2 of the report there was a statement that certain minor interde-
partmental transfers would be necessary to corer bids which exceeded budget
appropriation and recommending that $517.00 be transferred from Vehicular
Equipment - Replacement under Section u56, "Street Construction and Repair," to
Vehicular Equipment - Replacement under Section ~?1. "Garage," of the 1972-73
budget, to cover the excess between the low bid and funds otherwise available.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance transferring the neces-
sary funds:
(~20666) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section =S0, "Street
Construction and Repair." and Section aTl, "Garage." of the 1972-73 Appropria-
tion Ordinance. an~ providing for an emergency.
(For full text ~ Ordinance. see Ordinance Book ~37, page 373.)
Mr. Lick moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas seconded
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................... 7.
NAYS: N,ne ......~ .... O.
BUDGET-STATE H1GRMAYS: The City Manager submitted the following report
recommending that $10,077.36 be appropriated in order to make the latest semi-
annual progress payment on the project between Roanoke River and McClaaahan
Street, advising.that this bill represents all costs mith exception of final
right of way expenditures and primarily work performed by the Norfolk and
Mestern Railway Company and at such time as a final bill is submitted by the
Righway ,apartment for the remaining right of way expenses, it will again be
necessary to return to Council for supplemental appropriations:
"January 22, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Franklin Road Midening -
Roanoke River to McClanahan Street
In O~tober. 1971, City Council appropriated supplemental
funds for a partial payment to the Highway Department on the
City share of the above mentioned highway widening project.
At that time it was explained that the final costs Here
somewhat unknomn due to the fact that certain right of way
matters had not been concluded and that the final cost for
certain m6rh performed by the Norfolk and Western Railway
Company had not been completed. In general, the major
reason for increases in this project weredue to right of
way cost in excess of original estimates.
Me have again received a progress b'ill~ reportedly
semi final, on the project between Roanoke River and
McClanahan Street. This bill is in the amount of
and represents all costs with.exception 'of final right of
way expenditures. This sum represents primarily work per-
formed by the Norfolk and Mestern Railway Company. At
such time as u final bill is submitted by the Highway
Department for the remaining right of way expenses, it will
again be necessary to return to Council for supplemental
appropriations.
It is recommended that the sum of $10,077.35 be appro-
priated to Account No. CIP-19 in order that we may make this
latest progress payment.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Haner
Byron E. Baner
City Manager*
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the necessary
funds:
(~20667) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section usg. *Transfers
to Capital Improvements Fund** of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and pro-
viding for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u37, page 37~.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance.
by Dr. Taylor and adopted by th~ f,Il,win9 vote:
The motion was seconded
:319
320'
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Habard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ........................7.
NhYS: Noae ..........O.
STATE HIGHWAYS: The City Ranager submitted the following report
recommending that Council favorably consider adoption of a Besolution request-
lng the State fllghuay Department to program a project to study, design and
implement a TOPICS improvement at the Hershberger Road and ~illiamson Road
intersection:
'January 22. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Highway Improvement Project -
Millianson Road at Hershberger Road
Your administrative staff has taken the liberty of
inquiring of the Virginia Department of Highways as to the
possibility in the near future of further improvements at
the intersection of Rilliemson Road and Hershberger Road,
more particularly reconstruction of realign the Airport
Road (Route liB) leg of this five-way intersection. Such
improvement has been considered for sometime locally and
by the Highway Department but nas not included in the
recent tlershberger Road improvements so as not to delay the
widening and channelization which was accomplished west of
¥illiamson Road.
At the time of preparation of the local TOPICS plan
this realignment of Airport Road was not specifically
included as it was considered by the consultants to be
part of the then active project for improvements to
Hershberger Road. Nevertheless the Ilighway Department
Urban Office has indicated that it would look favorably
upon a request for a TOPICS project at this intersection
end would exert every effort to obtain approval from the
Federal Highway Administration. Although the details of
such a project would be determined by a more thorough study
and design, such a project would involve realigning Airport
Road so as to intersect with Williamson Road at some point
further north of the Hershberger Road intersection. Since
the project is at the City's north corporate limits, it
would have to be determined at a later date as to the detai~s
of financing and cost responsibility.
It is recommended that City Council favorably consider
adoption of a resolution requesting the StateHighway Depart-
meat to program a project to study, design and implement a
TOPICS improvement at the Hershberger and Williamson Road
intersection·
Respectfully submitted.
S! Byron E. Hamer
Byron E+ Bauer
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following Resolution recommending and urging
the initiation by the Department Of Highways of a project to improve the inter-
section of Milliamson Road and Hershberger Road in the City of Roanoke by
realigning Airport Road (Route 118) so as to intersect with Williamson Road at
a point north of the present intersection, setting out the need therefor, and
committing the city to pay its proportionate part of the cost of such study:
(n206§8) A RESOLUTION recommending und urging the initnition by the
Department of Higbnays of n project to improve the intersection o! Wllliamson
Road and Hershberger Road in the City of Roannhe by ~euligning Airport Road
(Route lift) so as to intersect mith Mllliumson Road at u point nort~ of the pre-
sent Intersection; setting out the need therefor; and committing the City to pay
its proportionate part of the cost of such study.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Cook ua?, page 374.)
Hr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Hr, Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard. Lisko Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Mebber .......................... ?,
NAYS: None ...........
SE#ERS AND STORM DRAINS: TheCity Manager submitted the folloning
report in connection with Phase I and Phase 11 of the upgrading and expansion
of the Sewage Treatment Plant, advising that he is in receipt of a communication
from the Dnited States Environmental Protection Agency pointing out that under
provisions of the amended Federal Mater Pollution Control Act. the federal grant
on this work is now increased to $5.045.500.00. representing an increase in the
federal participation in the project to seventy-five per cent of the current
estimated eligible cost, that it is his understanding that because of this change
in federal participation, state funds in the project will change from twenty-five
per cent to ten per cent. leaving the city obligated for fifteen percent of the
project cost rather }ham the former twenty per cent and that-the net effect of
the federal grant increase and the state 9rant decrease is that city funds now
required will be reduced by $336,280.00:
~January 22, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. ¥irginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Federal Grant - Sewage Treatment Plant
In connection with Phases I and II of the upgradin9 and
expansion of the City's Mater Pollution Control Plant, the
City was previously informed of the Federal government having
approved a grant in the umount of $3.700,070 representing 55
percent of the estimate for certain improvements, including
the sludge lagoons, phosphorus removal facilities, expansion
of the primary portion of the plant, and a 30 million gallon
retention basin/ballast pond. Much of that work has been com-
pleted or is under construction with the City awaiting State
~ and Federal approval to advertise for the balance of the work,
Me are in,receipt of a letter from the United States
Environmental Protection Agency advising that under pro-
visions of the amended Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
the Federal grant on this workls now increased to $5o045,500.
representln9 an increase in the Federal participation in the
project to ?5 percent of the current estimated eliglble cost,
It is our understanding that because of this change in Federal
participation State ~nds in the project will change from 25
percent to 10 percent, leaving the City obligated for 15
percent of the project cost rather than the former 20 per-
cent. The net effect Of the Federal grant increase and the
State grant decrease is that City funds now required would
be reduced by $336.280.
321.
Applying the,same Federal~and State participation tO
th~ proposed Phase III expansion ut the plant, including the
improvements, thc City*s obligations mould theoretically be
reduced b~ n~erly $700.000.~ Caution should be noted..houever.
because final project cost has traditionally been higher' than
uorthy'as they will provide for additlone~ mater pollution
$! Byron £. HaneF
Byron E. Barter
Mr, Thomas moved that the communication and report be received smd
filed, The motion was seconded by Mr, Trout and unanimously adopted,
WATER DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a uritten report trans-
mitting the'lg?l-?2 annual report of the City of Roauohe Mater Department.
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received and filed, The motion nas
seconded by Mr. Lash and unanimously adopted,
AUDITOR~UM-COLIS£UM: The City Attorney submitted the following report
in connection with certain litlDation instituted by ~ello L. Teer Company against
the Cityin the United States District' Court as a result Of construction of the
Roanoke Civic Center:
"January 22. 1973
?he Honorable Hayor and Members
of Roanoke City Uouncil
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that Nello L. Teer Company, the
City*s general contractor for the construction of the
Roanoke Civic Center. has brought action against the City
in the United States District Court for the Mestern District
of Virginia asking, as alternative forms of relief, that
(a) the City be required to submit to arbitration n claim
stated to be in the amount of $696.614.670 or (b) that,
failing to obtain arbitration of the claim, that it recover
judgment against the City for siad sum. with interest.
The litigation grows out of the City*s construction
contract with the plaintiff, as general contractor, dated
March 2§, 1969. for construction of the Roanoke Civic Center
complex at a contract price of $11,075.000.00 and within
750 calendar days after commencement of the work. 'Dy eleven
change orders authorized by the Council to be made to the
original contract, some in the may of deletions and others
in the way of deductions, the stated contract price for the
work was reduced to $11.0bl,935.43.' The work was inspected
and certified as fully completed on February 24, 1912. con-
siderably later than the contract completion date, although
partial use and occupancy had been accepted by the City at
un earlier date. On June 21. IR?2/ payment was made of con-
tractor*s request for Payment No. 41 and final payment in the
amount of $363,953.15, there having been deducted from the
total original'contract price $D2,000.00 as liquidated damages
for delay in completion of the contract, all of'the aforesaid
having*been reported to the Council by the City Manager.
PlaJntiff*s claim appears to be based on inclement
weather, delay, additional rock excavation and for remis-
sion of liquidated damages for delay in completion of the
murk, all of which has heretofore been considered by the
City*s architects and engineers and disallowed and this.
office and that of the City Manager have heretofore declined,
on the part of the City, to bindingly arbitrate what were
not recognized by the City as valid claims.
Unless otherwise directed by the City Council, the'
undersigned will oppose in the pending litigation a manda-
tory arbitration of the plaintiff*s alleged claims and mill
attempt to* defend on their merits such of the claims as the
Court takes under consideration.
Respectfully, -.
S/ J. N. Kincanou
J. N. Kincanou#
Mr. Thomosmoved that thereport be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
824
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
RADIO-TELEVISION: The Cable Television Committee submitted the roi-'
lowing report, transmitting n proposed agreement bet'ween the City of Roanoke,
the County of aoanote end the Town of Vfntau along with tbre conaultlng firms of
Atlantic Research Corporation and Foster Associates, Incorporated, ~roposing
that the consultants study the feasibility for a regional CATV system in the
Roanoke metropolitan area, offer recommendations with respect to the most appro-
priate way to serve the region and provide information on the advantages and
disadvantages of public versus private ouoership of such systems and recommendin~
that Council authorize the execution of the agreement as well as appropriate
$15,660.00 which represents the share of the City of Roanoke for the fees of the
consultants:
"January 22, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Cable TV
your Cable Television Committee has concluded another
phase in its study regarding the subject of cable antenna
television facilities and hereby reports to City Council on
the status of its efforts to date.
Your committee has met on numerous occasions with
representatives of Roanoke County and the Town of Vinton,
which goverflnents are similarly interested in the subject
facilities, and has participated in discussions with various
iedividualsnod groups interested in the commercial aspects
of the subject, and also several engineering consulting firms
who have expressed interest in providing studies and'design
for an area wide network. There are many interesting aspects
with regard to cable ante~fla television systems, now hot
more so in the future, and there is more than one opinion
among different groups as to the best means of approaching
this complex subject. Nevertheless your committee has
reached the conclusion that the most appropriate way.for the
City and other local governments to proceed is ~rough the
employment Of engineering consultants who specialize in
this subject.
Zhere is attached herewith for Council*s information a
proposed agreement between the City of Roanoke. the County of
Roanoke and the Town of Y/atom along with the consulting firms
of Atlantic Research Corporation and Foster Associ~teso Incor-
porated. Through this agreement, it is proposed that the con-
sultants would study the feasibility for a regional CATV
system in the Roanoke metropolitan area, offer recommenda-
tions with respect to the most appropriate way to serve the
region and provide information on the advantages and dis-
advantages of public versus private omnership of such sys-
tems. A second phase of the eonsultant*s work, fqllowing
local 9overnmental determination as to private versus
public ownership~ would be the preparation of necessary
detailed information for the bidding on franchises for.
private operation or for the .purchase of required equipment
in the event of public facilities. The total cost for the
work performed by the consultants will depend upon the
amount of time involved but will not exceed a maximum of
$27.000.
Each of the local governments involved will partici-
pate in the study on the basis of population in their
respective jurisdictions at the 1970 census. For the City
of Roanoke this willinvolve expenditure of $15,660 as a
maximum. Representatives of Roanoke County have indicated
this matter will be considered by that governing body at
their meeting on Tuesday, January 23, and the Tonn of
Vlntou bas already appropriated itc share 'of the consultant*s
fees. It is recommended that Council authorize the execution
of the proposed agreement as well as appropriate the above-
mentioned City shore of the consultant's fees.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Robert A. Garland, Chairman
S! Hampton W. Thomas
S/ Noel C. Taylor'
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
Cable Television Committee. The' motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and unani-
mously adop~ d.
In this connection, Mr. Christopher Rygo Station Manager of the Educa-
tional Radio St arian at Virginia Western Community College, opposed before Coun-
cil and read the folloulng prepared statement advising that Virginia Western
Community College is extremely interested in the educational potential of cable
television in the Roanoke Valley and requesting that their new educational radio
station be placed on the system for greater coverage and better reception, that
the cable television company install a line to their campus with no installa-
tion or monthly ,charges and that one channel be reserved for their future pro-
g£nmming to the community:
"PRESENTATION YO CITY COUNCIL ON CABLE
My name is Chris Ryg and l*m station manager of the new
educational radio station and instructor at Va. Western Com-
munity College.
Gary Kazanjian of our staff and Dr. Hopper were unable
to get amay at this time.
Virginia Western is extremely interested in the educa-
tional potential of cable television in the Roanoke Valley
(Last year we talked informally with Mayor Webber).
We believe that it is important that the educational
uses of this ~edium be fully discussed before the granting
of a franchise to a compnay. Me need to protect the educa-
tional potential of cable in order that we as educators can
take full advantage of it in the future.
We at Va. Western are extremely anxious to take advantage
of this medium and uso it as one component of our learning
resources.
Several colleges and universities are presently taking advan-
tage of cable in their instructional plans.
Other educators have been precluded from such use because no
provisions were made in the original franchise agreement.
Me hope that you gentlemen will consider ~nd incorporate into
a franchise' the uses 9f cable by educators.
II. Specifically we have three requests in terms of this
medium:
1. We would like to have our new educational radio
station placed on the system for greater coverage
and better reception (The station will provide
instructional, educational, and cultural programs
to the community).
2. Me would like to have the cable company install a
line to our campus mlth no installation charges. Me
could then take advantage of all the programming
offered by the system.
:326
3. Me mould like to have one channel reserved for-our
future programming to the community.
Va. Vestern presently has a TV Studio that is used by ?ur
broadcssting students.
Thus, me have n production facility and skilled personnel
already on caepus.
Although me presently do not utilize instruction'al televi-
sion, me have plans to pursue its use in the future.
Cable television could become one of the components of our
use of instructional TY at Vs. Western.
Our channel Mould be used primarily for offering instruc-
tional courses for tredit .... a College of the air.
Ue already hare plans to offer instructional courses
for credit by our radio station.
#any people are unable to come to our campus.~, thus,
ue mould be able to reach these people and alias them
to continue their education.
Also, we could program Ju-service training courses
for professional and occupational gronps
Educational enrichment courses could also be offered.
Our production facility could be used on a contractual
basis with other schools and community groups.
Ne are not at the point of being able to program a channel
now.,. We are going to develop our plan for instructional
TV first.
Howerer, we do feel it is important that a channel be
reserved for us for future utilization
We feel that it is important that such a reservation Be
wrilten into an ordinance covering cable in Roanoke
This will avoid problems of getting access to the
system later.
offer this service inexpensively and efficiently. We
hope that you will consider this request and allom us to
provide you with further information if you eish.
QUESTIONS????
S/ Chris J. Ry9
344-2031'
Mr. Thomas moved that the statement read by Mr. Ry9 be received and
entered into the official records of Roanoke City Council and that the City
Clerk be instructed to furnish a copy of said statement to the Cable Television
Committee to be discussed with the members of the Regional Cable Television
Committee. The motion was seconded by Re. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Garland then offered the follomlng emergency Ordinance authorizing
the City Manager on behalf of the City of Roanoke, upon similar authorization
given by certain other political subdivisions, of an agreement employing the
feasibility of an area type cable antenna te'levision system in said political
(z20669) AN ORDINANCE authorizing execution on behalf of the City,
upon similar authorization given by certain other political subdivisions, of on
agreement employing the professional services of certain consultants to study end
make report on the feasibility of an area type cable antenna television system
in said political subdivisions; and providing for an emergency,
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance flooh zaT~ page 375.)
MFo Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the follouing vote:
AYES: Masaru, Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Yehber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O.
Dr. Taylor offered the folloming emergency Ordinance appropriating the
necessary funds:
(~20670)' AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~09, "Transfers to
Capital Improvements Fund." of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and provid-
ing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page
DF. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk. Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Yebber ..... T .................... 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
PLANNING-POLICE DEPARTMENT-CAPITAL IRPROVEMENTS PROGRAM-JAIL-MUNICIPAL
BUILDING: Mr. William S. Hubard. Chairman of the Regional Corrections Steering
Committee. submitted a written report transmitting copy of the final Roanoke
Valley Corrections Center Agreement which is the same agreement as presented to
Council at its meeting on December 26, 1972, with the four changes requested by
Council and one change requested by the Council of the City of Salem which added
the last sentence Of Section 2:5(b), advising that he has discussed this matter
with representatives of the governin9 bodies of all four jurisdictions other than
the City of Roanoke and it appears that all of the 9overnin9 bodies are in a
position to act favorably upon this agreement and recommending that this Council,
by Ordinance, authorize the proper officials of the city to execute this agree-
ment.
Mr. Hubard then moved that the following Ordinance proposing that the
city enter into an agreement with certain other political subdivisions of the
Commonwealth of Virginia for the establishment of the Roanoke Valley Correction~
Board to operate and generally administer a Roanoke Valley Corrections Center and
related programs as a regional jail pursuant to Title 53. Chapter 7.1. Code of
Virginia 1950, as amended, be placed upon its first reading:
~328
(a20671) A~ ORDINANCE proposing that the Ci~yenter into an agreement
math certain other political subdivisions of the Comnonmealth of Virginia for the
establishment of the Roanoke Valley Corrections Ruurd to operate and generally
administer m Roanoke Valley Corrections Center amd related programs us u regional
jail pursuant to Title 53, Chapter ?.1. Code of Virginia 1950, as amended;
upprovfmg s certain agreement prepared to be entered Jato with certain governing
bodies herein named; conditionally authorizing the Rayor and the City Clerk
to execute said agreement for Bud on behalf of the City of Resnohe; and directin~
the City Clerk to transmit copies of this ordinance and of said proposed agree-
ment tu the governing bodies of said other political jurisdictions and to Other
agencies.
MIIEREAS, after meetings held and negotiations conducted by a committee
of the Council mith similar committies and representatives of other gorerning
bodies In the Roanoke Valley area. this Counoil*s committee with said other
committees and representatives have developed and caused to be prepared a
mritten agreement proposed to be entered into betmeen the City of Roanoke,
Roanoke.County. the City of Salem, Craig County and the Tomu of Vinton, mhich
said proposed agreement would establish the Roanoke Valley Corrections Board to
operate and generally administer for a period of et least tmenty (20) years, a
regional jail to be known as the Roanoke Valley Corrections Center and related
programs, as more specifically set out in said agreement and as made and pro-
vided by ~53:206.1 et seq. of the Code of Virginia. 1950, es emended, a copy
of which said agreement is ~n file in the office of the City Clerk, transmitted
to the Council math said Council's Regional Corrections Steering Committee's
report dated January 22. 1973. and to which form of agreement reference is
hereby made; and
WHEREAS. this Council's committee has proposed that. for reasons of
clarity, the agreement filed us aforesaid be amended by deletion of the last
paragraph of ~2:1 (a), to-wit: "In no event, homever, shall+the contribution
of any party hereto be less than the full amount of any grant, either state or
federal, to mhich any party may be entitled by reason of eotering into a
regional jail agreement.", and the substitution therefor of the foil~ming words
and phrases, to-wit: "In computing the proportionate ~hare of the parties
hereto each party shall have the right to use the proceeds of any grants or like
funds received, directly or indirectly, by virtue of being a party hereto, to
pay, curtail or reduce the proportionate amount of its share; provided, however,
if such grant or like funds exceed such member's proportionate share the entire
fund so received shall be promptly paid over to the 'Corrections Board**"; and.
further..~2:5 (b) be amended by insertion of the mord "all' in the line thereof;
and
WHEREAS. this Council*a committee has recommended that the City ,of
Roanoke offer to enter into the aforesaid agreement, amended as aforesaid, with
the County of Roanoke, the City of Salem, the City of Craig and the Town of
Vlntoa upon the conditions and provisions set out and contained in the proposed
agreement, Is amended; and
WHEREAS, the Council concurs In its committee*s aforesaid recommendatl~s
~OM. THEREFORE. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as
follows:
I. That the City of Roanoke is committed to and doth hereby'reaffirm
its interest in the concept of and its desire to participatewith certain other
local governmental authorities in the establishment Of a regional corrections
center, as a regional jail pursuant to Title 53, Chapter ?.l, Code of Virginia,
1950o aa amended, and of related programs in the Roanoke Valley area of the Fifth
Planning District, and to participate, in the future, ia the provision of new or
additionnl such f~cJlities as may be needed and as may be mutually agreed upon by
lparticipating parties.
2. That the form of agreement, as amended, caused to be prepared by
the committees and representatives as aforesaid, to be entered into betueem the
City and the County of Roanoke, the City of Salem, the County of Craig and the
Town of Vinton. and drawn by the City Attorney, a copy of which said agreement.
as amended, is on file in the office of the City Clerk, this day presented to aA
considered by this body. pursuant to which the City would obligate itself for a
period of at least'twenty (20) ye'ars to participate with said other governing
bodies as therein.provided in provision of certain joint-use, corrections facili-
ties and related'programs and future acquisitions and additions thereto as pro-
vided in said agreement, as amended, in order that corrections facilities may be
provided to all parts of the Roanoke Valley area of the Fifth Planning District.
be, and the aforesaid agreement, as amended, is hereby APPROVED.
3, That if and when the written agreement, as amended, and herein
approved to be entered into with the County of Roanoke, the Citl Of Salem, and
the County of Craig and the Town of Vinton. be similarly approved by the 9overn-
lng bodies of the County of Roanoke, the City of Salem, the County of Craig and
the Town Of Vinton and be authorized to be executed for and on behalf of said
respective political subdivisions, the Mayor and the City Clerk of the City o£
Roanoke be, and they are hereby authorized and directed to execute and to seal
and attest, respectively, said agreement, as amended, for and on behalf of the
City of Roanoke.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the City Clerk be, and she is hereby
directed to transmit attested copies hereof and of the aforesaid proposed agree-
ment, as amended, to the Hoard of Supervisors of Roanoke County, the Council of
the City of Salem, the Board of Supervisors of Craig County. the Councilor the
Town of Vinton, and to the Fifth Plannin9 District Commission.
The motion mos seconded by Mr. Lash and adopted by the follomieg vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garlnnd, Hubard,'Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Tr'out and Msyor
Webber ........................ ~7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
PARKS AND PLAYGROI~DS-GAgSAG£ RERO~AL: Ur. James O. Trout. Chairman
of the Landfill Committee. sub~itted the following report advising that as the
period of usage of Fallon Park for landfill purposes approaches a conclusion and
the dressing nut,' covering and grassing activities begin, city forces are start-
ing tn excavate the front of the landfill area for the final phase of this pro-
Ject. that the temporary fencing installed at a midpoint in the landfill area
has been moved forward to permit the usage of the last segment of the area
approved by Council. that this final action will eliminate the steep embankment
originally constructed and replace it with a sloping terrain similar to the slope
atthe sides of the area and that as the final stages in ~hts landfill area are
approached, the delays encountered in the approval of a permit for,the neu
regional landfill area poses a problem over mhere to 9o next and assuring
Council that the Committee will be actively seeking new sites, either for
temporary or permanent use:
#January 22, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
As the period of usage of Fallon Park Yor landfill pur-
poses approaches a conclusion, and the dressing out, cov-
ering and grassing activities begin, City forces are start-
ing to excavate the front of the landfill area for the final
phase of this project. The temporary fencing installed at
a midpoint in the landfill area has been moved forward to
permit the usage of the last segment of the area approved by
City Council. This final action will eliminate the steep
embankment originally constructed and replace it with a
sloping terrain similar to the slope at the sides of the
area.
The CitI has been most fortunate.in the use of'this
site. Originally it mas thought that the period of use
would be restricted as it mas envisioned that roc,k forma-
tion could limit the depth of the excavations. Contrar7
to this, the soil conditions have been excellent, and the
depth of cuts have been far greater than thought, with the
result that we have been able to utilize the alloted area
for longer than originally anticipated.
As we approach the.final stages in this landfill area,
the delays encountered in the approval of a permit for the
new regional landfill area poses a problem over where we go
next. This is to assure Citi Council that we will be actively
seeking nam sites, either for temporary or permanent use. '
Respectfully submitted,
$/ James O. Troot
S/ David K. Lisk
S/ Byron £. Hamer'
Mr. Raymond Hall, President, Southeast Civic League, appeared before
Council and expressed the opinion that the landfill boundary has been moved
further down into' the psrk and shut Council previously made 8 promise that it uoul~
not increase the boundaries o~ the landfill without contacting southeast residents
first, requesting thot Council consider abolishing the Landfill Committee at this
time end that the seven members of Council, the City Manage~ and the Assistant
City Ranager constitute the membership of the Landfill Committee and that he
hopes Council will not force the citizens of southeast Roanoke to go to the
expense of hiring u lawyer and going through expensive court proceedings to see
that previous promises made by Council with reference to Fallow Park are kept.
With reference to the statement made by Nr. Hall ns to abolishing the
Landfill Committee. Mr. Thomas expressed the opinion that the Council works
onder n committee system, that this hus been a difficult matter for the Landfill
Committee. that whenever a committee is representing Council it speaks for all
the members of Council, that he feels the Landfill Committee has tried to repre-
sent all of the citizens as well as they could, that Council realizes it has a
commlttnent and that Council bears its share of the ~esponsibllity along with
the Landfill Committee.
Mr. Lisk expressed the opinion that the Landfill Committee has kept
its promises, that the fence mss miscontrued as a boundary line, that the fence
was merely placed there to catch trash, that the city has stayed within the metes
and bounds originally established, that he does not feel the Landfill Committee
has let any of the people in the southeast down, that the committee only makes
recommendations to Council and Council in turn makes the final decision and that
the Committee has kept every promise and obligation made to the people of south-
east Roanoke.
Mr. Trout then moved that the report of the Landfill Committee be
received and filed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland.and unanimously
r adopted.
PARKS AN~ PLAYGROUNDS: Council having referred to a committee for
study, report and recommendatio? the bid of Nationwide Homes, in the amount of
$14,~00.00, for the construction of a caretaker's house on Rill Mountain, the
committee submitted the follouing report recommending that the bid be accepted:
"January 22, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke.-Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Caretaker*s Moose on Rill Mountain
After proper advertisement bids were received and pob-
licly opened and read at City Council's regular meeting on
January 8, 1973, for the construction of a new caretaker*s
house on Mill Mountain.
A single bid was submitted by Nationwide Homes' of
Rartinsville, Virginia, in the amount of
This bid has bee.n reviewed by your committee and it is
the committee's recommendation that this bid be accepted and
that a contract be awarded to Nationwide Homes in the amount
of $14,900.00.
331
'~332
Sufficient funds for this project are available in ~e
Mill Mountain Wild Flower Garden account.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hsner
City #monger
Committee Chairman
S/ William P. Clark
William F. Clark
Assistant City Manager
S/ Sam H. McGhee, Ili '
Sam H. ncGhee. III
City Engineer"
Mr. LJsk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the com-
mittee and offered the following emergency Ordtnaocet
(~20672) AN ORDINANCE accepting the proposal of Nationwide Bomes for
the construction Of a caretaker*s house on Hill Hountaio; authorizing the proper
City officials to execute the requisite contract; add providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Rook #37, page 377.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the ~ollo~iflg vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and N~yor
Webber .......................... 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: Council having previously deferred action on
a communication from Mr. Russell R. Itenleyo Executive Director, City of Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority, requesting official action by Council
approving Amendment No. 5 to the Kimball Redevelopment Pro~ect, Project No. VA.
R-4b, advising that said amendment entails changing the land use category to one
uniform designation of High-way Commercial and Light Industrial Use and that the
change is being made in an effort to allow maximum flexibility in the development
of the Kimball Project, the matter was again before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follow-
"January 4. 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, ~irginia
The above cited request was considered by the City
20. 1972.
Mr. Mesley Mhite appeared before the Planning Commission
and stated that this petition is not for a zoning change, but
original plan ~as prf,yJously approved by the City Planning,
ming Commission and the City Council for this amendment.
Finally, he stated that this imendment creates One uniform
land use classification.
Nr.'Parrott asked if the Commission has established
uny criterio or standards or does this flighnay Commercial
neet any of our zoning designations.
#r. White noted that this classitication actually is
Just to orientate the Uses and that the standards
certainly he held for this lznd use, and. in actuality,
calls for more stricter r~les governinb't~e use of the
load than the present plan does.
Accordingly, motion uus made, duly seconded and
mously approved recommending to City Council that this request
be approved,
Sincerely yours,
S/ Henry H. Hoynton by LN
Henry H. Hoynt?n
Chalrnan"
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the request of the City of
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority and offered the following Resolution:
(u20673) A RESOLUTION approving a certain amendment, being Amendment
No. 5. to the Redevelopment Plan for the Ninball Redevelopment Project, Project,
No. VA. R-46, located in the northeast section of the City of Roanoke, Virginia.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Hook ~37, page 378.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Hr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Mebber .......................... 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
~NTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC NELFARE-LEGIsLATION: Council having directed the
City Attorney to prepare the proper measure urging support, by the City's repre-
sentatives in the General Assembly of Virginia of legislation by which addi-
tional funds would be appropriated for the remainder of the fiscal year 1972=73
in the General Relief category of Public Welfare, he presented same; whereupon,
Mr. Trout offered the following Resolution:
(~20b74) A RESOLUTION urging support, by the City's representatives in
the General Assembly of Virginia of legislation by which additional funds would
be appropriated for the remainder of the fiscal year IqT2-T3 in the #General
Relief* category of Public Welfare.
(For f~ll text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book #37, page ~3HO.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
bI Mc. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................... ?-
NAYS: None .......... O.
334
BUSES: Council having directed the City Attorney to'prepure the
proper measure proposing certain apportionment with the City of Rosnoke of the
costs of providing bus transportation services in the City and ~in other adjacent
localities, he presented sase; whereupon. Br. Lisk offered the following Resolu-
tion:
(a2o675) A RESOLUTION proposing certain apportionment with the City
of Roanoke or the costs of providing bus transportation services in the City
and in other adjacent localities.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book a3T, page
Hr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Yebber .......................... ?*
NAYS: None ........... O.
BUSES-SCHOOLS-LEGISLATION: Council having directed the City Attorney
to prepare the proper measure urging support, by the city's representatives in
the General Assembly of Virginia, of legislation which would amend §46.1-169.1
of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, so as to allom certain buses used for
the transportation of pupils to and from schools in the City of Roanoke to be
offered the following Resolution:
(#20676) A RESOLUTION urging support, by the City's representatives
in the General Assembly of Virginia, of legislation which would amend §16.1-169.
of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, so as to allow certain buses used for
the transporation of pupils to and from schools in the City of Roanoke to be
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book n37, page 383.)
by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard. Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Robber .........................
NAYS: None ..........O.
MOTIONS AND ~ISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
PAY PLAN=CITY ERPLOYEES-CORMONREALTB' S ATTORNEY: At this point, Rayor
After the Executive Session, Mr. Thomas moved that the City Attorney
he directed to prepare the proper measure, effective February 1. 1973, increasing
the salary of Mr. Robert S. McLaughlin to $14,500.00 per annum and the salary of
Mr. Robert R. Osborne to $12,500.00 per annum and that the Commonwealth's
Attorney be instructed to advise Messrs. McLaughlin and Osborne that they are to
limit their private practice to a bare minimum and that they are to obtain
prior concurrence by the Commonmeulth°s Attorneybefore indulging in uny private
practice. The motion mos seconded by Rro Trout und unonimously adopted,
There being no further business° Rayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday, Jnauury 29° 19~3.
The Council of the City of R,an,he met in regular meeting in.the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, January 29, 1973, at 7:30
p.m** the regular meeting hour, with Mayor Roy Lo Mebber presiding,
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, Milliam S. Uubard, David
Lisk, Noel C. Taylor, Hampton M. Thomas, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy Lo
Mebber ....................... ?.
ABSENT: None ...... O.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Byron E. Hamer, City Manager; Mr. James
Eincanon, City Attorney; and Mr. A. N. Gibson. City Auditor.
INVOCATION: ~he meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend Genvel
J. Davis. Pastor, Rosalind Bills Baptist ~hurch.
MINUIES: COpy of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Ronday,
December ID, 1972, having been furnished each member of Council, on motion of Mr.
Trout, seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof was
dispensed mith and the minutes approved as recorded.
REARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
BUSES: Council having set a p~blic hearing for 7:30 p.m.. Monday,
ir January 29, 1973, on the proposed application of the City of Roanoke for a special
grant of $1,000,000,O0 from the Urban Mass Transit Administration, the purpose
of said grant to acquire some or all of the assets of Roanoke City Lines. Incor-
porated, the matter was before the body.
In this connection, Mr. Robert A. Garland, Chairman of the City Of
Roanoke Transportation Study Committee, advised that Mr. Marcus Bieler, Court
Reporter. Has present to transcribe the public hearing in detail and welcomed
Mr. Bieler to the meeting.
Mr. Garland pointed out that ~ritten notices advising of said public
hearing Here published in the Roanoke World-Nems on December 28, 1972o and in
the Roanoke Tribune ou January 11, 1973, and filed a copy of said notices of
publication mith Mr. Dieler.
Mr. Garland stated that the 9rant program provided two-thirds federal
share and one-third local share and that the costs are broken down as follows:
The purchase of twenty ne~ air-conditioned diesel buses.
to purchase the present fleet of bases and the real estate. $650.000.00; to
renovate the garage and shop facilities, $40,000.00; and construction and capital
improvements of $73,638.00 ~hich comes to a total of $1,500,000.00, pointing out
that Council, at its meeting on October 30, 1972, adopted Resolution NO. 20522
authorizing the City Manager to file the application with the Urban Mass Transit
Administration and that said application was submitted on November 30. 1972.
Mr. Garland further stated that Roanoke City Lines is the principal
mass transportation carrier in the urban area providing service to the Cities of
Roanoke and Salem. the Tonn of Vinton and portions of Roanoke and Rotetourt
Counties, that Roanoke City Lines, Incorporated, is a subsidiary of Continental
Traiinsys, that service Is at present provided on twenty-too routes and eight
lines over the follouing gtreet mileages in the various political subdivisions:
91.4 miles in Roanoke City;
7.1 miles in Salem;
S.I miles in Vinton;
4.8 niles in Roanoke County; and
5.3 niles in Rotetourt County; or s total of 240.3
total miles.
Mr. Garland pointed out that since 1959 ridership on Roanoke City
Lines, Incorporated. has declined from approximately 7.3 million to approximately
5.5 million, that figures for the past seven years have continued to decline
although at a somewhat lesser rate than in years since 1959. that approximately
1.5 million of these riders Mere school children in 1971, that the City of
Roanoke has, over the years, entered into a number of agreements with Roanoke
City Lines, Incorporated, mainly to permit fare increases in an attempt to keep
the Company financially sound.
Mr. Garland stated that three other bus companies operate mithin the
city: Pendleton Bus Company, Wright Bus Company and Abbott Bus Lines, Incorpor-
ated, that these companies 9enerally operate in areas not served by Roanoke City
Lines, that none sill be affected by the change in oMnership of Roanoke City
Lines, that the purchase of Roanoke City Lines. Incorporated, and thus this
grant, sas precipitated by the announcement in October of 1972 that the bus lines
would cease operations on January 1, 1973.
Mr. Garland presented the following breakdown of costs of the one and
a half million dollars by quarters and for the first, second and third fiscal
years:
Net Cost F~deral Local
First Quarter (After Project
Approval) $ 650,000.00 $433.334.00 $216,666.00
Second Quarter 360.000.00 240,000.00 120.000.00
Third Quarter 40.000.00 26,667.00 13.333.00
Fourth Quarter 40.000.00 26.667.00 13,333.00
First Fiscal Year Total 1,090.000.00 722,667.00 363,333.00
Second Fiscal Year Total 205,400,00 135,933.00 68,46T.00
Third Fiscal Year Total 204.600.00 136,400.00 68,200.00
Mr. Garland stated that the schedule of priorities and the grant request
is as follons:
First year, purchase of facilities and purchase of ten air-conditioned
diesel buses, construction of signs and shelters; the second year, purchase of
five hem air-conditioaed diesel buses and construction of signs and shelters;
third year, purchase of five neu air-conditioned diesel buses and construction
338
of shelters and signs nad also route extensions; the following yenr~, it is
intended to have route extensions and iuproveeent of rldership; advising that
financing, ns noted previously, will be usinly iron the Hrbnn Mass Transit Admi-
nistration Grant, the city bond issue, the General Fund nnd the prospect of aid
from some of the other local governments.
Mr, Garland pointed out that the transit development program will be
the cnntinning responsibility of the Roanohe City Engineering, Traffic and
Planning Departments, with assistance from similar departments in other local
governments, the Fifth Planning District Commission in its continuing traffic
planning capacity and the State Higb~ny Department.
Rt. Janes M. Colby, Executive Director of the Fifth Planning District
Commission. appeared before Council and advised that the Commission has consid-
ered this application most comprehensively during the month of January and that
the Executive Committee of the Fifth planning District Commission on January 11,
1973, gave unqualified endorsement to the application as prepared by the City of
Roanoke.
Mr. C. Po flrumfield, Planning Director, Total Action Against Poverty
in Roanoke Valley, appeared before Council and advised that TAP enthusiastically
supports this proposal.
Mr. George F. Dyer, 3038 Melrose Avenue, N. M,, appeared before Coun-
cil and presented a petition signed by 156 senior citizens to Melrose Towers and
Lansdowne Park requesting that Council provide the citizens in these areas with
better and safer transportation, that the busing route include the Lansdowne
Housing Project, continuing onto 31st Street, N. W., that the senior citizens
be given a fare of one-half regular fare or two tokens for thirty-five cents
between the hours of 10:00 a.a.. and 4:00 p.m.. that signs beerected on Melrose
Avenue to warn approaching traffic that elderly people are crossing and that
consideration be given toward including portable steps on the buses to provide
better ingress and egress for elderly citizens,
Rt. Garland moved that the petition be referred to the City Manager
for discussion with Mr. J. Mistar Stowe, President, Roanoke City Lines, Incor-
porated.
Reverend S. M. Hylton. Chairman of the Doard and Chief Executive
Officer oi the Senior Citizens Advisory Council of the City of Roanohe and
Roanoke County. appeared before Council and called attention to the dangerous
conditions which exist on Melrose Avenue and 31st Street, requesting that Council
route a bus through the Lansdowne Housing Project, up to 31st Street by Melrose
Avenue, by Melrose Towers and onto Melrose Avenue and further requesting that
Council look favorably upon providing better transportation to citizens of
LansdoMne Park and Melrose Towers.
After further discussion with reference to busing, Mr. Garland offered
the following Resolution ratifying and confirming the City of Roanoke*s
application dated November 30, 1972, for a grant under the Urban Moss Trsnspor-
ration Act of 1964, to assist in financing, ns a Capital Improvements Program
Project, a public bus transportation system for the City of Roanoke and certain
other areas of the Fifth Planning District:
(#20677) A RESOLUTION rntJfying and confirming the City of Roanoke's
application dated November 30, 1972. for a grant under the Urban Mass Transporta-
tion Act of 1964~ to assist in financing as a Capital Improvements Program Pro-
ject, a public bus transportation system for the City of Roanoke and certain
other areas in the Fifth Planning District.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book ~37, page 3tiS.)
Mr, Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................... ?.
NAYS: None ...........O.
STATE HIUDMAYS: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p,m.,
Monday, January 29, 1973, on the question of approving and adopting n certain
Roanoke Valley Area Thoroughfare Plan for 1985, dated 1969, developed and pro-
posed by the Fifth Planning District Commission, the matter was before the body.
In this connection, Mr. Randolph E. Campbell, Principal Transportation
Planner for the Department of Highmays, and Mr. Richard Burroughs, Assistant
Transportation Planning Engineer for the Department Of Highways, appeared before
Council and explained, in detail, the aspects of the Roanoke Valley Thoroughfare
Plan for 1985.
After a discussion of the matter. Mr. Lisk offered the following Reso-
lution approving and adopting a certain Roanoke Valley Area Thoroughfare Plan
(for 1985), dated 1959, developed and proposed by the Fifth Planning District
Commission:
(~20678) A RESOLUTION approving and adopting a certain Roanoke Valley
Area Thoroughfare Plan (for 1985), dated 1969, developed and proposed by the
Fifth Planning District Commission.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book #37, page 385.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion nas seconded
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the f,Il,ming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Rayor
Webber ....................... 7.
NAYS: None ......... O.
SCHOOLS-BUSES: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m.,
.Monday, January 29, 1973, on the question of approving and adopting a certain
Urban Area Transit Study, dated 1970, developed and proposed by the Fifth Planning
District Commission, the matter sas before the body.
,340
In tbis connection, Mr. Thomas Bradey, Environmental Ouality Engineer
for the Fifth Planning District Commission, appeared before Council and explained
in detail, the aspects of the Urban Area Transit Study.
After a discussion of the matter, Mr. Lisk offered the foil*ming
Resolution approving and adopting n certain Urban Area Transit Study, dated
1970, developed and proposed by the Fifth Planning District Commission:
(z20579) A RESOLUTION approving and adopting a certain Urban Area
Transit Study, dated 1970, developed and proposed by the Fifth Planning District
Commission.
· (For full text of Resolution, see as in Ordinance Hook =37, page 367.)
Mr. Link moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the foil*ming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Llsk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ........................ 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
PLANNING: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m., Monday,
January 29, 1973, on the question of approving and adopting a certain plan
entitled Grouth and Development - A Land Use Plan for the Fifth Planning District
dated March, 1971, developed and proposed by the Fifth Planning District Commis-
sion, the matter Mas before the body.
la this connection, Mr..James M. Colby. Executive Director of the
Fifth Planning District Commission. appeared before Council and explained, in
detail, the aspects of said Plan.
After a discussion Of the matter, Mr. Carland offered the following
Resalution approving and adopting a certain plan entitled Gromth and Development
A Land Use Plan for the Fifth Planning District, dated March, 1971. developed
and proposed by the Fifth Planning District Commission:
(z20680) A RESOLUTION approving and adopting a certain plan entitled
Growth and Development - A Land Use Plan for the Fifth Planning District.
dated March, Ig71. developed and proposed by the Fifth Planning District Commis-
sion.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Hook ~37, page 388.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
Mebber ...................... ?.
NAYS: None ......... O.
STATE HIGHWAYS: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m.,
Monday. January 29, 1973, on an application of Mr. S. Douglas ShackleS*rd. et ux.
to amend the Major Arterial Highway Plan so as to eliminate the proposed reloca-
tion of Moods Avenue at its intersection with the west side Of Franklin Road,
S. M., the matter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follomlng
report recommending that the request to amend the 1980 Hlghmay Plan be approved:
"December 7, 1972'
The Honorable Roy L. Mebber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request mas'considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of December b,
1972.
Mr. Dodson appeared before the Planning Commission and
stated that when the 1985 Major Arterial Highmay Plan made
some 5 or 6 years ago, Mr. Shackleford*s property on the
corner of Moods Avenue and Franklin Road, S. M,, was proposed
to be taken to eliminate a dogleg situation at this inter-
section. He further stated that this hem road would cut a
major portion of Mr. Shackleford's property, leaving it
unusable and that the only may Hr. 5hachleford could sell
this property would be if Moods Avenue was not realigned.
He further noted that the Fifth Planning District Commission
has approved maintaining Moods Avenue in its present align-
meat.
Zhe Planning Director noted that both the approved
19HO Zhoroughfare Plan and the proposed 1985 Thoroughfare
Plan showed the realignment of Moods Avenue at Franklin
Road. He noted that to maintain Moods Avenue in its pre-
sent alignment would require an amendment to the arterial
plan (1980) and appropriate action by the Fifth Planning
District Commission. Zhe Planning Director then presented
a letter from the Fifth Planning District Commission approv-
ing of this amendment to the ilighway Plan (See enclosed
letter).
Much discussion amah9 the Planning Commissioners
centered au the traffic situation on Woods Avenue and the
importance of eliminating the dogleg Situation on Franklin
Road and Moods Avenue.
After discussion by the Planning Commission members,
it was generally agreed that the 1080 Highway Plan be
amended so as to maintain Moods Avenue in its present align-
ment.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and unani-
mously approved recommending to City Council that this
request to amend the 1980 Highway Plan be approved.
Sincerely,
S/ Creed K. Lemon, Jr.. by LM
Creed K. Lemon, Jr.
Chairman"
Also in connection with the matter, the following report from Mr. Julian
F. Dirst, former City Manager. recommending that the Major Arterial Highway Plan
as to this immediate area be retained and that there not be a change in the pro-
posal of the realignment of Moods Avenue on the west side of Franklin Road, S.
was before Council:
"December 18, 1972
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Moods Avenue and Franklin Road, S. M,
The City Council several weeks ago received a request
from Mr. E. Griffith Dodson, Jr., Attorney, representing S,
Douglas Shackleford and Elizabeth C. Shackleford in which
342
it wes' requested that the maJo~'erterial highmay plan be
amended to elfmfnnte n proposal of n relocation of a por-
tion of Woods Avenue ut Its intersection with the west.side
of Franklin Road, S.W. At your meeting on December 11,
1972, you received n communication from the City Planning
Commission in mhich the Planning Commission concurred in
this request and recommended that Council request an
amendment to the highmay plan. There also accompanied a
letter from the Fifth Planning District Commission to the
City Planning Commission indicating concurrence by the Execu-
tive Committee of the Fifth Planning District Commission in
the request for realignment.
By Council actlom on December 11. this matter is
scheduled for public hearing in the latter part of January
1973.
I mFite to place on record question as to amending
the highway plan for this purpose and to recommend that this
change as has been petitioned for not be made,
Under the present street arrangement'the intersection
of Needs Avenue with Franklin Road on the west side of
Franklin Road is offset to the north from the intersection
of Woods Avenue with Franklin Road on the east side of
Franklin Road. As you are aware there are two things
in¥olred here in highway programming. Franklin Road is
scheduled ultimately to be midened and improved. Meverthe-
less the use in traffic situations prevails at the present
time irrespective of how much time will be ahead in this
improvement. The second element is the use of Needs Avenue
under the one-way system which is a part of the long-range
arterial plan and the use of this is already being experienced.
The purpose of the realignment of Moods Avenue on the
west side as proposed in the arterial highway plan is to
eliminate the *dogleg' situation and to provide a straight
intersection of Moods Avenueat Franklin Road. This is nest
desirable for traffic control, for traffic movement, for
signal installations and for the general alignment of the
roadway. Whenever possible an offsetting situation such as
this should be eliminated. The advantages of eliminating
this are already apparent under the present use conditions
and will become more apparent with the ,improvement and
widening of Franklin Road in some future years.
I would recommend that the major arterial plan as
to this immediate area be retained and that there not be
a change in the proposal of the realignment of Moods Avenue
on the west side of Franklin Road.
Respectfully submitted.
$/ Julian F. Birst
Julian F. Hirst
City Manager"
Mr. Byron E. Haner, City Manager, stated that he would like to re/term
the recommendation made by Mr. Hirst.
Mr. E. 6riffith Dodson. Jr., Attorney, representing the petitioner,
appeared before Council in support of the request of his client.
Mc. $. Douglas Shackleford also appeared before Council and expressed
the opinion that if Council does not grant this request, it will defeat the
opportunity of bringing a really nice development into the area.
After a discussion of the matter, Mr. Hubard moved that the public
hearing be continued until the regular meeting of Council on Monday, February
26. 1973, and that the City Manager be instructed to seek the advice and assis-
tance of the Fifth Planning District Commission math respect to the matter and
report bach to Council at that time with his recommendations regarding the
amendment to the Major Arterial Highway Plan. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Lisk and unanimously adopted.
ZONING:-Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m,, Monday,
January 29, 1973o on the request of Mr, S, Douglas Shackleford, et ux,, that pro-
perty located in the 300 block of Moods Avenue, $. W., described us Lot 10,
Block 14, Exchange Duilding ~ Investment Company, Official Tax No. 1030910, be
rezoned iron RG-2o General Residential District, to C-l, Office and Institutional
District, the matter uas before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follomJng
report recommending that the request be granted:
"December 7, 1972
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemeo:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of December 6.
1972.
Mr. Dodson appeared before the Planning Commission and
stated that the petitioner omned the two lots adjacent to
the subject lot at the corner of Moods Avenue and Franklin
Road, S. M., and would like to have the C-I boundary line
extended one lot over in order that all three of these lots
could be sold for construction of some type commercial build-
ing with adequate parking spaces to be provided, tie further
stated that the property along Franklin Road to the south
belongs to the Bowers and across the street is the medical
clinic and the old Ilayes, Stay, Mattern and Mattern Ruilding.
Finally, Mr. Oodson stated that there ace many handsome
buildings along Franklin Road and they would like to sell to
someone planning another office building on this property.
Mr. Wentworth asked if they had considered closing the
alley adjacent to the property. Mr. Shackleford answered
that it would give them some additional land but that they had
not requested this to be done at the present time.
After discussion by the Planning Commission members, it
was generally felt that this caroming would be in keeping with
the general character of the neighborhood.
Accordingly. motion mas made, duly seconded and unanimously
approved, recommending to City Council that this request be
approved.
Sincerely,
S/ Creed K. Lemon, Jr., by LM
Creed K. Lemon, Jr.
Mr~ E. Criffith Dodson. Jr.. Attorney· representing the petitioners,
appeared before Council in support of the request of his clients.
No one appearing in opposition to the request for rezoning, Dr. Taylor
moved that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(=20681) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1955, as amended, and Sheet No, 103, Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning,
RHEREAS, application has been made to the Council of the City of
Roanoke to have the property on the south side of Woods Avenue, S. M., known as
=350 and being Lot IO, Block 14, Exchange Building ~ Investment Company. Official
344
Tau No. 103091q, rezoned from RG-2, General Residential District, to C-l,
Office nnd .Institutional District; and.
WHEREAS, the City .Planning Commission has recommeeded that the herein-
after described land be rezoned iron RG-2, General Residential District, to
Office and lnstltutienal District; and
WHEREAS, the written notice and the posted sign required to be publishe
and posted, respectively, by Section ?1, Chapter 4.1, Title XV, of The Code of
the City of Roanoke, 1956. as amended, relating to Zoning, have been published
and posted as required and for the time provided by said section; and
WHEREAS, the hearin9 os provided for in.said notice was held on the
29th day of January, 1973. at 7:30 p.m.. before the Council of the City of
Roanoke, at which hearing nil parties in interest and citizens were given an
opportunity to be heard, both for and against the proposed rezoning; and
MHEREAS, this Council, after considering the evidence as herein pro-
vided, is of the opinion that the hereinafter described land s~ould be rezoned.
THEREFORE, I~K IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
Title XV. Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of The Code of the City of Ronnoke. 1956. as
amended, relating to Z~ning, and Sheet No. 103 of the Sectional 1966 Zone Map.
City of Roanoke, be amended in the following particular and no other, viz:
Property located on the south side of Roods Avenue, S. W.o known as
· 350. and being Lot 10. Block 14, Exchange Building ~ Investment Company,
designated on Sheet 103 of the Sectional 1966 Zone Rap, City of Roanoke, as
Official Tax No. 1030910, be, and i.s hereby changed from RG-2, General Residen-
tial District, to C-l, Office and Institutional District, and that Sheet No.
103 of the aforesaid nap be changed in this respect.
The motion was seconded by Rro Thomas and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. flubard, Lisk. Taylor. Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Rebber .........................
NAYS: None ........... O.
SIREETS AND ALLEYS: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30
Monday. January 29, 1973. on the request of the City of Roanoke Redevelopment
and IIousing Authority that certain streets, avenues and alleys within or border-
ing the area of the Eimball Redevelopment Project VA. R-46 in the northeast sec-
tion of 'the City of Roanoket he vacated, discontinued and closed, the matter was
before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follow-
ing report recommending that the request be granted:
"December 7. 1972
The Honorable Roy L. Rebber. Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
The abate cited request was considered by the City Plan-
ning Commission at its regular meeting of December 6. 1972.
Hr, Staples appeared before the Planning Commission and
stated that all of these streets and alleys are in the area in
which extensive grading ia going on nam and that the Roanohe
Redevelopment smd flousing Authority has now acquired all o! the
property necessary, and this application is to close the
remaining streets and alleys that they were unable to close
before.
Also, Mro Staples noted that they would lihe to with-
draw HcDowell Avenue, east or ?th Street from this applica-
tion because Esso Standard Oil, one of the few aha gun pro-
perty on these streets besides the AathoFlty, has a storage
area in this ~cation with the only access to it being by
#cDowell Avenue, east to ?th Street,
Finally, NV. Staples noted that all of the people that
night be affected bordering on any of these streets have been
notified in writing and that they have not encountered any
objection, with the exception of this little section of
KcDowell Avenue.
After discussion by the Planning Commission members, it
was generally felt that the closing of these streets and alleys
was in accordance with the redevelopment plan of the Kimball
project as approved by City Council in 1968.
Accordingly. motion was made, duly seconded and approved
unanimously that certain streets, avenues, and alleys within
or bordering the area of the Kimball Redevelopment Project
VA. R-d6 in the northeast section of the City of Roanoke. be
vacated, discontinued and closed with the exception of the
small section of McDoweil Avenue east of 7th Street.
Sincerely.
S/ Creed K. Lemon, Jr., by LM
Creed K. Lemon, Jr.
Chairman"
The viewers appointed to view the streets, avenues and alleys submitted
a written report advising that they have viewed the streets, avenues and alleys
and adjacent neighborhood and are unanimously of the opinion that no inconven-
ience would result from vacating, discontinuing and closing same.
No one appearing in opposition to the request. Mr. Trout moved that
the following Ordinance b~ placed upon its first reading:
(#20692) AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing
certain streets and portions of streets, avenues nad portions of avenues, and
alleys within the boundary of or bordering the Kimball Redevelopment Proj act
VA E-d6 in the northeast section of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as are herein-
after more fully described.
WHEREAS. the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority has
heretofore filed a petition with the Council of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, in
accordance with law. requesting said Council to permanently vacate, discontinue
and close certain streets, avenues and alleys or portions Of same located within
the boundary of or bordering the Kimball Redevelopment Project VA R-46, of the
filing of which said petition due notice was given to the public as required by
law; and
RHEREAS, in accordance with the prayer of said petition, viewers were
appointed by the Council on the 6th day of November, 1972, to view the property
and to report in writing whether in their opinion any inconvenience would result
from permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing said streets, avenues and
alleys or portions of sane; and
:346
WHEREAS, it appears from the written report of said viewers filed
with the City Clerk on the 4th day of 0ecember, 1972, that no inconvenience
mould result either to any individual or to the public from permanently vacating,
discontinuing and closing said streets, avenues and alleys or portions of same,
except mfth respect to lien ~o. 18 of said petition comprising all of the area
of NcO*nell Avenue, N. E** lying between its intersection with the easterly line
of Eimball Avenue (?th Street). N. E., and its present easterly terminus at the
property line of the Norfolk and Restern Railway Company, which street the viewer~
found and so reported to be in regular use by the Humble Oil Company for access
to a storage area, and that the property owner has no other access to such St*F--
age area. Said viewers accordingly reported that inconvenience and injury would
result to Rumble Oil Company (Esso Standard Oil) from a closing of Item No. 18
in said petition; and
WHEREAS. Council at its meeting on the 6th day of November, 1972,
referred the petition to the City Planning Commission. which Commission by its
report dated December 7, 1972, and filed with Council recommended that the
petition to vacate, discontinue and close the streets, avenues and alleys and
portions thereof as described in said petition be approved, with the exception of
said Item 16 of said petition being the portion of bcD*well Avenue above referred
to; and
WHEREAS, a public hearin9 was held on the question before the Council
at its regular meeting on January 29, 1973, after due and timely notice thereof
published in The ¥orld News. at which hearing all parties in interest and
citizens were afforded an opportunity to be heard on the question; and at said
bearing counsel for the petitioner advised the Council that the petitioner
desired to withdraw its application for closing with respect to Item No. 16 of
the petition comprising all of the area of icH*well Avenue, N. E., lying between
its intersection with the easterly line of Kimball Avenue (?th Street). N. E.,
and its present easterly terminus at the property line of the Norfolk and Nestern
Railway Company; and
WHEREAS, from all of the foregoing, the Council considers that, with
the exception above noted with respect to Item 18 of the petition, no incon-
venience will result to any individual or to the public fram permanently vacating,
discontinuing and closing the streets, avenues and alleys and portions thereof
within and bordering upon the Kimball Redevelopment Project, as applied for by
the petitioner, and that said streets, avenues and alleys and portions thereof
should be permanently closed as hereinafter provided.
ZHEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
all of the following described streets, avenues, alleys and portions of streets
and avenues located within the boundary of or borderin upon the Kimball Redevelop=
meat Project VA R-45 Of the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Aathority,
located in the northeast section of the City of Roanoke. be and they are hereby
permanently vacated, discontinued and closed; and that ail right, t~tle and
interest of the poblJc in and to the same be, and it is hereby released insofar
OS the Council Of the City of Roanoke i~ empowered sa to do, the City of Roanoke
hereby expressly reserving an easement in said streets, avenues, alleys and
portions of streets and avenues for the maintenance, operation, repair and replace
meat of any existing water line, or other municipal installation or public
utility nam located in said streets, avenues, alleys and portions of streets and
avenues, such easement or.easemeots to terminate upon the later abandonment of
use or permanent removal from tho streets, avenues, alleys and portions of streets
and avenues of uny such municipal installation or ftility by the owner thereof:
1, All of the area of 5th Street, N. E., lying between the
intersection of 5th Street with the northerly line of Shenan-
doah Avenue, N. E** and a line projected at right angles
across 5th Street from a point on the easterly side of 5th
Street 183.27 feet south of the southerly line of Gilmer
Avenue, N.
2. All of a certain 12 foot alley from its intersection
with Sth Street, N. E.. at a point 80 feet north of Shenan-
doah Avenue; thence northeasterly paralleling Shenandoah
Avenue approximately ISS feet to an angle turn; thence
northerly paralleling Sth Street approximately ?0 feet to a
left right angle turn; thence westerly parallel with Gamier
Avenue, N. E.. approximately 150 feet to Sth Street at a
point 80 feet south of Gilmer Avenue (now closed).
3. All of the area of Gilmer Avenue, N. £., from a p~int
90 feet east of the easterly line of 5th Street, N.
(now closed) to the intersection of Gainer Avenue with
the northwesterly line of Shenandoah Avenue, N. E.
4. All of the area of Sixth Street, N. E., lying between
the intersection of 6th Street mith the northerly line
of Gilmer Avenue.and the intersection of 6th Street with
the northwesterly line of Shenandoah Avenue, N. E.
5. All of a certain triangular portion of Harrison Avenue.
~. E., lying between the easterly line of 6th Street. ~. E..
(now closed) and the northwesterly line of Kimball Avenue,
6. All of the area of Walker Avenue. No E., lying between
its intersection with the westerly line of Kimball Avenue
(Yah St.), N. E., and the present terminus of Walker Avenue
approximately 250 feet west of 5th Street,.H.E.
7. All of the area of Gregory Avenue. N. E., lying between
its intersection with the westerly line of Kimball Avenue
(Yah St.), N. E., and its present terminus at the westerly
line of 5th Street, N. E.
6. All of the area of Madison Avenue, N. E., l~ing between
its intersection with the westerly line of Kimball Avenue.
{Yth St.), N. E., and its present terminus approximately 325
feet west of 6th Street, N. E.
9. All of the area of McDowell Avenue, N. E., lying between
its intersection with the westerly line of £imball Avenue
(?th St.), N. E., and its present terminus approximately 400
feet west of 6th Street, N. E.
10. All of the area of Rockview Avenue lying between its
intersection with the southerly line of Orange Avenue, N.
thence southerly approximately 200 feet to a right angle
turn, thence westerly approximately 500 feet to the present
westerly terminus of Rockview Avenue.
11. All of the area of 5th Street, N. E., lying between the
southerly llne of Walker Avenue and the northerly line of
Gregory Avenue.
3.48
12, All of the are· of 6th Street, N. ED, lying between the
southerly line of Walker Avenue ·nd the present northerly
terminus of 6th Street being the southerly line or Lots 1
and 2 of the flachrech Addition.
13o All of n cert·in 10 foot mlde alley extending from ·
point on the easterly line of 6th Street, equi-diatnnt from
Gregory Avenue on the north and Walker Avenue on the South·
and fanning parallel with Gregory Avenue ·nd Walker Avenue in
an easterly direction approximately 370 feet to the masterly
line of ·no·her alley,
14. All of a certain 10 foot wide alley from its inter-
section math the southerly line of Gergory Avenue approxi-
mately 138 feet mesa of Kimball Avenue, N. £** to its inter-
section with the northern line of Walker Avenue approximately
lO0 feet west of Kimball Avenue, N. K.
15, All of · certain 10 foot wide alley from its intersec-
tion with McDonell Avenue, N. £.. at a point approximately
75 feet westerly from Kimball Avenue to its point of inter-
section with the northerly line of Madison Avenue, N.
approximately 105 feet mesa of Kimball Avenue.
16. All of a certain alley from its intersection.w/th the
southerly line of Orange Avenue, N. K., at a pointapproxi-
ma·ely bO feet west of the easterly line of Rockview Avenue
to the present terminus of amid alley approximately 107,6
feet south of Orange Avenue.
17. All of a certain alley from its intersection with the
mesa line of 6th Street, N. E** approximately 65 feet north
of RcDomell Avenue, thence westerly approximately 370 feet
to the westerly terminus of said alley at a point approxi-
mately 76 feet north·est of the northerly line of McDowell
la. All of a certain alley between it s intersection with the
easterly liue of Kimball Avenue at a point approximately 110
feetnorth.ofMcDowell Avenue, N. E., and the easterly termi-
nus of said alley at the property line of the Norfolk and
Western Railway Co,
19. All of the area of Millis Avenue, N. £., lying between
its intersection with the easterly line of Kimball Avenue,
being the west property line of Lot 2A, Section 9, Official
Survey N. i. 6, Tax No. 3030105.
20. All of a certain O foot alley lying between its inter-
section with the easterly line of Kimball Avenue, N. E., at
a point approximately 30 feet southwesterly from the south
line of Orange Avenue, to the easterly terminus bf said
alley, being the west property line of Lot 2A, Section 9,
Official Survey. N. E. 6, Tax No. 3030105.
21. All of a certain 12 foot wide alley from the point of.
its intersection with the southerly line of the aliaI des-
cribed in number 20 above, approximately 52 feet south to
its present terminus approximately 28.2 feet north of Willis
22. All of the area located within·he following intersec-
tions of the above mentioned streets: intersection of 5th
Street with Wells Avenue; Gilmer Avenue with 6th Street;
Walker Avenue with 5th Street; Walker Avenue with 6th Street;
Gregory Avenue with Sth Street; Gregory Avenue with 6th
Street; Mc~owell Avenue with 6th Street.
All of the foregoing descriptions being according to Tax
Appraisal Maps 301, 302 and 303 of record in the City Engineer*s
Office of the City of Roanoke.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the City Engineer be, and he hereby is,
avenues, or portions thereof, or alleys on all maps and plats on file in his
book and page Of Ordinances and Resolutions Of the Council of the City of
Roanoke wherein this Ordinance shall be spread.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the Clerk of the Council deliver to the
Clerk of the Hustings Court of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, u certified copy
Of this Ordinance in order that the Clerk of said Court nay make proper notation
on all naps and plats recorded in his office upon mhich are shomn said streets,
avenues and alleys hereby.vacated, as provided by lam, and that, if so requested
by any party in intererto he may record the same in the deed book in his office
indexing the same in the City of Roanoke as grantor and in the name of any party
in interest who may request it ns grantee.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Ilubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber .....................
NAYS: None ............ O,
POLICE DEPARTMENT: Mr. George W. Graves. President, Private Patrol,
Incorporated, appeared before Council and presented the folloming communication
with reference to protection for citizens using the Jefferson Street Underpass
and with reference to security at Roanoke Municipal (MOodFum) Airport:
"PRIVATE PATROL INCORPORATED
Toute 5. Box
Roanoke, Virginia
January 29, 1973
City Council of Roanoke
Municipal Building
Gentlemen:
Private Patrol Inc. is a privately owned corporation,
which is licensed to patrol private property, highways and
through alleys.
Each patrolman is especially trained with two years of
college and six months of Judo and Karate. Each patrolman
has been trained to use Phase I (Camera - T.V.), i~stallment
of equipment will be $12,000, and $500.00 a month for rental.
Phase II (gao) will cost $100,000 which includes three
guns - rental on each gun is $100.00 making a total of
$$00.00 for all. Total rental on installment of Phase I and
II $600.00 a month.
Private Patrol Inc. is the most advanced Corp. which
is qualified in the use of electronics. We have and now
cover some of the places known to be the worst in Roanoke.
The areas between Melrose and llth Street (includes two
garages), Orange Avenue, Moorman Road at loth Street and
Moorman Road at 24th Street. Private Patrol has moved in
and cleaned up these break-ins and corruptions. There has
been only two break-ins in the last two years that Private
Patrol has been in business. And they apprehended then.
All Private Patrolmen are plains cloths in order not
to give away identity to the public.
UNDERPASS: (located at Norfolk and Nestern) If
patroled by Private Patrol Inc., the fee mill be $10.00
every ten minutes. Three cameras used for police car sit-
tin9 outside of underpass cost'will be $12,000. Dispatch
to be added - $300.00 a block. For use of Patrol Car for
schools $50.00 a block.
With the new Private Patrol Electronic Alarms System
one nan can do the work of all.
AIRPORT: If patroled by Private Patrol Inc. the fee mill
be $50.000 every six months. Me guarantee in writing, to be
able to detect any weapons on any person when entering or
350
or before entering the terminal. Only Private Patrol is
allowed the use of Phase II (gun - sleeping gun, oozy berm
puts one t~ sleep with'effects similar tO a heart attach),
We mill also be able to apprehend one inside of building bT
loching all doors by individual locBs.
Private Petrol Incorporated mill supply u Computerized
cst rot $70,000.
Yours truly,
PRIVATE PATROL INCORPORATED
S/ George Graves
George Graves. President
William A. Graves. Vice-President*
Mr. Thomas moved that the matter be referred tO the City Manager for
the purpose of contacting Mr. Graves to discuss this matter on behalf of the
City of Roanohe. Tho motion uae seconded bT ~r. Trout and unanimously adopted.
PETITIONS ANB COMRUNICATIONS:
OUBGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanohe City School Ooard.
requesting that $4,000.00 be appropriated to "Schools - LibrarT Materials."
under Section #gO000 of the 1972-73 budget of the Roanoke catT School Board, to
provide funds for library boobs and nate£ials for Roffner Jueior High School,
Fairvlew, Bound flail and Grandam Court Elementary Schools and advising that
lOO~ of actual expenditures nill be reimbursed from P. L. 89-10, Title li funds,
was before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanohe
catT School Board and offered the following em~rgencT Ordinance:
(a20683) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~9oo00, "Schools
Library Materials," of the 1~72-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n3?. page 389.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the OrdinanCe. The .notion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Lish. Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Bsyor Webber ................ 7.
NAYS: None--~ .......O.
AIRPORT: A communication from My. d. O. Logan, III, Attorney, repre-
senting Arrow Wood Country Club, Incorporated, advising that Arrow Wood Country
Club. Incorporated. leases from th~ city the property known as the Airport West
Clear Zone for use as a golf course, tBat the lease restricts the property to
use as a golf course, that Arrow Mood Country Club is securing a loan from the
Builders Investment Group pursuant to a loan commitment dated September 20, 1972,
for improvement of Arrow Hood's adjacent property and requesting the written
consent of the City of Roanoke to the agsignment of Arrow Wood's leasehold
interest under the aforesaid lease as security for said loan and that written
consent, mill in no uny affect the city's rights to rentals under the lense and
the conditions conta~ed therein, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be referred to the City Attorney
for study, report and recommendation to Council, The motion nas seconded by M£.
Trout and unanimously adopted.
COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY: A memorandum from the Commonnealth's Attor-
ney requesting that $9,000.00 be appropriated for Investigator Grant No.
TI-A1311, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the memorandum be referred to the City Manager
for study, report and recommendation and that the City Manager be requested to
report to Council by the next regular meeting of the 'body on Monday. February 5.
19T3. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
COMRONMEALTII*S ATTORNEy-PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOYEES: A memorandum from
the Commonmealth*s Attorney requesting an Executive Session with the members of
Council concerning the hiring of an additional assistant for his office, was
before the body.
~r. R. L. Lawrence, Commonwealth's Attorney. appeared before Council
and advised that he has a gentlemen who is interested in this job but he needs
to advise him of the starting salary for said position.
respondence from the State Compensation Board advising him what the Board will
approve as a starting salary for said new assistant and that upon receiving this
correspondence. Mr. Lawrence can then return to Council and request a supplemen-
tal appropriation if it Js deemed necessary.
Mr. Thomas then moved that the memorandum be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
RADIO-TELEVISION: A communication from Mr. Nilliam L. Glenn. Jr**
suggesting that Council confer with the Council of Charlottesville. Virginia,
with reference to their opinions and experiences concerning cable television
before the City of Roanoke hires a consulting firm to study the feasibility of
having cable television in the City of Roanoke. was before the body.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be referred to the CATV
Committee for its information in connection eith its study of the matter. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
INDOSTRIES-b'fATE RIGRMA~S: The City Manager submitted the following
report with reference to a communication from Mr. John D. Copenhaver, Attorney.
representing Highland Company, Incorporated. requesting city contributions to
upgrade a road being built by Appalachian Power Company to a new facility on 9th
Street, S. E** advising that for the City of Roanoke io participate in the con-
352
the Highland Company that they will provide the same services ns AppalschJnn
Pomer Company has provided for the 12HO-foot by 60-foot right of wny across the
property of Frsuhlin Realty nad subject to the receipt of the necessary informa-
tion as is required by the State Highmay Department for indostrial access funds.
that tbe city could either agree to request the State Highway Department to con-
aldeF this area for access road or the city could agree tn participate in the
construction of the roadway on the same terms as provided to the Appalachian
Power Company:
"January 29, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia.
Centlemen:
Subject: Highland Company, Incorporated, Request for Access
On Honday. December 18. lq?2, City Council received
a communication from Mr. John D. Copenhaver. Attorney.
representing Highland Company. Inc. Mr. Copenhaver mas
requesting the City of Roanoke to extend the Franklin
Realty Industrial Access Road across the Franklin Realty
acreage to the edge of their property to the west. The
Franklin Realty Company property is the site of the Appa-
lachian Porter Company's new building in the Roanoke Indus-
trial Center. Mr. Copenhaver stated that this 1.200-foot
roadway extension would allow Highland Company to develop
the 6.5 acres of land it owns as an industrial site thereby
increasing the value of this property. To do this would
require the extension of the Industrial Access Road across
property now owadd by the Franklin Realty Company.
It has been the custom in the construction of such
industrial access roadways for the property owner desiring
industrial access road to provide the right of way for this
construction and to provide pertinent data such as the num-
ber of employees, traffic flow, etc., for the industries
which would benefit from such roadway construction. Appa-
lachian Power Company provided the 4HO-foot by 60-foot
strip of right of way needed and that company will bear the
expense of the construction across ID1CO property to their
property line. lhe City is only participating by providing
an additional width and thickness of pavement which are
considered desirable for the type of traffic mhich will
use this roadway.
For the City to participate in the construction of this
roadway it would seem appropriate to request assurances from
Highland Company that they will provide the same services as
Appalachian has for the 1,200-foot by 60-foot right of way
across Franklin Healty"s property and subject to the receipt
of .the necessary information as is required by the State
Hiqhway Department for industrial access funds, the City
could either agree to request the State Highway Department
to consider this area for access road or the City could
agree to participate in ~e construction of the roadway
on the same terms as provided to the Appalachian Power Com-
pany.
Should City Council concur it would be recommended that
tbs City Clerk be asked to notify Hr. Copenhaver of this
decision.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Dyron E. Hamer
Byron £. Hamer
City Manager*
Hr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion mos
teconded by Mr. Link and unanimously adopted,
S~ATE HIGHMAYS: Council having referred to the City Manager for study.
report and recommendation a joint communication from Mr. Fred C, Ellis. Presi-
dent, Truck Sales. Incorporated. and Mr. C. P, Brooks, Manager. Sears Roebuck ~
Company, requesting the consideration of Council of a left turn opening on Orange
Avenue to go north on Courtland Road. the City Manager submitted the folloming
report transmitting the follomlng communication from Mr. J. G. Ripley, State
Urban Engineer for the Virginia Department of Highnays. advising that the High-
way Department cannot recommend a crossover at Courtland Road because of traffic
operation problems that would be incurred and the safety hazard that mould exist
and that if they could recommend the crossover, it nouH have been included in the
plans because it was certainly given considerable thought:
"January 29, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Centlemen:
Subject: Highway Redian - Orange Avenue at Courtland Road
At City Council's meeting on Tuesday. December 25, a
delegation of businessmen from the area of Orange Avenue and
~illiamson Road appeared before Council with a petition
requesting that a crossover be provided in tho recently
constructed median on Orange Avenue, U. S. Route 460. at
Courtland Road. This matter was referred to the City
Manager*s office for study, report and recommendation.
An inquiry into the subject was sent to Mr. J. G.
Ripley, State Urban Engineer for the Virginia Department
of Highways in Richmond. Mr. Ripley has since replied by
letter dated January 16. copy of which is attached for
Council*a information. A study of the City*s files con-
firm the history of this matter as reported in Mr. Ripley*s
letter. The highway median is and has been included in
all regional highway plans, which go back at least as far
as 1963. As with all local highway projects constructed
with State and/or Federal funds the City was required to
sign an agreement on the Orange Avenue project that we would
make no changes in the physical improvements without prior
approval of the Highway Department. As stated in Mr. Ripley's
letter, the Highway Department does not feel that it could
concur mith the requested median crossover.
The problems with a median crossover at Courtland Road
are associated with the access ramps at the 1-561 interchange
as well as the major intersection of Orange Avenue and Nil-
liamson Road. As it is now there is considerable traffic
weaving on Orange Avenue between the northbound exit ramp
from l-SDl and the left-turn storage lane at Milliamson
Road. To allom left turns at Courtland Road could lead to
backup in the storage lane in conflict with the interstate
off-ramp. The earlier Arterial Highway Plan called for n
cloverleaf interchange at Orange Avenue nod Milliamson Road
in recognition of the heavy traffic demand for left turns
northbound onto Nilliamson Road, The right of way for this
interchange mas not protected, and because of business and
other opposition the at-grade intersection was developed.
The requested median crossover would have a detrimental affect
on on already heavily loaded intersection, in the opinion of
all traffic officials involved.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Byron £. Boner
Byron E. Haner
City Manager"
After u discussion of the mutter, Mr. Trout moved that thq report be
referred bach to the City Manager for the purpose of coming up with u solution
satisfactory to all parties concerned. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and
unanimously adopted.
SALE OF PROPERTY: The C~ty Manager submitted the following report
advising that the city has received a request from Mr. Donald A. Smith. Vlnton
Tomn Manager, as to the mJllingness of the city to allow the Town of Vintoo to
use clty-omned Smith Spr~ng property for park and playground purposes and trans-
mitting copy of a lease prepared by the City Attorney*s Office whereby the city
will allow the Town of Vinton to use the Smith Spring property for park and
thirty days cancellation:
"January 29, 1973
IIonorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Subject: Smith Spring Property - Town of Vinton
Me have previously received a request from Donald
Smith, ¥inton Town Manager, inquirin9 os to our willingness
to allow the Tomn to use City-owned Smith Spring property for
parks and playground purposes. The City's property is in
¥inton adjacent to other property purchased by the Town
along the ~orfolk cod ~estern Railmay and Glade Greek. The
City*s property is of no immediate use to ns and the Town
usable for playground programs on their adjacent property.
The City Attorney*s office has prepared the attached
proposed lease whereby the City would allow the Town to use
the Smith Spring property solely for park and recreational
erected on this property uithout City Council*a approval
property for its intended purpose.
This matter is referred to the City Council for your
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Haner
Byron £, Raner
City
by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-SEMERS AND STORM DRAINS-PAy PLAN-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Man-
agar submitted the following report recommending that Council authorize the
employment of ~ne additional Sewage Treatment Plant Laboratory Technician to pro-
vide for a split shift arrangement at the Sewage Treatment Plant in order for the
laboratory to operate on a seven day per week basis and that $2,500.00 be
appropriated to provide funds for the re~ainiflg five months of this fiscal year;
*January 29, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
SubJect: Sewage Treatment Plant Laboratory
Mith the enlargement and upgrading of the City*s Mater
Pollution Control facilities the plant laboratory has become
increasingly busy, not only with the routine daily testing
of sewage plant operations. More and more me are involved
with experimental analyses and nam testing requirements.
This will become even more involved es the Advanced Maste
Treatment aspects of phosphorus removal, nitrification, and
the higher degree of sewage treatment efficiency is sought.
The major plant expansion will include a considerably en-
larged laboratory.
Last November, when lifting the nora*arian on sewer
connections, the State Hater Control Board directed that the
City nuke provisions for operating the plant laboratory on a
seven-day per week basis. Up to this time the City has
operated its laboratory between 0:aa n.m. and 4:30 p.m. five
days per meek. Samples collected at night, over meekends
and holidays are stored in refrigerated facilities until
the laboratory personnel return to complete the testing.
The State is thus suggesting that the two and three day.
delays in analyzing plant performance ere no longer consid-
ered desirable or allowable. With the additional testing now
being required and the more delicate treatment processes
being included, we agree that a more consistent operation of
the laboratory is desirable.
Until this year the City has operated wi(h three
laboratory personnel, a chief technician and two laboratory
technicians. With this yearts budget a chemist and at*i-
*lanai technician were authorized, bringing the laboratory
complement to five persons. Me believe that with one addi-
tional laboratory technician and a split shift arrangement
the City can operate its laboratory at the Mater Potation
Control Plant on a seven-day per week basis. It is recommend-
ed that Council authorize the employment of one additional
plant laboratory technician for the Sewage Treatment Plant.
Department Code 90. in salary 9rude No. 14. This will
necessitate an appropriation of $2,500 in Personal Services
for the remaining five months of the fiscal year.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating $2,500.00 to
Personal Services under Section ago, "Sewage Treatment Fund** of the 1972-73
Sewage Treatment Fund Appropriation Ordinance:
(n20664) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section =gO, "Sewage
Treatment Fund," of the 1972-73 Sewage Treatment Fund Appropriation Ordinance,
and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book ~37, page 3B9.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by ~r. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk. Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber ........................ ?*
NAYS: None O.
355
356
SALE OF pROPERTY-S~ATE HIGHWAYS-MATER DEPARTMENT: The City Manager
submitted the following report with reference to information obtained from
Appalachian Power Company and the C & P Telephone Company as to their plans for
utility relocations along the Tenth Street Highway Improvement Project between
Campbell Avenue and Fairfax Avenue, advising that there are several alternates
possible concerning this matter but the basic question is who will bear the costs
'January 29. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Tenth Street Utilities
At your meeting on Monday, December 4, 1972, Council-
man Garland requested that information be obtained from
Appalachian Power Company and the C ~ P Telephone Company
as to their plans for utility relocations along the Tenth
Street highmay improvement project between Campbell Avenue
and Fairfox Avenue. Me have inquired of both the utility
companies involved and hereby provide the folloming informn-
The C C P Telephone Company plans to relocate, under-
ground, their cable on Tenth Street from Norfolk Avenue to
London Avenue. This new underground facility will connect
to existing underground facilities in Tenth Street and in
Norfolk Avenue. In addition, they will relocate, under-
ground, facilities from Centre Avenue and Ninth Street.
along Ninth Street to London Avenue, along London Avenue
from Ninth Street to Eleventh Street and on Eleventh Street
from London Avenue back toward Centre Avenue. They are
planning to retain five overhead crossings of Tenth Street
throughout the length of this project. In order to retain
these crossings the telephone company will have to
spend approximately $2,360 in order to set new poles behind
the sidewalks proposed on Tenth Street. The additional
$22.700 for conduit approximately 100 feet on either side
of Tenth Street. Since the City*s fire alarm system involves
the use.of telephone lines there would possibly be some
additional costs involved for that aspect.
Appalachian Power Company advises that they plan to
realign their existing overhead line on Tenth Street to a
ne~ overhead location along this same street at their cost
of $12.H40. There are three overheadcrossings of Tenth
Street at Patterson, Rorer, and Loudon Avenues which mould
cost $32,610 to be placed underground. Additionally. the
Appalachian estimate for placing the overhead line along '
the street at a nam location completely off Tenth Street
mould be $21,650.
There are several alternates possible concerning this
matter but the basic question is who would bear the costs.
If Council has further questions we would be pleased to
discuss the matter at your meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Haner
City Manager"
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received and filed. The notion
was seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted. Messrs. Garland and Hubard voting no.
AUDITORIUM-COLISEUM: The City Manager submitted the following report
recommending that the question of catering at the Roanoke Civic Center be refer-
red to the Roanoke Civic Center Advisory Commission with the request that they
determine mhether or not it would be more beneficial for the city and the civic
357
center nsersto deal uith a single exclusive caterer or have a choice of Sseveral
or before April 1, 1913, and further recommending that the city extend thc
current contracts with the five caterers now authorized to serve food at the
Roanoke Civic Center until June 30, 1913:
"January 29. 1913
Honorable Hayor ~nd City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Centlemen:
Subject: Civic Center Catering
Under present arrangements for food services at the
Roanoke Civic Center, five local fires are authorized to
provide catering to groups using the Civic Center facilities.
The present agreements with these five caterers mill ter-
minate in Hatch 1913.
It is the opinion of the Civic Center manageuent that
the entire catering picture should be reviewed and the
possibility of changing the system carefully analyzed**
Specifically me need to determine mhether it mould be
more beneficial for the City and the Civic Center users
to deal with a single exclusive caterer or have a choice
of several as we presently function, There are precedents
at other Civic Centers for bath forms of operation and dis-
tinct advantages for each, The subject has been discussed
briefly by the Civic Center Advisory Commission and their
general feeling is reported to be that a reevaluation is
desirable.
It is recommended that the question 'of catering at
the Roanoke Civic Center be referred to the Civic Center
Advisory Commission 'with a request that they study this
situation and offer to City Council a recommendation on
or befsre April 1, 1973. This would provide an oppor-
tunity to implement any recommended changes concurrently
with adoption of the new fiscal year budget. At the same
time it will be necessa£y for the City to extend the current
contracts with the five caterers now authorized to serve
foot at the Civic Center until June 30, 1973,
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Haner
Byron E. Ilaner
City Ranager"
Mr. Thomas moved that Council cdncur in the report of the City Ranager
and offered the following Resolution conditionally extending until June 30, 1973,
the provisions of Ordinance NO. 19403, adopted on November 9, 1970, by mhich
Ordinance the city accepted the pro~osals of American Motor Inns, Incorporated;
Archie*s; the tlotel Roanoke; Lendy's Family Restaurants; and H. T, Shortt for
catering certain functions at the Roanoke Civic Center:
(n20685) A RESOLUTION conditionally extending until June 30, 1973, the
provisions of Ordinance No. 19403, heretofore adopted by the Council on November
g, 1970, by which ordinance the City accepted the proposals of certain caterers
for catering certain functions at the Roanoke Civic Center,
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book =37, page'390,)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
358
AYES: aessers. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................. ?.
NAYS: None .......... -0.
Mr. Thomos them moved that the report of the City Manager be referred
to the Roanoke Civic Center Advisory Commission for smd~ report and recommenda-
tion to Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
AL~DITORIUM-COLISRI~t: Council having directed the city Attorney to
prepare the proper measure incorporating a nam schedule of rates and charges for
use of the Roanoke Civic Center facilities, such new schedule having been
compiled and recommended for adoption by the Roanoke Civic Center AdrJ$ory
Commission, the Assistant City Attorney submitted the folloming report transmit-
ting three Ordinances mith reference to the matter:
"January 29, 1973
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia.
Gentlemen:
As previously directed by the Council, this office has
prepared the necessary ordinances uhich mould incorporate
a new schedule of rates and charges for use of the Roanoke
Civic Center facilities, snch neu schedule having been com-
piles and recommended for adoption by the Civic Center
Advisory Commission. The undersigned has met with the City
Manager, City Auditor and the Civic Center Director, and
reviewed in detail the proposed schedule.
Accordingly, there is transmitted herewith for the Coun-
ellis recommended adoption, in the order which follows,
the following three forms of ordinances:
(o) Ordinance which would approve the new schednie
of rates and charges, and mould further provide
that the Civic Center Director may renegotiate
existing contracts in accordance with the new
rates. This ordinance would further repeal pro-
visions of other ordinances inconsistent there-
with.
(b) Ordinance which would approve o new form of agree-
ment to be entered into with potential lessees of
Civic Center facilities. The amendments of the
former agreement are minor in nature and ore made
necessary to conform the existing agreement with
the new schedule of rates and charges. It is
anticipated that a new form of contract will be
proposed to Council at au early date. This Ordi-
nance would further repeal provisions of other ordi-
nancea inconsistent therewith.
(c) Ordinance which would amend and reordain Section 5.
Rates and charges; form of agreement, of Chapter 9,
Title VIII, of the City Code by approving the new
schedule of rates and charges and certain modifica-
tions in the form of permit agreement for the Civic
Center.
Respectfully,
S/ H. H. Jones. Jr.,
Assistant City Attorney*
Mr, Garland moved that Council concur in the report of the Assistant
City Attorney and offered the folloming emergency Ordinance approving o hem sche-
dule of rates and charges for use of the Roanoke Civic Center, providing that the
Civic Center Director may renegotiate existing contracts for the use of the
Roanoke Civic Center based upon the schudle of rates nnd charges approved and
repealing provisions of Ordinances inconsistent mith the provisions of said neu
Ordinance:
(u20686) AN ORDINANCE approving a new schedule of rates and charges
for use of the Roanoke Civic Center; providing that the Civic Center Director may
renegotiate existing contracts for the use of the Roanoke Civic Center based
upon the schedule of rates and charges herein ~pproved; repealing provisions of
ordinances inconsistent with the provisions herein; and providing for an emer-
gency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =37, page
Mr. garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Rebber .................... ?.
NAYS: None .........--0.
Dr. Taylor offered the following emergency Ordinance approving a new
form of agreement to be entered into with the users of facilities at the
Roanoke Civic Center. and authorizing the Civic Center Director, through the
City Manager, to enter into such agreement, and repealing provisions of Ordinance:
inconsistent with the provisions contained in said new Ordinance:
(=20607) AN ORDINANCE approving a new form of agreement to be entered
into with the users of facilities at the Roanoke Civic Center, and authorizing
the Civic Center Director, through the City Manager, to enter into such agree-
ment; repealing provisions of ordinances inconsistent with the provisions herein;
and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordlnahce Book n37, page 398.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption ?f the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Rayor
lebber ........... 7.
NAYS: None,
Mr. Lisk offered the following emergency Ordinance amending and
reordaining Section 5, Rates and charges; form of agreement, Chapter 9, Civic
Center Department, Title VIII, Public Buildings and Property, of The Code of the
City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, by approving a new schedule of rates and
charges, and for certain modifications in the form of permit agreement for use
of the facilities of the Roanoke Civic Center:
(a20688) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reorduin Sec. $. Rates and
~arfles~ form of nutrament, of Chapter 9, Civic Center Oeourtm~nt, of Title
VIII, Public Buildings and Property, Of the Code Of the City of Roanoke, 195§,
us amended, by approving a hem schedule of rates and charges, and for certain
modifications in the form of permit agreement for use of the facilities of the
Roanoke Civic Center; and providin9 for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinancet see Ordinance Book #37, page 404.)
Mr, LJsk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Tbomss and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lash, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber. '?,
NAYS: None .........
EUILO1NG$: Council having re/erred to the City Manager and the City
Attorneyfor stud~ report and recommendation a communication from Mr. Frank
Roupas requesting that'the City of Roanoke make arrangements to replace a home
owned by him at 707 Gilmer Avenue, N. M., said home having been condemned by
the Department of Buildings, the Assistant City Attorney'submitted the follow-
ing report advising that he finds no discrepancy in the procedure employed by
the city in the demolition of the house and tn~t the only liability that
exists in this matter is that of the specific property for an indebtedness of
$294.00 to the city in payment of the costs incurred by the city for demolition
of the house which bas for several years been unsafe and unfit for humao
habitation:
"January 29, 1973
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
I take this opportonity to advise that this office has
investigated the above referenced claim as directed by the
Council on January IS, 1973. The question of the house at
707 Gilmer Avenue, S. W., appears from the records of the
Health Department to have arisen in February IV&7, at which
time certain substantial repairs were noted to be neces-
sary_by the D~alth Department. Thereafter. in March
in February 196g, and in January 1970, the Health Depart-
ment routinely inspected the said premises and determined on
each succeedin9 visit that more extensive repairs were in
order. Finally, in November, 1971, by authority vested in
it by the City Code, the Health Department ordered that
substantial repairs be made to the hbuse. On November 12,
1971, the then owner of the house, Mr. Thurman Saunders,
was notified by letter, a copy of which is attached hereto,
of the state of the property.and the need for repair and
was granted an extension of time until February 1972, to '
effect such repairs. Thereafter, on January ~3, by letter.
a copy of which is also attached hereto, Mr. Saunders was
again granted un extension until March 10, 1972, to effect
said repairs. On March 10, 1972, Mr. Luther J. Light of '
the Dealth Department inspected the premises and found same
to be vacant and in Such state of disrepair us to he unfit
for human habitation. Hy of£1clul notice from the office
of the Commissioner of Health, a copy of which is attached
hereto, it was directed that the said house be and remain
unoccupied until repairs were made.
The former omner of the prewises, Hr, Sounders, has
stated that he was present on the premises and sam u white
elOCSvd placed on the house by Hr, Luther J, LigM of the
alth Department, This placard, according to Hr, Suunders,
desigafled the house *unfit for human habitation**
In April, 19Y2, the question of tbs house ut 707
Gilmer Avenue wes referred to the office of the Building
~ Commissioner, Tbut office caused the premises, to be
inspected on April 5t 1972, and deternined that the premises
should be condemned° · copy of this report is attached
hereto. On or about April 7, 1973, Mr. Freak Rumpus appar-
ently made inquiries about the house and a letter dated
April 7, 1972, a copy of which is attached hereto, was sent
to Mr. Roupos setting forth extensive repairs that mere
necessary to make the bouse safe for occupancy. Neither Mr.
Sounders nor Mr. Roupas have ever made application for a
building permit to make the repairs which were required, On
April 17, 1972, Mr. Lewis G, Leftwich, Commissioner of Build-
ings, mailed to Cora and Thurman E. Sounders, the then owners
of said house, an official notice that the house mas unsafe
end would have to be razed within thirty days; a copy of this
notice is attached hereto. Thereafter, the matter was held
in abeyance until August 23, 1972, uben the City solicited
bids for removal of said house. On September 12, 1972, the
City entered into a contract with Consolidated Contractors,
Inc.. for demolition of the house at ?07 Gllmer Avenue, N,
and on December 26, 1972, such demolition nas accomplished.
In view of all the foregoing, I find OD discrepancy in
the procedure employed by the City in the demolition of the
house at ?07 Gilmer Avenue. 1 would, therefore, conclud~ tfmt
the only liability that exists in this matter is that of the
specific property fur an indebtedness of $294,00 to the City
in payment of the costs incurred by the City for demolition
of the house which has for several years been unsafe and
unfit for human habitation.
Respectfully,
S/ James E. Bucbholtz
James E. Buchholtz,
Assistant City Attorney*
Mr. Thurman Sounders, former owner of said house, appeared before Coun-
cil and advised that he received no notification from the Department of Build-
ings that the house in question had been condemned.
Mr. Crank G, Roupas appeared before Council in support of his request.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the report of the Assistant
City Attorney and that sidreport be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted,
AIRPORT-TAXES-LEGISLATION: The City-Attorney submitted the followin9
report advisin9 that a bill seeking enactment of legislation in the General
Assembly of Virginia mhich would prohibit the imposition by localities of ser-
vice or use charges on airplane passengers using the facilities of municipally-
owned airports was introduced in the House of Delegates by Delegate William
Dudley, of Lynchburg, and teansmittiug a Resolution which would request the
city's representation to the Ceneral Assembly to seek defeat of the bill:
"January 29, 1973
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
It was reported'by the local press that on January
2~, 1973, a bill seeking enactment of legislation in the
361
362
General Assembly o£ Virginia mhich mould prohibit the
imposition by ]ocalltieaof Jerrico or use cbnrgea on
airplane passengers using the facilities of municipally-
owned airports uts introduced in the House of Delegates
by Delegate. Millinm N, Dudley, of Lynchburg. Mblle refer-
red to in the press as o locally imposed boarding tax,
the bill is thought to be aimed ut uhst is generally
knnun os the airline passengerst boarding or enplaning
service charge, The details of the bill, however, are
not year avoitable for study,
Inosmuchas the City Council has recently made pro-
visions for payment of a $1,00 service charge by certain
passengers enplaning on commercial aircraft at Hoanoke
#unicipat Airporto the proceeds of which service charge
are earmarked and set aside for provision of capital
prorements at the CJtyts airport, it is assumed, and it
would also be recommended that the Council would wish to
register its opposition to the hem State legislation which
has' been proposed and to request the City*s representation
to the General Assembly to seek defeat of the bill reported
to have been introduced in the House of Delegates,
Accordingly, there is transmitted with this communi-
cation a resolution by mhicb the Council might act on the
proposal in the manner above suggested.
Respectfully,
S! J, H. Kincanon
Jo H, Kincanon"
Mr. Garland offered the following Resolution requesting the City of
Roanoke*s delegation to the General Assembly of Virginia to oppose legislation
which would prohibit local imposition of a service charge on certain users of
municipal airport facilities:
(=206Bg) A RESOLUTION requesting the City of Roauoke's delegation to
the General Assembly of Virginia to oppose legislation which would prohibit
local imposition of a service charge on certain users of municipal airport
facilities.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book 737, page
Br. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Link and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................. ?.
NAYS: Hone O.
LEGISLATIOH: The City Attorney submitted a written report advising
of four bills which have been introduced in the 6eneral Assembly with reference
to legislation which mould authorize State participation in the cost of provid-
ing access roads to public sanitary landfill areas; legislation whichwould
increase to a maximum of $100,000.O0 the amount of state reimbursement to
localities for construction or enlargement of jail facilities; legislation which
would enable use of Roanoke school buses for municipal purposes in addition to
that of transportation of students; and legislation which would facilitate pro-
vision of public off-street parking garages by municipalities; pointing out that
he has discussed math certain members of the city*s delegation to the General
Assembly the interest of Council in legislation which would authorize an additionl
one per cent local opt, iqn sales and use tax and in legislation coupled with
appropriation of state funds for assumption of costs of certain local welfare
programs; and that legislation has been introduced mhich would postpone for one
year the effective dates of such uniform State-wide Building and other codes as
might be adopted by the State Board of Housing. superseding local building and
other codes already in effect in the various municipalities in the state.
Mr, Garland moved that the report be received and filed, The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted,
TAXES-LEGISLATION: The City Attorney submitted the following report
transmitting a Resolution iu the event Council wishes to state its objection to
the proposition now before General Assembly that no tax exempt property other than
that owned directly or indirectly by the Commonwealth be allowed to remain sub-
ject to n local service iu lieu of tax should a locality deem it necessary to
impose the same:
'January 29, 1973
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The 1971 Extra Session and the 1972 Regular Session
of the General Assembly. by enactment of what is known as
§5B016,2 of the Code of Virginia, authorized counties,
cities and towns of the State to provide for the payment
of certain service charges in lieu of real estate taxes,
by owners of property made exempt from taxation under
§5B-12 of that Code, providing, however, that such service
charges should not be applied ns to real estate owned by
religious congregations and used for worship or for the
residence of the minister of such church. A statutory
formula uaw provided in'the law for calculation of such
service char9e in lieu of tax, based on certain services
provided by the locality to the tax exempt property, wity
provision made that the service charge not exceed 40~ of
the local tax rate on taxable real estate. While the
enabling authority bas not been deemed necessary to be
exercised in the City thus far, other localities have put
into effect in varying degrees the service charge in lieu
of real estate taxation on some or all Of the othermise tax
exempt subjects.
Two companion-type bills, Sentate Bill SB2 and Ilouse
Rill 1373, have been introduced in the general Assembly now
in session the effect of each of which would be to withdraw
from localities the authority to impose the abovementioned
service charge on all except properties which are owned direct-
ly or indirectly by the Commonwealth. If enacted, either bill
would mithdraw the authority of localities now existing to
levy the maximum 40% service charge on the numerous classes
of property which are exempt by ~5R-12, abovementioned, from
the higher direct property tax. Rhile, at present, the City
derives no revenue from a service charge on tax exempt pro-
perties in lieu of a direct tax on said properties, it is
solely because the Couucil has wot seen fit to impose that
type of charge; and it would appear to be a step in the
wrong direction should the Legislature at this Session with-
draw from localities of the State the authority which was
given those localities at the two Sessions immediately pre-
ceding the current Session.
Accordingly, and should the Council wish to state
its objection to the proposition now before the General
Assembly that no tax exempt property other than that owned
directly or indirectly by the Commonwealth be allowed to
363
364
remain nubJect to e local service charge in lieu of tax,
should a locality deem it ·ecessary to impose the same, ·
resolutio· stating such oppositio· end requesting defeat of
Senate Bill 502 end its cou·terpart, House Bill 1373 has bee·
prepared for the Counollta consideration and is transmitted
heremith,
Respectfully,
$/ J, W. ~fuca·u·
Mr, L~sk offered the following Resolutio· stating that the'Council of
the City of Rea·eke looks with ~lsfavor apo· the General Assembly of Virginia
mithdrawing from localities the authority provided in Sectio· 58-16.2 of the
Code of Virgi·ia for luposing certain service charges in lieu of o real estate
tax on the owners of real estate exempt under Section 58-12 of said Code. except
the properties of religious congregations end requestl·g that such authority be
allowed to remain in all such localities:
(z2OGgO) A RESOLUTION relating to local service charges on certain
tax exempt real estate.
(For full Text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book =3?, page 407.)
Er. Lisk moved the.adoption of the Resolution. The motion mas seconded
by Mr. Ilubard and adopted by the fnllowin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Ilubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ..................7,
NAYS: None ......... O.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: NONE.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:. NONE.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
PLANNING~POLICE DEPARTMENT-JAIL-MUNICIPAL BUILDING-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
PROGRAM: Ordinance No. 20671, proposing that the city enter into an agreement
with certain other political subdivisions of the Commonwealth of Virginia for the
establishment of the Roanoke Valley Corrections Board to operate and ge·erally
administer a Roanoke Valley Corrections Center and related programs as a regional
jail pursuant to Title 53, Chapter 7.1, Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended;
approving a certain agreement prepared to be entered into with certain governing
bodies; conditionally authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute said
agreement for and on behalf of the City bf Roaooke and directing the City Clerk
to transmit copies of this Ordinance and of said proposed agreement to the
governing bodies of said other political jurisdictions and to other agencies,
having previously been before Council for its first reading, read and laid over,
was again before the body, Mr. Lisk offering the following for its second read-
ing and final adoption:
(=20671) AN ORDINANCE proposing that the City enter into an agreement
mAth certain other political subdivisions of the Commonwealth of Virginia for
the establishment of the Ronnoke Valley CorrectionsBoard to operate end genernlly
administer n Roanoke Valley Corrections Center nnd related progress as e regional
Jail pursuant to Title 53, Chapter T.I. Code of Virginia 1950, as snen~ed; approv-
ing a certain agreement prepared to be entered into with certain governing bodies
herein named; conditionally authorizing the Rayor and the City Clerk to execute
said agreement for nnd on behalf of the City of Roanoke; and directing the City
Clerk to transmit copies of this ordinance and of said pKoposed agreenen~ to the
governing bodies of said other political Jurisdictions and to other agencies,
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book mST. page 303.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion nas seconded
by Or. Taylor and adopted by tee following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Nubard. Link. Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Nebber ..................
NAYS: None ..........O.
In this connection, Mr. ~lllias S. Hubard, Chairman of the Regional
Corrections Steering Committee, submitted a written report t~ansmitting two new
pages which reflect changes in the Regional Corrections Agreement approved by
Council at its meeting on January 22. 1973, advising that these cha~ges do not
modify the intent of this agreement but merely makes explicit the agreement which
was reached by the Regional Corrections Steering Committee.
Mr. Rubard moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Link and unanimously adopted.
ACTS OF ACKNONLEDGEMENT: Council having directed the City Attorney
to prepare the proper measure stating and recording the genuine sorrow of the
members of Council and of the citizens of the City of Roanoke, Virginia. at the
passing of former President Lyndon floines Johnson on the twenty-second day of
January, 1973, he presented same; whereupon, Mr. Garland offered the following
Resolution:
(n20691) A RESOLUTION honoring the late LYNDON BAINES JOHNSON. former
President of the Gaited States of America.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 408.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
*seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the follomin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link, ~aylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber
NAYS: None O.
BUDGET-PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOYEES-COMMONMEALTH'S ATTORNEY: Council having
directed the City Attorney to prepare the proper measure appropriating necessary
funds to supplement the salaries of the two assistants in the Office of the
Commonwealth's Attorney, Mr. Lisk offered the following emergency Ordinance:
365
'366
(e20692) AN ORDINANCE to amend end reordain Section n22, 'Common-
meolth*s Attorney." of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for on
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see'Ordinance Dooh cay, page 400.)
Mr, Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the follouin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ...............
· NAYS: None ..........O.
COMMITTEES: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure adopting a policy for the operation of various Boards, Authorities
Commissions and Committees established by Council. he presented same; mhereupon,
Mr. Lisk offered the following Resolution:
(~20693) A RESOLUTION adopting a policy for the operation of various
Boards, Authorities, Commissions aedCommittee$.established by the Council of
the City of Roanoke.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book #37. page 409.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. ~he motion was seconded
by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................
NAYS: None ......... O,
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: NONE.
There being no further bus/ness, Mayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
A~EST:
Deputy City Clerk Bayor
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday, February 5, 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the Council
Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, February S, 1973. at 2 p.a.0 the
regular meeting hour. with Mayor Roy L. Webber presiding.
pRESENT: Cohncilmen Robert A. Garland. lllliam S. Ilubard. David K.
Lisk, Noel C. Taylor. Hampton J. Thomas, James O. Trout (gr. Trout arrived at
the meeting at 3:45 pon.) and Mayor Roy L. Webber----T.
ABSENT: None ............................ -0,
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr, Byron E. Hamer, City Manager: Mr. James N,
Eincanon, City Attorney; Mr, H, Ben Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorney; and
Mr. An N, Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend A,
Garnett Day, Pastor, Fort Lewis Christian Church,
R1Nt~ES: Copies of the minutes of the regular meeting.held on
December 26, 1972, and the regular meeting hel~ on January 2, 1973, having been
furnished to each member of Council, on notion of Dr, Taylor, seconded by Mr,
Lisk and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof was dispensed with and the
minutes approved as recorded,
ORARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIG MATTERS: NONE.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
BUSES: A communication from Roanoke Chapter ~42 of the American
Association of Retired Persons, Incorporated, advising that the last increase in
bus fares has made it almost impossible for retired elderly people to afford to
ride buses and suggesting that the city sell citizens who are sixty years of
age, or over, a weekly pass for $1.00 and restrict the use of that pass to the
hours when bus business is slow, thereby raising extra money for tho bus company,
was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be referred to the Transporta-
tion Study Committee for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
JUVENILE AND DOMESTIC RELATIONS COURT: A commdnication from Mr.
Burton J. Newman, Chairman of the Committee on Juvenile Detention Facilities,
requesting that Roanoke City Council appoint a committee to work with a commit-
tee composed of representatives from the 9overnments Of llleghany County, Bath
County, Botetourt County, City of Clifton Forge, City of Covington and Craig
County to explore the possibility of a cooperative program for providing juvenile
detention services, was before Council,
Mr. Bubard moved that the communication be referred to the City Manager
for study, report and recommendation to Council. Tho motion was seconded by
Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
367
368
ELECTIONS: A communication from the Electoral Board pointing out
that they hire been advised by Clapti Carpets, 2710 Franklin Road, S, W,, that
thel are no longer able to provide facilities for the polling place for South
Roanoke No, 3 Precinct, that the Electoral Board has been able to make arrange-
ments with. Mr, Frank R, Radford, the owner of property at 27~2 Franklin Road,
S. W,, for use of his building for voting.purposes and recommending that Council
approve this change of polling place, ua~ before the body,
Mr, Thomas moved that the communlcatio~ be referred to the City
Attorney for preparation of the proper, measure, The motion was seconded by
Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
In this connection. Dr. Taylor called attention to the unsightly
conditions uhlch exist in the voting precinct located at the forner Harrison
Elementary School building and moved that the Electoral Board be requested to
inspect this precinct and make recommendations to Council with regard to neces-
sary adjustments which need to be made at said precinct, The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
JAIL: A communication from Mr. R. P. Mason. Jails Superintendent,
Department of Melfare and ~nstitutions, advising of a routine inspection of
the Roanoke City Jail on January 16, 1973, mas before Council.
Mr, Hubard moved that the communication be received and filed.
In a discussion with reference to the condition of the city jail,
Mr. Garland expressed the opinion that the city should take temporary steps to
correct the conditions which exist in the lock up such as the painting and
pluubin9 fixtures and that he cannot see how Council can continually receive
and file these reports from Rt. Mason for month after month without taking some
corrective action.
Mr. Garland then moved that Sheriff Paul J. Puckett be requested to
report to Council on temporary measures which he feels will bring the city jail
facilities up to livable standards during the interim period of planning con-
struction of a Regional Corrections Facility. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
Dr. Taylor stated that he is in favor of putting some plan of
action into being right now. that he would like for the record to show that he
is in favor of painting the facility now and he is also in favor of making
some improvements to the lock up that will enhance the appearance of the
facility to some extent.
POLICE DPEARTMENT: A Resolution adopted by the Criminal Justice
Advisory Committee of the Fifth Planning District Commission endorsing the con-
cept of a mutual aide agreement among the Roanoke Valley Police Agencies an~
recommending that this concept be moved to implementation through the support
of the Roanoke Valley Law Enforcement Council, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved abut the Resolution be referred tn the City Attorney
for a legal opihlon, The motion mat seconded by Mr, Llsk and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET-SENERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted the follow-
ing report recommending that $500.00 be appropriated to Communications and
$5,000000 be appropriated to Overtime under Section ~90, *Sewage Treatment Fund,'
of the 1972-73 Sewage Treatment Fund Appropriation Ordinance, to provide funds
for the remainder of the fiscal year:
*February 5, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Semage Treatment Fund Budget
There are presently ama accounts mithin the Semage
Yreatment Fund administrative budget mhich are in need of
supplemental appropriations.
Throughout the year the Plant Superintendent has made
un inordinate number of long distance phone calls conversing
with consultants, chemical suppliers, equipment manufac-
turers, etc., because of the tremendous pressures exerted to
maximize the efficiency of plant operations. These efforts
have over expended the communications appropriation within
the Sewage Treatment Fund and necessitate our requesting an
appropriation of an additional $500 for the remaieder of the
fiscal year.
Due to the large volume of sewage treated throughout
the year, as well as continuously using all units of the
plant to maximize sewage treatmemt, equipment breakdowns
have been 9renter than normal. Certain portions of the
plant equipment are 20 years old and have been difficult
to sustain in operation for continuous periods of time.
The overtime appropriations have been exhausted due to the
extra maintenance Work required to keep all plant units in
operation throughout the year. It is also requested that
the sum of $5,000 be appropriated to the overtime account
to provide funds for the balance of the fiscal year.
Therefore. it is recommended that $500 be appropriated
to Account 90 - 220, Communications, and that $5,000 be
appropriated to Account 90 - 114, Overtime.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Byron E. Baner
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager*
Dr. Taylor moved that 'Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20~94) AN'ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section agO, ~Sewage
Treatment Fund," of the 1972-73 Sewage Treatment Fund Appropriation Ordinance,
and providing For an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 415.
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. and Mayor
Nebber ~.
NAYS: None O. (Mr. Trout absent)
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE: The City Manager submitted -the follow-
ing report advising that Council previously appropriated $10~000'~00 to provide
u program for expanded services to the citiznes of the City of Roanoke through
the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Extension Service, that
Mr. Edward S. Allen, District Agent for the Extension Service, has advised the
city that appropriate office space to meet their needs has been found in the .
Boxley Building for the sun of $2,491.20 per year and recommending that Council
authorize execution of the proposed lease for re~tal:
'February 5, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: VPI Extehsion Program
On November 20. 1972, representatives of the Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University Extension Service
appeared before City Council to explain their program for
expanded services to the citizens of the City of Roanoke.
Subsequently on December 26, 1972, City Council appropriated
$10.000 to provide funds for this expanded program during the
remainder of the current fiscal year, A portion of these
funds were intended to provide office space for the Extension
Agent, four technicians and one secretary working in the
City*s program.
Mr. Edward S, Allen. District Agent for the Extension
Service, has advised the City that appropriate office space
to meet their needs has been found in the Boxley Building on
South Jefferson Street in downtown Roanoke. A proposed
lease has been delivered to the City covering this office
space for the sam of $2,491.20 per year. This expenditure
will be covered by the appropriations previously made by
City Council for the expanded Extension Program.
It is recommended that City Council authorize execution
of the proposed lease for rental of the above mentioned
office space to serve the needs of the Extension Service pro-
gram serving the City of Roanoke.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Barter
City Manager*
Mr. Lisk moved that the matter be referred to the City Manager and the
City Attorney for preparation of the necessary legal documents. The motion was
seconded by Mr, Garland and unanimously adopted,
WATER DEPARTMENT: Council having referred to the City Manager for
study, report and recommendation a communication from Mr. Paul C. Buford, Jr.,
inquiring as to the status of a eater storage tank uhich was previously
intended to be installed in the 3400 block of West Ridge Road, S. W., the City
Manager submitted the following report advising that construction of this tank
Mas stopped due to complaints of the people lJvin9 in the area and after several
discussions and meetings with ten to twelve individuals who could not be con-
vinced that the desirability of the tank more than offset the thought of having
a water tank in the neighborhood, that the money for the tank was carried over
into the 1969-70, 1970-71 and 1971-72 fiscal year budget, that the money was
deleted from the 1972-73 budget on his recommendation because the city bed
devised a better control system for the pumping stations and had made plans to
increase the suction, or mater available, to the Peakmood Pumping Station and
recommending that if, there is sufficient interest in the area, particularly
in the vicinity of the tank site, that the city will study the project for fund
allocation in the near future:
*February 5, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Mater Storage Tank - Peukmood Area
At City Council*s meeting on Monday, January 22, a
letter mas received from Mr. Paul Buford i~quiring as to
the status of u mater storage tank which mas previously
intended to be installed in the 3400 block of Meat Ridge
Road, S. M. This matter was referred to the City Manager*s
office for investigation and reply.
The Mater Department asked for and received ~25,000.00
in the lg69-b9 Budget to install a water storage tank in
the vicinity of the higher elevations of Peakmood Drive,
S.M. Me purchased un easement mhich with legal fees and
other incidentals amounted to 91,696.52 and were in the
process of grading the tank site mhen me mere stopped on
September 10, 1969.
The storage tank, which mas in reality to be a 150,000 -
200,000 gallon standpipe, was being constructed to give
better control of Peakmood Drive Pumping Station and Chapel
Forest Pumping Station and for added fire protection to the
area. .Me mere having difficulty in meeting the peak summer
demand in these two pumping l~vels primarily due to the
inadequacy of thc supply to the suction side of the ·
Peakmood Drive Pumping Station.
The tank mas designed for one point and had to be u
certain height due to the controls of thc two pumping stations,
ie the high level cutoff ut Peakmood Drive Pumping Station
and the low level, or suction, cutoff to Chapel Forest Pump-
in9 Station. This point for the tank site is on City owned
property and is contiguous to the Blue Ridge Parkway pro-
perty on one side and two private lots on the other side.
Reference the attached plan shaming this location.
We stopped construction due to complaints of the
people living in the area and after several discussions
and meetings with 10 - 12 individuals could not convince
them that the desirability, of the tank more than offset
the thought of having a water tank in the neighborhood.
The money for the tank mas carried over in our budget
into the 1969-70, 1970-71 and 1971-72 budgets. The money
mas deleted from our budget this, the 1972-73 budget year,
on my recommendation because we had devised a better con-
trol system for our pumping stations and made plans to
increase the suction, or mater available, to Peakwood
Pumping Station.
There is a method of providing fire protection to the
area in question by pumping around pumping stations with
Fire Department pumping equipment. While this is fire pro-
tection, it is not as dependable a method as the storage
tank method. The storage tank is still recommended and
could be studied for next year*s budget. ~e recommend,
homever, that we not try force the issue math the resi-
dents but let them decide if they want the fire protection.
We therefore recommend that if there is sufficient interest
in the area, particularly in the vicinity of the tank site,
then the City mill study the project for fund allocation in
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Haner
Byron E. Haner
City Manager#
372
lo n discuaaiom of the matter, Mr. Thomas expressed the opJnlon that
the report of the City Manager vas brutally frank, that over-shadowing this
whole matter is the safety factor and that he hopes in the future when Council
appropriates money for a certain matter and if something goes amiss that the
administration will advise Council accordingly in order for Council to address
itself to the subject.
Mr. Thomas then moved that the report be referred back to the City
Manager for the purpose of determining, from a safety standpoint, whether or not
the tank is needed and that the City Manager be requested to report to Council
no later than February 26. 1973, on the safety question. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
TRAFFIC-STREETS AND ALLEYS: The City Manager submitted a written
report advising that Council previously authorized funds to modify the existing
traffic signal at Colonial Avenue and Brandon Avenue, S. M., to provide for u
leading green or protected left turning green signal for westbound traffic onto
Colonial Avenue, that at that time Council was informed that the anticipated
time for affecting this change would be nine months based upon past experience
with the delivery of equipment and pointing out that he anticipates being able
to shorten the previously advised time for obtaining this signal change due to
the response of the supplier to expedite this particular order.
Dr. Taylor moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously udopted~
POLICE DEPARTMENT-FIRE DEPARTMENT: Council having previously
authorized additional sixty day periods of payment to Patrolman William L.
Dowling who was injured in the line of duty on May 2?. 1972, and to Assistant
Fire Chief Robert M. Hancock who was injured in the line of duty on November lg,
1972, the CityManager submitted a written report recommending another sixty
day period of payment for these two city employees.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution authorizing an additional sixty
day period of payment for Patrolman William L. Bowling:
(#20695) A RESOLUTION authorizing and directing that lilliam
Bouling, a member of the Police Department who is unable to perform his regular
duties by reason of personal injury received in line of.duty, be paid his
regular salary for an additional period of sixty (60) days beginning January
23, 1973.
iFor full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book m37, page 415.)
Mr. Lisk moved the ad;priori of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Darland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Mebber .........................
NAYS: None O. (Mr. Trout absent)
Mr. Gorland then offered the f,Il,slug Resolution outhorfzlng an
additlonol~sixty day period of payment for Assistant Fire Chief Robert
Hancock:
(a20&g&) A RESOLtITION authorizing and directing that Robert
Hancock. a member of the Fire Department who is unnble to perform his regular
duties by reason of personal injury received in line of duty. be paid his regu-
lar salary for an additional period of sixty (60) days beginning January IH. 1973.
(For full text of Resolution. see as recorded in office of City -
Clerk In Ordinance O,ok u37. page
Hr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Hr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. tlubard. Lisk. Taylor. Thomas. and Hayor
Webber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Hr. Trout absent)
PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager aabmitted the following
status report with reference to the Management Study, advJsin§ that several con-
suiting firms have been interviewed with the result that one firm has been
invited to submit a proposal to the City Maflager*s Office for the consideration
Of Conncil. that copies of the proposal have been received and a recommendation
is being withheld at this time pending resolution of certain financial aspects
Of the 701 Grant from BUD, that it is anticipated that the matter of the grant
will be resolved immediately and he will be able to return to Council next week
with a recommendation:
*February 5, 1973
Honorable Mayor and CitI Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Status of Management Study
At a meeting in early December City Council asked that
the City Manager's office provide a report on the status of
selection of a management consulting firm to perform a
management study of City activities which generally fall
within the purview of the City Manager, Council had asked
that this status report be submitted not later than Feb-
ruary 5, 1973o
This is to report to City Council that several consult-
lng firms have been interviewed with the result that one firm
has been invited to submit a proposal to the City Manager's
office for City Council's consideration. Copies of the pro-
posal have been received; however, a recommendation is being
withheld at this time pending resolution of certain finan-
cial aspects of the ?01 Grant from HCD. It is anticipated
that the matter Of the grant be resolved immediately and that
we will be able to return to City Council next week with a
recommendation.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Byron E. Haner
Byron E. Haner
CitI Manager*
Mr. Thomas moved that the status report be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
373
'374
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS-ROUSING-SLUM CLEARJLNCE~ The City .Manager sub-
mitted the tollomlng report in connection with a Resolution adopted by Council
relative to the City of Roanoke Redevelopment end Housing Authority contract
with Hayes, Seuy, Muttern and Mattero, Architects ned Engineers, for the prepar-
ation of a report on the adequacy of existing off-street drainage facilities in
the Kimball Project Area. advising that mhen this matter first came to the
attention of the city, the Authority. at the request of the City Engineer, wrote
to Mr. Carroll Mason° Director of the HUD Area Office in Richmond. Virginia,
inquiring us to whether the Authority could participate in the cost of investi-
gative uork to determine the adequacy of off-site storm drainage through the
Horfolk mud Mestern Railway property adjacent to Kimball. that Mr~ Mason lnforne*
the Authority that HUD has made a determination that moa{es expended to investi-
gate the adequacy of storm drains off-site would not be eligible in part. or in
whole as a project expenditure, the CityManager pointing out that in light of
the position taken by HUD. the Housing Authority cannot enter into contract with
Hayes. Seay. Mattern and Mattern unless the city specifically states that it
will pay the cost of the services that would be rendered by the consulting
engineers ss well us the cost for construction of any new facilities and that
the Authority emphasizes the urgency of resolving this matter as quickly us pos-
sible since any new drainage construction that would be recommended by the con-
suiting engineers should be bid with the Kimball Project grading and site improve
meat work:
'February 5, 1973
Honorable Mayor and CitI Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Centlemeu:
Subject: Off-Site Storn Drainage
Kimball Urban Renemal Area
On Monday, January 8, 1973, City Council passed a
resolution relative to the Roanoke Redevelopment and
Housing Authority contracting with Hayes, Seay, Mattern
and Mattern for the preparation of a report on the
adequacy of existing Qff-site drainage facilities in the
Kimball Project area. I am in receipt of a letter from
Mr. Russell R. Henley, Executive Director for that organ-
ization, stating that they feel that the resolution does
not reflect the true situation and, therefore, have some
reluctance to agreeing to contract with Hayes, Seay, Mat-
tern and lattern for the needed engineering services.
It would seem t~at when this matter first came to
our attention in early 1972, the Authority, at the
reqnest of the City Engineer, wrote to Mr. Carroll
Mason, Director of HUD Area Office in Richmond, inquiring
as to whether the Authority could participate in the cost
of investigative work to determine the adequacy of off-
site storm drainage through the Norfolk and Western Rail-
way property adjacent to Kimball. Mr. Mason informed the
Authority that HUD had made a determination that monies
expended to investigate the adequacy of storm drains Off-
site mould not be eligible in part, or in whole as project
expenditures.
The Authority feels that in ~ght of HUD*s position
they caenot contract mith Hayes. Seay. Mattern and Mat-
' tern unless the City specifically states that it will pay
the cost of the services that would be rendered by the con-
sulting engineers as well as the cost for construction of
say nam facilities, The figure for engineering mas $1T,O00,
and at this time there is OD figure for construction as
~here fs no determination as to the requirements.
The Juthority emphasizes the urgency ur resolving this
matter es quickly cs possible since thy new dreinsge con-
struotion that ~oald be recommended by the consulting
engineers should be hid nith the Kimball Project grsding
and site improvement moth, The Authority hopes to request
bids for this work in the very near future.
Respectfully subeitted,
S! ny~on E. Bsner
Byron K~ Hamer
City Manager"
Mr. Garland moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure agreeing to pay the cost for said services
tendered by the engineers. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously
adopted.
STREET LIGHTS: The City Manager submitted the following report trans-
mitting copy of a proposed street lighting contract beteeen the City of Roanoke
and the Appalachian Power Company. and also transmitting copy of a ~ommunication
from Mr. O. C. Kennedy whereby the Power Company offers to furnish the city other
electrical service for municipal purposes at a rate of one cent per lillowat
hour, noting that us part of the street lighting contract the city will be
entitled to a discount of six per cent on all bidsfcr street lighting service
and further transmitting statistical summaries prepared by the city*s staff and
Appalachian Power Company showinR the several rates for various size and types of
lights under the expiration of the contract and under the proposed contract:
*February 5, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Street Lighting Contract
On Monday, January H, 1973, City Council received ·
report transmitting a proposed street lighting contract
between the City and Appalachian Pomer Company. Action on
the matter was deferred pending o meeting between City
Council and utility company officials concerning underground
utilities, along with other considerations.
It is deemed appropriate to again bring this matter to
Council's attention and suggest that it receive considera-
tion at an early time. For your information, there is
attached a letter dated January 19, from Mr. D. C. Kennedy,
Division Manager for Appalachian Power Company. Such a
letter has similarly been offered to the City in conjunction
with previous street lighting contracts, uhereby the power
company offers to furnish to the City other electrical ser-
vice for municipal purposes at a rate of one cent per kil-
lowat hour. As stated in Mr. Kennedy's letter, Appalachian
Power Company again offers this rate until such time as
they have completed certain rate studies uaw in progress
and have a more complete estimate of costs. This situation
is no doubt affected by expenses of power generation, costs
related*to environmental issues, and potential state and
federal regulations nith respect to rates for power.
'376
Additionolly, It should be noted thor es port of the
street'li~htlng contve~t the City"will be entitled to a dis-
count of 6 percent on all bills asr street;lighting service.
Since expiration'of the previous street lighting contract,
City has failed to benefit from this discount with a signifi-
cant effect on overall street lighting costs.
Finally, there is attached for Couzcil*s information
statistical' summaries prepared by the Clty*s staff and
Appalachian Power'Company showing the several rates for
vsriou~ size and types of lights under the former street
lighting contract, during the Interim period since abut
controctts expiration, and nnder the proposed contract. If
there ore any questions concerning this matter, we mould be
pleased to discuss them math Council at your meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
$/ Byron E. fisher
Byron £. Hamer
City Maoager*
Dr. Taylor moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mr. LJsk and
unanimously adopted.
Mr. Lisk then moved that the City Manager be requested to confer math
representatives of the Appalachian Power Company as to whether or not they will
consider reimbursing the city for the increased payments made by the city over
the several years period when the city did not have a street lighting contract.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
AIRPORT: Council having referred to the City Attorney for study,
report and recommendation a communication from Mr. J. D. Logan, III, Attorney,
representing Arrow Wood Country Club, Incorporated, advising that Arrow Mood
Country Club leases from the city the property known as the Airport Mest Clear
Zone for use os a golf course, that the lease restricts the property to use as
a golf course, that Arrow Wood Country Club is securing a loan from the Builders
Investment Group pursuant to a loan commitment dated September 20, 1972, for
improvement of Arrow Woodts adjacent property and requesting the mritten con-
sent of the City Of Roanoke to the assignment of Arrow Mood*s leasehold interest
under the aforesaid lease as security for said loan, the City Attorney submitted
the following report advising that he has reviewed and redrafted the proposed
Resolution which was submitted to Council. that the intended effect of the
former Resolution has not been changed, however, wording has been added which
is intended to expressly provide that, while consent is given to the assignment
by Arrow Mood of its rights and benefits under the lease its obligations there-
under for keepiog and performing the several covenants and agreements set out
in the lease and made binding on the city*s tenant thereunder will continue
unaltered and further, it is 'provided that attested copies of the Resolmtion.
itself, be evidence of the consent contained in said Resolmtion:
'February~ 5, lg73
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
You have direoted that I review the proposal of Arrow
Wood Country Club, Inc** dated January 25, 1973, that the
City consent to that corporationes aaaignnent of its lease-
hold interest under the written lessb dried October 4, 1965,
from the City to Arrow Wood Country Club, Inc** of the
westerly portion of the City*~ Wani~ipal Airport Southwest
Clear Zone property. The term of the lease wsa made to
commence on November 15. 1965. tad to terminate on November
IS, 1995, end contained, in Article VIII, provision prohi-
biting assignnent or transfer o! the lease by the tenant
nave with the prior written consent of the City, such con-
sent not to be arbitrarily or unreasonably withheld.
While ail of the other various terms and pr~visions
of the lease will not be set out herein, suffice it to
say that the lease is made subject to the superior use of
the property as an airport runway clear zone; is made sub-
Ject to the City's obligations to the Federal Aviation
Agency of the United States, provides for payment to the
City of $1,000,00 per year as rental; and provides right to
the City to recoup the leased premises or any part thereof
for any airport development purpose set out in the grant agree=
ment between the City and the United States government.
The proposed assignment is stated to be for the pur-
pose of providing certain security for a loan proposed to
be nude to Arrow Wood by Builders Investment Group, a
Florida business trust, the proceeds of which are stated
to be used for improvement of Arrow Wood*s adjacent pro-
perty. I bore received a copy of Arrow Wood*s proposed
assignnent agreement with its lender, supplied to me by
counsel for Arrow Wood but, since, properly, it is not
drawn to be executed by the City, I consider It unnecessary
in that instrument.
So long as the City*s consent to the lease assignment
out in the existing lease or diminish or impair any of the
rights of the City provided or zeserved in the lease. I can
perceive of ag substantial reason for which the City should
withhold consent to the assignment proposed.
Accordingly, I have reviewed and redrafted the pro-
posed resolution which was heretofore submitted to the
Council. The intended effect of the former resolution has
not been changed; however, wording has been added which is
iuteuded to expressly provide that, while consent is given
to the assigenent by Arrow Wood of its rights and benefits
unde~ the lease, its obligations thereunder for keeping and
the lease and made binding on the City's tenant thereunder
continue, unoltered. Further, it is provided that attested
copies of the resolution, itself, be evidence of the consent
contained in the resolution.
Respectfully.
S/ J. N. Kincanon
J. N. Kincanon"
Mr. ?bonus moved that Council concur in the report of the City Attorney
and offered the following Resolution:
(m20697} A RESOLUTIO~ providing the consent of the City of Ronnoke to
an assignment of the leasehold interest, but not the obligations, of Arrow Wood
Country Club. Inc., in a certain portion of the Southwest Airport Clear Zone pro-
perty of the City, which property was demised to Arrow Wood Country Club, Inc**
by the City of Roanoke under an agreement of lease dated October 4, 1965.
(For full text of Resolution. see as recorded in Ordinance Book ~37,
Page 417.)
Mr. Thomos moved the adoption nf the Resolution. The motion wos
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
37::7
378
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard. LJsk. Taylor. Thomas and Mayor
Webbez 6.
NAYS: None O. (Mr. Trout absent)
BUILDING DEPARTMENT: Coencil having referred to the City Attorney for
report as to uhether or'not local governing bodies can make changes in their bull
lng codes after the nem stat,mid, building code has been adopted, the Assistant
City Attorney submitted the foil,ming report advising that when the Uniform
Statemide Building Code is published and distributed, he will advise Council as
to whether or not local regulations will be permissible:
"February 5, 1973
The Honorable Mayor and Members
Of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Uefltlemen:
At your meeting of January 5, 1973, you requested an
opinion from the City Attorney as to whether or not the
local governing bodies may make changes in their building
codes after the promulgation by the State Board of Housing
of a Uniform Statewide Dnilding Code.
Chapter 829, 1972 Acts of Assembly, codified as Chapter
b, of Title 36 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, a
copy of which$is attached hereto for information, provides,
in part, in S 35-g0, as follows:
'The State Board of Housing is hereby
directed and empowered to adopt and
promnlgate n Uniform Statemide Building
Code. ~ch buildino code shall suner--
soda the buildina codes and regulations
~f t~e counties, municioalities and
It would appear from the above-quoted Code provision
that following adoption and promulgation of a statewide
code that the building codes and regulations of localities
On January 29. last. the Assistant City Manager, the
Building Commissioner and the undersigned attended a public
hearing before the State Board of Housing in Richmond and
presented a resolution heretofore adopted by the Council
which supported adoption of the Southern Standard Building
Code as the basis for a statewide building code. At this
hearing, which was attended by many persons from over the
state who gave similar support to the position of the Council,
provision be made for implementation of more stringent re§u-
this suggestion is not known at present.
Mhen the Uniform Statewide Building Code is published
and distributed, the undersigned will advise the Council
as to whether or not local regulations will be permissible.
Respectfully,
S/ H. Hen Jones, Jr
Assistant City Attorney"
REPORTS OF COMMITZEES:
PARKS AND PLAYGROt~DS-MATER DEPARTMENT: Council having referred to
the Town of Vinton that said Zown be allowed to use city-owned Smith Spring pro-
perry for park and playground purposes for a term of one year with automatic
renewals subject to thirty days cancellation, the Committee submitted the follow-
Jag report recommending that the proper arrangements be worked out between the
City of Rosnoke and the Tomn of Vinton with reference to said request:
'February S, 1973
Ronoroble Rayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Smith Spring Property - Town of ¥inton
This matter mas brought before the Council of the City
of Roanoke on January 29, 1973, in which Donald A. Smith,
Vinton Town Manager, inquired as to our willingness to
allow the Town to use City-owned Smith Spring property for
parks and playground purposes. The City*s property is in
Vinton adjacent to other property purchased by the Town
along tbs Norfo~ and Western Railway and Glade Creek. The
City's property is Of no immediate uie to us and the Tomn
has offered to clean the weeds and brush so as to make it
usable for playground programs on their adjacent property.
The City Attorney*s office has prepared the attached
proposed lease whereby the City would allow the Town to
use the Smith Spring property solely for park and recrea-
tional purposes for a term of one year automatically
renemal subject to thirty days' cancellation. No struc-
tures could bo erected on this property withou9 City
Couocil°s approval and the Twon mould be responsible for
persons using the property for its intended purpose.
This matter was referred to the City Council for
consideration and the Council referred it to the Real
Estate Committee for study. At a meetin9 of tlls Committee
held February 1, 1973, no objections mere raised, and it
agroed to recommend to the City Cooncil that the proper
Vinton.
Respectfully submitted,
SI David K. Lisk
David K. Lisk
~/ Bvro~ £. Haner
Byron E. Honer
S! A. N. Gibson
A. N. Gibson
S/ James N. Eincanon
James N. Kincanon~
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the Real
Estate Conmittee and offered the following Resolution concurring, generally, in
the proposal that the City of Roanoke make available to the Town of ¥inton. with-
out charge, for use of said Town's parks and playgrounds program, that certain
parcel of real estate situate in said Town and knomn as said city's Smith Spring
property:
(#20~98) A RESOLUTION concurring in a proposal that the City of Roanoke
make available to the Tomn of Vinton certain real estate of the City situate in
said Town; and authorizing the preparation of an appropriate agreement to be
entered into between the parties in the premises.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book m37, page 418.)
Rt. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
880
Webber-
AYES: Messrs, Glrland, Hublrd, task, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
6.
HAYS:. None O, (Mr, Trout absent)
WATER DEPARTMENT-SALE OF PROPERTY: Council baying referred LO the
Real Estate Committee for study, report and recommendation a Joint communication
from Mr, Molter F. Poff and Mro H. R, ClaMor offering to purchase a smalI trian-
gular parcel of land containing approximateIy one and one third acres of land
in the vicinity of Route 60I, the Committee submitted the following report
recommending that Council approve an exchange of lands as set out in a communi-
cation under date of January 12, 1973, fro~ Messrs. Pmff and CloueF with cer-
tain refinements, said main refinement being that in exchange for the land,
easement and right of way, Messrs. Poff and ClaMor agree to build a pumping
station for water service for themselves and to service the surrounding area
at a cost which will not exceed $10,000.00:
'February 5, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Proposal to purchase a portion of property owned by
the City of Roanoke at its Carvins Cove Mater Filtration
Plant nas before the City Council on December 4, 1972,
and was referred to the Real Estate Committee.
By letter from Mr. Walter F. Poff and Mr. H. M. Clower
representing Major Motor Inns, Inc., dated December 15,
1972, a proposal was made to Mr. Julian F. Hirst, former
City Manager, that they exchange some of their land for a
tract of City-owned land of approximately the same area.
The City land contains approximately one acre and is located
near the Carries Cove Filter Plant. Major Motor Inns, Inc.,
ia attempting to improve their site for construction'of a
motel off Interstate
Mr. Kit Riser. ManageF of the Mater Department, was
present at a meeting of the Real Estate Committee on
January 9. 1973, at which time this item was discussed end
several recommendations were made. Mr. Kiser met with
these gentlemen after which they wrote a letter to the
Real Estate Committee incorporating these changes.
The Committee met again on February I. 1973 with
Messrs. Riser. ClaMor. and Poff present and discussed the
letter of proposal in further detail and n more detailed
study which was prepared by their engineers was presented.
The Real Estate Committee agreed to recommend to the
City Council that it approve exchange of the lands as set
forth in their letter of January 12, 1973. but with certain
refinements. The main refinement being that in exchange for
the land, easement, and right-of-way, they agree to build a
lO,O00 gallon pumping station for water service for them-
selves and to service the surrounding area plus construction
of a 12" discharge line from the pumping station to a point
along Route 601 in front of their property as will be covered
underth~ City*s standard procedure for water line extensions
in the County generally.
The City Council*s approval of exchange of land is
invited with the request that the City Attorney incorporate
the refinements in the agreement.
Respectfully submitted,
SI David K. Lfsk
D~vid E. Lisk, Chairman
~! Byron E. Honer
Byron E. Hamer
S/ A. N. Gibson
A. N. Gibson
S/ James N. Kincanon
James N. ~incanon~
Hr. Lisk moved that Council concur In the recommendation of the Uonmit-
tee and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for preparation at the
proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland nnd unanimously udopted~
I.~FIN1SNED BUSINESS: ~ONE.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
ZONING: Ordinance No. 20691, rezoning property located in the 300
block of Moods Avenue, S. M., described as Lot 10, Block 14, Exchange Building
and Investment Company, Official Tax NO. 1030910, from RO-Z, General Residential
District, to C-l, Office and Institutional District, having previously been
before Council for its first reading, read and laid over, was again before the
body, Mr. Thomas offering the folloniug for its second reading and final adop-
tion:
(n20691) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV. Chapter 4.1. Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet No. 103, Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n37, page 410.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motinn was second-
ed by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Nabard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Kebber ..........................
NAys: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
S~NEETS AND ALLEYS: Ordinaoce No. 206B2, vacating, discontinuing and
closing certain streets and portions'of streets, avenues and portions of avenues
and alleys within the boundary of or bordering the Kimball Redevelopment Project
VA R-46 in the northeast section of the City of Roanoke, buying previously been
before Council for its first reading, read and laid over, was again before the
body, Mr. Nubard offering the follomin9 for its second reading and final adoption:
(n20682) AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and clos-
ing certain streets and portions of streets, avenues and portions of ~venues,
and alleys within the boundary of or bordering the Kimball Redevelopment Project
VA R-45 in the northeast section of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as are here-
inafter more fully described.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #27, page 411.)
Mr. Bubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
Mebber ........................
NAYS: None ......... -0. (Mr. Trout absent)
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
SEMERS AND STORM DRAINS: Mr. Garland presented the following communica-
tion with reference to a Resolution of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
382
uhich mould permit the Roanoke County Public Service Authority to expand its
Jurisdictions to include the entire County, advising that a public hearing on
this matter Is schednled for February 13, 1973o before the Roanoke'County Board
of SupervisOrS:
'1 Feb 73
Mayor Roy L. Mebber and
Members of Roanoke City Council
Gentlemen:
According to the news account, a public hearing has been
scheduled on a Resolution of t~e Roanoke County Board of
Supervisors that mould permit the Roanoke County public
Service Authority to expand its jurisdiction to include the
entire County. This hearing Is to be held at their meet-
ing on February 13, 1973. All interested parties are
entitled to be heard on this issue. It is the opinion of
this mriter that this proposal is not In the best interests
of the City of Roanoke, indeed the entire Roanoke Valley.
The City Council should make every effort to protect its
citizens who have property in the County and many do, not
to mention the complications that this would create for our
gun Administration in its future deliberations mith the
County and the Authority.
To arrive at such a conclusion, one only has to be made
aware of the history of this Authority since its inception
in the middle fifties and it becomes obvious that this de-
vice has only served to divide the Valley. It has pre-
cipitated several expensive and time consuming court ac-
tions, one even now pending before our own Law and Chancery
Court and yet to be resolved. The authority became the
party that seriously hampered, thmarted and frustrated the
recent sewer contract negotiations in early 1972 causing
delays, heated discussions and provocations. They demanded
and became a party to this agreement against the wishes of
the City Council as well as the City Administration. The
Authority forced itself upon the city even though the origi-
nal Sewer Treatment Contract between Roanoke City and
Roanoke County prescribed that the sewer mains in the county
embraced by this agreement 'shall be and remain the exlusive
property of the County.* Since 1955, the Authority bas
systematically collected and recorded titles tin fee simple)
to the many lines of privately constructed sewer maims in
Roanoke County in defiant contempt of the fact of the city-
nt sewer contract aforesaid prohibiting the ownership
con y ....... riles other than Roanoke County.
the further enlargement of the Authority*s powers and what
it might create, let me remind you gentlemen of what we
discovered at Friendship Manor. The Authority's estimated
canna ...... .~ a~roximately $145.000.00 under its
controlled by the Authority. Bven more astounding than this,
it would cost us about $1,200.00 per month thereafter for
sewer services. In contrast, if Roanoke City provided this
would be only about $300.00.
The proposed action Of th~ Board of Supervisors threatens
to make this situation even worse. If the past history.of
the Authority is any guide to its future, the enlargement of
the Authority*s dominion and power will in the near future
bring.forth additional bond issues by the Authority to pro-
vide additional sewer mains in the County at'large. The
legal duty to pay off these additional bonded debts will be
placed on the people aha already hhve furnished themselves
with their own subdivision sewer mains, as in the case of the
Edgehill and Jefferson Bills'residents recently annexed to
the City. The sewers in these annexed areas cost the Autho-
rity nothing but these sewers and their rightful owners have
been arbitrarily bonded to answer for the Authority's sewer
banded debts incurred to build sewer mains to promote the
Aathority*s propaganda. It would appear to any fuir sinded
person that uny expansion should be financed through general
Authority.
suburban County citizens themselves. They sought snnexs-
the unlimited hosing and illicit policy to which they ore
and certainly the governing bodies of this beautiful Valley
and economic well being of hundreds of our citizens for
S/ Robert A. Garland
Robert A. Garland"
384
#r. Garland moved thnt the communication be referred to the Water
Resources Committee for study, report end recommendation to Council. The motion
mas seconded by Hr, Hubard.
In n discussion of the matter. Mr. Lisk stated that in referring the
conmunicstion to the Water Resources Commltteeo it does not mean that Council
either agrees or disagrees with the contents of said communication, that each
member or Council has his nun personal feelings about the matter smd that the
main thing uhich concerns him is that he does not want to give Roanoke County
the impression that the City of Roanoke is trying to tell them what to do.
Hr. Thomas offered a substitute motion that the communication be
received and filed.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
At this point. Hr. Trout entered the meeting.
The original motion was then adopted by the following vote:
AYES: #essrs. Garland, Bubard, Lisk, and Taylor ......... 4.
NAYS: Mr. Thomas and Mayor Webber .....................
(Mr. Trout not voting)
COMMITTEES-SALE OF PROPERTY: Mr..Hubard moved that Council meet in
Executive Session to discuss the possibleexpnnsion of the Real Estate Committee
and the Revenue Study Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Dubavd, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber
NAYS: None ,0. (Mr. Trout not voting)
After the Executive Session, Mr. Garland moved that Mr. William $.
Hubard be appointed as an additiona~ member of the Real Estate Committee. The
motion mas seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber b.
NAYS: None O. (Mr, Hubard not'voting)
PLANNING-POLICE DEPARTMENT-JAIL-MUNICIPAL BUILDING-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT~
PROGRAM: Mr. Lisk moved that Council meet in Executive Session to discuss
nominations to the Regional Corrections Board. The motion mas seconded by Mr.
Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber .............. 7.
NAYS: None O.
SALE OF PROPERTY: Mr. Trout moved that Council meet in Executive Ses-
sion to discuss a real estate matter. The motion was seconded by Mr, Lisk and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber .......... 7.
NAYS: None ....... O.
]ELFARE DEPARTMENT: Mayor Webber called to the attention of Council
that there are three vacancies on the Advisory Board o! Public Welfare created
by the resignations of #r. Andrem N. Thompson, Mr. Herbert H, Moore, Jr** and
the Hevereod O. Benjamin Sparks for terms of three years each ending November
1974, and called for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Mr. Lish placed in nomination the names of Mr. Samuel H, Stuart. Mrs,
Thelma M. Johnson and Mrs. Jo Ann Tolnie.
There being no further nominations, Mr.* Samuel N~ Stuart, Mrs. Thelma
M. Johnson and HFS. Jo Ann Tolmie were elected as members of the Advisory Hoard
of Public Welfare to fill the unexpired terms of Hr. Andrem H, Thompson. Hr.
Herbert H. Moore, Jr., and the Reverend O. Benjamin Sparks for terms ending
November.?, 1974, by the following vote:
FOR MR. STUART, MRS. JOHNSON AND MRS. TOLMIE: Messra. Garland, Hubard,
Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor Webber ........... 7.
HEALTH DEPARTMENT: Mayor Webber called to the attention of Council
that there ia o vacancy on the Board of IIouslng and Hygiene created by the
resignation of Mr. A. Byron Smith for a tun year term ending January 31, 1975,
and called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Ilubard placed in nomination the name of Mr. Eugene Trayior.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Eugene Traylor mas'elected as
a member of the Board of Housing and Hygiene for a term of two years ending
January 31, 1975, by the following vote:
FOR MR. TRAYLOR: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Hayer Webber ......................... ~ .......... 7.
COUNCIL: Mr. Hubard moved that Council meet in Executive Session to
discuss a matter with reference to personnel. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Lisk and adopted by the followiag vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor ~ebber ....................................... 7.
NAYS: None ............................... O.
There being no further business, Mayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROYBH
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor.
COI~dCIL,REGULAR MEETING.
Monday, F=bruary 12, 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday. February 12, 1973, at 2 p,m.,
the regular neeting hour, uith Mayor Roy L, Webber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland. Willian S. Dobard, David K.
Lisk, Noel C. Taylor, Hampton W, Thomas, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L.
Mebber ~.
ABSENT:. None .... -~ ................ O.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Ryron .E. Boner, City Manager; Mr. William Fo
Clark, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Nincanon, City Attorney; Mr. D, Den
Jones, Jr** Assistant City'Attorney; and Mr. A. N..Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION~ The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend Ned
W. Crumpacker, Pastor, Ninth Street Church of the Drethren.
MINWIES: Copies of the minutes of the regular meeting held on January
6, 1973, and the regular meeting held on January 15, 1973, baying been furbished
each member of Council, on motion.of Mr, Trout, seconded by Mr. Lisk and unani-
mously adopted, the reading thereof was dispensed mith and the minutes approved
as recorded.
BEARING OF CITIZENS L~ON PUBLIC MATTERS:
AIRPORT: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids on the con-
struction of a fuel service building at Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport, said
proposals to be received by the City Clerk until 2 p.m** Monday, February 12,
lgTS, and to be opened at that hour before Council, Mayor Webber asked if anyone
present had any questions about the advertisement for bids and no representative
present raising any question, the Mayor instructed the City Clerk to proceed
.ith the opening of the bids; whereupon, the City Clerk opened and read the
following bids:
Name Base Bid Alt. No. I Alt. No. 2
A. Dane meddle - none none $16,384.00
Hodges Lumber
Corpor~ ion - ~21,000.00 none 16.700.00
Southwest Construction
Incorporated - 20.199.00 none 21,300.00
Mr. Lisk moved thatthe bids be referred to a committee to be appointed
by the Mayor for tabulation, report and recommendationto Council. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mayor ~ebber appointed Messrs. Byron E.~ Hamer,Chairman, James O. Tro~
and Marshall L. Harris as members of the committee.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-MUNICIPAL BUILDING: Pursuant to notice of advertise-
ment for bids on the installation of a Burglar Alarm Panel, said proposals to be
received by the City Clerk until 2 p.m., Monday, February 12. 1973, and to be
opened at that hour before Council, Mayor Webber asked if anyone present had any
questions about the advertisement and no representative present raising any
queatlon~ the Mayor instructed the City Clerk to proceed uith the opening of the
bids; mhereupon, the City Clerk read the one bid received from Hayden Construction
Company, in the amount of $19,220.00.
Mr. Llsk moved that the bid be referred to · committee to be appointed
by the Mayor for study, report amd recommendation to Council. The motion was
seconded by Mr, Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Webber appointed Messrs. Robert A, Garland, Chairman. Byron E.
Hamer. J. D. Sink and Alfred T. Beckley as members of the committee.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
STREET LIGHTS: Copy of a communication from the Appalachian Power
Company transmitting a list of street lights Installed aud/or removed during
the month of January, 1973, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas mnved that the communication and list be received and
filed, The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
SCHOOLS-TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTy IN ROANOKE VALLEY: Council havl~j
previously granted permission to Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley
to use the former Harrison Elementary School Building as a Hay Care Center, a
communication from Miss Patricia Waller, Lead Teacher; Mrs. Elizabeth Traylor,
Director of Education; and Mrs, Linda Walker, Parent Chairman of Total Action
Against Poverty expressing the appreciation of TAP for use of this building, mas
before Council.~
Dr. Taylor moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
PARKS AND PLAyGRo~Ds: A communication from Mr. Paul H. Knappenberger,
Associate Director, The Science Museum of Virginia, advising that the Science
Museum has withdrawn its amendment for the $S5,000.00 Master Plan money, that
important members of the Senate Finance Committee and Rouse Appropriations Com-
mittee have informed them that there will be no chance for getting funds for
Master Plans from the 1973 budget, however, there is still a possibility of obtain-
ing some funds for construction planning in the Capital Division, was before
Council,
Mr. Trout moved that the communication be received and filed and that
u copy Of same be transmitted to the Science Museum Committee and to the Mill
Mountain Development Committee. The motion mas seconded by Dr, Taylor and
unanimouslyadopted.
ZONING: Council baring previously, set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m.,
Monday~ February 2b. 1973, on the request of Mr. J. Hunter Roberts, Jr., that
property located in the 500 block of Albemarle Avenue, S. E., described as Lot
14, Block B. Roanoke Land ~ Improvement Map, Official Tax No. 4021716, be
rezoned from RD, Duplex Residential District, to RG-1. General Residential Dis-
trict, a communication from Mr. Roberts requesting permission to withdraw the
request for rezonimg, was before Coumcil.
387
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur ie the request of Mr. Roberts
for permission to mithdram the request for fez,ninE,. The motion mas seconded by
Mr. Trout snd unanimously adopted.
POLICE DKPARTMENT~SCflOOLS:~ Council having previously sppr.opriated fund
for · school crossing guard at the intersection of lOth Street smd Milliemson
Road, N. l** n comnnnicatlon from #rs. Hary Ann Muddinan, Corresponding Secre-
tary, Oakland Elementary Schoo~ Parent-T~acher Association, expressing the
appreciation of the Oakland Elementary School parent-Teacher Association for
said school crossing guard, mas before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
SALE OF PROPERTY: A communication from Mr. Franklin M. Rides,ur offer-
lng to purchase a strip of city-omned land which adjoins Lot 1, Block A, Map
2 Round Mill Terrace, for the sum of $300.00, cash, was before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that:the coemunication be referred to the Real Estate
Committee for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET-PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: The City.Manager submitted a written
report recommending that $2°000.00 be appropriated to Food. Medical and House-
keeping Supplies under Section m?5. "Recreation, Parks and RecreationaI Areas,"
of the 1972-73 budget, due to the increasing price of food for zoo animals and
to provide funds for th~ remainder of the currant'fiscal year.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(u2oGgg) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~75, "Recreation,
Parks and Recreational Areas," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and pro-
viding for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book m37, page 419.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. 6arland, Hubard. tAsk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber
NAYS: None O.
BUDGET-WEIGHTS AND MEASURES-MARKET: The City Manager submitted a
written report recommending that ~65.00 be transferred from Operating Supplies
and Materials to Other Equipment y New under Section ~66, *Rather,' of the 1972-
73 budget, to provide additional funds to purchase a 105 pound capacity plat-
form scale to be used for checkweighing in the Weights and Measures Division.
Rt. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinapce:
(n20700) AN ORDINANCE to amend end reordafn Section u66, 'Murket,'
of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, und providing for un emergency.
(For fall text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book sa?, page 420.)
Mr. Trout moved the udoption of the Ordinance, The notion was seconded
by Mr. Link and adopted bT the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lish, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................... 7,
NAYS: None ......... -0.
BUDGET-INTEGRATION-SEGREGATION-CITY MANAGER: The City Manager submitted
a written report requesting that Council appropriate $1,500.00 to Travel under
Section aa. 'City Manager." of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for moving
expenses of the City Manager and the Assistant to the City Manager.
Mr. Link moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager
and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(#20701) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section z3, "City Manager,"
Of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n37, page'420.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the followJu§ vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Dubnrd. Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber- 7.
NAYS: None .......... O.
BUDGET-COMMONMEALTII*S ATTORNEY: Council having referred to the City
Manager for study, report and recommendation the request of the Commonwealth's
Attorney for an appropriation of $9,000.00 to he used for Investigator Grant No.
71-11311, the City Manager submitted the following report recommending that
Council appropriate $10,080.00 to Personal Services, $1,000.00 to Travel. and
$920.00 to Office Furniture and Equipment - New under Section ~22, "Commonwealth's
Attorney." of the 1972-73 budget, to provide necessary funds for the Common-
wealth's Attorney to hire an investigator, $9,000.00 of said funds to be provided
through the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention:
"February 12, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Grant No, 72-A1311
At the two preceding City Council meetings the matter
with respect to Grant No. 72-A1311 was brought up hut in
both instances action was deferred. The first time to await
a report from the City Manager and the second because the
report as submitted by the City Manager did not ask for the
total funds required.
At this time, 1 would like to report to City Council
that a grant application from the Division of Justice and
Crime Prevention dealing with court administration, equip-
ment and personnel has been received and processed to the
390
City Manager b7 the Commnnmeolth's Attorney's office, This
grant would provide funds sufficient for the Commonseolth's
Attorney*s office to hire an Investigator. The total grant
funds to be expended would be $12,000 with $9,000 being pro-
'vided from the Division's Special Fund and $3,000 to be pro-
vided ,by the City of Roanoke. .,
It mould be recommended that City Council by budget
ordinance appropriate $12.000 to be distributed as follous:
Personnel Services $10,OOO, Travel $1,000 and Office Equip-
ment $920J Of the Total $12,000 to be appropriated it nay
be anticipated that $9,000 sill be reimbursed to the City
by DJCP.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Byron E. Honer
Myron E. Hamer
City Manager'
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
~anager and offered the follosiug emergency Ordinance appropriating the neces-
sary funds:
(n20702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section x2R, 'Common-
mealth's Attorney,' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for
an emergency.
(For fall text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book aa?, page 421.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubardo Lisk, Taylor, Thomos, Trout and
Moyor Webber .................
NAYS: None ..........O.
Mr. Lisk then offered the following Resolution authorizing the filing
of the application of the City of Roanoke with the Division of Justice and Crime
Prevention for an action 9rant of federal funds for implementation of an improve-
ment of prosecution and court activities and law reform program in the city:
(XROT03) A RESOLU~ION authorizing the filing of the City of Roanoke*s
application with the 0ivision of Justice and Crime Prevention for on action
9rant of federal funds for implementation of an improvement of prosecution and
court activities, and law reform program in the City.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~37. page 422.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the follomlng vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber
NAYS: None O.
CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager s~bmitted the following report
recommending that Council accept the proposal of Albert Ranond and Associates,
Management Consultants, for a management study, t~e first phase of said study
not to exceed $52,160.00 and pointing out that HUD has indicated a willingness
to participate in this study to the amount of $52,160.00:
'February 12. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Management Study
On August 14, 1972, City Manager Julian F. Rirst sub-
mitted to City Council m management study outline describing
the proposed study to improve the overall management capabi-
lities o£ city operations and to increase management effec-
tiveness through necessary organizational and procedural
innovations. Such a management study mas to be accomplished
under the funding auspices of the Federal government, more
specifically through the utilization of a HUD 701 Funding
6rant. At a later date, Mr. Hirst requested a committee
composed of Assistant City Manager, Mr. Jilliam F. Clarh;
Personnel Director, Mr. Donald M. Graham and Planning Direc-
tor, Mr. Lothnr Mermelstein, to iflterview vnrloms manage-
ment concerns interested in preparing this study math the
purpose of requesting a proposal for the accomplishment of
this management study.
I am presenting to City Council a copy of a proposal
received from Albert Remand and Associates, Management Con-
sultants, with offices in Alexandria, Virginia. This firm
mas first interviewed by the committee on January 12, 1973,
and a subsequent visit was made by Henry J. Stehling to the
City of Roanoke on Tuesday, January 23. Mr. Stehllng spent
a good portion of the day with members of the committee and
met with representatives of the Council*n Citizens Manage-
ment Study Committee, the Audit Study firm, and Mr. Ken
Motley of Vosbeck Vosbeck Kendrick Redlager. After this
second visit to the City of Roanoke, at the request of the
mittedto the City Manager a proposal for a management study
for the City of Roanoke. A copy of that proposal is attached.
In Part IV, Exhibit C of their proposal, they have broken
first phase uhich would cost not to exceed $52,160 would pro-
vide services to study all phases of the City Manager*s
operation and those activities outside the direct control
and responsibility of the City Manager but which elements of
the City government have a direct relationship or bearing on
the activities of the department. The study of these agencies
and activities will be made primarily to establish the inter-
face or interrelationships which may have direct bearing on
the efficient functioning of the City administration.
The committee has reviewed this proposal from Albert
Remand and Associates and has found it to be satisfactory.
It would he recommended to City Council that they accept
this proposal and request the City Attorney to prepare the
necessary documents to contract for this management study.
A check with HUD has been made and they have indicated a
willingness to participate in this study to the amount Of
$52,160.
Respectfully submitted.
S! Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager~
Mr. Thomas moved that Council officially go on record as approving the
report of the City Manager end the report of Albert Remand and Associates, Man-
ngement Consultants, and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure. The motion has seconded by Mr. Lisk and unani-
mously adopted.
PLANNIRG-TRAFFIC: The City Ranager submitted a written report request-
ing that Council meet as a Committee of the Whole after the regular meetin9 of
391
the body on Tuesdiyo Februery 20, 1973, to heir a presentation from Mr. Robert
Hauphrey, of Dlyeso Seay, Mattern nad Mattern. Architects Ind Engineers. rela-
tive to the TOPICS study completed by that firm.
Mr, Trout moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager.
The motion mas seconded by Dr, Taylor and unanimously adopted,
SALE OF PROPERTY-STATE HIGIIMAYS-MATER DEPARTMENT: The City Manager
submitted the follouJng report recommending that Council authorize the execution
of the latest agreement mith the Department of Highways for the Teeth Street
improvement project:
"February 12, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Teeth Street Highway Improvement Project
The City is in receipt of a proposed agreement with the
Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Highways for addi-
tional work on the Tenth Street highway improvement project.
During March 1972 City Council authorized execution of
an agreement with the highway department for the Tenth Street
improvement project between Patterson Avenue and Gilmer Avenue.
At that time, the extent of construction ready to commence
was the railroad overpass structure generally located between
Shenandoah Avenue and Norfolk Avenue. The estimate for
the City*s share of that construction was $262,443.40.
agreement approved last March, will provide for the
approach roadway construction to the bridge project. This
work mill be located between the railroad overpass and
Fairfax Avenue on the north and Campbell Avenue to the south.
The State's estimate for this phase of the project is $894,746
with the City's 15 percent share at $132,753.?0. Funds are
available within the City*s capital improvement account for
the Tenth Street project.
It is recommended that City Council authorize the execu-
tion of this latest agreement with the highway department
for the Tenth Street improvements. The City Attorney*s office
of the appropriate ordinance or resolution.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager"
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance providing for an
Virginia Department of Highways, authorized by Ordinance No. 20154, relative
to the construction and maintenance of Highway Project No. U000-128-101,
RM-20I, C-501, being improvements to 10th Street, N.M., and S.
(x20704) AN ORDINANCE providing fo[ an amendment, in the nature of
addition, to the City*s agreement with the Virginia Department of Highways,
authorized by Ordinance No. 20154, relative to the constr.uction and maintenance
of Highway Project No. U000-128-101, EM-201, C-501, being improvements to lOth
Street, Northmest and Southmest; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u37, page 422.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AVES: Messrs. Garland, Nubard, Limb, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ............... 7.
WAYS: None O.
ARMORY: The City Manager submitted the following report recomuending
that Council favorably consider the request of the Virginia Army National Guard
to construct a battalion supply room addition to the Roanoke National Guard
Armory:
'February 12, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: National Guard Armory
The City is in receipt of a request from the Common-
wealth of Virginia National Guard who proposes to construct
a batallion supply room addition to the Roanoke Armory. It
ia anticipated that this Improvement ~ill'result Jn enclos-
ing the courtyard between the two office wings on the east
end of the present Armory. The State's estimate for the
proposed addition is approximately $32,000.
The original agreement between the City and the Virginia
National Guard was entered into on June 28° 1954, and mas
for an original term of 25 years from and after the com-
pletion date of the Armory. This lease would therefore
expire in approximately 1983 bnt u~uld continue to allow
the National Guard occupancy of the Armory for so Ion9 a
period as they choose. Our relationships with the Guard
have been most agreeable and the City administration finds
no reason to object to the proposed building addition.
The City Attorney's office has been furnished mith informa-
tion necessary for preparation of a resolution authorizin9
the Commonwealth of Virginia National Guard to program
this improvement, with the dity reservin9 a right to approve
the plans prior thereto.
It is recommended that City Council favorably consider
the request of Virginia Army National Guard to construct
a battalion supply room addition to the Roanoke National
Guard Armory.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E, Hamer
Byron E. Manet
City Manager"
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution:
(~20705) A RESOLUTION consenting to and authorizing' the Commonwealth
of Virginia, acting by and through its Department of Military Affairs as tenant
pursuant to a certain lease agreement dated June R~, 1954, from the City Of
Roauoke, to make a certain addition to the leased premises, upon certain terns
and conditions.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book a37, page 424.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion nas seconded
by Dr. Taylor.and adopted by the following vote:
394
AYES: #easts: Garland, Hubard, task, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
7
Rayor Mebber ....
HAYS: None .....
AIRPORT: The City Manager submitted.the following report recommend-
ing that Cannel! favorably consider a request of the Department of Transporta-
tion, Federal Aviation Administration, for a new agreement to corer the change
in location of the IDealizer antenna serving Runway 33 along with the glide
slope facilities for that runway at Roanoke Municipal (Moodrnm) Airport:
February 12, 1973
Bonorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: AirpoFt -- FAA License for I.L.$.
The present instrument landing system at Roanoke Runi-
cipal Airport is located along north-south runway 15/33.
We have received from the Department of Transportation,
Federal Aviation Administration a request for a new license
agreement on this I.L.S. system for an improved type antenna
structure at a point approximately 40 feet behind the original
IDealizer site. There is presently an agreement between the
City and FAA for the old IDealizer site as mell as the exist-
ing glide slope facility and the Federal government is thus
requesting a nam license to cover these changed conditions.
The City*s Airport management has been marking with
FAA in regard to these new facilities and believes that this
should greatly improve our instrument landing system at
Roanoke Municipal Airport. The license was apparently pre-
pared much earlier by FAA than it was received in Roanoke
since it carries an effective date of December 1. 1972.
Homever, no work has been done at the Airport on this
facility prior to this date. The termination is June 30,
1973, apparently so as to coincide with the fiscal year.
and then provides for automatic annual renewal at the
option of the Federal government. The space involved for
the IDealizer and glide slope facilities is quite minimal
and is located near the Peters Creek.Road end of the north-
south runway.
It is recommended that City Council favorably consider
this request from the Department of Transportation, Federal
Aviation Administration for a new agreement to cover the
change in location of the IDealizer antenna serving runway
33 along with the glide slope facilities for that runway
at Roanoke Municipal Airport. The City Attorney's office
has been furnished with the information submitted.by FAA
for use in preparing the necessary ordinances for Council*s
consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
S! Byron £. Daner
Byron E. Baner
City Manager"
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation Of the City
Manager and that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(~20706) AN ORDINANCE providing authority to the United States of
America, Federal Aviation Administration, and right and privilege to install,
and maintain a certain IDealizer antenna structure and a glide slope
operate
facility antenna tower at Roanoke Municipal Airport for a certain term, but not
to extend beyond June 30, 1985, upon certain terms amd provisions, and supersed-
ing provisions Of License NO.'FAhYEA-30,046 previously granted said Government;
and authorizing execution of e new license agreement identified as Con,mci No,
DOT-FAT3EA-7023,
]flEREAS, the Federal Aviation Agency of the United States of America
has requested the City to enter into a new agreement as hereinafter provided to
provide for replacement of the localizer antenna serving Runmay 33 st the Roanoke
Manicipal Airport in n new location ood, an mell, to provide for continuing its
existing glide slope facility at said airport, the new agreement to cancel and
supersede License NO. FA67EA-30,O4b, heretofore granted by the City. to said
Federal Aviation Administration; and
IREREAS, the City Reneger. presenting said request to the Council, has
transmitted the new agreement to be entered into and has advised the Council that
the proposed new arrangement of the instrument landing facilities as provided
in said new agreement will greatly improve the instrument landing system ut sold
airport~ and has recommended that the new agreement be entered into. and so as
to cancel and supersede the provisions contained in the former license heretofore
mentioned.
THEREFORE. HE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
Byron E. limner. City Manager. and/or William F. Clark. Assistant City Manager.
be and each is hereby authorized, empowered and directed, to execute, for and on
behalf of the City of Roanoke and upon approval of the form thereof by the City
Attorney. that certain license agreement identified as Contract No. DO~-FAT3EA-
7023. prepared on FAA Form 4423-1 (5-67). u copy of which said agreement is on
file in the office of the City Clerk. pursuant to which the City of Roanoke
grant to the United States of America. Federal Aviation Administration. in con-
sideration of the benefit to the Roanoke Municipal Airport and to the general
public utilizing the same. the license, right and privilege to install, operate
and maintain the following described landing system equipment and necessary con-
trol facilities on said City*a Roanoke Municipal Airport property Au the County
of Roanoke. viz:
LocaJlzer: Localizer au,anna structure located 640
feet outbound from the end of Runway 15 on center-
line. Equipment trailer located 615 feet outbound
from the end of Runway 15. 294 feet perpendicular to
and southwest Of ceaterlineo
Glid~ Sloes: Glide Slope facility antenna tower
located 1250 feet inbound from the end of Runway
53 and hO0 feet perpendicular to and northeast of
centerline. Equipment trailer located 1268 feet in-
bound from the end of Runway 33 and 600 feet perpen-
dicular to and northeast of centerlioe;
together with appropriate rights of ingress and egress over lands of the City
and right-of-way for power and control lines thereto, all for a term commencing
as of December 1. 1972. and continuing to June 30. Ir?3. but to be renewed, at
the option Of the Government. from year to year upon the same terms therein pro-
vided, such option to be deemed exercised and the license so renewed each year
395
396
unless the Government gives the City thirty days notice that it will not exercise
its option, before the license year or any renemal thereof expires, provided,
honever, that no renemal thereof shall extend the period of the Government's
occupancy of the premises beyond June 30° 1986; said agreement to provide, inter
alia, that the City will not erect or allow to be erected on its property any
interfering structureor obstruction; that the facilities placed on the pro-
perty by the Government shall remain the property of and may be removed by the
Government; and that the license may be canceled by either party upon six months
notice in mriting to the other party or at any date which may be nutunlly agreed
upon.
HE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that there be attached to and incorporated in
aforesaid Contract No. DOT-FA?aEA-T023 and as a rider thereto Form FAAoI334
agreeing upon certain critical and no-parking areas applicable to the ab,yemen-
ti,ned instrument landing facilities and the City°s control and maintenance
thereof and providing, further, for the marking of paved areas delineating said
critical areas, and for the City*s removal of snow from certain areas adjacent
to said glide slope antenna.
BE IT FINALLY ORDAINED' that, upon full execution of aforesaid Con-
tract No. DOT-FA73EA-?023 by both parties thereto, License No. FAG?EA-30,046
heretofore granted by the City to the United States of America, Federal Avia-
tion Administration, shall thereby be and stand canceled and superseded.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrso Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber .................
NAYS: None ....... -0.
POLICE DEPARYMENT: Council having referred to the City Attorney for
a legal opinion in connection with a Resolution adopted by the Criminal Justice
Advisory Committee of the Fifth Planning District Commission end,Palm9 the con-
cept of a mutual aide agreement among the Roanoke Valley Police Agencies and
recommending that this concept be moved to implementation through the support of
the Roanoke Valley Lam Enforcement Council, the City Attorney submitted the
following report calling attention to two state statutes which bear upon this
subject. Section 15.1-131 which is self-enacting and Section 15.1.15g.? which
provides that "the governing bodies of counties, cities and towns or any comblna-
tion thereof whose boundaries are contiguous may by proper resolutions of such
governing bodies enter in and become a party to contracts or mutual aid agree-
meets for the mutual protection of all parties to such contracts or agreements
by the use of their joint police forces, both regular and auxiliary, their
equipment and materials all for their mutual protection, defense and the main-
tenance of peace and good order, that any pnlice officer, regular or auxiliary,
while performing his duty under any such contract shall have the same authority
In any county, city or town as he has within the county, city or town where he
was uppoin~d.~ the City Attorney pointing oat that while Section 15.1.159,?
from the Resolutions authorizing their execution° that It is entirely possible
that identical Resolution could heed,pied by governing bodies desiring to parti-
cipate in such an agreement; however, the rather precise provisions of that type
of agreement should be negotiated out between authorized representutivus of those
governing bodies before any such measure is adopted by one of the proposed
parties:
'February 12, 1973
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
At your meeting of February 5, 1973, the Council considered
and referred to the undersigned for review a form n£ reso-
lution proposed by the Roanoke Valley Law Enforcement Council
to be adopted by this Council and by other Valley governing
bodies, the effect of which adoption was stated to be to
implement a mutual aid agreement among the several Roanoke
Valley law enforcement agencies, The proposed resolution
was stated to be intended to implement the authorization
contained in S515.1-159.7.
Two State statutes bear upon this subject, one of which is
self-enacting, and would seem to require no further action
upon the part of the Council to become effective, and would
seem to be sufficient to cover certaiu situatJous Of emer-
gency and of ones dealing with the use or sale of controlled
drugs.
The first of these, S$15.1-131 of the 1950 Code of Virginia,
as amended, reads, in part, as follows:
*Rhenever the necessity arises for the enforce-
memt of lows designed to control or prohibit the
use or sale of controlled drugs as defined in
SS54-524.2, or during any emergency resulting from
the existence of a state of war, internal disorder,
or fire, flood, epidemic or other public disaster,
the policemen and other officers, agents and
employees of any county, city or town may, to-
gether with all necessary equipment, lawfully go
or be sent beyond the territorial limits of such
county, city or town to uny point within or with-
out the Commonwealth to ass/st in meeting such
emergency or need.'
The second statute and the one to which reference is made
in the communication to the Council, is not self-enacting
and would require, should the participating localities
desire to implement its provisions, the formulation of a
mutual aid agreement to be entered into by localities whose
boundaries are contiguous. That section, 5515.1-159.7, and
the one upon. which the request of the Roanoke Valley Law
Enforcement Council is based, provides as follows:
'The governing bodies of counties, cities
and towns or any combination thereof whose
boundaries are contiguous may by proper
resolutions of such governing bodies enter
in and bec,au a partr to contracts or mutual
aid agreements for the mutual protection of
all parties to such contracts or aqreements by
the use of their joint police forces, both
regular and auxiliary, their equipment and
materials all for their mutual pratection,
defense and the maintenance of peace and good
order. Any police officer, regular or auxiliary
while performing his duty under any such contract
shall hare the same authority in any county, city
or tomn as he has within the county.* city or town
where he was appointed** (Underscoring supplied.)
Jhlle S~15.1.159.T speahs of contracta aud agreements as
though the sane are intended to be separate from the reso-
~.lutlons authorizing their execution, it is entirely possible
that Identical resolution could be adopted b7 governing
b6dies desiring to participate in such agreement; houever,
the rather precise provisions of that type of agreement
should, I suggest, be negotiated out between authorized
representatives of those governing bodies before any such
measure is adopted by one of the proposed parties. At this
point, that does not appear to hare been accomplished,
Therefore, I bring the matter back to the Council for such
further action or instruction as the Council nay wish to take
or give relative to the recent communication of the Roanoke
Valley Law Enforcement Council.
Respectfully,
S/ J. N. Kincanon
After a discussion of the report, Mr. Lisk moved that the matter
he referred to the City Manager for farther consideration and report to Council
and that the City Manager he instructed to confer with the City Attorney and the
Chief of Police in his study of the matter. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Hubard and unanimously adopted.
PARKS AND PLAYCROUNOS-~ATER D£PARTMENT: Council having directed the
City Attorney to prepare the proper measure authorizing execution of a lease
agreement between the City of Roanoke and the Town of Vinton for use of the
Smith Spring property by the Town of Vinton for parks and recreational purposes,
the Assistant City Attorney submitted the following report transmitting said
City of Roanoke and the Town of Vinton for use of the Smith Spring property for
1973, for n nominal consideration of $1.OO per year, with provision for
provisions of said lease:
"February 12, 1973
To the Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
proposal of the Conncil*s Real Estate Committee that the City
of Roanoke make available to the Town of Vinton the City's
Smith Spring property, in Vinton, for use by said Tomn in
was referred to this office for consummation of details of
This office has prepared a proposed lease agreement to be
entered into by the City and the Town of Vinton which agree-
ment would lease to the Toun of Vinton the Smith Spring
property for a term of one year commencing March I, 1973,
for a nominal consideration of One Dollar ($1.OO) per year,
lease. The Town ~ould agree to use the property only for
the property during the term of the lease and save the City
harmless in such use, and would agree, also, that should the
Council determine that the City needs the property for any
of its purposes, the lease might be terminated at any time
upon the giving of thirty (30) days written notice.
I
reading:
The form and terms and conditions of this proposed lense have
been agreed to by the City Manager end the Town Ranager of'
YJnton,
Accordingly, there is transmitter heremlth for the Council*s
consideration an ordinance mhich mould authorize execution of
the abovementloned lense,
Respectfully,
S/ Ednard A. Natt
Eduard 4. Natt,
AssistaAt City Attorney"
Mr. Trout moved that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first
(n20707) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and providing for the lease by the
City of the Smith Spring property to the Town of Vinton, upon certain terms and
conditions.
WHEREAS, it has been proposed to the CouncJ! that the Town of ¥inton
has use for the City's Smith Spring property, situate in said Tomn and contain-
lng approximately two (2) acres of land. in the conduct of said Town's public
parks and recreation program, said Smith Sprin9 property being a part of the City*s
water properties but not now used as a source of water supply; and
IHEREAS, the Council*s Real Estate Committee having, in a report dated
February 5. 1973. recommended the aforesaid proposal, the Council, by Resolution
No. 20590. duly adopted, concurred and directed that details of o lease between
the parties be developed; and
MIIEREAS, the Council is further advised that said Town is willing and
desirous to lease and make use of said property upon the terms and provisions
hereinafter contained,
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
the Mayor and the City Clerk be and they are hereby authorized to execute, seal
and attest, respectively, a written lease agreement to be executed by said City,
as owner, and the Town of'Vinton, as lessee, pursuant to which the City will
lease to the Town of Vinton and containing approximately two (2l acres, said
lease to provide,' inter alia, for the following:
1. lhat the term of said lease shall be for a period of one (1) year.
commencing as of March 1, 1973, but to be automatically renewed for successive
terms of one (1) year each unless said lease be terminated by either party at
the end of any one year term by giving to the other party written notice thrity
(30) days prior to the end of said term of their intent to terminate said lease;
or unless terminated by the City upon any day, should said property he needed
by the City for any of its purposes or should the City desire to sell or other-
wise dispose of said property, provided the City give thirty (30) days written
notice of such termination prior to the termination thereof;
2. That said lease provide for a nominaX annual rental of One DolIar
($1.oo):
399
3. That the leased premises be used by the Town of Vlnton Solely for
park and recreational purposes Of said town, be maintained by said Town in rea-
sonably safe condition and so as not to contaminate the spring or s~rings
located on said property;
4. That said Toun agree that it alii save the City harmless by
reason of said Town*s use and occupancy of the premises; that no permanent
structures be erected on the premises without the Clty*s consent nor will
said premises be sub-let nor the lease assigned without similar consent of tho
City;
5. That the City shall have during the term of said lease the right
of ingress and egress when and as such ingress and egress may become necessary il
the discretion of the City Manager; and
6. That the form Of said lease be approved for execution by the City
of Roanoke by the City Attorney.
The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Bubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor lebber .................. 7.
NAYS: None O.
AUDITS: The City Auditor submitted a financial report of the City of
Roanoke for the month of January. 1973.
Mr. Lisk moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE: The City Auditor submitted a
monthly statement of expenditures for public welfare for the month ended
January 31, 1973.
Dr. Taylor moved that the statement be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
BUSES-SCHOOLS: Council having referred to the Transportation Study
Committee for study,.report and recommendation a communication from the
Roanoke City School Board transmitting a Resolution unanimously adopted by the
School Board at its meeting on January 9, 1973, requesting that Council grant
permission for the purchase of thirty-seveR sixty-six-passenger school buses,
two twelve-passenger carryalls and supporting facilities, for a total of
$379,000.00; and Council having also referred to the Transportation Study Com-
mittee for study, report and recommendation a request of Roanoke Chapter ~42
of the American Association of Retired Persons. Incorporated. advising that the
last increase in bus fares has made it almost impossible for retired elderly
people to afford to rid~ buses and suggesting that the city sell citizens who
are 65 years of age. or over, a weekly pass for $1.00 and restrict the use of
that pass to the hours when the bus business is slow, thereby raising extra
money for the bus company; the Transportation Study Committee submitted e writ-
ten report in connection with the request Of the Roanoke City School Board, advis-
ing that it wis the unanimous opinion of the Transportation Study Committee that
the consulting firm of lflbur Smith ~ Associates he interviewed by the Committee
to discuss the overall transportation problem, .that on January 31, 1973, the Com-
mittee met with representatives Of the aforementioned firm and after a very
thorough and extensive discussion the Committee requested the firm to submit a
proposal which was to include the purposes, possibilities and alternatives of
public and school transportation, the practicability of merging the two systems,
the maintenance as well as n Study of the various government contraptions that
such a system could operate within, that the Committee also requested that the
firm submit a price of such study and the time that it would take to accomplish
it, that hopefully this report should be ready by the week of February Il, 1973,
that the Committee will review it at the earliest possible time and that it
should be pointed out that the study will take an estimated four to six months
to complete; and in connection with the request of the American Association of
Retired Persons that the price of the bus pass be reduced to $1.00 foe those
persons 65 years of age or Older, advising that the Committee cannot justify a
recommendation to change the rate structure at this time because of the uncer-
tainty of the OVerall situation.
Mr. Lisk expressed the opinion that he does not think the d~lay in
purchasing the school buses is necessary, that he feels the buses are needed
for the fall school term and that the city needs buses which can be properly
identified ns school buses.
After 'a lengthy discussion as to the recommendation of the Transporta-
tion Study Committee with regard to the school buses, Mr. Thomas moved that Coun-
cil concur in that portion of the report. The motion was secondedby Mr. Trout
and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. ~arland, Nubard. Thomas, Trout and ~ayor
Webber .5.
NAYS: Messrs. Lisk and Taylor ....~---2o
Mr. Garland moved that that portion of the report dealing with the bus
ipass for elderly citizens be taken under advisement. The motion was seconded by
i~r. Thomas.
I In a discussion of the motion, Dr. Taylor expressed the opinion that
f certain elderly citizens ore not financially able to ride buses under the
present rates, mould it not be better to reduce the rates and let the City of
~oanoke subsidize the difference
Mr. Lisk offered a substitute motion that the question with reference
to a reduced bus pass for elderly citizens 65 years of age or older be referred
Jack to the Transportation Study Committee for the purpose of studying the feusi-
)ility and cost involved in connection ~ith providing, on a temporary basis, a
401
402
special rate for these elderly citizens mith the City of Roanoke subsidizing thc
difference between this special rate and the regular weekly $4.50 pass, The
motion mss seconded by Dr. Tzylor and adopted by the folloming rote:
AYES: Nessrs. Garland, flubard, Lish, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber .............
NAYS: None ......... O.
It mas also requested that tbs Committee tahe into consideration when
it studies the above matter, the fact that midoms retire at age
GRANTS: Mr. William S. Hubard, Chairman of the Audit Committee, sub-
mttted the following report with reference to the method to be used in administer
in9 the Law Enforcement Act (LEAA) funds granted by the Division of Justice and
Crime Prevention (DJGP) to the city pursuant to 9rant application in which the
city Js the named grantee and applicant and the City Manager and the City Auditor
are the Program Administrator and the Program Finance Officer, respectively,
advising that gr. Gayla Young. Accountin9 Consultant, Andrews, Burhet ~ Company,
Certified Public Accountants. recommended to the Audit Committee that the best
method of administering such 9rants is throu9h the ordinary administrative
processes of the city as same are established by Ordinance and that it seems
advisable that in any future or outstanding grants that the City Manager and
the City Auditor be named, either originally or by amendment. Program Administra-
tor and Program Finance Officer. respectively, in order that all programs can
be administered throw9h the established procedures:
AUDIT COMMITTEE
MINI~ES OF THE MEETING OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE
HELD TBURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1973, AT 4:00 P. M.
COMMITTEE MEMUERS PRESENT: William S. Hubard
ABSENT: Robert A. Garland
Hampton W. Thomas
OTHERS PRESENT: Byron E. Hamer, City Manager
William F. Clark, Assistant City Manager
A. N. Gibson, City Auditor
James N. Kincanon, City Attorney
James £. Duchholtz, Assis~nt City Attorney
Richard V. Hamilton, Planner
Gayle Young. Accounting Consultant - Andrews.
Burket ~ Company
The topic of discussion was the method to be used in
administering the Law Enforcement Assistance Act (LEAA)
funds granted by the Division of Justice and Crime Preven-
tion (DJCP) to the City pursuant to grant application in
which the City is the named grantee and applicant, and the
City Manager and the City Auditor are the Program Admini-
strator and the Program Finance Officer, respectively,
in order that the terms and conditions of the grunt appli-
cation and award be fully complied with.
Upon request of Chairman Hubard, Mr. Gayle Young,
recommended to the Committee that the best method of admini~
stering such grants was through the ordinary administrative
processes of the City as same are established by ordinance.
Mr. Young, in elaboration on this recommendationt made the
point that the City Auditor should keep the necessary books
and records, the City Manager should administerthe program,
and the Purchasing Department should make authorized pur-
chases.
Mr. Gibson stated that he mss in accord with the
recommendation and Mr. Hamer agreed that It would give the
City more control over the program.
It mss farther reported that, presently In existence,
number of other LE~A grants io which the City has undertaken
certain responsibilities as grantee pursuant to the grant
applications. It seems that, at the present time, no
definite method of administering such grants has been estab-
lished and the City has no way of fulfilling the obligations
undertaken by it.
It seems advisable, therefore, that, in any future or
outstanding grantz, the City Manager and the City Auditor
be named, either originally or by amendment, Program Adminis-
trator and Program Finance Officer, respectively, in order
that all programs can be administered through the City*s
established procednres.
SL Miiliam S. Hubard. Chairman
Milliam S. Hubard, Chairman"
Mr. Hubard moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Hubard then moved that the matter of proper bond limits for certain
city officials be referred to the City Manager for study, report and recommenda-
tion to Councit by the regular meet,ag of the body on Monday, February 25,
1973. The motion vas seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
SE~ERS AND STORM DRAINS: The ~ater Resources Committee submitted the
following report in connection with a meet/ag with the State Mater Control Board
on January 30. 1973, math reference to certain conditions at the Sewage Treatment
Plant, advising that under date of February 6, 1973, a communication was sent to
Roy F. ~eston Incorporated, requesting that firm to consider expaodin9 their
original commitment to analyze the total design of the Sewage Treatment Plant
expansion, that if this firm viii favorably consider this undertaking, they mill ·
submit a proposal to the city for such an undertaking and that at this time the
the city is awaiting a response to this letter:
"February 12, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
At the invitation of the State ~ater Control Board, your
Mater Resources Committee attended the monthly meeting of the
Hoard in Richmond on January 30, 1973. In addition to the
committee the City was represented by Vice Mayor David Lisk,
City Attorney James Kincanon and City Engineer Sam McChee
were represented by James McColl and George Fania.
The State ~ater Control Board staff reported to the
board on the status of the City of Roanoke sewage treatment
plant operation, recognizing the fact that heavy rains and
resulting infiltration bad a detrimental affect on' the plant
operation. They reported that the City has taken every
action possible to improve the plant operation. The staff
recognized shat the City had done about infiltration; how=
ever, they did indicate that additional'action mas needed
on the part of the City.
Your Committee and the administration reported their
awareness of this problem and the City Engineer reported on
two possible methods of resolving this problem, both of which
viii be reported to City Council in detail at such time as
:'404
their application is reconnended. Through,his presentation
to the board we wade hnown to them our anareneas of the
problem end ou~ interest f~ resolving i~ as expeditiously.
us possible.
Mr. George Vanla Of Boy F. Wes,gna Incorporated. reported
on'the progress (completion) of their analysis of the hydraulic
flow of the proposed senage pleat expansion, us designed by
AIvord, Burdick end Ronson. His report naa well. received~
however, he nas queried as to mhy the analysis hud been
restricted to hydraulic flow nhen the board had asked for a
full analysis of the design. The committee ~hairnsn responded
that to expedite matters Roy F. Wes,on, Incorporated, bud
been asked to initially perform this first portion only, and
they would be asked to proceed with the complete analysis.
This reply satisfied the State ~ater Control Board, and the
City nas complimented on its progress to date.
The City of Roanoke on February b, 1973, dispatched a
letter to Roy F. #es,on, Chairman of the Board of Roy F.
Wes,on, lac., asking his firs if they would consider expand-
ing their original commitment to analyze the total design of
the sewage plant expansion. If this firm would favorably
consider this undertaking, they would submit a proposal to
the City for such an undertahing. At this time, the City
is awaiting a response.to this letter.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Bampton W. Thomas
Hampton W. Thomas
S/ Milliam S. Hubard
Milliam S. Rubard
S/ Byron E. Bauer
Byron £. Hamer#
Mr~ Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bubard and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Thomas then verbally pointed out that at the meeting of Council
on Monday, February 5, 1973. Council referred to the Water Resources Committee
for study, report and recommendation a communication from Councilman Robert
Garland with reference to a Resolution of the Roanoke County Board of Super-
visors which would permit the Roanoke County Public Service Authority to expand
its jurisdiction to include the entire County, Mr. Thomas verbally reported that
this matter was discussed by the Water Resources Committee at its meeting on
Monday, February 12, 1973, at I p.m., and it is the recommendation of the Com-
mittee that Roanoke City Council take no action concerning the public hearin9
to be held in Roanoke County on February 13. 1973, relating to the expansion of
the jurisdiction of the Roanoke County Public Service Authority to include the
entire County and that'in makiug this recommendat.on the Water Resources Com-
mittee stands ready to assist the County and discuss the matter of water
resources at any time.
Hr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the verbal r~commendation
of the Water Resources Committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and
adopted, Mr. Garland voting no.
AIRPORT: Hr. James O. Trout', Chairman of the Airport Advisory Commis-
sion. submitted the following report transmitting four recommendations relative
to Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport:
"January 31, 1973
TO: ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
ROANOKE, VA.
Gentlemen:
At a called meeting of Council*s Airport Advisory Commis-
sion Wednesday, January 31, 1973, the foil,Ming items of
business were considered:
(1) Airline Leases (2) 900' Runway Extension on
n23 (3) Bank facilities in the expanded terminal
(4) Number of Bays needed in the proposed Airport
Fire Station (S) Airline Holding Rooms (to be
built by Piedmont Airllnes)'(6) Airport Information
Pamphlet (?) Fuel Concession Readvertisement.
The Committee voted unanimously to make the following
recommendations to Council:
1, That Council authorize a 3 year lease to Eastern and
Piedmont Airlines retroactive to April 1, 1972, and
contain the following principal rates: 12-1/2t/per
1000 lbs. landing weight, ~4o75 $.Fo for Air Condi-
tioning space. $3.50/S.F. non Air Conditioning space,
$2.50/5,F, storage in basement, Piedmont Airlines and
intercom $1?.§O/Mo. each drop.
2. That the City develop ~ans and specifications and
request sealed bids from four (4) Roanoke City
Ranks namely; First National, Colonial American,
Mountain Trust and Securities National for operation
of am Airport Bank in approximately 323 sq. ft. of
space available in the expanded terminal building.
3, That the City Manager be authorized to make an
Engineering study of the cost of extending runway
and taximay ;23, 900 feet to the N, £,, including the
relocated highway =liB.
4. That the new Airport Fire Station contain four (4)
bays for Airport fire fighting equipment instead of
the proposed three (3) bays.
The Commission decided to hold the next meeting at the
Airport and examine the general aviation situation in
detail,
Respectfully submitted,
S/ James O. Trout
JAMES O. TROUT. CHAIRMAN"
Mr. Trout moved that the recommendation with reference to authoriza-
tion of a three year lease agreement to Eastern Airlines and Piedmont Airlines
retroactive to April 1, 1972, to contain certain rates os outlined in said report
be referred to the City Attorney to work with the City Manager in order to con-
sumnate said three year lease agreement. The motion was seconded by Mr. Link
and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Trout farther moved that the City Manager be instructed to develop
plans and specifications and request bids from any bank in Roanoke City or Roanoke
County for operation of an Airport Bank in approximately 323 square feet of space
available in the expanded Terminal Building. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Link and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Trout further moved that theCity ManageF be requested to make an
engineering study of the cost of extending Runway and Taxiway ~23 nine hundred
feet to the northeast including the relocated ~ighnay :llB, The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Link and unanimously adopted.
4O5
Hr. Trout further moved thot Council concur in the recommendation that
the hem Airport Fire Station contain.four buys for airport ri~e fighting equip-
neat instead of the proposed three bays. The motion w'as seconded by Mr. Lisk
and unanimously adopted.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
CONSIOERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE,
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
STREET LIGHTS: Council hating directed the City Attorney to prepare
the proper measure authorizing and directing the Mayor and the City Clerk. for
and on behalf of the City of Roanoke, to execute a contract for street lighting
between the Appalachian Power Company and the City of Roanoke, dated the 1st day
of January, 1973, and approved by City Council at its regular meetln~ on Februa~
5, 1973, and, also, to accept,.on behalf of said city, said company*s offer to
furnish the city all electric current tb~t'it may need for city. uses on property
owned or leased by the city. other t~an for street lighting or resale, at a rate
and upon conditions hereinafter provided, he presented same; whereupon, Mr.
Thomas offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(n20?O~)AN ~RDINANCE authorizing and directing the Mayor and the
City Clerk, for and on behalf of the City of Roanoke, to execute a c~ntruct for
street lighting between the ~ppalachian Power Company and the City of Roanoke,
dated the 1st day of January, 1973, and approved by City Council at its regular
meeting on February 5, 1973. and. also, to accept, on behalf of said City, said
company's offer to furnish the City al~ electric current that it may need for
City uses on property owned or leased by the City, other than for street light-
ing or resale, et a rate and upon the conditions hereinfater provided; and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book m3T, page 426.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Dubard. Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Tro~t and
Mayor Webber .................... 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
In this connection, Council having previously requested that the City
Manager c'heck mith representatives Of App'alachian Power Company to ascertain
whether or not the Power Company will consider reimbursin~ the city for the
increased payments made by the city over the several years period w~en the city
did not have a contract, the City Manager submitted the following report:
"February 12, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City C~uncil
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Appalachian Street Lighting Contract
At its meeting on Monday, Februory 5,.1973, City Council
received my re~r¢ with regard to the street lighting cnn-'
tract with Appalachian Power Company nad referred this matter
to the City Attorney for preparation of the necessory do,u-
meats. At the ssme tine Council referred to the #suoger the
question as to'mb~ther Appalschinn Pomer Conpsn~ would con-
sider reimbursing the Clty~r the increased payments made by
the City over the several years period when the City did not
have a contract.
Aa a matter of info~matioe, I wight revlem that the
prior contract betmeen the City of Roanoke and Appalachian
Power Company expired as of December 31, 19~9. At the City*s
request, on January 21,'1970, Rt. D. C. Kennedy of Appala-
chian Power Company extended the terms.of the former contract
for aperiod of'six months or until June 30, 1970. At that
time, ns a, contract had been negotiated, Rt. Kennedy on
July 14 notified the City that they mould continue the agree-
meat and the rates specified in the old agreement mould
remain Jn effect;however, the tm, percent prompt payment
discount and the quantity discount mere discontinued upon
expiration of the agreement on June 30, 1970. Aside from
this discount, they mould continue to bill the City for
electric service until December $1 under the same condi-
tions ns specified io the initial agreemeflt dated December
?, 1959,
1 hav~ held ~mo discussions this meek mith representa-
tives of Appalachian Power Company and they indicate that
they feel that sufficient notice mas given to the City and
that a contract could have been negotiated at an earlier
date; however, they have indicated that they are milling to
make the new contract retroactive to January l, 19Y5, mhich
mill result in a savings to the City of approximately
$2,000. This agreement is based upon the assumption that
the City will promptly pass on this contract and place it
into effect.
I have relayed this information to the City Attorney's
office and have asked that they prepare this contract so as
to be effective January 1, 1973, and I would recommend
Council's acceptance of the contract under these condi-
tions.
Respectfully subaitted,
S/ Byron E. Haner
Dyron E. Owner
City Hanager'
ar. ~ubard moved that tbs report be received and filed. The motion
mas seconded by Kr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
SCHOOLS: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure authorizing and providing for lease by the city of certain office
space in the Boxley Ruilding located at the northeast corner of Luck Avenue and
Jefferson Street in the City of Roanoke, from the owners of said properties, to
be used us office accommodations for Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University Extension Service in the city, upon certain terms and conditions, he
presented same; mhereupon, Dr. Taylor offered the folloulng emergency Ordinance:
(a20709) A~ ORDINANCE authorizing and providing for lease by the City
of certain office space in the Roxley Uuilding located at the northeast corner of
Luck Aven~e and Jefferson Street in the City of Roanoke, from the omners of said
properties, to be used as office acconmodations for Virginia Polytechnic Insti-
tute and State University Extension Service in the City,'upon certain terms and
conditions; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook ~?, page 42~.)
407
40B
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: #easts, Garland. Hubard, LaRk. Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Ha/or Webber ............... 7.
NAYS: None ..........O.
RLECTIONS: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure amending andreordainin9 Sec. 49. Voting place in South Roanoke
Precint No. 3. Chapter 2. Precints and Voting Places. of Title IV. Elections,
of The Code of the City of Roanoke. 1956, as amended, so as to change the loca-
tion of the voting place in South Roanoke Precinct No. 3, he presented same;
whereupon, MF. Lisk offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(u20710) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordainin9 Sec. 49. ¥gtino olace
in ~9uth Roanoke Precinct No. 3, Chapter 2. precincts and Votino Places. of
Title IV. Elections, of the Code of the Gity of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, so
as to change the location of the voting place in South Roanoke Precinct No, 3;
and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book 53?° page 426,)
#r. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. LaRk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Mebber .................
NAYS: None ......... O.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
SCIIOOLS-SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: Mr. Lisk moved that the City Manager
be requested to report to Council on any temporary action which' can be token with
regard to the sewage situation at the Huff Lane Elementary School until the
permanent sewer line can be installed. The mot/on was seconded by Mr. Garland
and unanimously adopted.
AUDITORIUM-COLISEUM: Mr. Trout called to the attention of the City
Manager u matter with reference to basketball playoffs of the Junior High Leagues
advising that these 9ames were played at the Salem-Roanoke Valley Civic Center
rent-free and raised the question as to why these 9ames were played at the Salem-
Roanoke Valley Civic Center instead of the Roanoke Civic Center and requested
that the City Manager submit a report as to the facts surroundln9 this matter.
pLANNING-POLICE DEPARTMENT-JAIL-MUNICIPAL BUILDING-CAPITAL IMPROVE-
RENTS PROGRAM: Mr. Hubard moved that Council meet in Executive Session to dis-
cuss the question of the location of the Regional Corrections Facility. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber ...................7.
NAYS: None .......... O.
HEALT~ DEPARTMENToHOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: Or. Taylor presented the
tOllomlng communication in connection with consideration of a part-time heslth
clinic st Helrose Towers:
*February 9, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Webber
and Members of Roanoke City Council
215 Chruch Avenue, S. W,
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
I mish to request the support of the Roanoke City
Council and the City Administration in seeking to give
assistance to the Roanoke City Health Department in the
establishment of Melrose Tamers Clinic. It is my under-
standing that the position of a full-time physician is already
funded and I further understand that Melrose Towers has two
(2) equipped examining rooms and that funds are in the pre-
sent Health Department budget for additional equipment.
With the spacious area already provided and equipped, the
key problem is the matter of staff. There is a dire need
for a physician in order to open the Clinic facilities to
the residents.
The space that was designed and built for the Melrose
Tamers Clinic is presently being used us a Public Health
Nurse outreach station which serves individuals from the
community. However, the major need is that of providing
medicul care for the individuals who live in Melrose
Towers. Some of the residents are physically disabled or
handicapped and others do not have the strength to go to
some other medical facility for the needed medical service.
Some of the residents do not have the necessary funds to
pay for ambulance service. The Melrose TaMers, also, has
an elaborate alarm system to be used ~ case of a medical
emergency but there is no one to answer the buzzer.
The residents are respectfully requesting that City
Council make a study of the present Clinic to determine if
the days can be altered so that ~ e Melrose Tower s Clinic
may become a reality. Simply stated the door is presently
open to outsiders and locked to the residents for whom the
medical care was originally intended.
Since one of the prime responsibilities of City Council
is the protection and care of our citizens and knoming of
the great concern that each ~ember of this Council has for the
well~being of our Senior Citizens. I am asking that we use
every possible means of obtaining the service of a physician
so that Melrose Towers Clinic may be 'operated, if only on a
part-time basis. I admit that I do not have the nnswers but
I feel that we may obtain help through our local hospital
administrators. Secondly. we may contact Medical Schools
and ask them to recommend a physician from the upcoming
graduating class.
Finally. it is the opinion of the Melrose Towers resi-
dents that if the City Council and Administration will join
the Health Department as active partners in dealing with
this problem the possibility of a solution will be greatly
enhanced.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Noel C. Taylor
Noel C. Taylor*
- In this connection, Dr. Taylor presented a Resolution from the League
of Older Americans, adopted at its meeting on November 21. 1972, requesting that
the Health Department take immediate steps to begin operation of a public health
clinic in the Melrose Towers Buildln9.
410
With reference to the matter. Mrs. Bedy Baler. ·restdent of Melrose
Towers, ·ppe·red before Council and presented 8 petition signed by 209 residents
of Melrose Towers requesting that · public he·lth clinic be est·blished in
Melrose Towers.
Dr. Taylor moved that the matter be referred to the City Manager end
to Dr. James B. Fag·n, Commissioner of Bealth, for study and report to Council
and that the City Manager and Dr. Fegan be requested to take into consideration
in connection with their study of the matter the proposed clinic at Morningside
Manor in southeast Roanoke. The motion was seconded by Mr, Lisk and unanimously
adopted.
PLANNING-POLICE DEPARTMENT-JAIL-MUNICIPAL BUILDING-CAPITAL IMPHOVEMENT~
PROGRAM: Mr. Lisk advised that the Regional Corrections Facility agreement was
signed by representatives of the City of Roanoke, the City of Salem, the Town of
Vlnton, Roanoke County and Craig County at 1:30 p.m** Monday, February 12, 1973,
and that according to the agreement, the City of Roanoke is to appoint four
representatives to the Roanoke Valley Regional Correctious Board, whereupon, Mr.
Lisk placed in nomination the following names:
Or. Noel C. Yaylor - one year term ending February 12, 1974,
Hr. William S. Hub·rd -three year term ending February 12,
1976,
Mr. S. D. Roberts Moore - four year term ending February 12,
1977,
Mrs. Jeanette E. Hardin - two year term ending February 12,
1975.
There being no further nominations, Dr. Noel C. Taylor. Mr. William
S. Bubard, Mr. S, D. Roberts Moore and Mrs. Jeanette E. Hardin were elected as
representatives of the City of Roanoke to the Roanoke Valley Regional Corrections
Board by the following vote:
FOR DR. TAYLOR: Messrs. Garland, Hub·rd, Lisk, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber 5. (Dr. Taylor not voting)
FOR MR. BUBARD: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber .6. (Rt. Hubard not voting)
FOR MR. MOORE AND MRS. HARDIN: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor,
Thomas. Trout and Mayor Webber ..........
GARBAGE REMOVAL-COUNCIL: Mr. Trout moved that Council meet in Execu-
tive Session to discuss a real estate matter. The motion was secouded by Mr.
Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber '7.
NAYS: None -0.
After the Executive Session. Mr. Trout presented copy of a proposed
agreement to beentered into between Messrs. Henry J. Brabham, Jack E. Andrews,
Marvin E. Andrews, the Town of Vinton and the City of Roanoke providing for the
operation of a joint sanitary landfill, said proposed landfill to be located on
seventeen acres of land in the Town of VJnton.
Mr. Trout moved that Council accept the proposed agreement, us prepared
with the various parties Involved and that the matter be referred to the City
Attorney for preparation of the proper measure. The notion was seconded by
Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
In this connection, Mr. Hubard moved that Council officially go on
record e~pressing appreciation to the members or the Landfill Committee for their
efforts in negotiating with the Tomn of Vinton for landfill purposes. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Lisk end unanimously adopted.
SMOKE: The City Clerk reported that Br. Fred K. Prosser has qualified
as u member of the Advisory and Appeal Board, Air Pollution Control, for n term
of four years ending December 31. 1976.
Mr. Lisk moved that the report be received and filed. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
PLANNING: The City Clerk reported that Messrs. Aylett B. Coleman,
James ~. Burks, Jr., John P. Dradsham, Jr.. and Ilenry D. Ooynton have qualified
as members of the City Planning Commission for terns of four years each endin9
December 31, 1976.
~r. Lisk moved that the report be received and filed. The notion was
seconded by Mr. Garlaod and unanimously adopted.
There bein9 no further business, Mayor ~ebber declared the neetin9
adjouroed.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
412
COL~iCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Tuesday, February 20, 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Building, Tuesday, February 20, 1973, at 2
pom., the regular me'ting hour, mith Mayor Roy L. Webber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert
Llsk, Noel C. Taylor, hampton W. Thomas, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy Lo
Webber ..............
ABSENT: None ......... O.
OFFICERS pRESENT: Mr. Byron E. Ilanero City Manager; Mr. William F.
Clark, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Kincanon, City Attorney; and Mr.
A. N. Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting mas opened with a prayer by the Reverend Joel
L. Morgan, Pastor, Airlee Court Baptist Church.
MINUTES: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday,
January 22. 1973, having been furnished each member of Council, on motion of
Mr. Lisk. seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof
was dispensed with and the minutes approved as recorded.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Dr. Margaret Glendy, representing the
National Council of Christians and Jews, appeared before Council and presented
the Good Neighbor Awards in honor of Brotherhood Meek to the Reverend Alvord
M. Beardsley. Mr. William V. Blessingham, Mrs. Howard Hill, Mrs. Mary R.
Jeffreys. Mrs. Zady Martin. Judge Lawrence L. Koontz, Jr., Mrs. Vernon Mount-
castle, Mr. George Pollash. Mrs. E. Lorn Painter and Mr. Timothy Rodell.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: NONE.
PET~IONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
ZONING-TRAFFIC: A communication from Mr. James E. Reed, t/a Prillaman
Motors, requesting that Council allow him to construct an auto service garage in
the 1100 block of Orange Avenue, N. E., on the 25 foot arterial highway setback
line, was before the body.
Mr. Thomas moved that the request be referred to the City Manager for
study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Lisk and unanimously adopted,
BUDGET-STATE COMPENSATION BOARD-COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY-PAY PLAN-CITY
EMPLOYEES: Copy of a communication from the State Compensation Board addressed
to Mr. Richard Lee Lawrence, Commonwealth's Attorney, advising that subject to
concurrence of City Council, the Compensation Board approved an annual rate of
$10,500.00 for the employment of Mr. Jack Vernon Altizer as an Assistant
Commonwealth's Attorney, was before the body.
413
Mr. Trout moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion nas seconded by Mr. Lash and unanimously adopted.
In this connection, a communication from #r. Richard Lee Laurence.
Commonwealth's Attorney. requesting that Council appropriate $2,000.00 toward
the salary of his new assistant, Mr. Jack Vernon Altizer, In concurrence mitb
the $10.500.00 alreadr approved by the State Compensation Rourd. nas before the
body.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur In the request of the Commonwealth's
Attorney and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the necessary
funds:
(c20711) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section =22, "Common-
wealth*s Attorney." of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ua?, page 432.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
Webber ....................... 7.
NAYS: None ..........O.
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting that $1,000.00 be appropriated to "Schools - Vocational. Trade and
Industry." under Section =?SOO, and that $3,000.00 be appropriated to "Schools -
Vocational, Trade and Industry - Small Equipment," under Section =12500, of the
1972-73 budget of the Roanoke City School Board, to provide funds which will be
used to purchase equipment for vocational, trade and industrial shops, advising
that this appropriation must be matched by 29~ local funds which are available
under the accounts indicated and that the $4.000.00 appropriation will then be
100~ reimbursable from state funds, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanoke City
School Board and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
(=20712) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section =7000, "Schools -
and Betterments," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
(For full text of Ordinance, see as recorded in Ordinance Book =37.
page 432.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Bubard, Lash, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber 7.
WATS: Wone ........... O.
SCHOOLS-BUDGET: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting thor $2,S39.3~ be appropriated to #Schools ~ Library Boobs nnd
Materiolso' under Section ~91000, of the 1972-73 budget of the Ronno~e City
School Board,' to provide funds to supplement on allocation from P, L. 89-10.
Title II funds, advising that the School Board will be reimbursed 100~ of actual
expenditures, wes before the body.
Hr. Trout moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanoke City
School Board and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
necessary funds:
(u20713) AN ORDINANCE to amend and renrdain Section XglO00, "Schools
Library Rooks and Materials," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and pro-
viding for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook u37. page 433.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Rebber .................... 7.
NAYS: None ..........O.
BUSES: Council having previously adopted a Resolution proposing cer-
tain apportionment with the City of Roanoke of the costs of providing bus trans-
portation services in the city and in other adjacent localities, a communication
from Mr. A. Terrell Haskerville, County Administrator, Botetourt County Roard Of
Supervisors. advising that this Resolution was presented to the Rotetonrt County
Roard of Supervisors on February 6, 1973. and after consideration of said Reso-
lution the Hoard resolved not to participate in the apportionment of the cost
as outlined in said Resolution, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be referred to the Transporta-
tion Study Committee for its information in connection with its study of the
matter. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
AIRPORT-TAXES-LEGISLATION: A communication from the Honorable Ray
L. Garland expressing appreciation for Resolution No. 20669 dealing ~ith the
service charge on certain users of municipal airport facilities and Resolution
No. 20690 dealing with the service charges in lieu of a real estate tax on the
omners of real estate exempt under Section 5H.12 of the Code of Virginia, assur-
ing Council that he will faithfully represent the city*s point of view on these
matters, was before the body.
Mr. Trout moved that the ~ommunication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
SERERS AND STORM DRAINS: Mr. H. Lawrence Rice, Administrator,
Friendship Manor, appeared before Council and presented the following communi-
cation respectfully requesting that the Council of the City of Roanoke allow
Friendship Manor to connect to the Roanoke City seMer lines:
'February 9, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Webber
Mayor, City of Roanoke
215 Church Avenue. S, W,
Roanoke, Virginia.
Hear Mr. Webber:
Inasmuch as Friendship Manor is building end will need
sewer connections end whereas the sewer contract dated
the Nth day of March 1972 was wade between the City of
Roanoke and the County of Roanoke and/or the Roanoke County
Public Service Authority, we, therefore, respectfully
request the Council of the City of Roanoke to allow
Friendship Manor to connect to the Roanoke City sewer
lines.
This request is made for the following reasons:
1. All buildings, until the present construction program,
are within the City of Roanoke and it would be better to
have all structures serviced by the same municipality.
2. Taking a point mid-way of the new construction it would
be 258 feet closer to the sewer lines of Roanoke City than
to tho~e of the County.
3. Inasmuch as Friendship Manor is serving a desperate
need of the elderly on a non-profit basis and the estimated
costs, even after adjustment, by the Roanoke County Public
Service Authority are prohibitive so that it would be
extremely difficult to keep costs in line and thereby could
work a hardship on elderly persons, we would look to the
City for a sewer connection.
This connection and the construction of said line, if
approved, would be without cost to the City of Roanoke and
we would pay the normal connection fee charged by the City.
It is our hope that the City Council would proceed with the
County Hoard of Supervision representing the County of
Roanoke as provided in the contract.
Thank you so very much for all of your help.
Sincerely yours,
S/ H. Lawrence Rice
H. Lawrence Rice"
In a discussion of the matter, Mr. Thomas made reference to the fact
that the proper place of initiation of this request would be with the Roanoke
County Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Trout moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
a legal opinion. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas.
Mr. Hubard pointed out that he feels Council should refer the request
to the Water Resources Committee for study, report and recommendation and that
the Committee. in its study of the matter, will consult with the City Attorney
with reference to the legal questions.
After a discussion of the matter, Mr. Trout amended his notion to
provide that the request be referred to the City Attorney and to the Water
Resources Committee for study, report and recommendation, to Council. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Trout. 5.
NAYS: None- ~0.
(Mr. Garland and Mayor Webber not voting)
SEWERS AND STORR DRAINS: The foil*ming communication from Mr. S. B.
Simmons, Assistant Director, Grants Program, State Mater Control Board, with
reference to Section 206, ~em caw Reimbursement and Advanced Construction, nas
before Council.
'February S, 1973
Mayor, City of Roanoke
Municipal Building
Roanoke. Virginia 24012
Dear Sir:
The 92nd Congress recently enacted the Federal Mater
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
One of the major highlights of the new Act is Section 206,
"Reimbursement and Advanced Construction", mhich reods in
part as follows:
*Sec. 206(a) Any publicly owned treatment works in
a State on which construction was initiated after
June 30, 1966, but before July 1, 1972, which was
approved by the appropriate State water pollution
control agency and which the Administrator finds
meets the requirements of Sec. 8 of this Act in
effect at the time of the initiation of construc-
tion shall be reimbursed a total amount equal to
the difference between the amount of Federal finan-
cial assistance, if any, received under such Sec. G
for such project and 50 per centum of the cost of
such project, or 55 per centum of the project cost
where the Administrator also determines that such
treatment works mas constructed in conformity with
a comprehensive metropolitan treatment plan as
described in Sec. B(f) of the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act as in effect immediately prior
to the date of enactment of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972. Sothing
in this subsection shall result in any such works
excess of DO per centum of the cost of such project.*
Therefore, if a locality commenced construction of a sewage
pollution abatement project between June 30, 196h and July
1, 1972, the project could be eligible for 50% OF S5~ fund-
lng subject to the following:
1. Approval by the State Water Control Board before
construction
2. Complied with regional plan (for 55% lundin9)
Funded at a lesser percentage than 50 or
4. Grant funds awarded by any other Federal agency
not to exceed BO~ with EPA grant.
'Sec. 206(b) Any publicly owned treatment works con-
structed with or eligible for Federal financial
assistance under this Act Jn a State between June
30, 1956, and June 30. 196b, which was approved by
the State water pollution control agency and which
the Administrator finds meets the requirements of
Section 0 of this Act prior to the date of enactment
of the Federal Mater Pollution Control Act Amend-
ments of 1972 but which mas constructed without
assistance under such section B or which received
such assistance in an amount less than 30 per centum
of the cost of such project 'shall qualify for pay-
ments and reimbursement of State or local funds
used for such project from sums allocated to
such State under this section in an amount which
shall not exceed the difference between the amount
of such assistance, if any. received for such pro-
ject and 90 per centum of the cost of such project.*
Therefore, if a locality started construction of a pollu-
tion abatement semerage project between June 30, 1956 and
June 30. 1966, the project would be eligible for a
Federal construction grant if the following apply:
1.Approved by the State Water Control Board before
construction
2, Not funded, or funded ut a lesser percentage than
30~ from any other Federal agency
Also, the nem Act states that a municipality, with the
approval of the State, has one lear after the enactment of
the nam law (October 10, 1972) to file for such assistance.
It Is requested that the municipality advise the State
Water Control Soard of.any treatment works built in the time
period specified with a description of the project (includ-
ing layout map if possible), the final cost arrived at.
and the source of funds, The portions being eligible for
the said assistance would he a sewage treatment plant, inter-
ceptor lines, pump stations, and force mains. The State
Water Control Ooard would lite to have this information by
Hatch 1, 1973. The State mill determine eligibility for
funding and notify the Environmental protection Agency cnn-
cernin9 the request.
If you have any questions concerning the contents of this
letter, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely.
S/ E. R. Simmons
E. R. Simmons, Assistant Dir.
Grants Program~
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: A communication from Rt. R. R. Henley.
Executive Director, City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, trans-
mitting a checkin the amount of $35.4~7.61 representing payment to the City of
Roanoke in lieu of taxes of shelter rents from certain Housing Projects and
advisin9 that these amounts are for the fiscal year ended September 30, 1972,
was before the body.
Mr. Trout moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
GARBAGE REMOVAL: A communication from Mrs. Elizabeth L. ~illiams
expressing the opinion that instead Of constantly seeking temporary measures
for garbage disposal and a forever battle over landfills, that the city should
seek a more permanent solution and calling attention to an incinerator which will
reduce bulk by ninety per cent, advising that this incinerator will leave ash
which would make 9and fertilizer, that it is smokeless since it consumes its
own smoke, that it would handle the entire Roanoke Valley, that eventually it
should pay for itself, that it will solve the landfill problem and put the city
ahead in the environmental battle, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be referred to the Landfill
Committee for its information in connection with its study of the matter. The
motion was seconded by Hr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
EASEMENTS: A communication from Mr. CUFF L. Kinder, Jr., Attorney,
representing Blue Cross of Southwestern Virginia, advising that his client
is the owner of a parcel of land located at 1212 3rd Street, S. W., its main
office, and of a parcel of land located at 1119 2nd Street, S. W., its computer
'4;L8
center, that these tmo parcels nre separated et the rear by a fifteen foot
alley and respectfully requesting that his client be 9rooted aa easemeot across
the uforessid u]ley for the purpose of plucing the compoter cable or cables
underground betmeeu the two buildings to be done in accordance with the require-
meets set fo'rth by the Eogineeriag Department of the City of Roanoke, mss before
Council.
Rro Llsk moved that the comnunicatiou be referred to the City #aooger
for review and recommendation to Council, The ~otion was seconded by Rr, Trout
and unanimously adopted.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: An application from Mr. Carr L. Kinder, Jr..
Attorney, representing Reliance Equipment Corporation, Estate of Clyde S. Fulton
Charles M. Garlick, Grace M. Garlick, James E. Garlick and Robert M. Garlick to
permanently vacate, discontinue and close that certain fifteen foot alley run-
ning generally east-west through Block il, Map of Hyde Park Land Company. from
15th Street, N. W., to 16th Street, N. W.,. was before Council.
Mr. Thomas offered the following Resolution appointing viemers in
connection with vacating, discontinuing and closing the alley:
(x20714) A RESOLUTION provid'ng for the appointment of five free-
holders, any three of whom may act. as viewers in connection with the application
of Reliance Equipment Corporation, Estate of Clyde S. Fulton, Charles
Garlick, Grace M. Harlick. James E. Garl'ick, and Robert W. Garlick to permanently
vacate, discontinue and close that certain fifteen-foot alley running generally
East-West through Block 11, Map of Hyde Park Land Company, from 15th Street,
N. R.. to 16th Street. N. W., more specifically described below.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book u3?, page
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber ............... T.
NAYS: None, .0.
Mr. Garland then moved that the request be referred to the City Plan-
ning Commission for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion sas
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET-DEpARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE: The City Manager submitted the
following report advising that it will be necessary to appropriate an additional
$17,000.00 at this time to General Relief under Section {37, "Public Assistance,~
of the 1g72-73 budget[ if it is the desire of Council to proceed with payment
of the General Relief account at tBtal city expense with the hope of receiving
reimbursement from the state orr their share:
*February 20, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanohe, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: General Relief Melhre, Fonds
As of the date of this writing, the 1973 Legislature
has not completed action on the budget amendment requested
to provide funds for General Relief. Conversations with Mr.
Mllliam Lukhard. Director of Department of Welfare and In-
stitutions, indicate that the budget amendment has passed
the Rouse and is presently before the Senate Finance Com-
mittee. At this time, it is unknown uhether or not they
Mill accept this amendment, and he indicates that he will
not be able to provide that information to the City of
Roanoke before February 2~.
The City of Roanoke General Relief Account presently
has a balance of $3.30D.SO. As the average expenditure per
month has been running approximately $20.000, the existing
$3,000 is not enough to make the payments for March and
unless City Council Js desirous of appropriatJeg additional
funds, the checks generally dispatched on the first of the
month cannot be mailed. Should City Uouucll desire to pro-
ceed with payment of the General Relief Account at total
City expense, with the hopes of receiring reimbursement
from the State for their share, it will be necessary to
appropriate at this time an additional $17,000 to the Relfare
Department General Relief Account.
Respectfully submitted,
S! Byron R. Hamer
Byron E. Raner
City Manager-
Mr. Thomas moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure appropriating the necessary funds. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout mod unanimously adopted.
Mr. Lisk then moved that the City Manager be instructed to contact
the representatives Of the City of Roanoke tothe General Assembly to reemphasis
the importance that the legislators review and amend the budget which was just
adopted in reference to the cutback in public welfare funds. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
SBERIFF-BUDGET: The City Manager submitted a written report recommend-
log tbat $513.00 be appropriated to Office Furniture and Equipment - Replacement
under Section o23, 'Sheriff** of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for the
purchase of a typewriter, advising that the Commonwealth of Virginia will reim-
burse the city for one-half of said cost.
Dr. Taylor mowed that Council concur in the recommendationof the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the necessary
funds:
(~20715) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section o23, "Sheriff,"
of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and provldin9 for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n37, page 435.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber ......
NAYS: None O,
'420
BUDGET-CITY EMPLOYEES-GARHAGB REMOVAL: The City Manager submitted
the following report recommending that $15,000.00 be transferred from Personal
Services to Overtime under Section n§9, "Sanitation Division," of the 1972-73
budget, to provide necessary overtime funds:
"February 20, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Cooncil
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Sanitation Rodget - Overtime Account
City Council will recall that in October 1972 it became
necessary to request a transfer of funds within the Sanita-
tion Division budget due to a large expenditure within the
Overtime Account. This was largely created by an inordinate
number of vacant positions within that division which
required the remaining employees working extra hours in
order to maintain schedules.
Again, it is necessary to approach City Council on the
subject of Overtime funds within the Sanitation Division
budget for some of the same reasons, but additionally
because of certain new factors. During the month of Nov-
ember there contimued to be a number of vacant positions
within the Sanitation Division which required overtime
work by the remaining employees. That month*s operation
was also affected by the long holiday weekend over Thanks-
giving. During December a considerable change occured
in that nearly all vacant positions were filled and through-
out almost the entire month sufficient manpower was avail-
able to maintain schedules with crews working normal duty
hours. This Iow vacancy rate was of considerable help
over the long holiday weekends at Christmas and New Years.
Another factor affecting the Overtime Account within
the Sanitation Division budget has been the limited space
available at the Fallon Park landfill site. In order to
maintain a quality operation, overtime funds have been
expended maintaining 'good trenches and adequate cover
material within this confined location. ~e believe the
successful operation at this site has been worth the effort
put forth in this regard.
Finally, overtime has been expended in maintaining
schedules with our bulk container commercial collection.
Mith the inordinate rainfall during November, December and
January many vehicles have become stuck on the landfill,
certain breakdowns of equipment have occurred, and employees
hare worked many evenings as well as Saturdays to maintain
these commercial container schedules. The two new container
collection vehicles presently on order will allow us to
retire certain old and undependable equipment as well as
provide a spare unit for use in the event of breakdowns.'
Yhis should minimize overtime in the future with this
particular phase of refuse collection.
Mith the numerous employee vacancies within the
Sanitation Division earlier in the year, funds are
available for transfer to cover these overlie expenditures.
It is recommended that $15,000 be transferred within the
Sanitation Division budget from Account 69-101, personal
Services, to Account 69-114, Overtime.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Haner
Byron E. Haner
City Manager*
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(#20715) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section e69. *Sanitation
Division** of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergeuc~
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook =37, page 435.)
Or. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Nensrs, Garland, Habnrdo Link, Taylor, ~bomnno Trout and
Mayor Webber .................
~AYS: None ........... O.
In this connection. Mr. Lisk requested that the City Manager do some
spot checking into the platoon System of the City of Roanoke, pointing out that
there needs tn be closer dJscJpllne within the system.
BGDG£T-GARAG£: The City Manager submitted the following report request-
lng that $2.600.00 be transferred from Personal Services to Overtime under
Sectiou #?l, "Garage," of the 1972-73 budget, to provide necessary funds and
outlining reasons justifying this request:
*February 20. 1973
ltonorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Vir~inla
Gentlemen:
Subject: Garage Budget - Overtime Account
Mitbin the present budget for the City Garage operations
the Overtime Account is overdrawn and in need of supplemental
appropriations.
these fueds mbicb we believe should be explained to the City
Council in justifying this request for supplemental appro-
priation. As Council is well aware the City Garage opera-
failed to arrive for work thus requiring other employees to
turnover among the City personnel assigned to the night and
weekend shifts thus necessitating other employees working
double duty.
Sanitation Oivision equipment has been critical the
past rem months and considerable overtime has been expended
by the Garage personnel in maintaining this equipment in an
available state. Mith the new system of service charges for
bulk container collections, we believe it mandatory thnt the
City maintain its schedules for this operation and some over-
time has been expended in keeping these collection vehicles
on the road. As Council is well aware, landfill operations
have been very critical in the tight quarters and small
area within which me are working and-we have felt justified
in expending certain overtime to assure the availability
all heavy, equipment for landfill operations.
Finally, as an item of justification, we have on
weekends in order to keep sufficient police rehicles on
Me believe sufficient funds exist ulthim other Gurage
Therefore it is recommended that the sum of ~2,600 be
transferred from Garage Account ?I - 240, Insurance, to
Account 71 ~ 114, Overtime, to cover the present nver~
expenditure in this account plus provide funds for the
Respectfully submitted,
$/ Byron E. Haner
Byron E. Haner
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the request of tb~ City Manager
and offered the follomin9 emergency Ordinance:
(a20717) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section U?l, 'Garage,"
of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and pro. riding for an emergency. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinanc~ Rook u3?, page 436.}
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconde
by Mr. Llsk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: #essrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor ~ehber ................. 7.
NAYS: None ..........O.
TRAFFIC: Council having previously reverted to the CitI Manager for
study, report and recommendation a communication from Mr. Charles R. Merkel,
President of the Riverdale Civic League, calling attention to a drastic situa-
tion which exists at Riverland Road and gth Street, S. E.. at the Roanoke
Industrial Center. adrising that traffic is backed up at various times of the
day and creates not only a problem for the community but for the Industrial
Center, the City Manager submitted the following report in connection with several
traffic engineering studies and inrestioations which have been conducted in this
vicinity during the past year:
'February 20, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
6entlemem:
Subject: Traffic Congestion - Ninth Street, S. E.. Roanoke
Industrial Center
For a Ion9 time the City has had under study the traffic
conditions along Ninth Street, S. E.. through the Roanoke
Industrial Center, includin9 the intersection of Ninth Street
and Riverland Road. Over a period of time numerous indivi-
duals and groups have raised question with City Council and
the City administration over the need for relief to the
periodic congestion which exists in this vicinity.
Several traffic engineering studies and investigations
have been conducted in this vicinity during the past year.
The traffic situation is most congested at the morning and
afternoon rush hour when through traffic along Ninth Street
is compounded by employees arriving and leaving the Indus-
trial Center businesses.
An analysis of the Riverlaad Road--Ninth Street inter-
section shows that the morning traffic peak occurs between
?:30 a.m. and 8 a.m. with the afternoon traffic peak occur-
rim9 between 4 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. An on-site inspection
shomed a morning and afternoon backup of approximately 15
minutes duration mhich could be eased somemhat but not com-
pletely eliminated by a traffic signal installation. A
major lictor in the intersection congestion is the two-lane
bridge over Roanoke River which does not provide adequate.
room for storage of vehicles desiring to turn both left and
right soathbound at this intersection. Since a $16;o00
traffic signal would only provide relatively minor relief
for this intersection, and more importantly the traffic
congestion is limited to two relatively short periods during
the day, we do not believe the expense is presently justified.
This is not to say, homever, that we offer no relief
for the existing traffic congestion. Begiunin9 Monday.
February 12 a police traffic officer has been assigned to
the Rlverlend Road and Ninth Street intersection between
the hours o~ ?:30 ued 8 a.m. ced egain betweem 4 and 4 p.m.
in order to expedite traffic flow ut peak periods. Ne will
continue to give consideration to the possibility of program-
ming a parallel bridge structure over Roanoke River on Ninth
Street, S. £., which uould then make a traffic Signalize
more useful at the Riverlnnd Road Intersection. Additionally,
it would be noted that the already programmed highway pro-
Ject for the new Buzzard Rock Ford Bridge over Roanoke River
will, in the not-too-distant future, provide an alternate
route for much of the through traffic now using Ninth Street.
Finally, we are suggesting to the officials of Roanoke Indus-
trial Center that curb and gutter along Ninth Street uithin
the Center would help to define their parking areas and
reduce some of the traffic congestion which exists within
the Industrial Center.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Byron E. flaner
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager'
Mr. Llsk moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted,
BUILDINGS-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted the following
report recommending that Council amend the Fire Prevention Code to correspond
with the wording contained in the Southern Standard Building Code as it defines
institutional occupancy:
"February 20, 1973
Bonorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Institutional Category Buildings
Within recent months a change in policy with respect to
housing of veterans formerly housed at the Veterans Admini-
stration has resulted in the development of numerous institu-
tional buildings within the City of Roanoke. This recent
policy change provides that the Veterans Administration pays
for room and board for former patients to be house nearby
where they can visit the Veterans Administration on an out-
patient basis. This policy was implemented to reduce the
overloaded situation at these institutions. As a result of
ibis policy, numerous houses within the City of Roanoke have
been converted to this use. The first indication the Fire
Department has of this change in status is when they receive
notification from the State that these houses have been
licensed as institutions and are subject to fire prevention
regulations which apply to that category building, lhere
the difficulty lies is in the definition of Institutional
occupancy as contained in the 1965 Edition of ~e Fire
Prevention Code. It reads as follows: 'Institutional
occupancy means the occupancy or use of a building or
structure or any portion thereof by persons harbored or
detained to receive medical, charitable or other care or
treatment or by any persons involuntarily detained.' It
does not specify any specific number of individuals that must
reside at that location to obtain this institutional classi-
fication. As a result of this definition, when fire preven-
tion personnel inspect this institutional facility and find
it to be a two-story building generally housing up to nine
former patients, under current regulations they are required
to specify that this facility must be equipped with a
sprinhling system or it may only receive a provisional
license which limits its use to two years. Quite naturally
the owners of these facilities are deeply concerned as prior
obtained clearance from the State and from the Roilding
Commissioner. The Building Co=miisioner's definition of
an Institution is quite different fromthat contained in the
informed that a sprinkler system would be required or that
they would only get a provisional license as a result of
not having a sprinkler system. The Southern Building Code
definition as it applies to Institutional facilities reads
as follows:
,24
'407,1 -- SCOPE
' '*Buildings in which more ths~ ~ix people are detained
for pe~al or correctional purposes[ or in which the
liberty of the Inmates is restricted, or pisces of
involuntary detention, shrill be classlfed in Group
*Buildings in which more than ten pehple are har-
bored for medical, charitable or other care or
treatment shall be classified in Group
Group D-2 is further explained as follows:
'Institutional Occupancy--shall include, among others,
the following:
Hospitals. Sanitariums, Orphanages and Old Peoples
Homes.*
Basically this problem may be resolved by amending the
fire prevention code definition of institutional occupany to
correspond with that contained in the Southern Standard
Building Code. This would permit the use of these institu-
tional facilities for as many as nine occupants without
requiring the installation of sprinkling systems.
It would be recommended that City Co'uncil amend the
Fire Prevention Code to correspond with the wording contained
in the Southern Standard Building Code as it defines insti-
tutional occupancy.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Dance
Byron E. Bauer
City Reneger"
Hr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of tee City
Manager and offered the folloming emergency Ordinance amending Sec%ion ST.
Amendments, in the Fire Prevention Code, Chapter 2, Fire Prevention. Title XIV,
Fire Protection. of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, by
redefining the term "Institutional Occupancy." as contained in Section 1.12,
Definitions. of the 1965 Edition of the Fire Prevention Code adopted by reference
in said chapter and title:
(~20?lO) AN ORDINANCE amending Sec. 57, Amendments made in the Fire
Prevention Code, Chapter 2. Fire Prevention of Title XIV, Fire Protection. of
the Code of the City of Roanoke, 19$6, as amended, by redefining the term
"Institutional Occupancy" as contained in Section 1.12 Definitions of the 1965
Edition of the Fire Prevention Code adopted by reference in said chapter and
title; and providing for an emergency
(For full text of Ordinance, see ~rdinance Book ~37, page 436.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Hanses. Garland. Hubard. Lisk. Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber ................ 7.
NAYS: None O.
AIRPORT: The City Manager submitted a written report advising that the
Master Plan for Roanoke Runicipal (Noodrun) Airport as prepared by Talbert, Cox
and Associates. has been reviewed and approved by the Chief of the Washington
Airports District Office.
425
Mr, Trout moved that the report be received and filed. The motion uss
seconded by Mr. Llsk and unanimously adopted.
AUDITORIUM-COLISEUM: Council at its lust regular meeting having
requested that the City Manager report on the circumstances under which the City
of Roanoke Junior High School Basketball Championship Game mas played in the
Salem Civic Center instead of the Roanoke Civic Center, the City Manager sub-
mitted the following report advising that Mr. Howard Light, Supervisor of Health
and Physical Education for the Roanoke City School Hoard, indicated that the
City Junior High School Championship Game was played as a prelude to one of the
games played by Roanoke College and as a result was at no cost to the junior
high schools concerned, that Mr. Light also indicated that this occurred on the
same evening as the Addison High-Franklin County Mama, which was held in the
Roanoke Civic Center and they were unaware that there would be no junior varsity
9ama or said 9ama could have been scheduled before the Addison-Franklin County
9ama and that representatives of the School Board have indicated that nam that
new rental rates have been determined for the Roanoke Civic Center every effort
will be made to schedule important city games into the Roanoke Civic Center prior
to making any other arrangements.
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-AIRPORT: ~he City Manager submitted the following
report recommendinR that Council authorize the employment of three additioonl
Airport Patrolmen at Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport, effective March l, i973:
"February 20, 1073
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Oentlemen:
Subject: Airport Security
As members of City Council are anare, the strengthen-
lng of Airport security requirements, as directed by the
President of the United States and announced by the Secre-
tary of Transportation on December S, 1972, has resulted
in the additional requirement for three police officers to
be stationed at the Roanoke Municipal Airport. These
three police officers are required to supplement the exist-
ing authorized three Airport policemen. Necessity for
these three additional policemen and for physical.changes
to the security measures at the Airport Mere communicated
to City Council by Mr. Hirst On November 13, 1972.
On February 2, 1973, three regular police officers
were temporarily assigned to the Airport to augment the
Airport police nod to enable two-man coverage at that
location. One officer is primarily assiRned to the
inside of the terminal Mhile the second is assigned to
the exterior area around the terminal including the
parking lot area.
At the time these three Airport police positions
were established by City Council, they were established
with lower than normal qualifications and physical standards
and at a salary level two grades below that of the regular
patrolman. These three additional spaces would be in the
same Airport patrolman category.
Upon hiring and assignment of these Airport patrolmen
the regular patrolman temporarily assigned to augment the
existing City security force mould be returned to full
duty within the City.
'426
I~ Mould be recommended that City Council authorize
these three additional spaces to be effective March 1,
1973, This mould permit sufficient time for background.
investigation to be conducted on seven applicants nos on
file and the nemly appointed Airport policemen could be
included in the spring session of the Police Academy,
which is scheduled for the month of March. To delay
Mould result in the new men not receiving the proper
training until the fall session of the Police Academy.
It is anticipated that funds in the amount of $6,312
would be necessary to pay these additional Airport patrol-
men; however, there are sufficient lauds within the person-
nel account of that department to defray these costs for
this current fiscal year. NO appropriation mould be needed
at this time.
Respectfully subuitted,
S~ Byron E. Raner
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be referred to the Airport Advisory
Commission for study, report and recommendation to Council as to whether
or not these new positions should be classified as regular police officers of
if they should be placed in a special category and that the Committee be
requested to submit its report to Council by the next regular meeting of the
body on Monday. February 26. 1973, if possible. The motion mas seconded by Mr.
Garland and unanimously adopted.
SCHOOLS-SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: Council at its last regular meeting
having requested that the City Manager submit a report on any temporary action
which can be taken with regard to the sewage situation at the Ruff Lane Elemen-
tary School until the permanent sewer llne can be installed, the City Manager
submitted a written report advising that he has discussed this matter with
Mr. R. P. Via, Director of Plants for the Roanoke City School Roard and that he
has been informed that they have pumped this septic tank since this recent
occurrence and they will keep this situation under observation and Mill pumpthe
tank out from time to time to prevent recurrence Of this problem.
Dr. Taylor moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
S£MERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted the following
report recommending that Councilapprove the submittal of a revised grant appli-
cation to the State Mater Control Board for allocation of federal and state
9rant funds to the City of Roanoke for Phase III work at the Sewage Treatment
Plant, advising that this revised application will replace the application which
was filed with the Board on June 23, 1972, that the federal grant for this pro-
ject Mill be $11,471,200.00 the state 9rant will be $1,529,500.00 and city funds
will be
"February 20, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The Virginia State Mater Control Board has adopted a
revised program for funding projects for the development,
expnnsion end improvement of sewage treatment p'lents end
sewage transmission facilities, The State Mater Control
Board has revised its nllocntiun of Federal and State grant
funds to the City for Phnse Ill worh at the sewage treatment
plant (the expansion of the secondary facilities and the
construction of the advanced waste treatment facilities).
The Stere Mater Control Ooard has requested that the
City of Roanohe submit a revised application rot Federal
grant funds mhich application would include a new total
eligible project coat of $15,293.016. This revisedappli-
cation mill replace the application which uae filed with
the State Mater Control Board on June 23. 1972. The Federal
grant for this project would be $11.471,200 and the State
grant would be $1,32g.3BO. City funds would be $2.294,316.
It is recommended that the City Council approve the
submittal of this revised 9rent application and that by
resolution the City Nanager be authorized to execute the
· application in the name of the City of Roanohe.
The appropriate resolution is attached for your approval.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager'
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and offered the following Resolution:
(#20719) A RESOLUTION approving the filing of the City's revised
application for Federal Assistance under Catalog and Federal Domestic Assistance
No. 66-400 Mastewater Treatment Murks Construction Grants, previously filed in
the form of an application for Federal Grant for Sewage Treatment Murks, with
the ¥irginia State Mater Control Board under date of June 25,
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance nook #37, page 437.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Besolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Rayor Nebber ...................?.
NAYS: None .......... O.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
BUDGET-CITY MANAGER: Mr. Robert A. Garland, Chairman of the "Julian
F. Hirst Appreciation Dinner Committee,~ submitted a written report transmitting
copy of a statement of receipts as well as expenses relating to this event and
advising that an appropriation of $789.91 will be uecessary in order to balance
this account.
Mr. Lisk moved that council concur in the report of the committee and
offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the necessary funds:
(=20720) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section =1, ~Gouncil,'
428
AYES: #essrs. Garlnnd, Rubard, LJsk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Nayor Webber-
NAYS: None O.
FIRE DEPARTMENT: Mr. Robert E. Mullah, Chairman of the Board of Fire
Appeals, submitted nn annual report of the Board of Fire Appeals, advising that
since its inception, this Board has not been called upon to meet, that presumably
this is because the Fire Department is doing such a good Job in selling fire
prevention to the city citizens that no one has seen fit to appeal n ruling
made by thi~ Department and that the committee stands ready to serve when called
upon.
Mr. G~rland moved that the report be received and filed. The notion
was seconded by DF. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a written report in
connection with the request of Mr. Lawrence C. Musgrove, Attorney, representing
property owners of all lots with the exception of Lot I in Block 27, Map of
Riverview Land and Manufacturing Company, in the 1800 block of Patterson Avenue,
S. ]., between 18th Street and 19th Street, S. W., that their property be
retorted from RG-2, General Residential District, to C-l, Office and Institu-
tional District, recommending that the request be approved.
In this connection, the City Planning Director submitted the follow-
ing report transmitting a communication from Mr. Musgrove petitioning that the
entire block be rezoned to C-l, Office and Institutional District, and a
further'communication addressed to the owner of the single lot in question
notifying him of this rezoning petition and that in view of this recent situa-
tion, the Planning Director recommends that Council include the remaining lot
in the retorting petition as submitted by Mr. Husgrove so as to provide for one
uniform office and institutional zoning designation in the entire block:
"February 14, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
This matter was tabled by City Council at its meeting
of February 12, 1973, so as to permit the planning Depart-
ment to consider the feasibility of retorting a single lot
contained in an entire block petitioned to be retorted to an
office and institutional zoning designation.
The original rationale for not recommending having this
single parcel rezoned was that the owner of this lot was
resldin9 in Beirut, Lebanon and be could not be contacted
concerning this matter. However, the situation has recently
changed.
I am enclosing with this letter tho communication from
· Mr. MusBrove: one petitioning that the entire block be
rezoned to a C-I. Office and Institutional desiBnatlon and
the other a communication addressed to the omner of the
single lot in question notifying him of this rezoning
petition.
In vleu of this recent situatfon, ! mould recommend
that City Council fnclnde the remaining lot in the reaoning
petition os submitted by Mr. Mesgrove so as to provide for
one uniform office and institutional zoning designation in
the entire block.
I believe that Jo · situation of this nature, Planning
Commission action is not necessary and Council can act
directly on it.
Thank you.
Sincerely yours,
S/ Lothar Mermelstein
Lothar Mermelstein
Planning Director*
Mr. Lisk then offered the follouieg Resolution relating to the reclassi-
fication of all the sixteen lots in Block 27, Map of Rivervie¥ Land and Manu-
facturing Company, located on the south side of Patterson Avenue, S. W., and
on the north side of Chapman Avenue, S. g., from RG-2. General Residential Dis-
trict, to C-l, Office and Institutional District:
(s20721) A RESOLUTION relating to the reclassification of all of the
sixteen lots in Block 27, Map of Rivervie~ Land and Manufacturing Company,
located on the south side of Patterson Avenue, S. M., and on the north side Of
Chapman Avenue, S. M., from RG-2. General Residential District, to C-1. Office
and Institutional District.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book #37, page 439.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and May~
webber ...................... 7.
NAYS: None .......... O.
Mr. Lisk then moved that a public hearing on the question of rezoning
all sixteen lots be held at 7:30 p,m., Monday, March 2b, 1973, in the Council
Chamber. The notion was seconded by Mr. Trqut and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a mritten report in
connection with a request of Mr. Michael K. Smeltzer. Attorney. representing
Messrs. J. Tote McDroom and R. C. Churchill, Jr., that two parcels of land located
on the sesterly side of the 2500 and 2600 blocks of Stephenson Avenue, S.
Official Tax Nos. 1160133-and llbOlSb, be rezoned from RS-3, Single-Family Resi-
dential District, to RD. Duplex Residential District. recommending that the
Mr. Thomas moved that a public hearing on the request for rezoning be
held at ?:30 p.m., Monday, March 26, 1973. in the Council Chamber. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
ZONING~ The City Planning Commission submitted a written report in
connection uith the request of Mr. Earl A. Fitzpatrick, Attorney, representing
General Sales, Incorporated. that property located at the northeast corner of
the intersection of Melrose Avenue and Country Club Drive, N. M.. containing
;42'9
'430
2.104 acres. Official Tax No, 2660519. be rezoned from C-I. Office nnd Institu-
tional District, to C-20 General Commercial District, recommending that the
request be granted.
Mr. Thomas moved lhat a public hearing on the request for rezoning
be held at 7:30 p.m., Nonday, #arch 26, 1973, Jn the Cooncil Chamber. The motJoc
mas seconded by Hr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIRS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
AIRPORT: Ordinance No. 20706. providing authority to the United
States of America, Federal Aviation Administration. and right and privilege to
install, operate and maintain a certain localizer antenna structure and a glide
slope facility antenna toner at Roanoke Municipal Airport for a certain term.
but not to extend beyond June 30. 1966, upon certain terms and provisions and
superseding provisions of License No. FA67EA-30,046 previously granted said
Government and authorizing execution of a new license agreement identified as
Contract No. DOT-FA73EA-?023. having previously been before Council for its
first reading, read and laid over, was again before the body, Mr. Thomas offer-
ing the following for its second reading and final adoption:
(=20T06) AN ORDINANCE providing authority to the ·United States of
America, Federal Aviation Administration. and right and privilege to install.
operate and maintain a certain localizer antenna structure and a glide slope
facility antenna tower at Roanoke Municipal Airport for a certain term. but not
to extend beyond June 30, 1986, upon certain terms and provisions, and supersedil
provisions of License No. FAG?EA-30.046 previously granted said Government; and
authorizing execution of a ne# license agreement identified as Contract No,
DOT-FA73EA-7023.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book =37. page 428.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ...................
NAYS: None ........ O.
WATER DEpARTMENT-PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: Ordinance No. 2070T, autho-
rizing and providing for the lease by the City of Roanoke of the Smith Spring
property to the Town Of Vinton upon certain terms and conditions, having pre-
viously been before Council for its first reading, read and laid over, mas
again before the body, Mr. Trout offering the following for its second reading
and final adoption:
(a20707) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and providing for the lease by the
City of the Smith Spring property to the Town of Vistas, upon certain terms and
conditions.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book a37, page 430.)
Mr. Trout moved rue adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Dr. ToyXor and adopted by the'folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Llsk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................. 7.
NAYS: None ..........O.
SALE OF PROPERTY-MAYER DEPARTMENT:~ Council having directed the City
Attorney to prepare the proper measure concurring in the recommendation of the
Real Estate Committee that there be effected the exchange of certain lands ouoed
by the city nnd under option by Major Rotor Inns. Incorporated. upon certain
and conditions, he presented same; uhereupon, Mr. Lisk offered the following
Resolution:
(,20722) A RESOLUTION concurring in the recommendation of the Eouncil*s
Real Estate Committee that there be effected the exchange of certain lands
owned by the City .and under option by Major Motor Inns, Inc.. upon certain terms
and conditions.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Hook #37, page 440.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. Yhe motion was Seconded
By Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor lubber ...................
NAYS: None ......... O.
C17Y EMPLOYEES-pAY PLAN: Council having directed the City Attorney to
prepare the proper measure authorizing employment of Albert Ramond and Associates,
Incorporated. Management Consultants, for a study of the administrative and
management components of tee city's governmental structure at a cost not to
exceed $52.160.00. he presented sane; whereupon. Mr. Thomas offered the followilxj
emergency Ordinance:
(#20723) AN ORDINANCE authorizing employement of certain professional
managemeat consnltaat services for a study of the administrative and management
components of the City's governmental structure at a cost not to exceed $52,160.00
and providing for an emergency.
(For full text Of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book nS?, page ddl.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption Of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber 7.
NAYS: None O.
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS-HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: Council having directed
the City Attorney to prepare the proper measure concurring in the employment hy
the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority of the services of
engineering consultants to study the ~dequacy of existing off-site draingage
facilities in the area adjacent to the Kimball Urban Renewal Project and, if
432
necessnryo to prepare plans and specifications for work indicated by such study,
the costs of which study end neoessory plons sholl be paid by the city nnd
repealing Resolution No. 20647, adopted Janusry fl, 1973, he presented same;
whereupon, Hr. Lisk offered the following Resolution:
(u2o724) A RESOLUTION concurring in .the employment by the City of
Roanoke Redevelopment and Bousing Authority of the services of engineering
consultants to study the adequacy-of-existing off-site drainage facilities in
the area adjacent to the Rinball Urban Reneual Project and. if necessary, to
prepare plans and specifications for work indicated by such study, the costs
of which study and necessary plans shall be paid by the City; and repealing
Resolution No. 20647, adopted January 8, 1973.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance ROOk #37, page 442.)
ar. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Hubnrd and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: aessrs. Garland. Uubard, Lisk. Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
Rayor Mebber ...................
NAYS: None ........... O.
AIRPORT: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure awarding n contract to Creative Advertising for certain advertis-
ing privileges to be exercised at Roanoke Hunicipal (Moodrum) Airport upon
certain terms and provisions, on the basis of n certain proposal made therefor.
he presented same.
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk.
After a discussion uith regard to the contracts let by Creative
Advertising and as to the fee percentages. Mr. Lisk offered a substitute motion
that the matter be referred to the City Manager for restudy of the situation
and that the City Manager be requested to furnish Council with a copy of the
proposed agreement when he submits his report. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
CITY MANAGER: Mr. Milliam F. Clark. Assistant City Manager. submit-
ted the following communication tendering his resignation as Assistant City
Manager. effective March 19, 19Y3, since he is accepting the position of Execu-
tive Officer of Roanoke County:
"February 20, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The pa;t few weeks have been the most difficult time
of decision making in uy life. The offer of a job from
the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County.has been consid-
erably complicated by the fact that I am in no waydissat-
isfied with my present position with the City 'of Roanohe.
Nevertheless, I wish to advise that I have acceptedthe
position of Executive Officer with the County government,
beginning March 19, 1973.
The City of Roanoke has been most generous to me and I
would like to think that our relationship bis been mutually
beneficial. The challenges offered by this new opportunity
ere more than slightly appealing by reason of the fact that
my fniilyand X will not be required to relocate fnrnmsy
from those persons and surroundings which me have come to
knom and love.
I recognize that in years past Roanoke City and County
hove frequently experienced intergovernmental disagreements
sod certain suspicions still exist. While my nam allegiance
will be for Roanoke County I do not feel that this neces-
sarily means against Roanoke City. In this respect, X have
received considerable encouragement from both City and
County officials and residents. It will be my hope'that .
in · spirit of cooperation between all governments in the
Valley ue will face the problems and share the opportuni-
ties of the future.
In coucludiog. I woof to express to the Mayor and
Council. those present and in the past. my appreciation
for nil your support and eooperntion during the last eight
years; also. to all employees of the City mith whom X have
been privileged to work.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ William F. Clark
Milliam F. Clark
Assistant City Manager'
The Mayor. the members of Council and the City Manager expressed
regret over the decision made by Mr, Clark relinquishing his position as
Assistant City Uanager of the City of Roanoke but wished him success and best
wishes in his new position with Roanoke County,
Mr. Nubard then moved that Council meet in Executive Session to
cuss a matter concerning personnel. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and
adopted by the followin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebher .................... 7,
NAYS: None ...........O.
SALE OF PROPERTy-couNcIL: Mr, Trout moved that Council meet in Execu-
tive Session to discuss a real estate matter. The motion was seconded by Mr,
Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Rebber .?,
NAYS: None .........O,
PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT: Mayor Webber called to the attention of Council
that the two year terms of Messrs. Ralph K. Bowles, William A, Martin, James
Roe, Jr., Jonas G. Eller, J. C, Crutchfield nad Jinmie B, Layman as members of
the Personnel Hoard will expire on February 2B, 1973, and called for nominations
to fill the vacancies.
Jimmie B, Layman,
433
Lalman mere reelected as members of the Persgnnel Hoard for terms of tm, years
ending February 28, lg?S, b~ the foil,ming vote:
FOR MESSRS. 80WLES, MARTIN, ROE. ELLER, CMUTCflPIELH AND LAYMAN:
Messrs, Garland, Hobard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Heyor Webber ......
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: The City Clerk reported that Messrs. Eugene
Trnylor and Grady P. Gregory. Jr** Lave qualified as members o! the Hoard of
Housing end Hygiene for terms of two years each ending January 31, 1975.
Dr. Taylor moved that the report be ~eceived and filed. The m~tion
mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
There being no further business, Mayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTE~'~:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday, February 2bo 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in .regular meetfng in the Council
Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, February 26. 1973, at 7:30 p.m., the
regular meeting hour, with Mayor Roy L. Webber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilman Robert Au Garland, #illiam S. Hubard, David K.
Lisko Noel C. Taylor, Hampton M. Thomas. James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L.
Webber ........................ 7.
ABSENT: None ........ -0.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr, Byron E, Hamer, City Manager; Mr. William F,
Clark, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Kincanon, City Attorney; Mr, H,
Hen Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorney; and Mr. A. N. Gibson, City Auditor,
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend D, N,
McUrady, Pastor, Must Salem Raptist Church,
REARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC RATTERS:
STREETS AND ALLEYS-STATE HIGRMAYS: Council having continued until
7:30 p.m,, Monday, February 26, 1973, a public hearing on the application of
Mr, S, Douglas Shackleford, et mx,, to amend the Major Arterial Ilighway Plan so
as to eliminate the proposed relocation of Woods Avenue ut its intersectiou with
the west side Of Franklin Road, S, M,, the matter ~as again before the body,
In this connection, Council, at its meeting on Monday, January 29, 1973,
having requested that the City Manager seek the advice and assistance of the Fifth
Planning District Commission with respect to the matter and report back to Coun-
cil with his recommendations regarding amending the Major Arterial Highway Plan,
the City Manager submitted a written report transmitting a drwaing prepared by
the Traffic Engiueering and Communications Department showing a possible revi-
sion to the Major Arterial Highway Plan which would greatly reduce the taking
of Mr. Sbuckleford*s property and still allow for the construction of the inter-
sectio~ so as to permit unrestricted flow of traffic eastward along Woods Avenue
Franklin Road and advising that this revised realignment of the intersec-
tion has been coordinated with the Fifth Planning District Commission staff and
with their approval,
Mr, E. Griffith Dodson, Jr,. Attorney, representing Mr, S. Douglas
Shackleford, appeared before Council in support of the request of his client and
iadvised that he feels that the City Manager has done a fine job in trying to
this situation for Mr. Shackleford, but that he is concerned about the time-
table of when this development will take place and that he hopes Council will
make this a matter of priority in its funds to complete the intersection.
After a discussion of the matter, Mr. Thomas offered a proposed Resolu-
tion as prepared by Mr, Dodson uppr.oving and adopting a certain revision and
amendment Of a portion Of the Major Arterial Highmay Plan for the City of Roanoke
dated December 1963, and approved by Council Resolution No, 16274, dated February
15, lghS, The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk,
'436
In this connection, the City Attorney verbally advised that Council
recently approved the Roanoke Valley Area Thoroughfare Plan (1985) dated 1969,
that there will have to be some changes in the wording of the ubovedescribed
Resolution ia accordance with that Plan and the report of the City Manager and
suggested that Council refer the matter of drafting a suitable Resolution to
him.
Mr. Thomas then offered u substttut~motion that the matter be refer-
red to the City Attorney for preparation of the proper measure by the next
regular meeting of the body on Monday, March 5, 1973. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Lash and unanimously adopted.
BOUSIBG-$LUM CLEARANCE: Council having set a public hearing for
?:30 p.m., Monday, February 26, lg?3. on the question of adoption of a Housing
Availability Ordinance, thematter was before the body.
In this connection, Dr. Taylor moved that the following Ordinance
amending Title XV, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956. as amended, by the
addition of a new chapter numbered 8, Fair Housing; declaring the public policy
with respect to certain housing practices and procedures; defining certain words,
terns and phrases; defining certain discriminatory housing practices contrary to
public policy; establishing certain requirements and prohibiting certain acts '
and practicies; establishing a Fair Housing Hoard and an Administrator for said
board and prescribing their authority, duties and procedure to be employed by
each; defining the powers of the Fair Housing Hoard and providing for judicial
review of decisions of the Board; providing for initiation by the Hoard of cer-
tain legal proceedings, for the manner in which certain notices shall be given,
and for the time within which complaints under this Ordinance be decided; making
the various provisions, sentences, clauses, sections or parts hereof severable
and providing for the effective date of this Ordinance, be placed upon its first
reading:
(=20725) AN ORDINANCE amending Title XV of the Code of the City of
Roanoke, 195b, as amended, by the addition of a new chapter numbered Chapter 0,
Fair Housinn; declaring the public policy with respect to certain housing
practices and procedures; defining certain words, terms and phrases; defining
certain discriminatory housing practices contrary to public policy; establishing
certain requirements and prohibiting certain acts and practices; establishing a
Fair Housing Board and an Administrator for said board and prescribing their
authority, duties and the procedure to be employed by each; defining the powers
of the Fair Housing Board and providing for judicial review of decisions/ of
the Hoard; providin9 for initiation by the Board of certain legal proceedings,
for the manner in which certain notices shall be given, and for the time within
which complaints under this ordinance be decided; making the various provisions,
sentences, clauses, sections or parts hereof severable.; and providing for the
effective date of this ordinance.
WHEREAS, the continued harmonious relations between those persons of
different races, religions, nnd netlonnl origin are hereby declared essential to
the melfare, health and safety of the citizens of the Cltyof Roanohe; end,
WHEREAS° It is contrary to the public policy of the City to permit those
conditions to arise or continue unabated which impede the peaceful'coexistence
of nil people in the City, threzten peace end goad order and adversely affect
the physical, economic and sooizl well-being of the citizens; and,
WHEREAS, it is the duty of this governing body to exercise all avail-
able means and every pouer at its command to prevent the same so as to protect
its citizens from such perils; and
WHEREAS, in order to secure and promote the health, safety and general
welfare of the citizens of this City it is declared to be the policy of the City
to insure equal opportunity for all persons to purchase or rent adequate housing
facilities of their choice mithout regard to race, color, religion or national
origin and to that end this Council deems it expedient to adopt this chapter of
the Code of the City of Roanoke, Virginia.
THEREFORE, I~ IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
Title XV of the Code of the City of Roanoke. 1q$6, as amended, be and is hereby
amended by the addition of a new chapter, to be numbered Chapter D. Fair Housinq,
to read and provide as follows:.
CtlAPTER 8. Fair Housinn.
Sec. 1. Definitions.
For the purpose of this chapter the following words and com-
binations of mords shall have the meanings ascribed thereto, namely:
A.' *Person* - includes one or more individuals, corporatbns,
partnerships, associations, labor organizations, legal representa-
tives, mutual companies, joint-stock compaoies, trusts, unincorporated
oroanizations, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, receivers, and
fiduciaries.
B. "Lending institution* - means any bank, insurance company,
savings and loan association or any other person regularly engaged
in the business of lending money or guaranteeing loans.
C. "Housing" - means any building, structure, or facility,
or portion thereof, located in the City of Roanoke that is used
or occupied or is intended, arranged, or designed to be used or
occupied as the home, residence, or sleeping place of one or more
individuals, groups or families, and any vacant land located in
the City of Roanoke offered for sale or lease for the purpose of con-
structing or locating such building, structure, or facility, and
includes any interest in housing as so defined, fee simple, lease-
hold or other.
D. "Personal residence* - means a building or structure con-
taining living quarters occupied or intended to be occupied by no more
than four individuals, four groups, or four families living indepen-
dently of each other, and used by the owner thereof as a bona fide
residence for himself and any member of his family forming his house-
hold.
E. "Real Estate Broker" - means a person doing business in the
City of Roanoke who is the holder of a real estate broker's license
issued pursuant to Article 3 or Article 5 of Chapter 18 of Title
54 of the Code of Virginia.
F. 'Real Estate Salesman* - means a person doing business
in the City of Roanoke aha is the holder of a real estate salesman"s
license issued pursuant to Article 3 or Article 5 of Chapter i6 of
Title 54 of the Code of Virginia,
437
~438
G. #Persoo in the business,or building, developing, selling,
renting or leasing housing' - means any person nho, within the pre-
ceding twelve (12} months, has participated,as prlncfpa! or real
estate broker, real estate salesman or rental agent In three (3}
or nora transactions involving thesale, lease or rental of uny
housing.
Sec. 2. Discrlmlnatorv Houslno Practices.
A. It shall be contrary to the public polic~ and the intent
of this chapter:
l. rot any person solely on acoount-of the race,i color.
religion, or national origin of any other person:
(a) to refuse to sell, lease, sublease, rent, assign.
or transfer to such other person uny housing: or
(b) to refuse to transact business with such other
person rot the sale, lease, sublease, rental, assign-
aunt or other transfer of any housing; or
(c) to knowingly represent to such other person that
housing is not available for inspection, sale, lease,
sublease, reutal, assigcneut or other transfer; nheo
in fact such housing is so available, and a bona fide
offer shall have been made therefor by such other per-
son; OF
(d) to knonJngly represent to such other person that
housing is available for insepction, sale. lease, sub-
lease, rental, assignment or other transfer at rates or
on terns or conditions diffe/ent iron those at which or
on which it is in fact available to the generality of
persons; or
(e) to discriminate in respect to the provision or
services, facilities, or other amenities connected with
such other person*s ownership, lease, sublease, rental,
possession or occupancy of housing; or
(f) to interfere with, interrupt or terminate such
other person*s omnership, lease, sublease, rental,
possession or occupancy of housing or other enjoyment
of any interest therein; or
(g) to deny to such other person access to, participa-
tion in or other benefit of any multiple-listing service
or other service or facility related to the business
of selling or renting housing; or
2. for any person solely on account of the. race, color,
religion, or national origin of any other person:
'(a) to include in the terms or conditions o~ any sale,
lease, sublease, rental, assignment or other transfer
of housing any condition or provision that purports
to forbid or discourages or attempts to discourage
the ownership, leasing, possession, occupancy or use
of such housing by persons; or
(b) to print or publish or cause to be printed or
published any notice, statement or advertisement, to
announce a policy, to use any form of application or
to make a record or inquiry in connection with the sale.
lease, sublease, rental, assignment or other transfer
of housing that indicates any preference, limitation or
other discrimination based on race, color, religion, or
national origin, or an intention to engage in any such
preference, limitation or other discrimination; or
(c) to coerce, or attempt to coerce, any person'
to do any act declared to be a discriminatory housing
practice, or to engage in economic reprisal or other-
nise retaliate, or to coerce or attempt to coerce
another person to engage in economic reprisal or other-
wise retaliate against any person who has filed u com-
plaint, testified, assisted or participated in any
mannerin any investigation, proceeding or hearing
under this ordinance; or
~439
3. for any lending institution solely omni'count of the
race. color, religion, ornstionel origin of guy person,
to discriminate in lending money, guaranteeing loins,
accepting mortgages or otherwise mahing available money
for the purchose, acquisition, construction, alters*ion,
repair or maintenance of Shy housing or to discri-
minate in the fixing of the rates, terms or conditions
of nny such financing or in the extension of service in
connection therewith; or
4. for any person knowingly and for monetary gain, to
induce or attempt to induce another person to transfer
on interest in Foal property° or to discourage aeother
person from purchasing real property, by representa-
tions regarding the existing or potential proximity of
real property owned, used, or occupied by persons of
any particular race. color, religion or national
orioin; or ·
5o for any person to solicit or attempt to solicit the
listing of dwellings for sale or lease, by door to door
solicitation, in person or by telephone, or by mass
distribution of circulars~ for the purpose of changing
the racial composition of the neighborhood.
Nothing contained in this chapter shall:
1. bar any religious or denominational institution or
organization, or any organization operated for chari-
table or educational purposes which is operated, super-
vised or controlled by or in connection with a reli-
gious organization, from limiting admission to or giving
preference to persons of the same religion or denomina-
tion with regard to occupancy, leasing, sale or purchase
of housing, or from making such selection as is cal-
culated by such organization to promote the religious
principles for which it is established or maintained; or
2. apply to the rental or leasin9 ufa room or rooms in a
personal residence; or
3. prohibit a private club not in fact open to the public
which as an incident to its primary purpose or purposes
provides lodgings which it owns or operates for other
than a commercial purpose from limiting the rental or
occupancy of such lodgings to its members or from giv-
ing preferences to its members.
Other Reouirements and Prohibitions.
Every real estate broker and every other person tu the
business of ~eveloping, selling, renting, or leasing
housing, including every personwho operates a multi-
unit residential building containing more than two
units, except a personal residence as defined herein,
shall post in a conspicuous location in that portion
of his housing business normally used by him for negotiat-
ing the sale, rental or leasing of housing, a notice
that contains the following language, printed in
black on a light-colored background, in not less than
fourteen-point type:
It is contrary to public policy and to the intent of
the Fair Rousing Ordinance of the City of Roanoke,
Virginia, for any person to:
1. deny housing accommodations to any person because
of race, color, religion or national origin; or
2. discriminate against any person because of race,
color, religion, or national origin with respect to
the terms, conditions or privileges of housing accommo-
dations or in the furnishing of facilities or services
in connection therewith.
B. No real estate broker, real estate salesman or other
person in the business of building, developing, selling.
renting, or leasing housing shall:
1. solicit the sale, lease, sublease, rental, assign-
ment or other transfer of housing or discourage the pur-
chase, lease, sublease, rental, assignment or other
transfer of housing by representations regarding the
existing or potential proximity of real property
owned, used or occupied by a person or persons of any
particular race, color, religion, or national origin; or
Sec. 3.
A.
'440
2. hnouingly offer for tile or lease by sign or any
other device representing thtt housing ~is avsllable for
lnspectlouo sale, lease, sublease, rental, assignment
or other transfer uhen in fact Jt Js not sc available,
and such fact is hnoun by such broher, salesman or
other person,
C, Any person adversely ufrecte~ by ute ufa discrimina-
tory practice prohibited under this ordinsnce may insti-
tute un action for injunction and liquidated damages
against the person responsible for such discriminatory
practice in~u court of record having equity jurisdic-
tion in the city. If the court find that the defendant
mas responsible fur such u practlce and that the com-
plainant was adversely affected thereby, it shall enjoin
the defendant from use of such practice and, in its
discretion, award the complainant not more than tug
hundred fifty dollars liquidated damages.
Sec. 4, Fglr Housino Board.
There is hereby crested in the City of Roanoke a Fair Ilousing
Board, hereinafter referred to as the Board, which shall consist
of seven members, all Of'whom shall reside in the City of Boanohe.
The members shall be appointed by the City Council and shall serve
without compensation. Of the members first appointed, two shall be
appointed for terms of three years, two shall be appointed for terms
of two years and three shall be appointed for a term of one year,
all such terms commencing as of the first day of April, 1973. There-
after, members shall be appointed for terms of three years each. Any
member may be removed by the Council upon good cause appearing to the
Council. Any vacancy shall be filled by the City Council for the
unexpired portion of a term. Absence from five consecutive meetings
by any member shall vacate such member*s position on the Board.
There shall be an administrator of the Board, not a member of the Board
mbo shall be appointed by the City Manager. He shall serve as secre-
tary of the Board and shall be responsible for keeping the records of
the Board's proceedings. The position of the administrator shall be
included in the Pay and Classification Plan of the City of Roanoke and
subject to the provisions of the City's personnel ordinances and
regulations. The administrator may be a person otherwise employed
by the City and the duties of the administration of this chapter may
be assigned in addition to other duties. The City Council may autho-
rize the employment of Such additional personnel as are deemed
warranted to secure effective euforcement of this chapter.
Sec. 5. Conduct of Board.
At the first meeting of the Bo~rd following annual appointments
thereto, the Board shall elect a chairman and a vice-chairman from
its membership and establish such procedures of organimation and
conduct as it may deem necessary. The Board shall meet not less
than quarter-annually and upon call of the chairman of of any three
members of the Board. All meetings of the Board shall be with due
written notice to each member. Any final decision of the Board shall
be with the concurring vote of four of the members. The Board shall
render as of.the first day of January of each'year, and thereafter
quarterly during each year, to the City. Council a full written report
of its activities under the provisions of this chapter, and any
recommendations of the Board concerning measures to be taken to
further the purposes of this chapter.
A. The procedure of the administrator of the Board in the case
of the filing of a complaint shall be as follows:
1. A complaint alleging the commission of a discriminatory
housing practice, in writing and sworn to. or affirmed, may
be filed with the administrator by the complainant. Such
a complaint shall state the name and address of the com-
plainant and of the person or persons against whom complaint
is made and shall.also state the alleged facts surrounding
the alleged commission.of a discriminatory housing practice,
the date the discriminatory housing practice was allegedly
committed, and such.other information as the Board by
regulation may require. Upon receipt of such complaint the
administrator shall furnish a copy of the same to the person
. or persons uho allegedly committed or are about to commit
the alleged discriminatory housing practice and to the
chairman of the Board. For the protection of the privacy
of the individuals involved, in personal matters, every com-
plaint shall be held in confidence by the Board, its admini-
strator and employees unless and until the complainant and
the person complained against consent to its being made
public or until o hearing such as is described in Paragraphs
$ ·nd 6 of this section, l· began. No compl·int shall be
filed more thnu thirty,(30) d·ys ~fter the d·te of the
alleged discriminatory housing pr·ctlce.
2. ~pon th~ filin'g of~· co~pl~i'nt"is set'forth in Section
5. A~ 1.o and notice thereof to the person ag·ins* mhom
such complaint be made, the administrator of the Board shall
make such4nvestigatlon ·s he deems approprl·te to ascertain
the f·cts. If the administrator of the Board shall deter-
mine that there are reasonable grounds to believe · violation
has occurred end is~susceptlble of conciliation, (such deter-
mina*ion to be made uithin fifteen days of the filing of
the complaint) he shall attempt to conciliate the matter by
methods of conference and persuasion mith all interested
parties'and such representatives as the parties may choose
to assist them. Conciliation conferences shall be informal
and nothing said or done during such initial conferences shall
be made publicby the Board or its members or any of its
staff unless all parties thereto agree in arising.
3. The terms of conciliation agreed to by the parties nay be
'reduced to arising and incorporated into a consent agreement
signed by the parties, which agreement is for conciliation
purposes only and does not constitute an admission by any
party that the ordinance has been violated. Consent agree-
ments shall be signed on behalf of the Board by the chairman
or the vice-chairman.
4. It shall be a prima facie violation of this ordinance to
violate or fail to adhere to any provision contained in a
consent agreement. A failure by the Board to enforce a
violation of any provision of a consent agreement shall not
constitute a waiver of any right of any party to such
agreement. . .
5. if the administrator determines that the complaint lacks
reasonable grounds upon which to base a violation of this
chapter, he shall give written notice of such deternination
~o the complainant, the person complaimed against and the
Board. The notice shall also state that the complaint will
stand dismissed unless mithin twenty (20) days after mail-
ing of such notice the complainant files with the Board in
writing a request for a hearing by the Board. Upon filing
of request for such hearing, the administrator shall
immediately mail copy of such request to the person com-
plained against, together with notice of the time and place
fixed by the Board for such hearing; thereafter, and at such
time, the Board shall afford the parties an opportunity to
appear before the Board in person or by counsel. Upon such
hearing the Board may in its discretion dismiss such complaint
or determine that there are reasonable grounds to believe
the alleged violation of this chapter has occurred.
If the administrator ~r the Board has determined that
there are reasonable grounds to believe the alleged viola-
tion of this chapter has occurred,and the administrator
(i) fails to conciliate a complaint after the parties have,
in good faith, attempted such conciliation, or (ii) fails
to effect an informal conciliation agreement or a formal
consent agreement or (iii) determines that the complaint
is not susceptible of conciliation, he shall notify the
chairman of the Board immediately and in all cases, shall
give such motice within thirty {30) days after the filing
of the complaint.; provided that such period may be extended
not more than thirty (30) additional days by the Board for
good cause appearing to the Board. Upon receiving such
notice the chairman of the' Board shall prompkly thereafter
sechdule a public hearing to determine whether a violation
of this chapter has been committeed. The Board shall give
mritten notice to the respondent and the complainant
containing a statement of charges and of the time and place
of hearing. The respondent or his counsel may file such
statements with the Boardprior to the hearing date as be
deems necessary in support of his position. The hearing
shall be open to the public, unless for the protection of
the privacy of the individuals involved, in personal matters,
the respondent request in writing a private hearing, in
which case the hearing shall, be.private. The hearing shall
be held within twenty (20) days after mailing of the state-
ment of charges and. notice of hearing. The notices so issued
shall be signed by two members of the Board and sent by
certified mail. The interested parties may, at their option,
appear before the Board in person or by duly authorized
442
representatives and may be represented by'an attorney., The
parties miy testlfy~and pre*eat e~idence,~end the right to
cross-examine ultnesses shall be preservedl end, for these
purposes the'Board may'Jn~ite such additional persons to
appear os the ends of Justice may require. All testimony
and evidence ihall be given under oath or by,affirmation.
The Board shall not be bound by atruct rules of evidence
prevailing in courts of lam but shall adhere to rules of
equity. The Board shall keep t full record of the hearing,
mhich record shall; unless such hearing be private, be
public end open to Inspection by any person, and upon
request by iny principalparty to the proceedings, the Board
shall furnish such party n copy of the hearing record at the
cost of the party so requesting.
7. If, at the ConcluSion of the hearing, the Board shall deter-
mine that the respondent has committed or is committing
the discriminatory housing practice or, practices charged, the
Board shall state its findings and conclusions and shall
issue and cause'to be mailed by certified mail to the respon-
dent acopy of such decision which shall contain warning to
cease and desist from such discriminatory practice or prac-
tices and'to tahe such affirmative action as may be indicated
to effect the purposes of this ordinance, including, if the
Board so determines, ~eporting on the manner of his complianc*
B. If upon all the evidence at the hearing the Board shall
- find the respondent has not engaged in the discriminatory
housing practice or practices charged, the Board shall state
its findings and conclusions and shall dismiss the complaint.
Notice of such action shall be given to the complainant and
to the respondbnt by certified mail.
B. In a case in which the Board proceeds on its own initiative,
without receiving a formal complaint, the-procedure followed shall be
that prescribed in Section 7, following. No investigation shall be
undertaken by the Board on its onn initiative if more than sixty days
have elapsed since the occurrence of the discriminatory housing prac-
tice that the Board has reason to believe occurred. In a case in
which there is no complainant, the administrator of the Board shall
be responsible for developing the evidentiary-record before the Board.
Sec. 6. ~o~ers of the Board.
In making the investigations, pursuing conciliation and persua-
sion and conducting hearings, all as described in the foregoing
Section 5, the Board shall have authority'to hear testimony under
oath, to make finding~ of fact and issue decisions and namings in
accordance with the provisions of this chapter, and to make and
adopt and publish such rules of procedure as may be necessary or
proper for carrying out its functions under the provisions of this
chapter.
Sec. 7. J~terlocutorv Relief.
If, at any time after a complaint has been filed, or institution
of an investigation on the Board*s own initiative, the Board believes
that appropriate civil action to abate or prevent any discriminatory
housing practice, to p~eservethestatus quo or to prevent irreparable
harm appears advisable, the Board may, after consultation with the
Commonwealth's Attorney or his authorized designee, Certify the matter
to the Commonwealth*k Attorney to bring any action necessary to abate
or prevent such practice, preserve such status ~oor to prevent such
irreparable harm, including but not limited to temporary restraining
ordersand preliminary injunctions.
Sec. 8, Judicial-Review.,
A. Any partyaggrieved by h written decision of the Board made
after hearing held pursuant to Section 5 of this chapter may present
to a court of record of the City of Roanoke a petition, duly veri-
fied, setting forth that such decision is illegal, in mhole or in
part, specifying the grounds of the illegality and making party
defendant thereto the opposing party or parttesln proceedings before
the Board. Such petition shall be presented to the court within
thirty ($O),days after the filing of the decision in the office of
the Board.
B, Upon presentation of such petition, the court may allou a
writ of certiorari directed to the Board to review such decision of
the Board and shall prescribe therein the time within which a return
thereto must be made and served ipon the relator's attorney, ~htch
shall not be less than ten days and nay be extended by the court. The
allowance of the writ shall not stay proceedings upon the decision
appealed from, but the court may, on application, on notice to the
Board and to the opposing party and on due cause shown, grant a
restraining order.
,C.' The Board shall not be required to return the originnl
papers ucted upon by it, but it shall be sufficient to return
certified or nworn copies thereof.or of such portions thereof us may
be called for by such writ. The return shall concisely set forth such
other facts ua nay be pertinent ond material to show the grounds of
the decision appealed from and shall be verified by the chairman or
the udninlstrntor.
O. If, upon the hearing, it shall appear to the court that
testimony is necessary for the proper disposition of the matter, it
may take evidence or uppointa conmissioner to take such evidence as
it may direct'and report the same to the court with his findings of
fact and conclusions of lam. mhich shall constitute a part of the
proceeding upon mhlch the determination of the court shall be made.
The court may, reverse or affirm, wholly or partly, or way modlf.y the
decision brought up for review. "
E. Costs shall not he ulloued against the Hoard, unless it shall
appear to the court that it acted with gross negligence or in bad
faith or uith malice in making the decision appealed from.
Sec. 9. Enforcement by the Court.
If the respondent refuses or fails to comply with 'an~ decision
or warning of the Hoard, the Hoard shall refer the matter to the
Commoumealth*s Attorney, who shall bring an action against such
respondent in a court of competent Jurisdiction toeqforce compliance
with such decision. Any person who shall be found hy the Hoard to
have violated the intent of this ordinance or the public policy stated
herein relating to discriminatory housing practices shall be subject
to injunctive or other appropriate action or proceeding, and any
court of competent jurisdiction may issue restraining orders, temporary
or permanent injunctions, or such form of relief as the court deems
appropriate, and may award damages as provided in subsection C. of
Section 3, hereof.
Sec. 10. Other Remedies.
Nothing herein contained shall prevent any person from exercis-
ing any right or seeking any remedy to which he might otherwise be
laufully entitled, or from filing any complaint.with any other public
agency.
Sec. 11. Notice.
All notices required under the provisions of this ordinance to be
given by certified mail shall be addressed to.the person to whom such
notice is intended at the last knoun address of such person or to the
attorney of such person, should such attorney have formally appeared
before the Board on behalf of such person.
Sec. 12. Time Limitation.
Any complaint filed under the provisions of this ordinance shall
stand dismissed unless the Board has within ninety (90) days of the
date of the filing of complaint of the alleged discriminatory housing
practice served upon the respondent a decision pursuant to the provi-
sions of Section 5. A. 7., hereof.
Sec. 13. Severabilitv.
The provisions of this ordinance are severable, and if any provi-
sion, sentence, clause, section or part thereof is held illegalo invalid.
or unconstitutional or inapplicable to any person or circumstance, su~
illegality, invalidity, unconstitutionality or inapplicability shall
not affect or impair any of the remaining provisions, sentences,
clauses, sections, ur parts of the ordinance, or their.application to
other persons or circumstances. It is hereby declared to be the
legisiutive intent that this ordinance would have been adopted if such
illegal, invalid or unconstitutional provision, sentence, clause.
section or part had not been included therein, and if the person or
circumstance to which the ordinance or any part thereof is inapplicable
had been specifically exempted therefrom.
Sec. 14. Effective Date.
The provisions of this ordinance shall become effective on the
]st day of April, 1973.
The notion was seconded by Mro Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk~ Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber 7.
NAYS: None O.
Mrs, David Go,de'appeared before Council on behalf of the League of
Women Voters of the Roanoke Area and'advised that the League has, in the past,
endorsed open housing on the ~federal end state level because they believe that
any individual, regardless of race, sex or color, should have the opportunity to
live in any house of his choice as long as he can afford to pay for it, that
the League now mlshes to endorse the proposed local Ordinance, that they believe
that open housing, if it became a reality in Roanoke, would directly lessen
other community problems and that it is their hope that once Council passes an
open housing Ordinance. that each of the adjoining governments Mill pas~ n
similar law in order that there may be an improved housing situation throughout
the valley.
Hr. A. N. Hsmmerstrom, representing th~ Roanoke catholic office of
Social Development and the Social Kinistry Committee of our Lady of Nazareth
Church, appeared before Council and advised that both these organizations have
voted to endorse the passage of this Ordinance, thai because federal and state
legislation against discrimination in housing already exists, he feels that it
is also appropriate to have a city Ordinance, that by providing local admini-
stration with a local hoard to hear complaints and to take action, the means
of redress are brought closer to the people involved and that botbthe organiza-
tions which he represents are planning to urge similar legislation by other
local governing bodies.
Mr. Joseph Francis. member of the Human Relations Council, property
owner and long time resident of the City of Roanoke, appeared before Council in
support of the Housing Availability Ordinance, advising that the true value of
the Ordinance. andthe comfort it can bring to a long-suffering segment of our
people, cannot be measured in dollars and its passage will affirm that our city
believes in the importance of human dignity, the worth of the individual citizen
and freedom and justice for all.
The Reverend O. Benjamin Sparks, Director of Inner City Wo~k for the
Rontgomery Presbytery. appeared before Counci{ aid ~resen~ed a Resolution
adopted by the Montgomery Presbytery at its meeting on January 23,'1973, calling
upon all local governments to enact as swiftly as possible stroot, effective,
and enforceable open housing Ordinances and requesting that Council urge the'
other vallye governments to adopt the same Ordinance since an Ordinance of this
nature is long overdue in every government of this valley to insure justice for
all of the citizens in the metropolitan area.
Mr. Blmer R. Cox. President, Roanoke Valley Board of Realtors, appeare
before Council and presented a Resolution unanimously adopted by the Roanoke
Valley Hoard of Realtors endorsing the Housing Availability Ordinance.
At this point, the City A~torney pointed out that Council needs to
establish an effective date for the Ordinance and that he would suggest the
date of April 1, 1973.
Mr, Garland moved that the date of April 1, 19T3, be inserted in the
appropriate placed in Ordinance No, 20725. The motion 'was seconded by Mr, Lfsk
end unanimously adopted,
Approximately 125 persons were in attendance at the Council meeting in
support of the Housing Availability Ordinance,
Mr. Hen Morris, a member o! the Ilousing Availability Ordinance Committee
appeared before Council and complimented Or~ Ta~lor upon his leadership as
Chairman of the Committee,
Dr. Taylor moved that a communication from the ffomen°s Political Caucus
of the Sixth District, a Resolution from the Roanoke Valley .Council of Community
Services and a Resolution from the Roanoke Valley Roard of Realtors be received
and filed, The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
Dr. Taylor then =oFed that the City Attorney be instructed to prepare
the proper measure urgin9 the adoption of a Fair Housing Ordinance by the
governing bodies of neighborin9 jurisdictions. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Thomas and unanimously adopted.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: A communication from Mr. Russell R, Henley,
Executive Director of the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housin~ Authority,
advising that as a part of the 1972-73 Activities Program for the Oaiusboro
Neighborhood Development Program, the City Of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing
Authority is proposing for the sale of land to be developed for residential reuse.
that it is required by the Department of Housing and Urban Development that
additional and definite development restrictions be imposed on the various dis-
position parcels before they may be sold, that all regulations and requirements
imposed on the disposition parcels for the 1972-73 Activity Areas of the Gains~
boro Neighborhood Development Prooram meet and are in line wi~ t~e Redevelopment
Plan proposals and the City o~ RoanokeZonin9 Ordinances, that these restrictions
and regulations are required to be placed in the form of a Land Disposition
Supplement and most receive all local approvals ~s did the Gainsboro Development
Plan, therefore, the Housing Authority respectfully requests official action by
Council approvin9 this Land Disposition Supplement, was before Council,
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted t~e £o]lom-
lng report recommending that' the request be approved:
"February 14. 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayo~
and Members of City. Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City Plnn-
ming Commission at its reoular meeting of February ~, 1973.
Mr. Allen Edmondson, Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing
Authority, appeared before the Planning Commission and stated
that the regulations and controls for the disposal of the
parcels in the Gainsboro NDP must be approved by the City
Planning C'ommlooion ~nd the City Council in accOrdance with
HUD regulations. He further stated that most of the regu-
lations and requireaent~ are in actuality more itringent
than the Zoning Ordinance regulations.
After some discussion by the Planning Commiosion men-.
berm. it mas generally' agreed that the reuse regulations and
controls for the disposal of parcels in the GoJnsboro area
· mere acceptable and represented a viable set of controls for
the Gainsboro Community.
Accordingly, motion mas mode. duly seconded and unani-
mously approved recommending to City Council that the Gains-
borg NOP reuse regulations and controls for the disposal
of pracels created in this activity year be approved.
Sincerely yours.
S/ Henry H. Boynton by LM
Henry H, Boynton
Chairmgn"
Mr. Lisk moved that the report of the City. Planning Commission be
received and filed. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adoptec
Mr. Lisk then offered the follouing Resolution approving a 1972-73
Laud Disposition Supplement to the Gainsboro Redevelopment Plan providing for
certain restrictions to be imposed on the developers and future owners of land
in the 1972-73 Activity Area of the Dainsboro Neighborhood Development Program:
(~20726) A RESOLUTION approving a 1972-73 Land Disposition Supple-
ment to the Gainsboro Redevelopment Plan providing for certain restrictions to
be imposed on the developers and future omners of land in the 1972-73 Activity
Area of the Gainsboro Neighborhood Development Program, Program No. VA. A-6,
being the land bounded by Chestnut and gcDowell Avenues on the north, 5th
Street on the west, Rutherford Avenue on the south and'by Gainsboro Road and
Peach Road on the east. in the northwest portion of the City of Roanoke.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book 337, page 443.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubord and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Moyor Mebber .............. 7.
NAYS: None O.
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: A communication from the Roanoke Valley Chamber
of Commerce advising that the Chamberof Commerce is being given the opportunity
to moke a proposal to The Sertoma Foundation to locate an Industrial Center for
Communicative Disorders in this area, and inquirln9 as to whether OF not local
governments now own parcels of suitable land appropriate for this program and
are willing to consider donating such land to the project should the Chamber
be fortunate enough to establish the Center in the Roanoke Valley, mas before
Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the matter be referred to the City Manoger and to
the Roanoke Valley Health Services Planning Council for study, Teport and recom-
mendation to Council. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously
adopted.
447
BUSES: A communication from Mr. George F, Ferrell, City Clerk, City
of Salem, advising that at 8 meeting held on February 12,.1973, the Council of
the City of Salem uathorlze~ an appropriation of $1,114~00.to be paid to the
City of Roanoke as u subsidy for b~a transportation service for o slx month
period ending June 30, 1973, mas before the body.
Hr. Garland moved that the communication be received and filed mith
appreciation and that the City Attorney be instructed to prepare the proper
measure of appreciation. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Lis~ and unanimously
adopted.
BUDGET-BOGS: Mrs. Janes E. Melton, Chairman, The Executive Board,
Roanoke Valley Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, appeared before
Council and presented a communication requesting that an appropriation of
Sh,O00,O0 be included in the IgT3-T4 fiscal year budget for the SPCA.
Bath reference to the licensing of dogs, Mrs. Melton also presented a
petition signed by 83 city reisdents requesting that the Ci{y of Roanoke loner the
dog license fee on spayed female dogs amd altered male dogs.
Dr. Taylor moved that the request of the SPCA for an appropriation of
$6.000.00 be referred to 1973-74 budget study. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Lisk and unanimously adopted.
EASEMENTS: A communication from Mr. John B. Copenhaver. Attorney.
representing Harman*s Machine Shop', Incorporated. requesting the right to use a
space approximately four feet by eighteen feet in an unopened paper alley at the
rear of premises located at 21~ Fourth Street, S. N., for the purpose of plac-
ing propane tanks to be used for cleaning vats and possibly other operations.
mas before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the matter be referred to the City Managerfor
study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion Mas seconded by Mr.
Lisa and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET-AUDITORIUM--COLISEUM: The City. Manager submitted a uritten
report recommending that $500.00 be transferred from Advertising to Insurance
under Section ~440, "Civic Center Fund - Administrative Expenses." of the 1972-73
budget, to provide additional funds for au insurance premium, in the total
amount of $19.T4§.00.
Mr. Thomas moved that. Council concur in the recommendation of the Ci~
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance transfe~riog said funds:
(~20727) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain the 1972'-73 Civic Center
Fund Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook ~37, page 445.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seco'nded by. Mr. Lisa and adopted by the foil*ming vote:
,48
AYES: Messrs. Garlnnd, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout nad Mayor
Webber
NAYS:
WATER DEPARTMENT: Council at its meeting on Monday, February 5, 1973,
having requested that the City Manager report, from a safety standpoint,
whether or not a writer storage tank which wns previously intended to bp installed
in the 3400 block of West Ridge Road, S. W.. is needed, the City Manager sub-
mitted the folloming report advising that it appears to be desirable to improve
the flom of mater through the pumping stations in this area as mall as there
still exists a requirement to obtain at least an additional 500 gpm flow, that
this could best be provided by the installation of a mater storage tank at
some point near the crest of the hill, that the present system for pumping
water could he improved by installing high pressure surge relief valves on the
discharge line of each pumping station thereby decreasing the possibility of
future line ruptures and that if the solution is acceptable to Council, the
required funds mill be included in the budget figures presently being prepared
for next fiscal year:
"February 26, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Eoanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Peakmood Drive Mater Tank
On January 22. 1973. City Council received a communica-
tion from Mr. Paul C. Uueford, Jr** of 3716 Bosworth Drive,
$. M.. advislug that the mater storage tank previously
authorized by City Council for construction in the Peakwood
Drive area of the City bad not been constructed. Mr. Boeford
indicated that there mas a question as to whether there is
sufficient water available in the event of an uncontrolled
fire in that area.
City Council referred this matter to theCity Manager's
office for study and report to City Council. A report was
submitted on February 5. 19737 homever, CiXy Council
requested that the Manager restudy the situation and submit
another report explaining mhether or not there was adequate
fire protection in this area without the installation of
The matter has been reviemed by the City of Eoanoke
Mater Department with the resulting attached report from
Mr. Kit Eiser, Manager of the Mater Department.
Mr. Eiser appears to havegiven this problem consider-
able time and study. De indicated that to provide adequate
mater storage to meet the National Board of Fire Undermrlters
standards for an anticipated population of 1,000 residents
in this area, a fire flow of water of 1,000 gallons per
minute (gpm) for four hours mould be required.
Mr. Kiser indicates that the current method of providing
mater flow to this area is inadequate to meet the 1,000 gpm
demand and there is the disadvantage of time lost whJl~
connectin9. the fire pumper trucks to the existing lines as
mall as the difficulty in regulating the pressure on the
. suction and/or discharge of the pumper. Even though the
fire pumper is rated at 750 or 1,000 9pm a flow in excess
of 450 gpm is doubtful using current facilities. This
method, therefore, is limited to less than one-half of the
flow recommended by the National Board of Fire Underwriters.
ii
· It mould !ppesr that it would be desirable to improve
the flom of mater through these pumping stations os mall
os there still exists a requirement.to obtain et least un
additional 500 gpm'flow. This could best be provided by
the installation of u water storage tank at some point eeor
the crest of the hill. Hr. KJser indicates that the present
system for pumping mater could be Improved by installing a
high pressure surge reli~values on the discharge line of
each pumping station thereby decreasing the possibility of
future line ruptures. Through this method, which mould cost
approximately $4°000, the City could provide a reasonably
dependable 500 gpm by use of the pumping stations. This
means that on additional 500 gallons per minute must be
provided by construction of a water storage tank on the hill.
Construction ~f th~ originally planned ground storage
tank (200,000 gallon capacity} mas deferred 'in 1969 when
above the treetops' and affect the overall appearance of
the residential area. Subsequent to that time the funds
for this project were dropped from the budget and the pro-
Ject abandoned.
Mr. Kiser mas asked to provide acceptable alternates
to the originally designed tank, and it is felt that he has
done so. A dependable 500 gpm may he obtained from the
existing pumping station by the installation of surge relief
valves and another 500 gpm may be obtained by the construction
of a smaller less objectionable ground storage tent at the
original site. Being smaller and shorter, it will not be
readily visible from the surrounding residential area. It
will be screened by planting of evergreens in the area
This solution which mill provide adequate fire pro-
tection mill cost approximately $41,000. If the Solution
is acceptable to City Council. the required funds will be
included in the budget figures presently being prepared for
next fiscal year.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Haner
City Manager"
Mr. Milldam R. Rattle, 3221Fordham Drive, S. #., appeared before
Council and advised that it is his understanding that the sole purpose for the
tank is for additional 'capacity to meet desired firefighting requirements, that
the point of view of many residents of the Peakmood Drive area is that everyone
would ilks to have mhatever mater supplies that are necessary for adequate fire
protection but that they.object tO the sine of the tank, that the tank Hill be
highly visible to many residents, it will be visible to Blue Ridge Parkway users
and to a large part of the southwest city and county, that it will render pro-
perry values lower, that it will take auay from the value of the scenic outlook
and mill place a large burden on a small number of people for the benefit of
others, that Rr. rHaner*s suggestion for a tank of about one-half.the original
projected capacity is certainly a vast improvement, particularly if, as Mr,
Kiser's report suggests, its base is put at a level ten feet lower than originally
planned and an extensive screening is provided by planting uses, that the resi-
assurance that the screening mill be complete and that more storage mill not be
contemplated in the future, that Mr. Kiser noted that the number of alterna-
tives is almost unlimited except for financial conditions and therefore request-
ing that a decision be delayed until a more complete study can be made of these
alternatives.
'450
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the report of the City Mansger
for consideration'during 1973-74 budget study sessions and that the City Manager
continue his discussions with the Peotwood Drive residents. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
CIRCUSES-CARNIVALS: The City Manager submitted o written report
advising of the request of Mr. M. C. Ruc~ner, President/Manager of the Roanoke
Fair, that he be given permission to operate theFair on the.afternoon of
Sunday, September 2, 1973, between the hours of I p.m., and 11 p.m.
Mr. Trout moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure granting the request. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
JAIL: The City Manager submitted the following report advising that
the city has been notified by the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention that
it has been awarded funds under Grant RD. ?2-AIIO0 for the implementation of a
rehabilitation of jail inmates and ex-inmates program subject to the acceptance,
execution and filing by the city of the *Special Conditions for Action Grant
Awards,* and that the total estimated cost would be $26,B72.00 and recommending
that he be authorized to enter into this agreement with Offender Aid and Rest*fa'
tiou. Incorporated, in order to perform the services necessary to implement the
grant project and to provide all records necessary to assure proper utilization
of these funds as well as to require a fidelity bond in favor of the city with
respect to the funds:
"February 26, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Grant No, 72-Al100 - Implementation of a Rehabi-
litation of Jail Inmates and Ex-inmates Program
. The City of Roanoke has been notified by the Division
of Justice and Crime Prevention that it has been awarded
funds under Grant No. ?2-AllO0 for the implementation of a
rehabilitation of jail inmates and ex-inmates program sub-
ject to the acceptance, execution and filing by the City of
the 'Special Conditions for Action Grant Awards** Federal
fonds in the amount of $20.150 could be appropriated to the
Division to be used along with certain other state and local
funds and in-kind contributions to aid in implementation of
a rehabilitation of jail inmates and ex-inmates in the City,
The total estimated project cost would be $26,872.
It would be recommended that the City Manager be
authorized to enter into this agreement mith Offender Aid
and Restoration, Incorporated, to perform the services neces-
sary to implement the grant project and to provide all
records necessary to assure proper utilization of these funds
as well as to require a fidelity bond in favor of the City
withrespect to these .funds.
Respectfully submitted,
S! Byron E. Hamer
Byron R., Hamer
City Manager*
451
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur In the recomuendntion of the
City Manager and offered the follouing Resolution:
(m20728) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance, execution and filing
of the 'Special* Conditions for Action Grant'Awards' with the Division o! Justice
and Crime Prevention for an action grant of Federal funds for implementation of
n rehabilitation of jail inmates end ex-inmates program in the City.
(For,full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book uS?, page
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lash add adopted by the folloming Yore:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber .................... 7.
~AYS: ~one ..........O.
DRUGS: The City Manager submitted the follomiug report advising that
the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention has awarded funds to the city
to Grant No. ?1-A553 for implementation of a drug abuse prevention, treatment
and control program, subject to the acceptance, execution and filing by the city
of the 'Special Conditions for Action Grant Awards,' recommending that Council
authorize him to execute and file said Grant Awards with the Division of Justice
and Crime Prevention, the total estimated cost of said project to be $34,655.0D,
and further recommending that he he authorized to enter into agreement with the
Roanoke Area Drug Abuse Control Council to perform the services necessary to
implement the grant project, to prepare all records required to assure proper
utilization of these funds and to require a fidelity bond in favor of the city forl
this amount:
~February 26, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: RADACC
The Division of Justice and Crime Prevention has awarded
funds to the City pursuant to Grant NO.?I-A553 for implemen-
tation of a drug abuse prevention, treatment and coetrol pro-
gram, subject to the acceptance, execution and filing by the
City of the.*Specinl Conditions for ActionGrant Awards** It
would be recommended that City Council authorize the City
Manager to execute and file the *Special Conditions for
Action Grant Awards* form mith the Division of Justice and
Crime Prevention. Ucder this grant the amount of $25,555
is to be provided foruse in conjunction with state and
local funds and in-kind contributions to aid in the imple-
mentation of a drug abuse prevention, treatment and control
program in the City. The total estimated cost of this pro-
ject is $34,655.
Additionally, it is recommended ~hat the City Manager
be authorized to enter into an agreement with the Roanohe
Area Drug Abuse Control Council to. perform the services
necessary to implement the grant project, to prepare all
records required to assure proper utilization of these funds,
and to require a fidelity bond in favor of the City for this
amount.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Ryron E. Darter
Byron E. Haner
City Manager'
452
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation o! the
City Manager and offered the following Resolution:
(#2072g) A RESOLUTION authorizing the ucceptance, execution, end
filing or the 'Special Conditions for Action Grant Awards" mith the O~visfon
of Justice and Crime Prevention for an action grant of Federal funds for imple-
mentation of.o drug,abuse prevention, treatment and control program in the City,
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Oook #37° page 446,)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Hesolution. The motion was
seconded by MFo HubaFd and adopted by theYollowing vote:
:AYES: Messrs. Garland. tlubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Hayor Webber ................ T.
NAYS: None O.
GARBAGE REMOVAL: The City Attorney submitted the folloming report
relative to an agreement tentatively negotiated between the City of Roanoke and
the Toun of Vinton and certain other landowners in said Town providing for the
city's and the town*s use of approximately seventeen acres of land in the Town
of Yinton for a joint sanitary landfill operation:
"February 26, 1973
The Honorable Hayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On a report of the Chairman of the Council's Landfill
Committee made to the Council on February 12. 1973. relative
to an agreement tentatively negotiated between the City of
Roanoke and the Town of Vinton and certain other landowners
in said Town providing for the City's and Town's use of
approximately 17 acres of land in the Town of Vinton for
a joint sanitary landfill operation, the Council generally
approved the terns of the agreement so negotiated and re-
ferred the matter to the undersigned for preparation of an
ordinance authorizing execution of said agreement. At its
meeting on February 20th. the Town Council of Vinton similarly
approved execution of the three-party agreement which had
theretofore been agreed to be executed by the private land-
omners involved in the matter.
Accordingly, there is now transmitted to the Council
a copy of the written.agreement drawn to be executed on
behalf of the City, on behalf of the Town of Vinton and on
behalf of the owners of a 12vacre parcel of land adjoining
a 5-acre parcel of land owned by the Town of Vinton, all of
which land is made the subject of the agreement. There is
also transmitted herewith an ordinance which would authorize
execution of the abovementiohed agreement by.the Mayor and
the City Clerh, acting on behalf of the City. A copy of the
agreement as referred to in the proposed ordinance has been
filed in the office of the City Clerk.
It is recommended that Council adopt the abovementioned
ordinance as an emergency measure in order that the City and
the Tomn of Vinton nay proceed with their plans for utili-
zation of the l?-acre parcel of land abovereferred to.
Respectfully,
S/ J. N. Kincanon
In this connection, Br. Trout offered the following emergency Ordinance
nuthorlzihg the execution of said agreement:
(r20730) A~ OROIBANCE outhorizlng the execution of an agreement provid-
ing for the operation of a sanitary lnndfill by the City of Roanoke on properties
owned by the Town of Vlnton and certain other persons; and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 448.)
Hr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Link and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Uubard, Link. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................ 7.
NAYS: None ........
GARBAGE REMOVAL: The City Attorney submitted a written report trans-
mitting a copy of an attested copy of proceedings held on February 13, 1973. by
the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors in which a Special Gsa Permit (Condltionnll
was granted, upon certain stipulated terms and conditions, to the City of
Roanoke and the County of Roanoke to operate a sanitary landfill on certain pro-
party in the easterly poFtion Of Roanoke County now owned by Mr. M. S. Thomas
but under purchase option to said County and City.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
CITY EMPLOYEES-CITY ATTORNEY: The City Attorney submitted a written
report advising of the resignation Of Mr. Edward Aa Natt as an Assistant City
Attorney, effective February 23, 1973.
Dr. Taylor moved that the resignation be accepted with regret. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Llsk and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
MUNICIPAL BUILDING-POLICE DEPARTMENT: Council having referred to a
committee for study, report and recommendation the one bid received from Hoyden
Construction Company on the installation of a burglar alarm panel to be installed
in the Communications Room of the Municipal BuildinG, the committee submitted the
following report recommending that Council reject the one bid received and
request new bids providing that said new bids include, as a portion of their bid,
the time it will take for the prospective bidder to furnish and install this
i equipment and that an alternate bid be received for the city making the instal-
lotion of the equipment and that all equipment will have to have the Gnderwriters
Laboratories seal of approval:
~February 26, 1973
Honorable Nayor and City Council
Moano~e, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Bids on Burglar Alar~ Panel
The City Council on February 12, .1973.' received bids for
the provision add installation of n burglar alarm panel to be
installed in the Communications Room'of the HunJclpml'Building,
0nly one bid was submitted, thst bid by ?oyde~ Construction
Company in the amount of $19.22o.oo, ,'.~'
The bid submitted by flayden Construction Company was for
u prototype piece of equipment which would be built especially
for this purpose. The bidder has not previously built or
installed equipment of this type; therefore, your committee
could not evaluate his performance in this field.
Several firms, which generally produce the type of
equipment desired, indicated that not enough time hsd been
permitted to complete the project.
It would be recommended that City Council reject the
one bid as submitted and request new bids providing that the
new bids include as a portion of their bid the .time it
would tahe for the prospective bidder to furnish and Install
this equipment. Additionally. it would be recommended that
an alternate bid be received for the City making the installa-
tion of the equipment and that all equipment bid would have
to have the Underwriters Laboratories seal of approval. Such
safeguards would preclude the City receiving untested and
unproven equipment.
Once again it would be the recommendation of the com-
mittee that this bid be rejected and new bids be solicited.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Robert A. Garland
Robert A. Garland
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Uaner
S/ James D. Sink
James D. Sink '
S/ Alfred Beckley
Alfred Beckley"
Mr. Gnrlnod moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
committee and offered the following Resolution rejectln9 the one bid received:
(a20731) A RESOLUTIO~ rejecting all bids received for providing and
installing a burglar alarm panel in the Communications Room of the Municipal
Building.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book aS?. page 449.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Uubard, Link. Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber ................ ?-
NAYS: None ........
JAIL-PLANNING-POLICE DEpARTMENT-MUNICIPAL BUILDING-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT~
pROGRAM: Mr. Hubard advised that some six or seven months ago Council appointed
Mr. Link and himself as the City of Roanoke representatives to the Regional
Corrections Steering Committee to study the feasibility of undertaking a
Regional Corrections Program and construction of a regionnl jail for the
Roanoke Valley, that the matter has now been endorsed by all the 9overning bodies
that a meeting of the Regional Corrections Facility Board has been called for
Tuesday. Barch 6, 1973, that there will be no need to continue the representa-
tion of the City of Roanoke on the Regional Corrections Steerin9 Committee and
moved that the City Clerk be instructed to inform the Fifth Planning District
Commission that the purposes of the Regional Corrections Steering Committee
have been fulfilled. The motion was seconded by Mr. Link and unanimously
adopted.
WAT[R B£PARTIENT: ~r. ~amptou W. Thomas, Chairman of .the ~ater Reno
Committee, submitted the following:report in connection with the sale of surplus
water to various county areas and transmitting n proposed recommended policy for
furnishing surplus water to areas outside the ci.ty limits:
'February 23, ~973
Honorable Ha/or and Git! Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Extension of Water ~ervlce
I. Bachground - On January 18, 1973. representatives of
the Roanoke County Public Service Authority appeared before
City Council with a request that the City of Roanoke'give
City Council referred this matter to the Water Resources
Committee for study and report back to City Council.
1I. City*s Ability to Serve Add~tional Areas Water - YOur
committee has evaluated the water resources available to the
City and to the Valley. The committee recognizes that the
primary sources of water have and are being developed and
that the City has an obligation to continue to ascertain and
develop future sources of water in consooance with the
City's growth and needs.
The study reveals that the needs.of the City for water
are beiog met from current nod programmed sources and that
a surplus exists which would permit the extension of water
service to the majority of the developed portions of the
valley for the foreseeable future.
III. Sale of later to Areas Outside the City Limits - It
is the considered opinion of your committee that the matter
of the sale of surplus water to unincorporated areas out-
side the City limits could best be expedited Jf the City
were to deal directly with the Board of Supervisors of any
county desiring that approach. However, it is felt that
quality water servlc~ con best be provided by the City,
which has a current surplus of water, by direct service
rather than by the sale of bulk water to a second agency
or "middleman'. For the City to facilitate this act of
servicing areas outside the City limits, it would be rea-
sonable to instigate a liberalizationof the current basic
City policy with tespect to the extension of water facili-
ties outside the City limits. Yhe current policy is con-
servative in that all extensions are sized and approved by
the City but constructed by resident or developer desiring
service, at his expense. The developer or applicant then
conveys these facilities to the City with the agreement that
the City sell to the developer or applicant surplus water
through individual service connections,
The proposed recommended policy fo~ furnishing surplus
water to areas outside the City limits is as follows:
1. If it is projected that the cost of construction
will not ,exceed $200.00 per residential connection and/or
two and one half times the first yearts revenue from the
sale of water to nonresldential coOnectioos and it is agreed
that all of certain connections to be'served will obtain
service within 30 calendar days from the coepletion of the
constructioo, then:
AgThe City Will construct the facillty ut no cost to
the developer or applicant or
Bo The developer orapplicant desiring the service will
have the facility constructed and conveyed to the
City and the City will refund to the developer or
applicant the sum of $200.00 per residential
connection and/oF for nonresidential connection,
two and one half times the first year*s revenue
from the sale of water for each meter application.
lion costs.
2, If the estimated revenue as set forth In the preced-
ing psrsgrsph I cannot be met for any certain connection(s)
to be serviced uithin 30 oalendsr days from the ~onpletlon
of the project, then:
Au The City will estimate the cost of construction
and.revenue, require a deposit of the difference
in advance and construct the facility. Should
the actnal construction cost be lessor greater
than the estimated difference between the esti-
mated ravenna and estimated coestrnction cost, that
is the deposit, then the City mill refund t5 or
bill additionally the difference to the developer
or applicant desiring the water service or
fl. The procedure of method (I.B.) above may apply.
3. Should the developer or applicant mlsh,to take
advantage of any subsequent mater connection in addition
to those be can guarantee within 30 calendar days or not
wish to guarantee any connections, then the developer or
applicant will construct the water facility at his expense
and convey it to the City. The City will refund to the
developer or applicant $200,00 per residential connection
and/or tug and one half times theLfirst year*s revenue from
the sale of mater to nonresidential connections after each
service, residential or nonresidential, has delivered water
for a period of 12 consecutive months; however, no such
refunds mill be made after a period of five years nor will
refunds be made in excess of the original construction cost,
The City will charge and retain a nonrefundoble availabi-
lity charge equal to the service connection charge from each
individual consumer desiring service during the period that
refunds are being made to the developer or applicant
installs the water line,
4. The City may consider the extension of facilities
into areas either undeveloped or areas that are already
developed but served by a failing or insufficient water
system owned by someone or some agency other than the City
providing generally that the City could reasonablyexpect
to recover all expenses of the initial construction and/or
improvements to the existing system to meet City standards
within a period of five years from the sale of water and/or
collecting service availability charges. In'such instance
the City would charge a nonrefundable availability charge
equal to the service connection charge for each caw service
connection made directly to the new construction orthe exist-
ing system being improved until the ·entire initial construc-
tion cost is recovered. No such availability charge would
be charged to consumers who were being served by an existing
system at the time of acquisition by the City. All such
instances will be considered by individual merit by City
Council.
5. A. The sire and quality of each proposed distri-
bution system extension will be set by the City
Mater Department to meet the needs of the
developer or applicant and fire protection,
either proposed or in the futurethowever no
mater lines less than eight in~hes~indiameter
will be installed in open end streets or high-
says. Should the City, for projected future
needs, require facilities larger in size than
, needed or eight inches indiameter, whichever
is larger, then the City sillbear the increased
cost over and aobve that which Would have been
required for the developer or applicant.
B. Should pumping facilities be required, the
applicant or developer will construct all
such facilities according to plans approved
by the City Water Department. These facilities
will be sired for the actual development, or
'for 100 connections whichever is greater in the
case of residential developments or for actual
anticipated consumption and fire protection in
the·case of nonresidential developments. When
the City requires increased pumping station
facilities which result in an increased cost~
th~ City will reimburse the developer for those
increased costs. The developer*s actual cost
sill be considered as a part of the overall
water system development for refund purposes.
IV. Mater' Facilities Extension Within the City - If City
Council. adopts this modification in the procedure of extending
utter facilities ootslde the City'liwlt~ then it is recom-
mended that the following modifications bm made in the pre*
sent policy for the extension of water facilities within the
City Of Roanoke. The current policy is that the City now
reloads to any developer or applicant the sum of $50.00 per
residential connection and/or two and one half times the
yearly ravenna received from the sale of water to nonresi-
dential c~nnections. No refunds are made after a period
of £fve years nor ore any refunds made in excess of the con-
struction cost of the facility. The size of the water lines
to be constructed ore, and will continue to be set by the
City Water D~portment depending on the qoantity of water
desired, fire protection for subdivisions and so fnrth but
in no instance shall the water lines be less than tun Inches
in diameter. The policy of refunds wouldbe extended to
$200.00 per residential connection and/or five times the
first year's revenue for the sale Of aster for nonresidential
connections. The applicant or dereloper would otherwise,
ia. by substituting five times the first year*s revenue in
the case of an extension in the City for two and one half
times'the first year*s revenue in the case of an extension
outside the City, have the same options as previously stated
under the prnvtsions for extensions outside the City limits.
No such refunds would be made in excess of the construction
cost nor would any such rqfonds be made after rive years
from the completion of construction. '
V. Sale of Yater to the Town of Vinton - The Mater Resources
Committee has also considered the bulk water rate granted
to the Touo of Vintoa. The committee finds the current rate
of $0.50 per 100 cubic feet of water to be a reasonable
charge. This rate is lower than that currently charged to
individual residents outside the City limits, however it Is
recognized that the Town of Vinton has the responsibility of
operating and maintaining its own distribution system. It
is felt, however, that a savings could be reailzed by the
individual consumer of the Town of VJnton water system
should the To~n desire to integrate its system with the
City*s system. Should this proposition have appeal to the
Town of Vinton. it is recommended that City Council express
a willingness to discuss this matter with tho ¥inton To~n
Council.
VI. Summary - As to the specific question of the City
aupplying water service to areas outside the City limits,
it is recommended that bulk water sales not be made but
that the existing basic City policy of water line exten-
sions be liberalized to facilitate providing individual
water service to those desirous of this service. It is
at this time.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Hampton W. Thomas
Hampton M. Thomas
S/ William S. Hubard
William S. Hubard
S/ Byron E. Haner
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The'motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Thomas then moved that thereport be taken under consideration
until the regular meeting of Council on Monday, ~arch 19, 1973. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
GARBAGE REMOVAL: Mr. James O. Trout, Chairman of ~ eLaudfill Commit-
tee, submitted the following'report with regard to the regional'landfill, recom-
mending that Council authorize an expenditure not to exceed $55.000.00 of capital
'458
improvement funds for certain site atudies and that Council further ~uthorize a
six month extension of th~ option to purchase the proposed landfill site:
'Februnr! 26. i~73
Honorable Mnyor end C~ty Council
Roanohe.' Virginfo
Gentlemen:
Subject: Regional Landfill
On Mednesday. February 21. 1973. members 'of your Landfill
Committee met with the entire Regional Landfill Site Committee
to discuss near time future actions with respect to the certl-
flcatJon of and implementation of facility improvements to
speed the use of the new Regional Landfill site.' Your repre-
sentatives prepared an agenda which included the vnriou~
aspects of this program and ashed the guidance of the com-
mittee as amhole.
As a result of this meeting and to expedite the approval
of this site by the State Health Department, the committee
has asked that the Cit~ of Roanoke advance the money to pro-
~eed with the various site evaluation studies necessary to
obtain the approval of this site as a Regional Landfill
under the 20-year plan. It is understood that during the
study, should it become apparent that the regional landfill
might not materialize for some reason, the studies of this
site could he stopped at that point and the expenditures
cease. Also, under the current agreement, adopted in
principal by each of the various governments, advance expen-
ditures made by any participant would either be shared'by
all the participants or credits given toward the operation
of the landfill,
Additionally, the joint committee has recommended that
actions be taken to extend the option on the land for the
regional landfill and the administration should endeavor
to make arrangements with the State Highway Department to
expedite the study and improvements to the access roads,
both in the County and the City.
It would be recommended that City Council authorize the
expenditures of not to exceed $55,000 of capital improve-
ment funds for these site studies and Council authorize a
six months' extension of the option to purchase the pro-
posed landfill site.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ James O. Trout
James O. Trout
S/ David K. Lisk .
David K. Lisk
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Haner' ,:;
Mr. Trout moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure carrying out the intent of the Landfill
Committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
POLICE DEPARTMENT-AIRPORT: Council having referred to the Airport
Advisory Commission the question of whether or not the three new positions for
airport security at Roanoke Municipal (Moodrum) Airport should be classified
as regular Police Officers or if they should be classified as Airport Patrol-
men, Mr. James O. Trout, Chairman of the Airport Advisory Commission, submitted
a written report advising that after reviewing the duties and responsibilities
zt59
of the Airport Police end the qualifications nnd standards established for
incumbents of these positions, the Commission ia of the opinion that these
positions Should be retained in the airport security Classification with the
grade structure ns presently established in the Pay Plan and recommending that
Council concur with the recommendation of the CJt~ Manager as contained in bls
report to Council under date of February 20, 1973, and authorize the hiring of
three additional Airport Policemen at the grade level and pay currently
established in the police budget for the airport.
Mr. Lisk moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the pro'per measure in accordance.Math the recommendation of the
Airport Advisory Commission. The motion was seconded by Dr, Taylor and unani-
mously adopted.
BONDS FOR EMPLOYEES AND OTHERS: Council having referred to the City
Manager for study, report and recommendation the matter of proper bond limits
for certain city officials, the setter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Manager submitted a written report advis-
ing that he referred this matter to the Insurance Advisory Committee shich is
a committee appointed by the City Manager and that on February 21, 1973, Mr.
Reginald M. Mood, Chairman of this Committee, furnished him with a current
listing of bond coverage of city employees, however, due to a heavy Morkload
and the current illness of one of the members of the Committee, the matter of
possible changes in the bond limits has not been furnished and that Mr. Wood
has indicated a desire to discuss this matter with bis whole Insurance Advisory
Committee and the City Manager and that it is hoped to return to Council within
the next several Meeks with a report on the matter.
Mr. Hubard moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
pARKS A~D PLAYGROUnDS-LANDMARKS: Council having re[erred to the City
Manager for study, report and recommendation a request of the Roanoke Valley
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals that · ey be permitted to
re-erect the Frederick J. Kimball Memorial Fountain in a pet cemetery at the
SPCA facility on Eastern Avenue, and Council having also referred the matter of
the condition of a fountain in Highland Park to the City Manager for study and
report, the matter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Manager Submitted the following report
recommending that subject to the concurrence of the Norfoli and Westero RailMay
Company, that the Frederick J. Kimball Memorial Fountain be donated as it is
where it is, to the SPCA for their relocation 'and use; and with reference to the
fountain in Highland Park, advising that it is the intent of the Department of
Parks and Recreation to clean up this fountain with the advent of better weather
and that it is not intended to place the fountain into operation as this Mill
require the expeodJture of an excessive amount of money:
'February 26, 1973
Honorable Nayor and City Council'
Roanohe..Virgiuin
Gentlemen:
Subject: Frederich J. Kimball Memor~ial Fountain
On January 22, 1973, Mr. R. P. Barnes appeared before
City Council on several matters, one of which was a request
that the Roanoke Valley Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals be permitted to re-erect the Frederich
J. Kimball Memorial Fountain in a pet cemetery at the SPCA
facility on Eastern Avenue.
This memorial fountain, which for a number of years
stood opposite the railroad station, mas dismantled and
removed as a traffic hazard some years ago and since that
tine has been stored by the Norfolk and Western Railroad.
I understand that an investigation wit~ respect to
this fountain was made by the City after the SPCA's first
request and it mas determined that considerable expendi-
tures would be required to restore the fountain to its
former state. Evidently this matter was dropped at that
tine.
Centlemen of Council, the fountain has not been used
for a number of years, nov does the City have any firm
plans for its future use. Mr. Raimond P. Barnes and other
members of the SPCA have indicated a desire to be permitted
to erect the fountain at the SPCA facility. Subject to the
concurrence of the Norfolk and ~estern Railroad, who has so
graciously stored this fountain this long tine, it would be
recommended that the fountain be donated, as is--where is,
to the SPCA for their relocation and use.
With reference to the fountain at Highland Park, it
is believed that Mr. Barnes was referring to the Dog Mouth
Fountain. A check with Parks and Recreation indicates that
it is their intention to clean up this fountain with the
advent of better weather. It is not intended to place the
fountain into operation as this would require the expendi-
ture of a~ excessive amount of money.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron Eo Hamer
Byron K. Hamer
City Manager"
Mr. Hubard moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager. The motion was seconded by Rt. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Hubard further moved that the City Attorney be vequeated to check
into the legal aspects of donating the Frederick J. Kimball Memorial Fountain
to the Roanoke Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and to submit
his report tn Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously
adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDIN'ANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
BUDGET-DEpARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE: Council having directed the
City Attorney to prepare the proper measure appropriating $17,000.00 to General
Relief under Section ~aT, "Public Assistance," of the 1972-73 budget, Dr.
Taylor offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20732) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~aT, "Public
Assistance,* of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance~ and providing for an
emergency.
IFor full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~$T, page 450.)
461
Dr, Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mss seconded
by Hr. Th*mss end adopted bT the foil*ming vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Hnyor ~ebber T.
NAYS: None ........ ~.
NOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS OVSINESS: NONE.
There being no further business, Mayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST: Pc~-J~
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
CERTIFICATE OF ALFlllEIITIClTY
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FER~ENTLY
YALUAJ3LE RECORDS OF THIS OFFICE AS LISTED ON THE TITLE
SHEET HERE I'~ADE AVAILABLE FOR RICROFILI~iIIG BY THE LOCAL
~CORDS ~CH OF ~E ~CHIVES ~IVISION OF THE VIRGINIA
STATE Li'H~RY A$ A~ORIZE~ BY SECTIONS 15.1-8, q2.1-82,
A~U ~2.1-83 OF TR~ ~g~ oF VI~INIA, THE PURPOSE OF ~E .
HI'CROFI~IHG IS TO PROVIDE ~ECURI~ COPIES OF THE RECORDS,
CODNGIL, REGULAR ME~TING,
Monday, March $, 1973,
The Council of the City of Roanoke wet in regular meeting in the
Conocil Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, March S, 1973, nt
the regular meeting hour, with Mayor Roy L. Mebber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, William S. Nubard, Noel C.
Taylor, Hampton M. Thomas and Mayor Roy L. Webber ............ 5.
ABSENT: Vice Mayor David K. Lisk and Councilman
James O. Trout ...........................................
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Byron £. Honer, City Manager; Mr. William F.
Clark, Assistant City Manager; Hr. James N. Kincnnon, City Attorney; and Mr.
A. No Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend
J. Glint Noble, Pastor, Preston Oaks Baptist Church.
MINUTES: Copies of the minutes of the regular meeting held on
January 29, lB?3, and the regular, meeting held on February 5, 1973, having
been furnished each member of Council. on motion of Dr. Taylor, seconded by
Mr, Hubard and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof was dispensed with and
the minutes approved os recorded.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Mr. James C. Hensley, representin9 the
CIvil Defense Preparedness Agency, Region Two, appeared before Council and pre-
sented the Richard S. Funck Memorial Award to Mr. Warren E. Trent, Civil Defense
Coordinator for the City of Roanoke. Br. Bensley advising that this award is
presented to county and municipal officials in the five states and the District
Of Columbia which comprise the Region Two area and who, through competence,
dedication, leadership and lighly visible efforts, have exhibited excellence
in civil preparedness and that Mr. Trent is one of the eight recipients of
this award in the State of Virginia,
UEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
SIDEWALK, CURB AND GL~TER: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for
bids for miscellaneous, small area improved hard ~urface street and sidewalk
restoration occasioned by the normal daily opernti, ons of the Water Department
of the City of Roanoke for the period from April ~, lB?3. to April 2, 1974,
said proposals to be received by the City Clerk until 2 p.m.. Monday, March
lB?3, and to be opened at that hour before Council, Mayor Webber asked if any-
one present had any questions a~out the advertisement and no representative
present raising any question, the Mayor instructed the City Clerk to proceed
with the opening of the bids; whereupon, the City Clerk opened and read the
following bids:
John A. Hall and Company. Incorporated 5' $ 57,888.75
Adams Construction Company 58,436.25
Virginia Asphalt Paving Company,
Incorporated 63,160.25
#r~'Thomns moved that the bids be referred to n committee to be nppointed
by the Mayor for.tabnlitlon; report end recommendation to Council, The motion
was seconded by Or, Taylor mud unanimously adopted.
Mayor #ebber nppointedMessrs. Byron E. Hamer, Chairman, Kit B. Kiser
and B~ B, Thompson os'members of the conmittee~
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
LICENSES: -Councilman Robert A~ Garland presented the following connuni-
cation advising that it has been brought to his attention by several interested
citizens that some of the city residents hnve failed to purchase the annual
automobile decal and proposing that the City Manager be instructed to alert the
Police Department as to what appears to-be a deficiency in enforcoment:
'February 28. 1973.
Mayor Mebber and Members of
Roanoke City Council.
Roanoke, Virginia.
Gentlemen:
It has been brought to my attention by several interested
citizens that some of the city residents have failed to
purchase the annual automobile decal. If Council will re-
call several rather irate citizens appeared before us back
last year in regard to this matter and it was referred to
the City Manager. I further recall that the complainants
weren*t objecting to the tax but only to the fact that they
felt that many were escaping it and that the city was not
making the proper effort to enforce i~.
An investigation for the year 1~72 shoued that only 408 were
summoned to court and with fines as little as five dollars
to ten dollars, the breakdown being as folloms:
January 13
February 20
March - 46
April 14
May -- B
June - 59
July - 50
August - 45
September - 45
October - 41
November -- 42
December - 24
I would propose that the City Manager be instructed to
alert our Police Department to what appears to be a
deficiency in enforcement. I would particularly call to
his attention the following:
1. Trucks for hire
2. Mreckers
3. Boat trailers
4. pick up trucks
· ~ ~ · 5. Leased darn
Undoubtedly; there is only a small percentage of our people
that fail to purchase this decal but in fairness to those
that' dB/'every ~ffortshould,be-made by the administration
to apprehend those that enjoy our streets and highways but
at-the sa~e time escape this taxation.
It is'my feeling that our people do not object to taxation
as long as it is fair and equitable and applies across the
'board. *
Respectfully submitted for your consideration,
'8/ Robert A. Garland,
Robert AB Garland,
'Councilman.
Mr,'Garland moved that the communication be referred to the. City
Manager for bls information, The motion mas secoadedby Mr,-Mubord and unani- .
moasly adopted. · . .
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE-TRAFFIC: A communication from the. Central
Roanoke Development Foundation transmitting e. ResolutJon which mas adopted on
February 6. 1973, by the Trustees of the Central-Roanoke Development Foundation
requesting the Council of the City of Roanoke to adopt· a Resolution stating
that Council will give favorable consideration to the construction by the City
of Roanoke Of a parking building to support intensive private development in the
Downtown East Urban Renewal Area, was before the body.
Xe this connection, Mr. John ~. Chappelear, Jr., Chairman, and
Milliam R. Mill. Secretary. of the Central Roanoke Development Foundation.
appeared before Council in support of the request.
Mr. {homos moved that the matter be referred back to the Central
Roanoke Development Foundation us an item Of discussion and recommendation as
to parking in the Downtown East Urban Renewal Area. The motion was seconded
by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
TRAFFIC: Mr. Aylett B. Coleman, representing owners and tenants
the parkside Plaza Shopping Center, appeared before Council and presented a
communication expressing the opinion that a traffic control light is needed
at the intersection of Dale Avenue, S. E., and the main entrance to the Parkside
Plaza Shopping Center.
Mr. J. R. Sink, Superintendent, Traffic Engineering and Communica-
tions, appeared before Council and advised that based upon a recent study, the
traffic situation at this intersection does not merit a traffic control light
and that a permit would have to be obtained from the Highway Department before
a traffic control light could be installed at the intersection.
It appearing that this matter had previously been given study and
consideration by the administration, Mr. Thomas moved that the communication
be referred to thc City Manager to confer with Mr. Coleman and other interested
parties, to review thc report of the administration, to ascertain whether or
not something can be worked out and to report to Council with his recommendation
accordingly. Thc motion was seconded by DF. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
TAXES: A communication from HFS. Annie fl. Musgrove advising that
her real estate taxes were frozen in 1971, that her real estate tax bill for
lg?2 totaled $266.32 which is un increase of-$94.20~a'nd requesting that her
present real estate tax be the same os it mas in 19?lo.wusbefore Council.
Mr. Garland moved that the communication be received.and filed with
the suggestion that Mrs. Musgrove make the proper application to the Com-
missioner of the Revenue for the year 19~3 in sufficient time for the reel
estate tax deduction to be effective in lg?3. The.motion was seconded by
Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
COMMONREALTH*S ATTORNEY: Copy of an Order appointing Mr,.Robert F,
Rider aa Commonmealtb*s Attorney of the City Of Hoangke, Virginia, in the place
of Mr, Richard Lee Lawrence, resigoed, effective March 1, 19Y3, mgs before Council,
Mr, Hubard moved that the Order be received and filed, The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
PARKS AND PLAYGROI~DS-SCHOOLS: Mr, Samuel P, McNeil. Chairman of the
Roanoke City School Hoard, appeared before Council and presented u communication
from the School Board advising that the Hoard unanimously voted to locate the
proposed Southeast Elementary School at the Fellah park site and respectfully
requesting that Council take all necessary steps to procure the Fnllon Park site,
was before the body,
In a discussion of the request, Mr. McNeil stated various ad?outages
as to why the School Hoard feels the new elementary school should be constructed
in Fnllon Park, advising that this is the only area they knom of which will meet
the requirements of the Roanoke City School Hoard, the requirements of the
southeast residents and the requirements of the State Hoard of Education, point-
ing out that the School Hoard has a petiti.on signed by a number of southeast
residents approving this site end that he hopes Council ~ill give this matter
quick approval in order for construction to begin as soon as possible.
In this connection, Mr, Thomas questioned the legality of using Fellah
Park for this purpose.
Mr. Garland then moved that the City Attorney be requested to ascer-
tain, from a legal standpoint, whether or not the new Southe~stEl~mentary School
can be constructed in Fellah Park. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and
unanimously adopted.
DUDGET-SCBOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting that ~.H~O.O0 be appropriated to Inservlce Training under Section
~2000, *Schools- Instruction,* of the 1972-73 budget of the Roanoke City School
Hoard, to provide funds which will be us.ed to reimburse tuition expenses to the
colleges involved and that this represents additional revenue not budgeted in the
1972-T3 School Board budget, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor raised the question as to whether or not there are any trans-
fers which can be made within the budget of the Roanoke City School Hoard for
this purpose and moved that the matter be referred back to the School Hoard for
the purpose of ascertaining if any transfers cnn be made,
Later during the meeting, Hr. M. Donald Pack, Superintendent of Roanoke
City Schools, advised Council that this is a 100 per cent reimburseable item by
the federal government.
Dr. Taylor then moved that Council concur in ~he request of the Roanoke
City School Hoard and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
the necessary funds:
(~20T33) AN ORDINANCE to amend an~ reordain Section u2000o ~Public
Schools - Instruction,~ of the 1972-T3 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing
for on emergency.
IFor full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n37, page 458.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The warden uss
seconded by Hr. Bubnrd tad adopted by the'~ollowing vote:
AYES: Ressrs. Garland, Bubsrd, Tsylort'TbomsSo sad #syor Rebber---5o
NAYS: None* 2.
(Messrs. Lisk nnd Trout absent)
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A connunicntion Iron the Roanoke Cit~ School Board
requestlog that $470~b5 be appropriated to Upkeep and Operation of Motor
Vehicles under Section aGO00, 'Schools - Operation of School Plant,' and that
$1,175o51 be appropriated to Upkeep and Operation of Cafeteria Trucks under
Soction #9000, "Schools - Food Services," of the 1972-73 budget of the Roanoke
City School Board , to provide funds to repair damaged vehicles, advising that
checks totaling the above amounts will be deposited as additional revenae with
the City Treasurer, was before Council.,
Or. Taylor moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanoke
City School.Board and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
the necessary funds:
(~20734) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~6000, "Public
Schools - Operation of School ~lant," and Section ugo00° "Public Schools -
Food Services," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for on
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =37, page 458.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Huhard, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber ..................... 5,
NAYS: None ...........O. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
MUNICIPAL BUILDING-CAPITAL IRPROVEWEN~S PROGRAM: The City Manager
submitted the following report in connection with the Third Street Building
renovation, recommending that a change order he authorized to the contract with
Martin Brothers Contractors and that the sum of $4,429.00 be appropriated for
the additional work, additional fee for the architect and to cover the present
account deficit:
"March 5. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Third Street Building Renovation
Martin Brothers Contractors, engaged in remodeling the
City's Third Street Municipal Annex, for use by abe Juvenile
and Domestic Relations Court and the Police Department. has
recently completed all interior demolition work. In the
process of removing the old floor, wall and ceiling mat-
erials, certain needs have been discovered which could not
be foreseen and therefore were oat included on the original
plans. The following items appear desirable to include in
the project work ns a change order to the original contract:
l, Replace an existing 3-inch sanitary drain line ·
through the area presently occupied by the Social
Security Administration for service to proposed
hem toilets. This existlug line bad been thought
to be 4 inches but mas found to be smaller uhen
uncovered. The larger line is necessary for service
to the neu fixtures to be installed and mill cost
the additional sum of
2. Remove n 2-inch hump in the floor on the top level
of the old section of the building uhJch was dis-
covered upon removal of an old partition. This
is necessary to provide a smooth floor surface Jn
the remodeled facilities end mill add the sum of
$550 to the project cost.
3. Remove one old mindom frame and block up uith
masonrT, which mas discovered upon removal of old
mall paneling. This work mill add the sum of
$600 to the original contract price.
4. Change one door to a fire door and add panic hard-
ware to several doors at the request of the Fire
Marshal. This worh mill add the sum of $?14.30 to
the original contract..
So Delete one unit heater in rear stairway of the neu
building. The Fire Marshal had requested that this
unit heater be recessed but such is not practical.
This will result in a reduction in the contract
price in the amount of $220.
h. Delet new footer foe new brick wall along south
(parhin9 lot) side of building. It bad been anti-
cipated that an existin9 footer from a former
building at this location might be useable for this
purpose and such was found to be the case once exca-
vation around the foundation was accomplished. There-
fore, the elimination of this item will result in a
reduction to the original contract by the amount of
$954.
In remodqling projects it is not uncommon for additional
work to be necessary during the course of construction.
Items I through 4 will result in additions totalin~
$4.377.05. mhile items 5 and 6 will result in ~eductions
totaling $1.174.00. Zhe net additional contract costs total
$3.203.05. The additional architect,s fee (7 1/2%) on this
work will amount to $240.23. At the time of contract award
there resulted a slight deficiency in the project account as
advertising costs and several minor expenditures mere over-
looked; this involves $985.72. No contingency funds were
established in the project and it will therefore be neces-
sary for supplemental appropriations to be provided by City
Council. It is recommended that a change order be authorized
in the contract with Martin Brothers Contractors. and that
the sum of $4,429.00 be appropriated for the additional work,
architect*s fees and to cover the present account deficit.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager"
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriatin9 the necessary
funds:
(~2073§) AN OgDINANCE to amend and reordatn Section #09, 'Transfers
to Capital Improvements Fund," of thelg?2-?3 Appropriation Ordinance, and pro-
vidin9 for an e~ergency.
(For full t~xt of Ordinancq. see Ordinance Book #3?. page 459.)
Mr. Ga%land moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Hobord and adopted by thefollomlng vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland. Bubordo'Taylor. Thomas and Mayor
Webber ......... ~ ............ 5.
NAYS: None .......... O. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
Dr. Taylor then offered the following emergency Ordinance authorizing
the issuance of the change order:
(n20736) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the issuance of Change Order No.
I to the City's contract dated January 3. 1973. with Martin Brothers Contractors.
lac.. for certain alterations to the City's 3rd Street. S. W. Enllding. by
providing for certain changes in such work for an aggregate addilional cost
of $3.203.05: and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Oook ~37. page 460.)
DF. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion mas
seconded by Mr. Bubard and adopted by the follomin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Bubard. Taylor. Thomas and Mayor
Mebber ...................... 5.
NAYS: ~one ......... O. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
BUDGET-DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC MBLFARE: The City Manager submitted the
follomiog report advising that the State Department of Welfare sod Institutions
cnn meet the request of the city in the category of General Relief for the
remainder of this fiscal year and the city has obtained approval of an addi-
tional $110,000.00, that since the city has. during the months of. January and
February, already appropriated $35,000,00, it will requi~e an additional $75,000
appropriation, that the state has reduced the ~ity's funds in the categories of
Old Age Assistance and Aid to Depend~nt Children by $95,565.00 each and recom-
mending that $75.000.00 be appropriated to General Relief and that appropriate
adjustments be made in the other accounts in keeping with the state's allot-
ment adjustments:
"March 5, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Public Assistance Budget - General Relief
Soon after the beginning of the current fiscal year, the
City was advised by the State Department of Melfare and Insti-
tutions that they were only funding one-half of the amount
requested by the City in the category of General Relief.
Council subsequently reduced the Public Assistance budget
by approximately one-half in the category of General Relief,
although expenditures continued to be authorized at n level
in keeping with the original appropriation. It vas anticipated
that during the middle of the year these funds would be
expended and that additional appropriations weald he required.
Ou two recent occasions Couocil has appropriated supplemen-
tal funds for General Relief, while continuing to pursue the
possibility of increases State authorization for this cate-
gory of Public Assistance.
The City has nam been advised that the State Depart-
meat of lelfare and Institutions con meet our request in the
category of General Relief for the remainder of this fiscal
year and re have obtained approval of an additional $110,000.
Sln~e the City has'during the months bi'January and February
already appropriated $35,000, it alii require an additional
$?$,000 appropriation to the General Relief account within
the Public Assistance budget. Of the total $110tO00 added
to the General Bellef'acconnt~ the State Department of
Welfare and Institutions will reimburse the City 62.5~ or
$60,750.
In conjunction math this approval the State has reduced
the City*s funds in the categories of Old Age Assistance and
Aid to Dependent Children by $95,565 each, These categories
ere both 100~ State'reiubrusable, but we are expending funds
for these purposes et such a rate that the reductions will
not be objectionable.
It is recommended that City Council appropriate $75,000
to Account No, 37 - 271; General Relief mithin the Public
Assistance budget, and authorize appropriate adjustments in
other accounts in keeping with the State*s allotment adjust-
ments.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Dyron E. Darter
City Manager'
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance making the recommended
budgetary adjustments:
(~20737) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~37, "public
Assistance," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~37. page 4bi.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard,'Tnylor, Thomas and Mayor
~ebbe~ ......................
NAYS: None O. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
ZONING-TRAFFIC: Council having referred to the City Manager for study,
report and recommendation a request from Mr. James E. Reed, trading as Prillaman
Motors, concerning a problem with interpretation of building setback requirements
in the 1100 block of Orange Avenue, N. E., the City Manager submitted a written
report advising that in 1952, a City Council Ordinance created a future right of
way setback throughout the length of Orange Avenue, U. S. Route 460, in antici-
pation of future highway widening, that as that Ordinance affects the subject
property, the right of way setback was sixty feet from the then existing street
center line, that the 196b Zoning Ordinance adopted by Council included provisions
for an arterial highway 'setback requiring new construction to be restricted from
building Within 25 feet from proposed highway rights of way described in the
regional arterial highway plan, that the arterial highway setback is five feet
less re~trictive than the old highway right of way established in the 1952 Ordi-
nance, that the question therefore avlses as to which setback now applies for new
building construction on Mr. Reed's property, that in his opinion the 25 foot
arterial setback is now all that is necessary alan9 Orange Avenue since the
highway widening has been completed, suggesting that this setback established in
the 1966 Zoning Ordinance take preference to any earlier setback established,
however, such is not specifically stated in the Zoning Ordinance, that the City
Attorney la preparing appropriate papers to be considered by Council-in resolvie
the particular question la the IlO0 block of Orange Avenue, N, E~', and recom-
mending that Council favorably consider this proposal and additionally the
general problem of coordination between the arterial highway setbacks and older
street setbacks established by specific Council Ordinances and that this. matter
be referred to the City Planning Commission for their study and recommendation
so ns to clarify and eliminath similar questions which could otherwise arise
in the future.
Or. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution waiving enforcement of the build-
ing setback provisions of Resolution No. 11447, adopted May 26. 1952, as the
same relate to property situate at the northeasterly corner of Orange Avenue
and llth Street. N. £.. armed by Mr. James £. Reed, trading as PrJllaman
Motors:
(n20?3O) A RESOLUTION waiving enforcement of the building setback
provisions of Resolution No. 11447. adopted May 26, 1952. as the same relate
to property situate at the northeasterly corner of Orange Avenue. and llth
Street, N. E.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~37. page 462.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Mebber .....................
NAYS: None .......... O. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
Dr. Taylor then moved that the general problem of coordination between
the arterial highway setback lines and older street setback lines established
by specific Council Ordinance be referred to the City Planning Commission for
study, report and recommendation so as to clarify and eliminate questions which
could otherwise arise in the future. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard
and unanimously adopted.
STATE RIGHMAYS: The City Manager submitted a written report in con-
nection math a complaint from businessmen in the area of Orange Avenue and
Milliomson Road for a crossover to be provided in the nemly constructed median
on Orange Avenue, U. S. Route 460, at Courtland Road. advising that he has
once again communicated with Mr. J. G. Ripley. State Urban Engineer. Department
of Highways, and requested reconsideration of their position in the matter,
that he has suggested that representatives of the Highway Department meet with
representatives of the city on location to review the reported problems and
possible solutions, transmitting copy of u communication from Mr. Ripley wherein
he advised that the Highway Department and the Federal ~ighmay Administration
have reviewed this matter and continue to fled themselves ouable to recommend
10.:
a median opening at the intersectio· of Courtlaod Road and Orange Avenue, the
City Manager po!nt~ng out that he previqnaiy scheduled · meeting mftb Mr. C. P.
Brooks. #··agar of Sears Roebuck ~ Comp·ny, for March O, 1973o that he mill keep
this meeting end see if some substitute solution to the median crossover may be
reached.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Hr. Bubard and unsnimously adopted.
JUVENILE AND DOMESTIC RELATIONS COURT: Council having referred to the
City Manager for study, report and recomme·datlon · communication from Mr. Burro·
J. Neuman. Ch·irma· of the Committee on Juve·ile Detention Facilities, requestin~
that Roanoke City Council appoint a committee to work with a committee composed
of representatives from the governments of Allegbany County, Bath County, Botetourt
County, City of Clifton Forge, City. of Covington and Craig County to explore
the possibility of a cooperative program for providing juvenile detention ser-
vices, the City Manager submitted the following report advising that it is felt
that this situation is becoming sufficiently urgent .so as to warrant immediate
action by City Council and recommending that Council appoint one of its members
and at least one citizen to serve on a committee to study this matter and that
Council additionally designate the Judge and Chief Probation Officer of the
Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court, the Director Of the Department of Public
Welfare and the Superintendent of the Roanoke Juvenile Detention Home to assist
as ex officio members to this committee:
"March 5, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Juvenile Detention Facilities
On February 5, 1973, City Council referred to the City
Manager for study and report a letter requesting that the
City of Roanoke appoint a committee to explore the possibi-
lity of · cooperative program for providing juvenile deten-
tion facilities for several areas'in southwestern Virginia.
On February 16, 1973, the Manager net with Miss Bernice F.
Jones, Director of Public Welfare; Mr. William Kelly, Chief
Probation Officer of the Roanoke City Juvenile Court; Mr.
R. F. Hyatt, Superintendent of Roanoke Juvenile Detention
Rome, and members of a committee on juvenile detention
facilities representing Allegha·y County, Bath County,
Botetourt County and the cities of Clifton Forge and Covin§-
tion. Members of that committee were Burton J. newman,
Chairman (Alleghany County); Elwood T. Bostic (Ex Officio:
Chief Probation Officer, Regional Probation De~ar~ment);
Ann Deacon (Alleghany County) and ~os~ph Anderson (Mayor
of Clifton Forge).
Reverend Newman advised that in June 1972 the above-
mentioned governments each appointed a member of their
body and a citizen to a committee on juvenile detention
facilities. The purpose of the committee was to study
juvenile detention needs in their area. Their committee
found that juveniles are primarily confined in local jails
with'some occasionally being accepted by neighboring juve-
nile detention homes on a space available basis. At the
request of that committee a study of juvenile detention
needs of the six jurisdictions was made by the State
Department of Melfare and Institutions. This study
indicated a need for un average of 2.9 Juvenile detention
beds each day, or u range Of I to T beds to serve these
Jurisdictions, (this included Craig County).
The State Department of Welfare and Institutions encour-
aged the committee to explore means of'providing for their
Juvenile detention needs other than building a separate
20-bed Juvenile detention facility. One solution suggested
to this committee wes the establishment of contractual
arrangements with nearby Juvenile detention homes for board-
ing their Juveniles. A holding facility should be opened
in their areas which facility would hold a Juvenile for no
longer than 72 hours before transfer to the contracting
Juvenile detention home.
That committee feels that the Roanoke Juvenile Deten-
tion Home is the nearest facility although they are aware
of the Overcrowded conditions at the Roanoke Home. The
committee felt that Roanoke City might be interested in
making a joint effort toward solving the mutual problem of
a need for more juvenile detention bed spaces.
The City of Roanoke has an urgent need for additional
bed space at the Roanoke Juvenile Detention Home. This is
evidenced by the annual report of the Home and from past
studies made On the use of the Dome. Although the average
daily population at the Dome during calendar year 1972 was
19.fl children (capacity 21 children), the facility was
operated at over capacity for boys on 225 of the 365 days
and for girls 130 of the 365 days. On 26 occasions the
Home refused to take children when requested to do so
because of the overcrowded situation. To date no specific
project has been made to provide additional beds which are
urgently needed.
The consensus Of opinion of those present at this
meeting was that there is a definite need for note juvenile
detention bed space in the area of the Fifth Planning Dis-
trict. It was also felt that this need could probably be
more expediently met by a jolntcooperative effort. It was
felt that Craig County, Roanoke County and the City of Salem
should be invited to particil~te in any effort to study the
juvenile detention needs since they are currently using the
City of Roanoke Detention Home.
It is felt that this situation is becoming sufficiently
urgent as to warrant immediate action by City Council and it
would be recommended that City Council appoint one of its
members and at least one citizen to serve ga a committee to
study this matter and that additionally they designate the
Judge and the Chief Probation Officer of the Roanoke City
Juvenile Court, the Director of Roanoke City Department of
Public Relfare and the Superintendent of the Roanoke Juvenile
Detention Home to assist as ex official members to a commit-
tee. It is further recommended that these representatives
be authorized:
1o To meet with the committee on juvenile detention
facilities appointed by the governing bodies of
Alleghany County, Bath County, Dotetourt County, Roanoke
County, Craig County and the cities of Salem, Clifton
Forge and Covington and any other surrounding areas
interested in participating in a joint regional facility.
2. To conduct a study of the use being made of the Roanoke
Juvenile Detention Home.
To determine the Juvenile detention needs of the partici-
pating jurisdictions.
4. To request the State Department of Relfare and Insti-
tutions to ascertain and report on juvenile detention
needs in the jurisdictions served by the Roanoke Juve-
nile Detention Home and to correlate this report with
any report on jurisdictions desiring services from that
Home.
5. To consider solutions as to the needs they may find and
· to determine financial arrangements for any projected
solution.
6. To report their findings to the respective governing
bodies of those jurisdictions represented on this
mittee on ro before June 4,
It would be suggested that the Juvenile Detention Ser-
vices Study Committee be invited to visit the Rounohe Juve-
nile Detention Home et 7:30 p.m.o March 2?, 1973, at which
time these representatives could observe the conditions ut
this facility. This visit should be helpful to the commit-
tee in its further deliberations and recommendations.
Respectfully submitted,
$/ Byron B. Hamer
Byron E. Honer
City Manager*
Mr. Huhard moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and that Council discuss the appointments to this committee in Executive
Session. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
HEALTH DEPARTMENT-HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: Council having referred to
the City Manager and to the Commissioner of Health for study and report the request
of residents of Melrose Toners in connection with the consideration of a part-
tine health clinic at Melrose Towers and Morningside Manor, the City Manager sub-
mitted the following report advising that provision has been made for part-time
operation of the Melrose Towers Clinic and that similar arrangements for part-
time clinics are anticipated to be provided ut RoYnJngside Manor:
*March 5, 1973
Honorable Rayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Public Health Clinics - Melrose Towers and Morning-
side Manor
At the City Council meeting on Monday, February 12.
1913o the subject of operating a public health clinic in
Melrose lomers was considered by Council and referred to
the City ganager*s office for study and report. Additional-
ly, it nas requested that the health clinic facilities at
Hornlngside Manor similarly be considered.
The City Manager's office has discussed this subject
with Dr. James H. Fagan, Director of the Roanoke office of
the State Health Department, and has obtained the followln9
report from Doctor Fagan:
*This memorandum refers particularly to Melrose
Towers and Morningside Manor. Mhen these clinics
were jointly proposed by the Housing Authority and
the Roanoke City Health Department there were sev-
eral areas of agreement by both parties:
1. The clinics would be on a scheduled basis and
their frequency of meetings would be determined
by physician availability,
2. The frequency would, in all probability, be three
times per week with each ~linic being held for
a maximum of two hours each.
3. The admission to the clinics would be on appoint-
ment basis with some provision to see a limited
number of acutely iii patients nhen the doctor
was in attendance.
4. The clinics were to be only for adult paiientso
~nd the public health nurse could occasionally
refer adult patients from the nearby community.'
5. Ho pediatric clinic facilities were iD be esta-
blished within these tad elderly apartment house
complexes.
Such was our agreement and plums for these two
highly specialized housing projects. Dr. Tuylor*s
letter implies that we were to provide a conti-
nuous medical security. Such a plan would not be
feasible for a health department to undertake be-
cause the professional costs mould be prohibitive,
amounting to nearly $39,000.00 per year to cure for
some 234 individuals which is almost $1,700 per year
for each person or 160 times what me spend on ser-
vices to the average citizen of Roanoke.
Dr. Taylor goes un to state that the health
department budget has funds in it for further equip-
ment to be purchased during the balance of this year.
but his letter did not state the type.or equipment
to be purchased during the balance of this year, but
his letter did not state the.type of equipment nor
where it Wes destined to be placed. Some of this
clinic equipment wes destined to outfit a nemly con-
structed clinic in the Lincoln Terrace Housing Pro-
ject where three weekly clinics are held: Pedia-
tric Clinic, Immunization Clinic and Family Planning
Clinic. Other moneys was for replacement of dental
equipment which dated back twenty to twenty-five
years and for uhich replacement parts can ag longer
be obtained. It,was replace the equipment or close
our dental clinic.
The Roanoke City Health Department has been
diligently searching for a physician since July 15,
1972. ~e are listed with the Retired Officers
Association's Employment Office. with the National
M£DHIC Coordinator and its Virginia counterpart,
and the State has placed ads in the teaching medical
journals, Recently we have been in touch with a
doctor mbo has agreed to join our staff on a trial
basis, and if we both can come to a mutual agree-
sent, he mill join our staff in a full-time capa-
city.
In our original survey of the residents of
Melrose Towers, it mas found that 80~ of the people
designated local physicians as their family doctors.
This fact did not indicate that they were totally
without medical care, and the headquartering of the
Senior Citizens station wagons made many of them
mobile enough to attend our clinics at the health
department and our. other clinics at Ourroll Itospi-.
tal. The stricter lams coverning the stocking and
dispensing of drugs will not permit us to maintain
drugs on the premises.
As in all our General Medical Clinics throughout
the health department, patients receiving services
will be expected to pay a fee based on their net
income. In most cases, these patients ~ 11 be
recipients of Medicare and Medicaid and these pro-
grams pay such costs.*
In summary, provision has been made for part-time
operation of the Melrose Towers Clinic. which was the Health
Department*s original intention for these facilities. It
would appear that there were some possible misunderstandings
by the residents of Melrose Towers as to the extent of health
care to be provided by this clinic. We are advised that
similar arrangements for part-time clinics are anticipated to
be provided at Morningside Manor. If City Council would have
further questions on this subject, We, would be pleased to
attempt to secure additional information.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager#
Dr. Taylor moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
POLICE DEpARTMENT-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Reneger submitted tbe fol-
lowiug report in connection ulth the stutus of personnel in the Police Department
end the Fire Department us of January. 197~:
'March 5. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Personnel Changes - Police and Fire Departments
January, 1973
Listed below is the status of the Police and the Fire
Departmeuts ss of January31, 1973:
Enoloved Rcsiflned
Police Officer Tony R. Lundy Jan. 2, 1973
Airport Police Bernard M. Hudson Jun. 2, 1973
Police Officer Frank G. Monsour Jun. 6, 1973
Police Officer Harless G. Duncan Jan, 23. 1973
Ending January 31, 1973 (9) vacancies.
Ralph E. Spraker Jan. 1, 1973
Ray D. Franklin Jan. 1, 1973
At the end of January 1973 there was I vacancy in the Fire
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Honer
Byron E. Haner
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
CITY MANAGER-COUNCIL-CITY EMPLOyEEs: The City Manager submitted a
tion of this request be deferred until the next regular meeting of Council on
Monday, March 12, 1973.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the request of the CitI Manager
that the matter be deferred until the next regular meeting of Council on Monday,
March 12, 1973. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
In this connection, Dr. Taylor advised that he will be unable to stay
until the conclusion of the n~xt Council meeting on Monday, March 12, 1973, but
he is in complete accord with Council holding the Executive Session in his absence.
AIRPORT: Council having referred to the City Man'get for restudy a
proposed Ordinance amarding a contract for certain advertising privileges to be
exercised at Roanoke Municipal (Moodrum) Airport, upon certain terms and condi-
tions, the City Manager submitted the following report advising that it would
appear that the city has obtained an exceptionally good offer from Creative Adver-
tising, that this fee percentage appears to be higher than that obtained by similar
'March S. 19T3
Honorable Rsyor and City Council
Roanohe, Virginia
Gentlemen:
SnbJect: Contract for Advertising Space at the Airport
On Tuesday, February 20, 1973, City Council had before
it the matter of the contract betmeen the City of Roanoke and
Creative Advertising Agency, Incorporated. Rather than
approve this contract as a result of a question with regard
to the rates, the Council referred this matter to the City
Ranager for clarification. As I understood the question,
City Council desired clarification with respect to the fees
that the City would receive with respect to contracts let by
the Agency (Creative Advertising) as opposed to those fees
when some agency other than Creative Advertising sold the
advertisements. The question mas mhy should the City assume
the reduction from 70~ to 55X and why not a portion of the
advertising agency*s fee be reduced. A review of similar
contract situations between an agency and other city air-
ports reveals that the going rate is a 50-50 split at most
airports and as lom as a 40-60 split math the 40~ going to
the airport and the 60~ to the advertising agency ut some
airports. Because of the exceptionally high (?0~) rate that
the City of Roanoke would receive, Creative Advertising
quite naturally feels that the 15~ should come from the
City*s share when some agency other than Creative Advertis-
ing sells the ad.~
It would appear that the City of Roanoke has obtained an
exceptionally good offer from Creative Advertising Agency,
Incorporated, and that this fee percentage appears to be
higher than that obtained by similar airports alga9 the
eastern coast. Rt. Marshall Harris, Roanoke Airport Ranager,
has checked other airports and indicates this to be true.
The City Manager contacted the Greensboro Airport and ascer-
tained that their percentage fee mas 45X.
Based upon the information received, it would seem
that the City of Roanoke has been offered a high percentage
fee for this advertising contract and it would be recom-
mended that City Council accept the contract as prepared.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Haner
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager*
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance accepting the pro-
posal of Creative Advertising. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard.
After a further discussion as to the fee percentage, Mr. Thomas
offered a substitute motion that the entire matter of advertising space at
Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport be referred back to the Airport Advisory
Commission for reappraisal and reevaluation to Council as soon as possible.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted, Mr. Garland voting no.
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS-BUDGET: The City Manager submitted a written
report recommending that $1.200.00 be transferred from Operating Supplies and
Materials to Travel Expense under Section #gO, "Sewn9e Treatment Fund," of the
1972-73 Sewage Treatment Fund Appropriation Ordinance, to provide funds for
the remainder of the fiscal year.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance transferring the
necessary funds:
('20739) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordaJo Section ,90, 'Sewage
Treatment Fond," of the 197~-73 Sewage Treatment Fnnd Appreprlntlo, Ordinance, and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book nS?. page~462.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Taylor. Thomas end MoTor
Webber
NAYS: None .......... O. (Messrs. Lisk nnd Trout absent)
Mith reference to the sale of water. Mr. Thomas advised that the Mater
Resources Committee met at I p.m.. Monday. March 5. lgT~, end that it is the
recommendation of the Committee that at the end of the next Council meeting on
Monday. March 12. 1973. teat Council meet with the Committee and members of the
administrative staff to review in detail the report of the Mater Resources Com-
mittee dealing with the sale of surplus water to various county areas and a
recommended policy for furnishing said surplus water..
Er. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the Com-
mittec. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bubard and unanimously adopted.
REVENUE SHARING: The City Attorney submitted the foil*win9 report
advising that it has been brought to his attention that in order to qualify for
entitlement to any reyenue ~buring funds under Public Law 92-512 for any period
beginning on or after January 1, 1973, it is necessary that the Chief Executive
Officer of the city, namely the City Manager, make certain written assurances
set out or referred to on Treasury Form Nos. 3227 and 3226 and transmitting a
Resolution which will expressly give the City Manager the auth.ority to commit the
city to the assurances above referred to:
*March 5, 1973
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
It has been brought to the attention of the under-
signed that, in order to qualify for entitlement to any
revenue sharing funds under Public Lam 92-512 for any
period beginning on or after January 1, .1973. it is nec-
essary that the City's chief executive officer, namely the
City Manager. make certain written assurances to the Secre-
tary of the Treasury on behalf of the City, and ns such
assurances are set out or referred to on Treasury Form Nos.
3227 and 3226, copies of which are transmitted herewith for
the Council*s consideration.
Accordingly, and assuming that the Council Will
decide to so order, I have prepared and transmit herewith
a resolution which Would expressly gl. va to the City Manager
the authority to commit the City to the assurances above
referred to
It goes without saying that when such assurances have
been given by the City, the same must be strictly adhered
to. I am in the process of assembling the pertinent
regulations of the Treasury Gepartment and th*seep*rtl*ns of
the Actmbich ere referred to on the aforesaid forms amd, when
obtained, will supply copies thereof to the City Clerk, the
City Manager, the City Auditor and the City Treasurer.
Respectfully,
S/ J. N. Klncanon
J. N. Eincanon'
Mr. Garland mSved that Council concur in the report of the City
Attorney and offered the following'Resolution:
(m20740) A RESOLUTION authorizing certain assurances to'be made to
the Secretary of the Treasury mitb respect to the City*s use of revenue sharing
funds.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book uS?, page 463.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. Yhe motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber ...................... 5.
NAYS: None ......... O. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
LANDMARKS-PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: Council having requested that the
City Attorney check into the legal aspects of donating the Frederick J. Kimball
Memorial Fountain to the Roanoke Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals and submit his report accordingly, the City Attorney submitted the fol-
lowing report advising that it night be highly appropriate that now or at some
future date arrangements be made to renovate and relocate the Frederick J.
Kimball Memorial Fountain in or near the Kimball Urban Renewal Project now
under development by the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority,
in the Transportation Center area of Wasena Park or in some similar area of
the city bearing a relationship to the person memorialized or to the industry
to which he was so closely attached:
"March 5, 1973
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
At the meeting of the Council held February 26th the
Council directed that the undersigned look into the facts
pertaining to what is referred to us a drinking fountain
given to the City in 1907o in honor of the late Frederick
J. Kimball,
A summary review of the record of the City Council dis-
closes Ordinance No. 1063 adopted by the Common Council and
the Board of Aldermen in November 1907, by which the Council
made provision for the City's acceptance of and the dedication
of an 0.56 ~cre parcel of land on Shenandoah Avenue opposite
the railway passenger station and of a fountain located or
later erected on that land, all for public use and enjoyment
and a memorial to the late Frederick J. Kimball. The ordi-
nance indicates that the land was owned and dedicated by the
Virginia Company, (considered by the undersigned to be a
subsidiary of the Norfolk and Western Railway Company). and
the fountain to have been arranged and provided for by funds
contributed by certain citizens of the City and other friends
of the late Frederick J. Kimball.
Barnes' History of Boanohe Indicates the cost of the
fountain to then have amounted to approxiestely $3,O00 and
describes the late Frederfch J. Kimball to hare bee~ a
native'of Philadelphia. born in 1844, and to have occupied
high positions in the then developing railroad industry,
Among other high positions held in that industry, he bed
been President of the Shenondosh Valley Railroad, · Vice-
President end, Inter, the receiver of the Norfolk end
lestern RaJlusy Company end, still later Chairman of the
Board and President or the latter railway company, He is
described es having been a resident end s devoted friend of
the City of Roanohe after forming his connection with the
Horfolk and Bestern Railmsy Company. Klwbsll Avenue and the
Kimball ·rea of northeast Roanoke were doubtless named for
In June 1966, and the City needing to widen Shenandoah
Avenue Jato the 0.36 acre parcel of land aboveeentioned,
Resolution No. 17084 of the Council gave approval to the
removal of the public fountain loc·ted on the land and
directed that it *be kept and preserved in order that the
suns be relocated in some other appropriate place in the
City to be design·ted by this Council.'
Conceding that suggestions go beyond the purview of the
matter referred to the undersigned, nevertheless, it occurs
to the undersigned that it might be highly appropriate that
now or at some future date arrangements be nad& to renovate
and relocate the Frederick J. Kimball memorial fountain in
or near the Kimball Urban Renewal Project now under develop-
ment by the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Autho-
rity, in the Transportation Center area of Masena Park or in
some similar area of the City bearing relationship to the per-
son memorialized or to the industry to which he was so
closely attached.
Respectfully,
S/ J. N. Kincanon
Dr. Taylor moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Garland.
The City Manager pointed out that Council needs to make · decision as
to whether or not it will or will not donate the fountain to the SPCA.
Mr. Garland suggested that Council confer with the Roanoke Historical
erected which would be in keeping with the history of the City of Roanoke.
Mr. Nubard offered a substitute motion that Council reverse its deci-
sion of February 25, 1973, that the Frederick J. Kimball Memorial Fountain be
donated to the Roanoke Society for the Prevention Of Cruelty to Animals and that
the City Manager be requested to report to Council with his recommendations as to
by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
INTEGRATION-SEGREGATION: Mr. Hampton W. Thomas, Chairman of the Com-
munity Relations Committee, submitted · written report re.questing a joint meeting
with Co·ncil to review the activities of the Community Relations Committee for
direction of the Committee.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council meet with the Community Relatieus Committee
at 7;30 p.m., Mednesday, March 28, 1973, in the Executive Session Conference Room
of the City Council Chamber. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously
adopted.
GARBAGS REMOVAL: The Landfill Committee submitted the following report
in connection with an agreeaent between the City of Salem, the Town of Vlnton,
the County of Roanoke end the City or Roanoke for the acquisition of real and
personal property for the operation of a regional sanitary landfill and to
establish a Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Maste Disposal Hoard for the purpose
of administering and operating a sanitary landfill as a Joint and cooperative
undertaking and recommending that Council approve this agreement:
"March 50 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Landfill Agreement
There is transmitted to the City Council for your con-
sideration and approval an agreement between the City of
Salem, the Town of Vinton, the County of Roanoke and the
City-of Roanoke for the acquisition of real and personal
property for the operation of a regional sanitary landfill
and to establish a Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Maste
Disposal Board for the purpose of administering and operat-
ing a sanitary landfill as a joint and cooperative uncer-
taking.
The committee composed of representatives of these
various governments has met on several occasions and has
agreed to submit this document to their respective govern-
ments for approval. The agreement has been revised so as to
provide what we feel are adequate safeguards to preclude any
of the municipal governments from bearing an unfair OF dis-
proportionate share of the costs and to provide adequate
protection for any 9overnment which advances money for
either engineering or operating costs in advance of the
finalization of these agreement~
It would he recommended that City Council approve this
agreement.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ James O. Trout
James O. Trout
S/ David K. Lisk
David K, Lisk
S/ Byron E. Haner
Byron E. Hamer~
Mr. Garland moved that Council approve, in general, the form of
agreement and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for prepara-
tion of the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and unani-
mously adopted.
AIRPORT: Council having referred to a committee for study, report
and recommendation bids received for the construction of a fuel service build-
ing at Roanoke Municipal (Roodrum) Airport, the committee submitted the follow-
ing report recommending that the low bid of Southwest Construction, Incor-
porated, in the amount of $20o199.00, to erect a metal building at this loca-
tion, be accepted, and further recommending that Council appropriate an addi-
tional $H,200.00 to the original appropriation of $12,000.00 to provide suffi-
cient funds for accomplishment of this project:
'March S, 1973
Nonornble Nuyor nad city Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Bids for Fuel Service Building
On Monday, February 12, 1973. bids were received und
opened before City Council for the construction of n fuel
service building ut Rounoke's Woodrum Airport. Two bids
sere received rot metal buildings uitb the bid of South-
nest Construction. Incorporated. in the amount of $20.199
being Iow and three bids were received for cinder block
construction with the bid of A. Bane Neddle Company in the
amount of $16,384 being lam.
YOUr committee has reviewed the bids in detail and
has met with the low bidder for the block building. After
thoroughly analyzing the proposals and considering the
present site for this building, as opposed to the future
of Moodrum Airport, it is the considered opinion of your
committee that instead of a cinder block building the City
would benefit by utilizing a steel prefabricated structure
which could be moved to a new location at n future date.
At such time as the City permits some orgnnizat~on to take
over base aircraft maintenance fuel service may be located
at a different site on the Airport end the City might want
to move this building to that relocation.
Predicated upon this approach it would be the recom-
mendation of the committee that the low bid of Southwest
Construction. Incorporated, in the amount of $20,199 be
accepted to erect n metal building at this location and
that all other bids be rejected. It is further recom-
mended that City Council appropriate an additional
$8,200 to the original appropriation of $12,000 to pro-
vide sufficient funds for accomplishment of this project.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
Chairman
S/ James 0. Trout
James O, Trout
S/ Marshall L. Harris
Marshall L. Harris"
Mr. Thomas ~ored that Council concur in the recommendation of the com-
mittee and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the necessary
funds:
(~20741) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~340, 'Runicipal
Airport Fund," of the 1972-73 Municipal Airport Fund Appropriation Ordinance, and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u37. page 464.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubardo Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Mebber
NAYS: None. .0. (Messrs. L~sk and Trout absent)
Mr. Hubard then offered the followimg emergency Ordinance accepting the
proposal of Southwest ~onstruction, Incorporated:
(a20742) AN ORDINANCE accepting the bid of Southwest Construction
Company, Incorporated, for the construction of n fuel service building at
Eoanohe Nunicipal (Woodrun) Airport; authorizing the proper City officials to
execute the requisite c?ntruct; rejecting certain other bids mede for said
improvements; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Dooh z37, page 464.)
Hr. Hubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion mas
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubardo Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
Webber .....................
NAYS: None O. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION. AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: Ordinance No. 20725, amending Title XV of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, by the addition of a new
chapter numbered Chapter B, Fair Housing; declaring the public policy with
respect to certain housing practices, and procedures; definin9 certain words,
terms and phrases; defining certain discriminatory housing practices contrary
to public policy; establishing certain requirements and prohibiting certain
acts and practices; establishing a Fair Housing Board and an Administrator for
said board and prescribing their authority, duties and the procedure to be
employed by each; defining the powers of the Fair Housing Board and providing
for judicial review of decisions of the Board; providing for initiation by the
Board of certain legal proceedings, for the manner in which certain notices
shall be given, and for the time within which complaints under this Ordinance
shall be decided; making the various provisions, sentences, clauses, sections
or parts hereto severable; and providing for the effective date of this Ordi-
nance; having previously been before Council for its first reading, read and
laid over, was again before the body, Dr. Taylor offering the following for its
second reading and final adoption:
(r20725) AN OROINANCE amending Title X¥ of the Code of the City of
Roanoke, 1956, as amended, by the addition of a new chapter numbered Chapter 6.
Fair Nousina; declaring the public policy with respect to certain housing
practices and procedures; defining certain words, terms and phrases; defining
certain discriminatory housing practices contrary to public policy; establishing
certain requirements and prohibiting certain acts and practices; establishing
a Fair Housing Board and an Administrator for said board and pres.cribing their
authority, duties and the procedure to be empIoyed by each; defining the
powers of the Fair Housing'Board and providing for judicial review of decisions
of the Board; providing for the manner in which certain notices shall be given,
nnd for the time within which complaints under this ordinance be decided;
making the vBFioos provisions, sentences, clauses, sentions or parts hereof
severable; and providing for the effective date of this ordinance.
(For fall text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Boob 837, page 450,)
Dr. Tailor norad the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion wes
seconded bT Mr. Hubard and adopted bi the following vote:
· AYES: Messrs. Garland. Bubard, Tailor. Thomas and Mayor
Mebber ............. " ....... 5.
NAYS: None ........ O. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
Or. Taylor then offered the following Resolution urging adoption of a
Fair Housing Ordinance by the governing bodies-of the neighboring jurisdictions:
the 9overning bodies of neighboring Jurisdictions.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~3T, page 465.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Resolution. The notion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following rote:
AyEs: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Taylor, Thomas. and Mayor
Mebber .5.
NAYS: None ..........O. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
Dr. Taylor further moved that a member of Council and the President
of the Roanoke Valley Board of Realtors be requested to hand deliver Resolution
No. 20743 along with Ordinance No. 20725 to the governing bodies of the Town of
Vinton, the City of Salem, the County of Botetourt and the County of Roanoke at
one the the regular meetings of said 9overning bodies. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
In accordance with the above motion, Mayor Mebber requested that Dr.
Taylor and the President of the Roanoke Valley Board of Realtors present Resolution
No. 20743 and Ordinance No. 20?25 to each of the affected governing bodies at one
of their regular meetings.
BUSES: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the proper
measure accepting and expressing appreciation to the City of Salem for their con-
tribution to the city*s casts of a public transportation system in the City of
Salem, he presented same; whereupon, Mr. Garland off'red the followiog Resolution:
(=20744) A RESOLUTION accepting and expressing certain appreciation
for contribution to the City*s costs of a public bus transportation system in the
City of Salem.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book =37, page 466.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded bI Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber
NAYS: None ,0, (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
POLICE DEPARTMENT-AIRPORT: Council bsvJn9 directed the City Attorney
to prepare the proper measure authorizing the employment of three additional
Airport Police for Roanoke Municipal (Moodvum) Airport, effective March 1, 1973,
he presented same. ·
In a discussion as to the classification of the additional employees
at the airport, Mr. Thomas expressed the opinion that he feels these employees
should be full fledged-police officers, that he monders if Council is not set-
ting up a double standard, that he has reservations about classifying these
employees as*airport police, that if they are classified as airport police they
will have limited training and authority and that all Council will be doing
is providing increased personnel and not increased security.
Hr. Garland offered the Resolution authorizing the employment of three
additional Airport Police for Roanoke Municipal (Moodrum) Airport, effective
March 1, 1973. The motion was seconded by Mr. Nub·rd and the following vote
was recorded:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hub·rd and Taylor ....................
NAYS: Rt. Thomas and Mayor Webber ..........................
(Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
Mayor Webber advised that four affirmative votes will be required
for adoption of the Resolution.
Mr. Garland stated that Council should wait until the next regular
meeting of the body on Monday. March 12. 1973. when all members are ~ esent
to vote on the Resolution.
The Chair advised that anyone voting with the majority could move for
a reconsideration of the matter.
Mr. Thomas Offered a substitute motion that action on the matter be
deferred until the next regular meeting of Council on Monday, March 12. 1973.
The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-GARBAGE REMOVAL: Council havin9 directed the City Attorney
to prepare the proper measure appropriating $55,000.00 to Refuse Disposal under
Section aOg, *Transfers to Capital Improvements Fund." of the 1972-73 budget,
to provide funds for certain regional landfill site studies, Mr, Garland
offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20745) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~89. *Transfers
to Capital Improvements Fund,* of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and pro-
viding for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book-~37. page 457.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adored by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hub·rd, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber 5.
NAYS: None O. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
S~REETS AND ALLEYS: Council having directed the City Attorney to pre-
of n portion of the Major,Arterial Highmay Plan for the City of Roanoke, dated
December, 1963, and approved by the Council by Resolution No, 162740 adopted
February 15, 1965, and a similar revision and amendment of the Roanoke Valley
Area Thoroughfare Plan (lgBS),dated 1969, and approved by the. Council by Resola-
tion NO. 206?8, dated January 29, 1973, he presented same.
"March 1, 1973
Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council,
Roanoke, Virginia.
Gentlemen:
You will recall that the report of the Mater Resources
Committee containing certain analyses and recommenda-
tions pertaining to the source and supply of water for
the City of Roanoke and certain other valley areas mas
received and filed by the Council on Feb?nary 26. Zhe
matter of adoption of the report and establishment of
possible guidelines mas taken under advisement by the
Cnuncil for action on March 19, 1973.
I have noted by the media and by unofficial communica-
tion from Roanoke County that the Roanoke County Hoard
of Supervisors desires to meet with the Council to
discuss the matter of water supply prior to Council*s
scheduled action on March 19, 1973.
Accordingly, I request that Mayor Webber be instructed
to arrange a meeting with the Roanoke County Board of
Supervisors at a mutually agreeable time and place prior
to March 19, if possible.
Sincerely,
S! Hampton ~. Thomas
Hampton M. Thomas,
Councilman**
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be taken under advisement until
Council meets as a Committee of the Nhole after the regular meeting on Monday,
March 15, 1973, to discuss the report of the Mater Resources Committee. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Zaylor and unanimously adopted.
HEALTH DEPARTMENT: The City Clerh reported that Mrs. Anna L. McClung,
Hiss Dorothy L, Gibboneysnd Mr, Charles N. Day have qualified as at large
members o~ the Mental Health Services Hoard ~or terms o~ three years each end-
ing December 31, 1975.
Hr, Thomas moved that the report be received and ~lled, The motion
mas seconded by Hr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
There being no ~urther business. Mayor Nebber declared the meeting
adjourned,
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
2.6
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
.Monday, March 12, 1973,
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the Coun-
cil Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, March 12, 1973, at 2.p,m** the
regular meeting hour, ulth Mayor Roy L. Webber presiding,
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, William $. flubard, David M. Lisk,
Noel C. Taylor, Hampton M. Thomas, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L. Webber ....-7.
(Dr. Taylor left the meeting at approximately 2:30 p.m.)
ABSENT: None .................................................... O.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr, Nilliam F. Clark. Assistant City Manager; Mr.
James N. Kincanon, City Attorney; Hr. H. Ben Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorney;
and Mr. A. N. Gibson, City Auditor,
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened mith a prayer by Or. Noel C. Taylor,
Member of Roanoke City Council,
MINUTES: Copies of the minutes of the regular meetin9 held on February
12. 19?3, and the regular meeting hold on February 20, 1973, havJn9 been fur-
nished each member of Council, on motion of Mr. Trout. seconded by Mr. Lisk and
unanimously adopted, the reading threrof was dispensed with and the minutes
approved as recorded.
HEARING OF CITIZENS U~ON PUBLIC MATTERS:
FIRE DEPARTMENT: Reverend Gharles T, Green, President. N.A.A.C.P.
appeared before Council and read the following prepared statement in connection
with the methods used to select the Fire Marshal to the Roanoke City Fire Depart-
ment on March 10 1973:
"On January 31, 1973, 9:00 A.M.. a visit was made to Chief
Hughson of the Fire Department by Rev. C. T. Green, Joseph
Crutch/laid, and James Nilliams. The visiting party found
Chief Hughson at his desk and the purpose of the visit was
explained by Joe Crutchfield.
The Chief admitted he had selected Roberts as Fire Marshall
for his personal knowledge and ability; his intelligence, his
tenure and because he has a thorough knomledge of the fire
dept.
The Chief was asked if an exam mas given in the past for that
position, and he replied not to his knowledge.
The Chief was asked if that procedure wasn*t against city
policies, and he replied that the exam was not practicable
in this case so the selection was left up to him, lhe Chief
also said that Don Graham had the final mord on the examina-
tion question because Dan felt that the Fire Marahal position
was so diversified that he couldn't make up an examination for
it.
The fact .that Raleigh Qaarles was intentionally omitted by the
first letter sent by the Chief to personnel in the fire depart-
ment dated December 27, 1972. was brought to the Chief*s atten-
tion. lhe Chief replied by saying that ~e discussed this nith
Quarles, and justified his actions by telling him that there are
older men in the department who are qualified for that poma- ~
tiaa,' The Chief also stated that he told Ouarles that seniority
was a major pre-requisite of promotions, Rev. Green stated to
the Chief that seniority requirements are a deviation from
the 1970 job announcement, for there is no seniority stipu-
lation.
Joe Crntchfield stated that the second letter doted January
16, 19~2, Included 9aeries and wanted to knew what prowpted
the Chief to change his quslificntion standards, The Chief
replied that npplicunta were few and he needed wore so he
wrote the second letter,
Hughsou was asked about the qualifications needed for the
position nnd he replied experience in fire codes, building
codes, etc.
Joe Crutchfield then asked ~ugbson if Roberts was qualified,
Rnghson replied by saying that wben Holt was promoted Mithout
prior experience, he really applied himself and that Holt
was his personal choice.
The fact was mentioned to Hnghson that Roberts withdrew, then
reconsidered the position because he thought he would lose
money on his outside jobs. After being questioned, the Chief
admitted that he had u* concrete knowledge of Roberts* capa-
bilities, only that he hadhelped Poole out for years and
was involved in inspections, processing cards, etc. The
Chief was then asked by Joe Crutchfield if his selection
was in any way biased, and the Chief replied that Queries
was satisfied and if Graham sees fit to set up an exam be
will take it from there.
The Chief flatly stated that as his procedure in the past,
regardless of the results of the exam. he would make the
final decision.
Chief Ilughson's method of selecting an Assistant Fire Chief
was also discussed. The Chief was asked if he had ever con-
sidered Queries for that position, and he replied that he
hadn't. ~ughson was also asked if he had talked to Holt
concerning Queries' qualifications, and he stated that he
had not and later during the visit he stated that he had.
Hughson was also asked if he had any knowled§e of Ouarles'
qualifications, capabilities, or abilities that he used
in making a fair selection, *nd he stated that he did
not give any periodic review to determine an individuals'
qualifications, and that he didn*t know how qualified ·
Queries was even though he admitted knowing Roberts' ability.
Be also admitted not knowing who was the most qualified.
After bain9 questioned, Hughson stated that he felt he would
catch flak if Queries was promoted to that position.
Dughson also stated, after being questioned, that ho didn't
have any second choice for that position, but then, after
second thoughts, he said English might be his second choice
because of his seniority.
~e justified some of his decisions by sayin9 that Ralei9h
had a cyst taken off his hand in December. and even though
he was abort of hlep because of vacationers. Raleigh did not
come to work to answer the telephone. De concluded by saying
Raleigh wasn't dedicated.
Ne implied that he might have used poor judgement or discri-
mination because of his personal involvement with Roberts.~
Hr. Trout moved that the matter be re£erred to the City Manager
investigation and report to Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and
unanimously adopted.
Mr. Llsk pointed out that in sending this matter to the City Manager,
Council is trying to find out from the administration if the policies which
have been adopted by Council have been adhered to and fulfilled.
Mr. Hubard pointed out that it is regrettable that this matter could
not have been presented to the City Manager first, then to Council, and that
this would have been a more orderly way of handlin9 the situation.
PETITIONS AND CORRUN1CATIONS:
ZONING: Mrs. F. B. Caldwell appeared before Council and presented a
communication in connection with o decision made by the Board of Zoning Appeals
to allow n ~oster homefor teenage girls st ~09 14th Street, So W** advising that
this building la located on a $0' x $0' lot, that there is no room on either
side for expansion for any purpose, that the residents of the area feel they
mere denied consideration in this matter in viem of the fact that ama of the mem-
bers of the Board of Zoning Appeals mere contacted before the meeting and they
agreed that they mere familiar mith the location in question and that it is an
undesirable location for this purpose and that it mould seem to them that the
Board of Zoning Appeals did not act in this maiter uith the responsibility mr
interest vested in them for taxpaying citizens, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas pointed out that Council has no authority to act on deci-
sions banded damn by the Board of Zoning Appeals and that the only recourse mould
be to a court of record.
Mr. Thomas then moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
JAIL: Council having previously requested that Sheriff Paul J.
Puckers report on temporary measures which he feels will bring the city jail
facilities up to liveable standards during the interim period of planning and
construction of a Regional Corrections Facility. a communication from Sheriff
Puckett advising that if the lookup is to be effectively used in the future,
major remodeling will be required and in his opinion the cost will be in the
area of $?O.000.00, that another very serious concern is the inability to control
incarcerated i~ates so ns to prevent certain aggressive inmates from abusing
other inmates while incarcerated together, that because of this serious problem,
which often involves emergency treatment of inma~s attacked and at tines
hospitalization, it is his reconmendatiofl that closed circuit television be used
so that activities within the jail can be observed at all times and that comments
by those involved can be recorded for use in the courts, that one of the most
difficult problems in operating a jail involves the health of the inma~s, that
he is experiencing great difficulty in getting doctors to accept mark in the
jail and he is currently searching for someone to take on this work due to recent
resignations'of doctors who were peFfor~in§ this service, that while it is
imperative that there be a doctor available to the jail operation, it is possible
that the workload can be reduced by follomin9 the recommendation of the Department
of ~elfare and Institutions and employing three para-medics to assist with this
work, that the Bepartment of Welfare and Institutions mill pay their share of the
salaries of these meu and he recommends that this action be taken immediately,
was before Council.
Hr. Garland stated the opinion that he cannot, in good conscience,
continue to overlook the present conditions in the Intake Center.
Atthis point, Dr. Taylor left the meeting.
Mr. Ltsk questioned the possibility of securing LKAA funds for the
closed circuit television.
Mr. Trout moved that the City Manager be requested to furnish
Conncil with O cost estimate for necessary improvements to the lockup facility
and that the City. Manager also be requested to check into the possibility of
obtaining LEAA funds for the closed circuit television. The motion.was seconded
by Mr. Thomas.
Mr. Hubard pointed out that the city bas on active Jail Study Committee
and that he feels it would be most appropriate to refer this matter to that
committee.
Mr. Hubard then offered a substitute motion that the matter of recon-
struction of the Intake Center and the matter of closed circuit television he
referred to the City of Roanoke Jail Study Committee for study, report and
recommendation to Council. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously
adopted.
Mr. Thomas moved that the matter of para-medics to be used in the
jail facility be referred to the City Manager and the City Attorney for study,
report and recommendation to Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and
unanimously adopted.
BUILDINGS-STREETS AND ALLEYS: A communication from ¥osbeck Vosbeck
Kendrick Rediuger, Architects and Engineers, representing Monterey Corporation,
owner of the Patrick Unary Building, respectfully requesting a ruling from
Roanoke City Council for approval of air rights over a public alley located to
the north of the Patrick Henry Building on Jefferson Street and between that
building and the Coulter Building, advising that the Patrick Henry Building is
being remodeled for apartment use and due to the change in occupancy, the
Building Commissioner requires au additional exit stairway, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the matter be referred to the City Planning
Commission for study, report and recommendation toCouncil. The motion was
seconded by Rr. Trout and unanimously adopted,
BUSES: A communication from Mrs. Nina R. Williamson, Executive
Secretary, Rotetourt County Chamber of Commerce, transmitting a check in the
amount Of $110.00 which is the share of Botetaurt County Of transportation
subsidy as per Resolution No. 20575 of Roanoke City Council, was before the
body.
Rro Barland moved that the City Attorney be directed to prepare the
proper measure of appreciation to the Hotetourt County Chamber of Commerce.
,The motion was seconded by Rt. Trout and unanimously adopted.
REGISTRAR-ELECTIONS: Council haven9 requested that the *Electoral
Board inspect the precinct located at the former Harrison Elementary School
Building and make recommendations with regard to necessary adjustments which
advising that they will no longer use this room but instead will use a room
adjacent to that room which is more attractive and better lighted, was before
Mr. Trout moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion mas seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
~30
STREET'LICHYS-HOUSIN6-SLUW CLEARANCE: Copy of a communication from
the Appalachian Pouer Company transmitting a list of street lights installed and/or
removed daring the month of February, 1973, mas before Council,
Mr, Trout moved.that the communication and list be received and filed,
The motion mas seconded by Mr, Garland and unanimously adopted,
With reference to utility lines, Wt, Lisk moved that the City manager
be requested to correspond with the Executive Director of the City of Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority, to clarify the position of the City of
Roanoke pertaining to the matter of underground utility lines and particularly
as to mhere the city stands with regard to the Kimball Urban Renewal Area. The
motion was seconded by Wt. Trout end unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFXCERS:
PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOyEES-TRAFFIC ENGINEERING AND COMMUNICATIONS DEPART-
MENT: The Assistant City Manager submitted the following report of.the City
Manager recommending that $3.510.00 be transferred from Personal Services under
Section ~S6, "Public Rorks," to Personal Services under Section #57. "Traffic
Engineering and Communications," of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for the
employment of three additional Oispatcher X positions:
'March 12. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, ¥irginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Additional Dispatcher Personnel
With the establishment of the 1971-72 budget City
Council authorized the hirin9 of two Dispatcher I's,
twelve Dispatcher ll's and five Lead Dispatchers to
operate the five communication consoles and the Centrex
telephone system housed in the communications center of the
Municipal Building. The two Dispatcher l's are primarily.
Centrex operators and work a 40-hour seek between the hours
of 6 a.m. and ? p.m., Monday through Friday, on astaggered
shift arrangement. These operators also work rest breaks
and meal breaks for the communications dispatchers located
in the communications center. Dispatcher l*s are essentially
in training to eventually bqcome Dispatcher lI's and con-
sequently are called on to operate communications consoles
on a limited basis during vacations, sick leave absences and
holidays of the other dispatchers.
There are five main communications consoles. Thes~
positions are designated two for police; ~nd one position,
fire; and one position, combination fire and rescue; with the
fifth position, being that of a supervisor. The two police
positions are mutually cross-supporting and this also
applies to the fire and rescue positions. The supervisory
position can assist any of the aforementioned positions.
With the total 17 dispatchers, there is the equivalent
of 680 work hours per week available to qperate these five
consoles. This is exclusive of vacation, holiday and sick
days. With the police, fire and rescue communications con-
soles being manned around the clock on a R4-hour basis, this
consumes 6?2 hours of that total bSO available. This tends
to cut the time very thin as each dispatcher is authorized
14 days vacation, 8 paid holidays, and some allowance must
be made for occasional illness. As a result of this short
manning it has been necessary for the.Police Department to
augment the police consoles during the first years operation.
With the impending transfer of the burglar and fire alarm
panels to the new communication center, it would be hoped
that the police dispatchers would be relieved to return to
police duties. To do this it will be necessary to autho-
rize and fill three additional dispatcher positions.
It mould be recommended that City Council by budget ·
ordinance authorize three additional Dispatcher I posi-
tions. Mltb the addition
positions, the deficiency in dispatcher time presently
requiring the utilization of police officers as dispatchers
will be removed and will also permit the proper manning of
all of the consoles, as mell as providing enough time to
permit each dispatcher to receive training each year to keep
abreast of Job requirements,
It would be recommended that City Council authorize ·
these positions effective April 1o and to do so will require
an appropriation of $3,S10.00 to Account No. SY - 101.
Funds are available for transfer from the Public Morks
headquarters budget No, 56 - IO1 due to a vacancy in that.
office,
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Byron K, Hamer
Byron E, Haner
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and Offered-the following emergency Ordinance providing for the
necessary transfers:
(n20746) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~56. "Public
Works** and Section #57, "Traffic Engineering and Communications." of the 1972-
73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providin9 for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book z37, page 46B.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption Of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Ur. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber ......................
NAYS: None ........... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
Mr. Thomas then offered the following Resolution autborizin9 the
employment of the three additional Communications DEspatcher I*s in the Com-
munications Center of the Municipal Building, effective April 1, 1973:
(#20747) A RESOLUTION authorizing the employment of three (3)
additional Communications Dispatcher I's (Code 1052) in the Communications
Center of the Municipal Building, effective Aprill, 1973.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book ~37. page 468.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of tbe Resolution.. The notion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by tbe following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard. Lisk, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................
NAYS: None ..... ----0. (Dr. Taylorubsent)
BUDGET-CORMONWEALTH'S ATTORNE¥: The Assistant City Dsnager submitted
a written report of the City Manager transmittin9 a request of the Commonwealth'!
Attorney that $300.00 Be translerred from Fees for Professional and Special Ser-
vices to Printing and Office Supplies under Section m220 "Commonwealth's
Attorney," of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds to cover the current deficit
and to provide funds for the remainder of the fiscal year.
32
Mr, Garland moved that Council concur in the request of the Common-
mealth's Attorney and offered the follomlng emergency Ordinance providing for
the necessary transfer:
(m20748) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section =22, "Common-
uealth*s Attorney,= of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for
an emergency.
(For full text o( Ordinahce, see Ordinance Hook ua?, page 469.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the.Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................
NAYS: None .......... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
BUDGET-CITY ENGINEER: The Assistant City Manager submitted the follow-
ing report of the City Manager recommending that $1,O00.OO be appropriated to
Overtime under Section aso, *Street Construction and Repair** Of the 1972-73
budget, to provide necessary overtime funds in the Street Division of the
public Works Department:
*March 12, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Street Department Budget - Overtime
Early in the fiscal year employees of the Street Division
of the City*s Department of Public.Marks engaged in weed cut-
ting and other cleanup of debris on certain private proper-
ties throughout the City wherein the Health Department had
been able to obtain compliance from property owners Jn the
maintenance and care of their property. This work was
generally limited to properties for which the ownership
could not be determined oF for which the ability to seek
cooperation through other legal means did not seem practi-
cal. Since City forces also had their own regular assign-
ments with which to heap abreast, this private property
the arrival of cold weather in the fall, which has an
It had ~een hoped that the Street Division Overtime
Account had not been so depleted by the abovedescribed mark
that it would be sufficient for the remainder of the current
necessary in the Street Division that it now becomes nec-
essary to approach City Council for supplemental appropria-
tions. It can also be anticipated that during.the remainder
slams when Street Division personnel.will be required to
It is recommended that th~ sum ~f $1.000 bo appro-
priated to Account 59 - 114 for necessary overtime in the
Street Division of the Department of Public Works.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
City Manager"
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation.of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
necessary funds:
(a20749) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section asa, 'Street
Construction and Repair°# of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing
for an emergency.
(For full text.of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n57, page.469.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Link and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messr$, Garland, Hubard. Link, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ........................ b.
NAYS: None .......... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
BUDGET-PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS-(iARBACE REMOVAL: The Assistant City
Manager submitted the following report of the City Manager recommending that
$15,000.00 be transferred from Personal Services to Rentals under Section
n69, "Sanitation Department," of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds to permit
the rental of necessary equipment to proceed with site preparation work at the
Vinton landfill:
"March 12, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, ¥irginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Landfill Areas
The current projected time schedule for completion of
the landfill activities at Fallon Park is approximately
March 17. This date is predicated upon satisfactory weather
conditions and satisfactory equipment operation at this site.
It would be reiterated that this ~ould be the completion
of the landfill activities and would not necessarily mean
the date for pull out of the equipment. Several pieces of
equipment presently being used for landfill purposes ~ould
need remain at this location for some additional time to
complete the shaping, grading and landscaping activities
at this site.
In order for the City to proceed with the site prepara-
tion at the Vinton landfill He would need to rent additional
equipment. This site preparation at the new facility should
be carried on consecutively with the completion of the land-
fill operations at Fallon .Park. Unfortunately, the Sanita-
tion Department budget for this fiscal year did not anticipate
the necessity of rental equipment on this s~ope and insuffi-
cient fonds exist for this purpose.
It would be recommended that City Council approve the
transfer of $15,000 from Sanitation Account bg-lOl, Per-
sonal Services, to Sanitation Account 69-245, Rentals, to
permit the rental of the necessary equipment to proceed
math site preparation work at the ¥inton landfill. It
~ould be recommended that the City Council by budgqt.ordi-
hence approve the transfer of these funds between these
accounts that the City may expeditiously proceed with the
site preparation work at the Vinton landfill.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E, Hamer
City Manager~
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation.of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance providing for the recommended
transfer:
(n20?SO} AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section a69, 'Sanitation
Division," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text Of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u37, page 470.}
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion wus seconded
by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk. Thomas, Trout and. Mayor
Mebber ..................... 6.
NAYS: None ......... O. (Or. Taylor absent)
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Council having referred to the City Manager for
study, report and recommendation a request of Harman's Machine Shop for the
right to use a space approximately four feet by eighteen feet in an unopened
paper alley at the rear of premises located at 210 Fourth Street, S. M.,.for the
purpose of placing propane tanks to be used for cleaning vats and possibly other
operations, the Assistant City Manager submitted the following report of the City
at the nominal consideration of $1u. O0 with the understanding that prior to the
expiration of that time action ~ill be initiated to pernanently and legally
abandon the alley right of way:
"March 12, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Request for Encroachment -
Harman*s Machine Shop, Inc.
At your meeting on Monday, February 26. 1973, Council
received a communication from Mr. John D. Copenhaver,
lng the right to use a space approximately 4 feet by 16
feet in an unopened alley right Of way at the rear of
premises located at 210 Fourth Street, S. ~. This space is
needed for the purpose of placing propane tanks used in the
machine shop operations, but recommended by representatives
of the City*s Building Commlssioner*s office to be located
outside of the building structure. This matter was referred
to the City Manager*s office for study, report and recommenda-
tion to Council.
Me have visited the site and also discussed the matter
with Mr. Copenhaver. It would appear preferable to ultimately
legally close this alley tight of way, which is presently
unopen to use and of no need to the City of Roanoke. However,
Mr. Copenhaver has expressed a desire on the part of his client
for the legal proceedings of a right of way abandonment. Mr.
Harman will moon be entering the hospital and would like
to resolve this matter if at all possible prior to April
This office is agreeable to recommending that City
Council grant an encroachment to Harman*s Machine Shop, Inc.,
of the requested 4 feet by 16 feet for a period of one
year at the nominal sum of $10, with the understanding that
prior to the expiration of that time action would be ini-
tiated to permanently and legally abandon the alley.right
of way. It is felt that this will enable the expeditious
resolving of Mr. Harman's present situation while aiming
toward a more loug-range solution.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager"
In this connection, the City Attorney called attention to a procedure
nhich is currently under study with regard to a schedule of.fees to be charged
by the City for the granting of encroachments.
Rt. J. H. Elletto Attorney, representing Mr. Harman. appeared before
Council and advised that Mr. Harman is unable to operate his business until these
propane tanks are installed.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the report of the City
Ranager and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for preparation
of the proper measure. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously
adopted.
Mr. Thomas further moved that the matter of fees to be charged by
the City of Roanoke for granting encroachments be referred to the City Ranager
and the City Attorney for report to Council nhen their study of the matter is
complete. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
BUILDINGS-FlEE DEPARTMENT: Council having referred to the City
Manaoer for further study and report a report in connection ui~h a communication
from Mr. Robert E~ Mullen, Jr., dealin9 ~ith the requirement for installation
of sprinkler systems in high rise buildings, advising that it would seem desir-
able to defer action on this subject until it is known what provisions for
sprinkler systems in high rise buildings will be required by the new state
buildin9 code. the Assistant City Manager submitted the following report of the
City Manager in connection with reinstituting a previous policy with respect to
the installation of sprinkler systems in high rise buildings, submittin9 a
revised policy prepared by Mr. L. G. Leftwich. Commissioner of Buildings, and
reviewed and approved by Chief A. K. Bughson and Mr. Robert E. Mullen. Jr..
and recommending that Council adopt this proposed change:
"March 12, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On'December 18, 1972, Mr. Robert Mullee appeared before
City COuncil and requested consideration be given to the City
of Roanoke reinstituting a previous policy with respect to
the installation of sprinkler systems in high rise buildings.
On January 1S, 1973, the City Manager submitted a report to
City Council recommending a continuation of the existing
policy; such report was referred back to the City Manager
for further study and reconsideration.
There is suboitted for City Council's consideration a
revised policy prepared by Mr. L. G. Leftmich, Commissioner
of Buildings, and reviewed and approved by Chief A. K.
Hughson and.Mr. Robert Mullen. The revised policy real-
.firms the definition of high rise building as meaning a
building.having any floor used for human occupancylocated
more than g0 feet in height above the highest level of fire
department vehicle access. Height as applied to high rise
buildings means a vertical distance from grade to the
highest finished floor area. Specifically the revisions
apply to tuo categories of areas:
1. Restaurants and Assembly Occupancy
Ybere a floor area or portion thereof or a high rise
building is used or intended to bo used rot a restaurant
or place of assembly the entire floor area shall.be
or that area of restaurant or assembly area shall be
separated £rom the other occupancies by flnora, walls
and ceilings, having not less than a two-hour fire
rating. The area used for a restaurant or place of
assembly shall be protected with an approved automatic
sprinkler system.
2. Residential Occupancy
All areas above qO feet in height used for residential
occupancy shall be protected by an approred automatic
sprinkler system o£ comply math the following provi-
sions: All exit stairways sholl be constructed to
comply with requirements for a snokeproof tower as
set forth in the lqTO edition of the Life Safety Code
promulgated and as published by the National Fire Pro-
tection Association.
Gentlemen of Council, I would repeat that these revi-
sions have been approved by Fire Chief Hugbson and Mr. Robert
Mullah and the revision would appear to provide satisfactory
protection to high rise buildings proposed for construction.
It would be recommended that City Council adopt this
change.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Oyron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager"
Mr. Robert E. Mullah, Jr.. appeared before Council and expressed the
opinion that if Council adopts these two recommended changes, it is a step in
the right direction and that be hopes Council will initiate this action as soon
as possible.
Fire Chief A. K. Hughson appeared before Council and advised that he
has some questions .about the second recommendation contained in the report of the
City Manager.
Mr. Thomas pointed out that since it appears that Chief Hu§hson has
some question about the second recommendation in the report, it might be well
to refer the report back to the City Manager for the purpose of meeting with Chief
Rughsen and Mr. Mullah and to submit a further report to Council by the next
regular meeting of the body on Monday, March lg, 1973. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
SCHOOLS-BUSES: The Assistant City Manager submitted the following report
of the City Manager transmitting a proposed contract agreement between the City
of Roanoke and Wilbur Smith and Associates for their anticipated services in con-
nection with studyin9 the possibilities and alternatives of public and school
transportation, the practicability of merging the two systems and various other
aspects o£ the local bus transportation situation and recommending that this con-
tract agreement be executed at the earliest possible date if it is the desire of
Council to proceed with such a study:
'Hatch 12, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Consultant Survey - Schools/Public flus System
At the City Council meeting on Monday, February 12, 1973.
a report mos ncbmitted by CouncJl°s Transportation Committee
recomnendJu9 that the consulting firm of lllbur Smith and
Associates be engaged to study the possibilities and alter-
natives of public and school transpor~tion, the practi-
cality of merging the two systems, and various other aspects
of the local bus transportation situation. Me are now in
receipt of a proposed contract agreement betmeen the City
and Milbur Smith and Associates for their anticipated ser-
vices.
Certain services are anticipated to be provided by
City personnel in the collection of data needed for the
study, which thereby reduces the consultant*s fee to the
sum of $33°000. The major elements of the consultants study
will include an assessment and evaluation of the present
public transit company, an evaluation and appraisal of the
coupany*s assets, consideration of alternatives for organi-
zation and management, an analysis nf ridership, feasibility
of consolidation of public transit mith school bus service,
cost estimates and. financial arrangements for the various
alternatives considered. Wilbur Smith has indicated an
ability to commence work within two weeks after notice to
proceed and will submit a preliminary draft report to the
City for review within five months from the beginniug
date.
Copy Of the proposed cootract agreement has been fur-
nished to the City Attorney for his assistance in prepar-
ing appropriate documents for Council's consideration;
copies of the contract agreement are attached to this
report for City Council*s information and review. If
it still be City Council's desire tn proceed with such
a study, it is recommended that this contract agreement
with Wilbur Smith and Associates be authorized at the
earliest possible date.
Respectfully submitted.
$/ Byrou E. Hailer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager"
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the report Of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance authorizing the employ-
ment of the firm of Wilbur Smith and Associates for certain special professional
consulting services in the preparation of a Roanoke Regional Area Technical
Transit Study and report thereon, upon certain terns and conditions, at a cost
to the City of Roanoke of $33.000.00:
(g20?S1) AN ORDINANCE authorizing employment of certain special
professional consulting services in the preparation of a Roanoke Regional Area
Technical Transit Study and report thereon, upon certain terms and conditions,
at a cost to the City of $33,000.00; and providin9 for an emer§cncy.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book a37. page 471.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk. Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber
NAYS: None -0. (Dr. Taylor absent)
CITY EMPLOYEES-PAY PLAN*CLERK OF THE COURTS: The City Manager sub-
mitted the follouing report recommending that Council reinstitute the personnel
in the Office of the Clerk Of trw Courts to the city Classification and Pny Plan
with the full understanding that nt such time as these employees enter into the
Classification and Pay Plan that they will not only benefit from the increase in
salary but they mill also secure the reasonable benefits of the city holidays,
vacation, sick leave, etc.. as may be compatible with the operations of the
Courts:
*March 12, 1~73
Ifonorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Classification of Clerks of Courts
By letter dated June 5, 1972, Clerk of Court Molter R.
Carter. Jr., requested that the City Council ask the City
Personnel Department to mate a study of the Clerk of Courts
personnel positions and that that department be reincluded
in the City's Classification and Pay Plan. Be went on to
request that this action be retroactive to July 1. 1972. The
City Council referred this matter to the City Manager*s office
for study and response.
~ro Donald W. Graham and Mr. Carter have met on seyeral
occasions and the Personnel Department has prepared job
description sheets and has classified the positions in the
Clerk of Courts' office as to range, step and salary. All
differences of opinion have been resolved; and at this time,
I submit to Citl Council a listln§ of the personnel of the
Clerk of Courts' office, showing the recommended classifica-
tion range and step and salary, all of which was jointly
agreed to by the Clerk of Courts and the City admi~stration,
The matter with respect to the retroactive reclassifi-
cation of these positions to July 1, 1972, and the retro-
active pay would be a decision that only City Council could
make. I would report that there appears to be sufficient
funds within the Clerk of Courts Personnel Account to
obviate the necessity of any additional appropriation for
this fiscal year.
There is the question as to what affect the action of
the 1973 Legislature to place the courts under the State
might have with respect to these classifications. This
office has asked the City Attorney to research this pro-
blem.
It would be recommended that City Council by ordinance
reinstitute the personnel of the Clerk of Courts' office to
the Classification and Pay Plan with the full understanding
that at such time as these employees enter into the classi-
fication and Pay Plan they would not only benefit from the
increase in salary but they would also secure the reasonable
benefits of the CiaI holidays, vacation, sick leave, etc.,
as may be compatible with the operation of the Courts.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron i. Honer
City Manager*
Mr. List moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for p~eparation of
the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and una'nicously adopted.
In this connection, Mr. Walker R. Carter. Jr..' Clerk of the Courts. appear
ed before Council and requested that the change be made retroactive to July 1,
1972.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the request of Mr. Carter that
the change he made retroactive to July 1, 1972. The motion mas seconded by
Thomas and unanimously adopted.
PAY PLANoCITY EMPLOYEES-CITy ATTORNEY: The Assistant City Manager
submitted the follouing report of the City Manager in connection with a salary
adjustment for an employee in the City Attorney's Office° advising that through
an oversight this employee mas not granted her step increase at the appropriate
time mhich has resulted in a loss of income since September 1, 1970. of
$4R0.00 and recommending that Council authorize payment of the $400.00 necessary
to corer the salary othermise due:
'March 7. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia.
Gentlemen:
Subject: Budget - City Attorney's Office
A situation has been brought to our attention with
respect to a salary adjustment for an employee in the
City Attorney's office, mhich will require City Council's
approval.
Mrs. Margaret T. Cox mas employed in the City Attor-
ney"s office on February 23, 1970. as a Clerk-Stenographer
I11, having transferred from the Auditor*s office where she
mas employed as a Clerk-Typist I1. The six-month proba-
tionary period on this new position expired September 1,
1970. It is provided in the City's Classification and Pay
Plan that upon satisfactory completion Of the six-month
probationary period, employees are entitled to a one-
step or 5 percent increase. Through oversight, Mrs. Cox
was not granted her step increase at the appropriate time
which has resulted in a loss of income since that tine of
approximately $4§0. Correction of this administrative
error requires the approval of City Council because it
affects expenditures over several budget periods. Due to
other personnel changes within the City Attorney*s office,
sufficient funds are available within the personal services
account Of that department to cover this adjustment, if
approved* and no additional appropriation will be neces-
sary.
It is recommended that City Council by appropriate
action authorize payment to Mrs. Cox of the $460 necessary
to cover the salary otherwise due.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Bauer
Byron E. Boner
City Manager"
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution:
(~20752) A RESOLUTXON authorizing payment of a salary adjustment to
an employee of the City under the Cityts present and former Classification and
Pay Plans.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book n37, page 472.)
Mr. TrOut moved the adoption of the Resolution. The notion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Huhard, Lisk. Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Nebber
NAYS: None ......... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
SE~ERS AND SIORM DRAINS: The Assistant City Manager submitted a mritten
report of the City Manager recommending that Council approve the proposed changes
in the siding agreement with the Norfolk nnd Western Railway Company ns described
in the following memorandum from Mr. Samuel H. McGhee, 1II, City Engineer, under
date of March 6, 1973:
"March 12, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanohe, Virginia
Subject: Sewage Treatment Plant -
Railroad Siding Agreement
City Cooncil has previously adopted certain ordinances
with respect to an agreement with the Norfolk and Western
Railway Company for a railway siding to be constructed for
the purpose of delivering chemicals to be used in the opera-
tion of the City*s Mater Pollution Control Plant. There is
a report attached from the City Engineer with date of March
5, 1973o concerning arrangements that have been made to
reduce the costs for construction of this railway siding
as provided by the previous ordinances. It is considered
that Mr. WcGhee*s report is thoroughly explanatory of the
subject; however, if there be further questions from Council
we would be pleased to discuss the subject at your upcoming
meeting.
*DATE: March 5, 1973
TO: Mr. Hamer
FROM: Mr. McChee ~[ Sam Ii. McGhee, 111
SUBJECT: Sewage Treatment Plant - Railroad Siding
You will recall that it is necessary to construct
a railroad siding on the property of Wells Furni-
ture Company for the purpose of unloading chemicals,
primarily waste pickle liquor, for use at the Sew-
age Treatment Plant.
We have previously worked out a siding agreement
with the Norfolk and lestern Railway Company, which
agreement provided for the Rialroad to construct
the entire siding. Our initial cost, for the Rail-
road to do the work, was estimated at $20,500.
This agreement was approved by City Council by
Ordinance No. 20325 on June 19. 1972. The agree-
ment was subsequently executed.
Following the execution of the above agreement, it
was necessary that an additional agreement be
executed with the Norfolk and Western Railway con-
cerning close clearances in the vicinity of the
unloading facilities along the siding. This agree-
meat was approved by City Council Ordinance No.
20510 on October 50, 1972, and that agreement was
also executed.
In the meantime, at the suggestion of representa-
tives of the Norfolk and Western Railway Company,
we contacted several private contractors who con-
struct railroad sidings to the specifications of
the Norfolk and Western Railway. We have been
advised by these private contractors that they can
accomplish the work within the City*s easement
area at costs less than those quoted by the Norfolk
and Western Railway.
ment has been prepared by the Norfolk and Western
Railway, which agreement incorporated the terms of.
the previous two agreements which have been adopted
concerning this siding. This agreement also takes
into account the fact that the City mould have con-
structed that section of the siding located within
the City*s easement and that the City wouldpay the
Railway for the engineering work performed by the
Railway in designing that portion of the siding.
Thesnme refund provisions nra applicable in this
agreement ns were applicable in the original
agreement. This agreement reduces the City*s
deposit from $20,500 to $9,500.
It ia recommended that City Council be requested to
approve this revised agreement,
Please let me know if I can provide any additional
information or assistance**
It is recommended that City Council approve the proposed
changes in the siding agreement with the Norfolh and Mest-
ern Railway Company as described in the report from the
City Engineer.
Respectfully submitted,
S! Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Haner
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance ~uthorizing the
proper city officials to execute a supplemental written siding agreement with
the Horfolk and Nestern Railway Company relating to the construction and
operation of unloading facilities for the Sewage Treatment Plant:
(=20?55) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the proper City officials to
execute a supplemental mritten siding agreement with the Norfolk and ~estero
Railway Company relating to the construction and operation of unloading
facilities for the City's Sewage Treatment Plant; and providing for an emer-
gency.
(For £utl text of Ordinaoce, see Ordinance Book =37, page 473.)
Mr. Thomas moved the odoptioo of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Rr. LisE and adopted by the following vote:
AVES: Messrso Harland, Hubard. Lisk. Thomas and
Hayor ~ebber ..................
NAYS: Nooe ...........Oo (Mr. Trout not voting) (Or. TayIor absent)
JUVENILE DETENTION HOME: The City Manager submitted the following
report in connection with agreements with several local governing bodies through.
out Southwest Virginia for use of the facilities at the Juvenile Detention
Home at Coyner Springs, transmitting a proposed agreement which the city could
offer to each of the affected governing bodies whereby their costs for use of
the Juvenile Detention Home would be based upon an amount equal to that set by
the State Department of Melfare and Institutions for detention and board of
state wards at the IIome and recommending that Council officially offer this
agreement to each of the several governing bodies for detention and boarding
of juveniles from their area under the terms and provisions included therein:
"March 12, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Roanoke Juvenile Detention Home
Since 1955 the City has had agreements with several
local governing bodies throoghout nearby Southwest Virginia
for use of the facilities st the City*s Juvenile Detention
Home st Coyner Springs. Ail of those agreements provide
for o payment to the City or $2 per day for each Juvenile so
committed from that locality. For the last couple of years
there bas been consideration to amending the existing agree-
ments so as to more thoroughly reflect the cost to the City
for operation of its Juvenile Detention facilities. This
subject should not be confused uith other efforts, both
recent and past, to consider expansion Of the Detention
IIome and its use by other than the original Jurisdictions
with mbich the City has agreement.
For Council*s consideration there is attached o pro-
posed agreement which the City could offer to each of the
affected governing bodies whereby their cost for use of
the Roanoke Juvenile Detention Home would be based upon an
amount equal to that set by the State Department of Melfare
and Institutions for detention and board of State Wards at
the Home. For the current year this amount is $5°48 and
mould be subject to adjustment each year in keeping with the
change in expenses at the Home, The governmental entities
which now have such agreement with the City of Roanoke
include Dotetourt County, Henry and Patrick Counties and the
City of Martinsville, the City of Salem, Franklin County,
Bedford County and Roanoke County. Certain of these govern-
meats use the Roanoke facilities seldom if at nil; however,
they have expressed a desire to continue their relationship
math Roanoke in this regard and are acceptable to the
proposed agreement.
It is recommended that City Council officially offer
this agreement to each of the several governing bodies
abovenentioned for detention and boarding of juveniles
from their area under the terms and provisions included
therein. If there are questions on this matter, me will
be pleased to discuss this subject with Council at tis
coming meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron R. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
· City Manager"
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for prepara-
tion of the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously
adopted.
LICENSES: The City Manager submitted the following report in connec-
tion with the failure of some city residents to purchase the annual automobile
decal, advising that this matter has been discussed in detail with the Police
Department and the Courts and aa a result of these discussioaao it CaD be
reported that in the future a more coecentrated effort eill be made towards
apprehending and prosecuting violators of the City Decal Ordioance.
Rt. Garlaed moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
MAYEB DEPARTMENT-SALE OF PROPERTY: Council having adopted a Resolution
concurring in the recommendation of the Couucil*a Real Estate Committee that
there be effected the exchange of certain lands owned by the City of Roanoke and
the Assistant CityManager submitted the following report of the City Manager
'March 9, 1973
Bonorsble Mayor and City Council
Roanohe, Virginia
Gentlemen:
You have received o proposed ordinance nnd sgreement
for the exchange of certain land belonging to the City in
the vicinity of Carvins Core Filter Plant for certoin land in
the same vicinity belonging, or presently under option, to
Major Motor Inns,' Incorporated subject to certain terms and
conditions. This agreement has the conditions proposed and
approved by your Real Estate Committee as per their report
dated February 5, 1973, to Council and as per Resolution
20722, dated February 20, 1973.
Considering the easement the City mill receive, the land
exchange is approximately equal. Major Motor Inns, Incor-
porated is to construct a mater pumping station and pay the
first $10,000.00 of that construction, construct a water
line from the discharge of the pumpin9 station and cause
to be constructed a sanitary se~er line to their remaining
property borderin9 Carvins Creek immediately North of
Interstate BI. 7he City mill construct the low pressure
or suction line to the pumping station and pay any cost for
the construction of the pumping station that exceeds
$10,000.00. The estimated cost of the suction line is
$10,000.00. and the estimated cost of the pumping station
is also $10,000.00. Upon completion, all water facilities
will belong to the City. No contract for the construction
of the pumping station can be executed prior to approval
by this office.
Funds areavailable in the Mater Department budget for
this expenditure without additional appropriatioo.
I recommend approval of the agreement for real estate
traosfec ned water facility coustructioo.
Respectfully submitted,
S! Byron £. Naner
Byron E. HaMer, City Manager"
Mr. Link moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(~20754) AN ORDINANCE authorizing tbs proper City officials to
enter into agreement and to execute, seal. attest and acknowledge a deed of
exchange of certain properties between Major Rotor Inns. Incorporated. and
Messrs. Walter F. Puff and H. M. Clower, so as to provide for the development
of certain property situate in Roanoke County. to the east of the City's Carvins
Cove Mater Filtration Plant; to provide for the construction by said corpora-
tion or persons of a pumping station and certain water distribution lines to
serve their property; {o provide for the City*s sale of surplus water to said
corporation or persons following development of suchproperty; and to provide
for the exchange of certain lands betmeen the City and said corporation or
persons, upon certain terms and conditions.
MHEREAS, the Council*s Real Estate Committee has recommended, by
written report of February 5, 1973, to the Council the exchange of certain
Citl-omned land and land omned or under option to purchase by Major Motor Inns.
Incorporated. Messrs. Walter F. Puff and H. M. Clower, situate in Roanoke
County, adjacent to the City's Carvins Cove Mater Filtration Plant; in which
recommendation the Council concurred by adoption of Resolution No. 20?22 on
February 20, 1973; and
WHEREAS. a form of written agreement, a copy of which is on file Jn the
Office of the City Clerh. has been prepared which, when entered into by the
parties thereto, would provide for the orderly exchange of said lands, es nell
ns certain ancillary matters regarding the construction of a pueping station,
water distribution and related facilities, provision of water to the above named
corporation oF persons, which agreement has been recommended by the City Manager
for Council*s approval.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City'of Roan.he that
the City Manager be and is hereby authorized and directed, for and on behalf of
the City, to execute a certain written~agreement, a copy of which is on file in
the Office of the City Clerh, with Major Motor Inns, Incorporated, and Messrs.
Walter Fo Puff and H. M. Clower, the terms of which have been reviewed by and are
hereby APPROVED by the Council; such agreement providing, j~t?r alia, generally,
for the exchange of certain lands and interests in lands between the City and
said corporation and persons, said lands being situate to the east of the City's
Carvins Cove Mater Filtration Plant in Roanoke County. providing for the con-
struction of a pumping station on City=owned property, upon City specifications,
by said private persons at a cost not exceeding $10,000.00 without prior approval
by the Council. and certain other water distribution facilities by said private
persons; and providing for the sale of surplus water by the City following
development of said private persons' property.
BE IT FURTRER ORDAINED that, upon delivery of a good and sufficient
deed of conveyance, approved as to form and execution by the City Attorney. con-
veying to the City by Major Notor Inns. Incorporated, and Messrs. Molter F. Puff
and H. M. Clower fee simple, unencumbered, title to a certain 0.866 acre parcel
Of land described in said agreement, and an easement for access in lands adjacent
to Carvins Creek, accompanied by a certificate of title evidencing marketability
of title thereto, the Mayor and City Clerk be and are authorized, for and on
behalf of the City, to execute and to seal, attest ~nd acknowledge, respectively,
a deed of conveyance, prepared and approved as to form and execution by the City
Attorney, conveying by the City to Major Motor Inns, Incorporated. Messrs. Walter
F. Puff and H. M. Claw.r. fee simple title to u certain 1.103 acre parcel of land
described in sai~ agreement.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following rote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Ilubard, Lisk, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ......................
NAYS: None ......... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
POLICE DEpARTMENT-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The Assistant City Manager submitted
the following report of the City Manager in connection with the status oi person-
nel in the Police Department and the Fire Department os of February 28, 1973o
,!
'March ~2, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
SubJect: Personnel Changes - Fire end Police Departments
Listed below is the status of the Fire and Police
Department as of February 28. 1973:
*Fire Department
"At the end of February 1973 there was I vacancy in the Fire
Department**
'Police Department
Hired Resinn~ RehJred ResJoned
'Officer Dennis M. Davis 9/15/69 9/23/70 3/39/71 2/27/73
*Ending February 26, 1973 (10) vacancies.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager'
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received and filed. .The motion
was seconded by Mtn Lisk and unanimously adopted.
In this connection. Mr. Trout moved that the City Manager be requested
to report to Council with regard to procedures he is using to recruit veterans
and Others as police officers and that the City Manager further he requested to
report to Council as to why there is difficulty in filling vacancies in the
Police Department? Thc motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopte~
STREETS AND ALLEYS-STATE HIGHWAYS: The Assistant. City Attorney sub-
mitted a written report in connection with the proposed amendment of the Major
Arterial Highway Plan and the recently adopted Roanoke Valley Area Thorough-
fare Plan on Moods. Avenue at its intersection with Franklin Road, S. W., advis-
ing that investigation reveals that the published notice of public hearing for
the initial prop~se~ change concerned only the intersection of Moods Avenue,
S. M.. with the west line of Franklin Road, that a proposed compromise amendment
of said plans would involve shifting the entire intersection of Woods Avenue
and Franklin Road. on both sides of the last-mentioned street and further
advising that an additional public hearing should be held on the compromise
amendment, with published notice thereof given the general public, and,
accordingly, after consultation with the attorney representing the applicant.
there has been prepared and published a notice of public hearing on this matter,
said public hearing having been set for March 26. 1973.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the report of the Assistant
City Attorney and that the public hearing be scheduled for 7:30 p.m.. Monday,
March 26, 1973, in the Council Chamber. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard
and unanimously adopted.
AUDITS: The City Auditor submitted a financial report for the City of
Roanoke for the month of February, 1973.
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received nnd filed, The nation mas
seconded by Mr. Llsk and unanimously adopted,
In this connection, Mr. List called attention to pages 21 and 22 of
the financial report, pointing out that fifty-six capital improvement projects
hare not been started and that he hopes that the City Nanager mill report to
Council as to the status of these projects and a recommendation on bom the city
can proceed mith these projects in a more expeditious manner in the future.
BUDGET-DEpARTMENT OF PUBLIC NELFARE: The City Auditor submitted n
monthly statement of expendit, ures for Public Yelfare for the month ended February
28, 1973.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a written report in
connection uith the request of Mr. C. Richard Cranwell, Attorney. representing
MacDey, Incorporated, that property located at the corner of Memorial Avenue and
Dunmore Street. S. N.. described as part of Lots 5, and 6, part of a vacated
alley, and all of Lots 11 and 12. Block 1, Map of Virginia Heights, Official
Tax No. 132260g. be rezoned from RG-I, General Residential District. to RG-2,
General Residential District, recommending that the request be denied.
Mr. Trout moved that action on the report be deferred until the next*
regular meeting of Council on Monday. March 19, 1973, pending notification from
Mr. Cranwell as to whether or not his client desires a public hearing on the
request for rezoning. The notion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously
adopted.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: The City Planning Commission submitted n written
report in connection with a request Of Mr. Cart L. Kinder. Jr.. Attorney, repre-
senting Reliance Equipment Corporation, Estate of Clyde S. Fulton, Charles W.
Garlick, Grace g. Garlick, James E. Darlick and Robert M. Garlick, that a certain
fifteen foot alley running generally east-west through Block 11. Map of Hyde Park
Land Company. from 15th Street, N. M., to lGth Street, N. M.. be vacate~, dis-
continued and closed, recommending that the request be granted.
Mr. Thomas moved that a public hearing on the question of vacating,
discontinuing and closing the alley be held at 7:30 p.m., Monday, April 30. 1973.
in the Council Chambers. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously
adopted.
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a ~ritten report recom-
mendin9 that Section ? of the Zoning Ordinance be amended so as to provide for
art galleries as a special exception in the RG-1 and RG-2, General Residential
Districts, that the structure conform with the general character of the area and
that one parking space for each 400 square feet of floor, area be required.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted a further
report provid.ng for the definition of the term *art galley.*
Mr. Jack B, Coulter, Attorney,.representJng Mr. Jsmes M, YeaSts, et
end Mr. J. Morgan Anderson. appeared be~ore Council and advised that tbis matter
arose tram n rezoning petition to rezone properties located at 364 -366 and
360 -362 Malnut Avenue. $. M%, ~ron RG-2, General Residential District. to
C-2. General Commercial Dislrict. to permit Mr. YeaSts to use his property as
sa art galley and Mr. Anderson to use his property to house a mortgage lnvesteent
coupany, that after several hearings before the Planning Commission and after
· great deal of opposition tram surrounding property o~nerz, It ~as, agreed by
the Commission that art galleries are n compatible use in apartment distFicts,
'March 12. 1973
Roanoke, Vlrginia
S/'Hampton 4. Thomas
S/ Milline S. Hubard
S/ Byron E. Hauer
48
Mr, Thomas moved that the report be received nnd filed. The motion
mas seconded by Mr, Hubnrd and adopted, Mr. Garland and Mayor Webber not voting,
WATER DEPARTMENT: The Water Resources Committee submitted u written
report requesting that Council review, as u Committee of the Whole, the report
of the Water Resources Committee,.under date of February 26, 1973, pertaining
to the source and supply of mater for the City of Roanoke and other valley areas
at the end of the regulor meeting of Council on Monday. Hatch 12,
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the request of the Mater
Resources Committee. The notion mas ~econded by Mr, Hubard and unanimously
adopted.
SEWERS AND STORR DRAINS: The Water Resources Committee submitted a
written report advising that the Committee-requested the City Ranager to submit
a report of the Chairman of the State Water Control Hoard advising that the firm
of Roy F. Wesson, Incorporated, has been contacted in reference to reviemJng the
complete plans of the Sewage Treatment Plant expansion program, that the city has
received a reply from that firm to the effect that the requested reviem mould
pose certain professional problems and they do not wish to undertake the task at
this time and that the Committee has requested that the City Manager personnally
deliver this communication to Mr. Noman M. Cole ut a mutually agreeable tine and
place.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
WATER DEPARTMENT: Mr. Hampton W. Thomas, Chairman of the Water Resources
Committee. submitted a communication from Mr. S. D. Crowder. Vice Mayor, Town of
Vinton. Virginia, requesting that the Council of the City-of Roanoke give serious
reviem to the present rate of fifty cents per hundred cubic feet that is charged
by the city to the Town Of Vinton for the delivery of water by the City of
Roanoke.
Mr. Thomas moved that the matter be taken under ~dvisement to be dis-
cussed by Council at the end of the regular meeting on Monday, March 12. 1973.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
AMBULANCES-ROANOKE VALLEy REGIONAL HEALTH SERVICES PLANNING COUNCIL,
INCORPORATED: Council having requested that the City Manager and the City Attor-
ney review the proposed ambulance Ordinance with Mr. W. G. Creasy, Attorney, repre-
senting certain life saving crews in the Roanoke Valley and submit a report to
Council. the City At'torney and the City Manager submitted the following joint repot
advising that during recent months and at the direction of Council. they and the
members of their staffs have met with and attempted to resolve the questions and
objections raised by the local life saving cress concerning 'the proposed Ordinance,
that appearances at meetings of the several crems have b~en made for the same
purpose and their positions mith respect to the proposed ordinance have been
invited to be made in writing, that in summary, the crews go not object to the
'd
proposed Ordinance, instead they heartily recommend some degree of local con-
trol, bomerero and solely because of their non-profit and non-pay status, they
do not feel that they should come under its provisions, pointing out that it
is not considered that anything further can be accomplished by the City Manager
or the City Attorney by additional discussions on this subject, therefore, the
matter ia returned to Council for its further consideration and ~isposal:
##arch 12, 1973
· The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
During the last year the question of an ordinance to coor-
dinate the provision ~f emergency medical services uithin
the City of Roanoke has been before the Council on several
occasions. In October 1972, the Roanoke Valley Regional
Health Services Plannin9 Council, Incorporated. recom-
mended to the City a proposal on this subject. Sereral
questions mere raised, principally by representatives of
local life saving crems, and the matter was continued under
consideration by members of the City administrative staff
and the Health Services Planning Cooncil~
During recent months and at the direction of the Council,
the City Attorney and the City Manager and members of
their staffs have met with and attempted to resolve the
questions and objections raised by the local life saving
crews concerning the proposed ordinance. Appearances at
meetings of the several crews have been made for the same
purpose and their positions with respect to the proposed
ordinance have been invited to be nude, in mriting. For
the Council's lnfornatton, there ore attached copies of
the stated positions.of the three local life saving and
first aid crews. In summary, the crews do not object to
the proposed ordinance, instead, they rather heartily
recommend some degree of local control, however, and
solely because of their non-profit and non-pay status, they
do not feel that they should come under its provisions.
For the Council's information, there is again enclosed a
copy of the proposed ordinance pertainin9 to emergency
medical services, it would be noted that in Section 7,
existing ambulance services, including local life saving
cress, would bo entitled to a certificate of public con-
venience nod necessity upon application. In our opinion.
it would bo extremely difficult to have an effective emer-
gency medical services program, which is the intent of the
proposed ordinance, without having it apply to such an
important aspect of emergency medical services ns the local
life saving crews. The interest of the life saving and first
aid crews 'will be protected by their representation on the
proposed emergency medical services council provided to be
established'for the purpose of serving in an advisory role
to local governments and other parties concerning emergency
medical services in the Roanoke Valley area. Se believe
that the three local crews may be unduly alarmed over the
effect that the subject ordinance would have on their
activities.
It is not considered that anything further can be accom-
plished'by the undersigned by additional discussions on this
subject; therefore, the matter is returned to the City Coun-
cil for its further consideration and disposal.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ J. N. Kincanon
J. N. Kincanon. City Attorney
S/ Hvron ET Hamer
Hyron E. Hamer, City Manager"
Mr. #. G. Creasy, Attorney, representing the Montvale Life Saving
Cram. the Nillian~n Road Life Saving Crew, the Cave Spring Life Saving Crew
50 ~
and the Hunton Life Saving Crew appeared before Council and advised that the
groupshe represents do not went t~ be under the Ordin~nce because they do not
feel they bare done anything which should be regulated by an Ordinance. that
there ia no need for such'un Ordinance, that the proposed Ordinance does not tell
them what they can or cannot do and until it does they do not feel they should
cone under the provisions of the Ordinance.
Mr. S. A. Long. Jr** appeared before Council and ex~ressed the opinion
that the life saving crews should not come under the provisions of the proposed
Ordinance.
After a further discussion of the mutter, Mr. Hubard moved the adoption
of the proposed ambulance Ordinance.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
Mr. Thomas moved that the matter be referred back to the City Manager
and the City Attorney for the purpose of drafting an ambulance Ordinance which
will pertain only to commercial services and will exclude life saving crews.
The motion was seconded by Mr, Trout and adopted. Mr. Hubard voting no, Mayor
Webber not voting and Dr. Taylor absent.
WATER DEPARTRENT: The committee appointed to tabulate bids which were
opened before Council on'March 5, 1973, for miscellaneous small area improved
hard surface street and sidewalk restoration occasioned by the normal daily
operations of the Water Department for the calendar year April 3. 1973, through
April 20 1974, submitted a written report advising that additional information
should be sought from the low bidder in order to give proper consideration of all
bids and requesting permission to submit u report to Council on Monday, March 19o
L973.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
TRAFFIC: The Roanoke Highway Safety Commission submitted the following
report of the activities of the Commission for the calendar year 1972 and an
*Your Roanoke Highway Safety Commission held four (4)
meetings during the year 1972 as required by law. Several
'conference* meetings were also held with officials, both
local and state, on matters pertaining to the work of the
Commission.
Advisory Committee.meeting in May and the Pedestrian Award
meeting in October, at which meeting the City of Roanohe was
presented a special award for its pedestrian safety program.
During the year the Commission received reports on a
number of programs and projects conce~ lng highway safety
with the City such as TOPICS, special *ring-down* phones
in hosPitals for expediting emergency medical service (these
had been recommended by the Commission earlier), new highway
ties and changes in'the traffic code, and a report on the
A Plan of Work on highway safety for the next five
years Was completed and sent the Highway Safety Division.'
Preparation of this plan involved meetings of the Chairman
with each division Involved in such n plan, A yearly Program
of Work uaw also prepared, .
A special study of traffic fatalities was made mith the
police deportment In an effort to determine the'cause of the
rapidly increasing nunber of fatalities,
The problem of pedestrian accidents continued to be of
concern to the Commission. The Roanoke Valley Safety
Council, at the request or the Commission and mJth the coop-
eration of the school'system, Increased its programs through
elementary schools. A special slide p~ogram mas developed
on pedestrian safety for the elderly and is In mide use
an,rig senior citizen groups. Of special interest to the
Commission mas the Safety on the Streets program of the Safety
Council which emphasized all phases of highway safety. Study
mill be continued on the'pedestrian safety problem.
At the request of City Reneger Julian Rirst. a discussion
was held on the hem legislation permitting 'right turns on
red after stop.* The Commission agreed that blanket approval
should ~ot be given on this. Each intersection should be
considered on merit after trnffic engineering evaluation.
Such a'report was submitted to the City Manager.
At the December meeting of the Commission, officers
mere elected for 1973 as follows: Chairman, J. R. Sink:
Vice-Chairman, Dr. M. M. S. Butler. III; and Secretary,
Mrs. Alice Tice.
Current members Of the Commission are Dr. Butler, John
Clarke, Judge Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Capt. B. R. Eiser,
David Lisk, Lenis Peary. Mr. Sink, Mrs. Tice and Richard P.
Via.
Your Commission has been active duriog the past year
and plans to continue activities to promote all phases 5f .
highway safety in the City of Roanoke during 1973. The
Commission can make studies and recommendations for action to
City Council, but implementation of these recommendations
remains with City Council.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ J. D. Sink
J. O. Sink. Chairman"
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Link then offered the following Resolution approving the report
of the Highway S?f~ty Commission nod providing for the transmittal of a copy
of said report tothe Governor of Virginia, through the State Highway Safety·
Division:
(~207S5)' A RESOLUTION approving a report of the City of Roanoke
Highway Safety Commission; and providing for the transmittal of a copy of such
report to the Governor of Virginia, through the State Highway Safety Division.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book #37, page 474.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion ~as sec,nde
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk. Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Mebber .6.
NAYS: ~one, O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
COUNCiL-CITY ERPLOyEES: Couocil baying deferred action on o report
of the City Ranager requesting an Executive Session with the members of Conucil
to discuss a personnel matter, the matter was again before the body.
Hr, Thomas moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager.
The motion mss seconded by Mr. Trout and ado~ted by the following vote:
AYES: Ressrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber
NAYS: None ........ -0o (Dr. Taylor absent)
CIRCUSES-CARNIVALS: Council having deferred action on a Resolution
grunting the request of the Roanoke Fair. Incorporated, that it be allowed to
operate its Fair at Maher Field in the Cit~ of Roanoke on Sunday. September 2.
1973, between the hours of I p.m., and 11 p.m., the matter was again before the
body; whereupon, Mr. Lisk offered the folloning Resolution:
(~207S6) A R£SOLtrFION granting the request of Roanoke Fair, Inc., that
it be allomed to operate its fair at #sher'Field in the City of Roanoke on
Sunday, September 2, 1973, between the hours Of I p.m,o and 11
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Cook =3T, page 474.)
Re. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the follomin9 rote:
AYES: Messrs. Nubard, Lisk, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ....................
NAYS: Mr. Garland---l. (Dr. Taylor absent)
POLICE DEPARTMENT-AIRPORT: Council having deferred action on a Resolu-
tion authorizing the employment of three additional Airport Police for the
Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport. effective March 1, 1973, the matter was
before the body.
Mr. Thomas advised that since the last regular meeting of Council on
Monday, March 5, lg?3, he has received a number of telephone calls from citizens
who are concerned about the mat[er and who feel that the situation warrants fully
trained police officers and raised the question as to whether or not Council would
like to refer the matter back to the Airport Advisory Commission for further
study, report and recommendation to Council; whereupon, Me. Thomas moved that the
question of whether or not the three new positions at Roanoke Municipal (~oodrum)
Airport should be classified as airport police or regular police officers be
referred back to the Airport Advisory Commission for further study, report and
recommeodatioa to Council.
The motion failed fo~ lack of a second.
Mr. Garland then offered the Resolution providing for the employment
of three additional Airport Police for Rsanoke Municipal (Moodrum) Airport',
effective March 1. 1973. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk.
In a discussion of the matter, Mr. Lisk advised that the Airport Advi-
sory Commission has reviewed this matterthoroughly, that the Commission feels
that the city will have a difficult time getting regolar police officers right
away since these positions need to be filled now and that the city now has appli-
cants mbo are qualified to be classified as Airport Police.
Messru,!Garland and LisR pointed out that it might be better to defer
action on the roll cull vote for the ubovedescribed Resolution until a full
membership of Council is present; whereupon, Mr, Garland mlthdrem his notion
that the Resolution providing for the employment of three additional Airport
Police he adopted and Hr. Lisk wlthdrem his second to said motion.
Hr. Thomas then moved that the question of whether or not the three
additional personnel who are to be employed at Roanoke Municipal
Airport to be trained in anticipation of the handling of airport security should
be classified as regular police officers or airport police ~e referred to the
Airport Advisory Co~uission for further study, report and recommendation to
Council. The motion was seconded by NFo Garland and unanimously adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTXONS:
GARBAGE REMOVAL: Coancil having directed the City Attorney to prepare
the proper measure authorizing the City Manager to execute on behalf of the
City of Roanoke a certain Extension Agreement dated the 20th day of February,
lOTS, by and between M. S. Thomas (widower), Owner; the County of Roanoke and
the City of Roanoke, Grantee; and Thurman Realty Company, Agency, to extend for
a period of six months from and after April 1, 1973, a certain Option for Pur-
chase of certain real estate therein described, dated October 2. 1972. by and
betmeen the afore.said parties and recorded February 28, 1973, in the Clerk*s
Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, he presented same;
whereupon, Mr. Hubard offered the following Resolution:
(320?57) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to execute on
behalf of the City of Roanoke a certain Extension Agreement dated the 2Otb day
of February, 1973, by and between M. S. Thomas (widower), Owner; the County
of Roanoke and the City of Roanoke, Grantee; and Thurman Realty Company, Agency,
to extend for a period of six (6) months from and after April 1, 1973, a cer-
tain Option for Purchase of certain real estate therein described, dated October
2, 1972, by and between the aforesaid parties and recorded February 20, 1973, in
the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 475.)
Mr. Hubard moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebbex
NA¥S:'None O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
GARBAGE REMOVAL: Council having directed the City Attorney to pre-
pare the p{oper measure proposing that the city enter into an agreement in the
manner provided by Section 15.1-21, Code of Virginia, 1950, asamended, with
certain other poli.tical subdivisions of the Commonwealth of Virginia for the
establishment of the Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Waste Disposal Board to
operate nnd generally ndminister~a Roanoke Valley Regional Le~dfill;'npproving a
certain agreement prepared to be entered'into with certain governing.bodies
herein maned; conditionnlly authorizing the Moyor and'the City. Clerk to execute
said sgreement for and on behalf of the City of Roanoke; authorizing expenditure
of sums not to.exceed n total of $SS,O00oDO upon certain terms and conditions;
and directing the City*Clerk to transmit copies of said Ordinance and of said
*roposed agreement to the governing bodies of said other political jurisdictions,
he presented same; whereupon, Mr. Hubard moved that the following Ordinance be
)laced upon its first reading:
(n207S8) A~ OHDINA~C£ proposing that the City enter into an agreement,
in the manner provided by 5S15.1021. Code of Virginia, lqSO, os amended,.wlth
certain other political subdivisions of the Commonwealth of Virginia for*the
establishment of the Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Waste Disposal Board to operate
and generally administer u Roanoke Valley Regional Landfill; approving a certain
agreement prepared to be entered into with certain governing bodies herein
named; conditionally authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute said
agreement for and on behalf of the City of Roanoke; authorizing expenditure of
sums nut to exceed a total of $55,00g.og, upon certain terms and conditions; and
directing the City Clerk t5 transmit copies of this ordinance and of said pro-
posed agreement to the governing bodies of said other political jurisdictions.
Mg£R£AS, after meetings held and negotiations conducted by a committee
of the Council with similar committees and re~resentatives of other governing
bodies in the Roanoke Valley area, this Council's committee with said other com-
mittees nnd representatives have developed and caused to be prepared a written
agreement proposed to be entered into between the City of Roanoke, Roanoke County.
the City of Salem and the Town of Vinton, as,is authorized and provided for by
sS15.1-21 of the Code of Virginia, lgSO, as amended, which said proposed agreement
would establish the Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Waste Disposal Board, to
operate and generally administer for a period of at least twenty (20) years, a
regional landfill or landfills, as more specifically set out in said ~greement,
a copy of which said agreement is on file in the office of the City Clerk, trans-
mitted to the Council with said Council's Regional Landfill Steering Committee's
report dated March 5, 1973, and to which form of agreement reference is hereby
made; and
MHEREAS, this Council*s committee has recommended that the City of
Roanoke offer to enter into the aforesaid agreement, with the County of Roanoke,
the City of Salem and the Town of Vinton upon the conditions and provisions set
out and contained in the proposed agreement and in this ordinance; and
WHEREAS, this Council's committee bas further recommended that. if and
as needed, sums not to exceed the total amount of $55.000.00, be advanced by the
City, after full execution of the proposed agreement, for a~d on behalf of the
Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Maste Disposal Board for the purpose of defraying
the costs of necessary preliminary development of a site forsuch regional
landfill, such as costs for surveys, testing, plannfngo access ways or other
necessary purposes, prior to actual establishment of a regional landfill upon
the express credit or reimbursement provisions contained in $So of the
aforesaid agreement; and
WffEREA~, the Council concurs ia frs committee's aforesaid recom-
mendations.
~OM, TflEREFORE. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke
as follows:
1. That the City of Roanoke is committed to and doth hereby reaffirm
its interest in the concept of and its desire to participate, Jn the manner
provided by SS15,1-21, Code of Virginia, 1950. as amended, with those other
local governmental authorities named herein in the establishment of a regional
landfill in the Roanoke Valley a~ea to be used by all said authorities and by
others within their jurisdictions as set out iu said agreement, and to partici-
pate in the future, in the provision of new or additional such facilities as
may be needed and mutually agreed upon by participating parties.
2. That the Council hereby APPROVES as an agreement to be entered
into by the City of Roanoke, the City of Salem, Roanoke County a~d the Town
of Vinton. that certain form of agreement caused to be prepared by the afore-
said committees and representatiyes and presented to the Council by its Landfill
Committee on March 5, 1973, a copy of which said agreement, approved as to form
by the City Attorney, is on file in the office of the City Clerk, again this
day considered by this body. pursuant to which the City and said other parties
would obligate themselves for a period of at least t~enty (20) years to parti-
cipate, as therein provided, in provision of certain joint~use public landfill
facilities as provided in said agreement, in order that public landfill faci-
lities may be provided to all Said governmental jurisdictions of the Roanoke
Valley area.
3. That if and when the written agreement herein approved to be
entered into with the County of Roanoke. the City of Salem and the Town of
Vinton be similarly approved by the governing bodies of each said other juris-
diction and be authorized to be executed for and on behalf of said respective
political subdivisions, the Mayor and the City Clerk of the City of Roanoke be,
and tfley are hereby authorized and directed to execute and to seal and attest,
respectively, said agreement, for and on behalf of the City of Roanoke.
4. Tha~*upon full execution of the said agreement, the appropriate
officials of the City are authorized and directed to advance for or on behalf
of the Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Maste Disposal Board. as necessary, such
sums not to exceed a total of ~55,000.00 for the purpose of defraying the costs
of necessary preliminary development of a site for such regional landfill such
as costs of surveys, testing, planning, access ways or other necessary purposes,
prior to actual establishment of a regional landfill upon the express credit or
DE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the City Clerk be, and she is hereby
directed to transmit attested copies hereof and of the aforesaid proposed agree-
ment, to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County. the Council of the City of
Salem and the Council of the Town of ¥lnton.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, flubard. Lisk. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .6,
NAYS: None ~0. (Dr. Taylor absent)
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
JUVENILE DETENTION HOME: Mr. Hubard moved that Council meet in Execu-
tive Session to discuss appointments to the Re~lonal Detention Home Study
mitten. The motion uaw seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Lisk, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Nebber .........................
NAYS: None ......... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
CITY MANAGER: Mr. Garland pointed out that this is the last
Council meeting that Mr. ]i{liom ¥. Clark will attend as Assistant City Manager
of tbe City of Roanoke since he will be assuming his new duties on Monday, March
19, 1973, as Executive Officer of Roanoke County and wished Mr. Clark best
wishes in his new position.
There being no further business, Mayor Mebber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monduy. aareblg. 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Building. Monday. March Ir. 1973. at 2 p.m..
the regular meeting hour, with Mayer Roy L. Bebber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland. William S. Rubard. David
Lisk, Noel C. Taylor, Hampton M. Thomas, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L.
Webber ........................ 7.
ABSENT: None .....~-0.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Hr. Byron E. Baser, City Manager; Mr. James N.
Kincanon, City Attorney: Mr. H. Ben Jones, Jr** Assistant City Attorney; and
Mr. A. N. Gibson. City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend A.
Garnett any, Pastor, Fort Lemis Christian Church.
MINUTES: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held.on Monday.
February 25. 1973. having been furnished each member of Council. on motion
of Mr. Trout, seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof
Mas dispensed with and the minutes approved as recorded.
BEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC BATTERS: NONE.
pETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
BUILDINGS: Council havin9 previously received and filed a report of
the Assistant City Attorney with reference to a claim of Mr. Frank O. R,upas
regarding the demolition of a house owned by him at 707 Gilmer Avenue, N.
the Assistant City Attorney advising that be finds no discrepancy in the pro-
cedure employed by the city in the demolition of the house and that the only
liability that exists in this matter is that of the specific property for an
indebtedness of $294.00 to the city in payment of the costs incurred by the
city for demolition ef the house which has for several years been unsafe and
unfit for human habitation, Mr. Frank G. R,upas appeared before Council and
requested that Council relieve him of the responsibility of paying this debt
of $294.00.
The City A~torney pointed out that if Council grants the request of
Mr. R,upas, it will be establishing a precedent for future requests of this
nature and that an investigation into the matter reveals thatproper notice
Mas given to Mr. Roupas.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication from Mr. R,upas be received
and filed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk.
Dr. Taylor expressed the opinion that Mr. Roupas has experieuced
enough financial loss and that the city should relieve him of paying the $294.00
and offered a substitute motion that Mr. R,upas be relieved of the responsibi-
lity of paying the $294.00 for the demolition of a house which existed at 707
Gilmer Avenue, N. M.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
The original.motion that the communication be received and filed mas
then adopted by the f, Il,ming vote:
AYES: Hessrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Thomas and Trout ........
NAYS: Dr, Taylor and Mayor lebber ........................ 2.
Dr. Taylor then moved that the City Attorney be instructed to prepare
the proper measure unending the Building Code to provide that registered letters
be transmitted by the Building Commissioner to the owners of properties which
have been condemned and are due.to be razed. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Hobard and unanimously adopted.
HUS~INGS COURT: A communication from Mrs, Margaret Hart Games dedi-
cating to the City of Roanoke a portrait of her father, the late John Marion
Hart, Judge of the Hustings Court from 1922 to 1932, subject only to the condition
that the portrait hang in the Bustings Courtroom or in some other appropriate.
)lace along with the portraits of other Judges now in said Courtroom, was before
Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney
for preparation of the proper measure accepting the portrait. Zhe motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
LANDMARKS-PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: A communication from Mr. Raymond P.
Barnes requesting that Council reconsider its decision and that the Frederick J.
Kimball Memorial Fountain be donated to the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty
to Animals to be erected in a pet cemetery at the SPCA and advising that at a
later date,.it will be soogested that the Dog-Mouth Fountain be given to the
Roanoke Historical Society, was before the body.
Mr. Garland moved that the mutter be referred to the City Attorney for
)reparation of the proper measure donating the Frederick J. Kimball Memorial
Fountain to the Roanoke Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
SALE OF PROPERTY: A communication from Mr. J. Randolph Davis, one of
the co=ushers and attorney in fact for all other co-o~ners of o two foot strip
land, Official Tax No. 1231201, Estate of F. E. Davis, in the vicinity of Maiden
Lane, S. M., advising that his property has been paved and is being used by the
City of Roanoke, by residents of the Terrace Apartments and by the general public
as a part of the lane or street running back from Maiden Lane to the cemetery
that under the present circumstances he feels that the city should acquire the
)roperty from the oMuors and pay a fair and reasonable volue therefor taking into
consideration the taxes paid on it in the past and the expense to be incurred
in preparation of a necessary deed, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that the matter be referred to the Real Estate Committee
and to the City Manager for study, report and recommendation to Council. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
,d
· GARBAGE REMOVAL-SCHOOLS: A communication from Mra. Virginia.ahead,
representing abe Southeast Melfore Bights Organization, advising that she is
pleased to know that the landfill is being phased out in F~llon Park, expressing
appreciation to everyone mbo worked on locating the new landfill site and re-
questing that Council not allow the Roanoke City School Doard to construct
the new Southeast Elementary School in Falion Park due to heavy traffic conges-
tiomo was before the body.
Mr. Lisk moved that the communication be received and'filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
STATE COMPENSATION BOARD-COMMONMEALTH*S ATTORNEY-COMMISSIONER OF TIT
REVENUE-~ITY TREASURER-SHERIFF: Copy of a notice from Mr. David B. Ayers. Jr**
Chairman. State Compensation Doard. advising that the Compensation Board will
meet on April 2, 1973, at B:30 a.m., in the Community Room of the Salem-Roanoke
Valley Civic Center for the purpose of fixing the salaries and expenses of the
Attorney for the Commonwealth. Commissioner of the Revenue, Sheriff and Trams
for the fiscal year beginning July 1. 1973, and endin9 June 30, 1974. was before
Council.
Mr. Thomas moved thatthe communication be received and filed. The
motion sas seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Garland further moved that the Mayor or the Vice Mayor or any
member of Council to be designated by the Mayor along with a member of the
administrative staff be authorized to attend the meeting of the State Compen-
sation Board on April 2. 1973, to represent the City of Roanoke. The motion
was seconded by Mr. tlubard and unanimously adopted.
AUDITS-JUVENILE AND DOMESTIC RELATIONS COURT: A communication from
Mr. Joseph S. James. Auditor of Public Accounts, in connection with an audit
of the accounts and records of Mr. Lawrence L. Koontz, Jr., Judge of the
Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court. for the calendar year 1972. advising
that the examination revealed that fmll accounting hud been made for all
recorded receipts and that the records had been prepared in good order, was
before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication and audit be received and
filed. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimomsly adopted.
ZONING: Copy of a notice from Mr. Paul B. Matthews. Secretary,
Roanoke County Planning Commission, advising of a resuming petition from Over-
mite Transportation Company to rezone 9.B9 acres of a 40~04 acre tract of land
located on the north side of a service road along Interstate Route S~l, leading
to State Route 117 (Peters Creek Road) from Agriculture A-l, to Industrial
M-2 for the construction of a truck terminal and .advisin9 that a public hear-
in9 will be held by the Planning Commission on March 20, 1973, at ?:30'p.m.,
in the County Courtroom on the third floor o£ the County Courthouse in Salem,
Virginia. was before Council
Nr~ Thomos moved that the communication be received and filed. The
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET-BRIDGES-CAPITAL IHPEOV£#ENTS PMOGRA#: The City #oaeger submitted
the following report recommending that $378.3S be transferred from the Mud Lice
Bridge Capital Improvement Project account to the Normich Bridge Capital Improve-
ment Project account to permit final payment to the NorfolR and uestern Railway
Company for services performed by that Company. Jn the total amount.of
'March 19. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Norwich Bridge
As members of City Council will recall constructiba
wes completed and the Norwich Bridge was dedicated and
opened, to traffic on December 6, 1971, Since that date
all outstondingbllls have been paid except for the cost
of services performed by the Norfolk and Nestern Railway,
Yhe billing from Norfolk and Mestern Railway has been
received and final payment in the amount of $6,697,97 is
non due, As there only exists within this account $6,319,62, -
there is a need for an additional $378,35 lB this account
· to permit this final payment,
There remains in Account No. 69 - 117 (Mud Lick Bridge
on Grandin Road) sufficient funds to allow for a transfer
of $370.35 to the Norwich Bridge project. Ail payments
have been made on the Mud Lick Bridge; therefore, this
transfer may be made.
It would be recommended that City Council by budget
ordinance transfer $378.35 from the Mud Lick Bridge Capital
Improvement Project account to the Norwich Bridge Capital
Improvement account to permit final payment.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E, Bauer
Byron E. Boner
City Manager~
Mr~ Garland moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and offered the following emergency Ordinance authorizing the necessary transfer:
(~20759) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section #69-117, "Mud
Lick Bridge," and Section ~CIP-2b, 'Norwich Bridge Construction,".of the 1972-73
Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency,
(For full text of Ordinance, see. Ordinance Book ~37, page 476.) .
Mr, Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The mS'tion was
seconded by Hr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Hubard~ Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Bobber 7.
NAYS: None O.
Dr. Tn,ylor then offered the folloming Resolution authorizing and direct-
lng payment of thesum of $0.697o97 to Norfolk and ~estern Railway Company in
full reimbursement of the costs of said Company's uork in connection uith the
construction of the new Norwich Bridge:
(a20?bO) A RESOLI~FION outhorizing and directing psynent ~f the sum
of $8,69Y.g? to Norfolk and ~estern railway Company in full reimbursement o£
the costs of said Company's murk in connection with the ~onstruction of the Nem
Norwich Bridge, heretofore authorized by Ordin~nce No, 19516~
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book #3?, page 400°)
Dr, Taylor moved the adoption of the Resolution, The motion mas
seconded by Mr, Link end adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Hubard, Li~ko Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber .............. ~ .....
NAYS: None .......... O.
BUDGET-RECREATION DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted the follom-
ina report recommending that $435.00 be appropriated to Operating Supplies and
Materials under Section ~75, *Recreation, Parks and Recreational Areas," of
the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for the purchase of trophies which are to
be presented to the various league champions and runner-up teams in the basket-
bali program under the direction of the Department of Parks and Recreation, and
advising of a proposed procedure to be followed in the future in anticipation
of these funds contributed by the various teams in the cJty*s ~ports programs:
"March l~, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Parks a~d Recreation Budget
The basketball program operated by the City*s
Department of Parks and Recreation has recently con-
cluded. In connection theremith, the various teams
contributed $435 for the purchase of trophies which
were presented to.the various league champions and
runner~ups, Zhis money has nos been deposited with
the City Treasurer and it is recommended that it be
approp'riated to Account ~5 - 320 to allow expenditure of
funds for their intended purpose.
In future budgets, it will be proposed that an
estimated revenue account be established in a~ticl-
patios Of these funds contributed by the various
teams in the Cityts sports programs. A similar amount
would be added to the Parks and Recreation Department
account 'for Operating Supplies and Materials ~hich mill
allow for the purchose of trophies at the end of each
sport *season ~ithout having to return to City Council for
appropriation of funds in each individual instance.
Resp.ec.~fully submitted,
S/ Byro. n E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Man~ger'
Mr. Link moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the necessar
'funds:
(~207&1) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section u?$, "Recrea-
tion, Parks and Recreational Areas.~ of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance.
and providing for an emergency.
(For full' text ofiOrdinance, see Ordinance Book a37, page 481.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion uaw seconded
by Mr. Thomas smd adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Uubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber~-~ .............
RAYS: None O.
AIEPOET: The City Manager submitted the follomlng report recommendin9
that he be authorized to advise the Federal Aviation Administratinn that the City
of Roanoke will appropriate $30,000.00 as its share toward prozidfug additional
fencing along the airport boundary and additional ramp lighting at Roanoke
Municipal (Moodrum) Airport in order that the city might comply with the Federal
Airport Certification and Security Codes 106 and 139:
*March 19, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Centlemen:
Subject: Request for Aid - Federal Aid Airport Program
Recent Federal legislation with regard to Airport
security established certain guidelines that must be followed
by each and every airport which is serviced by one or more
of the'many airlines which traosport passengers about our
country. These guidelines set up certain security require-
ments which must be met prior to certification of these
various airports to handle airline passenger traffic. Dur-
ing a recent inspection by Mr. Robert Bachtell, FAA Special
AgentAir Transportation Section Office. end Henry Fairchild.
FAA Certification Section. the requirement to provide addi-
tional fencing along the Airport Boundary and additional
ramp lighting in order that we might comply with the Federal
Airport Certification and Security Codes 107 and 139 was
pointed out to our Airport representatives. An estimate of
the cost to meet these revised standards is $59.398. Of this
cost it Mould be anticipated that FAA would appropriate
approximately $29,699 while the City would be expected to
fund the remaining $29.699.
It would be recommended that City Council authorize the
City Manager to proceed with a request for aid--Federal Aid
Airports Program and forward such request to the Federal
Aviation Administration. To make such an application the
City Manager would need to be authorized to state the availa-'
biltty of the City's share of costs for accomplishment of
these projects. It would be recommended that City Council
authorize the City Manager to advise the Federal Aviation
Administration that the City will appropriate $30,000 as
their share toward the accomplishment of these projects.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Ryron E. Naner
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager"
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and that the matter be.referred to the City Attorney for preparation of
the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
EASERBRTS: The City Manager submitted the folloming report .in con-
auction with a request of Mr. Carr L. Kinder, Attorney. representing Blue Cross of
Southwestern Virginia, to provide for underground cables to be placed under the
alley between two of their office buildings in the vicinity of 2nd and 3rd
Streets, S. W., transmittin9 an Ordinance which would authorize the encroachment
with the specification that n fee be provided as nn annual payment for said
encroachment nnd recommending that the. sum of $50.00 be established ~er this
purpose:
'#arch 19, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanohe, Virginia.
Gentlemen:
Subject: Underground Alley Encroachment
On Tuesday, February 20, 19T3, Hr, Cart L, Einder appeared
before City Council with a request that the City authorize
an encroacbmemt to Blue Cross of 5outhmestern Virginia to
provide for underground cables to be placed under the alley
between two of their office buildings. This matter was
referred to the City Hanager for recommendation.
There is transmitted an ordinance prepared by the City
Attorney which would authorize the encroachment requested by
Mr. Einder with the specification that n fee he provided as
an annual payment for this encroachment. The ordinance as
prepared leaves the annual fee blanh.
It ~ould be recommended that the sum of $50 be esta-
blished for this purpose and this amount has been concurred
in by Mr. Kinder.' It would be recommended that City Council
approve the ordinance as prepared by the City Attorney and
insert the fee of $50 in the blanh on page 2.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ B~ron £. flaner
City Manager'
City Manager and that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(#20?62) AN ORDINANCE 9ranting revocable, non-transferrable authority
certain alley located between Lot 7, Block ll, Official Survey S. W. 3, Official
No. 1023112, and Lot 3, Block ll, Official Survey 5. W. 3, Official No. 1023102,
MHEREAS, Blue Cross of Southwestern Virginia, o~ner of Lot 7, Block
Official Survey S. W. 3, Official No. 1023112, and Lot 3, Block Il, Official
Survey $. ~. 3, Official No. 1023102, has requested that it be permitted to
install and maintain computer cables under the alley separating the aforesaid
in local 9overning bodies by Chapter 10, Title 15.1 of th~ 1950 Code of Virginia,
as amended, thisCouncil is agreeable to said omner's proposal and is willing
THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
permission be and is hereby granted Blue Cross of 5outhweatern Virginia, owner
of Lot 7, Block 11, Official Surrey S. Wo, 3, Official No, 1023112, and Lot 3,
Block 11, Official Survey S. #. ~, Official ~o. 1023102, to install and maintain
as an encroachment computer cables under the alley separating, the aforesaid lots,
said cables to be Installed in a conduit with the conduit encased in concrete;
that i ~inlmuw of one empty spire conduit° the some aize es the other conduit,
shall he installed; that any manhole or handhole access points to the conduits
shall not be located mithJn the olley right-of-way; that the top of the concrete
encasement shell have a minimum of thirty (30) Inches cover; that the owner shall
file with the City Clerh and the City Engineer a plat shoming the extct location
of the crossing; that the contractor lnstallin9 the conduits shall obtain a
street opening permit from the Deportment of Public Worhs; that fllue Cross of
Southmestern YlrgJnJo shall be responsible for installation and all future main-
tenance of the cables; that should the City of Roanoke CF any franchised utility
within the City of Roanoke have reason to reconstruct the alley or to install
other underground utilities which might conflict with the aforesaid cable instal-
lotion, Blue Cross of Southwestern Virginia shall be responsible for mahiog
necessary adjustments in its cable installation at no cost to the City of
Roanoke or the utility company; that existing sewer lines, water mains, drains
and existing utilities shall not be disturbed by the installation of the COUpUteF
cables; that said installation shall be made and maintained with approved and
permitted materials at the expense of the owner and in accordance with such of
the City*s building, fire and other regulations and requirements as are appli-
cable thereto; that the owner shall pay an annual fee of $50.00 for the permit
herein granted; the installation ced maintenance of the aforesaid encroachment
to be subject to the limitations contained in 5S15.1-375 of the lgSO Code of
Virginia, abovementioned, and the permit herein granted to be non-transferable
and revocable at the will of the City Council. it to be agreed by said permittee
as evidenced by its execution of an attested copy of this ordinance, that said
pecmittee consents hereto and agrees to indemnify and save harmless the City of
Roanoke of and from all claims for injuries or damages to person or property
that may in any manner arise by reason of such encroachment; that, upon notice
of revocation of the within permit, mailed to said permlttee or posted on the
aforesaid premises, said permittee shall, within (60) sixty days from the date
of mailing or posting of such notice, remove all said encroaching cables and
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the provisions of this ordinance shall not
become fully effective until such time as a street opening permit shall have been
issued by the Department of Public Works to the aforesaid owner or its duly
authorized contractor or representative, and until an attested copy of this
ordinance shall have been duly signed, sealed, attested and acknowledged by
said permittee and shall have been admitted to record, at the expense of said
permittee, in the deed books in the Clerk*s Office of the Hustings Court of the
City of Roanoke.
vole:
Webbes
The motion mas seconded b7 Dr. Tnylor and adopted by the following
AYES: Messrs. Gsrlsndo Nabsrd. Link. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
NAYS: Noner ...... O-
BUILOINGS-FIRE DEPART#ENT: Council baying referred n report of the
CiW #monger back to him for toe purpose of conferring with Chief A. ~. Baghson
nod Mr. Robert E. Mullen In connection mJth reinstituting a previous policy with
respect to the installation of sprinkler slstems in high-rise buildings, t~e
City Manager submitted a written report transmitting the following statement
signed by Mr. Mullen, Chief Hughson and Mr. Leftwich attesting lo the Eon-
currence of the revision and recommending that Council amend Chapter IX of the
Southern Standard Building Code, Section 901 - Sprinklers. subsection 901.6 -
Other Occupancy Sprinkler Requirements by adding a hem paragraph (d), which
paragraph shall read as follows:
(d)The folloming provisions and requirements shall
apply to nil high-Flsa buildings as defined in this
. Section and to all occupancies except the following:
Group B - Business occupancies unless specifically
provided for in this section.
"BATE March 14, 1973
TO: Mr. Byron E. Bauer, City Manager
PROM: Fire Chief Hughson, Robert E. Mullen, Jr., Pire
Protection Engineer, Lewis G. Leftwich, Coumis-
sonar of Buildings
SUBJECT: Sprinkler System, High-Rise Buildings
sprinkler systems in certain high-rise buildings and hereby
submit the following report:
Chapter IX of the Building Code sets forth in detail
requirements for sprinkler systems and standpipes in
certain buildings. Therefore, we are of thc opinion
that the proper place for the proposed requirements for
sprinkler systems in high-riie buildings should be
included within Chapter IX of the Building Code.
Me, the undersigned, realize that the proposed regulations
are less restrictive than a rem other cities throughout
the Country. We do feel that the proposed requirements
are reasonable and will be effective in providing addi-
tional protection to life and property, le are in full
S/ A. g.' Buahson
CHIEF OF FIRE DEPARTMENT
~f Lewis O. Left#ich
COMMISSIONER OF BUILDINGS
FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER~
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for preparation of the
adopted.
SIDEWALK-CURB AND GUTTER: The. City Man~ger snbmitted the following
report proposing to initiate a long term replacement program similar to the city
program for blacktopping streets end to include in next year's budget end each
following yeer*s budget an amount of money for. replacement of curb end gutter
and sJdewult.by contract, pointing out that subject to being advised by Council
to the contrary, it is proposed that this work be accomplished on a 100~ city
cost basis and not on the 50~ reimbursable basis presently used and that the
policy for the determination of areas of curb and gutter and sidewalk to be
replaced would be similar to that currently used with regard to blacktopping of
streets:
"March 19, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
SubJect: Curb and Gutter Replacement
The Roanoke City Code, as written, specifies that the
installation of curb and getter at various locations within
the City will be installed and paid for as a joint under-
taking between the City and the adjoining property owner.
The policy as contained in the City Code does not clearly
define the difference between new curb and gutter and
replacement curb and 9utter; therefore, the pFactlce has
been to require the property owner to share in the cost of
replacement curb and gutter and sidewalk as well as to
share in the cost of new curb and gutter and sidewalk.
I am certain that members of Council have observed
that in certain of the older sections of the City large
expanses of curb and gutter and sidewalk are deteriorated
and in some instances long areas of these facilities have
been destroyed, or broken up by the roots of trees located
between the curb and gutter and the sidewalk,
It has long been felt by the administration that the
Code as written should be revised so as to differentiate
between the installation of new curb and gutter and side-
walk as opposed to the replacement of deteriorated curb
and gutter and sidewalk, Once the property owner has
shared in 'the cost of the installation of the sidewalk,
the cost of maintenance aa well as replacement should be
the responsibility of the City, It is recognized that
there is a'great deal of deteriorated curb and gutter and
sidewalk in'the City, so such a replacement program should
of necessity continue over a long period of time.
It is proposed to initiate a long term replacement
program similar to the City program for blacktopping
streets and to include in next year's and each following
yeorts budget an amount of money for replacement of curb
and gutter end sidewalk by contract, Subject to being
advised by City Council to the contrary, it would be pro-
posed that this work be accomplished on a 100~ City.cost
basis and not on the 50~ reimbursable basis presently
used, The policy for the determination of areas of curb
and gutter and sidewalk to be replaced would be similar
to that currently used with regard to blacktopping of
streets,
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byroe K. Haner
Byron E. Haner
City Manager"
City Hunoger ond that the matter be referred to the City Attorney fOE prepare-
tlon of the proper measure amending the City Code. The motion nas seconded by
Mro Trout u~d unanimously adopted.
AIRPORT: The. City Munsger zubmitted ibc following report.advising
that on February 20, 1973, bids were received in the Office of the Purchoslng
Agent for the leasing of 325 square feet of space in the.new Airport Terminal
Building at Roanoke Municipal (Ioodru~) Airpor~ to be utilized as aa Airport
Eranch Bank, that the high annual rental bid was submitted bi The First National
Exchange Rank of Virginia In the ouount of $3,642.00 and recommending that
prior to proceeding with negotiations and contract, that Council accept the bid
of The First National Exchange Bank and authorize the City Attorney and the
City Homager to proceed with negotiations and preparation of a contract equally
suitable to The First National Exchange Rank as well as to the City of Roanoke:
Honorable Hayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia.
Centlenen:
aids for Lease of Space in Airport Teruinal
Mulldin9 for Monk Facilities
On F~bruary 20~ 1973, bids were received in the
office~of the Purchasing Agent and opened at 11 u.s.
the leasing of 325square feet of space in the new Airport
Terminal Muildin9 to be utilized as an Airport Branch
Bank. .Four letters were received with the bid of First
National Exchange Ranh with a proposed annual rental of
$3,b42 being the high bid. The bid is predicated on the
assumption that the lease would be of n ter~ long enough
for the recapture of their initial investment. They
would sug9est a minimum of ten years with an option to renew
£or an additional ten ~ith private negotiation for the
lease terns during the second period.
Prior to proceeding with negotiations, and contract,
· it would be recommended that City Council accept the
high bid of First National Exchange Bank and authorize
.the City ~ttorney and the City Manager to proceed with
negotiations and preporation of a contract equally suit-
able to ~he First National Exchange Bank as well as the
City.
Hespectfully submitted,
S! Byron K. Honer
Byron K, Hamer
City
City ~annger nnd offered the f~lloui~g Resolution approving, generally, n
proposal for the leasing to the First National Exchange Bank of Virginia of
certain space in the neu Terminal Building at Roanoke Municipal
~irport, to be utilized as an airport branch bank and dizec.tin0 the proper
city officials to confer and negotiate with snld bank the terns and provi=
signs of a written lease which uould be proposed to be entered into between
the City of Roanoke and said bank in the premises:
(n20763) A RESOLUTION approving, generally, a proposal for the leasing
of certain spice in the neu Terminal Building at Solnoke Municipal Airport, to
be utilized as in airport branch birth.
(For full text of Resolution, see as,in Ordinince Boob n3T, page 481.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution, The motion nas
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the fnllouing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lash, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................ ?~
NAYS: None ......... ..-0.
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: The City Manager submitted the follonlng report
advising that the Department of Parks and Recreation has been reviewing the
condition of equipment and facilities at the Transportation Museum in aetlci-
potion of the spring season opening, that the Director of the Paths and Recreation
Department considers it desirable and has obtained a $6,500.00 estimate to paint
the exterior of all the railroad equipment, the rocket and all the antique
cars and wagons, pointing out that he would like to seek bids for this proposed
work and at the appropriate time would like to return to Council for authoriza-
tion to anard a coutract:
*March 19, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke,-VirgJnia
Gentlem~n:
Subject: Transportation Museum
The Department of Parks and Recreation has been review-
ing the condition of equipment and facilities at the Trans-
portation Museum in anticipation of the spring season open-
ing. In that connection, the Director considers it desir-
able, and has obtained u $6,500 estimate, to paint the
exterior of all the railroad equipment, the rocket and all
the antique cars and wagons. It would be noted that the
Federal flood funds have already paid to teupholster all
the seats in the antique cars and wagons and also refurbish
the street car. Theproposed painting would, therefore,
complete bringing the Transportation Museum equipment into
a nam and attractive appearaoce for the 1973 season.
Within the present budget there mas provided the
sum of $$,D00 for improvements at the Transportation
Museum. Of this sum approximately $1,500 has either
been spent or is thought to be othernise needed for
items other than painting. Mith the remaining $1,500,
it will' require an additional $5,000 appropriation to
complete these proposed improvements.
This is not to request City Council appropriate
additional funds at this time but, with your concurrence,
we mould like to seek*bids for this proposed work and
at the appropriate time would return to City Council for
authorization to anard a contract.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager*
The Cit'y. Aoditor pointed out'that there are funds within the capital
account which ca,.be used for this purpose and that no appropriation by Council
will be necessary.
_O
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur In the report of the City Manager.
The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and.uemnlmomaly adopted~
POLICE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a written report
advising that by Resolution No. 20695. Council authorized n third Sixty day perlo
of extended salary to Patrolman Milllnm L. Bomling who mas injured in the line of
duty on May 2?, 1972. that as of #arch 23. 1973, this sixty dnyperiod will
expire and Officer Bomilng Is Still unable to return to duty and recommending
that Council authorize the payment to Officer Bomling of his salary for mn
additional sixty day period, or necessary portion thereof.'
Dr, Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager ond offered the following Resolution:
(a20764) A RESOLUTION authorizing and directing that Milliam L.
Romlin9, a member of the Police Department who is unable to perform his regular
duties by reason of personal injury received in line of duty, bepaid his
regular salary for an additional periodof sixty (60) days beginning March 23,
1973.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book na?o page 4B2o)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Resolutlon. The motion was
seconded by Mr. [isk and adopted by the Iolloming vote:
AYES: MesSrSo Garland, Hnbard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber~--= ........ 7.
NAYS: None ......... O.
FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a written report advis-
ing that bI Resolution Moa 20696, Council authorized a sixtyday period of
extended salary to Assistant Fire Chief Robert M. Hancock who was injured in
the line of duty on November 19, 1972. that as of March lB. 1973. this sixty
day period mill expire, that Assistant Fire Chief Hancock is still unable to
return to duty and recommending that Council authorime the sixty day period.
or necessary portion thereof.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation,of the City
Manager and offered the folloming Resolution:
(~20765) A RESOLUTION authoriming and directing that Robert M.
Hancock, a member of the Fire Department who is unable to perform his regular
duties by reason of personal injury received in line of duty, be paid his
regular salary for an additional period of sixty (60) days beginning March
1973.
(For full text of Resolution, see as recorded in office
of City Clerk in Ordinance Book ~37, page 483.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor ~ebber .
NAYS: None O.
.7O
,DEPARTMENT OF PDRLIC MELFJO~E: The City Auditor submttted.a written
report advising that on April 21, I972, the Department of Melfare and Institu-
tions delivered to nil of the localities in the State of Virginia a letter which
explains a.process mhereby an effort mould be made to prepay the localitiesfor
the reimbursement of Old Age Assistance, Aid to Dependent Children and Aid to
the Permanently and Zotally Disabled Programs, that the letter further states
that this effort mas being made to reduce the hardships placed on localities
mhich In some instances makes it necessary for the localities to borrow funds to
meet their obllgations.nnder the lelfare Program, that in effect, for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1972o the rations political subdivisions received thirteen
monthly reimbursements instead of the twelve monthly reimbrnsements normally
received by virtue of this prepayment, that ia the instance of the Cit~ of
this amounted to $4SO,O00.O0othat the letter 9Des on to say that this advancement
of funds would be deducted from the funds received in July 1972, that if the
situation as abovestated is not repeated, then the net result will be the receipt
of eleven payments for the fiscal year ending June 30. 1973, that this mill
reduce the city*s cash posit~on by approximately SdO0,O00,O0 at the end of the
fiscal year, pointing out that it would seem that the proper course.for the City
of Roanoke to follom would be to request the Governor of the 5tote of Virginia
future, that it is difficult to understand how this procedure established as a
one time situation could help either Roanoke or any other of the political sub-
divisions and that in addition to petitioning the Governor. it is recommended
that Council refer this matter to the Virginia Municipal League in order that the
other political subdivisions may he alerted to the problem and take part in the
effort to have this matter brought to a successful conclusion.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the report of the City Auditor
and that siad report be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor
and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Zhomas further moved that the City Attorney be instructed tO prepare
the proper measure urgin9 the Governor of Virginia and the State Department of
Welfare and Institutions to reinstate and continue advance reimbursements to
localities of assistance payments for Old Age Assistance, Aid to Dependant Childr~
and Aid to the Permenently and Totally Disabled welfare programs, The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Thomas further moved that when the measure is adopted by Council
that a copy be transmitted to the Virginia Municipal League with the request
that the League take such action as it deems necessary to support the' position of
the City of Roanoke, T~e motion was seconded by Mr. ZrOut and unanimously
adopted.
JAIL: Council having previously referred to.thn Jail Study Committee
for ~ludyo report and reconnendaticn the matter of reconstruction of the Intake
Center and the mntter 9f closed circuit television for.the Jail facility, the
City of Roanoke Jail Study Committee submitted the following report in connec-
tion with the condition of the lcckup and the need for closed circuit televi-
sion tn be Installed in the city Jail:
*March 19, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Ruanoke.,Virginia
Centlemen:
Subject: City Jail
On Monday, March 12, 1973, Sheriff Paul J. Puckett
appeared before City ~onncil and presented a communication
with reference to needed improvements for satisfactory
operation of the existing jail facility pending construc-
tion of a hem jail. Sheriff Puckett*s report dealt with
three items, tmo of mhich were.referred to the Jail Study
'Committee and one which was referred to the City Manager.
Zhe Jail Committee accompanied by Judge Ernest Ballon
met on ~uesdayo March 13, 1973. to discuss the problems
posed by Sheriff Puckett. The Committee shared the legi-
timate concern of Sheriff Puckett with respect to the con-
dition of the lookup and the need for closed circuit tele-
vision to be installed in the jail. Mith respect to the
condition of the lockup the committee reviewed this situa~
tiaa in detail and althouDh the conditioa of the lockup
marrants immediate action mith respect to rat extermination
and ventilation the committee feels that extensive and
expensive improvements should not be'made at this time until
there is a clear delineation as to the tenure of use that
this facility willhave. As a result the committe~ has
requested that immediate action be taken to correct the
lockup deficiencies sith respect to the incidents of rats
and make improvements to the ventilation system of that
facility.
The committee concurs with the request of the Sheriff
to install closed circuit television in various portions
of the jail to better control the activites of the inmates
and to preclude or reduce the aggressive tendencies of
some of the more abusive inmates. The committee asked that
the City Manager.contact LEAA to ascertain the availability
of grant funds for this purpose. Specifications have been
prepared for this work, and it would be recommended that
City Council by resolution authorize the solicitation of
bids for immediate installation of ~his closed circuit
television. Additionally, subject to the availability of
LEAA 9rant funds, it would be recommemded that City Council
authorize the City Manager to apply for a LEAA grunt. The
installation of the television, however, should not hinge
upon the availability of grant funds.
A separate report sill be submitted by the City Manager
on the matter of hiring and pay scale for para-medics for
the jail.
Mhile the committee sas in attendance, the Chairman.
Mr. William Hubard, made a short verbal report on po~sible ·
sites for the regional correctional facility.
Respectfully'submitted.
S! Milliam S, Hubard mt
~iiliam $.'Rubard
Mr. Hubard moved tbatthut portion of the report dealing with the
condition of the lockup be referred back to the Jail Study'Committee for further
study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Thomas and unanimously adopted.
Mr, Lisk moved that the City Manager along 'with Sheriff Paul J.
Pnckett be requested to explore the feasibility or providing n detoxification
center Instead of investing money in improvements and repairs to the lockup, The
motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard amd unanimously adopted.
In a discussion, certain members of Council questioned the City Manager
as to the possibility of acquiring LEAh funds to be used for the closed circuit
television for the Jail, whereupon, the City Manager replied that he has received
a communication from representatives of LEAA advising that they will not partici-
pate in this type of activity because they feel they will be spying on the privacy
of the inmates.
Mr. Hubard moved that Council receive and file and concur in that portion
of the report dealing with the closed circuit television for the Jail. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
PARKS AND PLAYGROI~DS: Council having appointed'a committee composed
of Dr. Charles M. Cornell, Chairman, Mr. David K. Lisk and Mr. Hampton W. Thomas
for the purpose of studying the feasibility of naming a park or something else of
an appropriate nature in honor of the late Benton O. Dillard, the committee sub-
mitted a written report recommending that the name of Elmwood Park be changed to
the Henton O. Dillard Memorial Park,
Mr. Lisk moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure. The motion vas seconded by Mr. Hubard and
unanimously adopted.
AMBULANCES-ROANOKE VALLEY REGIONAL HEALTH SERVICES PLANNING COUNCIL,
INCORPORATED: Council having requested that the City Manager and the City Attorney
prepare an ambulance Ordinance which will regulate to some degree the manner of
providing ambulance service in the City of Roanoke and making the provisions of the
proposed Ordinance inapplicable to Vehicles of volunteer, organized non-profit
life saving, first aid and rescue organizations and to the drivers and attendants
of and on such vehicles, the City Manager and the City Attorney submitted a joint
report transmitting said Ordinance.
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Or. Taylor.
In this connection, the City Manage? verbally reported that certain
members of his staff have informed him that there is a possibility that in a
short period of time the ambulance Ordinance can be worked out between all
parties conceroed.
Based on the verbal remarks of the City Manager, Mr. Thomas offered a
substitute notion that the matter be referred to the City Manager for additional
study and recommendation to Council. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and
unanimously adopted.
WATER DEPARTMENT: A committee appointed for the purpose of studying
bids received for miscellaneous small repairs to streets and sidewalks occasioned
by the nornal da'ily operations of the Water Department for the calendar year
April 3, 1973, through April 2, 1974, submitted the following report recommending
lhuk the low bid of John A. Hull ~ Company, Incorpornted, in the nmgunt of
$$7,686.75, be nccepted:
'March 19, 1973
Honornble Mayor nnd City Council
Ronnohe, Virginia
Gentlemen:
HOds .were received nnd opened before City Council on
March 5. 1975, for miscellaneous, smnll repairs Jo streets
nnd sidewnlks occasioned by normal daily operutions Of the
Water Depnrtuenl for the calendnr year April 3, 1973, through
April 2, 19?d. Three bids were received and referred to the
undersigned committee to tabulote and study the bids and
report bach to Council.
The bid by John A..ill & Company. Ina** was low in
the amount of $$?,8~B.?$ as shoun on the attached Tabulation
of Hids. The low bidder neglected to submit with his bid a
statement of qualification, houever upon request by a mem-
ber of the undersigned committee has furnished the commit-
tee with such n statement. The low bidder ia well known
to the City administration, has performed similar work for
the Mater Department before and currently has uorh under
contract with the City for roadway uorh at the Municipal
Airport. The committee feels the low bidder is qualified
and that the informality of submitting a statement of quali-
fication after the bid opening should be accepted under the
Eity*s provisions in the advertisement of reserving the
right foe the waiver of any informalities. This is in keep-
ing uith the spirit of comparative bidding.
Iris the recommendation of the committee that the
lom bid, as submitted by John A. Hall & Compnay, loc** be
accepted and all other bids rejected. Funds are currently
available in the Water Department budget for this work dur-
ing the current budget year and are proposed for the F.Y.
?3-?4 budget.
Respectfully submitted,
S/. Byron E. Honer
Byron E. Hamer, Chairman
S/ B. B, Thompson
Bueford B. Thompson
S/ Kit B. Eiser
Kit B. Kiser'
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the com-
mittee and offered ~he following emergency Ordinance:
(~20766) AN ORDINANCE accepting the proposal of John A. Hall & Com-
pany. Inc., for performing certain miscellaneous, small area hard surface
street and sidewalk restoration; authorizing the proper City officials to execut,
the requisite contract; reject'lng all other'bids; and pkovidin9 for an emer-
gency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book a37. page 484.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: MesSrS. Garland. Hubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ............ 7.
NAYS: None O.
TRAFFIC-BUDGET: The Roeuoke Highuay Safety'Commission submitted the
following report recommending the hiring o! n full-time profess~onnl safety
director sad further recommending the appointment of a safety committee to work
with the proposed safely director with repreaentetfonfrom nil the major depart-
ments and divisions of the city:
*The Roanoke Higbuny Commission, in view of the impend-
ing impact of the Federal Occupational Safety nnd Health
Act ,of 19TO, the Highway Safety ACt of 1966 and applicable
sections or the Code of Virginia relative to industrial and
highmay safety, urges the City of Roanoke to put forth
greater emphasis and effort in'complying with these safety laws
within the ietre-9orernuentnl operations of the City in
respect to industrial and highmay safety.
It is the unanimous opinion of this C~mmission that the
City of Roanoke, mith gOO general employees*and an additional
1,?00 in the school system, cannot operate a full safety pro-
gram effectively without a full-time professional safety
director. Whereas the Commission recognlaed the consider-
able effort put forth by the.City in recent years to provide
employee/supervisory safety training and ether useful tools
such as an Accident Review Ooard, and employee Defensive
Driving Courses, the magnitudeof the problem is still
sufficient to warrant a full-time safety director and
especially with the *get tough' provisions of OSHA
(Occupational Safety and Health Act) which mill apparently
be applicable to cities as they are now being applied to
private enterprise~
In view of these circumstances the Commission recom-
mends the immediate hiring of a fall-time professional safety
director~ This job position should be established ut the
highest possible administrative level with the person ia
the job position being responsible directly to the City
Manager and having the delegated authority of the City
Manager in the execution of his work. The Commission feels
one person in this position could well serve the Roanoke
School System as well as other facets of the local govern-
ment. In this connection the Commission would suggest
exploratory talks between Mr. Hamer, City Manager, and Or.
Pack. Superintendent of Schools. as to the feasibility and
merit of this suggestion if this report is given-favorable
consideration.
The first duty of the proposed safety director should
be to see that pertinent safety laws and regulations are
properly enforced in all departments, and divisions of the
City 9overnment. The authority of the safety director
should enable him to deal directly with department heads,
coocdJnate safety activities between departments and divi-
sions, and make on-the-spot corrections if a safety viola-
tiaa is noted, even going so far, if need be, to stop work
in progress where flagrant violations are observed.
The next order of duty of the proposed safety director
should be to prepare, implement and direct an annual safety
program pertinent to intra-governmental operations and City
employees. Such aprogram should be educational in nature ·
and directed to the preventive aspects of Industrial, Motor
Vehicle and off-the-job safety, broken down into monthly
programs with meekly or seasonal themes. The preventive
aspects of safety would include a wide variety of safety
films, slide presentations, posters, bulletins, hand buts,
safety talks, contests, and possibly an incentive awards
program.
A safety committee ia recommended to work with the pro-
posed safety director with representation from all the major
departments and divisions of the City. This committee mould
serve as the marking arm of the safety program and be a
major factor in the effectiveness of the program. Committee
members rotated on a periodic time basis mould assist the
safety director in weekly safety presentations to various
groups of City employees in addition to other duties assigned
the safety committee.
Other duties of the proposed s,fety director mould
include, but be limited, to, accidents, prescribing safety
Investigative procedures and format.' and any other related
safety activities the City Rousger nay direct us appropriate
to the Job position.' " -
Hr. Lisk moved that the matter be referred to 1973-74 budget study.
Yhen)tion mas seconded by Mr. Trout uud seconded by Mr. Trout and uuanJmo,,~y
adopted,
UNFINISHED HUSINESS:
MATER DEPARTMENT: Council having previously deferred action on a
report of the Mater Resources Committee in connection mith the sale of surplus
mater to various ~ounty areas and a proposed recommended policy for furnishing
surplus mater to areas Outside the city limits, the matter mas'again before the
body.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be taken under advisement until
the regular meeting of Council on Monday, April 9, 1973 to allom enough time
to discuss the report mith the various county areas. The motion mas seconded
by Mr. Liskand unanimously adopted.
ZONING: Council having previously deferred action on the folloming
report of the City Planning Commission in connection mith request of Mr. C.
Richard Cranmell, A~torney, representing RacDey, Incorporated, that property
located at the corner of Memorial Avenue and Dunmore Street, S. M., described
as part of Lots 5 and 6, part of a vacated alley, and all of Lots 11 and 12,
Block l, Mop of YJrgJnia Heights, Official Tax No~ 1322b09. b~ reznned from
RD-I, G~nernl Residential District, to RD-2, General Residential District, the
City Planning Commission recommending that the request be denied, the matter
was again before the body,.
~March Oo 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Rayor
aud Members of City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request Mas considered by the GitI
Planning Commission at both its regular meetings of January
3~ 1973, and March 7. 1973.
At the January 3, 1973. meeting, Mr. Flora, an
associate with Mr. Cranmell, 'appeared before the Planning
Commission and requested that this item be tabled.
Although this matter mas tabled by the Planning Commission,
three residents of the area appeared before the Planning
Commission and expressed their opposition to this rezoning
petition noting the density problem and the traffic situa-
tion that. mould be created by this rezoning. The three
residents voicing their opposition to this rezoning were
Mrs. Beverly Collins, 2932 Mootvale Road. 5. M.; Mrs.
Mortha Barry, 1614 Memorial Avenue, S. M.; and Mrs. Patty
Hinshaw,' 1606 Memorial Avenue, S. M.
At the March 7, 1973, meeting, Hr. Cranmell appeared
before the Planning Commission and noted that in regard to
this rezonlng petition there is presently a tmo-story,
approximately 70-year old home on this property which
houses four apartment units. He further stated that there
are five more apartment units on the back of the lot already
under.construction and that the petitioner proposes to raze
struct a leu building housing ? units, uhioh actually uould
be only au addition of'three o~its over the present number.
Hr. Laurence asked about uhnt the si~es of the units
uould be. Mr. Cranuell answered that the five units at
of the building'mould be ~nsonry and aluminum siding and
$135.00 per sooth nod the one bedroom apartments for approxi-
mately $110.00 to $120.00 per non!h, He further noted that
provided.
it was generally agreed ~ha~ this ;~zoning petition was not.
$/ Henry B. Boynton by LM
first reading, read and laid over, uas again before the body, Mr. Lisk offer-
ing the follouing~for its second ~eading sad final adoption:
(z2~?$4) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the proper City officials to
enter Into agreement and to execute, seal. attest and acknowledge · deed of
exchange of certain properties beteeen Major Motor Inns, Incorporated, and
Messrs. Melter F. Po~f and fl. M. Glower, so ns to provide for the deyelop~eet
of certain property situate in Roanoke County, to the east of the City*s Carries
Cove Mater Filtration Plant; to provide for the construction by said corporation
or persons of a pumping station and certain wa~er distribution lines to serve
their property; to prorJde for the City's sale of surplus water to said
corporation or persons following development of such property; and to provide
for the exchange Of certain.lands between the City and said corpa~tion ur
persons, upon certain terms and conditions.
(For f~ll text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook =37, page
Mr. Lish moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion uss seconded
by Mr. Trout andadopted by the following vote:
AVES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. L sk. Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber ..........................
~AYS: None ...........O.
GARBAGE REMOVAL: Ordinance No. 20756, proposin9 that the ~'ty enter
into an agreement,' in the manner provided by Section 15.1-21. Code ~f Virginia.
1950, as amended, with certain Other political subdiv:s'ions of the Commonwealth
of Virginia for the establ'ishment of the Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Maste
Disposal Board to operate and generally administer a Roanoke Valley Regional
Landfill; approving a certain agreement prepared to he entered into with certain
governing bod~es herein named; conditionally authorizing the Mayor and the City
Clerk to execute said agreement for and on behalf of the City of Roanoke;
authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute said agreement for and on
behalf of the City of Ro~floke; authorizing expenditure of sums not t~ exceed a
total Of $55,000.00, upon certain terms and conditions, and directing the City
Clerk to transmit copies of this Ordinance and of said pr'oposed agreement to the
governing bodies of said other political jurisd'ictions, having previously been
before Council fir its first reading, read and laid over. was again before the
body. Mr. Trout offering the following for its second reading and final adoption:
(~20759) AN ORDINANCE proposing that the City enter iht5 an agreement.
in the manner provided in §15.1-21, Code of Virginia, 1950. as amended, with
certai~ other political subdivisions of the Commonuealth of Virginia for the
establishment of the Roanoke Valley Regional Solid MasSe Disposal Board to
operate and generally administer a Roanoke ValXey'Regional Landfill; approving
n certain agreement prepur'ed to be entered into uith certain governing bodies
herein named; conditionally authorizing the Mayo~ and the City Clerh to
execute said agreement for and on behalf of the City of ~oanohe; authorizing
expenditure of sums not to exceed a total of $~5,000.00. upon certain terms
and conditions;'and'dlrecting the City Clerk to transmit copies of this ordinance
and of said proposed agreement to ~he governing bodies of said other political
Jurisdictions.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook aS?. page
Rt. Trout moved the adoption of th~ Ordinance. The motion mas seconded
by Hr. Lisk-and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: #essrs'. Garland. Rubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Nehber ........~ .......... ?*
NAYS: None ..........O.
CITY ERPLOYEES-CITY MANAGER: Mayor Webber called to the attention of
Council that the position of Assistant City Manager is now vacant and called
for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Trout placed in nomination thename of Mr. Samuel R. McGhee, III.
'There being no further nominations, Mr. Samuel H. McOhee. IIio was
elected as Assistant City' Manager of the City of Roanoke, effective March lg,
1973. by the follomieg vote:
FOR MR. MCGHEE: Messrs. Garland, Rubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Mebber .................. 7.
Dr. Taylor then offered the following Ordinance fixing the salary of
Mr. Samuel O. McGhee, 111o Assistant City Manager, at $19,000.00 and deleting
the position of Samuel ~. McGhee0 III. City Engineer, at a salary of $16o014.00:
(~2076T) AN ORDINANCE to amend Ordinance No. 2034B. adopted June 28,
1972, as amended, fixing the'annual compensation of certain unclassified officials
and employees of the City. by changing provisions made for the name and annuaX
compensation of the Assistant city Manager and of the City Engineer; and provid-
ing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =37o page 485.)
- Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, ~rout and
Mayor Webber .................. 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
Mr. Lisk then offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
$250.50 to Personal Services under Section us, 'City Manager,' of the 1}72-73
budget:
'(=20768) AN ORBINANCE to amend and reord~in Section ~3. "City Manager','
of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, an~ providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook :37, page
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas seconded'
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
A~ES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber ...........
NAYS: 'Non~
CITY ENGINEER-CITY WANAGEE: Ur, Garland offered the following Reso-
lution releasing.and marring such nlaJm an the City may bare against, William
F, Clark for reimbursement of a part of the funds paid said employee under the
terms of a mritten agreement dated August 29, 1969, between the city and
said employee, the claim so waived having a value of $2,185.33 as pf March
16, 1973:
(z20769) . A RESOLUTION maivln9 the City's claim for reimbursement of
certain sums arising out of a certain agreement dated August 29, 1969, provid-
ing for a leave of absence to a City employee, ·
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book z37, page 486.)
~Wr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion mas
seconded by DF. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Rayor Webber .................
NAYS: None ........... O.
BUSES: Council having directed the City Attornel to prepare the pro-
per measure accepting and expressin9 certain appreciation to the Botetourt
County Chamber of Commerce for its contribution to the city*s costs of main-
taining certain public bus transportation in a portion of Botetourt County.
he presented same; mhereupOno Mr. Trout offered the following Resolution:
(n20770) A RESOLUTION accepting and expressin9 certain appreciation
to the Botetourt County Chamber of Commerce for its contribution to the City's
costs of maintaining certain public bus transportation in a portioo of
8otetouFt County.
(For full tex$ of Resolution. see Ordinance Book ~37, pag~ d87. i
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The mgtlon was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Wayor Webber 7.
NAYS: None O.
ZONING: Mr. Bubard offered the following Resolution initiating an
amendment of Sections T and ~9.1, Chapter 4.1. Zoning, of Title IV, of The
Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, relating to RG-1 and RG-2,
General Residential Districts, and to the definition of certain terms and
wSrds employed in said chapter, by making provision for allowance in said
districts, as special exceptions after public hearing, of art gallery uses,
defining the term art gallery and providing for a public hearin9 on April 30,
1973:
(#20771) A RESOLUTION initiating an amendment of Secs. 7 and 79.1.
Chapter 4.1, Zoning, of Title XV of the Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as
amended, relating to RG-1 and RG-2 general residential districts and to the
7.9
80'
definition of certain terns end mords.enployed in said chapter, by nuhlog
pr,vision for ell,nonce in said diatvfnts, ns special.exceptions niter public
hearing, of nfl gallery uses, end by defining the'term Art Gallery,
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Rook n3T, page 4~)
Hr, Bubard moved the adoption of the Resolution. The notion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Buburd. Lish, Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
Hayer Webber ........... ~-----?.
NAYS: None ...........
PAY PLAN-CITY ERPLOYEES-CLERE OF TUE COURT: Council having directed
the City Attorney to.prepare the proper.measure amending Ordinance. No. 20348.
adopted June 28, 1972, fixing the annual compensation of certain unclassified
officials and employees of the city, by deleting therefrom the positions and
authorized annual compensation of all deputy,clerhs and photographers in the
Office of the Clerk of the Courts; and providing-that such changes be made
retroactive to July I. 1972, he presented same; whereupon. Mr. Bubard offered the
folloning emergency Ordinance:
(#20772) 'AN ORDINanCE to amend Ordinance No. 20346, adopted June 29,
1972, fixing the annual compensation of certain unclassified officials and
employees of the City, by deleting therefrom the positions end authorized
annual compensation of all deputy clerks and photographers in the office o£ the
Clerk of Courts; providing that such changes bo made retroactive to July 1,
1972; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Hook ~3T..page 489.)
Mr. Bubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance; The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lish and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber
NAYS: None O.
Mr. Lisk then offered the followlng emergency Ordinance amending Ordi-
nance NO. 20351, providing a System of Pay Rates and Ranges for the employees
of the City of Roanoke, by adding to Schedule R-of said System of Pay Rates
and Ranges new code positions for deputy clerks and photographers in the Office
of the Clerk of the Courts and providing the ranges and pay steps applicable
to each said new position; and providing for the effective date of July 1, 1972,
of the changes ordered:
(=20773) AN ORDINANCE to amend Ordinance No. 20351. providing a
System of Pay Rates and Ranges for the employees of the City of Roanoke, by adding
to S~hedule 2 of said Syst.em of Pay Rates and Ranges new code positions for
deputy clerks and photographers in the office of the Cler~ of Courts, and provid-
ing the rauges and pay steps appli'cable to each said new position; providing the
effective date of the changes herein ordered; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book'S3?, page'490,)
M~. Lfsk move~ the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland,.Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................. ?.
~AYS: None ........ ...Q,
EASEMENTS: Council having directed the City Atturney to prepare
the proper measure granting revocable, nou-traosferoble authority to norm*o's
Machine Shop, Incorporated, to maintain for a period of'one year, as an
encroachment, propane gas tanks in an area of unopened public alley abutting
the rear of property designated as Official Tax No. 1010622, a part of Lot
21, Block O, as shoun on'the F. Rorer Map of subdivision, upon certain terms
and conditions, he presented same; whereupon, Mr. Thomas moved that the
folloulng. Ordfnance be placed upon its first reading:
(#20?74) AS ORDINASCE granting revocable, non-transferable
authority to Barmon*s Machine' Shop. lac., to maintain for a period of one
(l) year, as an encroachment, propane gas tanks in an area of unopened public
alley abutting the rear of property designated as Official No. 1010022, a
part of Lot 21, Block O, as shown on the F, Rorer map of subdivision, upon
certain terms and conditions.
WHEREAS.,Oarmon*s Machine Shop, Inc., tenant of the property or
premises hereinafter described, has requested that it be permitted to main-
tain certain propane gas storage tanks as an encroachment in a 4-foot by
lO-foot portion of an unopened public alley abutting-the rear line of said
property; and upon consideration of the request and of certuin recommendations
made by the City Manager and pursuant to the authority vested in local govern-
ing bodies by Chapter 10, Title 15.1 of.~he 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended,
This Council is agreeable to said applicant*s proposal,,and is willing to per-
mit the encroachment in said area upon the terms and conditions herein con-
tained.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
permission be and .is herebygraoted Harmon*s Machine Shop, Inc., tenant of
the premises located at 210 4th Street, S. W., and designated as Official No.
1010922, a portion of Lot 21, Block O, F. Rorer Hap, to maintain for a period
of one year, as an encroachment, two (2) propane gas storage tanks and related
piping in and on a 4-foot by IO-fopt area of the unopened public alley abutting
the rear lineof said pr,*party, upon the foil*ming express terms and pr*vi-
si*us, namely:
1. That there be paid to the City the sun of ~lO.O0 cash, as a
charge or fee for the privilege hereiu provided;
2. That oil such t~nks and piping shall be properly constructed and
safely maintained and protected at the expemse of said tenant, in accordance
8'2:
with suGh of the Citytn building, fire end other regulations and requirements
us ere applicable thereto;
3. That the maintenance of the aforesaidencroachment be subJect to
the limitations contained in SS15,1-376 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, abovemen-
tioned, and the permit herein granted shall be-non-transferab~e and revocable
at the will of the City Council, it to be agreed by said tenant as evidenced by
its execution of an attested copy of this ordinance, that said permittee con-
sents hereto and agrees to indemnify and save harmless the City of Roanoke Of
and from all claims for injuries or damages to persons or property that may in
any manner arise by reason of such encroachment; and
4. That, upon notice of revocation of the within permit, mailed to
said tenant or to the owner of the aforesaid premises, or either of them. or
posted on the aforesaid premises, or upon the expiration of the one-year term
hereof should the within permit not be earlier revoked, said parties shall.
within thirty (30) days from the date of mailing or posting of such notice,
remove all said encroaching tanks, piping and other structures, at no cost what-
soever to the City.
DE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the provisions of this ordinance shall not
become fully effective until such time as a written permit shall have been
issued by the City*s Building Commissioner to the aforesaid tenant or its duly
authorized contractor or representative, permitting the aforesaid construction,
and until an attested copy of this ordinance shall have been duly signed.
sealed, attested and acknowledged by said tenant and the owner of the aforesaid
premises and shall have been admitted to record, at the expense of said parties,
in the deed books in the Clerk*s Office of the Hustings Court of the City of
Roanoke.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................... 7.
NAYS: None .......... O.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEY: Mr. Ralph Leach, Man-
~ower Director, Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley, appeared before
Council and requested that the City of Roanoke prepare to finance a summer youth
employment program math'funds of ~ e Public Employment Program, advising that
during the summer of 1972, TAP spent $148,$70.00 in the City of Roanoke to pro-
vide jobs for 3bO PeoPle* that these funds will not be available this year,
pointing out that the city*s Public Employment Program allocation will be greater
than necessary to phase down the present Public Employment Program, and offering
the cooperation of TAP and the availability of TAP as a subcontractor shoud such
be desirable.
Mr. Huburd moved.that the remarku nude by Mr. Lesch be referred to
the City M~neger for eonsiderotion and report to Council os soon as possible.
The notion nas seconded by Mr, Link and uneninouslT adopted,
JUVENILE HOME: Mr. Huburd called attention to · report of the City
Manager under date ~f March 5, 1973, recommending the appointment of a committee
to explore the possibility of m cooperative program fur providing Juvenile
detention facilities.for several ureas in southuestern Virginia; whereupon,
Hubard placed in nomination thenames of Dr. Noe~ C. Taylov and Mr..John J.
Heall. Jr** as representatives of the City of Roanoke. .There being no farther
nominationu. Or. Noel C. Taylor and Mr, John J~ Oeall, Jr., were elected as
representatives of the City of Roanoke ~o u committee to study the possibility
of. a cooperative pvogran for prpviding juvenile detention facilities for several
areas in Southwestern Virg~nip by the following vote:
For Dr. Taylor: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lfsk, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber .... T .......... ~---6. (Dr. Taylor not voting)
For Mr. Beall: Messrs. Garland, llubard, Link. Taylor, Thomas, Trout
smd Mayor yebber ............... 7.
COUNCIL-SALE OF PROPERTy: Mr. Nubard moved that Council meet in
Executive Session to discuss a real estate matter. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Manors. Garland, Dubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ..................
NAYS: None ..........O.
· .COUNCIL~SALE OF PROPERTy: Mr. Thomas moved, t~at Council meet in
Executive Session to discuss a pending real estate matter. The motion was
seconded by Hr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: 'Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................... 7,
NAYS: None ......... -4).
There being no further business. Mayor gebbe~ declared themeeting
adjourned,
APPROVED
ATTEST:
DEputy City Clerk Mayor
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday. March 26. 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in*regular meeting in the Council
Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday. March 26, 1973, at 7:30 p.mo, the
regular meeting hour, with Mayor Roy L. Mebber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland. Milliam S. Hubard, David
hisk,-Soel C.'Taylor, Hampton M. Thomas. James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L.
Mebber .........................?.
ABSENT: None
OFFICERS pRESENT: Mr. Byron E. Hanero City Manager; Mc. Samuel H.
McGhee, III, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N, Kincanon, City Attorney; Mr.
H. Ben Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorney; and Mr. A. N. Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend
James A. Dickerson. Pastor, Bethany Christian Church.
MINUTES: Copies of the minutes of the regular meeting held on March
5, 1973, and the regular meeting held on March 12, 1973, having been furnished
each member Of Council, on motion of Mr.'Trout, seconded by Mr. Lisk and unani-
mously adopted, the reading thereof was dispensed with and the minutes approved
as recorded.
BEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
TRAINS-BRIDGES: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids on the
painting of the Franklin Road railroad bridge, said proposals to be received by
the City Clerk until 2 p,m., and to be opened before Council at 7:30 pom.. Mayor
Rebber asked if anyone-present had any questions and no representative present
raising any question about the advertisement for bids, the Mayor instructed the
City Clerk to proceed with the opening of the bids; whereupon, the City Clerk
opened and read the following bids:
Electrical ~ Industrial Maintenance Corporation - $2b,047.50
L. R. Brown, Sr., Paint Company - 32,500.00
Burgess Hrothers Painting Contractors,
Incorporated - 37,967.00
Mr. Thomas moved that the bids be referred to a committee to be appointed
by the Mayor for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Webber appointed Messrs. Samuel H. McGhee, III. Chairman, J. H.
Brewer and 8. B. Thompson as members of the committee.
ACTS OF ACKNOMLEDGENENT: Mr. Trout offered the following Resolution
expressing congratulations to the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University Basketball Team and to its coaching staff upon their successful pursuit
of the National Invitational Tournament Basketball Championship; whereupon, the
City Clerk read the following Resolution in its entirety:
(~2077S) A RESOLUTION expressing congratulations to the Virginia
Polltechnic. institute end State Unfyer~ity Basketball Team end to its cooching
st~ff upon their successful pursuit of the National Invitationa~ T~urnauent
Basketball Championship.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book nS?, page
#r, Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Link and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, flubard, Llsh, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Mayor #ebber ................ 7.
NAYS: None ......... O.
~n behalf of the members of Council, Mayor Mebber presented Resolu-
tion NO. 20775 t~ Hr. Lacy N, Edwards, Jr., President of the Roanoke Chapter of
the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Alumni.
STREETS AND ALLEY~-ST*AT'£ ~[GBMAVS: Council having set a public hearing
for 7:30 p.m., Monday, March 26. 1973, on an application of Mr. S. Douglas
Shackleford, et ux., to amend portions of the Major Arterial Highway Plan for
the City of Roanoke, dated December, '1963, and of the Roanoke Valley Area Thorough-
fare Plan (lgOS), dated 19&9, $o that the proposed relocation of Woods Avenue,
S. M., at its intersection with Franklin Road, S. M.. be relocated by slightly
shifting said intersection in a northerly di~ec~lon, the matter was before the
body.
In this connection, the City Attorney reported that under the State
Code, amendments to the Major Arterial HiGhway ?lan may b~ d~ne only after
certain public notice has been published in a newspaper on two .successive weeks
at different periods of time between ~ach publication, that the City Clerk for-
worded the notice of public hearing in connection With the above Latter to the
newspaper to be published on March 9, 1973. and also on March 16, 1973, that
the newspaper published the n~tice only one time on March 9, 1973. that Mr. ED
Griffitb Dodson. Jr., Attorney. representing Mr. and Mrs. Shackleford agrees
that the notice should he published in accordance with the ~ode of Virginia,
and the City Attorney psinting 5ut that he has tentatively reschednled the
public hearing for'Monday, April 30. 1973, at 7:30 p.m** in order that proper
advertising may be accomplished.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the verbal report*of the
City Attorney and that the public hearing be re~cheduled 'for Monday. April
1973. 'The motio~ was seconded by Mr. Link and unanimously adopted**
ZONING: Council ~aving Set'a public hea~ing ~or 7:30 p.m.. Monday,
March 26. lg?S. on the question of re'zoning from RC-2, General Residential
District. to C-I. Office and Institutional District. all' sixteen of the lots
Block 27. ~s shown on the Map of Riverview Land and Manufacturin9 Company. being
Lots I - 16, inclusive, in said Block, Official Tax N~s. 1313601 - 1313616,
Inclusive, and being situate on~lh~ ~outh side o! Patterson Avenue, S.
and on the north aide of Chapnt~Avenue, $. H~, hetueen ~lath 5trees and
19th Street, S. H** the mutter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follow-
ing report vecoBmending that Council approve the request for rezoning uith the
exceptlun o~ Lot
NFebruary 8, 1973
Th~ Honorable Roy L. Webber, Hayor
and Hembers of City Council
Roanohe, Virginia "'
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was cbnsidered by the City
Planning Commission at Its regular meeting of February 7.
1973.
Mr.. Husgrove appeared before the Planning Commission
and hagan first with some historical perspective pertaining
to this petition by noting that Hr. and HFS. George Ashaell,
owners of four of the lots in this petition had requested this
commercial rezoaing and bad appeared before:the Plamning Cum-
mission on October 7. 1971, then represented by Denton 0illard.
He noted that since this property did not adjoin a C-I zoning
designation and could not meet the 2 acre minimum require-
ment, it uss agreed that aa attempt would be made to muster
up the necessary 2 acres to meet the zoning requirements.
Hr. Husgrove pointed Out that he canvassed the entire block
and succeeded in getting everyone in the block, mith the
exception of one lot owner, who is in Beirut, Lebanon, to
agree to join in this request for a C-I designation so as to
neet the zoning minimum.
Mr. Husgrove stated that Hr. and HFs. Ashwell plan to
erect m convalescent home on their four lots in addition to
an~existing building mhich they plan to operate also as
a convalescent home to house, primarily, patients released
from the Vo A. hospital.
Hr, Parrots stated that he felt that anything that could
be done under a C-l designation in this block would be much
better than another ~G-2 district, dr. floymtoa stated that
this C-I designation would provide for a good transition
After discussion by the Planning Commission members,
it was generally agreed that this use mas in keeping with
the general character of the neighborhood. - ''
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and unani-
mously approved recommeading to City Council that this request
be approved.
S/ Henry B. Boynton by
for one uniform office and institutional zonimg deslgaation in the entire block:
#February 14, 1973
The Honorable goy L, Mebber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
goanoke; Virginia
~entlemen:
This matter UBS tabled by City Council at its meeting of
Pebruary 12, 1973, so as to permit the Planning Department to
consider the feasibility of rezoning a single lot contained
in an entire block petitioned to be rezoned to an office and
institutional zoning designation,
The original rationale for not recommending having this
single parcel rezoned nas that the ovner of this lot vas resid-
ing in Beirut, Lebanon, and he could not be contacted con-
cernfng this matter. Hoverer, the situation has recently
changed.
I am enclosing with this letter tvo communications from
Mr, Musgrove: one petitioning that the entire block be
rezoned to a C-l, Office and Institutional designation and
the other a communication addressed to the owner of the
single lqt in question notifying him of this rezoning
petition.
In vi~m of this recent situation, I would recommend
that City Council include the remaining lot in the rezonin9
petition as aubmitted by Mr. Musgrove so as to provide for
one uniform office and institutional zoning designation
in the entire block.
I believe that in a situation of this nature. Planning
Commission action is not necessary and Council can act
directly on it.
Thank you.
Sincerely yours,
S/ Lothar Mermelstein
Lothar Mermelstein
Planning Director"
With reference to the matter, copy of a communication from Mr. Musgrove
advising that Mr. J. W. Boswell, Rental Agent for Mrs. Sultana Grayeb, owner
of Lot 1. Block 27, Map of Riverview Land and Manufacturing Company, telephoned
him and advised that Mrs. Grayeb does not desire to have her lot rezoned, how-
ever, she does not oppose the rezoning of all the other lots in the block as
requested by the petitioners, was before Council,
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of an Ordinance excluding Lot 1 owned by
Mrs. Sultana Grayeb. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Thomas.
Mr. Lothar Mermelstein, Planning Director, appeared before Council and
advised that it is not u good planning policy to leave one lot in a neighborhood
a different zoning classification from the other lots in that neighborhood and
that he is of the opinion that the entire block should be rezoned.
Mr. Hubard offered a substitute motioo that Council rezone all sixteen
lots in Block 27, including Lot I which is owned by Mrs. Grayeb. The motionwas
seconded by Mr. Lisk.
The City Attorney pointed out that Council can legally rezone the entire
sixteen lots in the block if it feels it is in the best interest of the city to
do SO.
Mr. Lisk expressed the opinion them it Is the prerogative of Council
to review facts involved end try to maintain continuity of zoning fo the City Of
Roanoke and that it would not be practical not to rezone Lot 1,
The substitute motion offered by Mr. Buburd, seconded by Mr, Lash,
that all sixteen lots in Block 27, Map of Rivervlem Land and Manufacturing Company
be rezoned from RG-2 to C-l, mas lost by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Hubard, Lash.and Dr. Taylor -3,
NAYS: #essrs. Garland, Thomas, Trout and'Mayor #ebber ............. 4.
Mr. Trout again moved that the following Ordinance rezoning only Lots 2 -
16, Block 27, Map of Riverview Land end Manufacturing Company..and excluding
Lot 1, which is owned by Mrs° Sultana Groyeb, from RG-2, to C-I, be placed
upon its first reading:
(~20776) AZ ORDINANCE tO amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of The
Code of the City of Roanoke, 19§6, as amended, and Sheet No. 131, Sectional 1966
Zone Map. City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
MHEREAS. application was made to the Council of the' City of Roanoke to
have Lots 2 through 16, inclusive, in Block 27, as shown on the Map of Riverviem
Land and Manufacturing Company, Official Tax Nos. 1313601 - 1313607 and 1313609 -
131361b, inclusive, and being situate on the south side of Patterson Avenue.
S. Mo, and on the north side of Chapman Avenue, S. Moo betmeen 18th Street and
lgth Street, S. M., rezoned from RG-2, General Residential District, to C-1.
Office and Institutional District, and such application was duly referred to the
City Planning' Commission ~hlch recommended that said land be rezoned from RG-2.
General Residential District, to C-I, Office and Institution District; and
#HEREAS, by Resolution No. 20721 adopted on the 20th day of February,
1973, Council deemed it appropriate to consider at the Public Bearing required to
be held on said application the reclassification, also of Lot I in the aforesaid
Block, such lot being the only remaintn9 lot in said block, but whose owner is
not u party to the aforesaid application; and
MHEREAS. the attorney for the owners of Lots 2 tbrou9h 16. inclusive,
in Block 27 as shown on the mup of Riverview Land and Manufacturing Company'. ·
has filed an amended petition requesting that the entire block be rezoned to a
C-l, Office and Institutional classification and sent a copy of the amended peti-
tion to the owner of Lot I in the rezoning petition so as to provide auniform
zoning designation for the entire block; and
NHEREAS. the attorney for the petitioners, owners of Lots 2 through 16,
inclusive, of Block 27 as.shown on-the aforesoid map of Rivervie~ Land and Manu-
facturing Company has advised Council that the owner of Lot I desires to retain
a RG-2, General Residential District. zoning for her lot; and
~HEREAS. the hearing as provided for in said notice was held on the
26th day of March, 1973, at 7:30, p.m., before the Council of the City Of Roanoke,
at which hearing all parties in interest and citizens were given an opportunity
to be heard, both for and against the proposed rezoning; and
89
RDEREAS, this Council, after considering the evidence ns herein
provided, is o£ the opinion that the hereinafter described land should be
rezoned.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1936, ns
amended, relating'to Zoning, and Sheet No. 131 of the Sectional 1966 Zone Rap,
City of Roanoke, be amended in the following particular and no other, viz.:
Property located on the south side of the IDOO.block of Patterson Arena
S. U., and on the north side, of the lflO0 block of Chapman Avenue, S. W.. between
IDth and 19th Streets, S. R., described as Lots 2 through 16, inclusive, in
Block 27 as shown on the nap Of Rlverview Land and Manufacturing Company, desig-
nated on Sheet 131 of the Sectional 1966 Zone Map. City of Roanoke, as Official
Tax No, 1313601 - 1313607 and 1313609-1313616, inclusive, be and is hereby,
changed from RG-2, General Residential District, to C-I. Office and Institutional
District, end that Sheet No. 131 of the aforesaid map be changed in this
respect,
The motion was seconded by Hr. Thomas and adopted by the folloming
vote:
AYES:- yessrso Garland, Thomas, Trout and Mayor Webber ...........4.
NAYS: Messrs. Hubard, Lisk and Dr. Taylor ....................... 3.
Mr. Lisk then moved that the communication from Mr. Musgrove be
received and filed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted
ZONING: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m., Monday,
March 26, 1973. on the request of Messrs. J. Tate BcDroom and R. Co Churchill,
Jr., that two parcels of land located on the westerly side of the 2500 and
2600 blocks of Stephenson Avenue, S. W., Official Tax Nos. 1160133 and 1160136,
be rezoned from RS-3, Single-Family Residential District, to RD, Duplex Resi-
dential District, the matter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the fol-
lowing report recommending that the request be granted:
~February 8, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Hayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of February 7,
1973.
Mr. Smeltzer appeared before.the Planning Commission
and stated the following information pertaining to this
petttion;.that this property was purchased by the peti-
tioners approximately a year ago;that the topography is
steep and does not lend itself for construction of single-
family residences too readily; that there are other duplexes
on this street that were built prior to the passing o£ the
1966 zoning Ordinance whereby duplex dwellings could be
built in single-family residential areas; that these pro-.
posed duplexes would resemble other duplexes on the street
and would be brick, two-story structures with one entrance
,9O
to have u value of approximately~$40,O00~ that In addition to
the number Of duplexes already on Stephenson Avenue, there are
a number mt afmgle-~amlly'homeaom thin ntreet~tbut ufa modest
Mr. S~eltzer presented to the Planning Commission mem-
bers a petition'signed by everyone that could possibly be
Interested in this rezoniag stating that they have no ·
objections to this rezoniag. He further stated that h~
bud tried to establish math the neighborhood that this mas
the best use Of this property and that the petitioners
hud utilized this property with a medium population density.
Mr, Boynton asked about the single entrance Of the r
duplexes. Mr. Smeltzer stated that there mas nme door
opening into a common foyer with each duplex branching
.off to the side,
Mr. Parrots stated that the rezoning of these tmo vacant
lots on this street mould take care of the possibility of
creeping commercialism coming up Stephenson Avenoe, mhich
the neighbors are so concerned math.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and unani-
mously approved recommending to City Council that this
request be approved.
Sincerely yours,
S/ Henry D, Boynton by LM
Henry B, Boynton
Mr. Lichael K. Smeltzer, Attorney. representing the petitioners,
appeared before Council in support of the request of his.clients.
No one appearing in opposition to the request for rezoning, Mr. Trout
moved that the following Ordinance be placed upon its karat reading:
(~20777) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1. Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and sheet No. 116. Sectional
1966 Zone Map. City of Roanoke~ in relation to Zoning.
NREREAS. application has been made to the Council of the City of Roanoke
to have Parcel Nos. 1160133 and 1160136, located on the westerly side of Stephenson
Avenue, S. N.. rezoned from RS-3, Single-Family Residential District, to RD.
Duplex Residential District; and
NRERgAS. the City Planning Commission has recommended that the herein-
after described land be rezoned from RS-3, Single-Family Residential District.
to RD. Duplex Residential District; and
NREREAS. the written notice and the posted sign required to be published
and posted, respectively, by Section 71, Chapter 4.1, Title XV, of The Code of
the City of Roanoke. 1956, as amended, relating to Zoning, have been published
and posted as required and for the time provided by said section; and
WHEREAS~ the bearing as prorided for Jn said notice was.held on the
26th day of March, 1973. at 7:30 p.m., before the Council of the City of Roanoke.
at uhich hearing all parties in interest and citizens mere given an opportunity
to be heard, both for and against the proposed rezoning; and
MHEREAS, this Council. after comsidering the evidence as herein pro-
vided, is of the opinion that the hereinafter described land should be rezoned.
J
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of The Code of the City of Eoanoke. 1956,
as amended, ~eletlng to'Zoning, and Sheet No~ i16 of the Sectional 1966 Zone
Map, City of Roanoke, be amended in the following particulars and no others,
Property located ou th'e westerly side of Stephenson Avenue, S.
described as follows:
PARCEL I
BEGINNING at a point on the westerly side of Stephenson
Avenue. S, W., at the southeasterly corner of Lot 3 of
the Shoal Map; thence with the southerly line of Lot 3,
N. 52° 45* M. 135.0 feet to a point in the branch;
thence with a new division line through the original
1.54 acre tract along the center of the branch, S. 13°
25' M. 77.0 feet to a point; thence S. S° 00' M. 24.0
feet to a point; thence S, 16° 41' W. 12,0 feet to a
point; thence $. 43° 06' M. 27.48 feet to a point on
the southerly line of the original 1.54 acre tract; thence
with the line of same. S. 42° 57* E. 90.0 feet tn a
point at Corner 3 on the westerly side of Stephenson
Avenue, S. ~.; thence with Stephenson Avenue, S.
N. 37° 15' E. 144.62 feet to the BEGINNING, and con-
taining 0.33 acre; and
PARCEL I1
Not ~o. I as shown Da the map of the sebdivision of the
property of Eliaabeth C, and Cash J, Shoal prepared by
C. B. Malcolm, S.C.E** dated November 2, 1953, and of
record in the aforesaid Clerk*s Office in Deed Book 914,
page 260, subject to the 10-foot easemeqt dedicated to
the City of Roanoke by said nap as shown thereon; and
Designated on Sheet 116 of the Sectional 1966 Zone Map,
City of Roanoke, as Official Tax Nos. 1160133 and 1160136.
be, and is hereby, changed from RS-3, Single-Family Residential District, to
Duplex Residential District, and that Sheet No. 116 of the aforesaid map be
changed in this respect.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ..................7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
ZONING: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m., Monday,
March 26, 1973, on the request of General Sales, Incorporated, that property
located et the northeast corner of the intersection of Melrose Avenue and
Country Club Drive, N. #., containing 2.164 acres, Official Tax No. 2660519, be
rezoned from C-l, Office and institutional District. to C-2, General Commercial
District. the matter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follow-
in9 report recommending that the request be 9ranted:
~February 6, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Webber. Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of February 7,
1973.
Hr. Fitzpatrick appeared before the Planning Conmivslon end
stated that this property has a frontage of 273 feet on
-Relrose Avenue~aod 365 fe~t on County Club Drive and is
presently owned by the Roanoke County Club and that General
Sales, Inc.. has an option to purchase it,
Mr. Fitzpatrick pointed out that General Sales intends
to erect a retail outlet on this lot if it is rezoned end
that the plans provide for 150 parking spaces to be located
in the front of the building, with the structure set back
approximately 250 feet on Relrose Avenue, He further noted
that everyone on Country Club Drive has been contacted
about this rezoning petition end that no opposition was
expressed to it.
After discussion by the Planning Commissioo m~mbers,
it was generally agreed that the proposed use would not be
detrimental to the surrounding property ouners aud was In
keeping with the general character of the ~elghborhood.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and u~anl~
nously a~proved recommending to City Council that this
request be approved: . ·
Sincerely yours,
S/ Henry B- Boynt°n hy LM .
Henry O. Boynton
Chairman'
Mr. Earl A. Fitzpatrick, Attorney. representing the petitioner, appeared
before Council in support of the request of his clients,
No one appearing in opposition to the request for rezoning, Rro
Thomas moved that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(a20770} AN ORDINAF4CE to amend Title X¥. Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet No. 266, Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke. in relation to Zoning.
NOEREAS. application ha~ been made to the Council of the City of Roanoke
to have the northeast corner of the intersection of Melrose Avenue and Couetry
Club Drive. N. ~.. containing 2.154 acres, bain9 the southerly portion of
Official Tax No. 2660501 rezoned from C-l, Office and Institutional District,
to C-2, General Commercial District; and
~HEREAS. the City Planning Commlssio~ has recommended that the herein-
after described land be rezoned from C-I~ OffiCe and Institutional District, to
C-2o General Commercial District; and
[HEREAS, the written notice and the posted sign required to be
published and posted, respectively, by Section ?1, Chapter 4.1, Title X¥, of
~he Code of t~e City of Roanoke. 1956. a~ amended, rela~in~ to Zoning, have been
published and posted as required and for the tine provided by said section; and
~HEREAS. the hearing as provided for in said notice ~as held on ~he
26th day of Rarch. 1973, at ?:~0 p.a., before the Council of the City of Roanoke.
at nhich hearln9 all parties in interest and citizens were given an opportunity
to be heard, both for and against the proposed rezoning; and
~HEREAS, this Council, after considering'the evidence asherein
proridedo is of the opinin that the hereinafter described land should be rezonedo
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the CoUncil of the City of Roanoke thbt
Title X¥, Chapter 4~1, Section 2, of The Code o£ the GitF of Roanoke, 1956, ns
amended, relating to Zoning, a&d Sheet No. 266 of the Sectional 1966 Zone Map.
City of Roanoke, be amended in the following particular and no other, viz.:
Property located at the northeast corner of the intersection of
Relrose Avenue and Country Club Drive, N, N** containing 2.164 acres, described
as
BEGINNING at the northeost corner of the intersection of
Relrose Avenue, N. #., and Country Club Drive; thence
along the easterly line of Country Club Drive, N. 10o 30*
E, 365.00 feet to an iron stake; thence with n new division
line through the property of the Roanoke Country Club, Inc.,
S, 5g0 ~?* 45* E, 261,05 feet to an iron stake on the east-
erly line of the Roanoke Country Club property; thence with
the same S, Ii° 50' M, 355,00 feet to an.iron stake on the
northerly line of Melrose Avenue; thence with the same No
59° 42* N, 273,05 feet to the point of BEGINNING, containing
· 2,184 acres and being the southerly portion of the property
conveyed to Roanoke Country Club, lac** by Emil Peter Rabil
by deed recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Hustings Court
for the City of Roanoke, Virginia, in Deed Hook 1232, page
164, as shown by plat of survey made by David Dick ~
1972,
designated on Sheet 2h5 of the Sectional 1955 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, as
Official Tax No, 2550501, be, and is hereby changed from C-l. Office and
Institutional District. to C-2, General Commercial District, and that Sheet
No, 255 of the a~oresatd map be changed in this respect.
The motion was secouded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber--~ ................. ?.
NAYS: None ..........O,
' FIRE DEPARTMENT: Council'having referred to the City Manager for
investigation and report a communication from the Reverend Charles T, Green,
President, N.A.A.C.P., in connection with the methods used to select the Fire
Marshal to the Roanoke City Fire Department on March 1, 1973, Reverend Green
appeared before Council and presented a communication expressing his lack of
satisfaction at the "so-called investigation" conducted by the City Manager
into the appointment of the Fire Marshal, and advising that he is more con-
vinced than ever that there was little or no adherence to Code 7115 from the
Class Specifications Manual for the Cityof Roanoke adopted in 1955 in makln9 -
the selection of the Fire Marshal,
It appearing that the City Manager had not reported back to Council
with the results of his i'nvestigation, Mr. Trout moved that the matter be
deferred until the next regular meeting of Council on Monday, April 2. 1973,
pending receipt of a ~eport from the City Manager and that Reverend Green be
furnished with a copy of said report before the Council meeting On Monday,
April 2, 1973. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
ACTS OF AC~NORLEDGERENT-PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: Council having requested
that the City AttorneF prepare the proper measure changing the name of £lmmood
Path to the Denton O, Dillard Memorial. Park, Vice-Mayor Lash and Councilman Thorns
~ubmit~ed a joint mritten report requesting that the report dated February 27.
1973. from a special committee appointed to study the feasibility of naming a
par~ or some other appropriate publl? piece or facility In the city so as to
honor the name and memory of the late Denton O. Dillard which mas before Council
at its meeting on Monday, March, 19, 1973o be returned to Council to be tahen
under consideration b~ Council as a Committee of ihe'Rhole.
Hr. Thomas then moved that the matter be referred to Council acting as
a Committee of the Rhole to discuss other suitable sites or projects'to be
named in honor of the late Denton O. Dillard and'to come up'with recommendations
more compatible with the wishes of the citizens of the City Of Roanoke. The
motion was seconded by Dr. Taylo~ and unanimously adop~ed.
Approximately twenty persons were in attendance at the Council meeting
in opposition to changing the name of Elmwood Path.
Communications from the Roanoke Valley Ristorical Society. Mrs. Ethel
A. Osborne, Mrs. O. Dlackwell Brown, gr. Felix Rargrett, Mrs. Rilliam S. Roses,
Rs. Emily Barksdale, Mr. Frank M. Rogers, Ms. Nell D. Ralters. Mrs. Lewis D.
Brown. Mrs. David A~ Dyer° The National Society of the Colonial Dames of America
in the Commonwealth of Virginia, Mrs. Elisabeth R. Carter, The Roanoke Valley
Garden Club, Mrs. Hugh To Trout, Drs. Charles D. Smith, Mr. M. Carl Andrews,
Mrs. Rarcellus A. Johnson, II1, Mrs. English Showalter and The Roanoke
Council of Garden Clubs, Incorporated, expressing opposition to changing the
name of Elmwood Park, were before Council.
A communication from Dr. Charles M. Cornell, advising that in the
interest of.harmony, he would like to withdraw ~is original recommendation and
suggest that the committee be dissolved and the whole matte~ ~r~p~e~, Was also
before Council,
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
DRUGS-JUVENILE AND DOMESTIC RELATIONS COURT: A communication from Mrs.
R. C. Nelson, Jr., 1409 Third Street, S. N** seconding a communication from
Mr. Raymond P. Barnes, written to the Editor of The Rorld~Nems on March 20, 1973.
concerning the establishment of drug centers in their residential area and, also,
calling attention to a matter which was brought to Council by residents in the
area pertaining to complaints about Youth Haven, pointing out that the citizens
have never been informed as to the results of the investigation by the City
Manager, was before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that the communication be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Rt. Thomas.
,!
Mr. Garland further moved thlt the City Maulger be requested to
investigate the matter with regard to complaints concerning Youth Haven and
report to Council accordingly. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lash and unani-
mously adopted.
BU1LOINGS-SPECIAL PERMITS: A communication from the Southwest
Virginia Community Development Fund requesting that they he aligned to encroach
six inches on city property in front of a building located at 720 Fairfax
Avenue, N. M., for the purpose Of installing a brick veneer front, was before
Council.
Mr. Trout moved that the matter be referred to the City Manager and
the City Planning Commission for study, report and recommendation to Council.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lash and unanimously adopted.
COUNCIL: A communication from Mr. E. VD Rexrode. Jr., Vice President
and General Hanager, HERA-TV, Channel 15, advising Council of MBRA-TV*s
intention to terminate the telecasts of the City Council meetings as of April
30° 1973, was before the body.
Mr. Trout moved that the communicotion be received and filed ond
thnt the City Attorney be instructed to prepore the proper measure of appre-
ciotion to MHRA-TV for its coverage of the City Councll meetings. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
MATER DEPARYMENT: A communication from the Chairman of the Roanoke
County Board of Supervisors requesting a joint meeting of the Roanoke City
Council and the Roanoke County Hoard of Supervisors to discuss the *water
situation' in the Roanoke Valley, was before the body.
Mr. Thomas moved that Mayor Mebber be requested to arrange a date
and time for such a meeting with the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. Yhe
motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
STATE COMPENSATION BOARD-COMMONMEALTH'S ATTORNEY: Copy of a communica
tion from the State Compensation Board, addressed to Mr. Robert F. Rider, Com-
monwealth's Attorney, advising that the Compensation Board, at its meeting held
on March 20. 1973. approved the following salary changes in his office:
Promotion of Mrs. Y. C. Sink to success Ms. Teresla Millis at
an annual rate of $5,400.00 as Secretary, effective March 15,
If?3;
Promotion of Mrs. E. C. Mood to succeed Mrs. Sink at on
annual rate of $5,350.00, effective March 15, 1q73;
Employment of Ms. Teresa A. Fogan at an annual rate of
$4,920.00, effective March 5, If?3, to fill the position
vacated, by Mrs. Wood.
Dr. Taylor moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
STATE COMPENSAYION BOARD: A communication from the State Compensation
Board advising that the Compensation Board would appreciate an expression from
Council as to its policy concerning salary increases in this locality, as well
as recommendations from Council with regard to the budget requests filed by
the Constitutional Officers, was before the body.
'¸96
Hr, Thonss moved thnt the coununicntion be referred' to 1973-74 budget
study with the understandJngthnt conferences are to be held with certain Constftutic
Officers to ascertlin Uheth~ or not thcydesfre their employees to be classified
under the City Pay Plan, The notion was seconded by Rro Trout and unanimously
adopted.
Hr. Thomas further moved that the City Auditor be authorized to attend
the meeting of the State Compensation Board on Monday. April 2, 1973, at the
Salem-Roanoke Valley Civic Center at 8:30 a.m. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Trout and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET-SEMERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted a written
report recommending ihat $12,000.00 be appropriated to Refunds and Rebates under
Section =90, 'Sewage ?reatment'Fu~d." of the 1972-73 Sewage Treatment Fund Appro-
priation Ordinance, advising that the semaoe treatment contract consummated
between the City of Roanoke and the County of Roanoke on March 17. 1972, con-
tained the provision whereby the Roanoke County Public Service Authority would
bill the city for sewage services for the Edgebill, Jefferson Hills'and Jefferson
Forest Areas and the residents of these areas would pay their normal bills to
the city. pointing out that no funds were set up within the sewage treatment
account to pay this hill and that the city has now received billing from the
Roanoke County Public Service Authority for this purpose.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Damager and offered au Ordinance appropriating the necessary funds. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout.'
There being some question as to the amounts charged for pkoperties
located' at 3625 Heritage Road and 3962 Bosworth Drive, Ur. Garland offered a
substitute motion that' the matter be referred back to the City Manager for
clarification and report to Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and
unanimously adspted.
BUDGET-POLICE DEPARTMENT: The City Damager submitted the following
report recommending that $3,000.00 be appropriated to Fees for Professional and
Special Services under Section =45, "Police O~p~rt~euto" of the 1972-73 budget,
to provide needed funds to compensate for an overexpendlture in this account and
to provide adequate funds ~or the remainder of the' fiscal year:
"March 26, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Couucll
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Appr'opriation of Funds - Police D~partment
Police Department Account Ho. 45, Object Code 210, Fees
for Professional and Special Services. is slightly overex-
pended. This account which is utilized to pay nurses for
draning of blood alcohol specimens, towing of vehicles and
medical services for police dogs was initially funded in the
amount of $8.530.
nal
Due to the high number of vehicles tomed during the
first seven months of this yeor, this account is now ut n
place where en cdditinBel epproprfBtign oF $3,000 Is.needed
to compensate for the orerexpenditures 8nd provide adequate
f~nds rot the remainder or the fiscBl yeor. It might be
noted that toming services are u reimburseuble item and
expenditures of this nature are returned to the Cltyts
General Fund.
It would be recommended that an additional $3,000 be
appropriated to Police Deportment Account No. 45, Object
Code 210, Fees for Professional and Special Services.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Boner
Byron E. Honer
City Manager"
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance providing for the
recommended appropriation:
(~20779) AN ~ROINANCE to amend and reordain Section n45,.#Police
Department,~ of the 1~72-73 Appro~riation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For ~11 text of Ordinance. see os in ordinance Book =37. page 496.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of ~he Ordinance. The =orion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. LOok, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Mebber ................... 7.
NAYS: None ......... -O.
INSURANCE: Council having referred to the City Manager for study,
report and recommendation the matter or proper bond limits for certain city
employees, the City Manager submitted the fqllowin9 report advisin9 that after
discussing this matter with the representatives Of the Insurance Advisory Com-
mittee and after evaluating the potential need for bond limitation, it is
recommended that the blanket bond limits initially established in the 1940's
be increased to $25.000.00 across the board uith an additional $25,000.00 for
the Civic Center Director and additionally, requestin9 that should an audit of
the city aCCOunts be recommended by the current audit study, that this audit
include, us a part of the study, the recommended bond coverage for the Civic
Center Director and for the City Auditor, recognizing that the'potential losses
through these departments could be somewhat greater than the blanket bond
coverage recommended:
*March 26, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
.Gentlemen:
Subject: Bond Limits for City Official's
On Monday, February 12, 1973, City Council referred
to the City Manager a request for a review and report with
regard to proper bond limits for City employees, A meeting
was held with Mr, Reginald Nood, Chairman of the City Manager*s
Insurance Advisory Committee, to discuss this matter in detail.
97
It isthe opinion of the Insurance Advisory Committee Sat
the bond coverage for City employees is too low, The
blanket bond of $2,500,00 for each employee uno established
fn the 1940's and is still in effect. Additional indemnity
is carried on the.following employees In the amounts shown.
Manager - Mater Department - $2,500
Assistant Manager - Mater Deportmeot - $2,500
Office Manager - Mater Department -
Building Commissioner - $2,500
Chief Clerh - Municipal Court - $12,5oo
Chief Clerk'- Juvenile ~ Domestic Relations Court - $12,500
Civic Center Director - $47,$00
Separate bunds ore in effect for certain other employees
and in the amounts as listed below,
City Treasurer - 9100,000
Clerk of Courts, Courts of Record - 9100,000
Sheriff - 930,000
Delinquent Tax Collector - $8,000
Treasurer, Employees Retirement System - $50,000
The three year premium for this blanket bond coverage
was $1,688,00, plus an additional $300.00 in 1971'when the
Roanoke Civic Center Director obtained $50,000,00 coverage,
Mr. Mood and the committee presented figures for increasing
the blanket bond coverage to $25,B00.00, $50,000,00 and
$100,000.00 across the board. Twenty-Five thousand dollar
bond coverage across the board with an additional
for the Civic Center Director would produce a premium of
$4,84T.00 for three years. Fifty thousand dollar bond
across the board would carry a three year premium Of
$5.552.000 while 9100,OoO.Ou bond across the board for
three years would cost $6,609.00.
It is recognized that the premium rates are based from
the exposure of approximately 10~ of City employees while
the other 90~. although covered, there is no premium charge
for this coverage. This is to say that only approximately
10~ of the City employees covered ore in a position of
risk.
After discussing this matter with the representative
of the Insurance Adivsory Committee end evaluatiog the
potential need for this bond limitation, it would be recom-
mended to City Council that the limits initially established
in the 1940's be increased to 925,000.00 across the board
with an additional $25.000.00 coverage for the Civic Center
Director.
Additionally, I would ask that should an audit of the
City accounts be recommended by the current audit study, this
audit be requested to include as n part of their sutdy the
recommended bond coverage for the Civic Center Director and
for the City Auditor. It is recognized that the potential
lossesthrough these departments could be somewhat greater
than the blanket bond coverage recommended.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Haner
Byron E. Huner
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be referred to the Audit Committee fOr
consideration and recommendation to Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout
and unanimously adopted.
JAIL: Council having referred to the City Manager for study, report
and recommendation the matter of para-medics to be used in the jail facility,
the City Manager s~bmitted the following report calling to the attention of Council
that the hiring of these para-medics will not reduce the city*s requirement to
have a city jail physician, that these para-medics must work under the jall
physician's supervision and recommending that should Council proceed to authorize
these positions, that they be authorized at Range 17 in the City Pay Plan
which is comparable to that of a policeman and one range higher than a
supervising nurse: ~
"March 26. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
SubJect: Bse of Paramedics for the City Jail
City Council, at its meeting on Monday, March 12.
1973. mas asked by Sheriff Paul Puckett to consider the
utilization of three each paramedics to provide around-
the-clock medical coverage for Jail inmates. City Council
referred this matter to the City Attorney and the City
Manager for study and implementation. It mould be inter-
preted that City Council*s referral mas directive in nature.
and mill be complied with accordingly. Homever, ~n or
before doing so, I feel compelled to call to Council*s
attention the fact that the hiring of these paramedics will
not reduce the Clty*s requirement to have a City Jail physi-
ciao. and these paramedics must work under the jail physician*s
supervision.
The qualification as shown in the Department of Melfare
and Institution*s Inter-Staff Communication describethis
individual as primarily administrative background with a
hnowledge of preventive medicine. ~t would not permit
diagnostic leeway nor prescribing of eedicioes without the
direct supervision of the jail physician.
A comparison of the Paramedic Technician 1I salary
scale recommended by Mr. Jackson with City salary scales
places Jt at Range 20, or one range above that salary range
presently assigned to the nursing superintendent at the
City Home and equivalent to a police sergeant. The salary
for Range 20 is as follows:
Step I 2 3 4 5 6
B,088 8.496 8,928 9,360 9,840 10.320
Predicated On the limitations placed in paragraph two
above, I am forced to question the validity of Range 20 for
this position. A check with t~ Department of Welfare and
Institutions reveals that local scales may be lower if local
scales for comparable work are lower. It would be my recom-
mendation that should City Council proceed to authorize these
positions, they be authorized at Range 17, which is compar-
able to that Of a policeman, and one range higher than a
supervising nurse.
Ranq~ 17
Steps I 2 3 4 5 6
6,984 7.320 7.704 B,088 8,496 8.928
Respectfully submitted.
S! Byron E. Haner
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager"
'Mr. Thomai moved that Council concur in the report of the City Ranager
and that'the matter be referred to the City Attorney for preparation of the
proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
PAY PLAN-CiTY EMPLOyEES-COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE: ~he City Manager
submitted the following report recommending that Coondlgive serious considera-
tion to classifying the personnel in the Office of the Commissioner of the
Revenue under the City of Roanoke Pay and Classification Plan and that Mr.
Jerome S. Howard, Jr., Commissioner of the Revenue, has requested that this
change be made effective April 1, 1973:
99
100
"Hsrch 26, 1973
Honornblo Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Clsssificntion of Commissioner of Re~enne Personnel
Commissioner of Revenue Jerome Houard bas requested that
the employees of his department also be lncladed under the
City of Roanoke Pay and Classification Plan. As a result of
this request a study of his departuent has been accepted, by
the City of Roanoke Personnel Department with the resultant
recommendation for classification of his personnel.
Mr. Homard has analyzed the availability of funds within
the personnel section of his budget and has determined that
aaequate funds e~ist for this change over to the effective
April 1. 1973. No additional funds will be needed.
It would be recommended that City Council give serious
consideration to classifying the personnel of the Commissioner
of Revenue*s Department and including them in the City*s pay
Plan.
Respectfully submitted,
S! Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager"
Mr. ThOmaS moved that Council concur in the report of the City ~anager
and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for preparation of the
proper measure. The motion was seconded by MF~ Lisk and unanimously adopted.
HOUSING-$LU~ CLEARANCE: Council havin9 previously requested that the
City Manager correspond With the Executive Director of the City of Roanoke Rede-
velopment and Housing Authority to clarify the position of the City of Roanoke
pertaining to the matter of underground utility lines in the'Kimball Urban Renewal
Area. the City Ranager submitted the following report advising that under the
circumstances, it would be his recommendation that Count{l, under the provisions
as stated in Ordinance No. 20395, waive the requirements for the placing of all
wires and cables carrying electricity, telephone and telegraph wires in conduits
underground; thereby allowing the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Autho-
rity to proceed with the development of this area:
"March 26, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Subject: Underground Utilities in Eimball
City Council upon advice of the City Attorney, on
July 24,1972, passed Ordinance No. 20385 which required
that all telephone and telegraph wires and all wires and
cables carrying electricity to be installed in the public
streets, avenues, alleys, ways and public places in the
Kimball area be placed in conduits underground, unless other-
wise expressly authorized by City Council. A copy of this
ordinance was transmitted to both the Appalachian Power Com-
pany and the Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company.
Subsequent meetings between City Council and representa-
tives of these utility firms resulted in the denial by these
utility firms of any responsibility to install underground
utilities in the area in question without reimbursement for
the additional cost as a result of underground construction.
Doth utility firms indicated a willingness to install the
J
utility systems underground; however° only after authoriza-
tion from the City, mSth the City expressing Its agreement to
pay the increased cost. As on example and quoting directly-
from Mr. Hirst*s report on May 30, 1972, *Reflecting the
costs to the City of Roanoke based on o net cost of ($356,400
less $22,600} $333,600 for electrical distribution and
($156,045 less $?,495) $150,550 for telephone distribution
lines would odd n total additional expenditure to the project
of $464,350,# ' '
It is my understanding that at this time there is a
s.erious question or doubt as'to mhether or not the Federal
government could or would participate in these costs.
Gentlemen of Council, I cannot speak to the legal as-
pects of this question, nor do 1 propose to suggest who is
right. I have been informed by representatives.of'the
Redevelopment and Housing Authority that they must'have a
decision at an early date so that they can proceed with the
development of the Kimball Urban Renewal Area. I recognize
the desirability of placing utilities underground; however,
with the many obligations of the City and math the lack of
assurances that the Federal government will participate by
supplying tmo-thirds of this cost, in all honesty. I cannot
recommend that City Council commit itself to pay the amount
needed to place the electrical and telephone services under-
ground.
Under the circumstances, it ~ould be my recommendation
that City Council under the provisions as stated in Ordinance
No. 20365 waive the requirements for the placing of all wires
and cables carrying electricity and telephone wires in con-
duits underground; thereby allowing the Redevelopment and
Housing Authority to proceed ~ith the development of this
area.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron Eo 6aner
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager"
Mr. Russell R. tlenley, Executive Director, City of Roanoke Redevelop-
ment and Housing Authority, appeared before Council and advised that he is
still in favor of placing the lines underground and cited figures as to the
total cost, the city*s share and the federal 9overnment*s share of placin9 the
la'new underground.
After a discussion of the matter, Dr. Taylor moved that certain
representatives Of Council to be appointed by the Mayor meet with the City of
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority and the utility companies in an
effort to negotiate a way in which the utility lines can be placed underground
and that the provisions Of Ordinance Ho. 20365 not be waived at the present
time. The motion was seconded byMr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
CITY MANAGER-COUNCIL-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a
written report requesting an Executive Session regarding a personnel matter.
Mr. Garland moved that Council grant the request of the City Manager.
The notion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS-SCHOOLS: Council having requested that the
Elementary School can be located in Fallon Park, the Assistant City Attorney
submitted the fo~lowing report accordingly:
102
'March 16, 1973
Honorable Mayor and Members
of Rosnoke City Council
Roanoke, Virglniu
Gentlemen:
At your meeting of March 5. last, the Council referred to the
City Attorney for opinion the proposal of the Sc~ool Roard of
the City of Roanoke to construct an elementary school in a
westerly portion of gallon Park.
The proposed school would be for elementury pupils and, as
currently designed, mould require the use of approximately
three and one-half acres immediately adjacent to 19th
Street, S. E** opposite the easterly terminus of Tazewell
Avenue, S. E.
Sy deed dated August 14. 192S~ the late grank gallon conveyed
to the City fo~ a consideration of $1,00. cash, and for other
considerations consisting of the City's construction of cer-
tain street pavement and sanitary sewers and of waiver of
1925 taxes on the property conveyed, approximately thirty-
eight acres of what is now the mesternmost portion of the
area known as gallon Park, that deed containing the follow-
ing provision:
*It being distinctly understood and agreed that
the land herein conveyed is to be used only for
the purposes o[a park for the benefit of the
citizens of the City of Roanoke.'
This deed contains no other words of limitation relative to
the use Of any of the abovedescribed land nor does it contain
what afc commonly referred to as reverter provisions, a~pli-
cable upon the breach of any covenant or condition contained
in the deed. Ry Resolution No. 1873, adopted on September
4, lg25, the Council, recognizing the geeerosJty of Frank
gallon and accepting the donation of said thirty-~ight acre
tract of land for park purposes, named the whole area *gallon
Park',
The City has the authority under its Charter and general law
to establish and maintain parks, playgrounds a~d other public
grounds and has the authority to acquire property by pur~ asa,
gift, devise, condemnation or otherwise, for any of the pur-
poses of the City. ned to hold. improve and sell the same,
Likewise. it has the authority to establish, organize and
administer public schools.
Under the law parks are for the benefit of and are held in
trust by municipalities, for the public, and where a'
donation or dedication of land is made to a municipal cor-
poration solely for a p~bllc park, the municipality may not
use it for purposes inconsistent with the pur~oses of suck
9rant. 10 McOuillin Municioal Corn,rations S 28.52a.
However, it has been held that a 9rant of power to munici-
palities to establish and maintain public parks, without
prescribing the use to which such p~operty may be devoted,
nor prescribin9 or limitin9 such use, vests such municipali-
ties with'a measure of discretion in determining the use to
which public park property may'be devoted. See Behrens v.
~pearfish. 845.D.615, 17~ N.W. 2d 52. The appropriate uses
of park property which may be mad~ by a municipal corpora-
tion are not subject to exact definition or enumeration,
beyond observing that such uses must be in accordance with
pertinent lam and in the public interest. It would appear
beyond serious question that a public school so located as
to serve citizens Jn the area wherein it is constructed
would be in the public interest.
Rhile maly courts have held that. in appropriate circumstances,
an improper use of park property may be enjoined, as where
adjacentproperty owners are especially damaged or their
property is substantially depreciated, or where such use is
illegal or a nuisance, it has also been held that a provision
in a deed limiting use for park and recreational purposes
amounts to a covenant and not a conditiou subsequent, so that
breach or noncompliance therewith would not work a reverter
to the dedicator, since conditions subsequent are not
favored in law and are strictly construed. Such provision in
a deed regarding use sill be construed as a covenant rather
!
than a condition subsequent° if posslble;.especfally where
there is no provision for forfeltnre in cases of failure to
continue the use. Clark V. CFnnd Raoids~ 334 #ich° 646,
S5 N.~. 2d i37.
The Supreme Court of Virginia bna considered the question
of conversion of use of property for public park purposes
'in the case of Martin v. Worfolk. etc., 20§ Va. 942
wherein certain lands had been conveyed to the.City of
Norfolk in 1922 for public parh and street purposes by deed
containing covenants for public park and street ~urposes .
by deed Containing covenants requiring the city,s acquisition
of additional adjacent lands to be used for the same pur-
poses. The deed also contained provision that unless the
city complied with the covenants within twenty-eight months.
the conveyance should be considered void. NJthJn the
stated time. the city acquired the other lands and opened
the park and street, which it maintained until 1960 when,
in the course of n redevelopment project, the property
was conveyed to another entity, after which the heirs of
the grantor filed suit asserting that they held a reversionary
interest for which they were entitled to be compensated.
The Court held the'heirs had no reversionary interest by
virtue of the city ceasing tq use the property as a public
park stating that..the city having performed the covenants
within the stated time. it held a title free of any condi-
tion. It further held that the covenant limiting use of
the.laud to park nod street purposes was not a condition .
subsequent but tan agreement for use. and nothing more'.
In this case the City of Norfolk had provided nearby lands
for another park, replacing the land converted to such
other non-park use. In this connection, Jt should be noted
that approximately two and one-half acres of land now compris-
ing the northwesternmost portion of Fullon Park were purchased
by the City from T. D. Berry and hav~ been devoted to use for
football'and baseball playing fields,, and that, more recently.
considerably more lands have been purchased and acquired
by the City lying east of the original thirty-eight acres
deeded by Frank Fallon. and have been subsequently utilized
for park purposes, Additionally, over ten acres of land
lying east of Tinker Creek and west of the Norfolk and
Western Railway Company's right-of-way have been acquired
by the City and might well be ionsidered by the Council for
dedication for park purposes and subsequent improvement.
In the iecent case of Annul v. Newport, __~.I. . 200
A2d 490. the Court held that leasing of a portion of a
park amounting to one-fortieth of its area for the erec-
tion of a facility for the use of retarded children did
not violate the terms of the deed by which the purl land
was dedicated to the public. This case stands for the
proposition that where land has been conveyed to a muni-
cipality and dedicated to use us a public park and recrea-
tional area, the dedicator will be presumed to have contem-
plated that the manner in which the land is used to accomplish
the intent of the dedicator may, with the passage of time or
the alteration of circumstances, require adjustment or change
if the intent of the dedicator is to be given effect under
changed circumstances or new conditions.
Should the Council decide to permit the use of the proposed
area in the westerly portion of Fallon Park for constructign
of a public school as requested by the School Board, the
Council would appear to have two alternate procedures avail-
able: The first, by ordinance, to pereit the use requested.
meeting such objection as might later arise upon the grounds
and authorities hereinabove set out; or the second, by
institution of a suit to construe the conditions of the
abovementioned deed of conveyance and to quiet title in
the City, hopefully gaining Court approval of such
changgd use prior to its actual accomplishment.
The foregoing was completed too late for inclusion on
Council*s agenda for its March 19th meeting, but doe to
what is considered the urgency of the question by the
Members of the Council and the School Board, is forwarded
in this manner.
Respectfully,
S/ M. Ben Jones, Jr.
fi. Ben Jones, Jr**
Assistant City Attorney"
103
104
Mr, Thomas moved that the City Attorney be authorized and instructed
to institute n suit in the appropriate court'for declaratory Judgment to ascer-
tain if the Fallon Park site could be utilized by the City of Roanoke for purposes
requested by the schoal administration. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Lisk
and unanimously adopted~
Nr, Thomaa then offered the following Besolutioa relating to the pro-
posal of the School Board of the City of Roanoke to construct a public school in
a westerly portion of Pallon Park and dedicating certain lauds as an addition to
Fallon Park for improvement f~r public park and recreational purposes:
(~207flO) A RESOLUTION relating to the proposal of the School Board of
the City of Roanoke to construct n public school in a masterly portion of Fallon
Park; and dedicating certain lands as an addition to Fallon Park for improvement
for public park and recreational purposes,
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 497.)
Mr. Thomas waved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr.' Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Rubard, Llsk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber ...................?.
NAYS: None .......... O.
BUSES: The Assistant City Attorney submitted a written report advising
that by Resolution No. 20522 Council authorized the City Manager to file on behalf
of the city with the U. S. Department of Transportation an application for finan-
cial assistance, to aid in the financin9 or acquisition of necessary motor vehicles
and real and personal property necessary to provide and operate a local transpor-
tation system and authorized the makin9 of certain assurances regarding Title Yl
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. that the city is advised by the Urban Mass
Transportation Administration that certain additional assurances need to be made
by the city regarding the provisions of Title III of the Uniform Relocation
Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 and transmitting.
for recommended adoption by Council, a Resolution which would authorize the City
~anager to make and file with the appropriate federal agencies such assurances.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the report of the Assistant
City Attorney and offered the following Resolution authorizing the filing of
certain assurances relating to land acquisition in connection with an application
with the Department Of Transportation, United States of America, for a grant
under the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as amended:
i~207B1) A RESOLUTION authorizing the filin9 of certain assurances
relating ~o land acquisition in connection mith an application with the DePartment
of Transportation. United States of America, for a grant under the Urban Mass
Transportation Act of 1964, as amended.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 496°)
105
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion nos
seconded by Mr. flubard lad adopted by the £ollowing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hnbard, LJsk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber ..................7.
NAYS: None ......... O,
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
AUDITS=CITY EMPLOYEES: Mr. Milliam S. Hubard, Chairman of the Audit
Committee, submitted a verbal report advising the firm of Andrews. Burke* and
Company, Certified Public Accountants. will meet mith the Audit Committee at
7:30 p.mo, Tuesday, March 27, 1973, in the Executive Session Conference Roam,
to discuss a preliminary report made by that firm on certain financial affairs
of the City of Roanoke and requested that as many members of Council as possible
be present at said meeting to hear this preliminary report.
SALE OF PROPERTY: The Real Estate Committee submitted the following
report recommending that Council accept the offer of Mr. R. C. Cassell to
purchase Lot 26. Block 1, Map of Eureka Land Company. for the sum of $1,000.00:
"March 26, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Disposal of Lot 26, Block 1. Map of Eureka Land
Company
Some time ago City Council received a letter from Mr.
Millinm C. Cassell offering to purchase Lot 25, Rlock 1.
Map of Eureka Land Company of the City at an offered price
of $300. At the recommendation of the Real Estate Committee,
Rt. Cassell was informed that the real estate records
appraise this lot at a fair market value of $1,000 and that
the City could not accept his offer of $300. Rt. Cassell
advised the Real Estate Committee that he would offer SI,BO0
for this property if that was the appraised market value.
Although your committee feels that the remainder of the
City-owned properly should be diaposed of through auction,
it is felt that since the City.had 9one so far as to advise
Mr. Cassell of the fair market value of this property and
he had submitted such an offer, it would be only fair that
the City accept Mr. Cassellts offer of $1o000 and sell Lot
26, Block 1, Map'of Eureka Land Company to Mr. Cassell.
Respect.fully submitted,
S/ David K, Lisk, Chairman A.N. Gibson
David K. Lisk, Chairman J.N. Kincanon
William S. Hubard Byron E. Haner#
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation Of the Real
Estate Committee and that the following Ordinance be placed upouit$ first
readin~:~
(~20782) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and providing for the City's sale
and conveyance of a lot or parcel of land known and described as Lot 26. Block
1, as shown on the Map of Eureka Land Company, and being Official NO. 2221109.
in the City of Roanoke, Virginia. upon certain terms and conditions.
106 '
MHEREAS, William C. Cassell has offered to the City, through the City's
Real Estate Committee, to purchase and acquire from the City for himself and bis
wife that certain lot or parcel of land, situate on the south aide of Hanover
Avenue, N, W., in the City of Roanoke and known and.described as Lot 26, eloch l,
according to the Map of Eureka Land Company, and as Official No. R221109. for the
sum of $1,000.00, cash; and the Councilts Real Estate committee. has recommended to
the Council that the sale of said lot be approved and ordered on the terns and
provisions herein provided, in which recommendation the Council concurs,
THEREFORE. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
the offer of Milliam C. Cassell and wife to purchase and acquire from the City
that certain lot or parcel of land situate in the City of Roanoke, knomn and
described as Lot 26, Block 1. as shown on the Rap of Eureka Land Company, and as
Official No. 2221109,.for a consideration of $1,000.00, cash, to be paid to the
City upon delivery of the City's deed of conveyance hereinafter authorized to be
made and executed, and with 1973 real estate taxes to be prorated and assessed
on said lot from the date of conveyance, be. and said offer is hereby ACCEPTED; and
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, upon payment to the City of the sun of
$1.O00.Og. cash, as aforesaid, the Mayor be, and he is hereby authorized, eaponered
and directed to execute, for and on behalf of the City. the City's deed of convey-
ance to the aforesaid lot or parcel of land. drawn upon such form as is prepared
and approved by the City Attorney, granting and co~veyiu9 with special warranty
of title to said William C. Cassell and Ann Roberts Cassell. husband and wife. as
joint tenants with right of survivorship, title to the above described lot; and
that the City Clerk. be. and is hereby authorized and directed'to affix to the
aforesaid deed of conveyance the City's seal, and to attest the same. the signa-
tures of the Mayor and the City Clerk to be acknowledged by each of them as
provided by law; thereafter said deed to be delivered to the City*s said grantee.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard. task. Taylor. ThomaS. Trout and
Mayor Mebber--.-- .......
NAYS: None ..........O.
SALE OF PROPERTY; The Real Estate Committee submitted the following
report in connection with an qffer of Hr. Franklin M. Ridenour.to purchase a
strip of city-owned property which adjoints Lot 1, Block A. Map No. 2. Round Hill
Terrace, for the sum Of $300.00. the Committee recommending that Mr, Ridenour he
notified that this property w/il be disposed of by auction at which t/me it would
he hoped that a more equitable price might be receiveds
'March 26, 1973
Honorable Hayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
C~ntlemen:
Subject: Sale of City-Owned Land
On February 4. 1973. Mr. Franklin g. Ridenour submitted
a letter' to City Council offering $300 to purchase a strip
of City-owned land which adjoins Loi 1. Block A. Mop No. 2,
Round Bill Terrace. This letter came before Council on
Monday, February 12. 1973. at which time it was referred to
the Real Estate Committee for study, report and recomnenda-
Your Real Estate Committ~e considered this matter ut
its meeting on Thursday, March 8, 1973, and it was the
unanimous recommendation of that committee that Mr, Ridenour
be notified that this property wo~id be disposed of by auction
at which time it would be hoped that a note equitable price
might be received.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ David K. Link,
David'E. Llsk. Chairman
S! Milliam S. Hubard
Milliam S. Huabrd
S/ J. N. Kincanon
J. N. Kincanon
$/ A. N. Gibson
A. N, Gibson
S/ Byron E. Haeer
By~on'E. Hamer"
Mr. Link moved that the report be received and filed and made a
part of the official records of Council. The ~otion was seconded by Mr.
Garland and unanimously adopted.
POLICE DEPABTM£NT-AIRPOBT: Council having referred to the Airport
whether or not the three new security positions ut Roanoke Municipal (Roodrum)
Airport should be classified as regular police'officers or if they should be
classified as airport police officers, the Air~ort Advisory Commission sub-
mitted a written report recommending that the category of Airport Police
be retained and that the three new positions be classified within the category
of Airport Police and further recommendin9 that u study be made of converting
this sacurity matter to contract security status instead of utilizing city
police personnel.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
Airport Advisory Commission and offered the following Resolution authorizin9
the employment of three additional Airport Police for the Roanoke Municipal
(~oodru~) Airport, effective March 1. 1973:
(~207B3) A RESOLUTION authorizing the employment of three (3)
additional Airport Police, (Code 7003) for the Roanoke Municipal (Roodrum)
Airport, effective March 1, 1973.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Rook ~37~ page
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Ilubard, Lisk, Taylor and Trout-~ ....... 5.
NAYS: Mr. Thomas and Mayor Webber ........... ~ ............... 2.
Mro Trout further moved that the City Manager be requested to make
u study of converting this security matter to contract secnrity status instead
108
of utilizing city police personnel, The notion was seconded by Mr. Link nnd
adopted, Mayor Webber voting no.
UNFINXSflED BUSINESS: NONE.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTROUUCTION ANO CONSID£RATION OF ORDINANCES ANO RESOLUTIONS:
EASEMENTS: Ordinance No. 20762, granting revocable, non-transferable
authority to Blue Cross of Southwestern Virginia to maintain computer cables under
that certain alley located between Lot
Official Tax No. 1023112, and Lot 3, Block 11, Official Survey S. M, 3, Official
Tax No. 1023102, upon certain terms and conditions, having previously been
before Council for its first reading, read and laid over, was again before the
body, Rt. Lisk offering the following for its second reading and final adoption:
(~20762) AN ORDINA%EE 9ranting revocable, non-transferrable authority
to Blue Cross of Southwestern Virginia to maintain computer cables under that
certain alley located betMeen Lot 7. Block 11, Official Survey S. M. 3. Official
No. 1023112. and Lot 3, Block 11, Official Survey S. W. 3, Official No, 1023102,
upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text Of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book ~37, page 491.)
~r. Link moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor~ Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ...................
NAYS: None ...........O.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Ordinance No. 20774. granting revocable,non-
transferable authority to Barnon*s Machine Shop, Incorporated. to maintain for
a period of one year, as an encroachment, propane gas tanks in an area of unopened
public alley, abutting the rear of property designated as Official Tax No. 1010822,
a part of Lot 21, Block B, as sho~n on the F. Rorer Map of Subdivision, upon cer-
tain terms and conditions, having previously been before Council for its first
reading, read and laid over, Mas again before the body, Mr. Trout offering the
following for its second reading and final adoption:
(~20774) AN ORDINANCE 9ranting, revocable, non-transferable authority
to Harmon*s Machine Shop, Inc.. to maintain for a period of one (1) year, as an
encroachment, propane gas tanks in an area of unopened public alley abutting the
rear of property designated as Official No. 1010822, a part of Lot 21, Block O,
as shown on the F. Rorer nap of subdivision, upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =37. page 493.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AVES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................... 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
LANDRARKS-BOGS: Council having directed the City Attorney to preparn
the proper measure donating the Frederick J, Kimball MenorJol Fountain to abe
Roanoke Valley Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animols, to be reerected
presented sane; whereupon, Ur, Lfsk offered the following Resolution:
{uRO?84) A RESOLUTION donating the Frederick J. Kimball Remorial
Fountain to the Roanoke Valley Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals,
to be reerected by said Society at its l~t cemetery on Eastern Avenue, N.
in the City.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book u37, page $00,)
Mr, Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber .....................
NAYS: None ............ O.
JL~ENILE HORE: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare
the proper measure authorizing agreements to be entered into with other politi-
cal subdivisions relating to their use of the Roanoke Juvenile Detention Home,
in ~utetourt County, he presented same; mhereupon, Kr. Lisk offered the follow-
lng Resolution:
(~20785) A RESOLUTION authorizing agreements to be entered into with
other political subdivisions relating to said others' use of the Roanoke Juvenile
Detention Home, in Hotetourt COunty.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 500.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the followin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber .................... ?.
NAYS: None ..........O.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE: Council havin9 directed the City
Attorney to prepare the proper measure urging the Honorable A. Linwood Holton,
Governor Of the Conmonsealth of Virginia, and the State Department of Welfare
and Institutions, to reinstate and continue advance reimbursements to localities
of assistance payments for Old Age Assistance, Aid to Dependent Children and
Aid to the Permanently and Totally Disabled welfare programs, he presented same;
whereupon, ir. Trout offered the following Resolution:
(~207B6) A RESOLUTION urging the Honorable A. Linwood Bolton, Gover-
nor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the State Department of Relfore and
assistance payments for Old Age Assistance, Aid to Dependant Children and Aid
to the Permanently and Totally Disabled welfare programs.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 501.)
~09
110
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion m~s seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the /ol~owfng vote:
AYES: Nessrs. Garland, Bubard. Lish, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Bayor
Nebber .............~--~ ........ 7.
NAYS: None ........... O,
BUILDINGS-FI~E DEPARTMENT: Council having directed the City Attorney
to prepare the proper measure amending Subsection 901.6 of Section 901. of the
1969 ~op~rJght Editionof t~e Southern Standard Building Code. heretofore adopted
and incorporated by reference, with certain amendments, as to the ci'tyts 1967
Buildino Code, by requiring the installation of'sprinkler systems in certain high-
rise buildings, he presented same: mhereupon. Hr. Trout offered the following
emergency Ordinance:
(~207B?) AN ORDINANCE amending Subsection 901'.8 of Section 901, of
the 1969 Copyright Edition of the Southern St'andard Building Code, heretofore
adopted and incorporated by reference, with c'ertain amendments, as the Cityts
1967 Building Code, by requiring the installation of sprinkler systems in certain
high-rise buildings; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ns?, page 502,)
Mr. Trout moved *the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: ~essrso Garland, Hubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber
NAYS: None ...........O.
AIRPORT: Council havin9 directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure authorizing the City Manager to cause a Federal-Aid Airport Program
Application to be prepared, executed and submitted to the Federal Aviation Admini-
stration for approval, to effect improvements proposed ~o be made at Roanoke
Municipal (Moodrum) Airport, and expressing C~uncil*s willingness to provide funds
to pay for its portion of the cost of such improvements, he presented same; where-
upon. Dr. Taylor offered the following Resolution:
(~20768) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to cause a Federal-
Aid Airport Program Application to be prepared, executed and submitted to the
Federal Aviation Administration for approval, to effect improvements proposed to
be made at Roanoke Municipal (~oodrum) Airport. and expressing this Council*s
willingness to provide funds to pay for its portion of the cost of such improve-
meats.
(For full tex~ of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~37, page 504.)
Dr. Ta~lor moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout nn adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Nebber
NAYS: None O.
HUSTINGS COURT: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare
the proper measure uccepting the portrait oF tho late Honorable John Marion
Hart, · former Judge oF the Hustings court'oF the City oF Roanoke and a Former
Commissioner oF the Revenue oF said city. which said portrait shall be hung For
public display in the courtroom oF the aforesaid Court, along with the portraits
OF other Former Judges oF the aforesaid Court. end expressing the appreciation
of Council to Mrs. Margaret Hart Hames For her gift to the city. he presented
Same; whereupon, Mr. Trout oFFered the Following Resolution:
(z207Bg) A RESOLUTION relating to the late John Marion Hart, a
former Judge of the Hustings Court of the City of Roanoke.
(For full text oF Resolution, see Ordinance Book naT, page $05.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. Yhe motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard. Lisk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: 'None ..........
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Mr. Jack A. Pitman, 1032 Markham Circle, S. E.,
appeared before Council and called attention to a serious traffic accident
which occurred on Garden City Boulevard, S. E., over the past weekend, pointing
out that in 1966 he approached Council and requested that improvements be made
to Garden City Boulevard. that to date these improvements have not been made and
petitioning Council to take some definite action in connection with said
improvements.
The City Maeaqer pointed out that the matter is currently in the
hands of the City Attorney awaiting condemnation proceedings for the acquisi-
tion of necessary land.
Mr. Lisk moved that the City Attorney be requested to furnish Council
with a progress report as to how the city is proceeding in the condemnation
proceedinqs and the timetable thereon. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout
ROUSING-SLU~ CLEARANCE: Dr. laylor pointed out that the Housing
Availability Ordinnnce mill take effect on April 1, 1973, in accordance with
the Ordinance. the City Manager is authorized to appoint an Administrator of the
Fair Housing Board. that the Ordinance calls for seven members to constitute
the Fair Housing Board and moved that each member oF Council be instructed to
nominate a representative to the Fiat Housin9 Hoard by the next regular meeting
of the body on Monday, April 2, 1973o The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout
and unanimously adopted.
TRAFFiC-AUDITORIUM-COLISEUM: Mr. Garland presented a communication
calling attention to certain parking arrangements which could be initiated at
the Roanoke Civic Center, pointing out that the general public could park in
111
112
the Civic Center parking lot absolutely free, that a shuttle bus could be used
to commute to the domatoun urea on a regular schedule picking up nnd discharging
passengers at various points throughout the domntomn Roanoke area and recommending
that the matter be referred to the Civic Center Advisory Commission for study,
report and recommendation to Council.
Mr. Garland moved that Cooncil refer his communication to the Roanoke
Civic Center and Stadium Advisory Commission for study, report.and recommendation
to Council, The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
COUNCIL-SCHOOLS: Mr. Lisk called attention to Resolution No. 17666
which provides for templar meetings between the Cooncii of the City of Roanoke
and the Roanoke City School Board and moved that Mayor Webber be requested to
establish a date and time for such a meeting with the members of the Roanoke City
School Board to discuss coordination of the city*s recreational programs and any
other pertinent matters that should cone before these two groups. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
CITY ~ANAGER: The City Clerk reportqd that Mr. Samuel Il. McGhee, III,
has qualified as Assistant City Manager. effective March 19, 1973.
Br. Taylor moved that the report be received and filed. The notion Mas
seconded by ~r. Trout and unanimously adopted.
There being no further business. Mayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk ~ayor
COONCILo REGULAR MEETING,
Mouday, April 2, 1973.
The Council or the City or Roangke.met in regular meeting in the
Council Chamber in the Runicipa! Building, Monday, April 2, 1973, at 2
the regular meeting hour, with Mayor Roy L. Nebber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, Milldam S. Hubard, David
Lisk, Rampton M. Thomas, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L. #ebber---5.
ABSENT: Mr. Noel C. Taylor .............................1.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Myron E. Haner,.City Manager; Mr. Samuel B.
McGhee. Ill, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Kincanon, City At~orney;
Mr. N. Ben Jones. Jr., Assistant City Attorney; and Mr. A. N. Gibson, City
Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend
C. Maynard Powell, Associate Paster. First Christian Church.
MINCFES: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held on March
19. 1973, having been furnished each ~ember of Council. on motion of Mr. Trout,
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof was dispensed
with and the minutes approved as recorded.
BEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
FIRE DEPARTMENT: Council having previously requested taut the City
Manager investigate the methods used in.selecting the Fire Marshal to the Roanoke
City Fire Department on March l, 19~37 and at the regular meeting Of Council on
Monday. March 25, 1973. Reverend Charles T. Green, Presidents N.A.A.C.P,
appeared before the body and expressed his lack of satisfaction at the
culled investigation" conducted by the City Manager into the matter and advised
that he is more convinced than ever that there was little or no adherence to
Code No. 7115 from the Class Specifications Manual for the City of Roanoke
adopted in 1966 in making the selection of the Fire Marshal and Council at its
meeting on March 25 deferred action on the entire matter pending a report from
the City Manager with reference to his investigation, the matter was again
before the body.
In this connection, copy of a communication from Lieutenant R,
Quarles, Fire Inspector, addressed to the City Manager, in connection ~th
the procedures which were used in selecting the Fire Marshal for the City of
Roanoke on March 1, 1973, advising that he reels he was discriminated against
with regard to the position, that procedures were changed f~om those used in
1970 in selecting the person for that p~sition, that he was not considered by
the Fire Chief and requesting a full scale investigation into the procedures
which were used in selecting said Fire Marshal, pointing out that he would like
for his qualifications and those of Mr. Rufus English to be compared and that
he feels his qualifications surpass those of Mr. English. was before Council.
Nith reference to the communication from Lieutenant Quarles, the
City Manager submitted a written report advising that it had been his intention
113
Rufus English to the position of Fire Marshal, houever, on Hatch 28, 1973, he
received a letter frou Lieutenant R. M. Quarles. Fire Inspector. officially
English as Fire Marshal, that Lieutenant Quarles specified that he questions the
115
Mr, Trout moved that the request be referred to the City Manager along
with the City Planning Commission and the Superintendent of Traffic Engineering
and Communications for consideration and recommendation to Council, The motion
mas seconded by Mr, LJak mod noaafmooaly adopted,
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: Dr. Harold H, Hopper, President, Virginia Mesteru
Community College, appeared before Council and presented the.proposed budget
rot Virginia Western Community College for the fiscal year 1973-74 and advised
that the requested share of the City of Roanoke is $16,942.97.
Mr. Hubard moved that the matter be referred to 1973-74 budget Study.
The motion nas seconded by Rro Trout and unanimously adopted,
SCNOOLS-TOTAL ACT/ON AGAINST POYERYy iN ROANOKE VALLE¥-flUDGET: Mr,
Cabell Brand, representing Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley.
appeared.before Council and presented a request of TAP that the City of Roanoke
and other governments contribute local money to sustain the functions of TAP
under the OEO programs at a greatly reduced level and transmitted a description
Of TAP*s components, their functions, the portion for which support.is requested
and the service each component #ill provide, Mr. Braad advising that the proposal
is divided into five parts, administration, neighborhood services, manpower,
planning and training, that TAP ts requestin9 from all local governments in the
area served by TAP a total of $446.000.00, which replaces approximately
$730,000.00 formerly received from OEO, that as can be seen from these figures,
TAP has already made substantial cuts in each department, that they have attempte~
only to retain a viable organization mhich can cont'inue to provide these vital
services.to disadvantaged citizens, that the share of the City of Roanoke of
this request is 61 per cent because 61 per cent of TAP*s programs are within
the city and that this amounts to $272.000.00
Mr. Lisk moved that the request be referred to 1973-74 budget study.
The motion nas seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
COUNC]L-COMMONWEALTH,$ ATTORNEY: Mr. Robert F. Rider, Commonwealth,s
Attorney, appeared before Council and requested that the members of Council
meet with him in Executive Session for the purpose Of discussing a personnel
matter pertaining to his office.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the request of Mr. Rider and
that Council meet with him in Executive Session at the end of the Council meet-
ing. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: ~essrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk. Thomas. Trout aod Mayor
Webber ..........................
NAYS: None .......... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
ZONING: A communication from Mr. Millard E. Donald requesting a non-
conforming permit in order to allow him to remodel a four room apartment located
over au existing storage building in the back of a frame residence at 322
Bollitt Avenue. S. E.. was before the body.
Hr, Garland moved that the matter be referred to the City. Manager for
investigation and report to Council. The motion was seconded by #r, Trout and
unanimously adopted.
GARRAGE REROYAL: Copy of a Resolution adopted by the Roanoke County
Board of Supervisors at its meeting on Tuesday, March 13, 1973. authorizing end
directing Milliam F. Clark to enter into preliminary negotiations with the City
of Salem and the City of Roanoke for the Joint construction mud operation of
transfer station, was,before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the Resolution be received ~nd filed and that a
copy of same be forwarded to the Landfill Committee for its information in connec-
tion with the matter. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
RUSES: A Resolution adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
at its meeting on Tuesday, March 13, 1973, agreeing to appropriate $902.00 as the
share of Roanoke County for contribution to Roanoke City Lines from January
1973, through June 30, 1973. was before Council.
Mr. Garland moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the necessary measure of appreciation to the Roanoke County Board
of Supervisors. The motion was seconded by Rt. Trout and unanimously adopted.
PARES AND PLAYGROUNDS: Copy of a communication from Mr. Frank C.
Martin, Jr** President. Mill Mountain Playhouse Board of Directors, addressed to
~r. ~o Carl Andrews. President of the ~ill ~ountain Development Committee, calling
attention to the conditions of the outside of Rockledge Inn atop Mill Mountain
and urgently soliciting the enthusiastic support of the ~ill Mountain Development
Committee in requestiog Roanoke City Council to restore one of the city*s most
famous landmarks, was before Council.
In this connection, Mr. R. Carl Andrews, Chairman of the Mill Mountain
Development Committee, appeared before Council and presented a report of the
~ill Mountain Development Committee, advising that the Committee agrees with
Mr. Martin that RockIed§e Inn, now known as the Mill Rountaln Playhouse, is in
serious if not critical physical condition, recommending that Council appoint or
authorize the Mayor to appoint as quickly as possible a special investigative
committee composed of the Assistant Cit~ Manager. the City Building Inspector,
an architect, a member of Council and a member of the Mill Mountain ReveIopment
Committee, to be charged with the responsibility of determining if the Playhouse
is structurally sound, if it can be saved, repaired and preserved at a reasonable
cost, that the committee provide a cost estimate i£ the structure is deemed
capable of being restored and that this be done by May 1, 1973, if possible, and
suggesting that sufficient funds be made available at the present time to do any
necessary painting before the beginning o~ Playhouse season in late June.
After a discussion of the request, Mr. Thomas moved that the matter of
immediate repairs to the Mill Mountain Playhouse be referred to the City Manager for
report back to Council. The motion was seconded by Rt. Hubard and unanimously
adopted.
· Hr, Thomas further moved that Council concur in the recommendation
for the appointment of an investigative committee as outlined in the report of
the Hill Mountain Development Committee mJth the addition of Mr, Frank C.
Martin, Jr,. as a member of said committee and that th~ committee also be
requested to make recommendations regarding the restroom facilities at the
Hill Hountain Playhouse. The motion mas seconded by Hro Lisk and unanimously
adopted.
Mayor Webber then appointed HF. H. Carl Andrems. Chairman. Hr. John
Tbonpsono Hr. James O, Trout, the City Homager. the Assistant City Homager, the
Building Commissioner and Hr. Frank C. Martin. Jr** as members of the investiga-
tive committee.
TAXES-DEpARTHENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE: A ~ommunication from Mr, Cecil
Simmons in connection mith freezing the real estate taxes for persons 65 years
of age and in connection with a tax return on certain utility bills if the
receipts of said bills are kept and inquiring as to whether or not the Welfare
Department could help welfare recipients receive duplicate copies of these
utility receipts if they have been misplaced, was before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that the communication be received and filed and that
said communication also he referred to Hr. Harold Bardy. Assistant to the City
Manager for Community Relations, for the purpose Of conferring with Mr. Simmons
w/th reference to the matter. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and
unanimously adopted.
Ur. Hubard suggested that in the future uhen Council receives commun-
ications of this nature, that the Assistant to.the City Manager for Community
Relations be requested to personally contact the individual and submit a
written report to Council as to the concern Of the citizen and what Council can
do about the matter.
BUDGET-STATE COMPENSATION BOARD-COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE: Copy of
a communication from Mr. J. S. Howard, Jr., Commissioner of the Revenue, addresse
to Mr. David B. Ayers. Chairman of the State Compensation Board. submitting
two budgets for the fiscal year 1973-74, a primary budget predicated on the
effective entry date into the City Pay Plan as Of April 1. 1973, and an alter-
nate budget predicated on July 1, 1973, as the effective entry date, was
before Council.
Ur. Thomas moved that the communication and budgets be received
and filed. The motion was seconded by ~r. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Thomas further moved that the City Manager be authorized to discuss
with the City Treasurer the matter of employees in his office being classified
coder the City Pay Plan. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously
adopted.
117
118
LANDMARKS-WATER DEPARTMENT: A communication from Mr. Esr~ A. Fitzpatrick
requesting that Couecil give serious consideration tomard zsming the dam and
reservoir at Carvius Cove the #STdoey F. Small Dam nnd Reservoir," mas before the
body.
Mr. Lisk moved that the matter be referred to Council acting ns a
Committee of the Whole for study and consideration, The,motion nas seconded
by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted,
STREETS AND ALLEYS: An application from Mr. James D. Apostolou,
Attorney. representing Liberty Terminal Corporation, requesting that the uesterly
portion of Louisiana Avenue (ap unopened street) a distance on the north aide of
said street of 114.15 feet, and the south side of said street 12$feet, more or
less. and $0 feet in width, be vacated, discontinued and closed, mas before Con,iL
gr. Trout offered the fallouing Resolution providin9 for the appointment
of viewers in connection uith the request:
(~20790) A RESOLU'flON providing for the appolntuent of five vieuers
in connection with the application of Liberty Terminal Corp. to permanently
vacate and close the uesterly portion of Louisiana Avenue (an unopened street)
in the Northeast section of the City of Roanoke, Virginia.
(For full text of Resolution! see Ordinance Book n$O, page 6.)
.MFo Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The notion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: ~eSSFS. Garland, Ilubard. task. Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Mebber .........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Or. Taylor absent)
Br. Trout then moved that the request he referred to the City Planning
Commission for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: An application from Mr. James D. Apostolou.
Attorney. representing Elias Apostolou.and Nora Ap~stolou, requesting that an
unopened alley running in an easterly direction from another existing alley.between
Franklin Road and Luck Avenue. S. [., as shown on Sheet 101 of the Appraisal Rap
of the City of Roanoke. be vacated, discontinued and closed, was before Council.
Rr. Trout offered the follosing Resolution providing for the appointment
of viewers in connection with the request:
(~20791) A RESOLtrflON providing for the appointment of five viewers
in connection with the application of Elias Apostolou & Nora Apostolou to per-
manently vacate and close an unopened alley runnln9 in an easterly direction
from another existin9 alley betmeen Franklin Road and Luck Avenue. S. ~., in
the-City of Roanoke, Virginia.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book ~38, page 7.)
Rr. ~rout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion mas seconded
by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
119
AYES: #essrs, Garland, Hnbard, LJsk, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
· ebber ........... -~--~ ......... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
Mr. Trout then moved that the request be referred to the City Planning
Commission for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion nas
seconded by ~r. Garland and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET-SEWERS AND S~ORM DRAINS: Council having deferred action on a
report of the City Manager recommending that $12,000.00 be appropriated to
Refunds and Rebates under Section =90, "Sewage Treatment Fund," of the 1972-73
Sewage Treatment Fund Appropriation Ordinance, to provide funds to pay the
Roanoke County Public Service Authority for sewage services for the Edgehill.
Jefferson Hills and Jefferson Forest Areas, pending clarification from the City
Manager as to the semage charges regarding properties at 3962 Bosworth Drive and
3525 Heritage Road, the City Manager submitted the following report advising
that these t#o accounts mere added after the initial bill ems received, that the
billing for 3962 Bosmorth Drive includes four months at the $4.50 rate and eight
months at the $4.50 rate, for a total of $62.00; while the hill for 3625 Beritag*
Road c~mputes to be I 22/30 months at the $4.50 rate and eight months at the
$S.50 rate, for a total of $51.80 and advising that uith the clarification with
respect tn these t~o residences, it is recommended that Council appropriate
$12,000.00 to Refunds and Rebates under Section =90, "Sewage Treatment Fund."
of the 1972-73 Sewaoe Treatment Fund Appropriation Ordinance in order that the
city may reimburse the Roanoke County Public Service Authority for these
services.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
necessary funds:
(=20792) AN ORDINANCE tO amend and reordain Section ~gO. "Sewage
Treatment Fund." of the 1972-73 Semage Treatment Fund Appropriation Ordinance,
and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =36, page
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the follo~ing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Lisk, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Nebber ........................ b.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
PAY PLAN-CITy EMPLOYEES-SHERIFF: The City Manager submitted a written
report transmitting n listing of personnel ~itbin the City Sheriff*s Office
with the request that they be classified and included sithin the City Pay Plan,
advising that no evaluation has been made as to the cost of these changes as
it ia assumed that they would be included within the new budget year to become
,120
effective July !, 1973. that it mould be proposed that Council accept this proposal
for lmplemeutution subject to the approval of the State Compensation Doard at
its meeting on April 3. 1973. and that should the Doard not approve lt. the
request mill be mithdramn,
Mr. Thomas noted that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and offered the folloming emergency Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 20351.
providing a System of Pay Rates and Ranges for the employees of the City of
Roanoke, by adding to Schedule 2 of said System of Fay Rates and Ranges new code
positions for Captain of Deputies. Lieutenant of Deputies. Sergeant of Deputies,
Deputy and Paramedic, in the office of the City Sheriff and providing the ranges
and pay steps applicable to each said nam position and providing for an effective
date of July 1, 1973. for said changes:
(~20793) A~ ORDINANCE to amend Ordinance No. 20351, providing a System
of Pay Rates and Ranges for the employees of the City of Roanoke, by adding to
Schedule 2 of said System of Pay Mates and Ranges new code positions for Captain
of Deputies. Lieutenant of Deputies, Sergeant of Deputies. Deputy and Paramedic.
in the office of the City Sheriff and providing the ranges and pay steps appli-
cable to each said nam position; providing the effective date of the changes
herein ordered; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book n30, page 8.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption Of the Ordinance. The notion mas seconded
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk. Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Mebber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
AIRPORT-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a written report
advising that the 1967 bond issue provided funds for the construction of a new
fire station in the northwest area of the city, that in January, 1971, the city
entered into an agreement mith Minston $. Sharpley, A.I.A.. for the design of
this fire station, that conferences were held with the Federal Aviation Admini-
stration and it was determined that the fire station could be located on the
airport site and that a combination fire and airport crash building could be
constructed with the Federal Aviation Administration participating in the cost,
that several locations for the fire station have been evaluated, that the location
decided upon and approved by the FAA is at the intersection of the Industrial
Access Route 1559 and the Airport Access Road, immediately southeast of the eastern
end of former Runway 27, that it is his recommendation that Council give its
formal approval to this particular site, that preliminary plans were developed
and submitted to the FAA, that these plans were reviewed in January, 1973, at
which tine the city and the FAA reached general agreement with respect to the cost
sharing on this project, that on March 3, 1973, he received from the FAA a tentative
allocation of $97,000.00 tomard the construction 5f this project, that this
tentative allocation represents approximately one-third of the total cost of
the project, that Rr, Sharpley has now revised the p~eliminary plans of the
fire station to meet the requirements of the FAA and of the city and is proceed-
ing mith the design and preparation of the marking drawings for this station.
that the FAA has reviewed the city*s agreement with the Architect and has
requeste~ that the follomJng changes be made to that agreement, that these
changes can be made by addendum mhich would be agreed to by the City and the
Architect. that these changes are as follows:
1, The effective date for performance of the contract
betueen the City and the Architect should be stated
as January 25, lg?l.
2. The agreement should state that completed plans and
specifications should be submitted through the city to
the FAA within six months from the date of the addenndum to
this contract.
3. Article 8 of the agreement should he modified to state
that the plans and specifications mill become the pro-
perry of the city.
Article 13 of the agreement should be amended to provide
that this agreement and the addendum are subject to
approval by the F~A,
the City Manager pointing out that the FAA has indicated that mith these
changes, the agreement is acceptable to them and can be approved and recommend-
ing that Council authorize the execution of an appropriate addendum to the
existing agreement.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the folloming Resolution designating the site of the
city*s new fire station for the northwest area of the city to be situate at
the intersection Of State Route 19§9 and the Municipal Airport Access Road
leading off of State Route 118 and situate immediately southeasterly of the
eastern end of former Runway 27 on said Airport property:
(;20794) I RESOLUTION designating a site for a new fire station
to serve the northwest area of the City and the City*s Municipal Airport pro-
perty.
{For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book =3~, page 9.)
Mi. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the foll~iag vote:
AYES: Messrso Garland. Hubard, Lisk. Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Webber ....................... 5.
NAYS: None ......... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
Mr. Trout then offered the following Resolution approving and
authorizing an agreement to be entered into with Minston S. Sharpley, Architect,
as an addendum to the city's written agreement with said architect dated Jan-
uary 25, lgT1, relating to architectural services to be provided the city in
connection mith t~ construction Of certain new fire stations:
i21
122
(a20795) A RESOLUTION approving and authorizing an agreement to be
entered into mitb NJnstne $. Sbarple~, Architect, ns an addendum to the City's
written agreement with said architect dated Jaeoary 25, 1971, relating to archi-
tectural services to be provided the City in connection mJth the construction of
certain new fire stations.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book #36, page 10,)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the follomlng vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ..........................
~A¥S: Bone ...........O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
PROCLAMATIONS-ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The City Manager submitted
the following rep,Fi recommending that Council by Resolution. proclaim the week
of April g - April 15 as #Earth Neek" and the weeks of April 9 - April 21 as
"Keep Virginia Ueautiful Meeks." and encouraging everyone to assist the city and
improve the appearance of their properties:
"April 2. lg?3
B,n,robie Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: "Earth Meek" and "Keep Virginia Beautiful' Neeks"
The United States Senate has proclaimed the week of
April 9 through the 15th as "Earth Neek" and the Bonorable
Linwood A. Bolton, Governor Of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
has proclaimed the weeks of April g through April 21 as
"Keep Virginia Beautiful Weeks."
It is recommended that the City Council, by resolution,
proclaim the week of April g through April 15 as "Earth
Meek" and the weeks of April 9 through April 21 as "Keep
Virginia Beautiful Neeks."
Zhe City administration has an interest in participating
in projects during this two-week period which would be
directed tOward cleaning up the community. Unfortunately, at
this particular t/me, the City is moving rapidly to close
the sanitary landfill in Fallen Park nhile at the same time
attempting to open the ne~ landfill area in Vintoo. Also.
we do not have City operated landfill space designated for
'disposal of inorganic materials. Fur the above reasons, the
City's participation must be somewhat limited at this time.
Ne would encourage everyone to assist the City and
improve their properties' appearance. Ne would suggest'that
the citizens put their debris in plastic bags which would be
placed at the curb side for regular collection~ Ne would
suggest that tree limbs and wood be placed in bundles at the
curb side in lengths not exceeding four feet. Ne would
encourage the citizens to dispose of large inorganic items
such as beds, stoves, refrigerators.'and similar items at the
privately operated inorganic landfill at 30th Street and
Johnston Avenue. N. N., or at local scrap dealers, where '
the items ~ould be recycled.
Following the completion of our work in Fallen Park,
it may be possible to free up certain vehicles and cre~s
of City forces to provide this type of pick up service for
a limited period of time. should there appear to be suffi-
cient citizen demand for this service.
Although concentrated programs of short duration, such
as "Earth Week" and "Keep Virginia Beautiful Neeks" are
beneficial, sufficient emphosis bas not been placed on
the necessity to keep the community clean every week, not
Our goal is, more properly, #Keep Roanoke Beautiful.
Aluaysl"
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byrbu E. Hamer
Byron E. Bauer
City Manager'
In this connection, the City Kauager verbally pointed out that
a Proclamation has been prepared on the matter.
Mr, Trout moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
SALE OF PROPERTY: The City Manager submitted the follouin9 report
recommendin9 that Council rent approximately tea acres of cleared land at the
city*s Coyner Springs property to Rt. James B. Ballard. for the sum of
payable in advance for a period of three years:
"April 2. 1973
Ronorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Rental of City Property - Coyner Springs
Yhe City is in receipt of a request from Mr. James B,
Ballard that he be allowed to rent approximately 10 acres of
cleared land at the City's Coyner Springs property for the
sum of $100, payable in advance, for a period of three years.
Mr. Ballard plans to use the land for planting corn. Mr.
Ballard would be respousible for maintaining the property,
The property would not be fenced, If the City desired to
terminate this lease following the planting of a crop, the
City would have to give four months notice of its intent to
terminate. If Mr. Ballard desires to terminate the lease.
a one-month notice would be sufficient. In the event of
termination of the lease, there would be no proration of the
lease amount.
In the past, the City has'rented 62 acres of its Coyner
Springs pioperty for the sum of $510 for a three-year period.
This latest request meets with the approval of'the Director
of the City*s Melfare Department, under whose administrative
jurisdiction the Coyner Springs property is assigned.
Yhe City has no particula~ need'for this property in the
foreseeable future and it would otherwise become a maintenance
problem for City forces. Therefore, it is recommended that
City Council authorize the agreement with Mr. Ballard as herein
stated.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Byron E. Honer
Byron Z. Hamer
City Manager"
Mr, Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation Of the City
Manager and that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(~20796) AN ORDINANCE providing for the lease of certain City farm-
land located at Coyfler Springs, in Botetourt County, ¥ir~inJa, upon. certain term
and conditions.
123
124
WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended the leasing of approximately
twelve (12) acres of CJty-omned farmland nt Coyner Springs for the growing of
crops, upon the conditions hereinafter set Out, in which recommendation the
Council concurs.
THEREFORE, DE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke us
follows:
1. That the offer of James D. Dallard, for the lease of approximately
11.93 acres of cleared farmland owned by the City near Coyner Springs, in Hotetourt
County. Virginia. set out in detail on Plan No. 5382. prepared under date of March
21, 1973, in the Office of the City Engineer, for a three year term-beginning
April 20, 1973, at a'rental of $100.00, for the term, payable in advance and in
no event subject to proration; the lessee to be solely responsible for the main-
tenance and upkeep of said land during the term of said lease; and the use of
said land by said lessee to be limited to the planting and harvesting of corn. and
matters ancillary thereto; be and said offer is hereby ACCEPTED; and
2. That the City Manager be. and he is hereby, authorized and directed.
for and on behalf of the City. to execute a written lease of th~ aforesaid lands
to the said offeror, said lease to be upon such form as is prepared and approved
by the City Attorney and to be upon such terms and conditions as are hereinabove
set out, and to contain the following provisions for termination and renewal, viz:
That should either party desire to terminate said lease, a thirty-day
written notice shall he given, in advance, provided, however, should the lessee
have planted a crop, as yet unharvested, the City shall give four months written
notice of termination; and that said lease may be renewed upon its termination for
a further period of three years by mutual agreement between the City and said
lessee.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
'AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lash, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber .......................
NAYS: None .......... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
CITY ENGINEER: The City Manager submitted a written report advisin9
that ¥osbeck Vosbeck Kendrick and Redinger have completed the comprehensive master
plan and program of the Public Norks Service Center, transmitting a copy of the
plan, proposing to present this plan to Council on Monday, ~pril 9, 1973. and
inquiring as to whether or not Council would like to discuss this report during
the regular agenda portion of the Council meeting or whether it should be made
in open session followin9 the regular agenda to Council acting as a'Committee of
the Whole and that it would be his preference to present this report to Council
a Committee of the Whole followin§ the regular Council agenda.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur inthe report of the City Manager
that the report of Vosbeck Vosbeck Kendrich and Redinger be presented to Council as
Committee of the Whole following the regular Council agenda. The motion was
seconded by Rr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
'125
SALE OF PROPERTY-COUNCIL: The City Manager submitted a written
report reqeesting that he be authorized to meet uith Council in Executive Ses-
sion to discuss a real estate matter.
Mr. Trout moved that Council grant the request of the City Manager.
Tie motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ........................6,
NAYS:' None ..........O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
SALE OF PROpERTY-SEMERS AND STORM DRAINS-SIDEMALK, CURB AND GUTTER:
Council having previously requested that the City Attorney pre~ar~ a progress
report with reference to property needed by the city for improvee~nt~ to Garden
City Boulevard. S. E., the City A~torney submitted the following report advising
that he has net with Mr. and Mrs. Gale B. Cyphers, owners of the remaining pro-
perty consisting of a 9,140 square foot strip of land and an adjoining 185
square foot easement area transmitting a communication from Mr. and ~rs. Cyphers
advising that they will accept no less than $1.500.00 for said land and trans-
mitting two Ordinances which provide for the acquisition of the land either by
condemnation or by accepting the written offer of Mr. and Mrs. Cyphers:
"April 2, 1973
The Honorable ~ayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Within the week the undersigned andmembers of his
.staff have renewed efforts to arrive at agreement on the
basis of which the single remaining property, consisting
of a 9,1dH square foot strip of land and an adjoinin9
IH§ square foot easement area. needed for widening and
improving a section of Garden City Boulevard, S. E., might
be acquired from its owners by purchase, as opposed to con-
demnation proceedings. The undersigned and one of his
assistants have personally again inspected the strip of
land involved and have conversed at length with its owners,
Mr. and Mrs. Gale B. Cyphers. in an effort to arrive at
what would be considered by them and recommended by the under-
signed as a fair and reasonabl~ basii upon which this acqui-
sition might be effected by the City, consistent with the
terms of the City's acquisition of other properties already
acquired for the same project..
Mr. and Mrs. Cyphers have given me,for transmittal
to the Council, although formally addressed to the City
Manager, what I am assured is 4beJr best offer and the one
below which they will not voluntarily go. A copy of their
written proposal is enclosed from which it can be seen that
the value placed by its owners on the area needed by the
City is considerably in excess of the value assigned it by
the City. A substantial part of the value, as viewed by
the owners, is attributable to their loss of one hickory
tree, several sycamores and a wild cherry tree which are
on the 9148 square foot parcel and will be removed in the
course of the construction project. A copy of the written
proposal has.been ~elivered to the City Manager who may
very well wish to comment on the matter at the Council
meeting.
Having asked for and obtained from Mr. and Mrs.
Cyphers their formal written offer so that it might be
presented to the Council, I now do that, leaving to the
Council*s decision whether it be accepted or ~is office
be directed to acquire the same land and easement by con-
demnation proceedings, I do not believe that further
126
efforts to arrive at a coupronJse settlewent of the matter
mould do other than further delay coumencement of the
road midening proJect~
Accordingly, I recommend that the Council adopt one
of the ordinances which have been prepared fur this meeting
Of the Council and mhich are as follows:
(a) An ordinance by which the City.mould
accept the owner's mritten offer trans-
mitted uith~is communication; or
(b) an ordinance which would direct acquisition
of the property in question, by condemnation.
Respectfully,
S/ J. N. Kincanon
J. N. Kincanon"
After a discussion of the matter, Mr. Garland moved that Council accept
the offer of Lt. and Mrs. Cyphers of $1,500.00 for the property and offered the
follouing emergency Ordinance providing for the purchase by the City of Roanoke
from Gale B. and Vera C. Cyphers of a certain parcel of land situate to the east
of Garden City Boulevard, S. E.. and of a certain tenporary 'easement in land
needed by the city for the widening and improvement of Garden City Boulevard,
S. E.. upon certain terms and conditions, and repealing Ordinance No. 10997:
(n20797) AN ORDINANCE providing for the purchase of a certain parcel
of land situate to the east of Garden City Boulevard. 5. E., in fee simple,
and of a certain temporary easement in land needed by the City for the widening
and improvement of Garden City Boulevard, S. E., upon certain terms and condi-
tions; repealing Ordinance No. 19997; and providin9 for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book :38, page 11.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motin was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the follouing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Lisk, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ........................
NAYS: Mr. ttubard ..... 1. (Gr. Taylor absent)
The City Attorney having pointed out that the land in question is
appraised for approximately $b60.00. Mr..llubard advised that he questions paying
the property owners a sun more than tulce the appraised value of the property when
other properties needed by the city in that particular area were purchased at
their appraised value.
BUDGET-CITY ATTORNEy: The City Attorney submitted a written report
requesting that $200.00 be appropriated to Dues, Memberships and Subscriptions
under Section =4, *City Attorney," of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for
the purchase of certain law books, code replacements, etc.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the request of the City Attorney
and offered the followin9 emergency Ordinance providing for the necessary appro-
priation:
(~20798) AN ORDINAHCE to amend nnd reordain Section #4, "City Attor-
ney," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, nnd providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book z30, page 13.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by RT. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Ressrs, Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Thomas, Trout and Ray~
· ebber ....................... 6.
NAYS: None ......... --0~ (Dr. Taylor absent)
TRAFFIC: The Assistant City Attorney submitted a written report
transmitting an Ordinance for recommended adoption of Council which will amend
and reordain Division 3. of Article V, Chapter 1. of Title XVIII, of the City
Code relating to the operation of automobiles and certain other vehicles while
under the influence of alcohol and other intoxicants, which Ordinance. if
adopted, will bring the City Code into conformity with the current state law.
Rr. Trout moved that Council concur in the report of the Assistant
City Attorney and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~2079g) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Division 3. of Article V.
Of Chanter 1. Title XVIII,of the Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956. as hereto-
fore amended, said chapter being the Traffic Code of the City of Roanoke Of
1956, relating to the operation of automobiles and certain other vehicles while
under the influence of of alcohol and other intoxicants, or narcoti~ drugs, or
other self'administered intoxicants or dr~§s; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~SH, page
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Webber .........................6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
AUDITS-SCHOOLS: The City Auditor submitted written reports transmit-
ting audits on the examination of the records of the ~oodro~ Wilson Junior High
School, the Stonewall Juckson Junior High School, the Ruffner Junior iligh School
the Monroe Junior High School, the James Madison Junior High School, the James
Breckinridge Junior lligh School, the Mestside Elementary School, the WestEnd
Elementary School, the Wasena Elementary School, the Washington Heights Elemen-
tary School, the Virginia Heights Elementary School, the Hound Hill Elementary
School, the Raleigh Court Elementary School, the Preston Park Elementary School.
the Oakland Elementary School, the Morningside Elementary School, the Ronterey
Elementary S!hool, the Melrose Elementary School, the LincoIn Terrace Elementary
School, the Jamison Elementary School, the Garden City Elementary School, the
Grandin Court Elementary School. the Highland Park Elementary School, the Huff
Lane Elementary School, the Hart Park Elementary School, the Forest Park
128
Eleuentary School, the Flshbura Park Elementury School, the Fairview Elementary
School, the Crystal Spring Elementary School, end th~ Relmoat Elementary School
for the school year ended June 30, 1972. advising that the examinations mere
made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and all the records
were Jn order and the Statements of Receipts and Disbursements reflects recorded
transactions for the period and the financial condition of the funds.
Hr. Trout moved that the reports be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Hr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF CORRITfEES:
INSURANCE: Council having previously referred to the Audit Committee
faf study, report and recommendation a report of the City Ranager making certain
recommendations in connection with the bond limits for certain city employees.
Mr. William S. Hubard, Chairman of the Audit Committee, submitted a written report
recommending that the blanket fidelity bond coverage on all city employees be
raised to $25,000.00, that the fidelity bond coverage on the Civic Center offi-
cials be set at $100,000.00 for the Director amd $100.000.00 for the dsslstaut
Director for Operations. advising that this increased coverage mill be effective
on the renemal date of the city's existing fidelity bond Da April 2b, 1973, and
that the Audit Committee further resolved to determine within the next year the
feasibility of the city adopting a system of self-insurance.
Rr. Hubard moved that Council concur in the report of the Audit Com-
mittee. The notion was seconded by Rr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
TRAINS-BRIDGES: Council having referred to a committee for tabulation,
report and recommendatiou the bids received for painting the Franklin Road Bridge
over the Norfolk and Western Railway, the committee submitted the following
report recommending that Council accept the lam bid of Electrical and Industrial
~uintenauce Corporation, in the amount of $2b,047.50. and that the appropriate
agreement between the City of Roanoke and the Norfolk and Western Railway Company
which will permit city personnel to perform maintenance activities on those bridge
structures which cross the Norfolk and Western Railway Company's tracks be com-
pleted and executed:
"April 5, 1973
Honorable ~ayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Bids for Painting of Franklin Road Bridge over the
~orfolk and Western Railway
Follomiu9 proper advertisement bids were received,
publicly opened and read at the regular meeting of the City
Council on Monday, Rarch 26, 1973. for the painting of the
Franklin Road Bridge over the Norfolk and Western Railway.
Three bids were received as itemized on the attached tabula-
tion of bids. The low bid in the amount of $26,047.50 was
submitted by Electrical and Industrial Maintenance Corpora-
tion of Salem, Firginia.
Tour bid committee has reviewed these bids and the
qualifications of the bidders and reconmends that a contract
be awarded to the low bidder.
to
Account 64 - 255, Maintenance of City Property - Main-
tenance of Buildings and Property, coatained.$18,O00 for
this work. An additional $9,000 was established in this
occoant for the replacement of the gymnasium floor in the
National Guard Armory. This $9,000 was not used for this
floor replacement and is available for use on this project.
Although the low bid is higher than the City*s original
estimate for this project, we believe that this higher cost
is justified due to the new stringent requirements of the
Norfolk and Western Railway of firms other than railway
employees working on railmay property. The contractor is
required to obtain the necessary insurance including
railroad protective liability insurance as might be
required by the'Norfolk and Western.
During discussions with the Norfolk and Western Rail-
may concerning this particular project, it mas pointed out
that the City still has not executed the appropriate agree-
ment with ~e Norfolk and Western Railway mhich would permit
the City to perform necessary maintenance activities on
those bridge structures which cross the Norfolk and Western
Railmay*s tracks. This particular agreement has been pend-
ing since September 27. 1971. If this agreement is not
executed prior to the shard of a contract for the painting
of this particular bridge, it will be impossible for City
personnel to inspect the contractor*s work.
It is your comnittee*s recommendation that (1) the
low bid of Electrical and Industrial Raidtenance Corpora-
tion; (2) all other bids received be rejected; and (3)
the appropriate agreement between the City and the Norfolk
and Western Railway which will permit City personnel to
perform maintenance activities be completed and executed.
Respectfully submitted.
S! Sam II, RcGhee. III
Sam H. McChee, III
Chairman
S/ Joseph H. Brewer, Jr.
Joseph H, Brewer, Jr.
S/ B. Bo Thompson
D. B. Thompson"
Mr..Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendationsof the
Committee and offered the following emergency Ordinance accepting the proposal
of Electrical.~ Industrial Maintenance Corporation:
(=20800) AN ORDINANCE awarding a contract for the painting of ~ e
'Franklin Road Bridge over the Norfolk and Western Railway Company*s right-of-way,
upon certain terms and conditions; accepting a certain bid made to the City
for performing said work; rejecting certain other bids made to the City. and
providin9 for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~38. page 20.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. Yhe motion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Thomas. Trout and ~ayor
Mebber ..................... 6.
NAYS: None O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
Mr. Lisk then offered the following emergency Ordinance authorizing
and emponering the City Manager to enter into written agreement with Norfolk and
129
130
Mestern Railway Company relative M the cJtyts maintenance of city bridges over
properties of said railway company:
(n20801) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and empowering the City Manager
to enter in~o written agreement with Norfolk and Nestern Railway Company relative
to the Cltyts maintenance Of City bridges over properties of said railway com-
pany; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book mjB, page
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the folloning vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk~ Thomas and Mayor
~ebber .........................5.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Dr. Taylor absent) (Mr. Trout not voting)
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
AUDITORIUM-COLISEUM: Council at its meeting on Monday. January 29.
1973, having concurred in a report of the City Manager recommending that the
question of catering at the Roanoke Civic Center be referred to the Roanoke Civic
Center Advisory Commission with the request that they determine whether OF not
it would be m~re beneficial for the city and the civic center users to deal
with a single exclusive caterer or have a choice of several caterers and that the
Commission report its recommendations back to Council on or before April 1, 1973,
the matter was again before the body.
In this connection, Ur. John A. Kelley, Chairmanof the Roanoke Civic
Center and Stadium Advisory Commission. appeared before Council and requested
that action on the matter be deferred until the next regular meeting of Council
on Monday, April 9, 19~3,
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the request of Mr. Kelley that
the matter be deferred until the regular meeting of Council on Monday, April
1973. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
ZONING:' Ordinance No. 2077b, rezoning Lots 2 - 16, inclusive, Block
2?, Map of Rivervieu Land and Manufacturing Company, Official Tax Nos. 1313601 -
1313607, inclusive, and 1313609 - 1313616, inclusive, located on the south side
of the 1800 block of Patterson Avenue, S. #., and on the north side of the 1800
block of Chapman Avenue. S. N.. betueen 18th Street and lqth Street,
from RG-2, General Residential District, to C-l, Office and Institutional Dis-
trict, having previously been before Council for its fir?t reading, read and
laid over, was again before the body. Mr. Trou} offering the foil ox inK for its
second reading and final adoption:
(a20775) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956. as amended, and Sheet No. 131, Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
(For fall text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n38, page 1)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion nas seconded
by Mr. Llsk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:. Messrs. Garland, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber ...................................... 4.
NAYS: Messrs,.Euhard and Lisk ............ 2. (Or. Taylor absent)
ZONING: Ordinance No. 20??7. rezoning two parcels of land located
on the westerly side of the 2500 and 2600 blocks of Stephenson Avenue, S.
Official Tax Nos. 1160133 and 1160136, from RS-3. Single-Family Residential
District. to RD, Ouplex Residential District, having previously been before
Council for its first reading, read and laid over, nas again before the body.
Mr. Trout offering the following for its second reading and final adoption:
(~20777) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet ~o. 116. Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke. in relation to Zoning.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Hook #30, page 2.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Ilubard, Lisko Thomas, Trout and.
Mayor Mebber ......................................6. .
NAYS: None .........................~ ....-0. (Dr. Taylor absent)
ZONING: Ordinance No. 20??8, rezonin9 property located at the north-
east corner of the intersection of Melrose Avenue and Country Club Drive, N.
containing 2.104 acres. Official Tax No, 2660501. from C-I, Office and Institu-
tional District, to C-2, General Commercial Olstrict. having previously been
before Council for its first reading, read and laid over was again before ~ e
body, Mr. Trout offering the following for its second reading and final adoption:
(~20776) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title X¥, Chapter 4.1. Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet No. 266. Sectional
1965 Zone Map, City of Roanoke. in relation to Zoning.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinnnce Hook ~39. page 3.)
Mr. Trout movedthe adoption of the Ordinance. The notion mas
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubnrd, Lisk, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Mebber ..................... 6.
NAYS: None ........ -0. (Dr. Taylor absent)
SALE OF PROPERTY: Ordinance No. 20782, authorizing and providing
for the city*s sale and conveyance Of a lot or parcel of land known end des-
crJbed as Lot 26, Block 1, as shown on the Map of Eureka Land Company, and
being Off$cial Tax No. 2221109, in the City of Roanoke, upon certain terms and
conditions, having previnusly been before Council for its first reading, read
and laid over, was again before the body, Mr. Trout offering the following for
its second reading and final adoption:
131
132
(a20782) AN ORDINANCE outboriziog and providing for the Clty*s sale
aud couveyaace of a lot or parcel of laud kuoma and described ss Lot 26. Block
1. as shomn on the Map of Eureka Land Company. and being Official No. 2221109, in
the City of Roanoke, Virginia, upon certain terms end conditions,
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book a38. page 5.)
Mr. Trout.moved. the adoption of the Ordinance.. The motlun mas seconded
by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber ...................... 6.
NAYS: None ......... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOyEES-SHERIFF: Council having directed the City
Attorney to prepare the proper measure concurring in the City Sheriff's employment
of three full timePara-Medical Technicians, he presented same; whereupon, Mr.
Trout offered the folloming Resolution:
(~20802) A RESOLUTION concurring in the City Sheriff's employment
of three full time Para-Medical Technicians.
(For full text.of Resolution, see Ordinance Rook nail, page 22.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the follomin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
~ebber .........................b.
NAYS: None .......... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOYEES-CORRISSIONER OF TRE REVENUE: Council having
directed the City Attorney to prepare the proper measure amending Ordinance No.
20351. providing a System of Pay Rates and Ranges for the employees of the City
of Roanoke. by adding to Schedule 2 of said System of Pay Rates and Ranges new
code positions for an Assistant Commissioner of Revenue, au Audit Inspector, a
License Inspector and a Supervisor of Real Estate Records in the Office of the
Commissioner of the Revenue and providing for the ranges and pay steps applicable
to each said new position,.effective April 1, 1973, he presented same; mhereupon,
Mr. Trout offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(m20803) AN ORDINANCE to amend Ordinance No. 20351, providin9 a
System of Pay Rates and Ranges for the employees of the City of Roanoke, by add-
ing to Schedule 2 of said System of Pay Rates and Ranges.new code positions for
on Assistant Commissioner of Revenue, an Auditluspector, o License Inspector,
and a Supervisor O[ Real Estate Records in theoffice of the Commissioner of
Revenue and providing the ranges and pay steps applicable to each said new posi-
tion; providing the effective date of the changes herein ordered; and providing
for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook ~38, page 23.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Hobard, Lisko Thomas, Trout and Mayor
febber ........................6.
NAYS: None ......... -0o (Dr. Taylor absent) .
COUNCIL: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure commending the management.and staff of fBBA-TV Channel 15 for
televisioo coverage of the meetings of the Roanoke City Council, he.presented
same; uhereupon, #r. Llsk offered the folloming Resolution:
(~20B04) A RESOLUTION commending the management and staff of RBRA-TV
Channel 15 for televisioo coverage of the meetings of the Roanoke City Council.
(For full text of Resolutioo, see Ordinance Book a3B, page 24.)
.Ry. Link moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Ry. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Nessrs. Garland, Bubard. Lisk, Thomas, Trout and.Rayor
Nebber ........................b.
NAYS: None .......... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
MOTIONS AND NISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: .
POLICE DEPARTMENT-JAIL-MUNICIPAL BUILDING-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM-
PLANNING: Mr. lilliam S. Bubard, Chairman of the Roanoke Valley Corrections
Board, presented a written report of the Roanoke Valley Corrections Board
requesting that Council authorize the execution of a contract between the city
and the Corrections Board whereby the City Auditor would advance initial
operating funds for the Corrections Board and.would.disburse these funds on
behalf of the Corrections Board upon proper requisition to the City Auditor,
advising that the Corrections Board is willing to pay the city a service charge
for this Jn the amount of two per cent of funds disbursed and to promptly
reimburse the city for any funds expended by the city for jurisdictions
other than the City Of Roanoke.
Mr. Hubard moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanoke
Valley Corrections Board and offered the.following emergency Ordinance autho-
rlzJng the execution of an agreement between the city and the Roanoke Valley
Regional Corrections Board for the disbursement of funds on behalf of said
Corrections Board and providing for payment by said CorrectJoos Board of the
cost of such services: and providing for the advancement by the city of
certain sums on behalf of the said Corrections Board upon certain terms and
conditions:
(~20B05) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the execution of an agreement
between the City and the Roanoke Valley Regional Corrections Board for the . .
disbursement of funds on behalf of said Corrections Board and providing for
payment hi said Corrections Board of the cost of such services; providing for .
the advancement by the City of certain su=s on behalf of the said Corrections
Board upon certain terms and conditions; and providing for an emergency..
(For full text of Ordinance, see as in Ordinance flook ~38, page 25.)
133
134
Hr. Nubard moved the adoption.of the Ordinance, The motion
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Neasrs, Garland. Hubard, Lisko Thomas. Trout end Mayor
Webber .........................
NAYS: None ..........-O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
Mr. Nubard then offered the follomJng emergency Ordinance appropriating
$5o000.00 to Regional Jail under Section #91, 'Non-Departmental,' of the 1972-73
budget to provide the necessary funds:
(u20806) A~ ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ngl, 'Non-Departn~sta]
of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, end providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Hook #SG, page
Hr. llubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrso Garland, Rubard, Llsk, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
HOUSING-SLU~ CLEARANCE: Counci! having previously requested that the
Mayor appoint a committee to work with the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and
Rousing Authority and the utility companies in an effort to work out agreements
with regard to the matter of underground utilities. Mayor Webber advised that
he is appointing Mr. David g. Lisk. Chairman, the City Manager, the City Attor-
ney. the City Auditor and Mr. R. R. Henley as members of said committee.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the appointments made by Mayor
Nebber to said committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously
adopted.
COUNCIL-SCHOOLS: Council having previously requested that the Mayor
arrange a date and time in order for Council to meet with the Roanoke City School
Board to discuss matters of mutual concern, Mayor Nebber advised that Such a
ueetlng has been scheduled for 7:30 p.m., Mednesday, April 4, 1973, in the
Executive Session Conference Room of the City Council Chambers.
COUNCIL-MATER DEPARTRENT: Council having previously requested that
the Mayor arrange a date and time for a meetin9 with the Vinton Town Council and
the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to discuss the matter Of the sale of
surplus water to various county areas and a proposed recommended policy for
furnishing surplus water to areas outside the city limits, Mayor Webber advised
that such a meeting has been scheduled with the ¥inton Town Council for 7:30
p.m., Wednesday. April 11, 1973, in the Executive Session Conference Room of the
City Council Chambers, and that another meeting has been scheduled for 7:30
pom.. April IG, 1973, in the Executive Session Conference Room of the City
Council Chambers with the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors for the same
purpose.
~HOOLS: Mayor Mebber welcomed a group of students from Jefferson
Senior Bigh School to the Council meeting.
CO~C1L-SALE OF PROPERTY: Mr. Bubard moved that Council meet in
Executive Session to discuss a matter of real estate pertaining to the Roanoke
Valley Correctigns Board. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Rubard, Lisk. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber ........................
NAYS: None ........ O. (Or. Taylor absent)
ROUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: Council at its last regular meeting havin9
decided to appoint representatives to the Fair tlousing Board, the matter was
again before the body.
Mr. Garland moved that action on the matter be deferred until the
next regular meeting of Council on Monday, April 9, 1973. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
There being no further business, Mayor Mebber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
Oeputy City Clerk Mayor
135
136
COUNCIL, REGULAR MKETIN
Monday, April 9. 1973,
The Council or the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting In the Council
Chamber in the Municipat Building, Monday, April g, 1973, at 2 p,m** the regular
meeting hour, mlta Mayor Roy L. Mebber presfdlog.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland. Milliam S. Hubard, David
Lish, Noel C. Taylor, Bampton
arriving at the meeting due to transaction of Qfficial business) and Mayor Boy L.
Mebber ........................
ABSENT: None ........ O.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Hr. Byron E. Honer, City Manager; Hr. Samuel fl.
McChee, III, Assistant City Manager; Rr. James N. Kincanon, City Attorney; Mr.
H. Ben Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorney; and Mr. A. N. Gibson. City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend
Bernard P. Edwards. Pastor. First Christian Church.
MINIffES: Copies of the minutes of the regular meeting held on March
26 , 1973. and the regular meeting held on April 2, Ig73, having been furnished
each member of Council. on motion of Mr. Lisk. seconded by Mr. Hubard and unani-
mously adopted, the readin9 thereof was dispensed with and the minutes approved as
recorded.
CITY GOVERNMENT: Mayor ~ebber pointed out that Bonday, April 9, 1973,
is being observed by the City of Roanoke as Monju Day in honor of its Sister City
of Monju. Korea; whereupon, Hr. Lisk offered the following Resolution proclaimin9
April 9. 1973. as Monju Day in the City of Roanoke and requested that the City
Clerk read said Resolution in its entirety:
(u20807) A RESOLUTION proclaiming April 9, 1973, as Monju Day.
(For fall text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book n38, page 27.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
5y Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas and Mayor
Webber ......................
NAYS: None Oo (Mr. Trout had not arrived at the meeting)
Mr. Million B. Poll, Chairman. The International Municipal Cooperation
:ommittee of Roanoke, Virginia, Incorporated, appeared before Council and prese~ ed
~uests from the City of Monjuo their spokesman being Mr. HO Eul ~haag, Minister
the Republic of Korea Embassy in Washington, D. G.; whereupon, Hr. Mhang expressed
~leasure at being in the City of Roanoke, advising that he knows of no more fruitful
Sister City Program than the one betmeen the City of Roanoke and the City of ~onju
and that he hopes this spirit of friendship and international cooperation will flow
throughout the world.
At thin point. Mayor Mebber presented Nr, Mhsng with tug Keys to the
City, one for himself, end one to be presented~t~ the Mayor of RonJu.
HEARING OF CITIZENS OPON PURLIC MATTERS:
SERERS AND STORM DRAINS: Pursuant ~o notice of advertisement for bids
on the construction of a storm drain between 6th Street, S. M., and Rain Street,
said proposals to be received by the City Clerk until ~ p.m** Monday, April 9,
1973, and to be opened at that hour before Council, Mayor Rabbet asked if anyone
present hsd any questions about the advertisement for bids and no representative
present ral~lng any question, the Mayor instructed the City Clerk to proceed
with tbs opening of the bids; whereupon, the City Clerk opened and read the follol
fag bids:
J* P. Turner Brothers, Incorporated - $16,261.50
Branch and Associates, Incorporated - 21,636.00
D. G. ffoliaedsMortb - 24,136.79
Lanford Brothers Company, Incorporated - 32,T75.00
Mr. Thomas moved that the bids be referred to a committee to be
appointed by the Mayor for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Webber appointed Messrs. RyronE. Hamer. Chairman and Samuel II.
McGhee, 1II, as members of the committee.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
ShERIFF-JAIL-BUDGET: A communication from Sheriff Paul J. Puchett
requesting that SB,O00.O0 be appropriated to Food Supplies under Section ;26.
*Jail,* o( the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for the remainder of tbs fiscal
year, Mas before Council.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the request of Sheriff Puckett
and offered the following emerRency Ordinance appropriating the necessary funds:
(~20BOB) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ;26. "Jail," of
the lg72-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book naB, page 27.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption Of.the Ordinance. Zhe motion was
seconded by Or. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Bubard, Lisk. Taylor. Thomas, and Mayor
Webber ....................... 6.
NAYS: None .......... O. (Mr, Trout bad eot arrived at the meeting)
HUSTINGS COURT: Council having previously adopted a Resolution accept-
ing the portrait of the late Honorable John Uarion Hart, a former judge Of the
Hustings Court of the City Of Roanoke and a formerCommissioner Of the Revenue Of
said city, said portrait to be hung for public display in the Courtroom of the
B~stings Court, along with the portraits of other former judges of said Court, and
expressing appreciation to Mrs. Margaret Bart Barnes for her gift to the city, a
communication from Mr. Richard F. Pence, President, Roanoke Bar Association,
advising that the Bar Association deems it appropriate to have a special ceremony
137
138
recognizing the generous gift to the City of Roanoke by Mrs, Barnes and that this
ceremony will be held at 2:30'p.m., on Tuesday, April 10, 1973, in the Bustings
Court and ii is hoped that ns many members of Council as possible will attend
this ceremony, uas before the ~ody.
Hr. Thomas moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconde~ b~ Mr. Llsk and unanimously adopted,
SALE OF PROPERTY~ A communication from Mr. Fred G. Ellis, President,
Truck Sales, Incorporated, requesting that Council consider selling him city-
owned property which is located in the 300 block of Carver Avenue, N. E., was before
the body.
Dr. Taylor moved that the request be referred to the Real Estate Committee
for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was seconded by Mr,
Garland and unanimously adopted.
STATE ~ORRENSATION BOARD-COMMISSIONER OF TIlE REYEN~: Copy' of a commun-
ication from the Store Compensation Board. addressed to Mr. Jo S. Howard. Jr.,
Commissioner of the Revenue, with reference to his February, 1973, expense voucher,
advising that his allowance for fiscal year 1972-73 for Data Processing Equipment
Re~tal showed an overdraft of $673.32. and that to cover this overdraft, the Com-
pensation Board has transferred $6T3.32 ~rom Data Processing Salaries Allomance to
Data Processing Equipment Rental, leavin9 a balance of $2,78To52 for Data Pro-
cessing Salaries and u balance of zero for Data Processing Equipment Rental, was
before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that the communication be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by ~r. Thomas and unanimously adopted,
REVENUE SHARING: A communication from Mr. Richard S. Oillis, Jr.,
Chairman. Department of Rental Hygiene and Hospitals, requesting that every con-
sideration be 91yen for the expenditure of some of the city's revenue sharing
dollars in the field of mental health and mental retardation, nas before Council.
Rt. Thomas moved that the communication be referred to 1973-74 budget
study. The notion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
STREET LIGHTS: Copy of a communication from the Appalachian Power
Company transmitting a list of street lights installed and/or removed during the
month of ~arch. lqT3. was before Council.
Rt. Garland moved that the communication and list be received and filed.
The motion Has seconded by Rt. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted a written report
advising that Council, in action taken at its meeting on December 11, lg?2,
approved Ordinance No. 20589 which authorized the City Manager to employ the
services of Roy F. Mestion. Incorporated, Environmental Scientists and Engineerso
to conduct an industrial wastewater survey and to prepare the form of on industrial
wastewater Ordinance for the City of Roanoke, that Roy F. Weston, Incorporated.
has completed the field survey interview portion of their mork and they are now
evaluating the information obtained prior to conducting actual field sampling
or selected Industrial mnstemnters, that nt the time the Ordinance was adopted,
no monies mere appropriated Ia pay rot these services end recommending that
$31,000.00 he appropriated to CIP Account $$0 - 832. Sewage Treatment Plant
Expansion, in order for said progress paymento to be mode.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager end offered the folloming emergency Ordinance appropriating the
necessary funds:
(#20809) AN ORDINANCE to auend and reordoin Section #550, 'Seuage
Treatment Capital Improvements Fund,* of the 1972o73 Sewage Treatment Fund
Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(FOr full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book z38. page 28.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. LJsk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, and Mayor
Webber ............. ~ ............ 6.
NAYS: 'None ........... O. (Mr. Trout had not arrived at the meeting)
BUDGET-JUVENILE AND DOMESTIC RELATIONS COURT: The City Manager sub-
mitted a mritten report recommending that $T,930.00 be appropriated to Fees for
Relations Court** of the 1972-73 budget, in order that Virginia Commonwealth
University can be paid for two courses conducted by said University for
juvenile detention personnel under Law Enforcement Action Grant No. 71-A1245.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(a20010) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordaiu Section ~19, *Juvenile
and Domestic Relations Court** of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~38, page 29.)
Mr. Ltik moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was'
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the follomiog vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout had not arrived at the meeting)
BUDGET-TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEy: The City Man-
ager submitted a written report recommending that $15,?04.00 be appropriated to
Section #91, ~on-Bepartmental,* of the 1972-73 budget in order that the proper
payments can be made to Offender Aid and Restoration in connection with a con-
tract between the city and O.A.Ro together with the city*s special conditions
for grant award which provides for the city to pay up to $15,704.00 of the
grant money to O.A.R. upon proper request rathe city'under Law Enforcement
Grant No. 71-AIIO0.
/3?
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in tie recommeudakion of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the necessory
funds:
(a20011) AN ORDINANCE to amend nod reordain Seckion agl, '~un -
Oeparkmental,~ of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For rail text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Oooh u3fl. page 29.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr, LisR and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, ~ubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas and Mayor
Mebber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout had not arrived at the meeting)
PARES AND PLAYGROUNDS: Council having previously requested that the
City Manager report on immediate repairs which are needed for the Mill Mountain
Playhouse. the City Manager submitted the following report recommending that
$50000.00 be appropriated for painting and $30000.00 be appropriated for window
replacement and that future repairs to this facility be considered during
Council's deliberations:
~April 9o 1973
Itonorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Mill Mountain Theater
On Monday, April 2, 1973, City Council received a letter
from Mr. Frank C. Martin, Jr., President of Mill Mountain
Playhouse Board of Directors, calling Council's attention to
the condition of the outside of Rockledge Inn. Mr. Martin
and Mr. M. Carl Andrews, with the enthusiastic support of
the Mill Mountain Development Committee, requested City
Council restore the Rockledge Inn as one of the City's
most famous landmarks.
City Council appointed a committee to investigate this
matter but asked that the City Manager report immediately
on needed repairs. On Wednesday, April 4, building mainte-
nance personnel accompanied the City Manager to the Mill
Mountain Theater to make a cursory investigation. There is
no question but what the building needs painting immediately.
Additionally, and prior to painting, a window replacement
program should be instituted. Of the IS windoms in the living
protion of the Inn all have over a period of years dete-
riorated and rotted to a point where they should be replaced.
Yhe sill{ to these windows crumble under the pressure of
one*s hand.
Gentlemen of Council, there is a great deal of work
mhich could be accomplished to restore this facility and a
large amount of money could be spent on this project. It
would be my recommendation that the 1S windows in the living
section of the second floor of the Mill Mountain Playhouse
be replaced at an estimated cost of $3,000 and that the main
structure and the surrounding buildings be repainted. To
properly repaint this building it will have to be scraped
and many areas sanded and some boards replaced. The above-
described work is estimated to cost approximately
$5,000:for' painting and $3,000 for the window replacement.
I feel quite certain that the report from the Mill
Mountain Committee that Council appointed will include a
great deal more work.
It would be recommended that City Council by budget
ordinance appropriate SB.O00 to Building Maintenance
Account 64 for the immediate repairs to the Hill Mountain
Theoter Playhouse and that future repairs'to this facility
be considered daring City Council's deliberations,
Respectfully submitted,
S! Byron E, Hamer
City Manager'
Mr, Thomas moved that Council concur In the.recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the neces-
sary funds:
(~20012) AN OROINANCE to amend and reordai~ Section ~64, *Maintenance
of City Property,' of the 1972-7~ Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for au
(FO~ full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Rook n30, page 30,)
Mr. ThoMas ~oved the adoption of the OrdinancE. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Lisk an~ adopted by she following vote:
AYES: ~essrs. Garland. flubard, Lisk. Taylor. Thomas and Mayor
Mebber ......................... 6.
NAYS: None .......... O. (Mr. Trout had not arrived at the meeting)
Mr. Lisk moved that the City Manager be requested to investigate
immediately the cost factors involved in putting the toilet facilities at the
Mill Mountain Playhouse in proper repair in order for them to be useable this
Mr. M. Carl Andrews, Chairman, of the Mill Mountain Development
Committee. appeared before Council and expressed the opinion that if improve-
ments could be nude to the toilet facilities, it would be appreciated.
BUDGET-COMMI SSIONER OF TIlE REVENUE-JUVENILE AND DOMESTIC RELATIONS
COURT-CITY PHYSICIAN-A~DITORIUrQ-cOLISEUM: The City Manager submitted the fol-
lowing report ia connection with supplemental appropriations and transfers to
'April g, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
.Subject: Supplemental Appropriations and Transfers
Attached is a tabulation of accounts which are currently
overdrama or Which need an additional appropriation nr trans-
fer of funds in order to provide sufficient funds in these
accounts for the remainder of the fiscal year. This ta6ula-
tion indicates the amounts that each account i{ currently
for the remainder of the fiscal year.
Several of these accounts ~equi~e further con'eat as
follows:
6 - Commissioner of Revenue - 320, Operating Supplies
and Materials. This over expenditure resulted from the
necessity to reorder City decals for motorcycles and
of this type of vehicle during this year.
19 - Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court -290.
Automobile Allomance, There mere unanticipated expenditures
In this account due to the request of the State Deportment
of Welfare and Institutions for four probation officers
from this court to participate on various State tusk
forces and committees mhich met almost meekly throughout
the summer orlg?2,' These task forces and committees-dealt
with the reorganization of the Juvenile courts which mill
become effective July 1, 1973. One-half of the requested
appropriation alii be reimbursed to the City by the Common-
mealth of Virginia.
19 - Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court -.340, Data
Processing. Oats processing needs of the court mere under
estimated for the current fiscal year.
46 - Medical Ezaminer - 21o. Fees for Professional and
Special Services. It is virtually impossible to adequately
estimate the funds necessary for this account for any given
year. Funds appropriated to this account are offset by
revenues,
91 - Non Departmental - 210, Fees for Professional and
Special Services. This account covers morkmenes compensation
and payments to doctors and hospitals, The City is self-
insured and it is impossible to estimate the necessary funds
which mill be required for this account for a fiscal year.
91 - Non Departmental - 53§. Recoveries and Rebates.
Amounts appropriated to this account are offset by miscel- laneous revenues to the General Fund.
9T - Terminal Leave - 115, Terminal Leave. This account
pays for vacation which has been accured by an employee*
mhd is leaving the employ of the City. It is impossible to
estimate the expenditures in this particular account.
440 - Civic Center - 320, Operating Supplies and
Materials. This account is used for the purchase of
tickets for various events at the Civic Center. Due to
increased usage of the Center it is necessary to provide
additional funds for this account.
440 - Civic Center - 538, Refunds Account. This account
is used to pay out refunds for tickets and also to make sales
tax payments. It is difficult to properly estimate the
required funds for this account and the additional appro-
· priation, which is offset by revenues, is needed.
It is recommended that the City Council authorize-the
appropriate transfer or appropriation of funds to the
accounts as shown on the attached tabulation.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E, Haner
Byron E. Haner
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and offered the following emergency Ordinance providing for the necessary appro-
priations and transfers:
(~20815) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordaln certain sections of the
1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =38, page 30.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs.'Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Nebber 6.
NAYS: None 0~ (Mr. Trout had not arrived at the meeting)
Dr. Taylor then offered the followln9 emergency Ordinance making the
necessary transfer and appropriation to the Civic Center Appropriation Fund:
g
143
(u20814) AN OROINANCE to amend end reordain Section u440, 'Civic
Center - Administration Fond," of the 1972-73 Civic Center Fond Appropriation
Ordinanceo and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance 8ooh ~3G,-page 31.)
Dr. T~ylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion aaa
seconded by Mr. LJsk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, and Rayor
Webber .........................6.
NAYS: None ...........O, (Mr. Trout had not arrived at the meeting)
POLICE DEPARTRENY: Council having previously requested that the
City Manager transmit information in connection with recruiting practices being
followed to hire military personnel being separated from the Armed Services,
the City Manager submitted the follouing report advising that the Police
Department, in an attempt to attract military personnel being separated from
the Armed Services, provider ruch information with respect to our minimum
requirements, pay scale, personnel benefits, etc.. to the International
Association of Chiefs of Police who in turn make this information available to
all military installations where personnel are being discharged:
"April g, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Subject: Police Recruiting
On Monday. March 12, 1973, City Council requested
information with respect to recruiting practices bein9
followed to hire military personnel being separated from
the Armed Services. This matter has been reviewed with
both Rt. Donald Graham, Director of Personnel. and Chief
g. David Hooper of the Police Department. with the follow-
in9 information being furnished.
military personnel being separated from the Armed Services,
International Association of Chiefs of Police who in torn
make this information available to all military installations
where,personnel are being discharged.
Our Police Department has received numerous inquiries
through this source; however, the number of actual appli-
cants have been few. It can only be assumed that the
personnel benefits and pay scale presently available is not
competitive with that of other police agencies particJpat-
Since January 1, 1972, twenty-one inquiries have been
received through this method. Doting the same period Of
time 87 applicants have been received of which 63 have been
investigated completely and 35 appointed to the department.
Three additional applicants were approved during this time
from their present employers. Au additional eight
withdrew their applications before final approval.. Mhere-
that there are approximately 15 men in the investigation
pipeline at this time. [ere all of this 15 or a large pot-
If City Council desires any additional information.
144
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Barter
.Byron E, Bauer
City Manager'
Mr. Bubsrd mo~ed that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Hr, Lisk and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Thomas requested that the City Manager furbish the members of
Council with more information of a factual nature with reference to the
salaries and working conditions of polic~ officers and how they compare with
other localities in the State of Virginia prior to the commencement of budget
study sessions.
CITY EMPLOYEES-PAY pLAN-CITY TREASURER: Council having authorimed
the City Manager to confer with Mr. J. H. Johnson, City Treasurer, as to whether
or not be would lihe for his employees to be placed under the City Pay Plan, the
City Manager submitted a written report advising that he visited with the City
Treasurer to discuss the var~io~s benefits derived by the placing of his subor-
dinates within the City pay Plan, and that Mr. Johnson remained firm ia his
conviction that be would await action by the State Compensation 6oard before
making any move towards inclusion of his employees under the City Pay Plan.
~r. Lisk moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by gr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
SALE OF PROPERTY-SEMERS AND STORM DRAINS-S1DE~ALK , CURB AND GUTTER:
The Assistant City Attorney submitted a written report advising that property
o.ned by Mr. and Mrs. Gale B. Cyphers directed to be acquired by the city by
Ordinance No. 20797, adopted April 2, 1973. to pro{ide for thq widening and
improvement of Garden City Boulevard,.S.K., has been acquired, the'requisite
deed having been recorded on April 5, 1973, and that this completes the right
of way acquisition for said project and it may now be advertised for bids for
construction.
Dr. Taylor s~ved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
ROANOKE VALLEY: The City Planning Commission submitted the following
report recommending the adoption of interim flood control regulations proFidlng
for Planning Commission review, deliberation and necessary recommendations of
all site plans pertaining to development.in the flood plain area (as delineated
by the Corps of Engineers Intermediate Regional Flood Category) prior to th;
issuance of building permits:
"April 5, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. W~bber. Malor
and.Members of City Council
Roanoke,' Virginia
Gentlemen:'
At the April 5, 1973. meeting of the City Planning Com-
mission, the Planning Director presented an interim report
(see enclosed) pertaining to e flood control mtncgeaent
plan for the City of Roanoke. It wes noted then that
Council had directed the Planning Commission to consider
the delineation of such e plan for subsequent adoption by
the City of Roonohe,
The Planning Director noted that this flood plain
control report uts of a preliminary nature and that a
more definitive report math substantive flood control
measures and recommendations woald be forthcoming mJth
the next gO days to City Council,
The Planning Commission members expressed much concern.
honever, with the need for'immediate action on this vital
community issue. After much discussion, the Planning
Commission members concurred that the best course of
action in this matter mould be to recommend to City Council
(100 year flood), until such time as the Planning Commas-
for Planning Commission revieu, deliberation and such
*April 5. 1973
Roanoke, Virginia
146
The above cited request mas considered by the City
Planning Commission ut Its regular meeting of April 4,
Mr. Motley appeared before the Planning Commission and
stated that the Putrlch Henry Hotel Building is now required
to provide an additional staivmay, and therefore, is
requesting use of the air rights in the alley in order to
install such stairway, (The Building Code states that
when a building is being extensively remodeled, it is
required to be brought up to Code standards.) He further
stated that this stairuay~ in order to meet State Fire
Codes and the FHA code must be u glass enclosed stairway
for meather protection purposes,
After discussion by the Planning Commi~sion members,
it was generally agreed that construction of this stairway
presented no detrimental impacts on the surrounding area,
Also, there mas no local opposition expressed to the utiliza-
tion of the air rights over the alley.
Accordingly. motion was made. duly seconded, and approved
unanimously recommending to City Council that this request
be approved.
Sincerely yours.
S/ Henry B. Boynton by LM
ilenry B, Boynton
Chairman"
Mr. Hubard moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney
for preparation of the proper measure granting the request. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted,
At this point, Mr, Trout entered the meeting.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
AUDITS: Council having previously entered into og~eement with
Andrews. Burket nad Company. Certified Public Accountants. for the purpose
of preparing an "Internal Control Review." of the financial operations of the
City o~ Roanoke. Mr. Hubard, Chairman of the Audit Committee, submitted the
followin9 report summarizing some of the more important recommendations and
comments in the Review as prepared by the accountants:
"April 5, 1973
TO: The Honorable Roy L. Webber
and Members of Roanoke City Council.
Gentlemen, attached is a copy of an "Internal Control
Review" of the financial operations Of the City of
Roanoke dated April 4, 1973, prepared by Andrews, Burket
and Company, Certified Public Accountants. This Review was
authorized by Council under a contract with this firm dated
January 6. 1973,
The Audit Committee of the City of Roanoke, consisting of
Councilmen Robert A. Garland. Hampton M. Thomas and the
undersigned, have studied this Review in detail and have
discussed the same at length with the auditors. The Audit
Committee agrees in principle with the recommendations in
this Review. City Hanager Hamer and City Auditor
Gibson have reviewed the same, and it is our understanding
that they concur with the general tenor of the Review,
though they nay have some reservations concerning specific
recommendations.
The Audit Committee recommends ~hat Council, after giving
an opportunity tohear the viems of all interested and/or
affected persons, and after making such modifications as it
deems advisable, adopt the recommendations in this Review
and put them into effect.
A summary of some of the more important recommendations
and comments in this Review are as follows:
g
1. Effective internal control over cash receipts dictates that
the cash collection function and the assessment function
be separated. City revenue in varying, amounts Is
collected by most of the departments within the City.
To the extent practical collection of revenues should
be concentrated In the Treasureres office with the
exception of the Civic Cente~, the Water Department,
and the Court System.
2. Internal control Of cash disbursements necessitates
separation of duties among several employees to
Insure. that a single employee does not have complete
control over · particular cash disbursement function.
In addition before completion of warrant processlngo a
supervisory employee should reviem and approve all
requests for payment.
3, The City currently, has an internal auditing division
within the City Auditor°s office. The current duties
of the Internal audit staff ere of an accounting nature
and actually have very little to do with the internal
auditing function. This, of course, leaves the City
without an effective internal auditing staff. An
internal audit division should be established, separate
from the Auditor°s office, and should report directly
to Council. The present City Auditor's title should
then be changed to Director of Finance or City Con-
troller.
4. A final primary area of concern is that the City does
not periodically have an independent audit by a certified
public accounting firm. Since public officials are
accountable to those who provide the resources used to
carry out governmental programs, the best way to deter-
mine that tbs City*s financial position is fairly
stated and that the revenues and disbursements are pro-
perly accounted for is to have a periodic independent
audit, and this practice is recommended.
5, An~imprest cbeckin9 account be established, with
sufficient funds, for the Civic Center so that pay-
mentsmay be made promptly to promoters.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ William S. Hubard
Chairman, Audit Committee.~
Mr. Dubard moved that the report be referred to Council acting as a
Committee Of the Rhole for its consideration, that interested persons be
given the opportunity to be heard on the matter and that the report be placed
on the agenda of Council for Monday, April 30, 1973. The motJen was seconded
by Hr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
ROANOKE VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: Council having referred to the
Roanoke ~alley Regional Health $~rvices Planning Council. Incorporated. for
study, report andrecommendation a communication from the Roanoke Valley
Chamber of Commerce advising that the ~hamber of Commerce is being given the
opportunity to make a proposal to The Sertoma Foundation to locate an Industrial
Center for Communicative Disorders in this area, and inquiring as to whether or
not local governments now own parcels of suitable land appropriate for this pro-
9ram should the Chamber be fortunate enough to establish the center in the
Roanoke Valley, the Roanoke Valley Regional Health Services Planning Council
submitted a written report recommending that the City o~ Roanoke, and Other
local governments in this area not mane a proposal or offer inducements to the
Sertoma Foundation for establishing a center for communicative disorders in the
Roanoke Valley, that based on the information supplied by the Sertomu Foutdttion,
this tree seems to be on par with proposed plans in the range Of services being
Jrovided end that the emphasis should be placed on the growth tnd development of
existing services mhich have served the area mell up to the present time.
Br. Taylor moved the adoption of the report of the Roanoke Valley
Regional Health Services Pleating Council, Incorporated. The motion mo~ seconded
by Hr. Theses end unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-ROANOKE VALLEY REGIONAL HEALTH SERVICES PLANNIHG COUNCIL,
INCORPORATED: A communication from Mr. Byron A. Hicks. President. Roanoke Valley
Regional Bealth Services Planning Council, Incorporated. transmitting the 1972
Annual Report of the Health Services Planning Council and requesting that local
governments provide a certain amount of money toward their operating budget, was
before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that thc request be referred to 1973-74 budget study.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Llsk and unanimously adopted.
AUDITORIUM-COLISEUM: Council having referred to the Roanoke Civic Center
and Stadium Advisory Commission for study, report and recommendation the question
of whether or not it mould be more beneficial for the city and the civic center
users to deal with a single exclusive caterer or have a choice of several
caterers, the Commission submitted the folloming report recommending, the selection
of one caterer for the Roanoke Civic Center through competitive bids for a two year
period beginning July 1, 1973:
"April 4. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virgi~a
Under present arrangement for food service at the
Roanoke Civic Center. five local firms are authorized to
provide catering to groups using the Civic Center facili-
ties. The present agreements with these five caterers
will terminate June 30. 1973.
In the opinion of the Civic Center management, the
entire catering picture should be reviewed and the possi-
bility of changing the system analyzed. Specifically,
a determination should b e made whether it would be more
beneficial for the City and the Civic Center users to
deal with a single exclusive caterer or have a choice of
several as we presently function.
Zhis matter was presented to the City Council in a
letter dated January 29, 1973, by Mr. Hamer. The City
Council in session January 29, 1973, referred the matter
to the Roanoke Civic Center Advisory Commission for study,
report and recommendation to Council. This is the report
In an attempt to gather detailed information on
was asked to meet privately with members of the
Commission. Representatives from Holiday Inn,
Hotel Roanoke, Archies and H. T. Shortt appeared
before the Commission and expressed their opinions
on present procedures for handling food service
with the Chairman after missing their scheduled
appointment with the 9romp.
,!
®
COMMONWEALTH o] VIRGINIA
VJRGINi~ STATE LIBRARY
RICHMOND 23219
DONALD HAYNES
ARCHIVES DIVISION
LOCAL ~CORDS BP&NCH
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT PAGE(S):
OF THIS VOL~E WERE MISSING OR BLANK AT THE TIME OF I~ICROFIt~IN6,
149
150
A secretary recorded the remnrhs of the caterer repre-
sentatives and copies were sent to each member of the Com-
mission for study.
The Commission mas culled into special session and the
matter discussed in detail. Following a reviem of the fucts,
it mos moved mud properly seconded that the Commission
recommend to the City Council the selection of one caterer
for the Cenler through competitive bids rot u two year period
beginning July 1, 1973. The motion curried unanimously.
This recommendation, which me £eel will be beneficial
to the Center, ia made for the following reasons:
Better service and supervision
Better sanitation
* More economical food purchasing
Less pilferage
Better staffing
More variety of meals
Rider range of meal pricing
More personal interest in serving public
o Increased income for Center
* Boohheeping simplified
* Better promotion and advertising possibilities
The Roanoke Civic Center Advisory Commission respect-
fully requests that this matter be placed on the City Council
Agenda for April 9, and urges the acceptance of this report
and recommendation.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ John Kelley
John Kelley, Chairman
Horace S. Fitzpatrick
Robert A. Garland
Lawrence Il. Hamlar
David K. Lish
RoOert M. McLelland
FFOn~ N. Perhiu$on
Mrs. Andrew L. Turner"
In this connection, the Roanoke Civic Center and Stadium Advisory Com-
mission submitted u further report in connection with food catering and conces-
sion sales at the Roanoke Civic Center, recommending that concessions and
food be combined for purposes of bidding for such services et the Civic Center
and that bid specifications be drawn to govern the selection of a caterer or
or concessionaire by the Civic Center staff, the City Purchasing Department and
the Commission and subject to the approval of the City Manager:
"April 4, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
la connection with our recommendation for the selection
of one food caterer for the Civic Center. a study of present
bid specifications for such services was made. During this
study, by a sub-comuittee of the Commission, it was proposed
that concessions be made a part of the bid specification on
an optional basis with catering. That is, a bidder may bid
the catering alone or be may bid a combination of catering
and concessions. Concessions could not be bid exclusive of
catering. The bid form would not require that we accept the
concession bid unless the financial benefits and assurance of
service exceeded our current self-operated situation.
The Commission feels this is an opportunity to determine
whether we cnn improve our concession service and increase
our income from concession sales.
Therefore: Me recommend thatconcessions and food
catering be combined for purposes of bidding for such
services et the Civic Center nnd that bid ~peciflce~ions be
drama to govern the selection of e caterer or concessionnire
by the Civic Center staff, city purchasing'department and the
Commission and subject to the approval of the City #anager.
Respectfully submitted,
ROANOKE CIVIC CENYER ADVISORy COMMISSION
S/ John ~elley.
JOHN KELLEY, CHAIRMAN
HORACE S. FITZPATRICK
ROBERT A. GARLAND
LAKgENCE H, HAMLAB
DAVID K. LISK
ROBERT M. MCLELLAND
FRANK N. PERKINSON
MRS. ANDREM L. TURNER, JR."
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the reports of the Roanoke
Civic Center and Stadium Advisory Commission and that the matter be referred
to the City Manager for advertisement of bids. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Garland and ·unanimously adopted.
TAXES-DEpARTMENT OF PUBLIC R£LFARE: Council having previously
requested that the Assistant to the City Manager for Community Relations con-
tact Mr. Cecil Simmons in connection with a communication from Mr. Simmons
pertaining to freezing real estate taxes and utility taxes, the Assistant to
the City Manager submitted the following report advising that Mr. Simmons* taxes
cannot be frozen because he is a recipient of public welfare, recommending that
Council once again read the communication from Mr. Simmons and give serious
thought to the elderly citizens in an effort to·find ways of relieving them of
more of their burdens as they advance in years:
"April 9, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke~ Virginia
Gentlemen:
At the request of Council I contacted Mr. Cecil
Simmons in connection with a communication which he had sent
to Council. The communication requested a freezing of real
estate taxes for persons 65 years of age and over and also
utility taxes, In conversing with Mr. Simmons it was
brought out that he did not want the taxes frozen, but
relieved of them completely,
At present, City Ordinance No, 20352 states that real
estate taxes can be frozen for persons. 65 years of age or
older if they are not receivin9 assistance other than
for medical expenses, It also states that the combined
income of that household cannot exceed $6°000 per year,
Mr. Simmons' taxes can not be frozen because he is on
welfare, although the combined income of he and his wife is
much less than
I do not know what assistance can be given tO Mr.
Simmons in regard to his request. I know that Mr. Simmons
is not alone in the struggle for survival in todays*
society.
I feel that it is our responsibility to take into '
consideration the problems of our elderly citizens
because Mr. Simmons does need relief. I hope that you
will again read Mr. Simmons* communication dated March 22,
1973. Under present laws Mr. Simmons is not eligible for
even having his taxes frozen and even'if he was eligible,
it would not help him much. It is my recommendation that
after reading this letter, City Council will give serious
151
thought to our elderly citizens and f:nd mays of relieving more
of the burdens as ~hey advance on in years,
R~spectfully submitted,
S/ Harold Hardy
Harold G. Hardy
Assistant tO the City Manager'
Mr. Trout moved that the City Attorney be requested to render on
opinion as to whether or not Mr. Simmons is eligible for real estate tax relief
under the provisions of Ordinance No. 20352. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Garland and unanimously adopted.
In answer to that portion of the report suggesting that Council
give serious thought to the elderly citizens in an effort to find ways of
relieving them of' more of their burdens as they advance in years, Mr. HaZard
pointed out that he' mould prefer that the administration come forth with such
recommendations for the coosideratioe of Council.
Mr. Hubard moved that the report from the Assistant to the City Manager
for Community Relations be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Lisk and unanimously adopted.
UNFINI~tED BUSINESS:
IATER,DEPARTtlENT: Council having previously deferred action on a report
of the later Resources Committee in connection mith the sale of surplus water to
areas outside the city limits, the matter was again before the body.
In this connection. Mr. Thomas, Chairman of the Mater Resources
Committee, again submitted the following report and recommended adoption thereof:
"April 9, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
1. Hackbround - On January IH, 1973, representatives of the
Roanoke County'Public Service Authority appeared before City
Council with a request that the City of Roanoke give con-
sideration to the sale of water to varJoas County'areas. City
Council referred this matter to the later Resources Committee
for study and report hick to City Council.
II. City's Ability to Serve Additional Areas later - Your
committee has evaluated the water resources available to
the City mod to the valley. The committee recognizes that
the primary sources of water have and ate being developed
and that the City has an obligation to continue to ascer-
tain and develop future sources of water in consonance with
the City*s growth and needs.
The study reveals that the needs of the City for water
are being met from current and programmed sources and that
a surplus exists which would permit the extension of mater
serric~ to the majority of the developed unincorporated
portions of the valley outside of the City for the foresee-
able future.
III. Sale of Mater to Areas Outside the City Limits - It
is the considered opinion of your committee that the matter
of the sale of surplus water to unincorporated areas outside
the City limits could bhst be expedited i£ the City were to
deal directly with the Board of Supervisors of any county
desiring that approach. Howevek, it is felt that quality
water service can best be provided by the City, which has
a current surplus of water, by direct service rather than
by the sale of bulk water to a second agency or *middleman.*
For the City to facilitate this act of servicing areas out-
side the City limits, it would be reasonable to instigate a
liberalization of the current basic City policy with respect
to the extension of water facilities outside the city limits.
The current policy is conservative in that all extensions are
sized and approved by the City but constructed by.resident or
developer desiring service, ut bis expense,. The developer or
applicant then conveys these facilities to the City without
cost with tho agreement that the City sell.tn the developer
or applicant surplus water through individual service connec-
The proposed recommended policy for furnishing surplus
water to areas outside the City limits is as folloms:
1, If it is projected that the cost of construction
will not exceed $200,00 per residential connection and/or
tun and one half times the first yearea ravenna from the
sale of water to nonresidential connections and it is
agreed that all of certain connections set out in.a proposal
to the City to be served will obtain service mithin 30
calendar days from the completion of the construction, then:
A.The City rill construct the facility at no cost
to the developer or applicant, or
B.The developer or applicant desiring the service may
have the facility constructed and conveyed to the
City and the City will refund to the developer or
applicant the sum of $200.00 per residential connec-
tion and/ar for nonresidential connection, two and
one half times the first year's revenue from the sale
~ of water for each meter application. No refunds
.will he made in excess of the construction costs.
2. If the estimated revenue as set forth in the preced-
ing paragraph I cannot be met for any certain connection (s)
under the proposal to the City to be serviced within 30
calendar days from the completion Of the project, then:
A. The City rill estimate the cost of construction
and revenue, reguire a deposit of the difference
in advance and construct the facility. Should the
actual constFuction cost be less or greater than
the estimated difference between the estimated
revenue and estimated construction cost, that is
the deposit, then the City will refund to or bill
additionally the difference to the developer or
applicant desiring the water service, or
B, The procedure of method (1,B,) above may apply,
3. Should the developer or applicant wish to take
advantage of any subsequent water connection in addition to
those he can guarantee within 30 calendar days or not wish to
guarantee any connections, then the developer or applicant
will construct the mater facility at his expense and convey
it to the City. The City mill refund to the developer or
appilcaflt ~200.00 per residential connection and/ar two and
one half times the first year*s revenue from the sale of
water to nonresidential connections after each service,
residential or nonresidential, has delivered rater for a
period of 12 consecutive months; homever, no such refunds
will be made after a period of ftve years not will refunds be
made in excess of the original construction cost, The City
will charge and retain a nonrefundable availability charge
equal to the service connection charge from each individual
consumdr desiring service during the period that refunds
ate being made to the developer or applicant who installs the
water line.
4.' The City may consider the extension of facilities into
areas either undeveloped or areas that are already developed
but served by a failing or insufficient mater system owned
by someone or some agency other than the City provided generally
that the City could reasonably expect to recover all expenses
of the initial construction and/or improvements to the
ing system to meet City standards within a period of five
years from the sale of water and/or collecting service avail-
ability charges. In such instance the City mould charge a.
nonrefundable availability charge equal to the service connec-
tion charge for eachnew service connection made directly to
the new construction or the existing system being improved
until the entire initial constuction cost is recovered. No
such availability charge would be charged to consumers who
mere being served by an existing system at the time of acqui-
sition b~ the City. All such instances will be considered by
individual merit by City Council.
'153
15.4
S. A. The size a~d quality or each proposed distribu-
tion.system extension will be set by the
Water Deportment, to meet the needs or the developer
or uppifcobt end fire protecilOn, either pro-
posed or fn the future, however no aster lines
less than eight inches in diameter will be
installed in open end streets or highways.
'Should the City, for projected future needs,
require facilities larger in size than needed or
eight inches fn diameter, whichever is larger,
then the City will bear the increased cost over
and above that.which mould.have been required for
the developer or applicant.
B. Should pumping facilities be required, the appli-
cant or developer will construct all such
facilities according to plans approved by the
City Water Department. These facilities will be
sized for the actual development, or for.lO0
connections whichever is greater in the case of
residential developments or for actual antici-
pated consumption and fire protection in,the
case Of nonresidential developments. Mhen the
City requires incceased pumping station faci-
lities which .result in an increased cost, the
City will reimburse the developer for those
increased costs. The developer*s actual cost
will be considered as a part of the overall water
system development for refund purposes.
IV. Water Facilities Extension Within the City - If City Coun-
cil adopts this modification in the procedure of extending
water facilities outside the City limits then it is recom-
mended that the following modifications be made in the present
policy for the extension of water facilities within the City
of Roanoke. The current policy is that the City now refunds
to any developer or applicant the sum of $50.00 per resi-
dential connection and/or two and one half times the yearly
revenue received from the sale of water to nonresidential
connections. No refunds are made after a period of five
years nor are any refunds made in excess of the construction
cost of the facility. The size of the water lines to be con-
structed are, and will continue to be set by the City Mater
Department depending on the quantity of water desired, fire
protection for subdivisions and so forth but in no instance
shall, the water lines be less than two inches in diameter.
The policy of refunds would be extended to $200.00 per
dential connection and/or five times the first year*s revenue
for the sale Of water for nonresidential connections. The
applicant or developer would othermise, i. e. by substituting
five times the first year*s revenue in the case of an exten-
sion in the City for two and one half times the first yearts
revenue in the case of an extension outside the City, have
the same options as previously stated under the provisions
far extensions outside the City'limits. No such refunds
would be made in excess of the construction cost nor would
any such refunds be made after five years from the comple-
tion of construction.
¥. Sale of Water to the Town of Vinton'- The Water Resources
Committee has also considered the bulk water rate granted
to the Town of Vinton. The committee finds the current rate
of $0.50 per 100 cubic feet of water to be a reasonable
charge. This rate is lower than that currently charged to
individual residents outsidethe City limits; however, it is
recognized that the Town of Vinton has the responsibility of
operating and maintaining its own distribution system.- It
is felt. however, that a savings could be realized by the
individual consumer of the Town of Vinton water system should
the Town desire to integrate its system with the City's
system. Shouldthis proposition have appeal to the Town of
Vlnton, it is recommended that City Council express a will-
ingness to-discuss this matter.th the Vinton Town Council.
VI. Summary - As to the specific question of.the City
supplying water service to areas outside the City limits,
it is,recommended that bulk water sales not be made but
that the existing basic City policy of water line exten-
sions.be liberalized to facilitate providing individual
water service to those desirous of this service. It is
recommended that the water rate schedule remain unchanged at
this time.
Respectfully Submitted,
S/ Hampton W. Thomas S/ William S. Hnbard S/ Byron E. Haner
Hampton W. Thomas Willlan S. Hnbard Byron E. Hamer'
Mr. Thouas moved that COuncil adopt the report of the Mater Resources
Committee In connection with the extension of water service to areas outside
the city limits. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Trout end unanimously adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATIO~ OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
SALE OF PROPERTY: Ordinance No. 20796, ~roviding for the lease of
certain city farmland lo~ated at Coyner Springs, in Botetourt County. Virginia.
upon certain terms and conditions, to Mr. James fl. nallard, having previously
been before Council for its first reading, read and laid o~ev. mss again before
the body, Mr. Trout offering the following for its second reading and final
adoption:
(n20796) AN ORDINANCE providing for the lease.of certain Cit~ lorn-
land located at Coyner Springs, in Dotetourt County, Virginia, upon certain
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #38, page 32.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
Mayor Mebber ....
NAYS: None ......... O.
BUSES: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure accepting and expressin9 appreciation to the Roanoke County Board
of Supervisors for its contributions to the city*s cost of maintaining certain
public bus transportation in a portioo of Roanoke County. he presented same;
whereupon, Mr. Trout offered the following Resolution:
(#20015) A RESOLUTION accepting and expressing appreciation to the
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors for its contribution to the City's cost
of maintaining certain.public bus transportation in a portion of Roanoke
County.
(For full text of Resolution, see as in Ordinance Book =36, ~oge
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the followln9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubardo LaRk. Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber ......
NAYS: None ......... O.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
SCHOOLS-RECREATION DEPARTMENT-PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: Mr~ Lisk moved
that Mayor Mebber be requested to appoint certain members of Council to serve
on a joint study committee with like appointments to be made from the Roanoke
City School Board for the purpose of reviewing Resolution No. 13236 in connec-
tion with joint use policies of properties under the respective immediate control
of the Boanoke City School Board and of the Roanoke City Department of Parks and
156
Recreation us submitted by the heads of the said departments and as'approved by
the City Manage~o the committee to make such appropriate recommendations for nny
changes or improvements as well as procedure for implementation by the two
governing bodies. The motion naa seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Mebber appointed Vice-Mayor David M. Link, Chairman, Messrs.
Hampton ~. Thomas and James O. Trout as the Council representatives to said study
committee.
COUNCIL-POLICE DEPARTMENT-JAIL-MUNICIPAL BUILDING-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
PROGRAM-PLANNING: Mr~ Dubard moved that Council meet in Executive Session to
discuss a matter pertaining to the Regional Corrections FocJ]ltyo The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor #ebber ................... 7.
NAYS: None ..........-0.
· Mayor Mebber declared a fifteen minute recess.
At 4:30 p.m., Council reconvened uith Mayor Webber presiding.
Dr. Taylor advised that Council has considered at length the matter of the
location of the Regional Corrections Facility, that the members of Council are still!
of the opinion that the Kimball Urban Ran*ual Area is the best site for the Regional
Corrections Facility, that Council bas considered the airport site. that this
property is not for sale at the present time due to its need for future airport
expansion, that it is felt in the spirit of cooperation that Council shauld recom-
mend to the Regional Corrections Board that it consider other suitable sites which
may be properly zoned by June 1, 1973, that said sites suggested by the Board will be
duly considered by ~he members of Council and moved that the City Attorney be lustful
ed to prepare the proper measure cony*yin§ the above stated opinion of Council to the
other valley governments who are parties to the February 12. 1973, agreement. The
notion nas seconded by Mr. Dubard and unanimously adopted.
There being no further business, Mayor Mebber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING.
Monday. April 16, 1973,
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular, meeting in the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Building. Monday, April 16, 1973, at 2 p,m.,
the regular meeting hour. with Mayor Roy L. Webber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, William S, Hubard. Noel C.
Taylor. Hampton M. Thomas, Janes O. Trout and Mayor Roy L. Webber ..... 6.
ABSENT: Vice-Mayor David K, Lisk .......................... 1.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Byron E, Hamer, City Manager; Mr. James N.
Ktncanon, City Attorney; Mr. II. Ben Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorney; and
Mr. A. N. Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the 'Reverend
Paul' E. Alwine, Pastor, First Church of The Brethren.
MINLUE$: Co~y of the minutes of the regular meetin~ held on Monday,
April 9. 1973, having been furnish'ed enc~ member of Council, on motion of Mr.
Trout, seconded by DF. Taylor 'and unanimously adopted, the reading *thereof was
dispensed with and the minutes approved as *recorded.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for
bids on Contract *C" which includes construction of concrete basins, piping.
miscellaneous buildinqs, ins~al~ati'on 'of 'equipment and associated work at the
Sewage Treatment Plant; and on Contract *D~ nhich includes site preparation,
construction of a thirty million gallon concrete basin, piping, installation of
equipment and associated work at the Sewage Treatment Plant, said proposals to
be received by the City Clerk until 2 p.m., and to he opened at that hour before
Council, Mayor Webber asked iT anyone present had any questions about the
advertisement for bids and no representative present raising any question, the
Mayor instructed the City Clerk to proceed with the opening of the bids; where-
upon, the City Clerk opened and' read the following bids:
~ame *Contract C* *Contract D# *Contract C ~ B'
Boyle Construction
Co., lnc, - $1,BB3,750.00
English Construction
Co., Inc. - 2,257,000.00 2.0BO,O00.O0 $4,207,000.00
N. C. Monroe Construc-
tion Co. 2.940,000.00 4,990,000.00
Peabody Petersen
Co. - 2,940,000.00
Pizzagalli Corporation - 4,694,000.00
J. M. Turner and
CO., Inc. 2,010,000.00 2.284.000.00
Mr. Thomas moved that the bids ~e referred to a committee to be
appointed by the Mayor for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council as
soon as possible. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Nebber appointed Messrs. Byron E, Hamer, Chairman, S. H. McGhee
III, D. E. Eckman, James N. Eincanon, H. S. Zimmerman and Hampton #. Thomas as
members of the committee.
i57
· POLICE DEPARTMENT-MUNICIPAL BUILDING: Pursuant to notice of advertise-
ment for bids for · burglar ·larm panel, said proposals to bo received by the
City Clerk until 2 p,m., end to be opened ut that hour before Council, M·yor
Webber. asked if anyone had any questions about the adrertJsement for bids and no
representative present raising any question, the Mayor instructed the City Clerh
to proceed mith the opening of the bids;· whereupon, the City Clerk opened ond
read the following bids:
Na~e Basin Bid ~iternate
Hoyden Construction Company - $18,820,00 $16,940.00
Design Controls, Incorporated - 22,095.00
Electralarm Systems, Inc. - 24,820,90
Mosler Electronics Systems - 31o780,00
Mr. Thomas muted that the bids be referred to a committee to 'be
appointed by the Mayor for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mayor #ebber appointed Messrs. J. D, Sink, Chairman, Alfred T. Beckley,
and Robert A. Garland as members of the committee.
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: Ms. Connie Smith, Secretary, Black Vanguard
Party, appeared before Council and read a prepared statement requesting that
outdoor restroom facilities and drinking fountains be installed in Eureka Park
for the coming season and advised that this request has the'endorsement of
Esquire United, Roanoke Chapter; the N. i. A. C. P.; the Ad-linc Committee; and
the Peoples Voters League.
Mr. Thomas suggested that the administration explore the possibility of
using portable chemical toilet facilities during the summer months.
Mr. Thomas then moved that the matter be referred to the City Manager
for study, report and recommendation to Council as soon as possible taking into
consideration his suggestion with regard to the portable chemical toilet facilities
and that the citizens of the City of Roanoke are to be assured that Council is
checking into the matter of proper facilities for all the parks in the city. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
PETITIONS AND COMUUNICATIONS:
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting that $1000000.00 be appropriated for the construction of a multi~
purpose room for instruction and for other school related activities at the
Oakland Elementary School and further requesting that $20,500.00 be appropriated
for grading and establishment of a playground area for the children at Masenn.
Elementary School, was before Council.
Math regard to the request for funds for the multi-purpose room for
instruction and other school related activities at the Oakland Elementary School,
the City Manager verbally called to the attention of Council t~at the proposed
extension of loth Street will go through the middle of the Oakland Elementary
School,
It oppearing that no representative from the Roanoke City School Board
uss present to onsuer questions pertaining to.the requested appropriation for
the Oakland Elementary School, Hr, Trout moved that action on the matter be
deferred until the next regular meeting of Council on Nonday, April.23, 1973,
pending clarification from the Roanoke City School Board, The motion nas
seconded by Or, Taylor and unanimously adopted,
Hr. Trout then offered the folloming emergency Ordinance appropriating
$20,500,00 to Nasena Elementary School under Section ~Bg, "Transfers to Capital
Improvements Fund," of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for grading and
establishment of a playground area for the children at Uasena Elementary
School:
(u20816) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section nO9, 'Transfers
to Capital Improvements Fund,# of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and pro-
viding for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~30, page 34.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following rote:
AYES: Hessrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber ..................... 6.
NAYS: None ........ O. (Mr. Link absent)
COMMONNEALTHeS ATTORNEy: Mr. Robert F. Rider, Commonuealth*s Attorney,
appeared before Council and presented a communication requesting that the city
appropriate $2,000.00 as additional supplement to the salary of an assistant
which he hopes to hire on April 17. 1973, that $%500.00 be supplemented for the
salary of the Commonwealth's Attorney and that an additional $2,000.00 be
appropriated to supplement the salary of Hr. Van Hobach, an assistant in his
office.
After adiscussion of the requests. Hr. Thomas moved that the City
Attorney be instructed to prepare the proper measure appropriating $2,000.00
as additional supplement to the salary of theassistant that Rt. Hider.hopes
to hire on April 17. 1973, and that an additional $2,000.00 be appropriated to
supplement the salary of Hr. Yan. Hoback. un assistant in the Office of the
Commonwealth's Attorney, with the understanding that the private law practice of
these two gentlemen is to be.limited to,a bare minimum and that the $7,500.00
supplemental appropriation requested by Mr. Hider for the salary of the Common-
mealth's Attorney be referred to 1973-74 budget study. The motion mas seconded
by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
SHERIFF: ,Copy of a communication from Hr. Paul J. Puckett, Sheriff,
addressed to the State Compensation Board, requesting an appropriation of
$1.200.00 for Temporary Help to provide funds for the remainder of the fiscal
year, was before Council.
In this connection, copy of a communication from the State Compensa-
tion Board, addressed to Mr. Puckett, in connection with the above request,
159
160
advising tbot the Compensation Hoard bus approved an additional allocation of
$1,200.00 rot Temporary Help subject to the concurrence of City Council, UBS
also before the body.
Mr. Hub urd moved that Council concur ia the request of the City
Sheriff and offered the.folloming emergency Ordinance appropriating the necessary
funds:
(u20817) AN OROINA~C£ to amend and reordain Section n23,.#Sheriff,"
of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency. .
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Hook n39, page 34.)
Hr. Hubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrn. Garland, Hubard. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber ....................
~AYS: None ..........-0. (Mr. Lisk absent)
.Rt. Trout moved that the communication from the State Compensation
Board be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor.and unani-
mously adopted.
BUDGET-SHERIFF: Copy of a communication from the City Sheriff addressed
to the State Compensation Board transmitting his 1973-74 fiscal year budget,
was before Council.
Rt. Trout moved that the communication and budget be received and
filed. The motion was seconded by Ur. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
JAIL: Copy of a connunication from the Department of Welfare and
Institutions addressed to the City Sheriff in connection with a routine inspec-
tion of the Roanoke City Jail on March 14, 1973. was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
SALE oF PROPERTY: A communication from Mr. Howard P. Starkey offering
to purchase city-owned property located on the east side of 1616 East Gate
Avenue, N. E., for the sum of $250.00, was before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that the offer be referred to the Real Estate Committee
for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was seconded by Dr.
Taylor and unanimously adopted.
EASEMENTS: A petition from Mr. Michael K. Smeltzer. Attorney, repre-
senting Mr. Hilly H. Hranch, requesting that a portion of n twenty foot wide
drainage and public utility easement, the center line of which is the northerly
line of Hlock 5, as more particularly shown.on the ~ap of Section No. 2, E~gehill
Estates, be vacated,.and re-~stahlished, was before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that the matter be referred to the City Manager and
the City Planning Commission for study, report and recommendation to Council. The
motion was seconded by Mr, Garland and unanimously adop~ed.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: A communication from Mr. John D, Copenhover,
Attorney, representing Mr, Daniel N. Monico, et ux** requesting that an unused
portion of Montvnle Road. S, M., ut the intersection of Spring Road, S.
be vacatede discontinued and closed, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor offered the following Resolution appointing viewers in
connection with the request to vacate, dlscontinu~ and close said unused por-
tion of Montvole Road, S. ¥.:
(=20SIO) A RESOLUTION providing for theappointment of five free-
holders, any three of whom may act, as viewers in connection with the petition
of Jimmy L. Meddle and ~ildred C. Meddle, husband and wife, and Daniel N. Monaco
and Louella Monaco, husband and wife, to vacate, discontinue and close a portion
of Rontvale Road, S, M., lying between Spring Road. S. M.. and th~ corporate
limits of the City, extending a distance of approximately 222 feet South of
Spring Road, and being the parcel designated as Official Tax No. 1550311.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book #39, page
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ..................... 6.
NAYS: None ........ L-O. (Mr. Lisk absent)
Dr. Taylor then moved that the request be referred to the City
Planning Commission for study, report and recommendation to Council. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
AIRPORT: The City Manager submitted a written report advising that
the Council on Criminal Justice of the Commonwealth's Division of Justice and
Crime Prevention has approved and awarded to the City of Roanohe LEAA Grant
No. 71-A1555 (S-O), in the amount of $10o522.00, for use in providing basic
criminal justice equipment at Roanoke Municipal (#oodrum) Airport for use in
airport security operations, that this grant must be matched with $2,516,00
of city funds for a total program of $14,0T0.00, that all equipment purchased
under this 9rant shall be assigned for the exclusive use of the law enforcement
personnel designated to perform preboarding passenger screening services at the
airport, recommending that Council approve the acceptance of this grant, and
authorize the City Manager to execute the acceptance statement of said grant.
further recommending that Council appropriate $14.070.00 to this grant project,
that $10,552.00 will be transmitted to the city as soon as the Commonwealth of
Virginia receives notification of the city's acceptance of the grant and that
the remaining $3,516.00 which is the share of the city is available in the
Airport Police Salary Account and could be transferred to this account.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the report of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution authorizing the acceptance,
execution and filing of the 'Special Conditions for Action Grant Awards" with
the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention for an action grant of fqderal fond
161
162
for the purchase df bssio'criminnl Justice equipment for the Enanoke #nnfclpnl
(Woodrnm} Airport. end expressing the clty*s'willingnei~ to p~o~ld~ l~cal matching
funds In an nmouet not to exceed
(nRORIg} A RRSOLUIION authorizing the acceptance, execution, and
filing of the 'Special Conditions for Action GrantAmavds# With the'Division of
Justice and Crime Prevention for an action grant of'Federnl Funds for the par-
chase of basic criminal Justice equipment for the Municipal (Woodruw) Airport.
and expressing the City*s willingness to provide local matching funds in en
amount not to exceed $3.518.00.
(For full text of Resolutioa. see Ordinance Rook u30, page 3b.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion nas
seconded by Mr. Hubard and'adopted by the following vote:·
AYES: Ressrs. Garland, Hubardo Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber-~ .......~ ............ 6.
· NAYS: None .........-0o (Mr. Lisk absent)
Mr. Garland then offered the folloming emergency Ordinance appropriating
$14.070.00 for said purpose:
(m20820) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reardain Section #340, "¥unicipal
Airport Fund,' of the 1972-73 Municipal Airport Fund Appropriation Ordinance,
and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook u38, page 37.)
Mr; Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following yard:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubardo Taylor. Yhomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ......... O. (Mr. Lisk absent)
CITY ENGINEER: ~he City Manager sub~itted a written report advising
that on November 28, 1972, the city advertised for bids for two new industrial
tractors complete with side mounted mowers, that bids were received and opened
on December 12, lg?2, and the committee report was submitted to Council on
January 15, 1973, and approved by Ordinance No. 20656, pointing out that it was
brought to his attention by the lam bidder, Selhel Brothers, Incorporated. upon
delivery of the two new tractors with side mowers, that there was au error in
the equipment list used for trade-ins, that the bid had listed trade-in allowances
~or three old tractors identified as a 1953 Ford. a 1960 Ford and a 1960 Masey-
Fergnson. that the 1953 Ford should have been listed as a 1953 Case and the 1960
Ford should have been listed as a 1950 International, that Seihel Brothers,
upon examining the actual tractors to be traded in, considers these tractors to
have no trade-in value and has requested that the city pay the additional $1,224.66
each ~or the two vehicles which were improperly identt£fed on the bid proposal,
the total additional payment to be $2,445.72, that in the absence of the two
erroneously listed tractors, it is recommended that Couucll authorize payment of
92,445.72 to Seibel Brothers, Incorporated, for the equipment not uvnllsble
for trade-in, that the two tractors not traded in remain es city property and mil
be disposed of by auction which will reduce the total cost of the new tractors
and in the future n new procedure which will discontinue the'practice of trad-
ing in vehicles ~nd instead putting these vehicles up for auction mill prevent
any recurrence ?f this problem.
Mrs Thomas moved that Council c~ncur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the folloming emergency Ordinance authorizing payment
to Seibel Brothers. Incorporated:
{x20fl21) AN ORRINANCE directing payment of the su~ of $2,445.72 to
Seibel Brothers. Incorporated. in lieu of delivery of certain trade-in equip-
ment; and amending Ordinance No. 20656 to the extent herein provided; and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book mas. page
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Taylor. Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Nebber ........................ 6.
NAYS: None ......... -0. (Mr. Lisk absent)
INDUS~RIES-STAT£ IIIGHMAYS: The City Manager submitted the following
report recommending that Council approve the city's participation in the Macke
Industrial Access Road Project for an estimated cost of $32,393.40, which cost
will be adjusted based on actual quantities of construction and that he be
authorized to execute the appropriate agreement between the city and the Vir-
ginia Department of Highways:
"April 16, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subjectl Macke Industrial Access Road
Bids for the construction of the Macke Industrial
Road from Tenth Street, N. W.. to the Mache site have
been requested by the Virginia Department of Highmays at
least three times during the past several years. Each
time, the bids were much higher than the estimated con-
Struction cost and the bids mere therefore rejected.
The Highway Department has finally received ~ bid in
the amount of $161,967.00 which it believes can be
accepted. The City's estimated share of the cost is
$32,393~40.
All of the right of way for this project has been
obtained by the City. Some utility adjustments will be
required during the construction. The current balance
in this account is
The Highway Department has submitted a proposed agree..
neat betmeen the City and the Virginia Oepurtment of Highways
for the construction and maintenance of. this new roadway.
It is recommended that City Council approve the City's
participation in this project for an estimated cost of
$32,393*40, mhlch cost mill be adjusted baaed on actual
quantities of construction, end that the City Manager be
euthorlzed to execute the appropriate agreement between
the City and the Virginia Department of ~lghunys end thor the
City Clerk be authorized to attest the execution of that
Respectfully submitted,
S! Byron E. Boner
Byron K. Honer
Cia7 Manager'
Mr. Thames moved that Council coucuv in the report of the City Manager
and offered the following emergency Ordinance providing £ov the execution of said
agreement with the Virginia Department of Highmays and concurring in the award
of a contract by the Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Highways:
(~2os2~) AN ORDINANCE providing for the execution of an agreement with
the Virginia Department of Highways relative to the constractioa and maintenance
of Access Road H~ghway Project No, 9999-128-103, C-SO1, C-S02, and signifying
the City*s intent to participate in the payment of a certain portion of the costs
of said project; concurring in the award of a contract by the Commonmealth of
Yirglnia, Department of Highways, for construction of an access road from the
intersection of lOtb Street, N. M., to the Macke Company, Incorporated, property;
and provldin9 for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n38, page 38.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr.,Trout and adopted by the follouing vote:
AYES:' Messrs, Garland, Hubard, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
· ebber ....................... 6.
NAYS: None ..........-0, (Mr. Lisk absent)
AUDITORIUM-COLISEUM: The City Manager submitted a written report
advisin9 that Council by Ordinance No. 20364 authorized a written agreement
between the city and Local No, 55 International Alliance of Theatrical and Stage
Employees and Moving Picture Machine Operators, that changes to the federal
laws with respect to FICA tax has resulted in a request to modify the current
agreement in effect for a payment of the.equivalent of eleyen per cent Qf each
gross billing for events in which the I,A.T.$.E, personnel participate, that
amount to include.l,A.T.S,E, costs of increased FICA tax and 5.15 per cent of the
9ross billing for IoA,T.S.E.'s other expense~ for record ~eeping and admlnistra-
tfve functions, that although this is a relatively small amount, and since
Ordinance No. 20364 authorized the amount to be paid, it i~ felt that Council
must authorize its revision, accordingly, the City Attorney has prepared a
Resolution authorizing modification of tbe city's written agreement with Local
No. 55 I.A.T.S.E. to provide the changes needed with respect to the amount paid
for each event in which the I.A.T.S,E. personnel participate.
Hr. Garland moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and offered the following Resolution authorizing the modification:
(n20823) A SESOLUTION authorizing a modification of the City's
written agreement with Local No. S5, International Alliance of Theatrical and
Stage Employees and #~ving Picture Machine Operators pursuant to the provisions
of Ordinance No. 20364o
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book z3B. png~ 41o)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the 'Resolution. The ~ntfon was
seconded by Mr, Trout and a~opted bT the follonlng vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland. Hubard. Taylor, Thomas, ~rout and Mayor
· ebber ......................
NAYS: None ......... -0° (Mr. Llsk absent)
S~SEETS AND ALLEYS: The City #nnnger submitted n written report
transmitting the lis~ and nap of those streets which he proposes to blacktop
during the spring and summer of 1973, advising that he is planning to advertise
this paving program on Sunday, April 22. 1973. with bids to be received by
Council o~ Monday, May ?. 1973, that the list is submitted in three sections.
the first section represents the basic blacktop program which he de'ires to
accomplish thisyear, that it represents 12,2 miles of streets no~ approximately
13.800 tons of bituminous concrete, that the second portion of the list
represents streets nhich will be vsed as additions to the ~irst list if the
unit prices received are such that the l~st ca~ be extended, that this second
portion of the list represents ?.1 miles of streets and approximately 8,760
tons of bituminous concrete, that the third section of the list could possibly
be used as additions to the second section if unit prices are sufficiently
low, that it represents 1.2 miles of streets and approximately 1,220 tons of
bituminous concrete end that 1~ the second and third sections of the list
cannot be paved in the 1973 program they will become the first section for the
1974 paving program.
Mr. Hubard move~ that the report, list and map be approved and filed.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
SE#ERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Manager' submitted a written report
recommending that Council authorize the issuance of a change order to the
contract with Kappa Associates. Incorporated, in connection with'their con-
tractual agreemen~ under Contract B. Item I. for the Sewage Treatment Plant
Expansion to furnish the comninuting equipment, advising that it has now been
determined that a'Change in design of the drive motor stands on said equipment
is desirable andlthe change is needed to provide faster maintenance nnd replace-
ment operations.
Rt. Thomas moved that C~uncil concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution appr~ving the City 'Ranager's
issuance of Change Order ~o. I in conflectto~ with ~he contract for the con-
struction of comminuting equipment at the Sewage Treatment Plant:
:165
166
(u20624) A RESOLUTION approving the City Wnnagerts issuance of Change
Order No. 1, in connection with the City*s contract for the construction of
couwinuting equipwent at the City*a Sewage Treatment Plant.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Boob uSO, page 42.)
Hr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout end adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, ,ubard. Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Rayor
Webber ....................... 6.
NAYS: Hone ....... -0. (Mr. Llsk absent)
Mr. Thomas then offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
the necessary funds to provide for the change order:
(a20825) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section #550, ~Sewa9e
Treatment Capital Improvements Fund,~ of the 1972-73 Sewage Treatment Fund Appro-
priation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook #38, page 42.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ....................... 6.
NAYS: None .......... O. (Mr. Lisk absent)
HUSTINGS COURT: The City Manager submitted the following report recom-
mending that Council authorize the submittal of an action grant award application
to the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention in connection with the courts:
~April 16, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
In December Of 1969, City Council of the City.of Roanoke
received a communication from Judge Ernest #. Dallou advis-
ing of areas of improvement which were taking place in
other states Mith respect to courts of record and courts
not of record. Judge Eallou pointed out *the possible uses
of computers for jury selection, status of criminal pro-
secutions, status Of suspended sentences in courts of record
and in courts not of record, local criminal records of
individual defendants as related to pending cases and so
forth.
Judge Ballon enumerated the dire need for information
not now readily available to the Roanoke courts and re-
quested that· a computer technician be assigned to ~he courts
to study the procedures available for recordin9 such data
and to make appropriate recommendations to the court. Sub-
sequent to that date under the provisions of LEAA guide-
lines the Virginia Division of Justice and Crime Prevention
obtained a review of the feasibility of automating certain
court operations in Roanoke and the surrounding jurisdic-
tiocs with the goal of designing an information system.to
expedite· control over criminal cases. The scope of the
review was somewhat n~iced as the Division of Justice and-
Crime Prevention felt that technical assistance would be
' valuablein three specific areas: (1) determining the need
for the court study, (2) evaluating the scope of the study
as outlined in the grant application, and (3) establishing
in greater detail the study work program.
The rerJem report contained the following four recom-
mendations: .
1, The State or Virginia should provide funds to ·
Roanohe City to develop u clear prototype criminal
Justice information system which would serve a
multiplicity of local end state requirements for
current, accurate and periodic data regarding
criminal Justice operations in the Roanohe
Valley.
2. The City of Roanoke,.the Judges of the Hustings
Court, the Circuit Court nod the Municipal Court
the Commonwealth*s Attorney, the Clerk of the Clr=
cult, Hustings and Municipal Courts, the Sheriff
and the Chief Of Police should cooperate in
developing the use of computers in processing
felony cases.
3. The judiciary in the Roanoke County and City
Courts and relevant state officials should deve-
lop and adopt a long range five-year plan to
automate information systems serving all court
operations during the period 1973 to 1978.
4. The Judges of Roanohe City and the County Courts,
the City Auditor and data processing officials
should seek further technical advisory assistance
to guide and expedite development of information
systems concerning felony systems in Roanoke
County.
As a result of this review prepared by the American
Cnlversity an application has been completed requesting an Action
Grant in the amount of $5S,000 from the Division of Justice
and Crime Prevention to build a program for improvement of
prosecution and court activities and law reform.
The'title of this program which would be administered
by Judge E~nest M. Ballon would be Comprehensive Court
Organization and Criminal Procedures and Implementation of
Recommendations. This grant would provide funds to the
Roanohe City to develop a clear prototype criminal justice
information system which would serve a multiplicity of
local and state requirements for current, accurate and periodic
data. The project would serve as a model for similar pro-
jects elsewhere in the State. This grant application, should
City Council approve, would be forwarded to the DJCP for
both funding and approval. The Federal share would be
$55,000 with in-hind State/Local share in the amount of
$9,356 worth of man hours and $11,000 worth of computer
time.
It would be recommended that City Council authorize
the submittal of this action grant application to the
Division of Justice and Crime Prevention.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager*
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and offered the folloming Resolution authorizing the filing of the City of
Roanoke*$ application with the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention for aa
action grant of federal funds for implementation of a program for improvement
of prosecution ~od court activities and law reform:
(~20826)' A RESOLUTION authorizing the filin9 of the-City of Roanoke*s
application with the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention for an action
grant of federal funds for implementation of a program for improvement of
prosecution, and court activities and law reform.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book u38, page 43.)
:!.'67
"168
Dr, Taylor moved the adoption Of the Resolution, The motion mas
seconded by Mr, Trout end adopted by the folioming vote:
AVES: #essrs, Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber '-6,
NAYS: None Oo (Mr, LAsh absent) ·
TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEY: The City Manager sub-
mitted n writtenreport in connection with the Neighborhood Youth Carp Program
for this fiscal year, advising that the Personnel Director attended a Department
of Labor Conference in Philadelphia on April 10,.1973, to receive instructions
as to the continuation of the Public Employment Program and to receive informa-
tion pertaining to the funding of the summer employment of the youth program for
1973, that it has been determined that the city will receive an additional
$1S0,000.00 to be channeled by the PEP pipeline for 1973 summer.employment, that
in addition to this, any residue to the PEP program can be scheduled for this
same use and that his office is in the process of evaluating various methods of
utilizing these funds and will return to Council with a report tn the near future.
~r, Thomas ~oved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by M~. Trout and unanimously adopted.
POLICE DEPARTmENT-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted the
followin9 report on the status of personnel in the Police Department and the
Fire Department as of March 31, 1973:
*April 15, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke~ Virginia ;
Gentlemen:
Subject: Personnel Changes - Police and Fire Departments
Listed halos is the status of the Police and the Fi~e
Department as of March 31, 1973:
Police Department
Name pired
Officer Mack ~. Gossage Mov. 1, 1966
Officer Bruce i. Booth Aug. 2, 1971
Officer Barney T. Arthur Oct. 4, 1971
Barbara S. Gray, Clerk-$teno. Nov. II, 19b8
Officer Roger E. Harris
Officer Larry R. Isom
Officer Keith N. Mood
Rhonda G. Palmer, Clerk-SteeD.
Hatch 6, 1973
March 12, 1973
March 12, 1973
March 16, 1973
Resianed Other
Dismissed
3/1/73
March.14.
1973
March 31,
1973
lng Dept.
March 15,
1973
Ending March 31, 1973 (13 vacancies)
Fire Department
At the end. of March there were two i2) vacancies in the Fire Depart-
ment,
'Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byr'on E. Hamer
Byron Eo Haner
City Manager"
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
mas seconded by NFo Garland and unanimously adopted.
TAXESoDEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC MELFARK: Council having requested that the
City Attorney render an opinion as to mhether or not Mr. Cecil Simmons is
eligible for real estate tax relief under the provisions of Ordinance No.
20352 since he is a recipient of public assistance, the City Attorney submitted
the folloming report advising that Ordinance No. 20352 contains the follomlng
provision. "No person or persons receiving public assistance, other than
medical assistance of any form, shall be eligible for the within provided
exemption," and that it is therefore his ?pinion that the "public assistance'
exception contained in Ordinance No. 20352 is a valid exception and it is
within the sole discretion of Council to determine mhether or not that excep-
tion should he retained:
"April 16. 1973
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
At your meeting of April g, 1973, the question arose
concernin9 the status of public assistance recipients'in
relation to the real estate tax exemption contained in
Ordinance No. 20352, adopted by Council June 30, 1972.
Contrary to my spontaneous response that such public
assistance recipients were not excluded from the exemption
created by Ordinance No. 20352, I find that such persons
are excluded by that provision of Ordinance No. 203~ .
as follows:
"No person or persons receiving public
assistance, other than medical assistance
of any form. shall be eligible for the
within provided exemption."
Code of Virginia, 1950, sS58-760.1, is the enabling legis-
lation which authorizes counties, cities and towns to
grant either an exemption or a deferral of payment of real
estate taxes to persons who are 65 years of age or older
and resident in such county, city or town. A City, in
order to afford its elderly citizens benefits granted by
the Act, most adopt an ordinance establishing the terms
and conditions upon which tax relief to the elderly is
afforded. 'The abovementioned enabling Act grants a wide
discretion to the county, city or t§wn electing to afford
its elderl~ citizens tax relief. S 56-760,1 establishes'
maximum income and net worth figures but allows individual
politic.al subdivisions to establish lower figures in order
for a person to qualify for tax relief. The recently
a~journed 1973 Session of the General ASsembly amended
S 58-760.1 with respect to certain income figures. It
did not' see fit, however, to disturb the discretion vested
in the political subdivisions to establish other conditions
as a prerequisite to granting such tax relief. It 'is, there-
fore, my opinion that the "public assistance" exception
contained in Ordinance No. 20352, is a valid exception,
it is mithin the sole discretion of Council to determine
whether or not that exception should be retained.
I trust that this opinion will be helpful to you in this
regard.
Respectfully,
S/ James N. Kincanon
James N.I' Kincanon"
169
17,0
The City Auditor pointed ou~ that after conferring with the Director
of the Department of Public Welfare he'has been informed tha~'each par Mr. Slmwons
applies rot and receives a lump sum check from the Yelfure Department for payment
of his real estate taxes'and that this money is reimbursed to the City of
Roanoke'by'the federal governwent, the City Auditor further pointing out that
anyone on public welfare can apply and qualify for this real estate aid.:
After a discussion of the matter. Ur. Garland woved, t~at the City
Auditor be requested tn report to Council un this procedure and us to whether
or not this policy applies to all recipients of public assistance who own real
estate. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
ROANOKE VALLEY: Council having referred to the City Attorney for
report as to the proper course of action to be followed by Council in connection
with a report from the City Planning Commission recommending the adoption of
interim flood control regulations providing for Planning Commission review.
deliberation and necessary recommendations of all site plans pertaining to
development in the flood plain area (as delineated by the Corps of Engineers
Intermediate Regional Flood Category) prior to the issuance of building permits.
the Assistant City Attorney submitted a written report recommending that,
should Council deem it necessary for the immediate protection of the health,
safety, welfare and property of the citizens of the city, tq prohibit construc-
tionin those areas of the city lying in defined flood plains, such could be
accomplished by adoption of a Resolution which would prohibit the issuance of
building permits for such construction and transmitting a form of Resolution
which would effectively prohibit construction in defined flood plains within
the city for a period of ninety days from April 16, 1973.
Mayor #ebber advised that many interested citizens have telephoned him
and requested that a public hearing be held on the matter before any definate
action is taken by Council and that he does not think Council should proceed
in a hurried manner.
Mr. Vincent $. hheeler appeared before Council and spoke against the
ninety day moratorium, advising that this moratorium will stop construction in
the City of Roanoke and that the answer to the question is to construct flood
control dams and not' impose moratoriums that would drive construction into other
valley communities.
Mr. Lothar Mermelstein. City Planning Commission Director, appeared
before Council and advised that action should have been taken years ago, that
in making this recommendation, the Planning Commission is not trying to binder
growth but to make sure that it takes place in an orderly fashion, that he does
not feel the ninety days is au unreasonable period of time to wait and that any
Ordinance which the Planning Commission recommends to Council will be a reasonable
one.
After a discussion of the matter~ Hr. ThOmas moved that Council hold
a public hearing on #ondayo April 30, 1973, at 7:30 p.m.. on the question of
adoption of u Resolution p~ohlbiting, rot a period of ninety days, the issuance
of building permits for all construction in those areas of the city defined as
lying within the intermediate regional flood plain us shown on the several
maps and studies of the Flood Plain Information made by the H. S. Army Corps of
Engineers, excep~ such construction as may be ordered by Council. The nation
mas seconded by Hr. Hubard and unanimously adopted, ·
CITY TREASURER-PAy PLAN: The City Auditor submitted the following
report in connection with a meeting held by the State Compensation Hoard on
April 2. 1973, advising that the Compensation Hoard was quite interested in
the progress being made by the constitutional officers toward having their
employees covered by the City Pay Plan, that the Compensation Hoard informed
the City Treasurer that the Hoard was highly interested in having all of the
constitutional o~ficers° employees classified under the City Pay Plan and
that the Hoard would like some reaction from Council as to the best method
to incorporate the employees in the Office of the City Treasurer into the
City Pay Plan:
"April 16, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke,' Virginia
Gentlemen:
The City Council instructed me to attend a meeting Of
the State Compensation Board that was hold in Salem, Va. on
April 2, 1973. This meeting mas attended by the City
Treasurer. Commonwealth's Attorney, Commissioner of Revenue
and City Sheriff.
The Compensation Board was quite interested in the pro-
gress being made by the constitutional officers on becoming
covered by the City Pay Plan. They were informed that the
Commissioner of Revenue had had his employees classified
and that City Sheriff was in the process of having his
employees classified and the Fomnonwealth's Attorney
informed the Hoard that inasmuch as he had only been in
office 30 days, he had not had sufficient time to look
into the matter, but he was of the opinion that it would
probably be the course he would follow.
The Treasurer was asked about having his employees
classified and he informed the Hoard he did not intend to
have his employees classified. Mr. Ayers, Chairman of the
Board, informed Mr. Johnson that the Board was highly
interested in having all of the constitutional officers*
employees classified and he was very insistent on this
subject.
In subsequent conversations with the Compensation
Board. they alluded to the fact that in the last case in
which Mr. Johnson had sued the Compensation Hoard for its
decisions on matter affecting the budget of the City
Treasurer*s Office and salaries in particular that the
Court found for the Compensation Board and against the City
Treasurer. In the Court*s decision, they suggested that
Mr. Johnson would do well tn subscribe to a pay plan which
in effect would parallel the City*s Plan. which would give
the Hoard some basis in the future for properly establishing
the pay for the employees in his office. The Hoard again
promised to give every consideration to the employees
becoming classified in the City Pay Plan.
171
172
The Board would li~e some reaction from Council as to
the best method to incorporate the employees or the City
Treasurer's Office into the City's Pay Plan.
I am attaching a copy of this court order.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ A. N. Gibson
City ~ud~tor'
Mr. T~omas moved that the matter be referred to the City Manager for
study, report and recommendation to Council as to mhether or not the employees
in the Office of the City Treasurer should be included under the City of Roanohe
Pay and Classification Plan by the regular meeting of the body on Monday, April
30, 1973, and that hopefully the recommendation of the City Manager will come to
Council with the concurrence of the City Treasurer. The motion was seconded by
Mr, Trout and unanimously adopted
AUDITS: The City Auditor submitted a financial report of the City of
Roanoke for the month of March, 1973.
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimonsly adopted.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
AIRPORT: Council having referred to the Airport Advisory Commission
for reappraisal and reevaluation the entire matter of advertising space at
Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum} Airport, Mr. Trout, Chairman of the Airport Advisory
Advertising to advertise commerically in the Airport Terminal Building at
Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport be accepted as drawn and approved by the
City Attorney; and further recommending that the City of Roanoke, through its
Airport Department, collect the passenger boarding charge now being collected
by the airlines and that the existing Ordinance controlling this charge be
altered to eliminate all exclusions except transfer passengers and airline
officials on company business.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the Airport
Advisory Commission and that the following ordinance awarding a contract to
Creative Advertising Agency, Incorporated, for certain advertising privileges to
be exercised at Roanoke Municipal (Moodrum) Airport on the basis of a certain
proposal made therefor, be placed upon its first reading:
(=20827) AN ORDINANCE awarding a contract for certain advertisin9
privileges to be exercised at Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport upon certain
terms and provisions, on'the basis of a certain proposal made therefor; and
directing the execution of a requisite contract.
MiIEREAS, by written proposal dated August 30, 1972, Creative Advertis-
ing Agency, Incorporated, has offered to provide certain display advertising at
Roanoke Municipal (#oodrum) Airport, which said proposal has been studied and
reviewed by the City Manager; and
MHEREAS, the City Manager in report to the Council under date of
December 2&o 1972. has recommended award of the contract for advertising
privileges as hereinafter provided; and the council considering all the same,
has determined that said proposal should be accepted.
TliEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
Creative Advertising Agency, Incorporated, be and is awarded a contract for
certain advertising privileges to be exercised at Roanoke Municipal (Moodrum)
Airport for the period commencing as of March l, 1973, and ending February 20,
1978, with an option to said agency to extend said contract for a period of
five additional years, in consideration of which said concessionaire shall pay
to the City seventy percent (?0%) of the total monthly value of all contracts
let by the corporation resulting from the exercise of the privileges granted in
said contract; provided, however, that in cases in which other advertising
agencies, other than ones owned or participated in by the corporation or any
of its officers, contract with the corporation, the percentage paid to the
City shall be fifty-five percent (55%) of the total monthly value of all contract
so let, and upon such other terms and provisions as are contained in that cer-
tain form of contract drawn to be entered into under date of January 23, 1973,
presented to the Council, a copy of which is on file in the office of the
City Clerk; and the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed, for and on
behalf of the City, to enter into and execute the aforesaid contract in writ-
ing with the aforesaid corporation respectin9 the advertising privileges to be
exercised by said corporation as herein awarded, said contract to be first
approved by the City Attorney.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Lisk absent)
Mr. Trout further moved that the City Attorney be requested to
prepare the proper measure amending the boarding tax Ordinance to provide that
the City of Roanoke, through its Airport Department, shall collect the passenger
boarding charge now being collected by the airlines and that the existing
Ordinance controlling this charge be altered to eliminate all exclusions
except transfer passengers and airline officials on company business. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
SEWERS ANO STORM DRAINS: Council having referred to a committee for
tabulation, report and recommendation the bids received for the construction of
a storm drain between Otb Street and Main Street, $. W., the committee submitted
a written report recommending that the proposal of J. P. Turner ~ Brothers,
Incorporated, in the amount of $16,251.50 be accepted.
173
174
Mr. Tront moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the commit-
tee and offered the.follouing emergency Ordinance accepting the proposal of
J~ P. Turner ~ Ocothers, Inc., for the construction of tbe storm drain between
flth Street and Main Street, S.
(a20828) AN OROINANCE accepting a bid and awarding n contract for the
construction of the' Porterfield storm drain, betmeen Otb Street, S. M.o and Main
Street, S. M., upon certain terms and conditions; rejecting certain other bids
made therefor; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #38° page 44.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion mas seconded
by Mr. Thomas andtadopted by the folloming vote;
AYES: MmSSFS. Garland, Hubard, Taylor. Thomas° Trout and Mayor
Mebber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Lisk absent)
UNFINISIIED BUSINESS: NONE.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
BUILDINGS-STREETS AND ALLEYS: Uouocil having directed the City Attorney
to prepare the proper measure permitting the construction of a steel exit
stairway on the north side of the Patrick Henry Building. O~ficial Tam No.
1013313. to encroach six feet over the south line of the public alleyway leading
westerly from Jefferson Street alongside said building, upon certain terms and
conditioos, he presented same; whereupon. Dr. Taylor moved that the following
Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(=20029) AN ORDINANCE permittin9 the construction of a steel exit
stairway on the north side of the Partick Henry Building, Official No. 1013313,
to encroach 6 feet over the south line of the public alleyway leading westerly
from Jefferson Street alongside said building, upon certain terms and conditions.
WHEREAS, representatives of Monterey Corporation, owner of the property
designated as Official No. 1013313, on which the Patrick Henry Building is located,
have requested that they be permitted, in the remodeling of said building, to
construct and maintain on the north outside wall of said building, a steel exit
stairway to extend from the loth floor of the building to a point not less than
14 feet from the ground surface, the last flight of said stairway to be a
weighted drop-down section, portions of which said stairway would
encroach, as designed, six feet over and into the south side of the 10-foot
wide public alleyway alongside said building; which proposal has been referred
to the City Planning Commission mhich has recommended to the Council that said
request be approved; mod
MIIEREAS. pursuant to the authority vested in local governing bodies
by SS15.1-376 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, this Council is agreeable
to the owner's proposal and is willing to permit the aforesaid encroachment over
the public alleyway herein described, upon the terms and conditions hereinafter
contained.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City ~f goanohe
that permission be and is hereby granted Monterey Corporation, owner of the
Patrlch Henry Huil~lng, Officinl No. 1013313, located on the west side~of
Jefferson Street between Hullitt Avenue and a lO-foot wide public alleyway
leading westerly from Jefferson Street, to construct end maintain as a 6-foot
encroachment over the public alley wa~ on the north side of said property a glass
enclosed steel exit stairway constructed on the north wall of the aforesaid
building and extending from the loth floor thereof.to a line not closer than 14
feet to the surface or said alleyway, the last flight of the stairway to the
ground to be a weighted drop-down section, in accordance with the plans drawn for
the same by Elnsey, Motley ~ Shana, Architects and Engineer~ revised February
25, 1972, entitled *Remodeling of Patrick Ilenry Huilding#, a copy of which said
plan Is on file in the office of the City Clerk' all such construction to be
made with approved and permitted building materials and to be cnnstructed and
safely and properly maintained at the expense of the aforesaid owner, its
successors or assigns, under a building permit issued therefor by the Huilding
Commissioner of the City of Roanoke, in accordance with such of the City's
building regulations and requirements as are applicable thereto; and with pay-
ment by said owner* to the City Of an annual fee of SgO.O0 for the ~rmit herein
granted; it to be expressly understood and agreed by said permittee that the
permission herein contained ia subject to the limitations contained in
sS15.1-376 Of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and that said permittee,
by making and maintaining said encroachment, agrees that it and its successors
and assigns will indemnify and save harmless the City of Roanoke of and from
all claims for injuries or damages to property OF persons that may ariseby
reason of such encroachment.
BE IT FUItT~ER ORDAINED that the provisions of this ordinance shall
not become fully effective until such time as an attested copy of this ordi-
nance shall have been duly signed, sealed, attested and acknowledged by
authorized officials of said permittee and shall have been admitted to record
at the expense of said permittee in the Clerk*s Office of the Hustings Court of
the City of Roanokei and until a written permit shall' have been issued by the
City's Building Commissioner for the construction of the encroachment herein
authorized to be made, said permittee, its successors and assigns, to be
required to furnish to the City of Roanoke and to keep effective during the
period of such encroachment a bond with surety in a penalty of not less than
$5,000.00 of an acceptable liability insurance policy with limits of not less
than $50,000.00, conditioned or insuring, as the case may be, against the City's
loss or liability by reason of the existence of the aforesaid encroachment°
The motion was seconded by Mro Trout and adopted by the following
vote:
AyEs: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
M~bber---~ ...................... 5.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Lisk absent)
175
'176
REGIONAL CORRECTIONS FACILITY: Council having directed the City
Attorney to prepare the proper measure expressing the ullllngness of the Council
of the City of Roanoke to cooperate with the remaining parties to the Roanoke
Valley Corrections Center Agreement in the construction and erection Of a regional
corrections facility on an acceptable site upon certain terms and conditions,
he presented same; whereupon, Mr. Trout offered the following' Resolution:
(s20830) A RESOLUTIO~ expressing the millingness of the Council of
the City of Roanoke to cooperate with the remaining parties to the Roanoke Valley
Corrections Center Agreement in the construction and erection of a regional
corrections facility on an acceptable site upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book #36, page
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of tbe Resolution. The notion was
seconded by Mr, Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
Nebber ..........................
'~ema;k_Lbv Jane I~°Ug.~_SaleLC_lt_~._Cp_~Ln~jJ_~ Aefo~LRp.a..~_o~e City_
~.p~pci
deuly become a political football. ~hat has been overloohed
in public discussion ia the last several days is that,
without concern for political expedleacyo the Corrections
Board based its site selection decision on what, in its
Judgement, Is bestror the welfare of the inmate and the
society to which he mast return.
A few of Us. on the Board, who thought it was out tush to
select a site for recommendation to all the interested
parties° may have spent a few moments dreaming of even
greater lnter*~Jovernuental endeavors. However, we quickly
faced reality. For as you and I hnow, we must build a
corrections facility now. On February 12 uhen, in 9god
faith, all of the governments signed an agreement to that
effect, I made the statement that this was one.joint venture
we weven*t being absolutely r6rced to*do.
There has been a great deal of talh Over the past decades
about the need for valley co-operation. Bawever, you and
I all know that co-aDoration does not mean that one side
attempts to call the shots and wield the power. On some
issues your city bas the cards stached in its favor; on
ethers, it cann*t even muster a hand. Surely we have
problems but they are problems which sensible people can
worh out. Please understand that by 'we* I mean every
government in this Valley, my gun included.
As I see it, we have two choices as elected officials. Ye
can either be politicians interested in preserving our own
bered for what we contribute to this Valley. I hnow that it
is as important to you as it is to me that we arrive at
reasonable approaches to our problems. Surely me do not
wish to'continue sharing embarrassing rebuffs such as that
some of our representatives suffered at a recent legisla-
tive hearing in Richmond.
I believe that you were sincere in helping to appoint the
Corrections Board and assigning it a task to do. 1 know,
from personal experience, the great demands on your time and
the vast variety of decisions you must make. And I know
that you cannot search out all the ansmers on your own.
Consequently, as council members, we should be doubly
grateful that we have public-spirited citizens willing to
give of their time to help us make our ultimate decisions.
Your turning down the Board's first recommendation is your
prerogative even thou9h it was done in a questionable manner.
I would like to believe at this stage that Roanoke City
Council is sincere in saying that it will consider other
recommendations from the Board. And I feel that you are
perfectly justified in asking for a deadllne, llowever, I
do believe that it is far too late to change the 9round
rules.
I am perfectly willing to spend the time necessary to make
a further site suggestion provided that I am absolutely
sure my opinion and that of my colleagues is of value and
carries weight. If this is not to be, then I would prefer
that some other unbiased agency make the decision for all
of us, In which event, I would say *so be it' and proceed
to lay {he foundation.
Some very fine and capable people~ devoted to their task,
serve on the Board and I trust that you will be sincere with
them and with me. We have a mammoth, time-consuming, fascinat-
in9 job to do - build the Roanoke Valley Corrections Center.'
WATER DEPARTRENT: Hr. Thomas offered the following Resolution con-
curring, generally, in a report of the Water Resources Committee recommending
certain liberalization of the clty*s current policy with respect to extension
of the water facilities of the city outside its corporate limits and to its
sale of surplus water a~d dlrectin9 certain actions to implement certain of suc!
recommendations:
~178
(n20831) A RESOLtrflON concurring, generally, in a report of the
Council*s Mater Resources Committee recommending certain liberalization or the
City*s current policy with respect to extension of the City*s water facilities
outside its corporate limits, and to its sale of surplus water; and directing
certain actions to implement certain of such recommendations.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance O, ok z3o, page 47.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ........... O.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
MATER DEPARTMENT: Council at its meetln9 on Monday, March 12, 1973,
having received a communication from Mr. S. B. Crowder, Vice-Mayor, Town of
Vioton, requesting that the Council of the City of Roanoke give serious review
tO the present rate of fifty cents per ode hundred cubic [eet that is charged by
the City of Roanoke to the Town of Vinton for the delivery of water by the City Of
Roanoke, Dr. Taylor moved that said communication along with consideration of
the future Mater supply for the Town of Vinton he referred to the Water ReSources
Committee for consideration and recommendation to Council. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
SALE OF PROPERTY-COUNCIL: ~r. Trout moved that Council meet in
Executive Session to discuss a real estate hatter regarding the airport. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Hessrs. Garland, Huhard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Lisk absent)
There being no further business, Mayor Mebber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday, April 23, 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke net in regular meeting in the
Council Chamber in the #unicipal Ruilding. Monday, April 23, 1973, at 2 p,n.,
the regular nee;lng hour, uith Mayor Roy L. Mebber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, Milliam $. flubard, David K.
Lisk (Mr. Lisk was late in arriving at the meeting) Noel C. Taylor, Hampton M.
Thomas, Janes O. Trout and Mayor Roy L. Nebber---7.
AB$£NT: None ..........................O.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Byron E. Barter, City Manager; Mr. Samuel Il.
McGhee. lll. Assistant City Manager; RF. James N. KJncanon, City Attorney; Mr,
D. Ben Jones, Jr** Assistant City Attorney; and Mr. A. N. Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by Or. Noel C.
Taylor, Member of Roanoke City Council.
MINUTES: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday,
April 16, 19730 having been furnished each member of Council, on ~otion of Mr.
Trout, seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof
was dispensed with and the minutes approved as recorded.
BEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
TRAFFIC-STREETS AND ALLEYS: Mr. W. Nolan Teague, ExecUtive Secretary,
Towers Mall Merchants Association, appeared before Council and expressed the
appreciation Of the Towers Mall Merchants Association to the members of Council
for expediting the lead green light allowing traffic to turn left into Colonial
Avenue, S. N., off Brandon Avenue Jn the vicinity of Towers Mall and called
attention to the continuing need for consideration Of widening Colonial Avenue
from 23rd Street to Broadway.
PETITIONS AND CORMUNICATIONS:
BIRUUES: A communication from Mr. Thomas D. Rutherfoord, Chairman,
Pedestrian Overpass Committee Of Downtown Roanoke, Incorporated, advising
that the Board of Directors of Downtown Roanoke, Incorporated, and bis
committee have reviewed the plan for a pedestrian bridge over the railroad track~
at Jefferson Street, that although they appreciate the work which has been done,
they must conclude that the plan is not adequate in that it does not capitalize
fully on either the economic or esthetic potential of this.part of the city,
accordingly, they suggest and recommend that'Council authorize a design competi-
tion for this project with the competition open to all student architects and
student urban planners in the State of Virginia, further recommending that the
criteria and rules for judging the contest be established by the City of
Roanoke, that Council authorize an appropriation of $2,000.00 to be awarded as
prize money in wuch amounts and to such number of winners as determined by the
rules and procedures set forth by the City of Roanoke, also recommending that
'179
180
should Council sen fit to proceed with the contest, that invitations to enter be
extended to appropriate schools and individuals prior to the end of this school
year, and that the deadline for entries be not later than August 1, 1973, advising
that the committee believes the contest will produce substantial benefits Jn the
form of imaginative design concepts which mill give the city government, the
business community and the general public a much broader view of the potential
inherent in a pedestrian connection over the railroad tracks, mas before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that the communication be referred to the City Manager
for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was seconded by #r,
Rubard and unanimously adopted.
SCROOLS-BUDCET: Council at its last regular meeting on April ~. 1973,
having deferred action on a request of the Roanoke City School Board that
$100,000.00 be appropriated for the purpose of construction of a multi-purpose
room at the Oakland Elementary School, pending clarification of certain questions
pertaining to the extension of lOth Street and its relationship to the Oakland
Elementary School, the matter was again before the body.
In this connection, the Roanoke City School Board submitted a communica-
tion advising that the patrons and administration at Oakland Elementary School
have strongly asserted the need for a multi-purpose room at the school for a
number of years in order to strengthen the educational opportunities for their
children, that the present situation is:
In inclement weather there is no place to conduct physical education and
game activities.
There is no adequate space for children to eat their meals. They
are using a tiny, converted classroom as a cafeteria.
Small and large group instructional assemblies are not possible.
The citizens and patrons in the Oakland vicinity are not able to
assemble at the school for school-community activities. This is
especially awkward for the PTA and the school administration.
Oakland Elementary School is handicapped in several ways, e.9.,
located on a busy street, small acreage for play, limited instruc-
tional areas. A multi-purpose room would partially reduce the
degree of this handicap;
pointing out that the School Board is aware of the fact that the long range time
schedule for the extension of loth Street is lqOS or soom thereafter and the
likelihood that Oakland Elementary School would be closed at that tine, that
this is twelve years in the future, that it is to be noted that two school genera-
tions will complete their education at Oakland Elementary School during this
period, that the School Board contemplates the construction of a modular multi-
purpose facility, the major portion of which can be disassembled for use in
another location after 1985 and the Board feels that this facility is needed and
respectfully petitions Roanoke City Council to appropriate the requested funds,
was before the body.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanoke City
School Board and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
requested funds:
(a20832) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordaim Section a89, "Transfers
to Capital Improvements Fund.' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and
providing for an emergency.
(For fall text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Dook naB. page 51.}
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas second-
ed by Hr. Trout and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard. Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
~ebber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Lisk had not arrived at the meeting)
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting that $3,?S0.00 be appropriated to Tuition for Learning Disabled and
Special Education Students under Section a2000, 'Schools - Instruction,- of
the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for the School Doard to pay a portion of
the tuition costs for students who cannot obtain the required special educa-
tion course in the Roanoke City Schools. said amount to be 100 per cent reim-
bursable from the State Department of Education, u as before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanoke
City School Board and offered the folloeiag emergency Ordinance appropriatJn9
the requested funds:
(=20833) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordaia Section #2000, "Schools
Instruction," of the 19T2-T3 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =30. page 52.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the followin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ................ r ........ 6.
NAYS: None .......... O. (Mr. Lisk had not arrived at the meeting)
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting that $19,664.00 be appropriated to Library Books and Audio-Visual
Materials under Section =~2200, 'Schools - Library Books and Audio-Visual
Materials,~ of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for the purchase of library
books and audio-visual materials under the provisions of P. L. 09-10 funds
throngh the State Department of Education, was before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanoke
City School Board and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriatin9
the requested funds:
(=20834) AN ORDINANCE to amend and .reordain Section ~92200, "Schools
Library Books and Audio-Visual Materials," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordi-
nance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Oook ~B, page
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the follouing vote:
181
:182'
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber ......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Hr. Link had not arrived at the weeting}
BUDGET-REGiSTRAR: A communication from Br. Andrew B. Thompson,
Chairman o! the Electoral Board, requesting that $S00.00 be transferred from
Printing and Office Supplies to Office Furniture and Equipment - Neu under
Section uBS. "Electoral Board." of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for the
purchase of two file cabinets for the storage of S x 8 cards of all registered
voters which the Registrar, under the Code of Virginia. is required to keep on
cards of this size, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the request of the Electoral
Board and offered the follo~lng emergency OrdJoance providing for the requested
transfer:
(~20B35) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section nBS, "Electoral
Board." of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for un emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book n3B, page 53.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebher ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Lisk had not arrived at the meetin9)
BUDGET-SCHOOLS-TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEy: Council
having previously referred to 1973-74 budget study a request of Total Action
Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley that the City of Roanoke and other 9overnmeots
contribute local money to sustain the functions of TAP under the OEO Program at
a greatly reduced level, a coemunication from Mr. James B. Stamper, Deputy
Director, Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley, advising that TAP
will continue to receive OEO funds through October 31, 1973, that they are asking
the local governments for the following amounts during thc fiscal year ending
June 30, 1974,
Botetourt County $17,860.00
Bsena Vista 5.954.00
Craig County 14,883.00
Lexington 11,907.00
Roanoke City 161,714.00
Roanoke County 23,B13.00
Rockbridge County 23,813.00
Salem 17.860.00
Total $297,G04.00
pointing out that their initial request was for twelve months funding instead of
eight months, noting that the $297.B04.00 represents a cut which TAP has made from
what ~onld have been a $4BB,O00.O0 OEO level during that same eight months, that
the federal court has just ruled President Nixon*$ action to abolish OEO and
community action programs to be illegal, that as he understands it. the ruling
only applies to the current fiscal year and not what happens after June 30, 1973,
and that a commitment is needed so TAP can let OEO and other federal agencies
know that next year will be a transition and not a phaseoout, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be referred to 1973=74 budget
study. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
SCHOOLS: A communication from Mr. Herman H. Pevler tendering his
resignation us a member of the Roanoke City School Board effective at once,
was be[ore Couucll.
Dr. Taylor moved that the resignation be received and filed with
regret. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
REGIONAL CORRECTIONS FACILITY: A communication from Mr. C. E.
Conklin suggesting that the city consider certain property owned by Blue Ridge
Steel located in the vicinity of 9th Street, N. E., as a location for the
proposed oew regional jail, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be referred to the City Of
Roanoke Jail Study Committee for its information in connection with its study
of the matter. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and uoanimously adopted.
SEMERS AND S~ORM DRAINS: A communication from Mr. Charles H. Pernter
in connection with the Edflehill se~er suit which has been pendin9 in the courts
since 1955. advising that he fully appreciates the interim action of the City of
Roanoke in standing between the citizens of the annexed areas and the Roanoke
County Public Service Authority. that he hopes the city realizes that there is
an important principle involved, that he is of the opinion that every legal
weapon should be brought to bear and if it is felt advisable, that special
legal consel be brought in, that he wishes the city success in their fight and
will await the outcome with a great deal of interest, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the City Attorney be requested to furnish
Council with a status report as to where the city stands in regard to the pend-
ing suit and as to representation of individuals involved in said suit. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Trout.
The City Attorney advised that he is in a position to give this report
to Council at the present time and verbally pointed out that the court has set
the matter for argument and disposition on May 11. 1973. and at that time his
office will represent the city and those intervenors in the case who share the
same position as the City of Roanoke.
After a discussion of the verbal report made by the City Attorney.
Mr. Thomas revised his previous motion to provide that the City Attorney be
requested to ~orrespond with Mr. Charles H. Pernter and inform him of the
same information which has just been verbally presented to Council. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
At this point, Mr. Lisk entered the meeting.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET-AIRPORT: Council having previously approved the employment of
additional personnel at Roanoke Municipal (~oodrum) Airport for the purpose Of
184
collecting the airport boarding charge, the City Manager submitted a written
report advising that in order for the city to provide this service for the last
two months of this fiscal year it will be necessary to appropriate }4,196.00
toward personal services and $500.00 toward miscellaneous non-reoccurring
expenses for a total of $4,696.00 and recommending that these funds be appropriated
to the proper airport account in order for the personnel to he hired nod for the
equipment and supplies to be purchased.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
recommended funds:
(=20HgG) AX ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section u340, "Munici-
pal Airport Fund," of the 1972-73 Municipal Airport Fund Appropriation Ordinance,
and providin9 for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~38, page 53.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motioo mas
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber .......................... T.
NAYS: None ........... O.
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS; Council having referred to the City Manager for
study, report and recommendation the request of the Black Vanguard Party that
outdoor restroom facilities and drinking fountains be installed in Eureka Park
for the coming season, the City ~!anager submitted the following report, recom-
mending that Council appropriate $10,000.00 at this time to construct permaoent
vandal-proof toilet facilities which would be accessible at ail hours of the day
or night, said building to contain not only the necessary sanitary facilities
but to have a drinking fountain as a part of the facility, and further advising
that the Parks and Recreation budget for the next fiscal year includes a request
for one additional drinking fountain to be installed in Eureka Park:
"April 23, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Eureka Park Improvements
At the meeting on Monday, April 16, City Council received'
a communication and complaint from the Black Vanguard with
respect to the lack of outdoor sanitary facilities in Eureka
Park. They indicated that there were inadequate toilet
facilities available other than those contained in the
creation Center which is open only at certain hours. This
is a valid complaint and it'is felt that immediate correc-
tive action should be tahen.
City Council had indicated that they would like the
City Manager to look into the installation of portable
chemical facilities until such time aa more permanent faci-
lities could be provided.
It would be my recommendation that City Council take
the more permanent action at this time and authorize the
expenditure of $10,000 to constr~ct permanent vandal-proof
toilet,facilities which would be accessible at all hours
of the day or night, This building would not only contain
the necessary sanitary facilities but would have drinking
fountain as a part of that facility. In addition, within
the Parks and Recreation budget for the next fiscal year
there is one additional drinking fountain to be installed
in Eureka Park.
It would be recommended that City Council appropriate
$10,000 at this time so that immediate action can be taken
to purchase this vandal-proof buildiog and fixtures for
installation by City force.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron K. limner
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager"
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
recommended fonds:
(~20837) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ;64, *Maintenance
of City Property." of the 1972-T3 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for
an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see as in Ordinance Book ~38, page
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber ...................
NAYS: None ...........O.
In this connection, Mr. Thomas encouraged the administration to
conduct a review of the parks in the City of Roanoke to ascertain if there are
adequate restroom and drinking fountain facilities therein and that such he
accomplished whether it be by chemical type facilities or permanent facilities.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-FIRE DEPARTMENT-MATER DEPARTMENT-CITY ENGINEER: The
City Manaoer submitted a written report advising that Council previously approved
the purchase of various automobiles for city departments, that a portion of the
report recommended the acceptance of the low bids and also recommended that
various funds be transferred from several automobile replacement accounts which
had extra funds to an automobile replacement account which did not have suffi-
cient funds and recommending that $102.00 be transferred from Vehicular Equipment
Replacement under Section ~55, "Engineering," to Vehicular Equipment - New under
Section {64, "Maintenance of City Property': that $200.00 be transferred from
Vehicular Equipment - Replacement under Section ~ST, *Traffic Engineering and
Communications," to Vehicular Equipment - Sew under Section ~64, *Maintenance
of City Property"; and that $500.00 be transferred from Vehicular Equipment -
Replacement under Section ~59, "Street Construction and Repair," to Vehicular
Equipment - New under Section ~64, "Maintenance of City Property".
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance providing for the
recommended transfers:
185
~I86
(a20838) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordaln certain sections of the
1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordlnance~ see Ordinance Book =38, page 55.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption or the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Hayor
Mebber ........................... T.
NAYS: None ............ O.
BUBGET-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a written report recommending
that he be authorized to execute appropriate forms for acceptance of Law Enforce-
neat Grant No. ?1-A1491, Roanoke Area Drug Abuse Control Council, and that
~O,?ll.O0 be appropriated to this grant account and the remaining $3,100.00 will
be administered to RADACC through the City of Salem.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
recommended funds:
(~2083g) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section
Departmental,' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book g3B. page 55.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Mebber ....................
NAYS: None ........... O.
BUDGET-GRANTS: The City Uanuger submitted a written report recommend-
ing that $6.3BB.00 be appropriated in connection with Law Enforcement Grant No.
ill-A553, Roanoke Area Drug Abuse Control Council, advising that the initial
grant amount mas ~25,555D0, that prior to the city taking over the grant for
administration, the Fifth Planning District Commission paid out $19.167.00 to
RADACC which leaves a total of $6,~BB.O0 for the city to administer and pay out.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
recommended funds:
(~20B40) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~91, "Non -
Bepartmental,' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~3B, page 56.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Mebber ....................
NAYS: None ........... O.
BUDGET-WATER DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted'a written
report requesting that $750.00 be transferred frog Operating Supplies and
Materials tn Utilities and that $10,000.00 be transferred fvom Personal Ser-
vices to Maintenance of Buildings and Property under Section ~290, *Mater -
Distribution and Transmission** of the 1972-73 Water Fund Appropriation Ordi-
nance, to provide funds to Insure adequate monies for electrical service and
fuel oil and to provide sufficient funds for the remainder of the fiscal year
for repairing facilities and for making adjustments due to the loth Street
construction.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the request Of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance providing for the
requested transfers:
(#20R41) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordaln Section ~290, "Water -
Distribution and Transmission** of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~afl, page 57.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption Of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Itubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber .................... 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
CIT¥ ENGINEER: The City ~anager submitted the following report
transmitting certain recommendations in connection ~ith the public works ser-
vice center:
"April 23. 1973
Honorable Mayer and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Public Works Service Center
At your regular meeting on April 2, 1973, we submitted
for your review the 'Comprehensive Master Plan and Program
for the catI of Roanoke Public Works Service Center" as
prepared by the Vosbeck Vosbeck Kendrick and Redinger
partnership.
The Service Center study commenced prior to the deci-
sion to employ Albert Ramond and Associates for the City's
management study and, consequently, a portion of the Service
Center study is directed toward organizational structure and
operations mhich had to be evaluated in order to arrive at
the type Of facility required to accomplish the goals of a
Public Works Service Center. Representatives of VVKR met
with representatives of ARCA to brief ARCA on the proposed
facility. We have subsequently discussed the proposed
facility with ARCA in order to ascertain that the proposed
facility will suit the needs of the City at such time that
recommendations are made concerning the realignment of the
City's organization structure. It can be stated that, in
general, the proposed facility can function under the exist-
ing organization, but would function better with a realigned
organization.
Space recommendations mere made by VVKR with emphasis
on the joint use of common work areas, warehouse areas and
employee facilities.
187
188
Proposed construction and associated costs were
phased and a schematic facility design was prepared.
The above tbree items (Organization, space and cost and
schematic design) were included in what should be called the
Schematic D~stgn Phase.
It Is recommended that City Council approve the
Schematic Design Phase of the recommended Phase I con-
struction which would include facilities for the garage.
building maintenance, sign shop, sanitation, radio shop,
signal-traffic engineering, street maintenance, facilities
common to all of the above activities, a warehouse to
serve the above activities, fencing, vehicle mashing equip-
ment. site work and landscaping.
It is further recommended that City Council authorize
the employment of YV£R for the preparation of the Design
Development Phase of the recommended Phase I construction
and the preparation of the construction documents. YVKR
has submitted to the City a proposal for accomplishing
these remaining phases of work including bidding phases and
construction contract administration. They propose to
accomplish this mark at a rate of S.D% of the construction
cost, less 10% as a credit on work accomplished in prepar-
ing the master plan.
The Design Development Phase would detail the actual
functional operation within the facility and would itemize
the special equipment installations necessary for efficient
functioning of the facility. The basic facility design
drawings would then be prepared for approval, together with
an updated cost estimate.
It is recommended that durin9 the Design Development
Phase that the impact of the possible addition of the public
transit system maintenance at this location be analyzed and
that the resulting design development drawings reflect this
possible impact by making provision for additions to the
facility if necessary without baying to revise the basic
structure.
It is also recommended that similar consideration be
given during the Design Development Phase to the addition of
the sewer maintenance and water department facilities to
this site.
The Comprehensive Master Plan recognizes that the new
site which has been purchased for the Service Center is large
enough for the proposed first phase construction. However,
in order to provide for future expansion of these facilities,
more property will be needed. It is, therefore, recommended
that all of the property betmeen the new Service Center
site and the existing Sanitation Division lot on Carver
Avenue, N. E., between Courtland Avenue, N. E., and Ioter-
state Route 501, less certain developed properties along
Courtland Avenue, be purchased now in order to be assured
that this property will be available for future expansion.
Due to the proposed high degree of development of this
site with buildings and paved areas, storm runoff and drain-
age control becomes important. It is necessary and it is
recommended that storm drains be extended from Orange
Avenue into the Service Center site,
The basic costs itemized in the Comprehensive Master
Plan for the construction of facilities does not include
specialized equipment mhich must be installed as a part of
the facilitl, such as vehicular lifts and specialized
warehouse equipment. It is recommended that funds be
included for this equipment.
Estimated costs can be tabulated as follows:
Facility Construction - Phase I $1,173,387.00
Architectural Fee (5.8% less 10%=5.22%) 61,250.80
Additional Site 400,000,00
Storm Drainage 134,000.00
Equipment .~_~0_0_.~0__~.~_00
Subt~t__al 1,868,63T.80
Original Site Purchased and Comprehensive
Master Plan Costs -- 254~7~3:3.~5~
Folloming the purchase and payment for the original
site and the payment for the Comprehensive Waster Plan,
there remains $745.266.50 in this account. Subtracting
this available appropriation from the additional costs of
$1,866,637.60, leaves a balance of $1,123,371.30 still to
be funded. It is our recommendation that revenue sharing'
funds be used to make up the difference in the actual cost
of this project and the funds now appropriated to this
a~ount.
We would recommend your concurrence with all of the
above recommendations in order that me can proceed mith this
much needed project.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Bsner
Byron E. Hnner
City Manager"
Mr. Lisk moved that the City Attorney be instructed to prepare the
proper measure providing for the advertisement of bids on the proposed
service center project and that he also be instructed to ascertain what funds
will be needed to complete this project through the use of revenue sharin9 monies
The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Lisk further moved that the matter of acquisition of additional
property for the service center be referred to the Real Estate Committee to con-
var with the o~ners of the property and to report back to Council. the City Attar.
ney be instructed to prepare the proper measure in accordance with the recom-
mendation of the Real Estate Committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas
and unanimously adopted.
mAYER DEPARYMENT: The City Hanager submitted the following report
recommending that Council consider naming the Catawba Creek Diversion Tunnel
in honor of the late Charles E. Moore, past Ranager and Engineer of the Con-
sumers Mater Company and later Manager of the Roanoke City Water Department:
"April 23, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Charles E. Moore
Over the past weekend, the local newspapers announced
the death of a long-time City employee. Mi. Charles Edmard
Moore. Mr. Moore, who is a past Manager and Engineer of
the Consumers Water Company and later Manager of the
Roanoke City Water Department, died on February 26, 1973.
Mr. Moore was Manager during the City's condemnation of the
private water company and continued as Manager after the
City acquired the company on May 1, 1938. He served as
Manager until March I. lgS1, when he was designated as Engineer
in charge of construction of projects. He retired December
1, 1955, after 39 years of service and efforts to provide
the City of Roanoke ~ith a good water supply.
The Falling Creek Filter Plant and Carvins Cove Dam
were build under Mr. goore*s management. It would seem
fitting that the City of Roanoke pay tribute to ~r. Moore
for his many years service and it has been recommended by
Mr. Kit Kiser of the Mater Department that possibly City
Council might consider dedicating the Catawba Creek Division
Tunnel to Mr. Charles E. Moore, utilizing his name as the
name for this tunnel. This seems firing to a man of Mr.
Moore*s stature and would be so recommended to City Council.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Byron E. Hane~
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager.-
189
'~90
#r, Garland moved that the report bereferred to Council acting as a
Committee of the Mbole for its consideration. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Lisk and-unanimously adopted.
STATE HIGHWAYS: The City Manager submitted a written report advising
that the city has received a proposed agreement between the City of Roanoke and
the Virginia Department of Highways which provides for the adjustment of Water
Department facilities which will be affected by the construction of the Southwest
Expressway betmeen Franklin Road and Rroadmay under Project No. 6220-120-105.
MW-201, that the majority of this utility adjustment murk will be performed by
city forces but the Virginia Department of Highways will reimburse the Water
Department for coats incurred and recommending that Council authorime the
execution of this agreement by the City Manager.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur Jn the recommendation Of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution:
(320842) A RESOLLrfION authorizing the proper City officials to
execute a written agreement between the City and the Comnoflmealth of YJrgJula,
Department of [lighways, to be dated April 23, 1973, dealing mith the adjustments
of water facilities due to the construction Of Route 220, Project
MN-201, (Southwest Expressway).
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~38, page 57.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by ~r. Eubard and adopted by the following vote~
AYES: Hessrs. Garland, 'ubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: ~ofle ........... O.
BUILDINGS: The City Manager submitted a written report transmitting
a report of the Commissioner of Buildings concerning the status of condemned
buildings for the last quarter. January 1. 1973. throw9h March 31, 1973. and a
summary of condemnation and demolition activities for the period of January l.
1970, through March 31, 1973.
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
POLICE DEPARTM£NT: The Assistant City Attorney submitted a written
report ia connection with a claim which bas been instituted by Ronald C. Taylor,
plaintiff, against Police Officers H. S. Deer and J. E. Castleman in the United
States District Court for the [astern District of Virginia, with regard to
certain police action alleged to have occurred on August 10, 1972, resulting in
the temporary incarceration of the plaintiff, advising that the officers have,
through the Chief of Police and the City manager, requested that Council give
consideration to the grant of authorimation to the City Attorney's Office to
act as their defense counsel in said proceeding and accordingly, in the interest
of time and should Council desire to provide such authorization, a Resolution is
transmitted which will authorize such representation.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the report of the Assistant
City Attorney and offered the following Resolution:
(u20843) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Attorney to represent
certain members of the City*s Police Department in certain civil proceedings
brought against said officers, upon the said police officers' request for such
repreaeotatfon,
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book waft, page 58.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Huhard, Llsk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor ~ebber ....................
~AYS: None ...........O.
MELFARE DEPARTMENT: The City Auditor submitted a monthly Statement
of expenditures for public welfare for the month ended Uarch 31. 1973.
Dr. Taylor moved that the statement he received and filed. The notion
mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unaoimously adopted.
BUILDINGS-SpECIAL PERMITS: Council having referred to the City
Planning Commission and to the City Manager for study, report and recommendation
a communication from the Southwest Virginia Community Development Fund that
they be all,weed to encroach six inches on city property in front of u building
located at TaO Fairfax Avenue, N. W., for the purpose of iustallin9 a brick
veneer front, the City Planning Commission submitted the following report
recommending that the request be approved:
'April 19, 1973
The ~o=orable Roy L. ~ebber, mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered By the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of April lB,
1973.
Ms. Diana Harrington appeared before the Planning Com-
mission, stating that she worked for the Southwest Virginia
Community Development Fund and that because of the remodeling
of the former Roanoke Dairy, the would need permission from
City Council to encroach six inches onto City property in
order to brick the front of their building.
Br. Boynton asked if there had been any consideration
given to using some other material for the front of the
building that would encroach only one or two inches on City
property. Bm. tiarrington stated that they felt that a
brick front would be more in keeping with the exterior of
the building.
Sam McGhee, Assistant City Manager, appeared before the
Planning Commission and stated that the Engineering Department
had surveyed this property and found that the building already
is set tm, inches over into the City street right of way, but
because of an eight foot sidewalk at this location, he
stated that he felt the request should be granted for the
two inch encroachment presently there in addition to the six
inch encroachment to enable the Fund to brick the front of
the building.
'"192
The Planning Commission members asked if this encroach-
ment mould, in any uny. convey any property rights and if at
a future time the City found that they needed these eight
inches, would they have to buy the property back, Hr, RcGhee
answered that this would still be City omned property and
they mould be able to use it if the need did arise and the
City mould not have to bare the face of the building removed.
Accordingly, motion was made. duly seconded and unani-
mously approved recommending to City Council that this
request be approved.
Sincerely,
S/ l~enry fi. Doynton by Lg
Renry fl. Boynton
Chairman"
Mr. Trout moved that Council hold a public hearing on the request for
7:30 p.m., Tuesday, May 2g, 1973, in the Council Chamber. The motion man
seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Council having referred to the City Planning
Commission for study, report and recommendation the request of Ur. Janes D.
Apostolou, Attorney, representing Elias and Nota Apostolou that an unopened
alley running in an easterly direction from another existing alley between
Franklin Road and Luck Avenue, S. W., as shomn on Sheet 101 of the Appraisal
Map of the City of Roanoke be vacated, discontinued and closed, the City Planning
Commission submitted a written report recommending that the request be approved.
~r. Trout moved that Council hold a public hearing on the request to
vacate, discontinue and close the alley at 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, May 29, 1973, in
the Council Chamber. The motion was seconded by ~r. Thomas and unanimously
adopted.
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a written report in
connection with the request of Mr. Charles M. Dahl that property located on the
nest corner of Melrose Avenue and Country Club Drive, N. W., described as part
of Lots 3, 4 and 5 and all of Lots 6, ?, O, 9 and 10, Cavalier Park, Official
Tax No. 2660110, be rezoned from C-l, Office and Institutional District, to C-2,
Ceneral Commercial District, recommending that the request be denled.
Mr. Trout moved that action on the matter ~e deferred until the next
regular meeting of Council on Monday, April 30, 1973, in order for the petitioner
to determine mhether or not he desires a public hearing. The motion sas seconded
by ~r. Link and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a written report in
connection withthe request of Mr. Wu H. Fralin. Attorney, representing Mr. G.
Wayne Frails, that all property lying east of the centerline of Peters Creek of
a certain described 4.97 acre tract of land, being 2.733 acres, Official Tax No.
2770102, be rezoned from C-I, Office and Institutional District, to C-2, General
Commercial District, recommending that the request be approved.
Mr. Trout moved that a public hearts9 on the request for refusing be
held at ?:30 p.m., Tuesday, May 29, 1973, in the Council Chamber. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
BUSES: Mr. Robert A. Garland, Chairman of the Transportation Study
Committee, submitted a written report advising that in order for the City of
Roanoke to extend its contract math Roanoke City Lines, Incorporated, beyond
June 30° 1973, Roanoke City Lines must be notified by May 1, 1973, of the
intention of the city to do so and that an Ordinance has been prepared by the
City Attorney which extends the contract until September 30, 1973, at mhich
time the contract will expire.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the report of the Transporta-
tion Study Committee and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(:20044) A~ ORDINANCE exercising the City's right to extend the tern
of a certain contract with Roanoke City Lines, Inc., successor, et cetera, dated
August 1. 1951, last amended December 18, 1972 and December 26. 1972, for an
extended term commencing July 1. 1973, end ending September 30, 1973, relating to
public bus transportation; providing the City's agreement to pay to Roanoke City
Lines, Inc., the sum of $5.000.00 per month On the first day of each month of
the extended term; making this ordinance effective notice of such extension
and agreement; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~39, page 59.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion sas
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by thefollosing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carload, Rubavd. Lisk, Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Nebber .................... 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
SALE OF PROPERTY: Council having referred to the Real Estate Com-
mittee for study, report and recommendation a communication from Mr. Fred C.
Ellis. President, Truck Sales, Incorporated. requesting that Council consider
selling him city-owned property which is located in the 300 block of Carver
Avenue~' N. E., the Real Estate Committee submitted a written report advising
that when this time came before the Committee, the City Manager announced his
proposal as set forth in a report to Council dated April 23. 1973. whereby
he requests that the city purchase certain lands to the south of Sycamore
Avenue between Interstate Spur 581 on the west, Courtland Road on the east and
down to Carver Avenue which would involve the subject property, that in light
of this report to Council, the Committee recommends that the city retain the
land Mr. Ellis wishes to purchase and that the Committee considers it appro-
priate at this time to recommend to Council that it concur in the request of the
City Manager that the city purchase the necessary lands as outland by the City
Manager.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the report of the Real Estate
Committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
193
!94
SAlE OF PROPERTY: Council having referred to the Real Estate Committee
and to the City Manager for study, report and recommendatlo~ a communication from
Mr. J. Randolph Davis, one of the co-owners and attorney tn fact for all other
co-omners of a two foot strip of land. Official Tax No. 1231201, Estate of F. E.
Davis. in the vicinity of Maiden Lane, S. M., advising that this property has
been paved and is being used by the City of Roanoke, by residents of the Terrace
Apartments and by the general public as a part of the lane or street running
back from Raiden Lane to the cemetery and that under the present circumstances
he feels that the city should acquire the property from the owners ~nd pay a fair
and reasonable value therefor taking into consideration the taxes paid on it
in the past and the expense to be incurred in preparation of a necessary deed.
the Real Estate Committee submitted the following report in connection with
the matter:
"April 23, 1973
Honorable Rayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
A letter from Mr. J. Randolph Davis, one of the co-
owners and attorney in fact for all the other co-omners and
proposing to sell to the City a certain 2* strip of land.
was before the City Council at its meeting on Monday, larch
19. 1973. and was referred to the Real Estate Committee for
study and report.
The Engineering Office has a ~asena Corporation Map
dated 1917 showing this strip. Obviously, when land was
acquired for construction of the old Roanoke Apartments,
now Terrace Apartments, there existed and still exists this
2* wide strip of land running approximately 596* parallel
and adjacent to the east boundary of the apartment property
between Maiden Lane and the Cemetery and containing approxi-
mately 1192 square feet. Zhis strip being on the outside of
the curb would make it appear to be a part of the alley but
actually it is not. It is owned by the F. E. Davis Estate
and is Official Zax No. 1231201.
The Real Estate Committee has determined that acquisition
of this land is not necessary for the proper function of the
alley. But because this item has come up time and again and
Committee has agreed to recommend to the Council that the
City purchase this property for the sum of $10.00 and absorb
the delinquent taxes for the one year 1955.
The City Council's approval is invited with the
Respectfully submitted,
$/ David E. Lisk
David K. Lisk, Chairman"
In this connection, the Real Estate Committee submitted a supplemental
report with reference to the above report, further recommending, as an alternate
to all Of the above, that it be understood that the present clainnants of the
two foot strip of land continue to retain such title in the two foot strip of
land as they may now have but that the city, employing the procedures for cor-
rection of erroneous real estate tax as.sessments set Out in the lam, insure that
the strip of land be exonerated from current taxes and for those assessed within
the statutory period prior thereto and that such of those taxes as may hare been
paid for the current year and three years bach be ordered refunded to the record
owners of the lnnd.
Mr. Ernest #. Anderson, representing the co-owners of the property,
appeared before Council in their behalf, and advised that he does not feel that
the co-owners will be satisfied with this offer and that he feels it would be a
good will gesture for the city to acquire this two foot strip of land at a
reasonable fee.
Mr. Lish moved that Council concur in the supplemental recommendation
of the Real Estate Committee and that the matter be referred to the City
Attorney for preparation of the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Trout and unanimously adopted.
TAXES: Council having referred to the Revenue Study Commission for
study, report and recommendation the matter of imposing a service charge upon
owners of certain dwellings for police and fire protection and for the collec-
tion and disposal of refuse, the Revenue Study Commission submitted the follow-
ing report recommending the adoption of the Ordinance, Which would enact a
service charge to the maximum degree permitted by Section 56-16.2 of the Code
of Virginia:
"April 23, 1973
To the Members of City Council
SUBJECT: Service Charge under Section 5§-16.2 of the
Code of Virginia
The Revenue Study Commission was referred the ques-
tion of the adoption of a service charge upon the owners of
certain tax-exempt property for police and fire protection
and the collection and disposal of refuse. At your request,
the Commission has given careful study to this question and
recommends the adoption by Council of an ordinance which
would enact a service charge to the maximum degree permitted
by Section 58-16.2 (copy attached).
This statute, as amended in the 1973 General Assembly,
permits the city to impose and collect a service charge
upon the owners of real estate exempted under certain por-
tions of Section 58-12 of the Code of Virginia. Generally,
the service charge could be applied only to property owned
by the Commonwealth and by lodges and clubs. The service
charge is based on the assessed value of the real estate
and shall not exceed 20% of the real estate tax rate, the
precise amount to be fixed by dividing budgeted expendi-
tures of the city for police and fire protection and for
the collection and disposal of refuse by the total assessed
fair market value of all real estate including non-taxable
property.
The idea of the service charge is simply to provide a
fair and proportional assessment against such tax-exempt
agencies for the service which the city provides them in
the areas of police and fire protection and garbage collec-
tion, which presently must be borne by other citizens and
property owners of the city. Such service charges have
been enacted, according to our information, by Richmond,
Salem, and Stnunton, and are being considered by a number
of other cities, including Alexandria, Chesapeak, Covington,
Fredericksburg, Franklin, Newport News, Radford and Suffolk.
Me understand Richmond has recently amended its ordinance to
cover only state-owned property.
The 1973 amendment greatly narrowed the property #Rich
could be covered by a service charge, excluding hospitals,
195
196
YMCA, property of the Roy and Girl Scouts and most other
charitable groups.
Based on the most recent estimates, we would expect
the amount of the tox to be assessed to be approximately
$10,000.00, with over half coming from state-owned pro-
perty.
As you are aware, considerable opposition to this pro-
posal uss shown earlier by the director of one local hospi-
tal. The 1973 amendment would, as previously mentioned,
exclude hospitals from the charge in any event.
The Commission believes, even in the limited form mom
permitted, this service charge mould provide un equitable
charge to the Commonwealth and other owners of tax-exempt
property mhich mould be a fair means of recognizing a small
part of the contribution of city government to such agencies.
Council might also want to consider, if it enacts a
service charge, placing at the same time an informational
fair share assessment upon tax-exempt property mhlch cannot
be assessed the service charge under Section 5§-16.2.
A representative of the Roanoke Ministers Conference indicated
to the Commission that some churches might be interested in
making voluntary contributions on such a basis, although he
also indicated a great many mould be strongly opposed. The
Commission is of the opinion that a fair share assessment of
this type for informational purposes and to encourage a
voluntary contribution will be of limited effectiveness.
The Revenue Study Commission mill be 91ad to supply
any additional information which we have or to discuss this
matter with you if you desire. A copy of the Code section,
as recently amended, is enclosed.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ M. Vernon Ilicks
N. Vernon Hicks
Chairman*
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received and filed and referred to
1973-74 budget study. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously
adopted.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
BUDGET-TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEY: Mr. Bubard
pointed out that on April 2, 1973, Council referred to 1973-74 budget Study the
request of Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley for financial support,
that Council needs to give this matter prior study before the request is con-
sidered during budget study sessions, therefore, the City Manager has requested
that the City Planning Department study this request and submit recommendations
to the City Manager thereon, that some years ago, the Roanoke Valley Council of
Community Services prepared a report on TAP and its functions; whereupon, Mr.
Hubard moved that the Roanoke Valley Council of Community Services be requested
to update siad report and make any further recommendations it may have to the
City Manager forhis assistance ia making recommendations to Council during the
1973-74 budget deliberations. 7he motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously
adopted.
Mr, Hubard further moved that the Mayor be requested to appoint certain
members of Council or certain members of the city administration to sit with the
City Manager in an ad hoc committee capacity to review the report which is being
prepared by the City Planning Department. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout
and unanimously adopted.
Mayor lebber appointed Messrs. YJlllaw S. Hubard, James O. Trout
and the City Auditor as members of said ad hoc committee.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
AIRPORT: Ordinance No. 20827, awarding a contract for certain
advertising privileges to Creative Advertising to be exercised at Roanoke Munici
(Moodrum) Airport upon certain termsand provisions, on the basis of a certain
proposal made therefor, having previously been before Council for its first
reading, read and laid over, was again before the body, Mr. Trout offering
the following for its second reading and final adoption:
{u2082T) AN ORDINANCE awarding a contract for certain advertising
privileges to be exercised at Roanoke Municipal (Noodrun) Airport upon certain
terns and provisions, on the basis of a certain proposal made therefor;
and directing the execution of a requisite contract.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~38, page 40.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber ....................
NAYS: None .......... O.
BUILDINGS-STREETS AND ALLEYS: Ordinance No. 20829, permittin9 the
construction of a steel exit stairway on the north side of the Patrick Henry
Building, Official Tax No. 1013313, to encroach six feet over the south line
of the public alleyway leading westerly from Jefferson Street alongside said
building, upon certain terms and conditions, having previously been before
Council for its first reading, read and laid over, was again before the body,
Mr. Trout offering the following for its second reading and final adoption:
(~20029) AN ORDINANCE permitting the construction of a steel exit
stairway on the north side of the Patrick Henry Building, Official No. 1013313,
to encroach 5 feet over the south line Of the public alleyway leading westerly
Iron Jefferson Street alongside said building, upon certain terms and
conditions.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Hook :38. page 49.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion Mas
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................. 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
WATER DEPARTMENT: Mr, Trout moved that the following Ordinance
anendin9 Rules 22, 23 and 38 of Section 5 Rules and Regulations, of Chapter 1,
Water Department, Title llI, Water, of The Code of the City of Roanoke. 1956,
as amended, relating to the rules for the extension of water mains #ithin and
197
'.'1,98
without the city and to the extension of asian and sale of surplus utter outside
the corporate limits, be plsced upon its first reading:
(u2oo45) AN ORDINANCE smending Rules 22. 23 and 30 of Sec. 5. Rul~s ami
Rennin*ions,of Chip*er l, Water Denaetment, Title XII Water, of the Code of the
City of Roanoke, 19S6o as amended, relating to the rules for the extension of
water mains within and without the City and to the extension cf mains and sale of
surplus mater outside the corporate limits.
WHEREAS, the Council's Water Resources Committee has recommended that
certain Rules and Regulations for the operati?u of the City*s ua*er department be
amended nad reordained as hereinafter provided, in mhich recommendation the
Council concurs.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
Rule 22, Rule 23 and Rule 38, of Sec. 5. ~ules and Reaulations,Chapter 1, Water
Denartment. Title XII, Water, of the Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended,
be and said rules are amended and reordained to read and provide as follows:
EXTENSION OF MAINS
Rule 22. This rule shall govern the extension of the water department*s
mains in occupied and developed areas where there are no mater
mains in the streets and/or roaduays. The water department
will extend mater mains along the roads or streets in occupied
and developed areas within the city to serve new customers
~king ;wice trd~ established meter rates on the following
terms and conditions:
(a) The water department shall make an estimate of the cost
of the proposed extension, which shall include all labor and
material required, including valves, meters, booster stations,
stand pipes, and/or reconstruction of existing woter mains to
which the proposed extension will be connected, and shall fur-
ther include the water department*s usual charge for supervi-
sion, engineerlng, insurance, tool and accounting expense. If
the estimated cost of the extension for residential connection
is not greoter than two hundred dollars, the water department
will finance and make the extension.
(b) If the extension is for non-residential connections, the
water department will finance and make the extension providing
the construction cost is less than five tines the estimated
annual revenue to be derived from the sale of water. Such
estimate shall be based on the experience of the water depart-
ment from consumption of other customer's similarly situated.
If the estimated cost of the proposed extenstion exceeds
two hundred dollars per resldentiaI connection and/or five
times the estimated annual revenue from the sale of water for
non-residential connections, the applicant or applicants for
service shall make a deposit, subject to adjustment based on
final cost, with the water department the difference between
the estimated cost and the allowance as defined above made
by the Water Department.
The applicant mill pay for or construct the size line
required but in no case less than a two-inch in diameter
pipe.
(c) The customer or customers shall sign u satisfactory con-
tract 9uaranteeiflg to the mater department that they will take
water service at their premises within thirty days after the
water is turned into the main.
Rule 23. This rule shall govern the extension of the water department's
mains in territory which is unoccupied and/or not developed,
where there are no water mains in the streets and/or roadways.
The water department will extend its mains on the following
terms and conditions:
(a) The applicant for extension of mains shall pay to the water
department a sum of money which is equal to the estimated cost
of all the labor and materials required for the proposed
199
Rule 38.
extension, iaclading the water department*s usual charge
ing expenses, The sum so advanced by the applicant shell be
and accounting are conpletedo
(b) The water department mill refund to the applicant daring
the first rive yearn after the mater main is installed as
follows:
For each residential consumer taking service from said exten-
sion ander established meter rates and regular Yearly contract.
the sam of two hundred dollars.
For each non-residential consamer tahing service, a refund of
five times the first year*s revenae from the sale of water,
During the period of time that rereads are made to the appli-
cant, the water departmentmill collect and retain an availabi-
lity charge equal to the service connection charge for each
size service used that directly connects to the water line (s)
installed.
(c) The sum of the refunds made by the mater department shall
in no event exceed the original amount paid to the water depart-
ment.
(d) Extensions made under this rule shall be and remain
the property of the City.
(e) The water department reserves the right to further
extend all mains laid under this rule, and consumers con-
nected to such further extensions shall not entitle the
applicant paying for original extension to a refund for the
(f) Extensions made under this rule shall be of cast-iron
pipe not less than eight inches in diameter for main
arteries. If the water department desires to make the exten-
sion in the pipe larger than eight inches in diameter, or
larger than the size of pipe reasonably required in the judgment
of the water department for water service to the community
to be served, the additional cost due to the larger size of
pipe shall be borne by the water department.
(g) The water department will not he liable for any fur-
ther refunds after five years from date of application and
agreement made under this rule.
(h) The water department will not be liable for any further
refunds after five years fram date of application and agree-
ment made under this rule.
(i) Formal application and acceptance for extension of mains
under Rules 22 and 23 shall be entered into before any work can
be started.
SALE OF SURPLUS WATER TO PERSONS
OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS
This rule shall govern the terms and conditions pursuant to
which the city may sell or supply to persons, firms or
industries, residing or located outside of the city limits.
any surplus of water it may have over and above the amount
required to supply its own inhabitants.
(A) An application may be made by a person, firm or cor-
poration to the water department, for a permit to proceed
mith the design of a distribution system proposed to be con-
structed in the public ways, without the corporate limits
of the city, for the purpose of providing water service to
persons, firms or corporations that occupy structures that
may front on such public ways; it being contemplated that said
system may be connected to the city's distribution system.
The application shall contain a map or plan showing the
public ways, and it shall also disclose whether the area
proposed to be served by the planned distribution system is
to be residential, commercial and/or industrial.
(B) Upon receiving such an application, the manager of
the water department may cause a survey to be made of the
over-all economic condition presemed thereby and mhenever
and wherever such survey discloses that the construction of
a satisfactory system is both reasonable and feasible, said
manager may 9rant such permit, for and on behalf of the city.
20O
(C) Upon the grunting of such permit, the applicant may pro-
ceed with the preparation of requisite plums for mains to be
laid in accordance with the city's specifications and of suf-
ficient sizes to furnish adequate fire protection.. In no
instance, however, shall the size of uny main he less than
eight Inches normal inside diameter unless the Manager of the
mater department Jcdges that there will never he a need for
future connections and/or fire protection, in which case the
line will be sized by the mater department for actual need
but in no case less than two-inches normal inside diameter.
(O) Upon receipt of the application, with maps. plats, etc.,
of the area or property to be serviced, the mater department
mill design the facilities, then one of the follcming mlll
apply:
1, If it is projected that the cost of construction will
not exceed $200°00 per residential connection and/or tmn and
one half times the first year*s revenue from the sale of water
to non-residential connections and it is agreed that all of
the certain connections sot out in a proposal to the City to
be served will obtain service mithin 30 calendar days from
the completion of the construction, then:
(a) The City will construct the facility at no cost
to the developer or applicant, or
(b) The developer or applicant desiring the
service may have the facility constructed and conveyed
to the City and the City mill refund to the developer or
applicant the Sum of $200.00 per residential connection
and/or for non-residential connection, tm. and one half
tines the first year*s revenue from the sale of water for
each meter application. No refunds will be made in
excess of the construction costs.
2. If the estimated revenue as set forth in the pr.ced-
in9 paragraph I cannot be met for any certain connection (s)
under the proposal to the Uity to be served mithin 30 calendar
days from the completion of the project, the:
(a) The City will estimate the cost of construction and
revenue, require a deposit of the difference in advance
and construct the facility. Should the actual construc-
tion cost be less or 9renter than the estimated difference
between the estimated revenue and estimated construction
cost, that is the deposit, then the City will refund to
or bill additionally the difference to the developer or
applicant desiring the water service, or
(b) The procedure of method (l.b) above may apply.
3. Should the developer or applicant wish to take
advantage of any subsequent water connection in addition to
those he can ouaraotee within 30 calendar days Or not wish to
Guarantee any connections, then the developer or applicant
will construct the water facility at his expense and convey
it to the City. The City will refund to the developer or
applicant $200.00 per residential connection and/or tm. and
one half times the first year's revenue from the sale of water
to non-residential connections after each service, residential
or non-residential, has delivered mater for a period of 12
consecutive months, however, no such refunds will be made after
a period of five years nor will refunds be made in excess of
the original construction cost. The city will charge and
retain a non-refundable availability charge equal to the ser-
vice connection charge from each individual consumer desirin9
service during the period that refunds are being made to ~e
developer or applicant who installs the water line.
4. The City may consider the extension of facilities
into areas either undeveloped or areas that are already
developed hut served by a failing or insufficient water
system omned by someone or some agency other than the
City provided Generally that the City could reasonably
expect to recover all expenses of the initial construction
and/or improvements to the existin9 system to meet City
standards within a period of five years from the sale of
water and/or collecting service availability charges. In
such instance the City mould charge a non-refundable availability
the existing system being improved until the entire initial
construction cost is recovered. No such availability charge
g
S. (a) The sine and quality of each proposed distriba£
tiaa system extension will be set by the City Mater Department
to meet the needs of the developer or applicant and fire protectio~
either proposed or In the future, however no water lines less
than eight Inches in diameter will be installed in open end
streets or highways. Should the City, rot projected future
needs, require facilities larger in sine than needed or
eight inches in diameter, whichever is larger, then the City
will bear the increased cost over and above that which mould
have been required for the developer or applicant.
(b) Should pumping facilities be required, the appli-
cant or developer will construct all such facilities according
to plans approved by the City Mater Department. These facilities
will be sizedfor the actual development, or for 100 con~eotions
whichever is greater in the case of residential developments
or for actual anticipated consumption and fire protection in
the case of non-residential developments. When the City
requires increased pumping station facilities Which result in
an increased cost, the City will reimburse the developer for
those increased costs. The developer*s actual cost will be
considered as a part of the overall mater system development
for refund purposes.
(E) Under no circumstances shall construction be commenced
until the applicant shall have executed an agreement embodying,
among others, terms and conditions substantially as follows:
1. That the City agrees to furnish prospective customers,
residing or located without its corporate limits, only water
from its surplus supply and should the City, in council*s sole
judgment, subsequently have insufficient treated water to
fill all requirements of its own inhabitants, the right is
reserved to discontinue the delivery of water to the distri-
bution system to be installed.
2* That the entire distribution system, including all
mains, valves, hydrant laterals, services, meter box settings.
requisite permanent easements, lands and all other appurtenances
thereunto belonging are and shall be vested in the city, in
fee simple, free and clear of all encumbrances whatsoever.
3. That valved hydrant laterals shall be installed at
be installed.
The water department may install a fire hydrant on any
such lateral upon the written application of the board of
supervisors of the county in which said lateral Js located
and such board*s agreement therein to pay, in advance, the
installation and annual fanta! charge provided in Part
of section 6 of this chapter.
(F) Except where it may be otherwise provided by special
contract, and except for the sale of surplus water made to
other incorporated municipalities pursuant to Rule 39 hereof,
the schedule of rates for surplus water supplied consumers
residing or located without the city limits shall be one
hundred per cent greater than those charged customers residing
or located within the city for like services; provided, however,
that each such individual consumer who shall use 450,000 cubic
feet, or more, of water during a calendar month shall be
charged and shall pay to the city a sum equal to $0.20 for
each one hundred cubic feet of water so used during such
month, and the schedule of charges set out in Parts A and
of section b. folloming, shall not apply to such consumer.
(C) The water department shall accept the applications
for water service of persons, firms and corporations occupying
structures, without the city llnits, that may front on a public
way in which an existing city main is located; provided,
such applicants shall first pay the applicable service charges
as set forth in Rule 7.
(H) Ail applications for the purchase of water made by
persons, firms or corporations, residing or located without the
city limits, shall contain a provision to the general effect
as follows:
This is an application to purchase water from any surplusof
water the City of Roanoke may have over and above the amount
·201
202
required to supply its gun inhabitants and the applicant fully
and clearly understaods that the city reserves the right to
discontinue to sell the applicant uater at any time mhen, in
couacfl*a fuze Judgment, tab city may bare ieaufricJent
treated mater to fill all requirements of Its oma inhabitants.
(I) Any person, firm or corporation, residing or located in
any area beyond the corporate limits and served by inadequate
city mains may Bake application for improvements pursuant
to the provisions of this rule, and such application shall be
considered and treated as though no service nas being supplied
in such area.
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion mas seconded
by Mr, Lisk and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Yessrs. Garland, Rubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Bayor
Webber ........................T.
NAYS: None ......... O.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
COUNCIL: Mayor Nebber expressed appreciation to WBRA-TV for their
coverage of the meekly Council meetings.
COUNCIL-SALE OF PROPERTY: Mr. Lisk moved that Council meet in Executive
Session to discuss a real estate matter. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout
and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Ressrs. Garland, Hubard. Llsko Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber ..................
~AYS: None ........... O.
WATER DEPARTMENT: Mr. Thomas advised that Council met with the Roanoke
County Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, Aprfl lO, 1973. in reference to the sale
of bulk water to Roanoke County, that there was one area of possible future dis-
cussion that Council may want to delegate to the Mater Resources Committee and
moved that the Water Resources Committee be permitted to contact the Roanoke County
Board of Supervisors to ascertain if they desire future meetings to discuss the
matter of a possible contract between the City of Roanoke and the County of
Roanoke for further extensions under the current policy of the City of Roanoke.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
ROANOKE VALLEY REGIONAL CORRECTIONS FACILITY-ALCOHOL: Mr. Ltsk moved
that the City of Roanoke Jail Study Committee be requested to confer with gr.
Richard H. Freemen, representing the Roanoke Valley Mental Health Services Hoard,
to ascertain Mhat Council needs to do to work out some cooperation agreement in
reference to a detoxification center for the City of Roanoke. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Ie this eonoectiou, Mrs. Bortense W. Ruddick, Executive Secretary, Roanoke
Valley Mental Health Services Board. appeared before Council and requested that
Council adopt a Resolution which will support the establishment of a detoxiftca-
tion center in the City of Roanoke.
Mr. Trout moved that the request be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and
ncanimously adopted.
MayOr Mebber then requested the* Mrs. Ruddick put her request in uritiag and
foruard it to the City Clerk in order rot the Clerh to trnnsmit said information
to the City Attorney for his information in connection uith the preparation of
such a measure.
SCNOOLS: Hr. Lisk moved that Council neet in Executive Session to
discuss a Roanoke City School Board appointment, The motion nas seconded by
Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Nessrs. Garland, Hnbard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor ~ebber .................... ?.
NAYS: None ...........O.
Later during the meeting and after the Executive Session, Mr. Lisk
moved that the appointment be referred to Council acting as a Committee of the
Nhole for further discussion. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Trout and
unanimously adopted.
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: Council having previously deferred action
on making appointments to the Fair Housing Board, the matter mas before the
body.
Mr. Thomas moved that the appointments be discussed in Executive Ses-
sion. The motion mas seconded by Or. Taylor and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................... 7.
NAYS: None ..........O.
JUVENILE AND DOMESTIC RELATIONS COURT-POLICE DEPARTMENT: Mayor Mebber
called to the attention of Council that the three year terms of Messrs. David
K. Lisk, Leighton H. Haley and Mrs. A. B. Camper and the two year terms of Mr.
Charles S. Perkins, Jr., and Mrs. Priscilla Tarplee as members of the Youth
Commission will expire on April 30, 1973, and called for nominations to fill
the vacancies.
Mr. Lisk placed in nomination the names of Mr. David K. Lisk, Mr.
Leighton H. Haley, Mrs. A. B. Camper, Mr. Charles S. Perkins, Jr.. and Mrs.
Priscilla Tarplee.
There being no further nominations, Mr. David K. Lisk, Mr. Leighton
H. Haley and Mrs. A. B. Camper were reelected as members of the Youth Commis-
sion for terms of three years ending April 30, 1976, and Mr. Charles S. Perkins,
Jr.,.and Mrs. Priscilla Tarplee mere reelected as members of the Youth Com-
mission for terms of two years each ending April 30, 1975, by the following
vote:
FOR MR. LISK: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber ...............................................................b. (Mi
FOR MR. HALEY, MRS. CAMPER, MR. PERKINS AND MRS. TARPLEE: Messrs.
Garland, Nubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor Webber ..............?.
203
Lisk not vo~
-204
At this point, Mayor Yebber declared n brief recess in order for the
members of Council to discuss appointments to the Fair Housing Board in Execu-
tive Session,
At 3:45 p.m** Council reconvened with Hayor Mebher presiding.
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: Br. Taylor placed la nomination the following
names us members of the Fair HouSing Board:
Mr. Joseph M. Francis - three year term
Mrs, Vernice J. Law - three year term
Mr. Robert H. flurcbfleld - two year term
Reverend Metz T. Coker - two year term
Mr. L. G. Leftwich - one year term
Mrs. Mabel N. Marmion - one year term
Mr. Clark M, Thomas - one year term
There being no further nominations, Mr. Joseph M. Francis was elected
as a member of the Fair Housing Board for a term Of three years ending March 31.
1976; Mrs. Vernice J. Law was elected as a member of the Fair Housing Board for
a term of three years ending March 31, 1976; Mr. Robert R. Burchfield was elected
as a member of the Fair Housing Hoard for a term of two years ending March 31,
1975; the Reverend Metz T. Coker was elected as a member of the Fair Housing
Board for a term Of t¥o years ending March 31, 1q75; Mr. L, G. Leftwich was
elected as a member of the Fair Housin~ Board for a term of one year efldtu~
March 31, 197~; Hrs. Hable N. Marmion was elected as a member of the Fair Housin~
8nard for a term of one year ending March 31, 1974; and ~r. Clark M. Thomas mas
March 31, 1974, by the following vote:
FOR MR. FRANCIS, MRS. LA~, MR. BURCHFIELD, REVEREND COKER, ~R. LE~MICH,
MRS. MARMION AND MR. THOMAS: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
a~d ~ayor Webber .................... 7.
There beia9 no further business, gayor ~ebber declared the ~eetin9
adjourned.
A P PR O ~E ~
AT~EST: ~~
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
2O5
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday, April 30, ~973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, April 30, 1973, at 7:30
p~m., the regular meeting ~our, with Mayor Roy Lo #ebber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, Milliam B. Huhard, David
Lish, Noel C. Taylor, Hampton W. Thomas, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L.
Webber .............................. ?.
ABSENT: None .............O.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Byron E. Hauero City Manager; Mr. Samuel
McGhee, III, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Kincanon, City Attorney;
Mr. H. Ben Jones, Jr,, Assistant City Attorney; and Mr. A. N. Gibson, City
Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend
Robert E. Houff, Pastor, Summerdean Church of the Brethren.
MINU~ES: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday,
April 23, 1973, having been furnished each member of Council, on motion of
Mr. Thomas, seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof
was dispensed with and the minutes approved as recorded.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
STREETS AND ALLEYS-STATE HIGHWAYS: Council having set a public
hearing for 7:30 p.m., Monday, April 30, 1973, on the application of Mr.
S. Douglas Shacklefurd, et ex., to amend portions of · e Major Arterial High-
way Plan for the City of Roanoke, dated December 1963, and of the Roanoke
Valley Area Thoroughfare Plan (1985) dated Igbg so that the proposed relocation
of Moods Avenue, S. W., at its intersection with Franklin Road, S. M., be
relocated by slightly shifting said intersection in a northerly direction, the
matter was before the body.
In this connection, Dr. Moffett H. Bowman appeared before Council in
support of the original plan as submitted by the State Highway Department con-
cernin9 the wideniu9 of Franklin Road at Moods Avenue, S. M., advisin9 that
the first proposal would take all of the southwest corner property, the
second proposal would take all but a triangular shaped piece of property about
fourty-five feet on the back and fronting approximately four feet on Franklin
Road which would leave hardly enough land for practical purposes, pointing
out the first proposal would allow WoodsAvenut to intersect Franklin Road
at right angles, that the second proposal would perpetuate an acute angle
intersection on the west side and develop an acute intersection on the east
side, that the second proposal would eliminate his building which is architec-
turally sound and has been in use for sixty-eight years, that his building has
produced considerable revenue to the city in real estate taxes and utility
taxes, and further pointing Out that Mr. Chackleford does not llve in the City
of Roanoke and contributes very little to the economy of the city and that
206
the consideration of Council in this tatter alii be greatly appreciated.
Mr. E. Griffith Dodson, Jr** Attorney, representing Mr. and Mrs.
Sbsckleford, appeared before Council in support Of the request of his clients.
After a discussion of the tatter, Mr. LJsk offered the follomiog
Resolution approving and adopting a certain revision and amendment of a portion
of the Major Arterial High.ay Plan for the City of Roanoke dated December
and approved by Council by Resolution No. 16274, adopted February 15, 1965,
and a similar revision and amendment of the Roanoke Valley Area Thoroughfare
Plan (1@85), dated 1969, and approved by Council by Resolution No. 206?6, adopted
January 29, 1973, so that the proposed relocation of Moods Avenue at its
intersection with Franklin Road, S. W** be relocated by slightly shifting said
intersection in a northerly direction:
(~2094T) A RESOLUTION approving and adopting a certain revision and
amendment of a portion of the Major Arterial Highway Plan for the City of
Roanoke, dated December, 1963, and approved by the Council by Resolution No.
162T4, adopted February 15, 1965, and a similar revision and amendment of the
Roanoke Valley Area Thoroughfare Plan (1985), dated 1969. and approved by the
Council by Resolution No. 20676° adopted January 29, 1973.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book ~Sa, page 66.)
Mr. Thomas moved that Resolution No. 20047 be amended to delete the
folloeing words in the third paragraph:
*have recommended that said application be granted and approved.'
The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Lisk then moved the adoption of the amended Resolution. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Bubard and adopted by the following vote:
AVES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber ..................7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Councll having set npublic hearing for 7:30
p.m., Monday, April SO , 19T$, on the request of Reliance Equipment Corporation
that a certain fifteen foot alley running generally east-west through Block 11,
Map Of Hyde Park Land Company, from 15th Street, N. W., to 16th Street. N.
be vacated, discontinued and closed, the matter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the folios-
lng report recommending that the request be granted:
#March B, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request tas considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of March T,
1973.
2O7
#r. Kinder, attorney for the.petitioner, appeared
before the Planning Commission'and stated that the peti-
tioners would lite to have this alley closed, pointing
out that an alley one block up has already been vacated.
Mr. Crabtree, of Reliance Equipment Corporation,
appeared before the Planning Commission and stated that
hit company, in particular, manta the alley closed and that
the remaining property owners have also Joined in this
petition. He farther noted that his company owns two
lots on Dhenandoab Avenue and the two lots directly behind
the alley on Centre Avenue.
Mr. Crabtree pointed out that they would like to close
the alley in order to fence in the property because of the
increased number of break-ins, 20 or 25 in recent months,
and to stop vandalism. He noted that the closing of this
alley would also eliminate a traffic hazard on Shenandoah
Avenue since tractor trailer trucks block Shenandoah
Avenue for as long as 10 minutes at times. Finally, he
stated that there were no present plans to connect the two
buildings across the alley but that the company*s property
would be fenced.
Mr. Boynton asked Mr. Crabtree how he planned to
cope with the drainage coming from the upper lots and onto
his property. Mr. Crabtree answered that they did have a
drainage problem on 16th Street but that he hoped it would
be corrected soon.
After some discussion by the Planning Commission members,
they generally expressed approval to this alley closure.
noting, in particular, that the sanitary sewer easement
running through the alley needed to be reserved.
Accordingly motion was made, duly seconded and
approved unanimously recommending to City Council that
this fifteen foot alley running generally east-west through
Block 11, Map of Hyde Park Land Company, from lSth Street.
N. W., to 16th Street, N. N., be permanently vacated,
discontinued and closed.
S! Henry B. Roynton by LM
City Planning Commission"
The viewers appointed to vies the alley submitted a written report
advising that they have viewed said alley and the surrounding property and are
unanimously of the opinion that no inconvenience would result to any individual
or to the public from vacating, discontinuing and closing said alley.
Mr. Trout then moved that the following Ordinance be placed upon
its first reading:
(~20848) AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and
closing a certain fifteen-foot alley running generally East-West through Block
11 of Hyde Park Land Company, from 15th Street. N. W., to 16th Street. N. W.
WHEREAS. Reliance Equipment Corporation, Estate of Clyde S. Fulton,
Charles W. Garlick. Grace M. Garlick. James E. Garlick and Robert W. Garlick
have heretofore filed their petition before the Council of the City of Roanoke.
Virginia, in accordance with law, requesting the Council to permanently vacate,
after described, the filing of which petition due notice was given to the public
as required by lam; and
WHEREAS. in accordance with the prayers of said petition, viewers
were appointed by the Council on the 20th day of February. 1973, to view the
property and to report in writing wkether in their opinion any inconvenience
208
would result from permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing amid alley;
und
MHEREAS, it appears from the written report of the viewers filed with
the City Clerk that no inconvenience mould result to uny individual or the public
from permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing said alley; and
MHER£AS, Council at Its meeting on February 20, 1973, referred the
petition to the City Planning Commission, which Commission in its report before
Council on March 12, 1973, recommended that the request to close the said alley,
as hereinafter described, be granted, subject to the retention by the City of any
utility easements; and
MHEREAS, a public hearing was held on the question before the Council
at its regular meeting on April 30, 1973, after due and timely notice thereof
published in The Roanoke Morld-News, at which hearing all parties in interest
and citizens were afforded an opportunity to be heard on the question; and
MHER£AS, from all of the foregoing, Council considers that no incon-
venience will result to any individual or to the public frnm permanently vacating,
discontinuing and closing the said alley, aa applied for by the petitioners, sub-
ject to the retention by the City of any public utility easements, and that,
accordingly, said alley should be permanently closed.
THEREFORE, fie IT ORHAIN£D by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
all of that fifteen foot alley running generally East-West through Hlock 11,
Hyde Park Land Company, from 15th Street, No W., to 16th Street, ~. M., in the
City of Roanoke, Virginia, more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at a point on the westerly side of 1Sth Street,
N. W., said point being the northeasterly corner of Lot
B, Block 11, Nap of Byde Park Land Company; thence in a
general northerly direction 15 feet, more or less, to a
point on the westerly side of 15th Street, N. W., said
point being the southeasterly corner of Lot 16, Block 11,
Map of Hyde Park Land Company; thence in a general westerly
direction 400 feet, more Or less, to a point on the
easterly side of 16th Street, N. W., said point being the
southwesterly corner of Lot 9, Block 11, Map of Hyde Park
Land Company; thence in a general southerly direction 15
feet, more or less, to a point on the easterly side of
16th Street, ~. W., said point being the northwesterly
corner of Lot 1, Block 11, Rap of Hyde Park Land Company;
thence in a 9eneral easterly direction 400 feet, more or
less, to the PLACE OF H£HINNIHH; and
BEING all of that alley running generally east-wear
through Block 11, Map of Hyde Park Land Company, from
15th Street, N. W., to 16th Street, ~. W.
be, and it hereby is, permanently vacated, discontinued and closed; and all
right, titleand interest of the City of Roanoke and of the public in and to the
same be, and they hereby are, released insofar aa the Council of the City of
Roanoke is empowered so to do, except that any public utility easements
located therein are hereby reserved by the City.
~E XT FURTHER ORDAINED that the City Engineer be, and he hereby is,
directed to mark "permanently vacated* on said alley on all maps and plats on
file in his office on which said alley ia shown, referring to the book and page
of Ordinances and Resolution of the Council of the City of Roanoke wherein this
Ordinance shall be spread.
(I
HE IT FURTHER ORDAINEO that the Clerk of the Council deliver to the
Clerk of the Hustings Court for the City of Roanoke, Virginia, a certified
copy of this Ordinance la order that the Clerk of said court may make proper
notation on all maps or plats recorded in his office upon which ere shown said
alley, as provided by law, and that, If so requested by any party la Interest,
he may record the same in the deed book in his office, indexing the same in
the name or the City of Roanoke as grantor and in the name of any party in
interest who may request it as grantee.
The motion uss seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following
vote:
AVES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link. Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Rayor Webber ...................... 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
ZONING: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m., Monday,
April 30, 1973, on the proposals of the City Planning Commission that Council
amend Section 7o RG-I and aG-R, General Residential Districts. regulations
of Chapter 4.1, Zoning, Title XVo Construction, Alteration and Use of Land,
Buildings and Other Structures of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as
amended, by providing criteria for allowance of art galleries in said districts
au an additional special exception after public notice and hearings by the
Hoard of Zoning Appeals; and, further, on the question of amending Section 79.1,
Interpretation of certain terms 3nd words, aY said chapter and title by
providin9 a definition of the term "AFt Galley,# the matter was before the
body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the
following report recommending that Section 7 of the Zoning Ordinance be amended
so as to provide for art galleries as a special exception in the RG-1 and RG-2,
General Residential Districts, and that the structure conform with the geneFul
character of the area and that one parking space for each 400 square feet of
floor area be required:
"Barch 8, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
This recommendation by the Planning Commission per-
taining to art galleries as a special exception in the
apartment districts hod its origin as a renaming peti-
tion: Mr. Coulter. attorney representing Mr. and Mrs.
James W. Veatts and Mr. Jo Rorgau Anderson. had originally
petitioned that the properties located at 364-366 and
360-362 Walnut Avenue, 5o W., be rezoned from RG-2 to
C-1 to permit Mr. Yeatts to use his property as an art
gallery and Rt. Anderson to use his propert7 to house a
mortgage investment company. This rezoning matter was
considered by the Planning Commission on numerous occa-
sions with much opposition expressed by the local resi-
dents in the area. Much of the opposition centered on the
C-I rezoning per se as opposed to the art gallery use with
the fear expressed by the residents that a C-1 rezonlng
would open up the entire area to a multitude of commercial
uses.
'209
210
After much discussion by the Planning Commission
members with Mr. Mennetto ottoreey represeetlng the
neighbors in the.oreo, it uasngreed that the best course
of action mould be to permit art gollerles in optrtment
districts ns n special exception uith conditions ottoched
thereto to preserve the essential integrity of the area.
This then would not necessitate ony retorting action nad
mould meet with tho satisfaction or the residents.
It mas ogreed by the Planning Commission members that
art galleries ore o compatible use in spartment districts,
Homevero it mas felt essential that the structure conform
with the general character of the area and that suitable
parhing requirements he delineated.
Accordingly, motion mas made, duly seconded and
approved unanimously that Section ? of the Zoning Ordinance
be amended so as to provide for art galleries ns a special
exception in the RO-I and RG-2 apartment districts and
that the structure conform mOth the general character of
the area nnd that I parhiog space for each 400 square feet
of floor area be required.
Sincerely yours,
S/ Henry 8. Boynton by LM
Henry D. Boynton. Chairman
City Planning Commission*
The City Planning Commission also submitted the following report
providing for the definition of *art gallery*:
*March 6, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Mebber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On March 7. 1973, this matter was considered by the
City Planning Commission and relates to the question
before Council today of permitting art galleries as a
special exception An apartment districts. It was agreed
by all the members of the Planning Commission that
an appropriate definition for an art gallery needs to be
delineated and incorporated into the Zoning Ordinance
and that this definition be so constructed as to insure
that the art gallery not he used for such purposes as
may be detrimental to the character and quality of the
area.
After discussion by the Planning Commission members,
it was generally agreed that the definition of the term
"art gallery* be so worded that no art supplies, equip-
ment or accessories may be permitted to be sold on the
premises.
Accordingly. motion was made, duly seconded and
unanimously approved recommending to City Council that
they incorporate into the Zoning Ordinance under Article
X¥I. Definitions, the following definition of an *art
gallery":
Art Gallery - A place or establishment arranged
for the display and exhibition of works of art and
for their sale, by one or mote artists; provided
that no art supplies, equipment, or accessories
may be sold or offered for sale other than wltb
the works of art.
Sincerely yours,
S/ Henry B. Boynton by LM
Henry B. Boynton, Chairman
City Planning Commission"
Wa one appearing in opposition to the requested amendments, Hr.
Lisk moved tbat the folloulng Ordinance amending the paragraph entitled Special
exceptions after public notice end hearing by the Board of Zoning Appeals of
Sec. 7, RG-I and RG-2, General Residential Districts, of Chapter 4.1o Zoning,
of Title X¥, Construction, Alteration and Ute of Land, Buildings and Olher
Structures, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 19Sb, as amended, by the
addition of a new subsection, to be designated Subsection 9, Art Galleries,
providing criteria for allowance of art galleries in the aforesaid districts
as an additional special exception; and unending Sec. 79.11nterprelation
of certain terms and words, of said chapter and title by the addition of a
new subsectiou, to be designated 0.1, Art Gallery, and providing for a definition
of such term, be placed upon its first reading:
(~2GR49) AR ORDINANC£ amending the paragraph entitled Suecial
exceptions after uublic notice and hearinu by the Board of Zoninn Aouealq Of
Sec. ?. RG-I and RG-2. General Residential Dimtri~, of Chapter 4.1. Zonin~
of Title X¥. Construction. Alt~rntion and Use of Land. Buildings and Other
Structures, of the Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, by the
addition of a new subsection, to be designated Subsection 9. Art Galleries,
providing criteria for allowance of art galleries ia the aforesaid districts as
au additional special exception; and amending Sec. ?g.I. Ynt~r.retation of
certain terns and ~ords, of said chapter and title by the addition of a new
subsection, to be designated 8.I. Art Gallery, providing a definition of such
term.
~HEREAS. the City Planning Commission by report dated Batch Bo
1973, has recommended that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of
Roanoke be amended by makin9 provision for art galleries in general residential
districts, as a special exception and with certain criteria and standards to
be met before such special exception be granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals,
and bas further recommended that a definition o£ such aft galleries be pro-
vided in said Zoning Ordinance; and the Council concurs in such recommendation;
and
~U£REAS, a public hearing on said proposals was held before the
Council at its meeting on April ~0, 1973, after due and timely notice, at
which hearjn9 all citizens and parties were afforded an opportunlt~ to be heard
on the proposals.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke
that that paragraph entitled Suecial excentions after uublic notice and hearino
by the Board of Zgnjno Anneals of Sec. 7. RG-I and RG-2. General Residential
Districts, of Chapter 4.1, Zonina, Title X¥, Construction. Alteration and Use
of Land. Buildinos and Other Structures, be amended by the addit~n of a new
subsection, to be designated Subsection 9. Art aalleries, to read and provide as
follows:
;211
212
9. Art galleries, provided that such structures conform
with the general character of the area and provided that
at least one off-street parking space be provided for each
fou~ hundred square feet of floor spacb in any such art
gallery.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that Sec. 79.1. lflteroretation of
certain terms and words~ of said chapter and title be amended by the addition
of a new subsection, to be numbered O.Ie to read and provide as follows:
0.1. Art Gallery.
A place or establishment arranged for the display and
exhibition of works of art and for their sale, by one
or more artists; provided that no art supplies, equip-
ment, or accessories are or may be sold or offered for
sole other than with the works of art.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Yrout and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Ressrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk. Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Wayor Webber ...................... 7.
NAYS: Nooe ...........O.
ROANOKE VALLEY: Council having set a public hearing for ?:30 p.m..
Ronday. April 30. 197~, in connection with the question of adoption of a Resolution
prohibiting, for a period of ninety days, the issuance of building permits for
all construction in those areas of the city defined as lying within the inter-
mediate regional flood plain as shown on the several maps and studies of Flood
Plain Information made by the O. S. Army Corps of Engineers, except such
construction as may be ordered by Council, the matter was before tbe body,
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted a
written report recommending the adoption of interim flood control regulations
providing for City Planning Commission review, deliberation and such necessary
recommendations of all site plans pertaining to development in the flood plain
area (as delineated by the Corps of Engineers Intermediate Regional Flood Category)
prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Mr. Henry B. Ooynton, Chairman of the City Planning Commission,
appeared before Council and advised that the request of the City Planning Con-
mission is an interim action and that the Commission needs ninety days to com-
plete their study of the flood control management plan for the City of Roanoke.
Mr. Vincent S. Wheeler appeared before Council in opposition to the
ninety day moratorium recommended by the City Planning Commission and expressed
the opinion that the adoption of this ninety day moratorium would be the worst
thing Council could do for the City of Roanoke and that all the city-needs to do
is to allow for more dams and dredging.
Mr. F, B. Hopkins appeared before Council and advised that the last
flood in the Roanoke Valley occured on June 21, 1972, that to date nothing has
been done in the way of flood control measures, and that he is more concerned
about dredging, dikin9 or possible small dams to prevent the occurrence of
future floods.
213
Mr. Jesse Thompson appeared before Council and advised that it
would be far better to provide for some type of flood lnsoraace for people who
build in the flood plain areas.
Mr. James H. Stamper, Deputy Directoro Total Action Against Poverty
in Roanoke Valley, appeared before Council and presented a written communica-
tion advising that the Corps of Engineers apparently is not as precise in
definition of our local fllod plains as many of us had believed, that the
Community Housing Corporation is working to provide 164 units of housing for
families mud elderly persons of low and moderate income on three sites in the
City of Roanoke, that TAP organized that corporation and has been responsible
for providing staff support to its efforts, that last year the project
received its Letter of Feasibility from HUD for '236" federal assisatnce, that
one of the sites would have been the block bounded by London and Gilmer Avenues
and 6th and 7th Streets, H. N., that as TAP worked to obtain from HUD the
"conditional commitment" for the mortgage, federal officials, confused by hems-
paper accounts of problems mith the State Hater Control Board. raised questions
about seNerage flomiflg into Trout Run, that when TAP cleared up the semerage
question, HUD began to raise questions about flooding along Trout Run. that
TAP had checked tgo books of Flood Plain lnfor~atioq prepared by the Corps Of
Engineers for Roanoke. one for the Roanoke River and the other for Peters Creek
and Lick Run., before TAP even connJdered the site, that TAP found no indication
of flooding problems, that when HUD raised the question. TAP checked ~ith
representatives of the City Planning Department, the Fifth Planning District
Commission. residents who lived in the neighborhood during the 1940 flood
and persons who had seen the site during the Agnes flood last year. that no
one could find any documentation or memories which would suggest that 6th
Street and Gilmer Avenue are in a flood plain, that TAP was required to have
a surveyor collect data shich, after much delay. HUD submitted to the Corps of
Engineers, that after much more delay, the Corps of Engineers decided there is a
possible "hundred year flood plain" which could mean water six feet deep at 6th
Street aod Moorman Road, ~. g., that as far as he can understand, each stream
is considered as if the others do not exist and there apparently is no compre-
hensive ur precise definition of all the local flood plains, that in the CiviI
Defense Hoom there is a map ~hich shoms mhere the water actually went during the
Hurricane Agnes flood, that if Council decides to adopt a policy concerning
flood plains, he would suggest that the affected areas might best be defined
beginning with the data on that map and that the main thing would he to have
whatever is used be fairly unambiguous.
After a lengthly discussion of the matter, Hr. Thomas offered the
following Resolution prohibiting the issuance of building permits for all con-
struction in those areas of the city defined as lying sithin the intermediate
regional flood plain as shown on the several maps and studies of Flood Plain
Information made by the U. So Army Corps of Engineers, except such construction
as may be ordered by Council
214
(n20850) A RESOLtrflOM prohibiting the issuance of building permits
for nil construction in those areas or the City defined as lying within the
intermediate regional flood plain as shomn on the several maps end stndies of
Flood Plain Information made by the Ro S. Army Corps or Engineers, except such
construction as may be ordered by the Council.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book a38. page 67.)
Mr, Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Mesarso Garland, Rubardo Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ......................
MAYS: Mane ........... O.
Mr. Garland then moved that Resolution Mo. 20RSO be in effect for a
meriod of ninety days from May 1, 1973, The motion was seconded by Br. Taylor
and unanimously adopted.
Rr. Thomas then moved that Mayor Webber be authorized to appoint a
committee to contact the other affected governing bodies to get a consensus of
feeling as to measures that may be taken to dredge existing streams, reconsider
dam proposals and suggest other matters as may coordinate relief in these
affected areas. The motion was seconded by Mr. Llsk and unanimously adopted.
SCHOOLS: Mr. A. Byron Smith, President, Jefferson Senior High
School P. T. A., appeared before Council and advised that ia March of this year
the school administration recommended to the Roanoke City School Board that
Jefferson Senior High School be closed as a high school at the end of the 1974-75
school year or as soon thereafter as an additionaI unit at another hi9h school
could be completed, that this action was passed by the School Board without
any public participation in a rather quick fashion, that in contrast, the State
Committee for Quality Education feels very strongly that parents are an invaluable
ingredient in a quality education program and insist that parents be included
in the program at each school, however, the Iocal School Board made its decision
without consultation with the parents and mith a bit of haste, that the Jefferson
Senior High School P. T. A, is in opposition to this proposal in the guise of
quality education and in the guise of a savings or reduced costs, therefore, the
Jefferson High School P. T. A. is requesting that Council place a moratorium on
the allocation of funds for building any additions to the other schools until
the Jefferson High School P. T. A. has made a full report to the School Board
about their findings, that this report ~ill point out many or nearly all of the
discrepancies and distortions of the proposal for raising the quality of education
report submitted to the School Board by the school administration ia Rarch, 1973,
that this report should be ready during October, 1973, and that the basis for
this action is:
1. Approximately 80% of all high schools in Virginia are
smaller than Jefferson.
2. There are 25 or more extra curricular nctivitea at
Jefferson, which provides leadership nnd opportunities
rot active porticlpntlon for hundreds of students.
Most of this would be~lost J! Jefferson is alloued to be
destroyed ns n high school.
3. Nenrly one million dollars has been spent in recent
months nt Jefferson ns n high school.
4. The reluctance of the School Board to be responsible
to parents end citizens.
$. That the P. T. A. feels thnt the administration and/or
the School Board has forbidden teachers to discuss this
decision.
This would greatly increase the bussing population
of students.
Mr. Lisk moved that the matter be referred to 1973-74 budget study
and that hopefully during the budget study deliberations, the Roanoke Uit!
School Board will furnish Council with an indepth report on the action it
has taken with regard to closing Jefferson Senior High School. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and ~nanimously adopted.
ZONING: Mr. Leonard F. Anglin appeared before Council and pre-
sented a written communication requesting special permission from Council
to continue remodeling a residence owned by him at 1306 Patterson Avenue. S.
since this is a non-conforming use under the C-2. General Commercial District,
zoning regulations.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be referred to the City
~anager for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was
seconded by ~r. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
STREETS AND ALLEyS-ZONING: A communication from Mr. Bill Laferty,
President, B £ R Auto Parts, Incorporated, requesting that the existiu9 set-
hack line of twenty feet in the 2000 block of Melrose Avenue, N. W., be waived
in order to permit the construction of a building in said block, was before
Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be referred to the City
Manager for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
UORMON~EALTH*S ATTORNEY: A communication from Mr. Robert F. Rider,
Commonwealth*s Attorney, requesting an additional telephone and an additional
telephone line for his office, wasbefore Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney
for preparation of the proper measure granting the request Of the Uommonwealth*s
Attorney. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
PARKS AND pLAyOROGNDS: A communication from Mr. Richard Snidow,
1120 Amherst Street, proposing that Nasena Park be closed from the area between
the flood gates near Franklin Road and Wasena Bridge on each Sunday from the
hours of O n.m** to B p.m., during the summer months to allow for walking,
bicycling, picnicing and playing, was before Council.
215
216
Dr, Taylor moved that the mutter be referred to the City Manager
for study, report ccd recommendation to council. The motion was seconded by
Mr. flubard and unanimously adopted.
BOSRS: A communication from Mr. Garland L. Gordon advising that
he currently operates an lntercity bus line and has been in the bus transportation
business for 25 years and that he would like to meet with Council and/or the
Transportation Study Committee regarding the possibility of leasing Roanoke City
Lines, Incorporated, from the City of Roanoke and assuming the responsibility
of operating the bus lines, was before Council.
Or. Taylor norad that the communication be referred to the Transporta-
tion Study Committee for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Llsk and unanimously adopted.
STREETS AND ALLEYS-STATB HIGHWAYS: A communication from Mr. Gordon
H. Shapiro. Attorney, representing Gln*s Cycle Sales, Incorporated, requesting
that Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 32, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956,
as amended, be amended to allow for the erection of a sign within the twenty-five
foot setback line for the proposed arterial highway right of may on Willinmsoa
Road at the corner of Williamson Road and Forest Hill Avenue, N. E., mas before
Council.
Mr. Bubard moved that the matter be referred to the City Planning
Commission for appropriate action. The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and
unanimously adopted.
BUOGET-SIIERIFF: Copy of a revised budget of the Sheriff for the
fiscal year 1973-74, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that the revised budget be referred to 1973-74
budget study. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES: A communication from Mr. Kenneth L. Milkey,
General Manager, The Hotel Roanoke, requesting an extension of the present
closing hour of 1 a.m., in the mimed alcoholic beverage outlets to 2 a.m.,
during the period of Daylight Saving Time, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the request be referred to the City Attorney
to check into the necessary details. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and
unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDOET-ROANOKE LIFE SAVING CRE#: The City Manager submitted a written
report recommending that $500.00 be appropriated to Food, Medical and Housekeeping
Supplies under Section ~51, 'Life Saving Crews," of the 1972-73 budget, to pro-
vide funds for the remainder of the fiscal year.
Br. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the folloming emergency Ordinance appropriating the
recommended funds:
(z20051) AN ORDIM&NC6 to amend end reordnin Section us1. "Life
Saving Crews,' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for on
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Boob u3fl, page 68.)
Dr, Taylor moved the adoption or the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard. Lisk, Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Mebber ...................... 7.
MAYS: None ........... O.
BUDGET-SERERS AND S~ORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted the
following report advising that Alvord. Burdich and ltowson, Consulting Engineers.
have recommended the installation of time-controlled motor-operated valvoa iff
the primary basins in lieu of the existing manually operated valves at the
Sewage Treatment Plant, and recommendin9 that $5,000.00 be transferred from
the Sewage Treatment Plant Replacement Reserve Account to Maintenance of Muchiner
and Equipment under Section z6?. "Sewer Construction and Maintenance,' of the
1972-73 budget:
"April 30. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Sewage Treatment Plant - Transfer of Funds
Me have been working with Alvord, Burdick C tlowson
over the last several months in order to come up with a
method by which primary sludge can be removed more effi-
ciently from the existing primary basins and pumped to
the digesters.
Alvord. Burdick ~ Howson has recommended the installa-
tion of time-controlled motor-operated valves in the pri-
mary basins in lieu of the existing manually operated
valves. This installation would permit the pumping of a
denser sludge to the digesters which would result in a
longer life for the sludge lagoons. This proposed
installation would be of a temporary nature, in that
the new primary facilities for which we have just re-
ceived bids includes a new primary sludge pumping sta-
tion with sludge density meters which will ultimately
accomplish the same desired results.
The new pumping facilities will not, however, be
in operation /or approximately one year. For this reason,
Jt is our recommendation that me be allowed to proceed
with the installation of these time-controlled motor-
operated valves at this time in order to have the
efficient operation just as soon as possible.
In order for ns to proceed with this installation,
it will be necessary to transfer $5,000 from the Sewage
Treatment Plant Replacement Reserve Account to Account
Number 57-260, Naintenaoce of Machinery and Equipment.
The installation of the valves would be accomplished by
Sewage Treatment Plant personnel.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Haner
Byron E. Haner
City Manager"
217
218
Mr. Link moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the folloming emergency Ordinance:
(n2oos2) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reorduJn Section a§O0, 'Seucge
Treatment Fund - Appropriations for Capital Outlay - Replacement Reserve,' of
the 1972-73 Sewage Treatment Fund Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book w38, page 69.)
Mr. Lish moved the adoption of theOrdinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber .................... 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
SEWERS AND STORM BRAINS: The City Manager submitted the following
report advising that in accordance with the requirements of the State Mater
Control Board as contained in their November 17, 1972, Minutes, arrangements
have been made with Roy F. Wanton. Incorporated, Environmental Scientists and
Engineers, to perform a complete design analysi~ of the plans as prepared by
Alvord, Ourdick and Howson. Consulting Engineers. for the expansion of the Mater
Pollution Control Plant and recommending the approval of Council to enter into
this contract:
"April 30. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Analyses of Sewage Treatment Plant Design
In accordance with the requirements of the State Mater
Control Board as contained in their November IT, 1972, Minutes,
arrangements have been made with Roy F. Wanton, Inc., Environmental
Scientists and Engineers, to perform a complete design analysis of
the plans prepared by Alvord, Burdick and Howson for the
expansion of the City of Roanoke*s Mater Pollution Control
Plant.
The proposal as submitted by Roy F. Meston contains
aa estimated probable cost of $17,500, with actual payment to
be based upon hourly charges and expenses. Should any
real design problems be encountered, and it is not antici-
pated that this will occur, additional time and effort would
be required and could cost additional monies.
Payment for this service may be made from the Sewage
Treatment Plant expansion account; however, authorization is
needed for the City Ranager to enter into a contract with
Roy F. Wanton, Inc., for accomplishment of this work.
It might be noted that Alvord, Hurdick and Nowson has
concurred in the accomplishment of this design review.
Council's approval to enter into this contract is recom-
mended.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager~
Mr, Thoana moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the folloming emergency Ordinance authorizing the
City Msnnger to employ the services of Roy F. Mestono Incorporated, Environmental
Scientists nad Engineerst or Mesa Chester, Pennsylvania, to make a complete
design ussessuent of the city·s plans for certaiolong-raage improvements to
its Seuuge Treatment Plant, including recommendations ns to adequacy of
margin Of capacity, upon certain terms end conditions:
(z208S3) AN ORDINAHC£ authorizing the City Manager to employ the
services of Roy F. Neston. Inc., environmental scientists and engineers· of
Nest Chester· Pennsylvania, to mahe a complete design assessment of the CJty·s
plans for certain long-range improvements to its sewage treatment plant, includ-
ing recommendations ns to adequacy of maroin of capacity, upon certain terms and
conditions; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Honh z30, page
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following ~ tn:
AYES: Messrs. Darland, Dubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Nebber .................... 7.
HAYS: Hone ...........O.
TRAFFIC: Council having referred to the City Manager for study,
report and recommendation the request of owners and tenants of the Parkside
Plaza Shopping Center for a traffic control light at the intersection of Dale
Avenue, S. E., and the main entrace to the Parkside Plaza Shoppin9 Center, the
City Manager submitted the following report advising that the Traffic £ngineerin~
and Communications Department has completed a comprehensive study of the traffic
situation at this location including an analysis of vehicular volumes, pedes-
trian volumes, accidents and interruptions of continuous traffic flows, that the
study indicates that there is no single justification alone for installing the
traffic signal on a warrant basis alone but there does appear to be sufficient
grounds to request the Virginia Department of Ilighways to mahe exception to thel]
rules and to issue n permit for this traffic signal installation and that if the
shopping center OWners and tenants agree to pay a portion of the cost of the
installation based on policies previously established for such installations,
it would be his recommendation that the city then make application to the
Virginia Department of Highways for an exception to their rules to provide for
installation of this traffic signal and that if such approval is received by
the city that city funds be budgeted~for the installation:
*April 30, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
6entlemen:
Subject: Traffic Signal Request - Parkside Plaza
The communication from Mr. Aylett B. Coleman, repre-
senting owners and tenants of the Parhside Plaza Shopping
219
220
center, requesting the Installation of a traffic signal at
the intersection or Dale Avenue, S. E., and the main entrance
to the Parhalde Plax* Shopping Center aaa before City Council
nt its meeting on Monday, March 5, 1973,
The Traffic Engineering and Communications Division of
the Department of Public Moths hms completed n comprehensive
study or the traffic situation at this location including in
analysis of vehicular volumes, pedestrian volumes, acci-
dents and interrnptions of continuous traffic flews.
The study indicates that there is no single Justifica-
tion alone for installing the traffic signal on a warrant
basis alone but there does appear to be sufficient grounds
to request the Virginia Department or Highuays to make
exception to their rules and to issue a permit for this
traffic signal installation.
SJwJlar traffic signal installations of this type
mhJch have been erected to control access from public
streets into private driveways have been paid for in part
by the ouner of the private davy*way, The private owner
cast participation has varied from SO to 75 percent of the
total cost of the installation, with the City paying the
remaining costs.
Our estimate of costs for this particular installa-
tion is $22.000. plus labor costs,
Me have met with Mr. Coleman and representatives of
the tenants of Parkside Plaza to discuss the results of our
study. They are still most interested in having a traffic
signal installed at this location hut do not know whether or
not they are able to participate in the cost of the instal-
lation.
If the Shopping Center owners and tenants agree to pay
a portion of the cost of the installation based on the
policies previously established for such installations, it
would be our recommendation that the City then make appli-
cation to the Virginia Department of Highways for an excep-
tion to their rules to provide £or installation of this
traffic signal and that if such approval is received by the
City that the City funds he budgeted for the installation.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Baner
Byron E. Bauer
City Manager"
After a discussion of the matter, Mr. Trout moved that the City Attorney
be instructed to prepare the proper measure appropriating the necessary funds for
the installation of a traffic control light at the intersection of Dale Avenue,
$. E., and the main entrance to the Parkside Plaza Shopping Center. The motion
nas seconded by Mr. L/sk and adopted, Mr. Hubard voting no.
Mr. Bubard then moved that the City Manager be requested to furnish
Council with a list of other traffic lights similarly installed and the shared
cost basis of installing them. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unani-
mously adopted.
TRAFFIC-S~REETS AND ALLEYS: Council having referred to the City Manager,
the Superintendent of Traffic Engineering and Communications and the City Planning
Commission for study, report and recommendation the request of American Motor
Inns, Incorporated, for an access road to be constructed to Wiley Drive for use
by employees of American Motor Inns, Incorporated, the City Manager and the
Superintendent of Traffic Engineering and Communications submitted a joint report
recommending that this request be denied in order that Miley Drive can be presers~d
for its intended usage.
In this connection, Mr. Frank N, Perkins*n, Jr** Attorney, repre-
senting American Motor Inns, Incorporated, appeared before Council and advised th
it was his understanding that this matter mas also due to come before the City
Planning Commission for a recommendation to Council and that he had planned to
prese~his case to that body.
Dr. Taylor.moved that action on the joint report of the City Manager
and the Superintendent of Traffic Engineering and Communications be deferred anti
the City Planning Commission submits its report and recommendation to Council.
The motion mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
PAY PLAN-CITY TREASURER: Council having previously referred to the
City Manager for study, report and recommendation the question of mhether or
not the employees in the Office of the City Treasurer should he included under
the City of Roanoke Pay and Classification Plan, the City Manager submitted an
interim report advising that the City Personnel Department and the City Treasurer
are working tomards that end and that he hopes to return to Council in the near
future with a proposal mhich mill be mutually agreeable to the Treasurer and to
the administration.
Mr. Nubard moved that the interim report be received and filed. The
motion mas seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
AIRPORT: The City Attorney submitted the foil*mtn9 report in connec-
tion uith the proposed airport use agreements mith Piedmont Aviation, Incor-
porated, and Eastern Airlines, Incorporated, for use of Roanoke Municipal
(Mo*drum) Airport:
"April 30, 1973
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
As the Council is aware, a number of conferences have
been held between representatives of the City and those of
the scheduled airlines operating at the Municipal Airport
relative to the terms and provisions of new airport use
agreements necessary to be entered into between the City
and those airlines, the most recent of which former formal
agreements having heretofore expired. As a result of these
conferences and negotiations over this and other matters
relating to the Municipal Airport, a current schedule of
rates, rentals and charges has been negotiated between the
parties and a form of airport use agreement incorporatin9
those and other matters has been drawn, a copy of which is
transmitted heremith to the members of City Council and
filed with the City Clerk.
As mill be noticed, the proposed new agreements with
Piedmont Aviation, Incorporated, and mith Eastern Airlines,
Inn** are drawn under date of and mould be retroactive to
April 1, 19~2, and would be effective for a three-year
period commencing as of that date. The agreements follow
very closely the form of the preceding written airport use
agreements heretofore in effect between the parties, the
major change being that of the schedule of rates, rentals
and charges to be paid by each airline to the City for its
use of space and facilities at the Airport and for the
operating privileges described in the agreements. In each
instance the airlines mould pay to the City the following
Sums:
221
222
(a) Landing Fees, $.125 per 1.000 pounds of
the certificated g~oss aircraft landing
weight of the Airlines* scheduled end
noa-schedaled aircraft landed at the air-
port carrying passengers, cargo, express
or mailo certain types of landings, ham-
ever, to be continued to be excepted from
such charge.
(b) For the exchsfve asa of certain'air-
conditioned space in the Terminal Building,
at the rental rate of $4.75 per square foot
per annum;
(c) For use of Public Address System, a charge of
$17.50 per unit per month.
In addition, Piedmont mould pay for'space occupied
in the basement of the Terminal Building at the rental rate
of $2.50 per square foot per annum and would pay for use
of such of the taah farm spaces on airport property as it
had in use on April 1, lg?2. $100.00 per month, gross.
Other provisions of the proposed new agreements follow.
generally, provisions of the most recent similar agreements
with each of the two airlines, brought up-to-date with the
City's current management and operation of the Airport. I
am authorized to state that Councilmen Trout and Link, to-
gether with the City Ranager, and all of mhom are members
of the Council's Airport Advisory Commission, have approved
and recommended the schedule of rates and charges and, gen-
erally the terms and provisions of the proposed agreements
and the undersigned has approved the form of said agreements.
Representatives of Piedmont Aviation, Incorporated
have stated desirability, if not necessity, of concluding
a formal agreement of the type herein involved before
going further into the matter of provldin9 passenger holding
rooms or areas at the Terminal Building, construction of such
holdln9 rooms being partly involved in the expansion of the
Terminal Ruildin9 now under construction. Accordingly, and
if the new schedule of rates, rentals and charges meets
with the approval of Council. it is recommended that the
Council authorize execution of the new agreements with
Piedmont and Eastern as is provided for in ordinances
which have been prepared by the undersigned for that pur-
pose and which will accompany this communication.
Respectfully.
S/ J. N. Kincanon
J. N. Kincanon"
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the report if the City Attorney
and that the following Ordinance authorizing and directing the city's execution
of an agreement with Piedmont Aviation. Incorporated. for certain use by said
corporation of the Roanoke Runicipal Airport and certain of its facilities.
upon certain terms and conditions, for a three year period commencing as of April
1. 1972. be placed upon its first reading:
(#20854) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and directing the City's execution
of an agreement with Piedmont Aviation. Incorporated. for certain use hI said
corporation of the Roanoke Municipal Airport and certain of its facilities, upon
certain terms and conditions, for a three (3) year period commencing as of April
1, 1972.
WHEREAS, after conclusion of certain negotiations held with Piedmont
Aviation. Incorporated. it has been recommended to the Council by the City*s
representatives in said negotiations that the fees and reotals hereinafter set
forth are reasonable to be fixed and agreed upon between the City and said cor-
poration for the latter's use of the Municipal Airport for the period hereinafter
provided, and has exhibited to the Conncil a written Airport Use Agreement drawn
as of and retroactive to April 1. 1972. proposed to be entered into betmeen the
Citl and said corporation, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City
Clerk. approved by the City Attorney; and
,!
RHER£AS, the form of agreement as proposed baa been tendered to said
Airline. mbo ia reported to be agreeable to and milling to execute the sane,
TBEREFORE. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
the City Manager and the City Clerk be and they ere hereby authorized and
directed, on behalf of the City, to execute end to seal and attest, respectively,
a certain Airport Us~ Agreement drawn and made to be entered into between tbs
City end Piedmont Aviation, Incorporated, under date of April l, 1972, provid-
ing rot said alrline*s use of Roanoke Runicipal Airport and leasing unto said
airline certain rights, privileges and space at said airport for a period of
three years, commencing as of April 1, 1972. and terminating March 31, 1975,
at the foil*ming charges, viz:
L~ndina Fee:
$0.125 per 1.000 pounds of aircraft weight
landed by said airline at said Airport, per
month;
Terminal Building svace rental
For its air-conditioned space in the Terminal
Building, $4.75 peF square foot per annum;
For its non air-conditioned space in the Terminal
Building, $3.50 per square foot per annum;
For basement space in the Terminal fluilding,
$2.50 per square foot per annum;
Fuel Tank farm area snaees
For fuel tank farm spaces in use by said Air-
line as of April 1, 1972, the sum of $100.00
per month.
Public address system
$17.50 per unit per month;
and upon such other terms and conditions as are set out and contained
in the aforesaid Airport Use Agreement drawn under date of April 1, 1972.
and on file in the office of the City Clerk, the form of which has been
approved by the City Attorney, said Airport Use Agreement to be so executed
on behalf of the City after the same shall have been tendered to and executed
on behalf of Piedmont Aivation, Incorporated.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber .................... 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
Mr. Trout further moved that the following Ordinance authorizin9 and
directin9 the city's execution of an agreement with Eastern Airlines, Incor-
porated, for certain use by said corporation of the Roanoke Municipal Airport
and certain of its facilities, upon certain terms and conditions, for a three
year period commencing as of April 1, 1972, be placed upon its first reading:
(~20655) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and directing the City*s execu-
tion of an agreement with Eastern Airlines, Inc., for certain use by said
223
224
corporation of the Roanoke Municipal Airport and certain of its facilities, upon
terms nnd conditions, for a three (3) year period commencing as of April 1. 1972.
MHEREAS, after conclusion of certain negotiations held with Eastern
Airlines, Inc.e it has been recommended to the Council bi the Cities representa-
tives in said negotiations that the fees and rentals hereinafter set forth are
reasonable to be fixed and agreed upon between the City and said corporation for
the latter's use of the Municipal Airport for the period hereinafter provided,
and has exhibited to the Council a written Airport Dsc Agreement drawn as of
and retroactive to April 1, 1972, proposed to be entered Jato between the City
and said corporation, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk,
approved bI the City Attorney: and
MHEREAS, the form of agreeme~ as proposed has been tendered to said
Airline, who is reported to be agreeable to and milling to execute the sane.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED bI the Council of the City of Roanoke that
the City Manager and the City Clerk be and they are hereby authorized and
directed, on behalf of the City, to execute and to seal and attest, respectively,
a certain Airport Use Agreement drawn and made to be entered into batsmen the
City and Eastern Airlines, Inc.. under date of April 1, 1972, providing for said
airllne*s use of Roanoke HunJcipal Airport and leasing unto said airline certain
rights, privileges and space at said Airport for a period of three years, com-
mencing as of April 1, 1972, and terminating March 31, 1975, at the followin~
charges, viz:
Landina Fee:
$0.125 per 1,000 pounds of aircraft weight
landed by said airline at said Airport, per
month;
Terminal Buildina svace rental
For its air-conditioned space in the Terminal
Building, $4.75 per square foot per annum;
For its non air-conditioned apace in the Terminal
Building, $3.50 per square foot per annum;
Public address system
$17.50 per unit per month;
and upon such other terms and conditions as are set out and contained in the
aforesaid Airport Use Agreement drawn under date of April 1, 1972, and on file
in the office of the City Clerk, the form of which has been approved bi the City
Attorney, said Airport Use Agreement to be so executed on behalf of the City
after the same shall have been tendered to and executed on behalf of Eastern
Airlines, Inc.
The motion was seconded bI Hr. ~isk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber .................... 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
BUOGET-CITY AUDITOR: The City Auditor submitted a written report
requesting that $3,600.00 be transferred from Data Processino to Other Equipment -
.!
New under Section alO, 'City Auditor,# of the 1972-73 budget to provide funds
to increase the vault capacity.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the request of the City Auditor
and offered the following emergency Ordinance providing for the requested
transfer:
(a20056l AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section =10o 'City
Auditor," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Hook a38, page 70.)
Hr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AVES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisko Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Nebber .................... 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
JAIL: Mr. MJlliam $. Hubard, Chairman of the City of Roanoke Jail
Study Committee, submitted the following report recommendiog that Council
concur in the solicitation of bids for modification of the existing lockup to
meet the interim standards listed by Mr. R. P, Mason, Jails Superintendent.
Department of Welfare and Institutions, as set out in a communication addressed
to Sheriff Paul J. Puckett under date of April 5. 1973. and further recommending
that Council. by Resolution. support the request of the Roanoke Valley Mental
Health Services Hoard for a Division of Justice and Crime Prevention Grant to
install a detoxification center for alcoholics in the City of Roanoke:
"April 30. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The City of Roanoke Jail Study Committee met on Tuesday,
April 24, 1973, to discuss the City's needs with respect to
lockup facilities. Representatives of the Roanoke Valley
Mental Ilealth Services' staff met mith your committee to
discuss their proposal to implement a detoxification pro-
gram in the Roanoke Valley and to explain how this facility
will compliment the City*n need for lockup facilities. Yhe
Roanoke Valley Mental Health Services Hoard has asked City
Council to support their request for a Division of Justice
and Crime Prevention grant to implement such a detoxifica-
lion facility.
Discussion at this meeting revealed that the imple-
mentation of an alcoholic detoxification program mill not
completely remove the need for a City lockup. The need
would be reduced but it will not be completely eliminated.
Sheriff Paul Puckett by letter dated April 5, 1973, was
informed by Mr. R. P. Mason. Jails Superintendent, Depart-
ment of Melfare and Institutions, as to what interim re-
pairs and modifications would be required to permit con-
tinued use of the existing Iockup facility, pendin9 definite
determination of the need for and construction of a more
permanent jail and lockup facility.
Mr. Mason*s letter outlined the need for replacement
of the substandard sanitary facilities, the installation of
more adequate lighting and the need for some method of
providing and circulating fresh air mithin the lochup
facilttiea. Indications are that these minor modifications
can be accomplished at a cost well within the amount of
money available in the Capital Fund account for thin pur-
pose. There is little doubt but that the existing lockup
will be needed for several ye ars to come while more adequate
facilities are programmed and constructed.
225
226
It would be recommended that.City Council concur in
the solicitation of bids for modification Of the existing
lockup to meet the interim standards listed by Mr, Mason.
Additionally, os a future detoxiflcotion facility mould
result in lowering the population in the City lockup end ,
Jail, It would be recommended that City Council by resolu-
tion support the request of the Roanoke Valley Mental Health
Services Board for a Division Of Justice and Crime Prevention
grant to install a detoxificotion center for alcoholics in
the City of Roanoke.
The City Attorney has been requested to prepare a
resolution far City Councllts consideration at this meeting,
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Milliam S. Bubard
Milliam S. Hubard
Chairman*
Mr. Rubard moved that the City Manager be authorized to advertise for
bids for modification of the existing lockup to meet the interim standards
listed by Mr. R. Po Mason. Jails. Superintendent, Department of Welfare and
Institutions, as set out in a communication addressed to Sheriff Paul J.
Puckett under date of April 5, 1973. The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and
unanimously adopted.
SEWERS AND S~OR~ DRAINS: Council having previously referred to a
committee composed of Messrs. Byron E. limner. Chairman, Samuel H. ~cGbee. III,
D~ £~ Eckmann. James H~ Kincanon, Il. S. Zimmerman, and Hampton N. Thomas for
tabulation, report and recommendation the bids received for Contract C - Sewage
Treatment Plant additions, construction of concrete basins, piplng, miscellaneous
buildings, installation of equipment and associated work; and Contract D - Sewage
Treatment Plant additions, site preparation, construction of a thirty million
gallon concrete basin, piping, installation of equipment and associated work, the
committee submitted the following report recommending that a contract award in
the amount of $$,H94,000.00 be made to the Pizzagalli Corporation for the com-
bined work of Contract C and Contract D, conditioned on the proper approval being
received by the city from the State Water Control Board and the Environmental
Protection Agency for the award of this contract; that all other bids be held
until such time as the proper approval from the State Namer Control Board and the
Environmental Protection Agency is received by the city and the appropriate con-
tract executed between the city and the Pizzagalli Corporation at mhich time the
other bids could be rejected:
*April 30, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
After proper advertisement, bids were received and
pnblicly opened and read at the regular meeting of City
Council on Monday, April 16, 1973, for Contract C - primary
facilities, and Contract O - thirty million gallon basin.
Four bids were received for Contract C, three bids were
received for Contract D, and three bids were received for
the combined work of Contract C and Do A tabulation of the
bids received is attached to this report.
The contractor submitting the lowest bid for the work
was the Pizzagalli Corporation, Their bid was for the com-
bined work of Contracts C and D and was in the amount or
$3,fl94,000. The next lowest combined bid would be a com-
bination of the bid of Boyle Construction Company, in the
amount of $1,883,750 for Contract C and the bid of English
Construction Company tn the amount or $2,080,000 rot Contract
D for o total cost of $3,963,7S0, which is $69,?50 higher
than the low combination bids subnitted by the Pizzagalli
Corporation.
The bid submitted by Pfzzagalli Corporation is somewhat
less than the cost estimate provided by Alvord, Hurdick ~
How$on.
Federal and State grant monies bare been offered to and
accepted by the City for this project. There are sufficient
City funds available which when combined with the Federal
and State grant monies provide sufficient funds for this
project.
Since the Pizzagalti Corporation is headquartered in
South Burlington, Vermont, your committee was not familiar
with the firm's qualifications. Me have, therefore, contacted
other engineers and owners for whom the Pizzagalli Corpora-
tion has worked. In all instances, we have received reports
which are very complimentary of the performance of this
corporation.
It is our recommendation that (1) a contract award
in the amount of $3,B94,000 be made to the Pizsagalli
Corporation for the combined work of contract C and
contract D, conditioned on the proper approval being
received Oy the City from the State Nater Control Board
and the Environmental Protection Agency for the award of
this contract; and (2) that all other bids received be
held until such time as the proper approval from the State
Water Control Board and the Environmental Protection Agency
is received by the City and the appropriate contract
executed between the City and the Pizzogalli Corporation
at which time the other bids could be rejected.
A communication dated April lB, 1973, from Mr. D. E.
Eckmann of Alvord, Burdlck ~ tfowson transmitting Alvord,
Burdick ~ Bowson*s recommendations concerning the bids
received is also attached to tis report.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Hyrofl E. Hamer
Byron E. Ban*r, Chairman
S! D. E. Echmann
D. E. Eckmann
S/ Hampton N. Thomas
Hampton N. Thomas
S/ Sam H. McChee III
Sam H. McGhee
S/ J. N. Kincanon
J. N. Kincanon
S! H. S. Ztmmerman
H. S. Zimmerman'
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation Of the
committee and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(z2OflSY) AN ORDINANCE accepting the proposal of Pizzagalli Corpora-
tion, for construction of all structures, piping and incldenttal construction
and ancillary work for commtnutor chamber, suction well, commJnutors, splitter
box, grit basin and primary settling basins and sludge pumpfng stations, and of
all structures, piping and incidentlal construction and ancillary works for a
thirty (30) million gallon basin, upon certain terms and conditions, at the
227
228
Clty*a Sewage Treatment Plant, and conditionally emarding a contract therefor;
authorizing the proper City officials to execate the requisite contract for such
construction, upon receipt of approval thereof by State and Federal agencies; and
providing for un emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u38, page TI,)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Bubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber ...................?.
NAYS: None ...........O.
PENSIONS: The Employees' Retirement System Committee submitted a
written report advising that the Trust Department of the First National Exchange
Bank of Virginia has contracted with the City of Roanoke Employees* Retirement
System for custody and investment advisory services of the funds for the system.
that said Trust Department has requested the Board of Trustees of the Bmployees*
Retirement System to permit the bank to establish a nominee name under which the
securities bald by the bank will be registered, that this matter sas referred
to the City Attorney, who in o written opinion, found that such a procedure was
legal under the laws governing retirement systems established under the Code of
Virginia, that the Board of Trustees has approved this action and transmitting
an Ordinance which will amend the City Code to permit this procedure.
Mr. Link moved that Council concur in the report of the Employees*
Retirement System Committee and offered the following emergency Ordinance amend-
lng subsection (2) of Section 9, Ranugement of funds, Chapter l, General Provi-
sions, Title III, Pensions and Retirement, of The Code of the City of Roanoke,
1956, as amended, relatin9 to the management of funds and assets of the Employees'
Retirement System of the City of Roanoke:
(~20858) AN ORDINANCE amending subsection (2) of Sec. 9. Manaoement of
f~nds, Chapter 1. General Provisions, Title III, Pensions and Retirement, of the
Code of the City of Roanoke, I956, as amended, relating to the management of
funds and assets of the employees* retirement system of the City; and providing
for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book aS0, page ?2.)
Mr. Link moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link. Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber ................... ?,
NAYS: None ..........O.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
AUDITS: Council having previously deferred action on a repot{ of the
Audit Committee summarizing some of the more important recommendations and comments
contained in an 'Internal Control Reviem' of the financial operations of the
City of Roanoke. ns prepared by Andreus, Durket and Company, Certified Public
Accountantso the matter mas again before the body,
Mr. Dubavd moved that the City Attorney be requested to prepare the
proper measure or measures mhich mill provide for an imprest checking account
for the Roanoke Civic Center so that payments may be made promptly to promoters
and also authorizing the Audit Committee to obtain proposals for a complete
audit of the financial affairs of the City of Roanoke. The notion nas seconded
by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
ZONIN6: Council having previously deferred action on a report of the
City Planning Commission in connection with a request of Mr. Charles W. Dahl
that property located on the west corner of Melrose Avenue and Country Club
Drive, N. W., described as part of Lots 3, d and 5 and all of Lots 6, 7, OD
and 10, Cavalier Park, Official Tax No. 2660110, be rezoned from C-I, Office
and Institutional District, to C-2, 6amoral Commercial District, the City Plan-
ning Commission recommending that the request be denied, the matter was again
before the body.
Mr. Trout moved that action on the report of the City Planning
Commission be deferred until the next regular meeting of Council on Monday,
May 7, lgTS, pending notification as to mhether or not the petitioner desires
a public hearing on the request for rezonin9. The motion mas seconded by
Lisk and unanimously adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: WONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUIIONS:
WATER DEPARTMENT: Ordiuaaco No. 20045, amending Rules 22, 23, and 3~
of Section 5, Rules and Regulations, of Chapter 1, Water Department, Title XII,
Mater, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, relating to the
rules for the extension of water mains within and without the city and to the
extension Of mains and sale of surplus water outside the corporate limits of
the city, having previously been before Council for its first reading, read
and laid over, was again before the body, Mr. Thomas offering the following
for its second reading and final adoption:
(~20845) AN ORDINANCE amending Rules 22, 23 and 38 of Sec. 5. Rules
and Reoulatio~{, of Chapter 1, Water Devartment, Title XII Water, of the Code
of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, relatin9 to the rules for the exten-
sion of water mains within and without the City and to the extension of mains and
sale of surplus water outside the corporate limits.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book CaR, page 61.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr, Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carland, Hubard, Lisko Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ...................7.
NAYS: None .......... O.
229
230
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES: Council having directed the City Attorney to
prepare the proper Rensure expressing the support of the Council of the City of
Roanoke of the concept of a coaounlty based pr,gram for alcoholic detoxiflcatlon,
he presented sore; whereupon, Mr. Buburd offered the following Resolution:
(u208S9) A R£SOLI~rlON expressing the support of the Council of the
concept of a coRmunity based program for alcoholic detoxification.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~38, page 73,)
Mr. Buhard moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Ljsk and adopted bT the foil,Ring vote:
AYES: Hessrs. Garland. Bubard. LJsk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor ~ebber ..................... ?.
NAYS: None ............ O.
GRANTS: Dr. Taylor offered the following Resolution authorizing the
acceptance, execution, and filing of the ~Special Conditions for Action Grant
Awards" with the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention fur an action grant
of federal funds for implementation of a drug abuse prevention, treatment and
control program in the City of Roanoke:
(u20860) A RESOLOTION authorizing the acceptance, execution, and
filing of the "Special Conditions for Action Grant Amards' with the Division of
Justice and Crime Frevention for an action grant of Federal Funds for implementa-
tion of a drug abuse prevention, treatment and control program in the City.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Boor ~38, page
Dr. Taylor moved the adoptlon of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Oarland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Hayor Robber .................... T.
NAYS: None ........... O.
CITY ENGINEER: Mr. Lisk offered the following emergency Ordinance
appropriating $153,636.68 to Municipal Service Center under Section ~89, "Transfers
to Capital Improvements Fond," of the 19Y2-T3 budget, to provide funds in connec-
tion with the employment of ¥osbeck ¥osbeck Kendrick Redingero Architects, to
prepare plans and provide professional services relating to the design and con-
struction of a public service center:
(~20861) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section nflg, "Transfers to
Capital Improvements Fund," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providi~J
for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook z38o page TS.)
Rt. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Huhard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor ~ebber .....................
NAYS: None ........... O.
Dr. Taylor offered the following emergency Ordinance transferring
$569,733.32 from Revenue Sharing Trust Fund to Municipal Service Center under
23:1.
Section =89, 'Transfrrs to Capital Improvements Fund,' of the 1972-73 budget,
to provide funds in connection with the employment of ¥osbeck Vosbeck Mendvick
Redingor. Architects, to prepare plans and provide professional services relatln,
to the design and construction or · public works service center:
(#ROS62) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section n89, 'Transfers
to Capital Improvements Fund," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and pro-
riding for on emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book a3O. page 76.)
Or. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES~ Messrs. Garland. Hubard. Lisk, Taylor. Thomas. Trout and Mayor
~ebbeF .........................7.
NAYS: None--~--~ ..... O.
Mr. Lisk offered the follomJng emergency Ordinance approrfng and
authorizin9 the employment of Vosbeck Vosbeck Kendrick Redinger, Architects.
to prepare plans and provide professional services relating to the design and
construction of a public works service center in Roanoke. upon certain terms
and conditions:
(=20863) AN ORDINANCE approving and authorizing the employment of
Vosbeck ¥osheck Kendrick Redinger, Architects. (o prepare plans and provide
professional services relatiog to the desigo and construction of a public Marks
service center in Roanoke. upon certain terms and conditions; and providing for
an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~30, page 76.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Ltsk. Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Nebher .................... 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
JUVENILE DETENTION HOME: Or. Taylor moved that Council neet as a
Committee of the Mhole following the regular meeting of Council on Monday,
May 14, 1973, to discuss with state and local officials the possibility of
expanding the operation of the Roanoke City Juvenile Detention Bome to meet
the needs of the Fifth Planning District, the possibility of operating the
Juvenile Detention Bome on a joint and/or iodependent basis, the funding
possibilities for future expansion and discussion of other programs relating
to the Juvenile Detention Bame. The notion mas seconded by Mr. Trout and
unanimously adopted
There being flu further business, Mayor ~ebber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVEO
ATYEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
232
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
· Monday, May T, 1973.
The Council of the City Of Roanoke met Jn regular meeting in the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Sullding, Monday, May ?, 1973. at 2 p.m., the
regular meeting hour, with Mayor Roy L. Webber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, David K. Limb, ~oel C. Taylor,
Daapton M. Thomas, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L. Webber ............ -6.
ASSENT: Coancilman William S. Hubard ........................ 1.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Byron E. flaner, City Manager; Mr. Samuel H.
McGheeo IIio Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Klncanon, City Attorney; Mr.
H. Ben Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorney; and Mr. J. B. Mitchell, Assistant
City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend
Ernest E. Muntzing, Pastor, Hollins Road Church of the Srethren.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
SERERS AND STORM DRAINS: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids
on the construction of a double S' x T' box culvert and 12" ductile iron sanitary
sewer line in Washington Park, N. W., said proposals to be received by the City
Clerk until 2 p.m.o Monday, May 7, 1973. and to be opened at that hour before
Council. Mayor Webber asked if anyone had any questions about the advertisement
for bids and no representative present raising any question, the Mayor instructed
the Deputy City Clerk to proceed with the opening of the bids; whereupon, the
Deputy City Clerk opened and read the following bids:
Bennett Construction Company, Incorporated - $ 137,220.80
Robertson Construction Company, Incorporated - 162,942.00
Lanford Srothers Company, Incorporated - 163,320.60
Burado Construction Company - 195,384.00
Mr. Lisk moved that the bids be referred to a committee to be appointed
by the Mayor for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Webber appointed MesSrSo Samuel H, McGhee. III. Chairman.
Harold G. Hardy and B. D. Thompson as members of the committee.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids on
paving streets at various locations in the City of Roanoke, said proposals to be
received by the City Clerk until 2 p.m., Monday, May 7, 1973, and to be opened at
that hour before Council, Mayor Webber asked if anyone had any questions about
the advertisement for bids and no representative present raising any question,
the Mayor instructed the Deputy City Clerk to proceed with the opening of the
bids; mhereupou, the Deputy City Clerk opened and read the following bids:
Adams Construction Company and
Virginia Asphalt Paring Company, Inc. $ 154,719.40
S. R. Draper Paving Company 156,879.60
John A. Hall ~ Company, Incorporated 15S,656.20
233
Mr. Thomas moved that the bids be referred to n committee to be
appointed by the Mayor for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council.
The motion man seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Mebber appointed Messrs. Samuel H. McGhee, III. Chairman.
Harold G. Hardy and B. B. Thompson as .embers of the committee.
SEMERS AND STORM HRAINS: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for
bids on Contract I - Construction o! a storm drain at Mai.ut Avenue. S. ¥**
from Jefferson Street. S. M.. to Maple Avenue+ S. M.; and Contract II - Construct
of a storm drain at the intersection of Jefferson Street and El. Avenue. S. M..
said proposals to be r~ceived by the City Clerk until 2 p.m.. Monday+ May 27.
1973, and to be opened at that hour before Council. Mayor Mebber asked if anyone
had any questions about the advertisement for bids and no representative present
raising any question, the Mayor instructed the Deputy City Clerk to proceed
with the opening of the bids; whereupon, the Deputy City Clerk advised that
no ~ds have been received on this project.
Mr. Trout moved that the matter be referred back to the City Manager
for readvertisement of bids at a later date. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Thomas and unanimously adopted.
S~REETS AND ALLEYS: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids on
the relocation of a portion of Garden City Ho.lev.rd, S. E., said proposals to
be received by the City Clerk until 2 p.m** Monday, May 7. 1973, and to be
opened at that hour before Council, Mayor Mebber asked if anyone had any question!
about the advertisement for bids and no representative present raising any
question, the Mayor instructed the Deputy City Clerk to proceed with the opening
of the bids; whereupon, the Deputy City Clerk opened and read the following
bids:
John A. Hall ~ Company, Incorporated - $ 65,445.25
Branch and Associates, Incorporated . - 85.360.00
Dr. Taylor moved that the bids be referred to a committee to be
appointed by the Mayor for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
Mayor [ebber appointed Messrs. Samuel H. McGhee, lilt Cgairman,
Harold G. Hardy and B. B. Thompson as members of the committee.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: A communication from the City of Roanoke
Redevelopment and Ilo.sing Authority requesting that Council approve Amendment
Ho. 4 to the Kimball Redevelopment Project, Project No. VA. R-46, to provide
for certain curb cuts, landscaping, screening, underground utility lines and
off-street parking, was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follow-
ing report in connection with the abovedescribed request of the Housing
Authority, advising that Amendment No. 4 to the Kimball Project is in conformity
with the General Plan of the City of Roanoke:
234
received
adopted.
'April 26. 1973
The Honorable ROT L. Hebber, Mayor
and Hembers of City Council
Roanoke, ¥irgfala
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of April 18, 1973.
Mr. H. MaRley Yhlte, Assistant Director of the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority appeared before the Planning
Commission and stated that the Housing Authority is In the
process of amending the Kimball Redevelopment Project Plan
so as to bring it into more conformity with the City's
General Plan.
Hr. ~hite noted that while the major portion of this
amendment is financial, some minor changes bare been made
to the Redevelopment Plan. Specifically, he noted, these
pertain to curb cuts, landscaping, screening, and under- ·
ground utility lines (See enclosed).
After some discussion by the Planning Commission members,
it was concluded that these amendments to the Kimball Redevelop-
ment Project would add materially to the projects visual
attractiveness, provide for a more viable development; and
generally enhance the quality and character of the area. It
was also concluded that these amendments were in conformity
with the intent and purpose of the City*s General Plan.
Accordingly. motion was made, duly seconded and approved
unanimously that this Amendment No. 4 to the Kimball Project
ia Jn conformity with the General Plan of the City of Roanoke.
Sincerely,
$/ Henry H. Roynton by LM
Henry fl. Doynton
Chairman*
Mr, Thomas moved that the report of the City Planning Commission be
and filed. The motion mas seconded by Rt. Trout and unanimously
Mr, Lisk then offered the following Resolution approving a certain
Amendment, being Amendment No. 4, to the Redevelopment Plan for the Kimball
Redevelopment Project, Project No. VA. R-46, located in the northeast section
of the City of Roanoke:
(#20664) A RESOLUTION approving a certain Amendment, being A~efldment
No. 4, to the Redevelopment Plan for the Kimball Redevelopment Project, Project
No. VA. R-46, located in the northeast section of the City of Roanoke, Virginia.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Hook u36, page
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. 7he motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Zaylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hnbard absent)
JAIL: Copy of a communication from Mr. R. P. Mason, Jails Superintendent,
Department of Welfare and Institutions, in connection with an inspection of the
Roanoke City Jail on April 24, lg73, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
J
235
STATE HIGHWAYS: A Joint communication from Hrs. Elva B. SI,tn and
Mr. James G. Harvey, II. requesting n meeting with Council concerning the pro-
posed new location of Franklin Road end Elm Avenuee S, #., as set forth in the
plans of the 1985 Arterial Highway Plan. advising that they are under contract
to buy property that will be taken by this project and they would like for the
proposed route of Franklin Road to be altered so their property mill not be
taken, wes before Council.
#r. Thomas moved that the matter be referred to the City Rannger for
consideration and report to Council. The motion mas seconded by Dr. Trout end
unanimousl7 adopted.
SALE OF PROPERTY: A communication from Mr. J. Randolph ORris. one
of the co-owners and attorney in fact for all other co-owners of n two foot
strip of land. Official Tax No. 1230201, Estate of F. E. Davis, in the
vicinity of Daiden Lane, S. W.o advising that the report of the Real Estate
Committee under date of April 23, 19T3, in connection with the abovedescribed
matter is acceptable if the City of Roanoke prepares the deed and bears all
costs of recording including recording sixteen powers of attorney from various
heris, was before Council.
Ry. Trout moved that the communication be referred to the City Attorney
for proper handling. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously
adopted.
OPPORTUNITIES I~DUS~RIALIZATION CENTER: A communication from
George E. Franklin, Sub-Committee Chairman, Opportunities Industrialization
Center, requesting the assistance of Council in determining the future design
for a comprehensive manpower training system within the Cooperative Area
Danpower Planning Systems Area 1I, was before the body.
Mr. Trout moved that the matter be referred to the City Homager
for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was seconded by
Dr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
CIRCUIT COURT-COMMONW£ALTD*S A1~FOHNE¥: Copy of a communication from
Mr. D. Hennett. Executive Secretary, Supreme Court of Virginia. in connection
with the salaries of the Judges of the Circuit Court, transmitting copy of
House Dill 26S (Chapter 544, Acts of the Assembly, 19T3) which amends Section
14.1-33 of the Code of Virginia. 1950, advising that the State Comptroller
staten in a recent letter that, under the authority of this section, it is his
understanding that localities will:
*** deposit gross supplements without deductions into the
State treasury, the State payroll will then reflect the
salaries appropriated by the state plus local supplement.
Under these conditions the State will issue the only
covering compensation of the several judges. Further,
in order to be consistent, all deductions for retirement,
group insurance and hospitaliaation in addition to
taxes will be deducted on the state payroll ...
236
that the Executive Senretary of the Supreme Court of Virginia alii, effective
July 1, 1973. become the Court Administrator rot the State, that the State
Comptroller has requested that his office assume payroll responsibilities for the
Circuit Court Judges, that as authority for payment of the local supplement, the
Comptroller and his office will require e copy of the Ordinance providing for
salary supplements to be paid on or after July lo 1973. to Circuit Court Judges
and requesting that on or before June 1, 1973, that tug copies of such Ordinance
be forwarded to bin. was before Council.
Rith reference to the above matter, copy of a communication from the
Office of the Comptroller advising that as requited by Section 14.1=33. Code
of Virginia, 19S0. the Comptroller has apportioned between the counties and cities
comprising each Judicial circuit of the Commonwealth of Virginia the salaries of
the judges of the Circuit Court and that the part of the salaries of the judges
of this judicial circuit which has been apportioned to this city for the fiscal
year July 1, 1973o through June 30. 1974, is $28,g38.88. was before Council.
Germain to the matter of salaries, copy of a communication from the
State Compensation Board addressed to Mr. Robert F. Rider. Commonwealth's Attorney,
advising that the Compe,nsution Board approved the promotion of Rt. Bobby H.
Osborne to succeed Mr. Robert C. McLaughlin as Chief Assistant Commonwealth's
Attorney, at an annual rate of $11,000.00, effective April 16. 1973, and also
approved the employment of RF. Barry Tatel. at an annual rate of $10,000.00,
effective April 16. 1973. to fill the position vacated by Rt. Osborne. was also
before Council.
Rt. Thomas moved that the Mayor be requested to appoint a committee of
three members of CounclJ to meet with representatives of the Roanoke Oar Associa-
tion and other appropriate persons and report bach to Council. during budget
study sessions, with facts and recommendations concerning salaries of the judges
of the courts of record and the courst not of record and of the salaries of the
Commonwealth's Attorneys. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously
adopted.
Mayor Webber appointed Messrs. Hampton W. Thomas, William S. Hubard
and Robert A. Garland as members of the committee.
BUDGET-TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEy: A communication
from Rs. Betty Watkins. Chairman. St. John's Parent Group. requesting that Council
consider and appropriate the sum of $101.000.00 to ensure program operations
of Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley, was before the body.
Rt. Garland moved that the communication be referred to 1973-74 budget
study. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
RUDGET-GARBACE REMOVAL: The City Manager submitted a written report
recommending that $10,000.00 be appropriated to Fees for Professional and Special
Services under Section m69, 'Sanitation Division,' of the 1972-73 budget, to
provide funds for payment of fees to the Town of Yinton for disposal of city
refuse.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the report of the City
Manager and offered the folloming emergency Ordinance appropriating the
recommended funds:
(u20965) AN ORD1MAWCE to emend and reordain Section a69. "Sanitation
Division," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #39, page 04.)
Br. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion was
seconded by Mr, Trout and adopted by the follomlng vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Llsk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................... 6.
NAYS: None ........... O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
BUDGET: The City Manager submitted the following report in connec-
tion with the transfer of funds for various accounts:
"May 7, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Transfer of Funds
Several departmental operating accounts will require
additional funds in order to meet anticipated expenditures
for the remainder of this fiscal year.
Yhese accounts are as follows:
Account 59 - Street Construction and Repair - 114 -
Overtime. A significant amount Of overtime was expended in
the construction of the lam water bridge access into the
Vinton Landfill. This use of overtime was necessitated by
the extremely wet weather during that period and the require-
ment to build the facility as soon as possible at times when
weather conditions would not interfere mith the construction.
It is recommended that $1,000 be transferred from Account
59 - 330, Supplies and Materials, to provide sufficient
funds for the remainder of this fiscal year.
Account 67 - Sewer Construction and Maintenance - 114 -
Overtime. Yhe excessive amount of rainfall me have had dur-
ing the past six months has resulted in a significant
increase in use of our semer crews for maintenance calls
after normal working hours. It is recommended that Si,SO0
be transferred from Account 67 - 330. Supplies and Materials,
to provide sufficient funds for the remainder of this fiscal
year.
Account 440 - Civic Center - 312 - Medical and House-
keeping Supplies. Several normal maintenance items were
originally budgeted in Account 440 - 255, Maintenance of
9uJldings and Property. Xt has been determined that these
items should be charged to Account 440 - 312. It is
recommended that $2500 be transferred from Account 440 - 255,
Maintenance of Buildings and Property, to Account 440 - 312,
Medical and Housekeeping Supplies.
Account 4 - City Attorney - 300, Printing and Office
Supplies. The City Attorney has advised that additional
funds will be required Jn this account to cover anticipated
printing costs for the remainder of the fiscal year. It is
recommended that $400 be transferred from Account 4 - lOl,
Personal Services to Account 4 - 300, Printing and Office
Supplies.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Haner
City Manager"
237
238
#r. Trout moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and offered the following emergency Ordinance providing for certain transfers
within Section m58, 'Street Construction and Mepair,' Section ~b?, "Sewer
Construction and Maintenance.' and Section =4, 'City Attorney," of the 1972-73
budget:
(m2OSh6) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordoin certain sections of the
1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book =36. page
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Llsk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
Dr. Taylor then offered the followio0 emergency Ordinance providing for
certain transfers uithJn the Civic Center Fund Appropriation Ordinance:
(=20867) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~440, "Civic
Center Fund - Administrative Expenses," of the 1972-73 Civic Center Fund Appro-
priation Ordinance, aod providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book maO, page 86.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AyEs: Messrs. Garland, Lisk. Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .........................6.
NAYS: None ...........O, (Mr. Hubard absent)
POLICE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a written report in
connection with the transfer of funds in order to purchase two military surplus
night vision devices for use by the Police Department and recommending that Council
authorise the payment of $S§0.00 as the city's cash-match share to the Division
of Justice and Crime Prevention.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance transferring the recommended
funds:
{=20gbO) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section =45, "Police
Department," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book m38. page 86.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Yhomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
SEMERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted a written report
requesting authorization for the issuance of a change order to the contract with
Jeffrey Manufacturing Company, for Contract B, Item III, Primary Settling
Equipment, at the Sewage Treatment Plant, to provide certain changes in the
payment schedule and in the warranty period as set forth iu the specifications.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur In the request Of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance accepting and agreeing to
nn addendum to the clty*s contract mith Jeffrey Manufacturing Company dated
April 20, 1973, for the furnishing of certain equipment for the Sewage Treat-
ment Plant, Item III under Contract E - Primary equipment:
(~20869) AN OROINANCE acceptin9 and agreeing to an addendum to the
City*s contract with Jeflrey Manufacturing Company dated April 20, 1973, for the
furnishiug of certain equipment for the City*s Sewage Treatment Plant, Item III
under Contract #B" - Primary equipment; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book a39, page 67.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption Of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
SENERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted a written
report recommending that he he authorized to execute a chaflge order with
English Construction Company to Contract A. Division Il, Phosphorus Removal at
the Sewage Treatment Plant, which will increase the contract time for this pro-
ject by sixty calendar days with the bonus-penalty clause to apply at the end
of the extended time,
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution approving the issuance by the City
Manager of Change Order No. 1, in connection with the city*s contract for the
construction of phosphorus removal facilities at the Sewage Treatment Plant:
(ff20870) A RESOLUTION approving the City Manager*s issuance of
Change Order No. l, in connection with the City's contract for the construction
of phosphorus removal facilities at the City*s Sewage Treatment Plant.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~38, page 88.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ...... ~ ................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. tlubard absent)
STATE HIGHWAYS: The City'Manager submitted a written report advis-
ing that the Virginia Department of Highways is presently in the location and
design stage for Route 24, between Eleventh Street. S. E., and Nineteenth Street
239
240
So E., Project No. 0024-128-103, R/# 201; for Thirteenth Street, S. E** from
Biverdele Bond, S. E., to Hale Avenue, S. E., Project No. U000-120-102, R/N 201;
and for the Jefferson Street Dridge over the n ~ M railroad and Roanohe River,
Project NO. UOHO-12H-I06, R/W 201, that the Virginia Department of Highways will
soon be in n position to acquire land needed for right of way purposes end recom-
mending that Council, bT Resolution, request the Virginia Department of Highways
to acquire the necessary rights of way for the three projects and that the city
agree to pat its appropriate share (IS~) of the right of way acquisition costs.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution requesting the State Highway Com-
missioner to acquire the necessary rights of may for Project UOOO=I2H-I06, R/R 201,
being for the Jefferson Street Bridge over the Norfolk and Western Railway Company
tracks and Roanoke River, within the corporate limits of the city and agreeing
to reimburse the Commonwealth of Virginia for fifteen per cent of ail costs
incurred in such acquisition:
(320H71) A RESOLUTIO~ requesting the State Highmay Commissioner to
acquire the necessary rights-of=way for Project ~000-12H-106, R/# 201, being for
the Jefferson Street Hridge OVer the Norfolk and Western Railway Company tracks
and Roanoke River, within the corporate limits of the City; and agreeing to
reimburse the Commonwealth of Virginia for fifteen percent (15%) of all costs
incurred in such acquisition.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book m3H, page 69.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Rayor
Webber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
Mr. Lisk offered the following Resolution requesting the State Highway
Commissioner to acquire the necessary rights of way for Project No. U000-120-102,
R/M 201, being Thirteenth Street, S. E., from Riverdale Road, S. E., to Dale
Avenue, S. E., within the corporate limits of the catI and agreeing to reimburse
the Commonwealth of Ykginia for fiftenn per cent of all costs incurred in such
acquisition:
(~20072) A RESOLUTION requestin9 the State Highway Commissioner to
acquire the necessary rights-of-way for Project Ho. UOOO-12fl-102 R/W 201, being
?hirteenth Street, S. E., from Riverdale Road, S. E., to Dale Avenue, S. E.,
within the corporate limits of the City; and agreeing to reimburse the Common-
wealth of Virginia for fifteen percent (15%) of all costs incurred in such
acquisition.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Hook ~38, page 90.)
Rt. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Rr, Trout and adopted by the following vote:
241
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Limb, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Nebber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ............ Om (Mr. Uubard absent)
· Mr. Lishthen offered the following Resolution requenting the State
Highway Commissioner to* acquire the necessary rights of way rot ProJect
0024-12fl-103, R/M 201, being U. S. Route 24 between Eleventh Street, S.
and Nineteenth Street, S. E., within the corporate limits or the city and
agreeing to reimburse the Commonwealth or Virginia EOF fifteen per cent or
all costs incurred in such acquisition:
(a20873) A RESOLUTION requesting the State Highway Commissioner to
acquire the necessary rights-of-uny for Project 0024-128-103, R/M 201, being U. S
Route 24 between Eleventh Street, S. E., and Nineteenth Street, S. E.. within
the corporate limits of the City; and agreeing to reimburse the Commonwealth
of Virginia for fifteen percent (15%) of all costs incurred in such acquisition.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book marl, page 91.)
Mr, Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ...................
NAYS: None ..........O. (Mr. tlubard absent)
INDUSTRIES-APPALACtlIAN POWER COMPANY: The City Manager submitted a
written report advising that Council by Resolution No. 20505 approved
generally the construction of a new access road into Appalachian Power Company's
new service facility and agreed to share the cost of construction Of this road-
way with Appalachian Power Company in order to obtain a better roadway than that
required by the Subdivision Ordinance, that formal agreement between the City
Roanoke and Appalachian Power Company which provides tar this construction and
cost sharing has been drafted and the deed conveying the necessary rights of
way to the city is being circulated for signatures, recommending that Council
adopt an Ordinance which would authorize the execution by the city of the agree-
ment between the Appalachian Power Company and the City Of Roanoke, authorization
for acceptance and recordation of the deed conveying the right of way and adver-
tisement and receipt Of bids for the construction Of the roadway folloming
executiou of the agreement and receipt of the deed.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(=20874) 'AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City*s execution of an agree-
aent with Appalachian Power Company providing for the construction of a 60-
foot wide public street or road from Otb Street, S. E., to the propegyllne or
said Company, in the Roanoke Industrial Center complex, upon certain terms and
conditions; authorizing the City*s acceptance of a deed Of conveyance or the
242
right-cf-way therefor, and of a certain easemenk in lnnd adjacent to said righto
of-way; directing the City Manager to proceed with the advertisement and receipt
of bids for the construction of said road; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book #36, page 91.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion nas seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the follomlng vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, LJsk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Mebber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
BDSES: The City Manager submitted a written report advising that the
city has previously entered into the appropriate agreement with Milber Smith and
Associates. Transportation Planners, for the Roanoke Regional Area Technical
Transit Study, that the cost of this study is $33,000.00, that it had been anti-
cJpated that the entire cost of this study would have to be borne by the city,
that it has come to his attention that financial support is available for this
type of study from the Virginia Department of Highways, that the financial
support would provide for the Virginia Department of Highways to pay 85% of the
study coats with the city paying 15% of the costs, that the breakdown Of funding
for this study would be $28,050°00 state share and $4,gSO,O0 city share if the
request is approved by the Virginia Department of Highways and recommending that
the city request, by appropriate Resolution, the financial participation of the
Virginia Department of Highways in this study.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution recommending and urging participation
by the Department of Highways in the cost of the Roanoke Regional Area Technical
Transit Study being undertaken for the city by Wilber Smith and Associates,
Consulting Engineers and Planners:
(#20975) A RESOLLr~ION recommending and urging participation by the
Department of Highways in the cost of the Roanoke Regional Area Technical Transit
Study being under.ken for the City by Wilher Smith and Associates, Consulting
Engineers and Planners.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Hook =38, page 93.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion Was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AVES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................... 5.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
PENSIONS-PAY pLAN-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted the fol-
lowing report recommending revisions to the City Pay Plan for classified posi-
tions nad also a proposal to expand the classified Pay Plan to include the 9rent
majority of the unclassified positions and further recommendin9 that Council
study these proposed revisions and approve their incorporation into the 1973-74
budget to be effective July 1, 1973:
#May 7o 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanohe, Virginia
Gentlewen:
Subject: Proposed Revisions to City Pay Plan
There is submitted to each member of Council recommended
revisions to the Clty*s Pay Plan for classified positions
and also a proposal to expand the classified pay plan to
include the great majority of the City,s unclassified posi-
tions. It is recommended that City Council study these
proposed revisions and approve their incorporation into
the 1g73-74 Budget, to be effective July 1, 1973.
Both classified and unclassified employees have expressed
their concern in writing to the Hanager*s office with regards
to the increased cost of living and its affect upon their
buying power. One petition signed by several hundred
employees ashed for as much as · 20% increase in salary,
while the unclassified personnel ashed for inclusion in a
pay plan whereby they could at least foresee some possible
projected progression from year to year. Both requests have
merit.
This proposal, as presented for currently classified
personnel, includes an upward revision in pay of 5% for
most spaces. Compared to the requests received, the
increase appears inadequate; however, this 5% increase will
be coupled with the 3 - 4 % increase in tahe home pay to be
realized as the result of an unanimous recommendation from
the City's Retirement Board to eliminate the employee's
contribution into the City's Retirement System. It was
hoped that that report would precede this message. That
will result in an approximate fl - 9% increase in pay for
all classified employees. The Pay Plan as submitted also
recognizes the difficulty in recruiting of police officers
and to meet the current ~end throughout the State, an
increase of one range for patrolmen and corporals is
requested. This iocreaue, with the recommended 5~ lecrease.
will result in a starting salary of $642 per month iht
policemen. This compares favorably with the starting
salaries paid policemen in Charlottesville, Colonial
Heights, Hampton, Petersburg, Richmond and Virginia Beach.
The second proposal for City Council*s consideration
is to expand the classified pay plan beyond the current 30
ranges by adding IO additional ranges. Those departmental
positions under the direct supervision of the City Manager,
the City Attorney and the City Auditor are proposed for
inclusion in the expanded pay plan.
The mechanics of extendin9 the Pay Plan by adding 10
ranges is relatively simple. The translation of the cur-
rently unclassified personnel into the proper ranges is
more difficult. The incumbent individual currently filling
a position and his or her attitude and application to work,
however difficult to overllik, should not be a prime consid-
eration in the establishment of the range level. It is
necessary to relate the range of the position to the follow-
ing; the responsibilities of the position; the training
and education necessary to fill the position; comparison
with the other positions witJln the Pay Plan; the pay scales
for commensurate positions both in surrounding communities
as well as the local cowmunity~ and the grade structure
for subordinates to this position.
If we are to retain competent personnel or be able to
recruit replacement departmental heads, we need to establish
the pay levels based upon those factors, and those alone.
Seniority of the City*s employee will be a faOor in determin-
ing the step of the range in which the incumbent is placed.
It would appear logical that most employeeswould be slott~d
into the top salary of the range; however, the disadvan-
tages of this are the range becomes established more the
individual than the position and the chances for merit
increases are removed. Additionally, the determination as
to the earning of these merit increases should lie within the
scope of the City Manager, the City Attorney or the City
Auditor who supervise these employes and individuals.
243
244
Under the current practice no matter how determined an
effort is made to be impartial, it is difficult to establish
the salary of the department heads without consideration of
personalities. Past experience indicates that department
heads* salaries have been kept low predicated upon the
knowledge that the more senior employees would be hesitant
to resign their position of long employment even though
their salaries remain unjustifiably low. , Salary rates for
these positions should be based upon the going rate for
comparable positions in other cities in Virginia. To this
purpose there is enclosed n partial listing of salaries for
comparable positions of other Virginia cities. Additionally,
with the recommended salary scales enclosed, there is
furnished a list showing the number of years the incumbent
has served the City as well as the salary earned by bis or
her assistant.-
I think that it should be mentioned that certain
widdle-management positions wight be expected to result
from the management surveys currently in progress. At such
time as these studies ore complete, it would be anticipated
that additional funds would be needed to man these new spaces.
These proposals to classify these department heads and
to provide an across=the-board S% increase in classified
salaries are submitted to City Council with a recommendation
for favorable consideration. It is believed that such
revisions to the Pay Plan will contribute greatly to the
strengthening and betterment of the service of these posi-
tions and to the service of those who now occupy those
spaces.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Honer
City Manager"
In this connection, Mr. Trout presented the following prepared statement
recommending that Council consider granting city employees a 5.5% pay increase
as permitted under federal guidelines, that Council assume the remaining portion
of pension benefits that the employees are now committed to pay and that Council
consider the possibility of 9ranting an additional five per cent hazard pay
increase to firemen and policemen:
"Honorable Mayor and Members of Council:
The high cost of living has been and will continue to
be the number one topic for most people during 1973. National
economists have predicted that food cost alone will advance
6% this year. The rise in the cost of food from 1962 has
been 45%. The average family food bill has risen 37% in the
past decade and the end is not in sight. Added to this
bad news is the increase in Social Security taxes which all
results in all earning gains made by our City employees dar=
lng the past few years being completely wiped out.
I realize that there sill be many demands on Council
during the coming Budget Study. Bowever, I feel we must give
consideration to the needs of our employees and give this
top priority in our decisions.
I would recommend that Council consider the following:
1. Grant our employees a 5.5% pay increase as permitted
under Federal guidelines.
2.Assume the remaining portion of pension benefits that
our employees are now committed to pay.
Consider the possibility of granting an additional 5%
hazard pay to our firemen and police.
These men are required to make numerous individual
decisions which results in great individual responsibility
and pressure. Most of our other employees are in jobs that
have preplanning and the work is so scheduled that this is
not a requirement.
245
Also, we should bear in mind that me have a great
investment in our hem Police Department building, Me have
on the Planning Board a great investment in new fire houses
and It ulll be necessary to have men on duty to meet any
disaster at the Airport which will require special training.
Mith this great investment in special training and equipment
for hazardous Jobs, I feel that hazard pay is Justified.
It ia my recommendation that this consideration he
referred to Budget Study mith immediate attention given
to this matter uben deliberations on the budget cosmence.
S/ James Trout
James O. Trout"
Mr. Trout moved that the report of the City Manager and his statement
be referred to 1973-74 budget study. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor
and unanimously adopted.
Nith reference to the Employees' Retirement System, the Board of
Trustees of the Employees' Retirement System, submitted the folloming report
recommending that there be no change in the minimum and service requirements
for retirement: that there be no change in amount of retirement benefit granted
for each year of credited service: and that employees no longer be required
to contribute to the Employees' Retirement System. that the city bear the entire
cost of the System, that in addition, it is recommended that the city return
to each employee now covered under the System the total contributions which he
has made to the System together with accumulated interest, that payment of
accumulated contributions and interest should be made to each employee on the dat
of his Service or disability retirement or. in the event of his death prior to
retirement, to the person entitled to receive his death benefits under the
System, that interest credited to the contributions held for each employee
would be at the rates specified by the System prior to July 1, 1973, and at four
per cent per annum, compounded annually thereafter, and that each retiring
employee would have the option to have his accumulated contributions applied
to increase his retirement benefits instead of receiving them in a lump sum:
"May 2, 1973
tlonorable Mayor
and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
In 1972. the City Auditor was requested to investigate the
cost of providing three liberalizations in the Retirement
System for employees of the City of Roanoke. The three
liberalizations to be considered were:
(1) A reduction in the minimum age and service
requirements for retirement.
(2) An increase in the amount of retirement benefit
granted for each year of credited service.
(3) The complete elimination of employee contributions
to the System, with a refund to the employees of
contributions previously made, together mith
interest on the contributions.
The Hoard of Trustees of the Retirement System has consid-
ered each of these proposed liberalizations over a period of
months. In the course of our studies, we have, of course,
commissioned and received recommendations and cost esti-
mates from George B. Buck Consulting Actuaries, Inc., the
actuarial consultants for the System. In addition, we have
received and considered recommendations from several City
employees. Included among the employees making recommendations
246
was the Roanoke Fire Fighters Association uhJch had
commissioned its gun actuarial study or ways in uhlch both
benefits and service requirements for retirement could be
liberalized for the Police end Fire Departments within
the existing financial resources of the plan.
As a result of its studies, the Board of Trustees submits
the following recommendations for changes in the Retirement
System to be effective July 1. 1973.
(1) That there be no change in the minimum and service
requirements for retirement.
(2) That there be no change in amount of retirement
benefit granted for each year of credited service.
(3) That employees no longer be required to contribute
to the System and that the City bear the entire
cost of the System. In addition, we recommend
that the City return to each employee now covered
under the System the total contributions which
he has made to the System together with accumulated
interest. Payment of accumulated contributions
end Interest should be made to each employee on
t~e date of his service or disability retirement
or, in the event of his death prier to retirement,
to the person entitled to receive his death
benefits under the System. Interest credited to
the contributions held for each employee mould he
at the rates specified by the System prior to
July 1. 1973, and at 4% per annum, compounded
annually, thereafter. Each retiring employee
would have the option to have his accumulated
contributions applied to increase his retirement
benefits instead of receiving them in a lump sum.
Minimum Service Requirements for Retirement
The present requirement for service retirement is age 60 or,
if earlier, the cumpletlon of 30 years of credited service.
The liberalization considered by the Board in its studies
was to set the requirements of age 55 or 25 years of service.
· e decided against recommending this change for several
reasons.
(1) At age 55, the great majority of people still
have several years of useful workln9 ability
ahead of them and would not be content with a
life of inactivity. At the same time, they
will have reached an age where other employment
will be difficult to obtain.
(2) The additional cost of providing a pension at age
55 which bears the same relationship to current
earnings as the pensions now payable would be
very substantial, 4.32% of payroll for general
employees and 6°86% of payroll for policemen
and firemen.
In the Dnited States b5 still is generally regarded as the
standard retirement age although most governmental systems
are more liberal in their requirements. And many corpora-
tions are gradually permitting and encouraging retirement
at earlier ages. The requirements of the present System
seem to be in line with practices prevalent throoghout the
country. NbJ]e it must be admitted that many jobs in the
service of the City are hazardous or require considerable
physical stamina, the same can be said of many industries
with similar age and service requirements.
The principal interest in reduced age and service require-
ments seems to lie in ~e Police and Fire Departments, even
to the extent of having separate requirements for these
Departments. It can be argued that the hazards and physical
requirements of these jobs are such that employment beyond
age 55 is not practicable. Statistics on a national basis
probably wauld bear this out, but the demands of a smaller
city such as Roanoke would not seem to be as rigorous as those
in more densely populated areas. Other departments of the
City have jobs which are equally demanding physically.
The Board feels it is important to maintain a uniform system
for all employees. It is almost a certainty that preferential
treatment for certain departments would be ill-received by
the others.
The present plan provides a retirement benefit of l/?Oth of
nn employee*s final salary multiplied by his years of
this is 30/70tbs or 43% of bis rinnl salary, This benefit
level Is belou today*s generally accepted idea that retire-
meat benefils from all sources should be at least one-half
1. Some employees acquire more than 30 lears of service,
and their retirement benefits becoie a higher propor-
tion of final salary.
mall before age 60 and obtain other full-time emplolment.
of the City*s retired employees have benefits belou u
levels.
Security. This mill accomplish tun purposes:
available Social Security benefits in fulfilling
(2) It will provide a greater degree of equity among
even this ~wer level (more than 3% of salary)
6% is a sizeable burden,
(2) When Federal income taxes are considered, employee
24'7
earnings before they contribute these earnings
bach to the System, If the cost of security
benefits Is considered ·long with mares as tot·l
compensation, more benefits can be provided for the
same money by b·viag the money flow directly
into the Retirement System.
Council may wish to take into account the increase in real
income which employees receive from making the System
noncontributory when it sets the level of wage Increases
to be granted rot the cowing year.
The recommend·tmon to refund to employees their accumulated
past contributions is an expensive one--the amount of money
involved is approximately $4 million, The decision to
refund will Increase the City*s unfunded liabilities under
the plan by this amount. However, · great deal of inequit~
will be created among present and future employees if the
refund provision is not included in the change to a noncon-
tributory System.
HisregardJng any savings which might result from offsetting
reduced contributions from employees against current
wage increases, the cost to the City to make the System
noncontributory (Rased on the assumptions currently
in use for valuation of the plan) is as folloms:
% of
Pavrol I Amount
General Employees
Current Service Cost 2.02% $154,647
Unfunded Liability Payment 1.93% $147.757
Total 3.95% $302,404
Policemen and Firemen
Current Service Cost 2.74% $ 75.3R6
Unfunded Liability Payment 2.63% $ 72.359
Total 5.37% $147,745
$450,149
The unfunded liability payment is the amount required each
year over a 30-year period to return to the Fund the amounts
set aside to refund accumulated contributions.
The interest rate used in valuing the liabilities of the
System is 4%. For several years, the investment return
available on funds of this nature has been substantially
above this level. The Fond presently is invested about
50% in common stocks and 50% in high grade corporate bonds.
We can reasonably expect that the combined appreciation and
dividends will exceed 6%. For several years, yields on
high-quality long-term corporate bonds have
exceeded 7% and there is no current indiciatton of a
significant change.
The Hoard and its investment manager feel that an increase
in the valuation interest rate from 4% to 5% is well within
the bounds of conservatism. An integral part of our recom-
mendations, not previously stated, is the adoption of a 5%
interest rate for valuing the System's liabilities. Mith
the increased interest rate, the System would be able to
operate on a noncontributory basis without any increase
in its annual cost for the System as it is now constituted
on using a 4% rate.
If the Board of Trustees can provide any additional infor-
mation about its recommendations or about any other changes
mhich Council might wish to consider, please call on us.
S! Milllam R. Battle
Milliam R. Hattie
Chairman
Board Of Trustees
Retirement System of the City of Roanoke*
Mr. Garland moved that the report be referred to the City Attorney
for preparation of the proper measure carrying out the recommendations of the
Hoard of Trustees of the Employees* Retirement System, The motion was seconded
by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
249
Nith regard to pensions, Council previously referred to the Board
of Trustees of the Employees* Retirement System, a request rot benefit increase
consideration from Mr, D. Oo Brown, a retired fireman mbo mas a member and
mbo ia retired from the Police and Fire Pension Systeme the Board of Trustees
of the Employees' Retirement System submitted u written report advising that
after considerable discussion ~t the Board meetings, the Board mould like for
Council to hold this matter in abeyance until it can be determined if it is
feasible to merge the Police and Fire Pension System into the Employees*
Retirement System in the near future so that the employees who have retired
mill be given equal benefit increases mith retirees under the Employees*
Retirement System from time to time, thus keeping future problems in the
administration of the retirement program to a minimum and that as a part
of its study, the Board mill also determine if it is feasible to offer to
members of the Police and Fire Pension System still employed the benefits of
the Employees' Retirement System on an equal basis mith other employees.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the report of the Board of
Trustees of the Employees' Retirement System. The motion mas seconded by
Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a
written report advising that by Resolution No. 20564 Council authorized a
fourth sixty day period of extended salary to Patrolman William L. Bowling
who mas injured in the line of duty on May 27, 1972, that os of Bay 31, 1973,
this sixty day period will expire, that Officer Bowling is still unable to
return to duty and again recommendin9 that Council, by appropriate
Resolution, authorize payment to Officer Bomling of his salary for an addi-
tional sixty day period, or necessary portion thereof.
In this connection, the City Manager submitted a further report
advising that by Resolution No. 20765 Council authorized an additional sixty
day period of extended salary to Assistant Fire Chief Robert M. Hancock who
mas injured in the line of duty on November lg~ 1972, that as of May lb, 1973,
this sixty day period mill expire and A~sistant Fire Chief Hancock is still
unable to return to duty and again recommending that Council, by appropriate
Resolution, authorize payment to Assistant Fire Chief Hancock of his salary
for an additional sixty day period, or necessary portion thereof.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendations of' the
City Manager and offered the following ~esolution authorizing and directing
that Robert M. Hancock, a member of.the Fire Department #ho is unable to
perform his regular salary for an additional sixty days beginning May 16,
1073; and that ~illiam L. Bomiing, a member ~f the Police ~epartment who is
unable to perform his regular duties by reason of personal inj'ury received in
line of duty, be paid his regular salary for on additional period of sixty
days beginning May 21, 1973:
25O
(a20876) A gE~0LUTlOg.autborlzing end.directing that Robert
Mancock, a member of the Fire Department who Is unable to perform his regular
duties by reason of personal injury received in line of duty, be paid his regular
salary for an additional period of sixty (60) days beginning May 16, 1973, and
that Milldam L, gosling, a member of the Police Department mbo is unable to per-
form his regular duties by reason of personal injury received in line of duty,
be paid his regular salary for an additional period of sixty (60) days beginning
May 21, 1973,
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book u3M, page 93.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Rubard absent)
ALCODOL: Council having referred to the City Attorney for report
in connection with a communication from Mr. Kenneth L. Nilhey, General Manager,
The Hotel Roanoke, requesting an extension of the present closing hour Of I a.m.,
in the mixed alcoholic beverage outlets to 2 a.m., during the period of
Daylight Saving Time, the City Attorney submitted the following report advising
that mhile the poser to extend the closing hour of the sale of beer, mine and
mixed beverages lies wholly within the authority of the Alcoholic Beverage Control
Board, it is clear that the Board has such authority which may be exercised on
application of a licensee or licensees, or on proposal made by the governing
body of a locality; however, such regulation when made by the Board must be
general to the whole locality or, conceivably, to a particular class or type of
licensee under the Board, that in other words, such regulation must be general
or applicable to a definable class of licensee but not to a specific licensee:
"May 7, 1973
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
At the last meeting of the City Council a communica-
tion from the General Manager of Hotel Roanoke dated April
19, 1973, relative to the hotel's desire for an extension
of the present closing hour of 1:00 A. M., applicable to
the sale of mixed alcoholic beverages at its various
outlets, was considered; and the undersigned was directed
to advise the Council as to matters of procedure in the
premises. This report is made in light of an examination
of the Code provisions relating to ABC matters and of
telephone conversations which I have had with enforcement
officials both in Roanoke and in Richmond.
Sec. 11, Chapter 3, Title XXIII of the Code of the City
of Roanoke regulates, only, the hours of sale Of wine, beer
or soft drinks and,.in so regulating, is applicable only
to the sale of those beverages in residential districts of
the City. The prorision =ekes unlawful the keeping open of
any place or establishment shere wine, beer or soft drinks
are sold or offered for sale within any residential dis-
trict between the hours of 12:OO midnight, and 7:00
of the following day.
~4-90,5 of the Code of Virginia provides that mixed
beverages may be sold in u city, tOmB or county only nt
such flues a* beer, wine Or other similar alcoholic beverages
way be sold in such city, town or county; end §4-36 of the
Code et Virginia provide* that the Alcoholic Beverage
Control Board shall prescribe by regulation** which say
from tiwe to tine be altered, awended Or repealed, between
what bourn oud On whet day* wine and beer aball not be *old
or allowed to be consumed upon premises of any licensed
establi*hment.
I nm adrfsed by repre*entatfves of the Board that,
by regulations heretofore adopt ed by the Board, it has -
been generally provided lhat beer, wine and similar bever-
ages way not be sold between the hours of 1:00 A. B. and
6:00 A. #., folloming and, thus, the sale of mixed beverages
is precluded during those same hoars. I aw further
advised that in tmo localities of the state, special regula-
tions promulgated by the Board have the effect of extending
the closing hour of sale from l:O0 A. M. to 2:00 A. M., those
citie* being Norfolk and Virginia Beach.
Thus, while the power to extend the closing hour of
the sale of beer, wine amd mixed beverages lies wholly
mithin the Hoard, it is clear that the Board has such
authority which may be exercised on application of a
licensee or licensees, or on proposal made by the governing
body Of a locality; however, such regulation when made by
the Board must be general to the mhole locality et, con*
ceivably, to a particular class or type of licensee under
the Hoard. Iff other words, such regulation must be general
or applicable to a definable class of licensee but not to
a specific licensee.
I await any further directive or inquiry from the
Council.
Respectfully,
$/ J. ~. Kiucanon
J. N. KJncanon"
Mr, Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
mas seconded by Mr. Llsk and unanimously adopted.
TRAFFIC: Council having previously requested that the City Attorney
prepare the proper measure appropriating the necessary funds for the
installation of a traffic control light at the intersection of Dale Avenue,
$. E., and the entrance to the Parkside Plaza Shopping Center, the City
Attorney submitted a written report transmitting said appropriation Ordinance
and advising that prior to actual installation of the proposed'new traffic
signal, the approval of such installation should be sought and obtained from
the Department of Highways.
Mayor Webber advised that Councilman William S. Hubard has requested
that action on this item be deferred until the next regular meetin9 of
Council on Monday, May 14, 1973.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the request of Councilman
Bubard that action on the matter be deferred until the next regular meeting
of Council on Monday, May 14, 1973. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk
and unanimously adopted.
TRAFFIC-STREETS AND ALLEys: Council having referred to the City
Manager, the Superintendent of Traffic Engineering and Communications and
the City Planning Commission for study, report and recommendation the request
o£ American Motor Inns, Incorporated, for one access road to he constructed to
251
252
Miley Drive for use by employees of American #otor Inns, Incorporeted, from
their new office building being constructed edJacent to Miley Drive near
Franklin Roudo S, M** the City Planning Commission submitted the following report
recommending that Miley Drive be maintained as a parkway and that this request
for an access onto Miley Drive be denied nnd further recommending that the City
Planning Department be authorized to undertake u comprehensive study of Miley
Drive and its environs and mahe such recommendations deemed necessary and essential
to the maintenance and integrity of this park area:
"May 3. 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of May 2, 1973.
Mr. Perkins*n, attorney for American Motor Inns, Incor-
porated, appeared before the Planning Commission requesting
access to Miley Drive from American Motor Inns* and Franklin
Road, S. M. Mr. Perkinsom stated that there would be
approximately 100 cars driven by employees leaving and enter-
ing the new office building between the hours of 7:50 and
6:30 a. m. and 4:30 and 5:30 p. m. and that it will be
almost impossible for them to exit on to Franklin Road
because the traffic backs up at Drandon Avenue and Franklin
Road to the bridge and that traffic coming over the bridge
comes past the only exit out of the office building.
Mr. Perkinson stated that be felt that the petition was
a logical one traffic-wise since automobiles could exit from
the property, tarn east on to Wiley Drive and out to Franklin
Road or they could go north or south on Jefferson Street.
He further stated that if vehicles are restricted to the
Holiday Inn exit, they would have to cross the south bound
traffic, creating potential hazards to life. He noted that
if the City grants this request, the petitioner would abide
by any restrictions placed by the City on the drivers
and that the employees would be instructed that if Wiley
Drive is abused, the access from it mould be closed. He
further noted that stipulations could be placed in regard to
this access point to the effect that traffic going west on
Wiley Drive must exit at Main Street so that excessive
traffic would not be created around the transportation
museum.
Mr. Perkinson noted that from a traffic standpoint.
this request is logical but that there would be some over-
ridin9 matters that could cause people to believe that this
is an illogical request. He stated that one of these
factors might be the violating of a will or an estate but
that this section of Wiley Drive does not have requirements
against it as do many parks in the City because the property
was condemned by the City from the prior owners, and
therefore, no stipulations were placed. Another of these
concerns might be that some property owners had petitioned
in the past (December B, 1966 and February 25, 1967) for
a rezoning to an apratment use mith three exits on to
~iley Drive but that this request was denied. Also, be
noted, that another of these concerns might be that it would
open a Pandora's box with other petitioners requesting
access on to Wiley Drive if this request is approved but
that because of the topography of the land and the sur-
rounding uses, such as the river and the railroad tracks,
and a large embankment, there would be no other property
owners in a situation such as this that could possibly use
Wiley Drive. Finally, he noted that the petitioner would
abide by any restrictions placed on them by the City such as
time parameters, duration, or landscaping in the area, and
would continue to do so and that this request would be
entirely left to the will of the City.
Mr. Dradshaw asked what they would do in the instance
of flooding of Miley Drive. Mr. Perkinson answered that the
t
people would not use the exit then and that a similar
barricade to the one used mhen it Is flooded could be placed
nt the office building exit so that no one could use Wiley
Drive then,
Hr, Coleman asked if it would help the situation any to
open it ut certain times during the day. Hr. Lserence stated
that it seemed if trnrfic desired to turn east. it mould
complicate the traffic even more and would choke ap Wiley
Drive also at 5:00. Hr. Perkinson stated that he had viewed
Wiley Drive on n rainy day nad that in five minutes, he only
counted 8 cars using Wiley Drive in both directions.
Mr. Parrott stated that betmeen the hours of 4:00 to
6:30 or 7:00 p.m.. these parks are filled with people
playing in the sandlot athletic games and people coning to
watch the games and if 100 additional cars are added.
cars mill be backed up at Wasena Park and South Roanoke
Park.
The Planning Director stated that a related itme has
been referred to the City manager by Council concerning the
possibility of closing off a portion of Wiley Drive from
0:00 a.m. ou Sundays to fl:O0 p.m. that same day roy
bicycling and picnicing and sundry leisure time activities.
The Planning Director pointed out that Wiley Drive is
a scenic route, the only one of its kind in the City, whose
major purpose is to service and provide access to a system
of five parks - Ghent. Smith, South Roanoke, Wasena and gaher
Field. Its major intent, it was noted, is to provide for a
multitude of active and passive recreational activities
geared to all age groups in the City. As such, he noted.
Wiley Drive was not intended as a through street or geared
to service abutting comuercial properties.
The Planning Director noted that by providing for any
additional access onto Wile/ Drive, you mould be, in fact,
changin9 the character, nature, and intent of this Drive.
In this case. the hem office structure would generate well
over 300 automobiles, not counting the use that would be
made of this access point by other existing commercial
establishments nearby and the accompanying traffic and
circulation problems so created.
It was pointed out that the character of the Drive was
already deteriorating and that measures need to be taken
now to insure that the Integrity, purpose and intent of this
scenic route not be altered. The Planning Director recom-
mended that the Department be instructed to study Wiley
Drive and its environs and make such recommendations deemed
necessary to insure for the essential integrity of this
scenic area.
After much discussion by the Planning Commission mem-
bers, it was generally agreed that this request is not in
the best interest of the citizens of Roanoke and presented
serious aesthetic and traffic and circulation problems to a
major scenic recreation area of the City.
Accordingly, motion mas made, duly seconded and
approved with a vote of five (5) ayes and one (1) nay,
recommending to City Council that Wiley Drive be maintained
as a parkway and that this request for an access on to
Wiley Drive be denied.
motion was also made, duly seconded, and approved
unanimously recommending that the Planning Department u~
take a comprehensive study of Wiley Drive and its environs
and make such recommendations deemed necessary and essen-
tial to the maintenance and integrity of this park area.
Sincerely,
S/ L. A. Ourham Jr. by LM
L. A. Durham, Jr.
Acting Chairman"
In this connection, the City Manager and the Superintendent of ?raffi
Engineering and Communications, submitted the following joint report recommend-
ing that this request be denied in order that Wiley Drive may be preserved
for its intended usage:
253
2.54
WApril 30, 1973
Honorable Mayor nnd City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
C~ntleaen: .. ·
The request of American Rotor Inns, lng.. for access
to Niley Drive from their new office building mhJch is
under construction near Frunhiin Road adjacent to ~iley
Drive, which was before City Council at its meeting on
Ronday, April 2, 1973, was referred to Mr. J. D. Sink,
Superintendent of Traffic Engineering and Communications.
and we for consideration and recommendation back to
City Council.
Ue recognize ell of the many problems associated
with access from this property to either Franklin Road
or Brandon Avenue due to the high volumes of traffic on
both of these streets. These traffic conditions were in
existence prior to the construction of the Ifoliday Inn
Motel and this office structure.
At such time as the Southwest Expressway is extended
across the Roanoke River, the traffic volumes at this
location are expected to drop to approximately 1/3 the
volume that exiats today.
Mhile recognizing American Motor Inn°s problem, we
also recognize the fact that roadways in parks should be
available for use by thc citizens for the enjoyment of all
park facilities and that there should be adequate safety
measures of all park roadways in order to protect the
citizens utilizing the facilities. ~e do not believe that
private access to a park roadway is in keeping with the
intended usage of that roadway.
A check through our files indicates that the same
request mas presented to the City several years ago by the
Holiday Inn at the time that the Holiday Inn was under
construction, and the request was denied at that time.
It is again our recommendation that this request be
denied in order that Wiley Drive can be preserved for its
intended usage.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Haner
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager
S/ J. D. Sink
J. D. Sink, Superintendent
Traffic Engineering ~ Communications"
Hith reference to the matter, a communication from Mr. Harvey
Latins, Attorney, representin9 Kirk-Jeff, Incorporated, in connection with the
request of American Rotor Inns, Incorporated, advising that Kirk-Jeff, Incor-
porated, opposes the granting of such access road. however, if permission is
granted for the construction and maintenance of such an access road for and on
behalf of American Motor Inns, Kirk-Jeff, Incorporated. likewise desires an
access road from its property onto Riley Drive, was also before Council.
Mr. Frank N. Perkinson, Jr., Attorney, representing American Motor
Inns, Incorporated, appeared before Council in support of the request Of his
client, advising that the use of this access road is only requested from the
hours of 7:30 a.m. to 6:30 a,m., and from 4:30 p.m., to 5:30 p.m., and that
his client is very much concerned with the matter of safety.
Mr. J. D. Slab, Superintendent of Traffic Engineering and Communica-
tions, advised that ir council grants this request It will be opeining the
door for more requests of this nature.
After a discussion of the matter, Mr. Garland moved that the City
Attorney be instructed to prepare the proper measure authorizing the construc-
tion of the access road to Uiley Orlve and for Its use during the hours of
7:30 a.m., to 6:30 a.m,, and from 4:30 p.m., to 5:30 p.m., five days per
week on a temporary basis until such time as the Southmest Expressway is
opened and that the proper barricade be erected at the expense of American
Motor Inns, Incorporated, to prohibit traffic from using thin access road
except during the specified hours. The motion Was seconded by Mr. Trout and
unanimously adopted.
EASERENTS: Council having referred to the City ganager and to the City
Planning Commission for study, report and recommendation a petition from
Michael K. Smeltzer, Attorney, representing Mr. Billy fl. Branch. requestin9
that a portion of a twenty foot wide drainage and public utility easement,
the center line of which is the northerly line of Block S. as more
particularly shomn on the Map of Section No. 2, Edgehill Estates. be vacated
and re-established, the City Planning Commission submitted a written report
recommendin9 that the request be ~anted.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council hold a public hearing on the request
at 7:30 p.m., Monday, June 25, 1973, in the Council Chamber. The motion
was seconded by Ur. Link and unanimously adopted.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Council having referred to the City Planning
Commission for study, report and recommendation the request of Liberty Terminal
Corporation that the westerly portion of Louisiana Avenue (an unopened
street) a distance on the north side of said street of 114.15 feet, and on the
south side of said street 125 feet, more OF less, and 50 feet Jn width, be
written report rec'ommendin9 that the request be granted.
gr. Thomas moved that Council hold a public hearing on the request
to vacate, discontinue and close the street at 7:30 p.m., Monday, June
1973, in the Council Chamber. The motion was seconded by Mr. List and unani-
mousll adopted.
STREETS AND ALLETS: Council having referred to the City Planning
Commission for study, report and recommendatioo the request of Mr. Daniel N.
Monaco, et ux., nod gr. Jimmy L. Weddle, et ux., that an unused portion of
Moa,vale Road, S. W., at the intersection of Spring Road, S. ~., be vacated,
discontinued and closed, the City Planning Commission submitted a written
report recommending that the request be granted with a reservation of all city
and public utility easements.
255
256
Hr, Thomas moved that Council hold a public hearing on the request to
vacate, discontinue end close the street et 7:30 p.m., Wonday, June 25, 1973,
in the Council Chamber. The motion was seconded by #Fo Lish and unanimously
adopted,
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a written report In
connection with the request of Mr. Donald D. margined, that property located at
135 Xsddoch Avenue, N. £., described as Lots 53 and 54, Block C, Hap of Williamson
Groves, Offlcial Tax No. 3080909 and the tub vacant lots adjacent thereto,
described as Lots S1 and 82, Bloch C, Map of Wllllaason Groves, Official Tax No.
308090B, be vezoned from RD, Duplex Residential District, to C-2, General Com-
merical District, recommending that the request be granted and further recom-
mending that the City Planning Department be authorized to conduct a study of this
general area to determine the advisability of rezoning it, or a portion thereof,
to a C-2, General Commercial District, or a more appropriate designation.
Br. Thomas moved that a public hearing on the request for rezonino
be held at 7:30 p.m., Monday. June 25. 1973, in the Council Chamber. The motion
mas seconded by Mr. Link and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a written report in
connection with the request of Mr. William T. Dalton, Jr., and Mr. Freddie
Dalton, that property located on the northerly side of the 800 block of Jamison
Avenue, S. £., described an Lots IT and lB, Section 13, Map of Belmont Land
Company, Official Tax Nos. 412011? and 412011B, be rezoned from RG-2. General
Residential District, to C-2, General Commerical DistFict, recommending that
the request be granted and further recommending that the City Planning Department
be authorized to conduct a study of Jamison Avenue from gth Street to Interstate
Route 581 to determine if this frontage facing on Jamison Avenue should be
rezoned or a portion thereof rezoned to a C-2, General Commerical District, or
some more appropriate alternate zoning designation.
Mr. Thomas moved that a public hearse9 on the request for rezonlng be
held at 7:30 p.m., Monday, June 25, 1973, in the Council Chamber. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Link and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
INTEGRATION-SEGREGATION: The Community Relations Committee submitted
the follouing report in connection with certain activities of the Committee
since its appointment in 1969 and inquiring as to whether or not the Community
Relations Committee is to continue, and if so, whether on an ad hoc basis or as
a standing committee of Council and requesting, if Council desires that the
Committee continue on a permanent basis, that the Committee be authorized to
select its own Chairman on an annual basis and that the Assistant to the City
Manager for Community Relations be made an ex-officio member of the Community
Relations Committee:
"TO: MAYOR AND UE~RERS OF COUNCIL
FROM: COMUUNITY RELATIONS COMMITTEE
The Community Relations Committee (CRC) mas appointed
by Council on JuJy 21, 1969, in an effort to accumulate data
and investigate complaints of discrimination as voiced by
members of the Black community and various civic organiza-
tions in the areas of municioal emnlovnent, dilanidated
housino, recreational facilities nod malice-community rela-
tions.
The Committee mas composed originally of 6 persons--3
blacks and 3 whites. After 2 public meetings held on
July 24th and August 6, 1969, the Council responded to a
request to enlarge the Committee to 12 members as being
more representative of the community. The Committee was
increased LO 6 blacks and 6 mhites as indicated on the
attached list aY Committee members.
A re-organizational meeting was held on October
1969, at which time the Committee decided to devote its
full attention on a first priority basis to an in-depth
study of the problem of alleged discrimination in the
area of municipal employment in order to arrive at valid
recommendations based upon a factual analysis of the
situation.
Since the meeting of Octobor 15, 1969, the following
matters have beon considerod by the Committeo and reported
to Council:
(1) Report on Runicipal Employment - (5-1-70)
(Dave Ooode, Chairman)
(2) Resolution re-affirnin9 City of Roanoke ns Equal
Opportunity Employer (3-31-T0)
(3) Survey of Parks and Rocreatioa (4-21-70)
(Charles Davis, Chairman)
(4) Survey of Condemnation of Buildings (9-1-70)
(Dr. James Crooks, Chairman)
(5) Report of Status of Police-Community Relations
(10-1-?0) (William C. Thomas, Chairman)
Establishment of Fair Employment Practices
Committee (William C. Thomas, Chairman)
(7) Recommendation for Establishment of Comparable
Bi-Racial Committee by School Board
(fl) Recommendation for Establishment Of Post of
Community Relations Officer as liaison between the
Community and Municipal Government with particular
emphasis on problems of Black community
(9) Served as liaison for individual requests and
problems referred to the Committee by Council
On behalf of the Committee, we uish to express apprecia-
tion for the interest, cooperation and support we have
received from Council, the City administration, news media
and citizens. We feel we have been effective as a Committee.
~e feel me have accomplished significant inroads into bridg-
ing the 'communication gap' between municipal 9overnnent
and the people.
There is a great deal still to be done, particularly
in the area of improving police-community relationships;
however, as an adh o c Committee we feel it is now time to
receive further guidance and direction from Roanoke City
Council.
Please advise as to whether the Council desires for
the Committee to continue and, if so, whether on an ad hoc
basis or as a standing Committee of the Council. Should
the Council denire the Committee to continue on a permanent
basis, me mould request permission for the Committee to
258
select its oma Chairman on an annual basis. Also, me would
request that the Assistant to the City Manager be made an
Ex-Officio member of the Committee.
S/ Hampton W. Thomas
Hampton N. Thomas, Chairman
Community Rela~ans Committee'
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Hr. Lish moved that the City Attorney be instructed to prepare the
proper measure authorizing the Community Relations Committee to continue as a
)armament committee of Council. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Garland and
unanimously adopted.
MUNICIPAL BUILDING-POLICE DEPARTMENT: Council having referred to
a committee for tabulation, report and recommendation bids received for the
provision and Jnstallatlon of a burglsr alarm panel to be installed in the
Commnnications Center of the Municipal Ruildina. the committee submitted the
following report recommending that the proposal of Electrolavm Systems, Incor-
porated, in the amount of $24,H20.90, be accepted, and advising that an
additional appropriation of $6,000.00 will be needed for said purpose:
"May 3, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, ¥irginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Bids on Burglar Alarm Panel
The City Council on April 16, 1973, received bids for
provision and installation of a burglar alarm panel to be
installed in the Communications Center of the Municipal
Building. Five bids were received, three to furnish and
install the equipment and two alternate bids to furnish
equipment only with installation being accomplished by
City forces.
The IBm bid and low alternate bid were both submitted
by Hayden Construction Company in the amounts of $1O,O20.O0
and ~16,940.00 respectively.
These bids submitted by Hoyden Construction Compnny are
for prototype, untested equipment which would be built
especially for this purpose. The bidder has not previously
built or installed equipment of this type; therefore, your
committee could not evaluate performance of his equipment
in this field.
Furthermore, bis equipment, to this time, is not
UndermrJter Laboratories accepted and listed and he has
no assurance that it will receive this necessary acceptance
subsequent to manufacture. For these reasons, your commit-
tee recommends that City Council reject both the initial
and alternate bids submitted by Hayden Construction Company.
The Bid submitted by Mosler Electronic Systems, lac.,
in the umonnt of $$1,7g0.00 and the alternate bid submitted
by Design Controls, Inc., in the amount of $22,095.00 do not
comply with the specifications in that they both stated that
their systems mere not Undermriters Laboratories approved.
7he bid submitted by Electralarm Systems Incorporated in
the amount of $24,820.90 most closely meets the specifications
and is, in fact, the only proposal submitted mhich is
Undermriters Laboratories accepted and listed.
Acceptance of the bid submitted by Electralarm
Systems will require an additional appropriation in the
amount of $6,000.00. This is due to the fact that the cost
estimate for this project prepored prior to the ~lscul
year 1972-73 budget was bused on $20.000.00 for equipment
installed mith $$,000.00 to be used for remodeling to pr6-
vide a secure locution in the old court house building
with necessary conduit and cable. The remodeling has been
virtually completed, the conduit has been installed and the
cable is on order. As cf April IS, 1973, $s.2o4,27 hud
been encumbered from this account.
Your committee after reviewing the City*s specifications
and the contractor's proposals, unanimously recommends that
the City Council accept the bid of Electralurn Systems
Incorporated in the amount of $24,fl2o.9o end reject all
other bids. rot the reasons above stated.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ James O. Sink, Chairman
James O. Sink, Chairman
S/ Robert A. Garland
Robert A. Garland
S/ Alfred Beckley
Alfred Beckley*
In this connection. Mr. Robert L. Hayden. representing Rnyden Con-
struction Company. appeared before Council and raised various questions as to
why his bid was not accepted since he was the apparent low bidder.
Mr. J. D. Sink, Chairman of the Committee, advised that the equipment
which Mr. Byden plans to use has not, to this time, been accepted by the
Underwriter Laboratories and that Mr. Bayden has no assurance that it will
receive this necessary acceptance subsequent to manufacture.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
committee and offered the folloming emergency Ordinance accepting the proposal
of Electralarm Systems, Incorporated:
(~20877) AN ORDINANCE accepting a proposal of Electralarm Systems,
Inc., for providing and installing a complete burglar alarm panel in the
City's Communication*s Center; authorizing the proper City officials to execute
the ~quisite contract; rejecting certain other bids made to the City; and
provldin9 for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~aa, page 95.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................
NAYS: None ......... O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
Dr. Taylor then offered the following emergency Ordinance
appropriating the additional amount of $6,000.00 for said equipment:
(~20876) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~57, "Traffic
Engineering and Communications," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book naB, page
259
26O
Dr, Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................... 6.
NAYS: None ............O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
ZONING: Council having on two occasions deferred action on a report
of the City Planning Commission in connection with the request of Mr. Charles
N. Dahl that property located on the west corner of Melrose Avenue and Country
Club Drive, N. W., described as part of Lots 3, 4 and 5 amd all of Lots
7, 8, 9 and 10, Cavalier Path, Official Tax No. 2660110, be rea,ned from C-l,
Office and Institutional District, to C-2, General Commercial District, the
City Planning Commission again submitted the follaming report recommending that
the request for rea,ming be denied:
*April 19, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission on numerous occasions.
At the March ?, 1973, meeting, Mr. Jim Early appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that the purpose
for this fez,ming petition ia to operate a drive-in con-
venience store. He noted that this store mould be similar
to a 7 - 11 Store or a Eenney*s Bantam Market except that
it is a drive-in service through a sliding door.
Mr. Early then presented an architectural rendering
of the proposed building showing automobiles driving under
the carport being served through sliding glass doors. Be
noted that a number of these stores are called *milk
Outlets* in Other states and that their menu is basically
bread, milk, soft drinks, and other spur of the moment items.
Mr. Lawrence asked if parking mould be provided. Mr. Early
replied that it would be, but that it is designed basically
for a drive-in type store. He noted that one entrance
would be provided off of Country Club Drive and the other
one off of Melrose Avenue. N. N. Mr. Boynton asked mhat
the specific location of this store would be off of Country
Club Drive. Mr. Early answered that the store would set
hack 45 feet off of the street and that the petitioner
liked the site of the lot and that it had 9ood sight
distance d,mn the road.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and
unanimously approved that thin ~em be tabled and that the
Planning Department review and study the mite plan and not
the overall effect of thin type of use on the character and
generally on the surroundin9 area.
At the April 4, 1973, meeting of the City Planning Com-
mission. Mr. Jim Early again appeared before the Planning
Commission and stated that a question had arisen at the
last meeting of what the petitioner would do for parking
should there be an overflow of cars. Be stated that they
had limited the opening onto Melrose Avenue to one spot for
ingress and egress and one on Country Club Drive and that
they have also provided approximately 13 parking spaces,
one or two for employees and the balance for the overflow
of cars, should the situation warrant.
Mr. Bradshaw asked that if one car was being served,
would there be sufficient room for another car to get com-
pletely off Melrose Avenue. Mr. Early stated that actually
4 cars can get off Melrose Avenue. Also, Mr. Lawrence asked
what doors the people that park and walk in to the store
would use. Mr. Early answered that they would use the same
doors as provided for the automobiles, but that they did
not anticipate this situation happening.
The Planning Director appeared before the Planning Caw-
wission and slaled that in lerws of the slreet itself,
Melrose Avenue la · business orienled street and wuny of
lhe lots are zoned either C-l or C-2 districts. He further
slaled lhal nueerous queslions uhould be ushed, (1) can
the street hold uny wore additional lraffic (2) can we go
to a C-2 dislrict ulthout aggravating lhe present lraffic
situation. He farther holed that in respect lo this use,
ue should beep ill traffic orr country Club Drive, the
slreet right of way is enly aboul 30 feet and this road is
the only access point to lhe Counlry Club, which has a
membership of over l,OOO persons. He noted lhat this
particular lype of use will generate much lraffic and lhat
lhere was already a serious problew or bach-up lraffic across
#elrose at lhe car wash eslablishmenl.
#r. Dab! appeared before lhe Planning Commission and
slaled that there was an almost ldenlical situalion in the
south of Philadelphia and lhat they mere experiencing no
problems there even at peah hours. He further staled lhat
lhere was a sleady ingress and egress of lraffic planned
here wilh no bach-up to speah of with at the most two cars.
He holed that there nas discussion about Country Club Road
being only a 30 fool streel and lhat if the Commission
felt there was a need, the slreet should be widened to a
50 fool streel. He furlher staled lhal lb*re was approxi-
mately 24,000 cars using HelFose Avenue per day and that
he had personally viewed the slluation at Counlry Club
Drive and had noliced no problems there now and thal lb*re
were very few cars all day long using Counlry Club Drive.
He staled lhat caru would come in the Food King, be served
and Oel out, in most cases, in less lhan a minule.
After some discussion by the Planning Commission
members, it was generally agreed that inquiry should
be made to the City Engineer on the possibility or feasi-
bility of widening Country Club Drive to become a 50 foot
street and it was further agreed that no action be tahen
on this petition until such time as the Planning staff had
resolved this situation.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and
approved unanimously that this item be tabled and that
the Plannin9 Director be instructed to confer with the
Engine*Fin9 Department on the possibility of widening
Country Club Drive, N. W., to a 50 foot street.
At the April ID meeting, Mr. Early again appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that from their
experience with other stores of this nature and in a
locale such as this one, they would anticipate an average
of 250 to 400 cars per day and that the heaviest use would
be Jn late afternoon but that the store would be open from
7:00 a.m. until 12:00 midnight.
The Planning Director stated that although there iua
20 foot setback ordinance that applies to the easterly
portion of Country Club Drive that there were no lan9
term plans (within the next 10 years) to widen this street.
Mr. Hradshaw stated that he felt that the entire strip
up Country Club Drive would be an excellent site for a
business but that the corner lot should not be cut off as
would be done in this case.
After much discussion by the Planning Commission
members, it was generally agreed that this particular
use was not compatible with the area.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and
approved unanimously recommending to City Council that
this request be denied.
Sincerely,
S/ Ilenry D. Hoynton by LM
Henry H. Hoynton
Chairman"
262
It appearing that the petitioner has not advised the City Clerk as to
whether or not he desires a public hearing on the request for rezonlng, Yr.
Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City Planning
Commission nnd that the request for rezoning be denied. The motion was seconded
by Nv. Garland and unanimously adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIHS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Ordinance No. 20848, vacating, discontinuing ond
closing a certain fifteen foot alley running generally east west throngh Block
11 of Hyde Park Land Company, from 15th Street. N.
having previously been before Council for its first reading, read and laid over
was again before the body, Hr. Trout offering the following for its second
reading and final adoption:
(=20848) AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing
a certain fifteen-foot alley running generally East-Nest through Block 11 of
Hyde Park Land Company. from 15th Street, N. N.. to 16th Street. N.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~38. page ??.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Mebber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Rubard absent)
ZONING: Ordinance No. 20849, amending the paragraph entitled Special
exceptions after public notice and hearing by the Board of Zoning Appeals of
Sec. T. RG-I and RG-2. General Residential Districts, of Chapter 4.1. Zoning. of
Title X¥, Construction, Alteration and Use of Land, Buildings and O~ er Struc-
tures, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956. as amended, bi the addition of
a new subsection, to be designated Subsection 9. Art galleries, providing
criteria for alIowance of art galleries in the aforesaid districts as an addi-
tional special exception; and amending Sec, 79.1 Interpretation of certain terms
and words, of said chapter and title by the addition of a new subsection, to be
designated 8.1, Art Gallery, providing for a definition of such term, having
previousIy been before Council for its first reading, read and laid over, was
again before the body, Hr. Garland offering the following for its second reading
and final adoption:
(~20849) AN ORDINANCE amending the paragraph entitled Special exce~tlons
after public notice and hearinq by the Board of Zonino Aooeals of Sec.
RB-1 and RG-2~ General Residential District of Chapter 4.1. Zoninq of Title X¥.
Constructiont Alteration and Use of Landt Bulldinqs and Other Structures of the
Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, by the addition of a new subsection,
to be designated Subsection 9. Art oalleries, providing criteria for aIlowance
of art galleries in the aforesaid districts as an additional special exception;
and amending Sec. 79.1. Interpretation of certain terms and words, of said
chapter and title by the addition of a new subsection, to be designated O.l.
Art Gallery, providing a definition of such term.
(For full text or Ordinance, see Ordinance Boob n38, page 79.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by BF. Llsk and adopted by the follomJng vote:
AYES: Nessrs. Garland, Lash, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Mayor
· ebber .......................... 6. .
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
AIRPORT: Ordinance No. 20854 authorJzin9 and directing the clty°s
execution of an agreement with Piedmont A~tJon, Incorporated. for certain ose
by said corporation of the Roanohe Municipal (Moodrum) Airport ond certain of
its facilities, upon certain terms and conditions, for a three year period
commencing as of April 1. 19T2, having previously been before Council for its
first reading and laid over. was again before the body, Mr. Trout offerin9 the
folloxing for its second readin9 and final adoption:
(~20854) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and directing the City*s
execution of an agreement with Piedmont Aviation. Incorporated, for certain
use by said corporation of the Roanoke Municipal Airport and certain of its
facilities, upon certain terms and conditions, for a three (3) year period
commencin9 as of April 1, 1972.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =38. page 00.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lash and adopted by the following vote:
AVES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor #ebber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
AIRPORT: Ordinance No. 20855, authorizing and directing the city's
execution of an agreement with Eastern Airlines, Incorporated, for certain
use by said corporation of the Roanoke Municipal (Roodrum) Airport and certain
of its facilities, upon certain terms and conditions, for a three year period
commencing as of April 1, 1972, having previously been before Council for its
first reading, read and laid over, was again before the body, Mr. Trout offer-
ing the folloming for its second reading and final adoption:
(~20855) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and directing the City's execution
of an agreeme~ with Eastern Airlines, Inc., for certain use by said corpora-
tion of the Roanoke Municipal Airport and certain of its facilities, upon
certain terms and conditions, for a three (3) year period commencing as of
April 1, 1972.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~38, page 61.)
26~4
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion wes seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adopted b7 the following vote:
AYES: #easts. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
~syor Webber ..................... 6.
MAYS: None ............ O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
SEEERS AMD STORM DRAINS: Council having previously adopted on Ordinance
conditionally accepting the proposal of Pizzagalli Corporation for Contract C
and Contract O at the Sewage Treatment Plant, Mr. Lish offered the following
emergency Ordinance appropriating $3,963,750.00 for said purpose:
(~20B79) AM ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section usSo, 'Sewage
Treatment Capital Improvements Fund°' of the 1972-73 Semage Treatment Fund
Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u38, page 97.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
BUDOET~OMMOMWEALTH'S ATTORNEy: Council having directed the City
Attorney to prepare the proper measure appropriating the necessary funds to
provide for an additional telephone line and an additional telephone for the
Office of the Commonwealth's Attorney, Mr. Lisk offered the folla~ng emergency
Ordinance:
(~20B80) AM ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section u22, "Commonmealth's
Attorney," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~38, page
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ............O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
SCHOOLS: Mrs. D. F. Ryan appeared before Council and presented a
communication from the Jefferson Senior High School P. T. A. extending a formal
invitation to the members of Roanoke City Council to visit Jefferson High School
at 11 a.m., Monday, May 21, 1973.
Mr. Garland moved that Council tentatively accept the invitation and
express appreciation to the Jefferson Senior High School P. T. A. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
ROANOKE VALLEy: Mayor Webber advised that in accordance with a motion,
duly seconded and unanimously adopted at the last regular meeting of Council on
¥osday, April 30, 1973o he has appointed Messrs. Samuel H, #cGheeo III,
Chairman, Lothar Yermelsteia, George
Nheeler, Million L. Myers and J. T. Hophlns as members of the Flood Plain
Committee.
TRAFFIC: Mr. Lash called to the attention of Council a hazardous
traffic condition mbich exists on Melrose Avenue and 31st Street, N. u** and
moved that the City Mansger be requested to submit a report and recommendation
to Council math regard to some type of traffic control on Melrose Avenue and
31st Street, N. M** Jn the vicinity of Melrose Tumers, advising that there are
many elderly citizens who cross this street en route to and from the bus
stop. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
JAIL: Mr. Trout presented a prepared statement in connection with
jail facilities for the City of Roanoke and recommending that the City Manager
mahe recommendations to Council as to his thoughts on the location and time-
table for such facilities mith an eye tomard inclusion of sufficient amounts
in the 1973-74 budget to get the program under#ay at once.
Since Councilman Milliam So Huhard was not present. Mr. Trout
moved that action on the statement be deferred until the next regular
meeting of Council on Monday, May 14, 1973. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Garland and unanimously adopted.
SCHOOLS: A communication from the Breckinridge Junior High School
P. T. A. requesting that the vacancy on the Roanoke City School Hoard created
by the resignation of Mr. Herman H. Pevler be filled by someone resldin9 in
the Milliamson Road area, was before Council.
Mr. Llsk moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
SCHOOLS: A communication from the Addison High School P. T. A.
Executive Board requesting that the vacancy on the Roanoke City School Hoard
created by the resignation of Mr. Herman H. Pevler be filled by someone
residing in their school attendance zone, was before Council.
Mr. Lisk moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
There being no further business, Mayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
265
266
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday, May 14, 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, May 14, 1973, at 2 p.m**
the regular meeting hoar, mith Mayor Roy L. Webber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garlaud, William S. Bubard, David K.
Limb, Noel C. Taylor, Hampton W. Thomas and Mayor Roy L. Webber .... 6.
ABSENT: Councilman James O. Trout .......................1.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Byron E. Hamer, City Manager; Mr. Samuel ii.
McGhee, Ill, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Klncanono City Attorney; Mr.
H. Ben Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorney; and Mr. A. N. Gibson. City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened #ltb a prayer by the Reverend
Harold S. Moyer, Pastor, Milllamson Road Church of the Brethren.
MINUTES: Copies of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday,
April 30, 1973; and the regular meeting held on Monday, May 7, 1973, having been
furnished each member of Council, on motion of Mr. Thomas, seconded by Mr. Bubard
and uoamimously adopted, the reading thereof was dispensed with and the minutes
approved as recorded.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: NONE.
PETITIONS AND COMRUNICATIONS:
STREET LIGHTS: Copy of a communication from the Appalachian P,met
Company transmitting a list of street lights installed and/or removed during
the month of April, 1973, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication and list be received and filed.
The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-CITY CLERK: A communication from the Deputy City Clerk request-
ing that $900.00 be appropriated to Printing and Office Supplies under Section
=2, ~Clerk,' of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for the remainder of the
fiscal year, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the request of the Oeputy'City
Clerk and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the requested
(~208G1) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~2. "Clerk," of
the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book =38. page 98.)
BUDGET-HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: A communication from Mr. Russell R.
Henley, Executive Director, City of Roanohe Redevelopment and Housing Authority,
transmitting n summery of the financial status of the Kimball Redevelopment
Project, Project No. VA. R-46, which requires an obligation by the City of
Roanoke to increase its participation in the financing of the Project. advising
that the increased costs are primarily due to higher site improvement costs
than anticipated in 1968 and interest expense to be incurred on monies to meet
the increased costs and borrowed to carry out the execution of toe project.
was before Council.
Mr. Hubard moved that Council concur in the request of the City of
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority and offered the following emergency
Ordinance outhoriziog and empowering the Mayor of the City of Roanoke and the
City Clerk, for and on behalf of the City of Roanoke, to enter into and execute
a certain Revised Cooperation Agreement with the City of Roanoke Redevelopment
and Housing Authority, bearing date of May 14, 1973, carrying into effect the
Redevelopment Plan for the City of Roanoke designated Redevelopment Plan for
the Kimball Redevelopment Project, Project No. VA. R-4h:
(~208fl2) AN ORDINANCE authorizin9 and empower}n9 the Mayor of the
City of Roanoke and the City Clerk, for and on behalf of the City of Roanoke,
Virginia, to enter into and execute a certain Revised Cooperation Agreement with
the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and }lousing Authority, bearing date Of May
14, 1973, carrying into effect the Redevelopment Plan for the City of Roanoke
designated Redevelopment Plan for the Kimball Redevelopment Project, Project
HO. VA. R-46, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #38, page
Mr. Hubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance. ?he motion was
seconded by Mr. Yhomos and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, T~ylor, Thomas and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
In this connection, Mr. Thomas offered the.following emergency
Ordinance transferring $157,361.00 from the Civic Center account to the Kimball
Redevelopment Project to provide sufficient funds in connection with the above
request of the Housing Authority:
(~20893) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~Bg, "Transfers
to Capital Improvements Fund,# of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~$8, page 105.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following Vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........Oo (Mr. Trout absent)
26.7
268
BUDGET-TOTAL ACTION AGAINS~r POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEY: A communication
from Mr. E, Cabell Bracd, President, Total Action Against Poverty In Roan*Se
Valley, in connection with the request of TAP for funds for support to continue
TAP operations, advising that the bulk of his communication deals with the social
benefits yielded through TAP by relatively small financial costs, mas before
Council.
Mr. Garland moved that the communication be referred to 1973-74 budget
study and to a committee composed of Messrs. Milliam S. Hubard, James O. Trout
and the City Auditor. Yhe motion mas seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously
adopted.
SPECIAL pERMITS-ROANOKE VALLEY: A petition from Mr. Michael K. Smeltzer,
Attorney, representing Eranch ~ Associates, Incorporated, requesting that Council
order the Building Commissioner to issue permits for the construction of the
remaining improvements to the property to be in*wu as Jamestown Plaza in the
vicinity of Riverland Road and Bennington Street, S. E., said property being
located in the Regional Intermediate Flood Plain, was before the body.
Mr. Thomas moved that the petition be referred to the City Planning
Commission for study, report and recommendation to Council as soon as possible.
The motion was seconded by gr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: A petition from Mr. Daniel So Ur*wu, Attorney, representing
Mr. Carl E. Dillon, et ux., and Mr. Richard S. ~instead, et mx., requesting
authorization for the Commissioner of Buildings to issue a certificate of
occupancy for nonconforming use for three apartment units located at 1129-1131
Masena Avenue, S. W., and 1133-1135 Masena Avenue, S. N., was before Council.
Mr. Carland moved that the petition be referred to the City Attorney
for consideration and recommendation to Council at the next regular meeting Of
the body on Monday, May 21, 1973. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and
unanimously adopted.
REVENUE SHARING: A communication from Mr. James M. Colby, Executive
Director. Fifth Planning District Commission, advising that the Fifth Planning
District Commission has developed, as an additional service, an information and
technical assistance capability with regard to general revenue sharing and the
various proposals for special revenue sharing at no additional cost to the
localities and offering the assistance of the Commission in connection with certain
revenue sharing matters, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by gr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
MUNICIPAL CO[~RT-JUVENILE AND DOMESTIC RELATIONS COURT: A j *iht communica-
tion from Judge Beverly T. Fitzpatrick and Judge Lawrence L. Koontz, Jr., advis-
ing that effective July 1, 1973, pursuant to enactments by the last General
Assembly of Virginia, the new district court system will come into operation, that
the 23rd Judicial district mill include the Cities of Roznohe and Salem, the
County of Roanoke, and the Town or vlnton, that within the district court
system, the present county and municipal courts will become general district
courts and the present Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court will become
Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Courts, that there mill be a chief
general Judge and a chief Juvenile Judge who will each have ultimate responsi-
bility for the personnel within.the district, that Judge Fitzpatrick and
Judge Kcontz have been selected as these Chief Judges, that the Judges will
become state employees on July 1, 1973, with their salaries to be set by the
state, that the state law has authorized localities to provide a local supple-
ment as the City Council, in its discretion may deem appropriate in view of the
responsibility and duties of each district judge, and that they are requesting
at this time that consideration be given in the forthcoming budget study session
for appropriate local supplements to the city's district judges responsible for
the City of Roanoke cases, mas before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that the communication be referred to 1973-74 budget
study. The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
ALCOHOL: A communication from Br. Kenneth L. Kilkey, General Manager,
The Hotel Roanoke, in connection with his request for an extension of the
closing hour of I a.m., in the mixed beverage outlets to 2 a.m., during the
Daylight Saving Tine period, advising that since the ABC Board has approved
the extension of closing hours on sales ~ 2 a.m.. in Norfolk and Virginia
Beach, it is his sincere hope that Council, as the governing body of this
locality, will make such a recommendation to the Board in general so other
licensees in their definable class might have the same privilege, was before
Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Br. Garland and unanimously adopted.
ROANOR£ VALLEY: A communication from Br. ~. E. Richardson extending
his congratulations and expressing appreciation on the recent decision to pass
n temporary moratorium on construction in the flood plain areas within the City
Of Roanoke and advising that he is of the opinion that Council was very wise
in following the advice of the City Planning Commission, mas before the body.
Dr. Taylor moved that the communication be received and filed.
The motion was seconded by Br. Garland and unanimously adopted.
JAIL: A communication from Br. Randolph B. Smith, Acting City
Clerk, City of Salem, advising that at a regular meeting of the Council of the
City of Salem held on April 23, 1973, an agreement was authorized with the City
of Roanoke for an advancement of funds on behalf of the Roanoke Valley Regional
Corrections Board in accordance with Resolution No. 20805 adopted by the
Council of the City of Roanoke, was before the body.
269
27O
Dr. Taylor moved that the communication be received and filed, The
motion mas seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
SIGNS-STATE HIGHWAYS: A communication from Mr. D. D. Berglund, President,
Rerglund Chevrolet, Incorporated, requesting permission to move their service
entrance sign 267 feet south of where it is presently located mhJch would place
the sign at the corner of Wllliamson Road and Zhuroton Avenue, advising that the
sign mould be tmo feet from the Williamson Road property line and tmo feet from
the Thurston Avenue property line, nas before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that the communication be referred to the City Manager
for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion mas seconded by Mr.
Lisk and unanimously adopted.
SCHOOLS: A communication from the Ruff Lane P. T. A. Executive Board
requesting that mhen considering a new member for the vacancy On the Roanoke City
School Board that consideration be given to someonm residing in the Williamson
Road area, mas before Council.
Mr. Garland moved that the communication be referred to Council acting
as a Committee of the Nhole. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously
adopted.
SCHOOLS: A communication from Mr. Max A. Berman. Chairman of the
Williamson Road P. T. A. Schools Committee, requesting that when considerin9 a
replacement for Mr. Ilerman H. Pevler to the Roanoke City School Board that con-
sideration be given to someone residin9 in the Williamson Road area, was before
Council.
Rt. Garland moved that the communication be referred to Council acting
as a committee of the Rhole. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously
adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET-COUNCIL-PLANNING-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a
written report requesting that $1,000.00 be appropriated to Travel Expense under
Section ~1, "Council ,* of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for the remainder
of the fiscal year; that $380.00 be transferred from Operating Supplies and
Materials to Printing and Office Supplies under Section u83, "Planning Commission,"
to provide funds for the remainder of the fiscal year; and that $1,410.00 be trans-
ferred from Automobile Allowance, that $631.40 be transferred from Vehicular
Equipment - Replacement and that $2,041.40 be appropriated to Other Equipment -
Replacement under Section ~47, *Fire Department," of the 1972-73 budget to pro-
vide funds for the purchase of a hose expander for use by the Fire Department.
Mr. Hubard moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20884) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book a38, page 105.)
Mr. Hubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Or. Taylor nnd adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubsrd, Limb, Taylor, Thomas and
Mayor ~ebber
NAYS: None ...........O. (Hr. Trout absent)
EOOGET: The City Manager submitted a mritten report advising that
there will be submitted to the members of Council the proposal for the 1g73-74
fiscal lear budget in the form of a budget message and the detailed budgets of
the city on Monday, May 14, 1973.
In this connection, the City Manager submitted the 1973-74 budget
message consisting of eleven pages in addition to comments relative to the
individual department budgets as submitted to Council.
Mr. Lish moved that the proposed budget be tabes under advisement
by Council acting as a Committee of the Mhole and referred to 1973-74 budget
study. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
RECREATION DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a written report
in connection with the President*s Summer Recreation Program, advising that the
City of Roanoke received a Mailgram from the Office of Economic Opportunity
through Mr. Donald Sandridge, Manpower Coordinator, at the Fifth Planning
District Commission, notifying the city that the President would be makin9
available $14,000,000.00 to approximately 100 cities for summer programs orientec
at disadvantaged youth 14 years of age and under, that as the suspense for
filing an application was May 9 and as these funds, if they become available,
will be 100% federal grants, the city rather quickly prepared a proposal request-
in9 $140,000.00 to expand the city*s summer recreation program and submitted
it to meet this early suspense, that it has been called to the city's attention
that money for this program is intended to come from the Office of Economic
Opportunities operating funds as part of the President's effort to commit
appropriated funds as a portion of his attempt to dismantle this agency, that
a question exists as to whether this legally can be done and also on the impact
this would have on local community action agencies, that his administrative
opinion was that if in fact this can and is done, the city should be in a
position to avail itself of some Of these funds and that as more information
is received he mill advise Council accordingly.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
SMOKE: The City Manager submitted a written report advising that
the Federal Environmental Protection Agency has existing regulations providing
for state review procedures of any stationary source such as a business or
industrial structure at a location mhere emission from that source would inter-
fere with the attainment or maintenance of national clean air standards, that
these state regulations will be effective as of May 31, 1973, that EPA now
plans to promulgate additional air quality regulations requiring states to
271
272
review locol construction picas to determine if the associated activity generated
by the specific use will permit air quality standards to be met, that these uses
could include shopping centers, sports complexes, parking lots and garages end
the like, that the EPA is concerned not only with the pollution stemming from the
facility itself, but more specifically with the associated pollution generated
by the proposed facility such as automobile traffic, that the proposed new
regulations to be promulgated by EPA by June, 1973, and to be effective May, 1975,
mill require the states to develop programs to maintain the air quality standards
by August, 1973, that Mr, I. Jones Keller, Director Of Air Pollution for the
City of Roanoke, ls presently coordinating mith the Virginia State Air Pollu-
tion Board in the updating of the city*s air pollution Ordinance, that the intent
is to produce a revised Ordinance that will comply with the new state regulations
and mt such time as the revised Ordinance is completed, he will present it to
Council.
Mr. Garland moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
COOPERATIVE AREA MANPONER PLANNING SYSTEM: The City Manager ~ubmitted
the £ollowiflg report in connection mith the Cooperative Area Manpower Planning
System and the Manpower Revenue Sharin9 proposal, recommendin9 that the city,
at this time, accept *prime sponsorship" for the CAMPS Program, thereby obligating
the city for manpower planning only for the fiscal year 1973-74, after which
time the city could still make a determination ns to how it wishes to proceed
with the Manpower Revenue Sharing Program:
*May 14, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: CAMPS (Cooperative Area Manpower Planning System)
It is necessary that a decision be reached with regards
to not only the Cooperative Area Manpower Planning System.
but also to what is known as the President°s MRS (Manpower
Revenue Sharing) proposal. There is a relationship between
these two programs.
The CAMPS program was established a number of years ago
by the Federal Government to encourage manpower planning to
take place on a regional or labor market(s) basis in an
effort to obtain some cohesion in programs and to avoid
duplication of training facilities provided by federal
funds. CAMPS, at that time, was set up as a Mayor*s grant
to one city within a given area. Where a large enough city
did not exist in an area, the State was given authority
mithin that area. This means that one city within a de-
signated CAMPS area was selected as a "prime sponsor" to
receive the manpower planning grant money with which to
accomplish the manpower planning for that area. The
rational behind this was that a certain minimum size of
governmental organization capability was needed in order to
effectively prepare a manpower plan and it was believed
that the selected prime sponsor city would in ali likeli-
hood have the most manpower programs within the designated
area. Roacoke was selected as one of the prime sponsor
cities for this program.
At the time that the City was approached to receive
this grant, it was not felt that the City of Roanoke should
be responsible for accomplishing all of the manpower planning
for this total region. Accordingly° en arrangement uss
made to transfer this plenning function to the Fifth .
Planning Oistrict Commission. The City thereby declined
mhat is hnomn as *prime sponsorship' and transferred the
grant funds to the Fifth Planning District Commission.
Two committees were then established for CARPSt one a
policy committee and the other a technical committee with
a start hired utilizing the grant funds. This framemork
has existed for amd years end has been.expended by direction
of the policy comzlttee in order to include not only the
Fifth Planning District Commission area, but the Fourth
Planning District Commission area as mell.
At this tine very little information is available con-
cernlng the Presidentts proposal for Manpomer Revenue
Sharing (MRS), because the legislation has not been passed.
All indications, homever, point to the fact that this
proposal will become un actuality for fiscal 1974-7S. The
information ue have been able to obtain indicates that MRS,
as such, will follow the CAMPS Structure; i. e., where a
CAMPS area is in existence the money for that area mill be
given to the 'rime sponsor' city and tbnt city will be held
accountable for the disbursement of the funds withie the
designated area, in addition to being responsible for doan9
the manpower planning on which fund disbursement is predicated.
In areas mhere a CAMPS organization is not existent, the MRS
funds mhich would have been allocated for that area mould
revert to the State for the State's discretionary use in
manpomer programs based on State established criteria and
needs.
If our local area (mom consisting of the thirteen
political jurisdictions encompassed by the Fourth and
Fifth Planning District Commissions) is to qualify as a
Manpower Revenue Sharing area, the area must have a
'prime sponsor'. The only acceptable 'prime sponsor'
appears to be the City of Roanoke.
In essence then, the City is placed in a position tbnt
if it wishes to insure that, at a minimum, its proportionate
share of Manpower Revenue Sharing funds are to be used mithin
the City, then the City must accept this responsibility for
becoming a "prime sponsor'. The City's alternative is to
declin~ "prime sponsorship' and let the Runpower Revenue
Sharing funds revert to the State.
With this background it is recommended that City Council
authorize the City Manager to accept on behalf of the City
the "prime sponsorship' for the CAMPS program. This would
mem that the City would accomplish manpower planning durin9
fiscal 1973-74 for manpomer programs to be accomplished in
fiscal 1974-75.
An existing annual 9rUnt Of $34,000 is mom being used
by the Fifth Plannin9 District Commission to finance the
operations of the Manpower Planning staff housed at the
Fifth Planning District Commission. The staff consists of
a planner, a technician, and a secretary. Their salary
ranges correspond to similar City positions. This grant
and the staff should be transferred to the City. This
staff would prepare a manpower plan during fiscal 1973-74
for use in £i~cal 1974-75. The plan would be developed
utilizing the flexibility allowed under the Nanpower Revenue
Sharing concept to redesign existing federal programs to
better reflect local needs. Thin plan would be based on
utilizing an anticipated Manpomer Revenue Sharin9 grant of
$1,250o000 which we have been informed would be this arno's
MRS allocation for fiscal 1974-75.
A number of options would exist for the City when
Manpower Revenue Sharing becomes an actuality, including:
1. The City could, on the basis of one year*s man-
manpower planning experience, decline to continue
as ~prime sponsor" and request the State to take
over.
2. The City could, and possibly should, request that
the sphere of responsibility for ~e MRS Grant be
reduced to the local labor market area, or the
Standard Metrupolitan Statistical Area (SMSA).
3. The City could subcontract all manpower programs
except planning.
273 .
274
4. The City could Operate its ow~ manpower programs and
subcontract some manpower programs to other political
subdivisions within the area as wight he mutually
agreed upon.
A recommendation concerning the above options would be
one of the functions.or the manpower planning accomplished
during fiscal 1973-74.
The summation of our evaluation Of the above information
is our recommendation that the City, at this time, accept
"prime spansorabip' for the CAMPS program, thereby oblJgati~
the City for manpower planning only for the fiscal year
1973-74, after which the City could still make o determina-
tion as to how it wishes to proceed in the Manpower Revenue
Sharing program.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hane~
Byron E. Rawer
City Manager"
After a discussion of the report, Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur
in the option as expressed by the City Manager that the City of Roanoke make
application for these funds, that the program for the Fourth andFifth Plannin9
Districts be continued as is presently constituted and that the matter be
referred to the City Attorney for preparation of the proper measure if needed.
The motion was seconded by Mr, Lisk and unanimously adopted,
TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEY: The City Manager
submitted a written report advising that the existing lease agreement between the
City of Roanoke and Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley for use of
the Harrison Elementary School property by TAP expired on December 31, 1972, that
he has since received a communicatio~ from Mrs. Elizabeth E. Traylor, Director
of Education for TAP, expressing a desire to continue the lease for the
period from May 1, 1973, through April 30, 1974, under the same tares and condi-
tions as the previous lease and recommendin9 that Council approve the execution
of a new lease agreement with Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley
for the period from May 1, 1973, to April 30, 1974.
Mr. Lisk moved that Counci'l concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(~20885) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and providing for the lease by the
City of the former Harrison Elementary School site to Total Action Against
Poverty in Roanoke Valley; upon certain terms and conditions.
WHEREAS, by report dated May 14, 1973, the City Manager has recommended
that the City lease to Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley the former
Harrison Elementary School site to be used as a Day Care Center upon the terms
hereinafter provided, in which recommendation Council concurs.
THEREFORE, DE XT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
the City Manager be, and he is hereby authorized to enter into written lease
agreement on behalf of the City with Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke
Valley, leasing ~o said organization certain area in the former Harrison Element~y
School building to b~ used for a Bay Care Center, including the kitchen, rest
rooms smd playgrounds, betmeen the hours of 6:00 a.m. end 6:00
through Firduy, for a term of one year conuencing on May 1. 1973, the fair
rental value of said premises to be waived by the City as a charitable donation,
the City reserving the right to use tun building nt nil other times during the
term of such lease; such lease to contain such other reasonable terms end
provisions as may be required by the City Manager and to be, otherwise, upon
such form ns is approved by the City Attorney.
The motion mas seconded by Dr. Taylor end adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, 8ubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: Council having previously instructed the
City Attorney to prepare the proper measure authorizing American Motor Inns,
Incorporated, to construct an access road from their nam building to MJley
Drive for use by their employees durin9 the hours of 7:30 a.m., to 8:30 a.mo,
and from 4:30 p.m., to 5:30 p.m., five days per meek on n temporary basis
until the nam Southwest Expressmay is opened and that the proper barricade be
constructed at the expense of American Motor Inns to prohibit traffic from
using this access road except during specified hours, the City Manager
submitted a written report advising that if right turn movements are to be
permitted from the east bound lane Of Wiley Drive into the west bound lane
which exits at Franklin Road. the pavement section of Miley Drive will have
to be widened, that this widening would allow the traffic to remain in the
proper lane without encroaching in adjacent traffic lanes, which now occurs.
that the additional traffic during the peak hours generated by American Motor
Inns would necessitate this pavement change, that it should be noted that the
widening would have to be accomplished on the river side of the road which
will reduce the channel width of the river, that the low water bridges on
Wiley Drive are subject to flooding, as is the area under the Franklin Road
~ridge over the river, that gates bare been installed so that Wiley Drive
can be closed when flooding occurs in these areas, that due to the pavement
adjustment described above, one of these gates will have to be relocated and
recommending that the gate mhich American Motor Inns proposes to install be
equipped with a hatch so that the city can lock this lock at the same time the
city gates are locked to eliminate traffic on Miley Drive under flooded condi-
tions and recommendin9 that any and all costs incurred by the city in order to
provide for the American Motor Inns access be charged to American Motor Inns,
Incorporated.
In this connection, Mr. Frank N. Perkinson, Jr., Attorney. represent-
ing American Motor Inns. Incorporated. appeared before Council and read a
prepared statement advising that due to the fact that some public sentiment
has been expressed against the access, his client does not wish to create any
275
276
embsrressment fOr the members of Council and wishes to withdraw its request and
that if Council or th~se persons charged with the responsibility 0r traffic
control within the city hare any suggestions that would assist in the orderly
flow of traffic from Franklin Road to the office building ia question, they
will find bis client willing to cooperate in any way possible.
Mr. Llsk nnved tbst the report of the City Manager be received and
filed. The motion mas seconded by DF. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Lisk further moved that the communication from Hr. Perkinson be
received and referred to the City Manager, for the purpose of offering any
suggestions which will assit in the orderly flow of trnf£ic ~rom Franklin Road
to the office building in question. The motion was seconded b~ Br. Garland and
unanimously adopted.
Mr. Thomas moved that the matter of the current issuance of building
permits as they effect ingress and egress be referred to the City Ranager for
review and that Council be advised of procedures which will be followed in the
future. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Llsk and unanimously adopted.
ZONIRG: Council having referred to the City Manager for study,
report and recommendation a communication from Rt. Leonard F. Anglin requesting
special permission from Council to continue remodeling a residence owned by him
at 1306 Patterson Avenue, S. M., since this is a non-conforming use under the
C-2, General Commerical District, zoning regulations, the City Manager submitted
a written report advising that Council has two options in this matter, (1) the
existing non-conforming use permit could be voided and a new non-conforming use
permit issued, allowing four dwelling units or, (2) require that Mr. Anglin
petition for rezouiflg o~ the property to RG-2, Ceneral Residential District;
the City Manager recommending that Council require that this matter be resolved
by the procedures for rezoain9, that this mill allow for proper control to be
exercised under the Zoning Ordinance for, among other things, off street parkin9
requirements, which cannot be enforced under a non-conforming use permit, that
in addition, a rezoning would eliminate the possibility of this particular
structure being used for both residential and commercial purposes, that this
approach also appears reosonable in that the general area is residential in
nature and also pointin9 out that the City Planning Commission is presently
studying the entire question of non-conforming use permits so os to provide
for a more rational end simplified approach to this issue and will be making a
recommendation to Council on this specific matter.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Rubard and unanimously adopted.
TOTAL ACTION AOAINS'~ POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEY: The City Manager
submitted the following report in connection with the PEP Summer Employment Pro-
gram, recommending that Council authorize the City Manager to contract with the
Virginia Employment Commission to perform these services based on four reasons:
"Hay 14. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
SubJect: PEP Summer Employment
A report mas prepared to City Council tar the May T,
1973, Agenda. to present alternatives for the utilization
of $75.000 available to the City of Roanoke for the
employment of young persons during thla summer season. At
that time, only tmo options appeared appropriate, the handling
of the program by regular City departments or the participa-
tion with the City of the Virginia Employment Commission.
However, late in the day of Ray 3, IgT3, Mr. Ralph
Leach of Total Action Against Poverty advised the Personnel
Department that TAP°s potential for a summer employment
program had been restored and an opportunity to file a
proposal was requested.
You will find attached, a copy of the earlier men-
tioned report to include the proposal of Virginia Employ-
meat Commission to operate the summer program, and a copy
of a proposal submitted by TAP signed by Rt. Leach.
The basic difference betmeen these proposals is as
follows: VEC mould operate the summer program with parti-
cipation of the City of Roanoke in the area of financial and
supervisory control and participation in payment of FICA and
Morkmea's Compensation obligations. The VEC's proposal is
geared to employment of youth in all age 9romps for varied
numbers of hours pet week dependin9 upon the ages involved.
TAP proposes to pursue a program similar to Neighbor-
hood Youth Corps guidelines, with emphasis on younger
people (14 to 17 years of age) and a scheduled 26 hour work
week. The proposal includes use within the City departments
of a larger number of youngsters than may be possible in
consideration of the ages and hours of work designated.
It would be recommended that City Council authorize the
City Manager to contract with the Virginia Employment Cam-
mission to perform these services for the following reasons:
1. VEC has developed a rather simple methodology
package for young.people wishing to take part in
the program which will simplify the applicant*s
submission for employment.
The VEC approach permits a mere representative
distribution of flexible employment criteria for
employment of these younger people, i.e., it is
geared to ease placement of these persons.
3. VEC has more potential resources to call upon
should the need become apparent.
4. VEC has indicated a willingness, through this
proposal, to undertake a new program type
approach in Roanoke in locating and placing
persons who are seeking work and should be
encouraged to do so.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager*
Mr. Lisk moved that the report be taken under advisement for the
purpose Of discussion. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Carland.
In this connection, Mr. Ralph Leach, Manpower Director, Total Action
Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley, appeared before Council and advised that he
does not concur in the recommendation Of the City Manager.
277
'278
After n discussion or the mutter, Mr. Thomas offered a substitute
motion that the report be referred buck to the City Manager for the purpose of
further discussions uith Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley and
that the City Manager be requested to submit a further report to Council by the
next regular meeting or the body on Monday, May 21. 1973. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
STATE HIGHMAYS: Council having referred to the City Manager for
consideration and report a Joint communication from Mrs. Riva B. Slums and Mr.
James G. Harvey, Il, requesting a meeting with Council concerning the proposed
new location of Franklin Road and Elm Avenue, S. M., as set forth in the plans
of the 1985 Arterial llighnay Plant advising that they are under contract to buy
property that will be taken by this project and they mould like for the proposed
route of Franklin Road to be altered so their property will not be taken, the City
Manager submitted a written report advising that he met with Mrs. $loon and Mr.
Harvey on Mednesday, May 9, 1973, that aa a result of their discussion, the
parties have agreed to review their requirements with respect to the proposed
street revisions aa envisioned in both the Downtown Plan and the 1985 Thoroughfare
Plan and at such time as they have evaluated the various facts with respect to
these plans and have come to a decision as to what action they would like to take,
they will return either to the City Manager or to City Coaccil with a revised
plan and possible request.
Mr. Garland moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted the
following report in connection with the status of personnel in the Police
Department and the Fire Departaent as of April 30, 1973:
~May 14, 1973
tlonorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Police and Fire Monthly Report
Listed below is the status of the Police and the Fire
Department as of April 30. 1973:
Fire Department
At the end of April there were two vacancies in the
Fire Department.
Employed: B.M. Poindexter
Resigned: R.M. Nilson
Police Department
Employed Resigned Other
Gary Vance Black
(Airport Police) 4/2/73
Nm. E, Burroughs
(Police Officer) 4/2/73
Michael A. Lester
(Police Officer) 11/8/71 4/9/73
Herbert A. Thomas
(Police Lieutenant) T/16/37 4/9/73 Retired
Larry E. Stewart
(Police Officer 4/17/72 4/29/73
George C. Nindle
(police Officer) 3/15171 4]29]73
J
Ballard S. Clary
(Police Officer) 4/30/T3
Ending April 30, 19T3 (13 vacancies)
Respectfully submitted,
$/ Byron E. Hamer
Hyron E. Hamer
City Manager'
Hr, Llsk moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
mas seconded by Hr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ~H COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMKNT-RAOIOS: The City
Manager submitted a written report concurring in the following recommendation
of a committee tbat the proposal of Motorola, Incorporated, for supplying tug-
way radios and battery chargers, in the amount of $17,324.00, be accepted:
"May 14, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanohe, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On Friday, April 20, 1973, bids were received and opened
before the committee whose names appear below for various
types of two-way radios and battery chargers as shomn on
the attached tabulation.
Although the specifications were non-restrictive, only
one bid was received. The bid was submitted by Motorola,
Incorporated, at a net sum of $17.324. and conforms to all
specifications of the City of Roanoke.
It is the recommendation of the Committee that the bid of
Motorola, Incorporated, be accepted for supplying the
two-way radios and battery chargers-at the net sum of
$17,324 as quoted. Thos amount is within the funds
appropriated in the current budget of the Traffic Engineer-
lng g Communications Division, Account =57, Object Codes
370 and 395, for the purchase of this equipment.
Respectfully submitted,
$/ Joseoh H. Brewer.
Joseph H. Brewer. Jr.
Acting Director of Public Norks
$/ Kit Kiser
Kit Kiser
Manager, Water Department
$! B. H, Thompson
Bueford B. Thompson
Purchasing Agent"
ar. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance accepting the proposal
Of Motorola, Incorporated:
(=206Bb) AN ORDINANCE provi~ ng for the purchase and acquisition of
twenty-eight (28) new two-way radios for use in various City vehicles, by
acceptin9 the proposal of Motorola Communications and Electronics, Incorporated,
upon certain terms and provisions; and ~ ovidtn9 for an emergency.
(For full text Of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =aU, page 105.)
Mr. Lish moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
279
28O
AYES: Nessrs, Garland, Hubard, Llsk. Taylor, Thomas and
Nayor Nebber .................. 6,
NAYS: None ...........O. (Nv. Trout absent)
CITY ENGINEER: The City Ranager submitted a written report concurring
in the following recommendation of a committee that the proposal of Baker
Brothers. Incorporated, for supplying a Case Model DSflOB-PS-CK Front End Loader,
in the amount of $8,750.00, be accepted:
'Nay 14, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On Friday. April 20, 1973, bids were received and opened
before the committee ah*se names appear below for one new
Self-Propelled Front End Loader.
Yhree bids were received as shown on the attached tabulation,
with the lomest bid being submitted by Baker Brothers, Incor-
porated at a net sum of $S,750. The basic weight of the
machine of the low bidder is under the minimum weight as
specified by the City; however, when considering the required
counterweight as quoted, the bid will meet and exceed all
specifications of the City of Roanoke.
It is the recommendation of the Committee that the bid of
Baker Brothers, Incorporated be accepted for supplying a
Case Model DSOOR-PS-CN Front End Loader at the net sum of
$8,750 as quoted. This amount is within the funds appro-
priated in the current budget of the Street Cleaning Divi-
sion, Account ~69-360, for the purchase of this equipment.
Respectfully submitted,
~/ Joseoh H. Brewer. Jr..
Joseph H. Brewer, Jr.
Acting Director of Public Norks
S! Kit Kiser
Kit Kiser
Manager, Water Department
S/ B, H, Thom*son
Bueford B. Thompson
Purchasing Agent~
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recomme~ation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance accepting the proposal of
Baker Brothers, Incorporated:
(~20887) AN ORDINANCE providing for the purchase of (1) new self-
propelled front end loader upon certain terms and conditions; accepting a certain
bid made to the City for furnishing and delivering said equipment; rejecting
other bids made to the City; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u36, page 107.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and
Mayor Webber ...................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
CITY ENGINEER: The City Manager submitted a written report concurring
in the following recommendation of a committee that the proposal of
Associates of Virginia, Incorporated, for supplying a Gallon Model Roller with
IHC VD-236 Diesel Engine, in the amount of $10,666.00, be accepted:
#May 14, 19~3
Honoruble Mayor end City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On Friday, April 20, 1973, bids were received and opened
before the committee ubose names appear belom for one new
nine wheel Rubber Tired Roller.
Two bids were received as shomn on the attached tabulation,
with the low bid being submitted by A, E, Finley ~ Associates
of Virginia, Incorporated at a net sum of $10,666. This
bid meets all specifications of the City of Roanoke.
It is the recommendation of the Committee that the bid of
A. E. Finley ~ Associates of Virginia, Incorporated be
accepted for supplying a Gallon Hodel Roller with
VD-236 Diesel Engine at the net sum of $10,665 as quoted.
This amount is mithin the funds appropriated in the current
budget of the Street Construction and Repair Division,
Account ~5B-365, for the purchase of this equipment.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Josenh B. Brewer.
Joseph H. Brewer, Jr.
Acting Director of Public Morks
S/ Eit Kiser
Kit Kiser
Manager, Mater Department
S/ B. B. Thompson
Bueford B. Thompson
Purchasing Agent"
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance accepting the proposal
of A. E. Finley ~ Associates of Virginia, Incorporated:
(#20888) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the purchase of one new nine-
wheel rubber tired roller for use by the Department of Public Norks, upon certain
terms and provisions, by accepting the bid made to the City by
Associates of Virginia, Inc.; rejecting certain other bids; and providing for
an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book ~38, page 108.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Oarland, Dubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Nebber ..........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
BUILDINGS-SPECIAL PERMITS: The Assistant City Attorney submitted a
written report advising that at the meeting of Council on April 23, 1q73, the
request of representatives of the Southwest Virginia Community Development
Fund that they be allowed to encroach six inches upon city right of may at
720 Fairfax Avenue, N. N., for the purpose of installing a brick veneer
exterior during remodeling of the building at said address was reported to
Council by the City Planning Commission mith u recommendation that said request
be granted, that at that time Council set a public hearing on this request for
281
282
7:30 p.m,, Monday, Nay 29, 1973, that aince.thSsis a request for a street
encroachment, the same does not require un advertised public hearing and the
Council may act upon said request et its pleasure, accordingly,.end after con-
sultation with the City Wanager, there has been prepared and is transmitted a
form of Ordinance which would, if adopted, permit the construction of said brick
veneer exterior at 720 Fairfax Avenuee N. M.e by encroaching six inches over the
south line of the public right of way for a distance of approximately ninety
feet along said building and pointing o~t that the Ordinance will further pro-
vide for an annual fee of $50,O0.payable to the city.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the report of the Assistant
City Attorney and that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(a20889) AN ORDINANCK permitting the construction of a brick veneer
exterior on the north side of a building located at ?20 Fairfax Avenue, N.
Official No. 2111101, to encroach six inches over the south line of the public
right-of-way for a distance of approximately 90 feet alongside said building,
upon certain terms and conditions.
~HEREAS, representatives of Southwest Virginia Community Development
Fund, owner of the property designated as Official No. 2111101. have requested
that they be permitted, in the remodeling of said building, to construct and
maintain on the north wail of said building, a brich veneer exterior to encroach
six inches over and into the south side of the public right-of=way alongside said
building; which proposal has been referred to the City Planning Commission which
has recommended to the Council that said request be approved; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority vested in local governing bodies
by 215,1-376 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, this Council is agreeable
to the owne£*s proposal and is willing to permit the aforesaid encroachment over
the public right-of-way herein described, upon the terms and con~tions hereinafter
contained.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
permission be and is hereby granted Southwest Virginia Community Development Fund,
owner of property bearing Official No. 2111101, located De the south side of
Fairfax Avenue, N. W., at No. ?20 thereof to construct and maintain as a six-
inch encroachment over the public right-of-way on the north side of said property
a brick veneer exterior to be constructed on the north wall of the aforesaid
building; all such construction to be made with approved and permitted building
materials and to be constructed and safely and properly maintained at the
expense of the aforesaid owner, its successors or assigns, under a building
pernit issued therefor by the Building Commissioner of the City of Roanoke, in
accordance with such of the City's building regulations and requirements as are
applicable thereto, and with payment by said owner to the City of an annual
fee of $50.00 for the permit herein granted; it to be expressly understood and
agreed by said permittee that the permission herein contained is subject to the
limitations contained in J15.1-376, et Ar.i., of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as
amended, amd that said permittee, bf making and maintaining said encroncbnento
agrees that it nnd its successors nnd assigns will indemnify and save harmless
the City of Roanohe of and from all claims for injuries or damages to property
or persons that may arise by reason of such encroachment.
BE IT FURTBER ORDAINEO that the provisions of this ordinance shall
not become fully effective until such time ns an attested copy of this ordi-
nance shall have been duly signed, sealed, attested and acknowledged by
authorized officials of said permittee and shall have been admitted to record
at the expense of said pernJttee in the Clerk's Office of the Bustings Court
of the City of Roanohe; until a written permit shall have been issued by the
City's Building Commissioner for the construction of the encroachment herein
authorized to be made.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Oarland and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and
Mayor Mebber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ........... O. (Mr. Trout absent)
AIRPORT: Council havin9 directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure to amend the airplane boarders' use and service char9e Ordi-
nance so as to relieve the airlines from the collection of such charge and to
broaden the base of said Ordinance by eliminating all exclusions except
certain transfer passengers and a~rline employees, the Assistant City Attorney
submitted a written report transmitting said Ordinance.
Mr. Lisk then moved that the follomin9 Ordinance be placed upon its
first reading:
(~20890) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining Chapter 5.1 of Title
VIII, of the Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, imposing and
fixing a use and service charge for certain enplaning passengers utilizing
premises or facilities at Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport; providing for
the method of payment and collection of such charges; definin9 certain
unlawful acts and providin9 penalties therefor; providing for severability of
the provisions of this ordinance; and providing for the effective date of this
ordinance.
WHEREAS, the City of Roanoke, empowered to adopt rules, regulations,
and ordinances in respect to the use of the Airport or any part of its facilitie
by tenants or members of the general public and to charge reasonable and adequa~
fees, charges and rents for the use of Airport property and services rendered
in the operation thereof, has heretofore imposed, by Ordinance No. 20343 and
Ordinance No. 20533, certain use and service charges to be paid by certain
enplaning passengers using premises or facilitles at said Airport and, in said
ordinances, made provision for collection of said charges and remittance
thereof to the City; and
283
2'84
IBEREASo the Council his determined that Chapter 5.1 of Title VIII
of the Code of the City of Roanohe, eforeseido should be amended so ns to broaden
application of the use end service charges imposed by Ordinance No. 20343 and
Ordinance No. 20533, making applicable the provisions thereof to all persons
enplaning any scheduled or nonscheduled aircraft or charter Or air-taxi aircraft
except transfer passengers not engaging in pre-planned stopovers and airline
employees traveling on company business un appropriately marked travel vouchers;
and so as to provide for the sale by the City of boarding passes required to be
purchased by certain enplaning passengers, and by makin9 unlawful the failure
to purchase said boarders' passes or, failing in such purchose, to attempt to
board or enplane an aircrnft of an air carrier or a commercial air carrier at said
airport after being ordered to remove himself from a boarding gate or boarding
apron at said airport.
THEREFORE. 6£ I? OROAI~EO hy the Council of the City of Roanoke. that
Chapter 5.1, Airolane Boarder's Use and Service Charq~, of Title VIII, of the
Code of the City of Roanoke, 195b, as amended, be and said chapter is hereby
amended and reordained, so as to read and provide as follows:
Chapter 5.1.1. AirDlnne Boarder*s service and use charge.
Sec. 1. Commencing on June 1, lg?3, there is hereby
fixed, established and imposed a use and service charge of
One Oollar ($1.00), to be paid by each passenger enplaning
any commercial scheduled or non-scheduled aircraft, or
charter or air-taxi aircraft operated from the Roanoke
Municipal (Woodrum) Airport, and payin9 therefor a fare;
and no person upon whom such use and service charge is
hereby imposed shall board or enplane, or be allowed or
permitted to board or enplane the aircraft of any commercial
air carrier or charter or air-taxi aircraft departing
Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport without harSh9 paid
such use and service charge as herein provided.
Sec. 2. Each enplaning passenger shall pay the sum
of One Dollar, ($1.00), to the City of Roanoke. thrum9h
its Airport Department, and obtain a boarding pass, pro-
vided by the City. which pass shall be surrendered to the
air carrier or commercial air carrier at the boarding gate
or boarding apron prior to OF contemporaneously at the time
said passenger leaves said boarding gate or boardin9 apron.
Sec. 3, Each air carrier or commercial air carrier
shall collect from each passenger enplaned by it. a detacb-
able stub of said boarding pass. and shall transmit to the
City through its Airport Manager. on or before the 2$th
day of July, 1973, and on or before the 25th day of each
month thereafter, one such stub or in lieu of such stub,
the sum of $1.00 for each such passenger enplaned bI it
at the Roanoke Municipal (Ioodrum) Airport during the pre-
vious calendar month, the word 'passenger~ to have the mean-
ing ascribed to 'passengers enplaning any commercial aircraft
operated from Roanoke Municipal (~oodrum) Airport~, defined
in section 5 of this chapter.
Sec. 4. If any such commercial air carrier fail or
refuse to transmit to the City's Airport ~anager the
detachable stubs of said boarding passes or in lieu thereof,
the use and service charges herein imposed and required to
be collected and remitted under this ordinance, within the
tine and in the amount specified in this ordinance, there
shall be added to such unpaid use and service charges, by
the City's Airport Manager, and there shall be paid by
such commercial air carrier to the City, interest at the
rate of two-thirds of one percent per month of the amount
of the unpaid use and service charges for each mouth or
portion thereof, from the date upon mhich the use and ser-
vice charges are due as provided in this ordinance and
remain ·ap·Id; and if said use and service charges and
interest thereon shall remain.delinq·ent ·nd ·ap·id for
a period of one month from the date the same are due and
payable, there shall be added khereto by the City*s Airport
Manager · penalty or ten percent of the amo·nt of the un-
paid use and service charges, all such delinquent charges,
interest ·nd penalty to be collected by the city from said
commercial air carrier, as a debt.
Sec. 5. The term "each passenger enplaning any com-
merical aircraft operated from Roanohe M·niolpal (Moodrum)
Airport', as ·Red in this chapter, shall incl·de every
person enplaning or boarding ·ny sched·led, non-sched·led
or chartered aircraft a·d every aircraft operated as an
air-'taxi at or from Roanohe Municipal (Moodrum) Airport
except transfer passengers not engaging in preplonned
stopovers and except commercial air carriers' emplofees
traveling on company b·siness on appropriately marked
travel vouchers;.and the term "air carrier" or "commercial
air carrier" shall mean and shall incl·de every person,
firm or corporation providing sched·led, non-sched·led,
charter or air-taxi passenger air service at or from
Roanohe Municipal (Moodrum) Airport for which passenger
air service a fare is charged.
Sec. 6. All revenue collected from the use and ser-
vice charges imposed in this chapter shall he held by the
City of Roanoke in o separate f·nd and ·sad for the p·rpose
of defraying the present and rut·re costs incurred by said
city in the constr·ction, improvement and eq·ipment of
said airport and its facilities for the continued use and
future enjoyment by all users thereof.
Sec. 7. It shall be unlawful for any person upon
whom, as an enplaning passenger, a use or service charge
is imposed by this chapter, to attempt to board a carrier*s
aircraft without first having paid said charge and having
obtained said boarding pass and having surrendered the stub
thereof to the air carrier or commercial air carrier per-
forming the transportation for the passenger; and any enplan-
lng passenger uho is required by this ordinance to purchase
such boarding pass and uho fails, mhen ordered by Airport
Police, or by other duly authorized agents or officials of
the City to leave or remove himself from the hoarding 9ate
or boarding apron, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and
upon conviction thereof shall be punishable by fine not
exceeding $50.00 or by confinement in jail not exceeding
thirty days, or by both such fine or confinement.
Sec. 6. If any provision, clasue, sentence, phrase
or word of this ordinance, or the application thereof to
any particular person or circumstance is held invalid,
such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or
applications of this ordinance mhich can be 9ivan effect
without the invalid provision or application, and to this
end the provisions of this ordinance are declared to be
severable.
0£ IT FURTHER ORDAINED that nothing contained in this ordinance
shall be construed as impairing or waiving any right, duty or obligation
heretofore created or imposed by Ordinance Nos. 20343 and 20533, existing
thereunder prior to June 1, 1973.
BE IT FINALLY ORDAINED that this ordinance shall be i~ force and
effect upon and after June 1, 1973.
The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Messr$, Carland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ............O. (Mr. Trout absent)
5-fRE£TS AND ALLEYS: Council having referred to a committee for
tabulation, report and recommendation bids received for paving of streets at
285
286
various locations in the City of Roanoke, the committee submitted · written
report recommending that u contract be ou·rded to Adams Construction Company and
Virginia Asphalt Paving Company, Incorporated. based on their low joint bid
and that the actual amount of the contract be increased to the full amount
budgeted for this work which is $177,000.00, with · · unit prices submitted by
Adams Construction Company and Virginia Asphalt Paving Company, Incorporated, being
utilized for determination of the payment to be made based on as-built quantities,
advising that by awarding a contract for the full budgeted amount, there can be
placed an ·dditional 2,000 tons of pavement material which will allow the city
to pave not only all of those streets designated in the first section listing
in the report to Council under date of April lb, lg?3, but will also allow a
considerable number of streets listed in the second section of that report to
also be paved and further recommending that the other bids which were received
be held until such time as a satisfactory contract is executed between the city
and Adams Construction Company and Virginia Asphalt Paving Company, Incorporated,
following which the other bids would be rejected.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendations of the
committee and offered the following emergency OrdJnnflce accepting the joint
proposal of Adams Constriction Company and Virginia Asphalt Paving Comp·ny,
Incorporated:
(~20891) AN ORDINANCE accepting the joint proposal of Virginia
Asphalt Paving Company, Inco, and Adams Construction Comp·ny for the paving of
streets at various locations in the City of Roanoke; authorizing the proper City
officials to execute the requisite contract; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Dook ~38, page IO9.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr, Hubnrd and adopted by the foil*win9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
#ebber ........................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
JAIL: Council at its last regular meeting on Monday, May 7, 1973,
having deferred action on a statement from Councilman James O. Trout in connec-
tion with the provision for jail facilities, advising that it is his opinion
that Council should instruct the City Manager to review the situation regard-
ing the status of jail facilities for the City of Roanoke and to immediately
make recommendations to Council as to his thoughts on the location and time-
table for such facilities with an eye toward inclusion of sufficient amounts ia
the budget to 9et the program undermay at once, pointing out that the City of
Roanoke has available the Kimball property and the Reid and Cutshall property
together with sufficient revenue sharin9 funds to get the project underway at
once, that the need of the city speaks for itself, that one only has to look at
the deplorable condition of the Jail to realize that Council cannot delay this
matter any longer, that this should be a regional project ir at all possible,
both es to location and use, homever, ir the parties cannot resolve the matter
by July 1, 1973. and make provision for moving the project ahead at once by
inclusion or funds in their 1973-74 budgets, he feels that the City of
Roanoke must move ahead on its own accord in the best interest of the citizens
of the city, that should the city be forces to move ahead on its own, the
facilities should be made available to our neighbors on un equitable cost
basis which would be to the interests of all citizens in the Roanoke Valley
area. the matter was again before the body.
On behalf of Mr. Trout, Hr. Thomas moved that the statement be
referred to 1973-74 budget study since the City Manager hashcluded in his
1973-74 fiscal year budget proposal one million dollars for the Jail facility.
The motion mas seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
~ TRAFFIC: Council having deferred action on a report of the City
Attorney in connection with a request of owners and tenants of the Parkside
Plaza Shoppin9 Center for the installation of a traffic signal on Dale Avenue.
S, E., at the entrance to the Parkside Plaza Shopping Center, the matter mas
again before the body, whereupon, the City Attorney submitted the followln9
report advising that prior to actual installation of the proposed new traffic
signal, the approval of such installation should be sought and obtained from
the Department of llighways, which request may be effected either by Resolution
of Council or by written letter of the City Manager:
"May 7, 1973
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
AS directed at the last Council meeting, an ordinance
appropriating $22,000.00 as the City Manager*s estimate of
costs for installation of a traffic signal on Dale Avenne,
$. E., at the entrance to Parkside Plaza shopping center
will be before the Council at its meeting this date.
I wish to call the Council*s attention to a written
agreement entered into by the City of Roanoke with the
Virginia Department of Higbuays under date of December 4,
1957, and pursuant to the authority contained in Ordinance
No. 17873, pursuant to which, and the City having requested
the Highway Department to participate in the improvement of
Dale Avenue, a part of. Route 24, the following, among other
things, is provided:
*Roanoke hereby agrees that the location,
form and character of information, regu-
latory, warning signs, curb and pavement or
other markings and traffic signals, installed
or placed by any public authority, or other
agency, shall be subject to the approval of
the Highway Department**
Accordingly, and prior to actual installation of the
proposed neu traffic signal, the approval of such installation
should be sought and obtained from the Department of Highways,
which request may be effected either by resolution of the City
Council or by written letter of the City Manager.
Respectfully,
S/ J. No Kincanon
J. N. Kincanon
287
'288
In this connection~ Council having previously requested that the City
Manager submit a list or other traffic lights similarly installed nnd the
shared cost basis of installing them, the City Mnnuger submitted a uritten report
including a tabulation, in order by date, indicating the property owner involved,
the percentage or the property oxners cost, the total cost of the installation
and the location of the installation.
Mr. Bubard made reference to the abovedescribed report of the City
Manager, advising that over a period of sixteen years on ten occasions the city
has asked property owners to pay from fifty per cent to one hundrec per cent of
costs involved in the installation of traffic lights and that he is of the
opinion that if the city is going to establish policies it should be consistent
mith these policies as far as all citizens are concerned.
Mr. Hubard then moved that action on the matter be delayed until it
is determined whether or not owners and tenants of Parkside Plaza Shopping Center
are willing to participate in the cost of this traffic installation.
The City Ranager pointed OUt that representatives of the Parkside
Plaza Shopping Center have indicated to the Assistant City Manager that they do
not xish to participate in the cost of the traffic light.
Mr. Thomas then offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
$22,000.00 to Other Equipment - New under Section =57, "Traffic Engineering
and Communications," of the 19T2-73 budget, to provide funds for the installation
of the traffic light:
(=20892) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordatn Section =57, "Traffic
Engineering and Communications," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and pro-
viding for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =38, page 111.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption Of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber .........................5.
NAYS: Mr. Nubard-L---l. (Mr. Trout absent)
Mr. Dubard moved that the City Manager and the City Attorney be
requested to furnish Council with a recommendation as to establishing a policy
for sharing of costs of installation of traffic signals at private entrances.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLtF/IONS:
INTEGRATION-SEGREGATION: Council having directed the City Attorney
to prepare the proper measure establishing the Commnnity Relations Committee as
a permanent committee of Council and making certain provisions relative to said
Committee, he presented same; whereupon, Mr. Thomas offered the following
Resolution:
(=20693) A RESOLUTION establishing the Community Relations Committee
as a permanent committee of the Council, and making certain provisions relative to
said committee.
- !
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book z38. page 111.)
Wt. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Wessrs. Garlnndo Bubard, Lish, Taylor, Thomas and Rnyor
Webber ........................... 6.
NAYS: None ............O. (Mr. Trout absent)
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
AUOITS-CITY EMPLOYEES: Mr. Hubard called to the attention of Council
that the Audit Committee will meet at 10:00 a.m.. Wednesday, Nay 16. 19T3, to
bear proposals from various Certified Public Accountants in connection with an
audit of the financial affairs of the City of Roanoke.
COUNCIL: Mr. Dubard moved that the City Attorney be instructed to
prepare the proper measure wishing Councilman James O. Trout, mbo is now in the'
hospital, a speedy recovery. The motion mas seconded by Dr. Taylor and
unanimously adopted.
Yhere being no further business, Mayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
289
290
cOUnCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday, May 21, 1973,
The Council of the City of Roanoke wet in regular meeting
in the Council Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, May 21, 1973, at
2 p,m** the regular meeting hour, with Mayor Roy L, Nebber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilman Robert A. Garland, Millfam
Llsh, Noel C. Taylor, Hampton R. Thomas and Mayor Roy L. Mebber ......
ABSENT: Councilman James O. Trout ......................... 1.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Byron E. namer, City Manager; Mr, Samuel H.
McGhee, III, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Kincanon, City Attorney; Mr.
II. Een Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorney'and Mr. A. N. Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend
Milldam Vann, Associate Pastor, Greene Memorial United Methodist Church.
RINLrIES: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday,
Nay 14, If?3, having been furnished each member of Council, on motion of Mr.
Hubard, seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof was
dispensed with and the minutes approved as recorded.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: NONE.
pETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
FIRE DEpARTMENT-LANDMARKS: A communication from Mr. Junius R. Fishburne,
Jr., Executive Director, Virginia Historic Landmarks Commission, adFtsing that
his office has received notification that the Fire Station Ho. One property in
the City of Roanoke has been entered in the National Register of Historic Places,
was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
SALE OF PROPERTY: Council having concurred in a report of the Real
Estate Committee in connection with an offer of Mr. Fred C. Ellis, President,
Truck Sales, Incorporated, to purchase city-owned property in the 300 block of
Carver Avenue, N. E., the Real Estate Committee recommending that the city retain
this land in connection with the purchase of certain lands to the south of
Sycamore Avenue between Interstate Spur 591 on the west, Courtland Road on the
east and down to Carver Avenue which would involve the property that Mr. Ellis
desires to purchase, a communication from Mr. Ellis advising that Truck Sales
owns 240 feet of land on Carver Avenue adjacent to the city-owned property and
lies within the boundaries being considered, that these lots hare a combined
total of 1.058 acres, that he purchased the above lots for the purpose of relo-
cating Truck Sales, Incorporated, that on April 9, 1973, he requested that Council
consider selling to him land located in the 300 block of Carver Avenue, N. E.,
for the purpose of expandin9 and relocating his business, that since the need to
relocate is still imminent and ho would like for his business to remain in the
city and in the northeast area, he is willing to trade these lots for property
in the Kimball Urban Renewal Project No. 2, was before Council
Mr, Garlsnd moved that the communication be referred to the Real
Estate Committee for study, report and recommendation to Cooncil. The motion
was seconded by Hr, Llsh and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
OUDGET-MDSTINGS CODRT: The City Manager submitted a written report
advising that a grant request to the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention
for the development of a clear prototype criminal justice information system
has been approved by the O.J.C.P., that the total amount of this grant is
$?5,356.00 with $55,000.00 of the grant coming from federal funds and $20,356.00
coming from local in-king matching funds consisting of time contributed to the
development of the information system by local officials and computer time on th~
city's computer, that authorization to file this grant math the O.J.C.P. and to
execute and file all other assurances and agreements was given to the City
Manager by Resolution No. 2o~26, dated April 16, 1973o and recommending that
the $55,000.00 federal share be appropriated to this 9rant account.
Mr. Rubnrd moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
requested funds:
(#20894) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reocdain Section =16, "Oustings
Court,' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =36, page 117.)
Mr. Bubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Link and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........OD (Mr. Trout absent)
BUDGET-AIRPORT-$EMAGE TREATMENT FUND: The City Manager submitted
a written report recommending that $100.OO be appropriated for a change fund
at Roanoke Municipal iRoodrum) Airport to be used in connection with the pending
change and procedure for the collection of the boarding fee by city personnel
and further recommending that $20,000.OO be appropriated to the Sewage Treatment
Plant account to provide funds for the purchase of additional spare parts which
it is necessary to have on hand in order to minimize down time of any of the
Sewage Treatment Plant units.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
$100.OO for the establishment cfa change fund at Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum)
Airport:
(~20895) AN OROINANCE to amend and reordain Section =340, "Municipal
Airport Fund," of the 1972-73 Municipal Airport Fund Appropriation Ordinance,
and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Cook =38, page Il?.)
291
292
Or. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk nnd adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messra, Garland, flubard, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas and
Mayor Mebber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Hr. Trout absent)
Or. Taylor then offered the folloming emergency Ordinance appropriating
$20.000.00 to #nintenance of Buildings and Propert~ under Section agO, 'Seuage
Treatment Fund." of the 1972-73 Seuage Treatment ~und Appropriation Ordinance:
(a20896) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~go. "Sewage
Treatment Fund.' of the 1972-73 Sewage Treatment Fund Appropriation Ordinance.
and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~3B, page 118.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and
Mayor ~ebber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
COOPERATIVE AREA MANPOWER PLANNING SYSTEM: Council having directed the
City Attorneyto prepare the proper measure providing for the participation by
the City of Roanoke in the Cooperative Area Manpower Planning System Program for
this region, the City Manager submitted a written report advising that pursuant
to a request of Council'on Monday, May T, 1973, the City Attorney is preparing a
Resolution for the consideration of Council whereby the city sill actively
participate in the Cooperative Area Manpower Planning System Program for this
region.
In this connection, Mr. James M. Colby, Executive Director, Fifth
Planning District Commission, appeared before Council and requested that action
on this matter be deferred because he feels there ia an alternative to this
proposal which he would like to present at a later meeting of Council, advising
that since he is currently responsible for the overall supervision of the CAMPS
Program and since he has not had an opportunity to discuss the thoughts of the
Planning Commission on this matter with the City Manager, he feels that a delay
ia in order, that the Commission feels that a continuation witbin the existing
framework mould be most beneficial, effective and economical to the interests of
the City of Roanoke, that the city currently contributes twenty cents per capita
annually to support the Fifth Planning District Commission to carry on this and
similar programs for the city. that the city requested the Fifth Planning
District Commission to assume responsibility for this program and that he has
been appointed by the Director of State Planning and Community Affairs to a
special committee to develop a policy statement concerning the involvement of
local elected officials in the manpower planning process and that he would like
to have the opportunity to discuss these and other pertinent matters with the
City Manager after mhich he anticipates returning to Council with a more
complete statement.
After a discussion of the request, Mr. Garland moved that action on
the matter he deferred until the regular meeting of Council on Monday, Jane
1073. The motion was seconded by Mr, Thomas and unanimously adopted.
CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a written report in con-
nection with the ?01 Program, advising that on April 13, 1973o a notice of
Grant Award from HCD to the City of Roanoke for the sum of $51,000.00 was
transmitted from Mr. Carroll Mason, HCO Area Director, to Mayor Roy L, Webber,
that the funds are tentatively awarded for reservatien purposes for fiscal year
1973o74 as part of the Comprehensive Planning Assistance Program as authorized
by Section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954. that the total program cost is to
be $77,000.00 and entails the implementation phase of the management study at a
consultant cost of $30,726.00 of mhich $1fl. O00.O0 will come from a 701 grant
reservation for the fiscal year 1072-T3 and the remainder from this grant
reservation of $13.000.00, that the overage in the grant of $274,000.00 will be
applied to the federal project inspection fee, that an additional $5,000.00
will represent staff salaries; a housing market analysis at a total cost of
$45,000.00 of which $38,000,00 represents consultant services and $7,000,00
represents staff salaries; a land use policy study at n total cost of
all Of Which represents staff salaries; an update Of the Zoning Ordinance at a
total cost of $0,000.00, all of which represents staff salaries, pointing out
that the local share of this program which will be approximately $26°000.00
will be totally matched by in-kind services to be provided by existing planning
department staff capabilities engaged in the conduct of the various program
elements, that the details of each of the projects outlined will be detailed
and transmitted to Council in the near future as part of the federally mandated
Overall Program Design document presently being prepared by the Planning Depart-
ment, that the $51,000.00 federal grant is predicated on both Council and the
Department of Housin9 and Urban Development approval of this Overall Program
Design element and that he will hemp Council informed Of developments and
transmit the Overall Program Design document to Council upon its completion.
Dr. Taylor moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
mas seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
ZONInG-STREETS AND ALLEYS: Council having referred to the City
Manager for study, report and recommendation the request of H ~ R Auto Parts.
Incorporated, that the existing setback line of twenty feet in the 2000 block
Of Melrose Avenue, N. M., be waived in order to permit the construction of a
building in said block, the City Manager submitted a written report advising
that it should be noted-that.City Council, in 1052, established n twenty foot
setback line extending to the west city limits not only for the property in
question but for both sides of Melrose Avenue for its entire length, that this
293
294
action was taken by Council in anticipation of the need to alden Melrose Avenue,
that the 1985 Thoroughfare Plan shows only a portion or Melrose Avenue designated
ns a major arterial highway, being that portion generally west of 22nd Street
where Orange Avenue connects to Melrose Avenue extending to the west city limits,
that the parcel of land In question is located on 20th Street which is excluded
from this arterial designation and therefor it is recommended that the 1952
Council established setback line on both sides of Melrose Avenue be deleted
for that portion of Melrose Avenue not designated as an arterial highway ns set
forth In the 1985 Thoroughfare Plan, being that area extending generally from
llth Street to 22ad Street on Melrose Avenue and includes the property for which
B C R Auto Ports, Incorporated. bas requested a setback meager.
Mr. Carland moved that Council concur Jn the report of the City Manager
and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for preparation of the
proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEY: Council at its last
regular meeting on Monday, May 14, 1973, having deferred action on a report of
the City Manager in connection with the PEP Summer Employment Program, recommend-
ing that Council authorize the City Manager to contract with the Virginia Employ-
ment Commission to perform these services based on four reasons, the City Manager
submitted the following report again recommending that Council approve, by
Resolution, the proposal submitted by the Virginia Employment Commission:
"May 21, 1973
Noflorab]e Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: PEP Summer Employment
The report submitted to City Council on this subject
last Monday was incomplete in that it did not include
copies of the proposal of the Virginia Employment Commis-
sion (VEC) to the City. This was an oversight whichis
being corrected by its inclusion with this report.
The report submitted May 14, 1973, recommending the
utilization of VEC as the contractor to provide summer
employment for disadvantaged youth Mas made in good faith
and was based partially on the stated reticence of TAP to
participate when first asked. They were contacted first and
when informed that only 4% could be used for overhead costs
informed the City they could not operate within those con-
strictions.
Another prime factor in the recommendation to use
VEC as the subcontractor was the reticence on the part of
the City Auditor to operate this program through ZAP
because of the inability to hold TAP responsible for funds
allocated to them. Funds transferred to VEC would be handled
and disbursed throngb the Virginia Commonwealth processes
and a firm accounting could be guaranteed in case of audits
by the Federal 9overnment. It must be understood that funds
transmitted to the City for use in this program are the City
Auditor's responsibility. He cannot transfer thatrespon-
sibility.
Members of City Council indicated a hesitancy to
select VEC over TAP in this matter, indicating a feeling
VEC might be biased. I cannot speak to this, although a
report submitted ~o City Council by Mr. Palmer K. St. Clair
mould seem to disclaim this accusation.
The Federzl government wend uppeurs t6 be turning
away from funding community action programs direct. This
is evidenced by the change in policy in transmitting this
$750000 to the City of Roanoke for this mummer employment
purpose.
TAP has been in contact with the City Manager during
the past week to assure the City of their willingness to
cooperate in uny may possible to perform the program this
summer. There is little question of the capability of
either of these organizations to perform the function. Under
the VEC the City would have more control over the actions
of these young employees, should they not perform as expected.
Under TAP this has not been true in the past.
It was felt that the recommendatl6n made to City Council
to select VEC to carry on this youth employment program was
Should it be City Council*s desire to select TAP to
continue this summer employment program, the City Auditor
has expressed the desire that these funds be transmitted to
TAP in a single block of funds with all details with
respect to routine financial matters to be transferred also.
Gentlemen of Council, after review of the proposals
and counterproposals, there is little differnece in what
the two organizations can do. The significant factors are
the philosophy of summer employment, the fiscal account-
ability procedures and the attitude of the youngsters and
program supervisors as to who Js *bo~** These factors
point toward a better administration under VEC with
adequate safeguards to assure compliance to the PEP
guidelines. Therefore, once again it is recommended that
City Council approve by resolution the proposal submitted
by the Virginia Employment Commission. Because Of the
urgency of this situation, should Council not concur, I
have asked that the City Attorney have a substitute resolu-
tion prepared approving the proposal of TAP.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Haner
City Manager"
Mayor Webber advised the members of Council that Councilman James On
Trout has requested that action on this matter be deferred until the next
regular meeting of Council on Tuesday, May 2g, 1973, in order that he might
be present to enter into the discussion; mhereupon after discussing of the
request of Councilman Trout, Mr. Lisk moved that Council proceed with considera-
tion of the question at the present time because of the time element involved in
9eating the program underway. The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and
unanimously adopted.
In this connection, Mr. Ralph Leach, Monposerflirector, Total
Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley, appeared before Council and read the
following prepared statement on support of the proposal of Total Action
Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley to operate the PEP Summer Employment Program,
advising that the purpose of the program is to provide work experience and income
for disadvantaged youths:
"Notes for response by Ralph Leach on behalf of Total Action
Against Poverty to report of City Manager, May 21, 1973:
1. Our reticence. True program cannot be administered for
4 percent of total cost, but not reticent -- urged City
to operate and offered substantial assistance at no cost
to City. As soon as court decision freed our use of
funds, reported same to City, learned City did not
desire to operate itselk, and promptly made proposal.
295
296
2, Auditor's reticence. Only slight truth in statement that
City unable hold TAP accountable for funds allocated to
us, City may specify such controls and reports as it
desires, may audit our records or inspect our *un audits.
Audited annually by Anderson and Reed on overall opera-
ti*n; also nad!ted by federal government on each separate
manpomer contract. We've been audited move in past
year than City has in past 37 -- and have never had
question raised that could not be answered satisfac-
torily, Ronded and insured; in unlikely event me mis-
appropriate some portion of the money, City mould collect
from our carrier. The Slight truth in the Auditor°s
objection is that should the DOL disallow some portion
of the total costs on a question of bad Judgment or
incompetence on our part, and were we no longer in busi-
ness when the disallomment occurred, the City could
collect from our carrier only if criminal misuse mere
involved, not merely for bad Judgment or incompetence.
With the exception of the State of Virginia, which
likely be in business as long as City, that is true of
any agency City desires to subcontract with; Jf Auditor*s
position mere valid, City could not subcontract with any-
one to operate its buses, for example. In fact, all sorts
of cities contract wlth private firms all the time. San
Francisco does it for garbage collection. Norfolk does it
for buses. Omaha and Albequerqoe do it for manpower
programs, and Richmond plans to subcontract manpower
programs to several agencies beginning July I. The
City is correct to concern itself with doing business in
responsible manner with reputable agency.. On that
score: We'Ye had 23 contracts with DOL in past seven
years; never had any expense dtsallomed.
3. True federal trend away from funding CAAS directly. This
fact should not be permitted to cloud desirability of
City subcontracting with TAP. Purpose of the change i*
manpower funding channels is to permit decisions as to
type of program and most effective operator to be sade
at local level. As official of DOL said at planning
meeting in Philadelphia in March: 'If me say to a city
~Vou choose mhom you buy your services from,~ and not have
in mind some alternatives from mb!ch the choice can be
made, we would be foolish. We see CAAs os the only real
alternative to the Employment Service as a vendor of
services, and it would be foolish to *yawl*oh all the
manpower expertise CAAS have developed in eight years.'
4. Mr. Hamer says under VEC the City would have more control
over the actions of these young employees, should they
not perform as expected. The significant factor, he says,
in addition to fiscal accountability, is 'the attitude of
the youngsters and pr*gram supervisors as to who is
'bom.' We discussed this at some length in our meeting
Thursday with Mr. Hamer, Mr. Gibson mod Mr. Graham. The
purpose of the program is to provide work for poor youths
in such a way that they get needed income, are encouraged
to return to school, and have a work experience that is
useful in moving them toward the world of work on gradua-
tion. Inasmuch as they are inexperienced workers, there
will be some problems. Our approach is to make the pro-
gram a good learning experience, to improve job-
readiness. Hr. Gibson and Mr. Honey several times
asked how rapidly we would fire an enrollee if something
went wrong. ~e explained that when something 9*es wrong
it nay be the enrollee at fault, it may be the supervisor,
it may be a misunderstand!n9 that can be worked out.
Sometimes it is necessary to fire a hid, but if that is
the immediate response he*s not go!n9 to earn any money
and he certainly isn*t 9*in9 to have satisfactory work
experience. Mr. Gibson and Mr. Hamer keep tahlin9 about
firing people; we'd prefer to solve the problems.
As Mr. Hamer himself has said, there is llttle question
of TAP's capability. On the significant factors of
philosophy and accountability, we respond again that
our seven years of highly evaIuated and totally
accountable experience permits us to offer unique com-
petence to the City.
Mr. Palmer K, St. Clair appeared before Council in support of the
request of the Virginia Employment Commission to operate the PEP Sumcer Employ-
meat Program.
J
In a discussion of the matter, the City Auditor advised that he uill
have to write the checks, that if he is to write the checks, the City Manager
should be the administrative officer of the program, that the city cannot pay
block grants to anyone, that the city will be totally responsible for the money
and that the decision which is made by Council concerning this program will be
the forerunner for programs to come.
Mr. George E. Franklin, Sub-Committee Chairman, Opportunities Industri~
ization Center, appeared before Council and expressed the opinion that the
decision mede by Council with reference to the PEP Summer Employment Program
will affect future programs but the decision will not necessarily be binding on
The City Manager pointed out that the main basis for his recommenda-
tion is that if Council accepts the proposal of the Virginia Employment Commis-
sion for administration of the program it will give the city control over the
Approximately 75 youths appeared before Council in support of the
proposal of Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley for operation Of the
PEP Summer Employment Program.
In a discussion of the matter, Dr. Taylor expressed the opinion that
in the past the City of Roanoke has been pleased to have TAP programs and now
Council is in a position to be of some help of TAP, that the Virginia Employment
Commission does not need help as much as TAP needs it now and moved that the
City Attorney be instructed to prepare the proper measure awarding the PEP
Summer Employment Program to Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley and
that the City Manager be authorized to apply for the grant immediately. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
Later durin9 the meeting, Mr. Hubard offered the following Resolution
providing for subcontractin9 to Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley
of performance of certain administrative services in connection with that portio
of the Public Employment Program as authorized under the Emergency Employment
Act of 1971, modified for the purpose of employment of youth during the summer
of 1973 and authorizing the City Manager to make application for 9rant of
federal funds under the aforesaid Act:
(~20897) A RESOLUTION providing for subcontracting to Total Action
Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley of performance of certain administrative
services in connection with that portion of the Public Employment Program as
authorized under the Emergency Employment Act of 1971, modified for the put*
pose of employment of youth during the summer of Ir?3; and authorizing the
City Manager to make opplicatton for grant Of federal funds under the aforesaid
Act.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book =aB, page 118.)
297
298
Hr. Nubard moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor smd adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lish, Taylor, Thomas and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
BUDGET-CITY ATTORNEY: The City Attorney submitted a written report
requesting that $100.00 be transferred from Personal Services to ones, Nemberships
and Subscriptions under Section n4, "City Attorney," of the 1972-73 budget, to
provide funds for the purchase of a secondhand but unused set of the Code of
Virginia for use by the third member of the staff of the City Attorney.
Mr. LJsk moved that Council concur in the request of the City Attorney
and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the request of the
City Attorney and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
requested funds:
(~2069fl) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~4, "City Attorney,'
of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providin9 for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ua0, page
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the foliowin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
ZONING: The City Attorney submitted a written report advisiu9 that
it has been called to his attention that in the preparation of Ordinance No.
20849 which was adopted by Council on May 7, 1973, and which bad the effect of
adding new subsections to and of amending another section of the Zonin9 Ordinance,
the subsection which provided a definition of the term art gallery mas assigned
the subsection of 9 whereas, for purposes of proper sequence it should have been
numbered subsection 6, that the error, if it be called that, is purely ministerial
and would have been and will be corrected in the process of codification into
the City Code by the Code publisher, however, and so that the Council's and the
City Clerk's records be complete, he has prepared a short Resolution which
recognizes and corrects the misnumbering of that subsection and he recommends
that it be adopted by Council at the present time.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the report of the City Attorney
and offered the folloming Resolution providing for the correction:
(~20899) A RESOLUIION relating to the codification of Ordinance NO.
20849, which added a new subsection dealing mith Art Galleries to Title X¥~
Chapter 4.1, Section 7, Zoning, of the Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, ~s
a~ended.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book n38, page 120.)
Hr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolulion, The motion mas
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Bubardo Lisk, Taylor. Thomas and
Mayor #ebber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
ZONING: Council having referred to the City Attorney for considera-
tion and recommendation n petition from Mr. Ganlel S. Brown, Attorney, repre-
senting Mr. Carl Eo Dillon, et am., and Mr. Richard 5. Niostend, et
requesting authorization for the Commissioner of BnildJngs to issue a certificate
of occupancy for nonconforming use for three apartment units located at
1139 - 1131Masena Avenue, $. M.. and 1133 - 1135 Masena Avenue, 5. M., the
City Attorney submitted the following report recommending that the Board of
Zoning Appeals be constituted as the agency mhich, in proper cases, and under
guidelines set up by Council within the provisions of the Zoning Drdinance,
may order or direct the issuance of a certificate of occnpnncy for a noncon-
forming use which has existed more or less continuously since August 29, 1966:
'May 21, 1973
The Bonorable Mayor and Rembers
of Roanoke City Council
Roanohe, Virginia
Gentlemen:
At the meeting of the Council held on May 14. 1973,
the Council was petitioned to direct lssunnce of certifi-
cates of occupancy for nonconforming uses under the Zoning
Ordinance, applicable to certain pro@ertles on Wasena
Avenue, S. M. The Council referred the matter to the under-
signed for consideration and recommendation.
Not going into the merits of the petition presently
before the Council I have, however, and with the assistance
of the Commissioner of Buildings, considered again the matter
of providing some general rule within the Zoning Ordinance,
itself, by which these and other later situations may be
handled so as to provide, in proper cases, a method by which
the relief requested may be afforded.
It is my view that, to the'greatest extent possible,
all of the rules and regulations concernin9 the administra-
tion of the City's Zoning Ordinance should be contained in
the ordinance, itself, so that property omners may determine
from the express provisions of the regulations the zonin9
requirements placed on their properties by the regulations
and the procedures mhich control variances, special exceptions,
certificates of occupancy and certificates of occupancy for
nonconforming uses.
Upon adoption of a totally new set of zoning regulations
on August 29, 1966, and realizing that those new regulations
would, overnight, create a number of situations not in
conformity with the new regulations, the Council wisely
allomed a period of time immediately folloming the adoption
of the new regulations within which any owner or occupant of
property, the use of which was made nonconforming by'the new
requirements, might apply for.and obtain a certificate of
occupancy permitting continuance of such nonconforming use.
The period initially allowed by the Council has, on several
occasions, been extended; however, even mom, and almost
seve~ years later, and the last of the extensions havin9
long since expired, requests are periodically made to the
City Council that permission be given to continue certain
uses which were made nonconforming by the August 29, 1966,
ordinance. Also, it is the general understanding of the
Zoning Administrator that there still remain in the City
a number of situations wherein nonconforming uses of pro-
perty exist and for mhich certificates of occupancy would
299
3OO
have been issued had the property owners made timely
applications during the periods allowed therefor.
The undersigned again recommends that the Board of
Zoning Appeals be constituted'as the agency mhich, in proper
cases, and under guidelines set up by the Council within the
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, may order or direct the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy rot a nonconforming
use which has existed more or less continuously since August
29, 1966. I do not recommend that any further general ex-
tension be provided for the time in which the certificates
be automatically issued by the Zoning Administrator; however,
and in consultation with the Zoning Administration, I do
recommend that the Board of Zoning Appeals he authorized to
direct such issuance, on appeal from the Administrator as
for a variance, if It be made to appear to the Board that
the use existed prior to August 29, 1966, that it has not
subsequently been discontinued for more than one year and
if the use, in fact, be not detrimental to the immediate
neighborhood.
An amendment of the zoning regulations such as is pro-
pose d would need to be preceded by a public hearing on the
question, held by the Council. That is the procedure that
I recommend, and there is transmitted herewith a proposed
resolution mhich would initiate such procedure should the
council so desire.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ J. N. Kincanon
J. N. Kincanon"
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Attorney and offered the folloming Resolution initiating an amendment of Chapter
4.1, Zoning, of Title XV, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended,
relating to the issuance of certificates of occupancy for nonconforming uses
under the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and providing for a public hearing
to be held on the matter at 7:30 p.m., Monday, June 25, 1973, in the Council
;hamber:
(~20900) A RESOLUTION initiating an amendment of Chapter 4.1, Zoning,
of Title XV, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, ss amended, relating to
the issuance of certificates Of Occupancy for nonconforming uses under the pro-
visions of the city's Zoning Ordinance.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~aB, page 121.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Yhomas and
Mayor Mebber .................... ~.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
In this connection, Mr. Daniel S. Brown, Attorney, representifl9 Mr. Carl
E. Billon, et ox., and Mr. Ricbard S. Minstead, et. ux., appeared before the
body in support of the request of his clients and requested that Council refer
the request of his clients to the City Manager for study, report and recommenda-
tion rather than deferring the matter until the public hearing on June 25, 1973.
Mr. Hubard moved that Council concur in the request of Mr. Brown and
that the matter be referred to the City Manager for study, report and recommendatio
to Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
~mmmm /
With regard to zoning, Hr. Llsk celled to the attention of Council
that there nrc times when Council rezoned properties for specified purposes
but the developers do not develop the properties according to plans presented
to Council and requested the City Attorney be requested to check into the possibi
lity of amending the Zoning Ordinance to provide that when a parcel of land is
rezoned for a specific purpose and the developer does not develop according
to plans presented to Council that mithin a specified period of time the parcel
of land will revert back to its original zoning. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
GARBAGE REMOVAL: The Assistant City Attorney submitted a written
report advising that the city bas intervened in the Bollinger v. Board of
Supervisors of Roanoke County suit as a party defendant, that the proceeding
was instituted by Mr. Bollinger and others who are adjacent property owners, to
enjoin ese of the M. S. Thomas property as a regional sanitary landfill for the
use and benefit of the Roanoke Valley and that the city, as joint holder of
an option to purchase the Thomas property and as a joint petitioner for a
special use permit before the Board of Supervisors to use said property for
landfill purposes, has a vital interest in the outcome of this proceeding.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
wa~ seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
CITY ATTORNEY: The City Attorney submitted a written report request-
ing an executive session to discuss two matters pending in litigation.
Mr, Thomas moved that Council concur in the request Of the City
Attorney. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and
Mayor Webber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........Oo (Mr. Trout absent)
AUDITS: The City Auditor submitted a financial ~eport of the City of
Roanoke for the month of April, 1973.
Dr. Taylor moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE: The City Auditor submitted a
monthly statement of expenditures for public welfare for the month ended April
30, 1973.
Mr. Lisk moved that the statement be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a written report in
connection with a request of Mr. John L. Apostolou, Attorney, representing
Richard R. Hamlett Construction Company. Incorporated, requesting that a
certain parcel of land containing 0.301 acre. situated in the 2600 block of
Stephenson Avenue, S. W., designated as Official Tax No. 1160136. be rezoned
301
3O2
from RS-3, Single-Family Residential District, to RD, Duplex Residential District,
recommending that the request be approved.
Mr. Garland moved that Council hold a public hearing on the request
for rezoning at 7:30 p.m.. Monday. June 25, 1973, in the Council Chauber. 7he
nc,ion was seconded by Mr. Link and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted u mritiea report in
connection with the request of Mr. Howard E. Slgmon that certain parcels of
land located on the uest end of Lansing Drive, S. ~., contained approximately
2.2 acres, according to a mop dated February23, 1973. by C. D. Yalcolm ~ Son,
S. C. E., be rezoned from eS, Single-Family Residential District. to
General Residential District, recommending that the request be denied.
In this connection, a communication from Mr. Howard £. Slgmon
requesting a public hearing on the request for rezoning was also before Council.
Mr. Garland moved that Council hold a public hearing on the
request for rezoning at ?:30 p.m.. Monday. June 25, 1973, in the Council
Chamber. The motion was seconded by Mr. Link and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: The City Planning Commission submitted a written report in
connection mith the request of Mr. John H. Kennett, Jr., Attorney, representing
Mr. Co Gordon llunter, that property located on the south side of the 3000 block
of Melrose Avenue, N. M., described as Lots 5, 6 and the westerly fifty feet of
Lot 7, Mop of H. E. Roberts. Official Tax No. 2530230, 2530231 and 2530232, be
rezoned from C-l, Office and Institutional District, to C-2, General Commercial
District, recommending that the request be denied.
Mr. Outland moved that action on the matter be deferred until the next
regular meeting of Council on Tuesday, Hay 29, 1973, pending notification from
Mr. Eennett as to whether or not his client desires a public hearing on the
request for rezoning. The motion was seconded by Mr. Link and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: The City Plannin9 Commission submitted a mrttten report in
connection with the request of Mr. Richard Lee Lawrence, Attorney, representing
Carl E. and Barbara L. Coleman and Alice F. Ferguson, that property located on
Stewart Avenue, S. E., 13th Street, S. E., Dale Avenue, S. £., and 13th Street,
S. E., described as Lots 1, 2 and 13, and the west seven feet of Lot 14, Block 7,
Map of Oakridge Land Company, be rezoned from RD, Duplex Residential District, to
C-2, General Commercial District, recommending that the request be denied.
Mr. Garland moved that action on the matter be deferred until the next
regular meeting of Council on Tuesday, May 29, 1973, pending notification from
Mr. Lawrence as to whether or not his clients desire a public hearing on the
request for rezoning. The motion was seconded by Mr. Link and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
AUDITS: Mr. ~illiam S. Hubard, Chairman of the Audit Committee sub-
mitted a written report advising that on May 17, 1973, the Audit Committee met
with 'the firms of Andrews, Burket ~ Company, and Peat, Marwick, Mitchell ~ Company,
for the purpose of receiving proposals for an audit of the finances of the City
of Roanoke, that the proposuls were reviemed by the Committee Bt considerable
length as to the type of audit, scope, detail and procedure as set out in the
proposals, that in cevieming the proposals, the representatives of both firms
indicated that the proposals mere for general and complete audits, that the
proposal of Peat, Marmick, Mitchell and Co=pony mill produce the lowest cost to
the City of Roanoke, therefore, on motlon duly made, seconded and unanimously
adopted, the Committee recommends that Council engage the firm of peat, Mavmick
Mitchell G Company to conduct an audit of the financial condition of the City
of Roanoke.
MF. Hubard moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
Audit Committee and offered the following emergency Ordinance authorizing the
employment of certain professional accounting and auditing services for a
complete audit of the city*s finances for the fiscal year ending June 30° 1973,
at a cost not to exceed
(#20901) AN ORDINANCE authorizing employment of certain professional
accounting and a~ditlng services for a complete audit of the city's finances
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 19T3, at a cost not to exceed $24,750.00.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book g39, page
Mr. flubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mc. Garland and adopted by the follomin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
Mr. Hubazd then offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriatin~
$24,750.00 to Fees for Professional and Special Services under Section z12,
*lndependent Auditing," of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for the ser-
vices of Peat, Marwick, Mitchell ~ Company:
(n20902) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~12, *Independent
Auditing,' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~38, page 123.)
Mr. Hubavd moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Council having referred to a committee for
tabulation, report and recommendation bids mhich mere received for the relo-
cation of a portion of Garden City Roulevard, S. C** the committee submitted
the folloming report recommending that the proposal of John A. Ball and Company,
Incorporated, in the amount of $65,445.25, be accepted, and further recommending
303
304
that $23,538.61 be transferred from the Route 460 widening from the 12th Street
to the east corporate limits account to the Garden City Boulevard account ia
order to provide sufficient funds for this proJect:
"May 21, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Garden City Roulevard
After proper advertisement, bids mere received and
publicly read before City Council at its regular meeting
on Monday, May 7, 1973, for the relocation or a portion of
Garden City Roulevard, S. E. Two bids mere received as
shown on the attached tabulation. The lom bid in the amonflt
of $6§,445,25 was submitted by John A. Hall and Company,
Incorporated.
Your committee has rerlemed the lom bid and finds it in
order althoogh it exceeds the amounts previously appropriated
for this mork. There remains $43,078.42 in this account.
All of the necessary right of may for this proJect
has been acquired by the City.
It is the committeeOs recommendation that:
1. A contract in the amount of $65.445.25 be awarded
to John A. Hall and Company, Incorporated.
That the sum of $23,53H.bl be transferred from
Account CIP b4-5, Route 4bO Nldeniog from 12th
Street to the East Corporate Limits, which project
has been completed, to the Garden City Boulevard
Account in order to provide sufficient funds for
this contract and necessary materials testing, and
3. That the other bid received be rejected following
the execution of a satisfactory contract between
the City of Roanoke and John A. Hall and Company,
Incorporated, for tbJ$ project.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Sam H. McBhee, III
Sam H~ McGhee, lll
Chairman
S/ Harold G. Hardy
Harold G. Hardy
S/ Bueford fl. Thompson
Bueford B. Thompson"
Mr. Llsh moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the committee
and offered the folloming emergency Ordinance acceptin9 the proposal Of John A.
Ball and Company, Incorporated, for certain improvements in connection with the
relocation of a portion of Garden City Boulevard, S. E.:.
(#20903) AN ORDINANCE accepting the proposal of John A. tlall G Company,
Incorporated, for certain improvements in connection with the relocation of a
portion of Garden City Boulevard, S. E.; authorizing the proper city officials to
execute the requisite contract; rejecting all other bids for said work; and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =38. page 123.)
Mr. Llsk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Thomas nad adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Hubard, Llsk, Taylor, Thomas and
Mayor Webber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ........... O. (Mr. Trout absent)
Or. Taylor then offered the folloming emergency Ordinance transferring
$23.538.61 from Route 4hO Widening from 12th Street to the East Corporate
Limits to Garden City Boulevard under the Transfers Mithin the Capital lmprovemen
Fund account to provide sufficient funds for this project:
(u20904) AN OROINANCE to amend and reordain 'Transfers Within
Capital Improvements Fund' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n3B, page 124.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Nubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and
Rayor Webber ....................
NAYS: ~one ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS-SEKERS AND STORR DRAINS: Council having
referred to a committee for tabulation, report and recommendation bids which
were received for the construction of a double 5' x 7' box culvert and a 12~
diameter sanitary seMer line in Washington Park, the committee submitted the
following report recommeodin9 that the proposal of Bennett Construction
Company, in the amouot of $137,220.60, be accepted, and further recom-
mending the transfer of certain funds in connection with the project:
"May 21, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Washington Park Box Culvert
After proper advertisement bids were publicly received
and read before City Council at its regular meeting on
Monday, May 7, 1973, for the construction of a double S
foot by ? foot box culvert and a 12-inch diameter sanitary
sewer line in Washington Park. Five bids were received
for this work as sbomn on the attached tabulation. The
low bid in the amount of $137,220.B0 was submitted by
Bennett Construction Company.
We have reviewed the lom bid and have consulted with
the Yirginia Department of Highways coocerntn9 bids which
they have recently received for similar work in order to
prepare costs. It is the committee's opinion that the low
bid received is a good bid and represents the cost of con-
structing this facility although the cost is higher than
monies previously budgeted for this work. There remains
$95,980.42 in this account.
Consideration was also given to the fact that major
grading operations will be undertaken in the close vicinity
of Washington Park in the very near future and that excess
material from this grading operation might be available for
use in filling the ravine in Washington Park if the box
culvert is constructed at this tine. If the construction
of the box culvert were to be delayed, there would be con-
siderable additional costs involved in filling this ravine.
305
306
Ii is the committee's recommendation that:
1. A contract be awarded to Bennett Construction ~ompauy
in the amount of $37,220.80,
2. $1,357.64 be transferred from Account CIP 64-5, the
Route 460 Widening from 12tb Street to East Corporate
Limits to this account; that $10.704.61 be transferred
from Account CIP 20, the construction of the Albemarle
Avenue storm drain; that $190959,33 be transferred
from Account ClP 69-16, the nam bridge on Grandam
Road over Mud Lick; end that $0.998 be transferred
from Account ClP ?1-6, the improvement or
Hershberger Road, All of these projects have been
completed. These transfers tO the Wasbiugton Park
box culvert account mill provide sufficient funds
for this contract.
3. It is recommended that the other bids received be
rejected following the execution of a contract
betmeen the City of Roan.he acd Henaett Construc-
tion Company fOr this project.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Sam H. McGhee. III
Sam II. gcGhee. III. Chairman
S~ Harold G. Hardy
Dar. Id G. Hardy
S/ Bueford B. Thonpson
Oueford B. Thompson'
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
committee and offered the following emergency Ordfflaace accepting the proposal
of Bennett Construction Company:
(#20905) AN ORDINANCE providing for the construction of a double
5-foot by 7-foot box culvert and a 12-inch diameter ductile iron sanitary sewer
line in Washington Park. N. W., upon certain terms and conditions, by acceptin9
a certain bid made to the City; rejecting certain other bids; and providing for
an emergency.
(rot full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book n38, page 12S.)
Or. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Ur. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, and
Mayor Webber .................... 6,
NAYS: None ........... O. (Ur. Trout absent)
Dr. Taylor than offered the following emergency Ordinance transferring
$41,019,5H from various accounts to provide additional funds for the project:
(#20906) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain 'Transfers Nathan Capital
Improvements Fond,' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance nook n3B. page 126.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Nr. Lash and adopted by the foil.ming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Oarlacd, Hubard, Lish, Taylor, Thomas
and Malor Webber .............. 6.
NAYS: None ..........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
SCHOOLS-TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEY: Ordinance No.
20885 authorizing and providing for the lease by the City of the former Harrison
Elementary School site to Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley upon
certain terms and conditions, having previonsly been before Council for Its
first reading, read and laid Over, was again before the body, Mr. Unbard
offering the following for its second rending and final adoption:
(n20885) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and providing for the lease by
the city of the former Harrison Elementary School site to Total Action
Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley; upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Uook ~38, page 112.)
Mr. Hubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Llsk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Llsk, Taylor, Thomas, and
Mayor ~ebber ...................6.
NAYS: None .......... O. (Mr. Trout absent)
BUILDINGS-SPECIAL PERMITS: Ordinance No. 208Dr permitting the con-
Struction of a brick veneer exterior on the north side of a building located
at T20 Fairfax Avenue, N. W., Official Tax No. 2111101, to encroach six inches
over the south line Of the public right of way for a distance of approximately
90 feet alongside said building, upon certain terms and conditions, having
previously been before Council for its first reading, read and laid over, was
again before the body, Mr. Lisk offerin9 the followin9 for its second reading
and final adoption:
(~20689) AN ORDINANCE permitting the construction of a brick veneer
exterior on the north side of a building located at T20 Fairfax Avenue, N. Wo,
Official Tax No. 2111101, to encroach six inches over the south line of the
pnblic right of way for a distance of approximately 90 feet alongside said
building, upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Dook x380 page 113o)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. 6arland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas
and Mayor Webber ................ b.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Trout absent)
AIRPORT: Ordinance No. 20890 amending and reordaining Chapter 5.1
of Title XIII, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, imposing
and fixing a use and service charge for certain enplaning passengers utilizing
premises or facilities at Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport; providing for
the method of payment and collection of such charges; defining certain unlawful
3O7
308
acts and providing penalitle$ therefor; providing for severability of the pro-
visions of this Ordinance and providing for the effective date of this Ordinance
having previously been before Council rot its first reading, read and laid over,
was again before the body, Mr. Lisk offering the following for its second reading
and final adoption:
(=20890) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining Chapter 5.1 of Title
XllI. of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, imposing and fixing
a use and service charge for certain enplaning passengers utilizing premises
or facilities at Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport; providing for the method
of payment and collection of such charges; defining certain unlamful acts and
providing penalties therefor; providing for serernbllfty of the provisions Of
this Ordinance; and providing for the effective date of this Ordinance:
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book n3fl. page 114.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and
Rayor Mebber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ........... O. (~r. Trout absent)
PENSIONS: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure amending Section 1, Definitions, Section 3, Membership, Section
4, Creditable service, Section 6, Early service retirement benefit, Section 7,
Benefits, and Section 8o Method of financing, of Chapter 1, General Provisions,
of Title III, Pensions and Retirement, of the Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956,
as amended, in certain particulars, so as to broaden and increase the benefits
tO members of the Employees' Retirement System. he presented same; mhereupon,
Mr. Thomas offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~2090T) AN ORDINANCE amending Section 1. Definitions, Section 3,
Eeaberships, Section 4. Creditable service, Section 6. Early service retirement
benefit; Section 7. Benefits, and Section 6, Method of financing, of Chapter 1,
General Provisions, of Title Ill, Pensions and Retirement, of The Code of the
City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, in certain particulars, so as to broaden and
increase the benefits to members of the citT's Employees' Retirement System;
and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n38, page 127.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Nubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and
Mayor Webber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ........... O. (Mr. Trout absent)
COUNCIL: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure conveying to Councilman James O. Trout the best wishes of the
Council of the City of Roanoke and looking forward to his early return to active
duty as a member of City Council, he presented same; whereupon, Mr. Hubard
offered the following Resolution:
(o20908) A RESOLUTION conveying to Councilman James O. Trout the
beat wishes of the Council of the City or aganoke.
(For fuji text of Resolution° see Ordinance Hush #38, page 136o)
Mr. Hubard moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and
Mayor Mebber ...................6,
HAYS: Hone .......... 0, (NFo Trout absent)
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
COMPLAIHTS-JL~ENILE OETEHTZON HOME: Mrs. I. G. Nelson, 1409 3rd
Street, S. ~., appeared before Council and called attention to certain incidents
which have occurred in her neighborhood caused by children who are residents of
Youth Haven and commended the Police Department for answering these calls in
such an expeditious manner.
In this connection, Mrs. Nelson also made reference to a vacant house
at 1415 3rd Street, S. M., advising that the doors are left open and people are
coming iu and out of the house at their pleasure.
Mr. Garland moved that the City Manager be requested to check into
the status of the vacant house at 1405 3rd Street, S. M°, to ascertain if
there are any violations of the law and submit a report to Council. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-COUNCIL: Mr. Garland presented a communication advising that
on several previous occasions he has made the suggestion that the City Council
make a tour of the various City installations either before or during the
budget study, that ho felt that this would not only familiarize the members
of Council with the operation of the city but at the same time mould help the
members of Council ia determining whether or not certain items should be
included or excluded in the budget, advising that the tour would not be unlike
Governor Bolton'$ tour of the state with his Budget Study Advisory Committee
which is takin9 place at the present time, that it would appear to him that
Council could accomplish this tour in one to two days, accordingly, he recom-
mends that Council request the Mayor to select a time that mould be appropriate
add convenient for Council within the next two seek period and further recom-
mending that a bus be used for this purpose, that the nems media, the City
Manager and the Assistant City Manager along math any other personnel that he
might feel would be helpful in explanations be invited to accompany the Council
on this tour.
In this connection, it was decided that Council will tour the various
city installations on Tuesday, June 5, 1973, beginning at 8:00 a.m., that the
1973-74 budget study sessions will begin at 6:30 p.m., on June 5, 1973, and
that further budget study session will be scheduled for 5:30 pon., on June 6
and 7 and on June 12, 14 and 15, 1973.
309
310
PARES.AND PLAYGROUNDS: Mr. Lisk expressed the opinion that It is time
that measures were taken to protect Mlley Drive us u scenic roadway, suggesting
that one possibility would be to limit access to the current terminus points,
i.e** Jefferson Street and Maseao Park, with egress also at the Transportation
MuSeum, advising that the closing Of the Franklin Road intersection would
eliminate use os a short cut to Jefferson Street and a da*gev*us traffic bottle-
neck. suggesting a movable gate to make access.possible from Franklin Road during
major events at Victory Stadium and moved that the Mayor be requested to appoint
a committee to study the above suggestions and present any other proposals mhich
will protect Miley Drive as a scenic roadway. The motion was seconded by Mr,
Hub*rd and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Mebber then appointed Messvs, Byron E. Hamer, James O. Tv*ut,
David K. Llsk, James D. $inh and Lotbav MermelsteJn as members of the committee.
Also with reference to the matter, Mr. Lisk moved that the City Attorney
be requested to prepare any necessary legal recommendations which would designate
Niley Drive once and for all as a scenic roadway and eliminate any commercial
and thoroughfare use of this drive in the future. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Yhomas and unanimously adopted.
There being no further business, Mayor Mebber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST: ~
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Tuesdsy, May 29. 1973.
The Council or the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the
Council Chanber in the Municipal Building, Tuesday, Mny 29, 1973, at 7:30
p.m., with Mayor Roy L. Mebber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, MillJam S. Hubard, David K.
Limb, Noel C. Taylor, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy Lo Mebber .......
ABSENT: Councilman Hampton M. Thomas ....................
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr, Byron E. Darter, City Manager; Mr. H. Ben
Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorney; Mr. James E. Buchholtz, Assistant City
Attorney; and Mr. A. N. Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened mith'a prayer by the Reverend
Onen O. Stultz, Executive Director, District Church of the Brethren.
MINUTES: Copy Of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday,
May 21, 1973, having been furnished each member of Council, on motion of
Mr. Trout, seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof
was dispensed with and the minutes approved as recorded.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
CITY MARKET: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids on electrical
alterations to the City Market Building, said proposals to be received by the
City Clerk until 2 p.m., Tuesday, May 29, 1973, and to be opened before Council
at 7:30 p.m., Mayor Webber asked if anyone had any questions about the advertise-
ment for bids and no representative present raisin9 any question, the Mayor
instructed the City Clerk to proceed with the opening of the bids; whereupon,
the City Clerk opened and read the following bids:
DID I
Jefferson Electric Company, Incorporated $22,142.00
New River Electrical Corporation - 39,412.00
BID I1
Jefferson Electric Com-
pany, Incorporated - $2,320.00 $2,320.00 $~.320.00 $2,320.00
O. R, Chisomo Electri-
cal Contractor 2,626.00 2,626.00 ~,~26.00 2,~2~.00
New Biver Electrical
Corporation 5,gg3.00 5,993.00 5,993.00 $,~93.00
BIO III
Jefferson Electric Company, Incorporated - $ 9,021.00
New River Electrical Corporation -
BIO IV
Jefferson Electric Company, Incorporated - $40,443.00
O. R. Chisom, Electrical Contractor - 43,~00.00
New River Electrical Corporation - 76,181.00
Dr. Taylor moved that the bids be referred to a committee to be
appointed by the Mayor for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
'3il
'312
Mayor Webber appointed Messrs. Sanael H. ¥cGheeo III, Chairman, J. fl.
Drawer, end L. G. Leftmich'as members of the committee.
ZONING: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m., Tuesday,
May 2g, 1973, on the ~equest of Mr. G. Weyne Fralin lbat all properly lying
easl of lhe cenlerline of Pelers Creeh of a cerlain described 4.97 acre tract of
land, being 2.733 acres, official Tax No. 2770102, be rezoned from C-1, Office
and Inslllutional Dlslrict, to C-2, General Commercial DIslricl, lhe mailer mas
before lhe body.
In this conneclion, lhe City Planning Commission submitted the folloming
reporl recommending thal lhe request he granled:
~April 19, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. ~ebber, Mayor
and Members of Cily Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Genllemen:
The above ciled request mas considered by the City
Planning Commission at bolh its regular meelings of
February T, 1973, and April 18, 1973.
At the February 7, 19T3. meeting, Mr. Fralin appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that the petitioner
was making this request so that he could build a retail
hardware store to be of steel and concrete slab construction,
similarto the exterior of The First National Hranch Dank
located on 419 and Apperson Drive. He stated that the pro-
posed building would cost between $350,000 to $400.000 and
that the parking area would consist of about 20.000 square
feet; 137 parkin9 spaces to be provided in the front of the
building, 34 cars at the side~ and anadditional 350 spaces
at the rear of the building.
Mr. Fralin also noted that this property is located
both in Roanoke City and in Roanoke County and the proposed
structure would, in actuality, straddle both jurisdictions.
He noted that they have contacted all of the immediate pro-
perty owners, 3 in the City and I in the County and no
opposition has been expressed in regard to this rezonin9
petition, Mr. Fralin stated that there is a large concern-
tration of people in this area and the prospects are very
good for the continued commercial development of Peters
Creek Road with so many businesses located near this loca-
tion.
Mr. Hradshaw asked what effect this changing of the
creek and storage on the flood plain would have on the
property omners above and below this location. Mr. Fralin
stated that the creek is 15 feet deep, which height it did
not reach in the last flood, and the building would be another
2 feet above this before the mater could reach the bottom of
the building. He stated that there would be no filling in
by the Constructio~ of the building because the building
would be built on stilts over the creek.
Mr. John Cone, architect for the proposed building,
stated that the creek was straightened out in its original
location. 'He 'further stated that the previous owner cut
a straight line with the creek and filled in about 15 feet
on the east side of the creek and that the new owners
planned to fill in the west side to some degree, leaving
the creek 40 feet wide and 15 feet deep, and the building
mould be made like a bridge over the creek.
Mr. Bradsham stated that after looking at the site, he
found the property across the creek and this side of the
creek to be very low and that this area is used for a
storage area for flash floods and that the channels should
not he straightened mithout some sort of conditions. He
further stated that if a C-1 designation for this property
were used, the entire space proposed to be used wonld not
be necessary, mhereas, in the C-2, designation, the land
used as a reservoir would be used with nowhere for the water
from a flash flood to go. Mr. Bradsham noted that he felt
that some further study should be made before rezoning this
property.
Mr. Boynton.stated he felt that this petition should be
tabled until anch time ns the City Englneer*s office could
review it. After'some discussion by the members of the
Planning Commission on the need for such a study, it was
generally agreed that there was much merit in having the
City Engineer study and review this rezonJng petition in
light or the flooding situation.' This matter uss then
tabled.
At the April 18 meeting, Mr. Frnlin appeared before the
Planning Commission and stated that he hsdbeen asked by Sam
McGhee to insert the various elevations on the plans and
having done tbis,'Nr; HcGhee sent a letter to the Planning
Director stating his views on this petition (See Attached).
Mr. Fralin stated that actually the elevation of the buildln~
is higher than Peters Creeh Road itself, Mr. Fralin noted
that this elevation is above the 100 year'flood plain.
Hr. Dradshaw asked where the building would set in
relation to the City/County boundary line and that wasn*t
the original creek the catnal bonndary line. Mr. Fralin
answered that the building would set across both lines with
a portion being in Roanoke City and a portion being in
Roanoke County and that the original creek was the boundary
line but the creek has a new flow line with the entire fill
finished on the Roanoke City side.
Mr. flradshaw stated that he felt the developer should be
commended for his consideration on this particular project,
realizing that this will be located Jn a flood plain and
making provisions for this fact.
The Planning Director stated that there would be a
public hearing before City Council on April 30 for con-
sideration of an interim moratorium on building development
in flood plain areas. Mr. Bradshaw stated that the Commis-
sion*s intent in requesting City Council to give'consideration
for a moratorium on building in the flood plain until the
flood plain text is finished was in order so'that the Commission
could be sure that the developer was making provisions for
property located in these areas and that he felt that this'
particular developer had met all of the requirements that
the Commission would like to institute ~to the Zoning text
for building in the flood plain areas.
After much discussion by the Planning Commission
members, it was generally agreed that this request con-
forms with the basic intent of the Planning Commission's
flood plain regulations.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and unani-
mously approved recommending to City Council that this
request be approved.
Sincerely,
S/ Henry O, Roynton by LM .
Henry D. Roynton
Chairman"
Mr. W. H. Fralin, Attorney, representing the petitioner, appeared
before Council in support of the reqnest of his client.
No one appearing in opposition to the request for rezoning, gr.
Trout moved that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(~20909) AN oRDINANC£ to amendTitle X¥, Chapter 4;1, Section 2 of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1955, as amended, and Sheet No. 277, Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
WBEREAS, application has been madeto the Council of the City of
Roanoke to have:
ALL property lying east of the centerline'of Peters Creek
of the hereinafter described 4.97 acre tract: BEGINNING
at a point on the present westerly line'of Peters Creek
Road, said point being the northeasterly corner of the
property of C.H. Waldrop oodL. $. Woldrop, recorded in
Deed Book 976, page 190, in the Clerk's Office of the
Hustings Court f6r the City of Roanoke, Virginia, said
point being corner I on Plot prepored by Boford T. Lemsden
~ Associates° dated Januory 3, 1972; thence leaving said
beginning pointe and with the northerly line of the Waldrop
property, N. 6q~ 45' W. 463.TO'feet to a point, being
corner 2 on said plat; thence N. 16° 12' 45" W. 440.22
feet to corner 3; thence N. ?S° 21' 40" E. 93.00 reef to
corner 4; thence with the southerly line of the property
now or formerly R. B. Luxman, et al, S. ?O° 03* 20" E,
502.BO feet to corner 5, being on the uesterl! line of
Peters Creek Road; thence with the same, S. 9v 30' 00"
W. 332.96 feet to the place of BEGINNING, end containing
4,97 acre. end Official Tax No. 2770102.
rezoned from C-I, Office and Institutional District, to C-R, General Commercial
District; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission boa recommended that the herein-
after described land be rezoaed from C-l, Office and Institutional District, to
C-2, General Conmerical District; and
HIfEREAS. the written notice and the posted sign required to be published
and posted, respectively, by Section ?1. Chapter 4.1, Title XV, of The Code of the
City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, relating to Zoning. have been published and
posted os required and for the time provided by said section; and
RDEREAS, the hearing as provided for in said notice was held on the
29th day of Ray. 1973. at ?:30 p.m.. before the Council of the City of Roanoke,
et mhich hearing ell parties in interest and citizens were given an opportunity
to be heard, both for and against the proposed rezoning; and
WHEREAS. this Council. after considering the evidence as he. in provided,
is of the opinion that the hereinafter described land should be rezoned.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City OF Roanoke that
Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as
amended, relating to Zoning. and Sheet No. 2?7 of the Sectional 1966 Zone Map,
City of Roanoke, be amended in the following particular and no other, viz.:
Property located on Peters Creek Road
and described as follows:
ALL property lying east of the centerline of Peters Creek
of the hereinafter described 4.97 acre tract: BEGINNING at
a point on the present westerly line of Peters Creek Road,
said point bean9 the northeasterly corner of the property
of C. B. Haldrop and L. S. Waldrop, recorded in Deed Book
970, page 190. in the Clerk's O££ice of the Bustings Court
for the City of Roonoke, Virginia, said point being corner 1
gu Platprepared by Duford T. Lumsden & Associates, dated
Jonuarx 3, 1972; thence leaving said beginning point, and
with the northerly line of the Waldrop property, N. B9° 45'
W. 463.78 feet to a point, being corner Z on said plat;
thence N. 16° 12' 45' w. 440.22 feet to corner 3; thence
N. ?S° 21' 40' E. 93.00 feet to cornur 4; thence with the
southerly line of the property now or formerly H. B. Layman,
et al, S. ?O° 03* 20" E. 502.88 feet to corner So being
on the westerly line of Peters Creek Road; thence with the
same, S. 9° 30* 00" Wo 332.96 feet to the place of BEGINNING,
and containin9 4.97 acres, and Official Tax No. 2770102.
designated on Sheet 277 of the Sectional 1Bbb Zone Map, City of Roonoke, as
Official Tax No (S). 2770102, be, and is hereby, changed from C-I, Office ned
Institutional District, to C-2, General Commercial District, and that Sheet No.
2~T of the aforesaid map be changed in this respect.
The watiaa was seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the followisg
vote:
AYES: Ressrs, Garland, Hubard, Llsk, Taylor, Trout and
Mayor Nebber ....................
NAYS: None .......... -0. (Mr. Thomas absent)
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Coancil having set a public hearing for 7:30
pom** Tuesday, May 29, 1973, on the request Of Mr, Elias Apostolou, et ax., that
an unopened alley running in an easterly direction from another existing alley
between Franklin Road and Luck Avenue, S. #., as shown on Sheet 101 of the
Appraisal Map of the City of Roanoke, he vacated, discontinued and closed, the
matter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the
following report recommending that the request be granted:
#April 19. 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Webber. Mayor
and Members of City Couccil
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of April
1973.
Mr. John L. Apostolou appeared before the Planning
Commission and stated that this small alley has never been
opened and that the petitioner owns all of the property
abutting this alley. He further stated that the C ~ P
Telephone Company owns one-half of this block with the
petitioner ownin9 the other half and the petitioner
intends to raze some existing buildings and a new struc-
ture would he built that will cover the entire other one-
half of this block.
After some discussion, the Planning Commission members
generally agreed that the closing of this alley would not
he detrimental to the neighborhood.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and
approved unanimously recommending tn City Council that
this request be approved.
Sincerely,
S! Henry B. Boynton by LH
Henry B. Boynton
Chairman"
The viewers appointed to view the alley submitted a written report
advising that they have viewed the alley in question and the neighboring
property and they are unanimously of the opinion that on inconvenience would
result, either to any individual or to the public from permanently vacating,
discontinuing and closing said alley.
No one appearing in oppostion to vacating, discontinuing and closing
the alley, Mr. Hubard moved that the following Ordinance be placed upon its
first reading:
(~20910) AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing
a certain map alley or roadway, being 12 feet wide and 54.3 feet long, running
in an Easterly direction from another existing alley between Franklin Road and
315
316
Luch Avenue, S. N., in the City of Roanoke* Virginia, as shown on Sheet 101 of
the Appraisal Rap of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, in the Roauohe City Engineer*s
Office.
WR£R£AS. Jume$ Do Apostolou, has heretofore filed his petition before
the Council of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, in accordance with law, requesting
the Council to permanently vacate, discontinue and close the above-described map
alley or roadway, the filing of which petition due notice Was given to the
public as required by law; and
WH£REAS, in accordance with the prayers of said petition, viewers
were appointed by the Council on the 2ad day of April, 1973, to view the property
and to report iu writing whether in their opinion any inconvenience would result
from permanently vacating, discontinuing and cloning said map alleyor roadway;
and
WHEREAS, it appears from the written report of the viewers filed with
the City Clerk that no inconvenience would result to any individual or to the
public from permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing said map alley or
roadway; and
WHEREAS, Council at its meeting on April 2, 1973, referred the Petition
to the City Planning Commission, which Commission in its report before the
COuncil on April 23, 1973, recommended that the request to close the said map
alley or roadway, as hereinafter described be 9ranted; and
NHEREAS, a public hearin9 was held on the question before the Council
at its meeting on the 29th day of May, 1973, at 7:30 p.m., after due and timely
notice thereof published in the Roanoke #arid ~ews, at which hearln9 all parties
in interest and citizens were afforded an opportunity to be heard on the
question; and
NHEREAS, from all of the foregoing, the Council considers that no
inconvenience will result to any individual or to the public from permanently
vacating, discontinuing and closing the map alley or roadway, as recommended by
the Planning Commission, and that accordingly said map alley or roadway should te
permanently closed.
~HER£FORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
the following unopened alley described as follows:
BEGINNING on an alleyway that extends from Franklin Road
to Luck Avenue, S. W., in the City of Roanohe° Virginia,
at a point on said alleywayl04.5 feet north of Franklin
Road to a point; and thence in an easterly direction from
existing alleyway a distance of 54.3 feet wide, and being
as shown on an Appraisal Map of the City of Roanohe,
Virginia, Sheet 101, in the Roanoke City Engineer*s Office.
be, and it hereby is, permanently vacated, discontinued and closed and that all
right, title and interest of the City of Roanoke and of the public in and to the
jsame be, and it hereby is, released insofar as the Council of the City of Roanoke
is empowered so to do, the City of Roanoke reserving unto itself, however, a
perpetual easement for sewer lines, drains, water lines and other public utilities
which may now be located in and over the aforesaid map alley or roadway.
EE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that the CfrF Engineer be, and he hereby is,
directed to mark "permenentlT closed" on the map alley or roadway, above
described on all maps and plats on file in his office on uhich the said alley
or roadway may appear, referring to the book and page of Ordinances end
Resolutions of the Council of the City of Roanoke uherein this Ordinance shall
be spread.
I~ IT FURTHER ORDAIHEO, that the Clerk of the Council deliver to the
Clerk of the Ilustings Court for the City of Roanoke. Virginia, a certified copy
Of this Ordinance in order that the Clerk of said court may make proper notation
on all maps or plats recorded in his office upon mhich are shown the said alley,
as provided by lan, and that if so requested by any party in interest, he may
record the same in the deed book in his office indexing the same in the name
of the City of Roanoke us grantor and in the name of any party in interest who
may request it as grantee.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Trout and
Mayor Rabbet .................... 5.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Thomas abs~ t)
BUDGET-TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEY: Mrs. James
D. Stewart appeared before Council and spoke in favor of the request of TAP
for funds in the amount of $181,000.00 for the fiscal year 1973-74. advising
that in the past several years she has been a volunteer in Neighborhood Ser-
vices, both visiting a client referred by outreach workers and in the transpor-
tation pool, pointing out that she feels that TAP workers, through the neigh-
borhood services, have done a good job in helping to meet some of the needs of
the poor in the City of Roanoke and tbat she hopes Council will appropriate the
requested funds to continue TAP programs and services.
Mr, Trout moved that the communication be referred to 1973-74 budget
study . The motion was seconded by Mr. Link and unanimously adopted.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
BUDGET-TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEY: A petition
signed by nine residents of the City of the City of Roanoke in opposition to
the City of Roanoke participating in the fnnding of Total Action Against
Poverty in Roanoke Valley, was before the body.
Mr, Trout moved that the petition be referred to 1973-74 budget
study. The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEY: A communica-
tion from Mr. E. Benjamin Sanders, Rector, St. Elizabeth's Church, respectfully
requesting that Council give serious and earnest consideration to the request
of Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley for funding of its programs
317
318
that serve the needs of persons in the Roanoke Valley, advising that this does
not imply endorsement of the entire program of TAP, mas before the body,
dr. Trout moved that the communication be referred to 1973-74 budget
study. The motion mas seconded by dr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
BUOGET-SCROOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting that $3,R33.46 be appropriated to Section ~2RO0, 'Instructional
Supplies.' of the 1972-73 budget of the Roanoke City School Roard, advising that
this amount is 100 per cent reimbursable from the schools add the revenue in
this category will be increased by this amount, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanoke City
School Board and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
requested funds:
(=20911) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section =2000, "Public
Schools - Instruction," of the 19?R-T3 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook =38, page 136.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas seconded
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, llubard, Lisk, Taylor, Trout and
Mayor Nebber .................... ~.
NAYS: None ........ -0. (Mr, Thomas absent)
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting that $33,558.58 be appropriated to Section ~9300, "Cafeteria Food."
of the 1972-T3 budget of the Roanoke City School Roard, advising that funds in
this amount have been received from the U. S. Department of Agriculture in lieu
of commodities that would normally be furnished to the schools for use in school
School Roard and offered the follomin9 emergency Ordinance appropriating the
(a20912) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section =9000, "Public
Schools - Food Services.' of the 1972-T3 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n38, page 137.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption Of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk. Taylor. Trout, and
Mayor Mebber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ..........O. (Mr. Thomas absent)
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Hoard
requesting that Council approve certain transfers within the 1972-73 budget of
the Roanoke City School Board, was before the body.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanoke
City School Board and offered the follomfog emergency Ordinance providing for
the requested transfers:
(x20913) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~36, page 137.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Dubard, Lisk, Taylor, Trout and
Mayor Webber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Thomas absent)
BUDGET-SHERIFF: A communication from Sheriff Paul J. Puckett
requesting that $150.00 be appropriated by Council to replace an adding machine
in his office mhich is morn beyond repair and must be replaced, adtisJng that
the Department of Welfare and Institutions will reimburse the city for one-
half of this cost, was before the body.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the request of Sheriff
Puckett and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
requested funds:
(~20g14) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~2~, ~Sheriff,~
of the 19T2-?$ Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency,
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~38, page 1~8.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption Of the Ordinance, The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the followin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Nubard, Lisk, Taylor, Trout and
Mayor Nebber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Thomas absent)
DOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: Mr. Napoleon Kaiser, Chairman of the
Gainsboro Neighborhood Development Program Area Citizens Committee, appeared
before Council and advised that the Board of Directors of the People's Area
Committee in the Gatnsboro Redevelopment Program would like to gather more
information concerning the future funding of their project and they are
desirous of meeting with the members of Council in the near future in order
to better understand what the future holds for the redevelopment program in
the Gainsboro Area, Mr. Kaiser pointing out that a bill pending before Congress
will give localities renewal revenue sharing funds that will go directly through
the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority and that the development
of the Gainsboro area is important to many people in that area, that it is
going well and the residents wish to keep it moving in the future.
The City Manager verbally advised Council that he understands there
may. be stringent restrictions on spendin9 of special revenue sharing monies for
housing and renemal.
319
32O
Or. Taylor advised that he personally favors giving top priority to
the Cainsboro Redevelopment ProJect.
After a lengthly discussion of the matter, Hr. Hubnrd moved that
Council record its continued support of the Gainsboro Redevelopment ProJect, and,
federal funds being available and subject to Councflfs establishment of priorities
on the use of those funds, Council will continue financial support of the
Galosh,to Redevelopment ProJect. The motion was seconded by Or. Taylor and
unanimously adopted.
SCHOOLS: A communication from Mrs. William H. Jordon. Corresponding
Secretary, William Fleming High School Parent Teacher Student Association,
requesting that Council consider appointing a resident of the Williamson Road
area who has at least one child in the city public school system to fill the
vacancy on the Roanoke City School Board. nas before the body.
Mr. Garland moved that the communication be taken under consideration.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET-CXT¥ ENGINEER: The Clty'Ranager submitted a written report
recommending that $1,500.00 be transferred from Personal Services under Section
~56, 'Public Works," to Overtime under Section =?1, "Garage." of the 1972-73
budget, to provide funds for the remainder of the fiscal year.
Wv. Lisk moved that Council concur in the report of the City manager
and offered the i,ll,ming emergency Ordinance providin9 for the requested
transfer:
(=20915) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section nSb. "Public
Works," and Section =TI, "Garage," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Hook u38, page 139.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by ar, Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, flubard, Lisk, Taylor, Trout and
Mayor Webber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Thomas absent)
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted a written report
in connection with an easement which is needed with regard to the Springhill
Drive Storm Drain Project, advising that the easement needed for this specified
project is across property escheated to the state and sold by the escheator to
the Commonmealth of ¥irglnia, that such sales are not final until the lapse of
one year from the date of the sale and consequently an easement across the pro-
perty corm,the granted at this time, however, the property is subject to condemna-
tion for a public use and the condemner can acquire good title to the required
easement through the judicial process, and that this matter is brought to the
attention of Council with the recommendation that the property be acquired bI
condemnation proceedings.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the report of the City
Manager and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for preparation
of the proper measure. The motion uas seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously
adopted.
STREETS AND ALLE¥SoSTATE HIGHMAYS: Council having referred to the
City Planning Commission and the City Manager Ior study, report and recommenda-
tion the request of Gio*s Cycle Sales. Incorporated; and the request oID. D.
Berglund, President. Berglund Chevrolet. Incorporated, concerning the
installation of signs within proposed future rights of may, the City Manager
submitted a written report advising that Council. by Resolution No. 13514.
adopted on September 29. 19S8. authorized the Building Commissioner to issue
permits for the erection of signs on privately owned property mlthin areas
designated by Council for future street widening purposes provided that no
traffic hazards mere occasioned thereby and provided also that the respective
owners of the signs first agree in writing to remove the signs upon reasonable
notice fram the city to remove the signs and at no cost to the city ii the city
needed the area in the future for actual street widenin9 purposes, that this
particular Ordinance was adopted prior to the establishment of the arterial
highway regulations within the Zonin9 Ordinance adopted in 1966 and that it is
the opinion of the City Attorney's Office that the Building Commissioner could
continue to issue these permits as authorized by Resolution No. 13514, recommend.
lng that this administrative procedure be continued and further recommendin9
that the City Planning Commission give consideration to the inclusion of this
Resolution into the Zoning Ordinance proper.
Mr. Ltsk moved that the City Clerk*s Office be instructed to forward
matters of this nature to the Building Commissioner since they are administra-
tive matters. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Hubard moved that the City Planning Commission be requested to
give consideration toward including Resolution No. 13S14 into the Zoning
Ordinance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
STATE HIGHWAYS: The City Mnnager submitted a mritten report advising
that he has received notification from the ¥irginia Department of Highways of
their tentative allocation of Interstate, Primary and Urban construction funds
to the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year 1973-74 and that the Virginia
Department of Highways will hold a public hearln9 on these tentative allocations
on Wednesday. June 20. 1973, at 9 a.m.. at The ltotel Roanoke.
Dr. ~aylor moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: The City Ranager submitted a written report
in connection With improvements to the Mill Mountain Threatre, advising that
a tour of this structure was mode hy the Mill Mountain Development Committee
and n list of ten items was ascertained which needed attention, transmitting a
321
322
list of those items with an estimated cost for accomplishment of each, pointing
out that the Committee. in viewing this structure, ascertained that although
this building is structurally sound, doe to its age it would appear to be
economically unfeasible to anticipate continued use of the building beyond nn
eight to ten year period at the outside, that the Hill Hountain development study
presently in progress could recommend removal of the structure prior to that
time, that because of the anticipated useabillty of this structure, be finds it
extremely difficult to recommend total replacement of the porch and roof as
proposed under Item 7, at a total cost of $34.000,0~ that he could recommend that
the other items on the list be accomplished and to this purpose, it Is recommended
that Council during Its budget deliberations consider adding $10,475.00 to the
proposed budget for next year for this purpose.
mr. Trout moved that the report be referred to 1973-74 budget study.
The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
HISCELLANEOUS-GAHBLING: The City Homager submitted a written report
in connection with bingo 9ames, advising that by its action during the 1973 Short
Session the Virginia State Legislature has legalized the issuance of bingo
permits through its provisions of the Virginia Code Section 18.1-340 to be valid
after June 1, 1973, that to date the city has already received numerous inquiries
with respect to the issuance of these permits and on Thursday, Hay 17. 1973,
representatives of the City Attorney*s Office. the Commissioner of the Revenue
and the Chief of Police met in the City Manager's Office to discuss the methods
and procedures for the issuance of these permits, that although this section of
the Code authorizes only nonprofit organizations to operate bingo, there is
little question but considerable revenues can be generated by this activity,
recommending that Council authorize the issuance of a permit under the sane
terms as a license is issued by the Commissioner of the Revenue with the city to
receive nn initial payment of $25.00 for the annual permit and one and one-
half of one per cent of the 9ross income received from these activities which
means that for each $1,000.00 of gross revenue obtained from bingo, the city
would receive $1S.00.
In a discussion of the matter, the City Auditor advised that there is
no way to estimate in advance the amount of revenue the city will generate from
the bingo games but he would prefer that there be a flat fee on each game held
because it would be easier to collect.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the report of the City Haoager
and offered the following emergency Ordinance amending and reordaining Section
7. Gambling and Section 0. Gaming tables, etc., of Chapter ~. Offenses Against
Horality and Decency, of Title XXIII. Hisdemeanors and Offenses. of The Code
of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended; adding a new section relating to
annual permits authorizing the conduct and operntion of bingo games by certain
organizations, upon certain terms and conditions:
(a20916) AN ORDINANCE to amend and veordsiu Sec. T. Gaming and Sec.
8. Gaming Tables, etc., of Chapter 3. Offenses Against Morality and Decency,
of Title XXIIIo Misdemeanors and Offenses, of The Code of the City of
Roanoke, 1956, as auended; adding a new section relating to annual permits
authorizing the conduct and up*ration of bingo games by certain organizations,
upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book z30o page 140.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion was
seconded by Mr. Link and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubardo Link. Trout and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: Dr. Taylor .....1. (Mr. Thomas absent)
CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Ranager submitted the following report in
connection wlth Phase II of the Management Study, advising that there is n
need to go into Phase I1 which is the implementation phase just as soon as
possible followiP9 the study phase, that he has been advised of the receipt
of a tentative grant allocation for the '701Progra~~ which grant would cover
the fee of the consultants for Phase II and that if it is the intent of
Council to proceed with the Phase II implementation work he will return to
Council at a later date with specific recommendations with regard to Resolu-
tions and contracts:
'Ray 29, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Management Study
As you are aware, the consulting firm of Albert Ram*nd
and Associates was retained by the City in February, 1973,
to conduct a study of the City's operations, with the
objective of improving the overall management of the City.
The consultants have been working with us since February on
this study, and are now involved in task three and task
four of the Phase I work, the development of conclusions
and recommendations for changes in the organizational
structure of the City administration. They ore also
developing recommendations for implementing the proposed
changes. Then tasks were outlined previously for you in
the consultants' proposal' for the Phase I study.
The consultants anticipate having a summary report of
their findings available by the end of this month, with the
final report containing nil of the backup material ready by
June 22, 1973.
Equally as important as the Phase I study work is the
Phase II work, the actual implementation of recommended
changes, following the concurrence in the changes by City
Council. It is important that a thorough orientation of
the Manager's staff be conducted to review the final report.
Departmental objectives must be established. Service
level determinations must be made, for both service to the
citizen and to other City departments. Some organizational
restructuring mustbe accomplished, including adjusts*uts in
personnel, organization, chain of command, span of control and
physical operations and logistics. Forward planning methods
will need to be adopted covering a project from conception
to installation. The City's Pay Plan will need to be reviewed
with respect to any changes in the organization. Material
323
324
management methods wlll'need to be implemented. This is
Just n partial listing of some of the items involved in an
implementation phase.
At the time that Albert.Ram*nd and Associates submitted
their proposal for the Phase I study, they also submitted
a proposal for the Phase Xl implementation work. They
would propose to accomplish the Phase II work'in approximately
16 weeks, for an approximate fee of $300726, utilizing the
same fee schedule now in effect for the Phase I study.
There is. ue believe, a need to go into the implemen-
tation phase Just as soon as possible foil*ming the study
phase. We are advised by Albert Ram*nd and Associates that
the same individuals who conducted the study phase would
also be available to conduct the implementation phase, if
the implementation phase closely follows the study phase.
This bas the decided advantage of utilizing consulting
personnel who are wast familiar not only with the current
City operation, but also with the City personnel with whom
they have been worhing so closely during the past several
months.
In our report to City Council on Ray 21, 1973. we
advised of receipt of a tentative grant allocation for the
'701 Program** which grant would cover the consultants*
fee for Phase II.
For planning purposes, we need to know City Council*$
intent or wishes with respect to proceeding with Phase II.
With this knowledge, Albert Ram*nd and Associates can
schedule their personnel.
If it is the intent of City Council to proceed with the
Phase II implementation moth, we mould return to City
Council at a later date with specific recommendations with
regards to resolutions and contracts.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Bauer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager*
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and that the city proceed with Phase II of the Management Study. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
BUILBINO CODE: The City Manager submitted a written report advising
that the Uniform State Buildin9 Code will take effect in Virginia on September 1,
1973, in all municipalities except those which have previously adopted a buildi~
code and who request a delay in the effective date of implementation, that these
municipalities will be given up to a two year delay in time before going to the
State Building Code, that he has received notice from the State Board of Housing
stating that if the city desires to continue with their present building code,
Council should adopt a Resolution or take some formal action requesting such a
delay, that he.feels that the valley should all use the same building code and
recommending that Council authorize the City Manager to request an extension of
time for the use of our present Building Code which is the Southern Standard
Building Code 1959 Edition, until July 1, 1974.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution advising the State Board of Housing
that the City of Roanoke requests an extension of the Southern Standard Building
Code as the building code applicable to the city until July 1, 1974:
(#20917) A RESOLUTION advisin9 the State Board of Housing that the
City of Roanoke does hereby request aa extension of the Soo*here Staadard Hulldia
Code es the baildiag code applicable to the city aa*il Jaly 1, 1974o
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book uSB, page 142,)
HFo Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion mas
seconded by Hr. Trout and adopted by the [ollowfng yore:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link, Taylor. Trout and
Wayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Thomas absent)
BgSES: The City Attorney submitted n written report in connection
with an application of Hr. Francis To Bromn to the State Corporation Commission
for a certificate of Public Conveoience and Necessity to operate as a special or
charter party motor vehicle carrier of passengers over routes originating in
Roanoke, Salem, Bedford and Lynchburgo
Br. Link moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was Secooded by Rt. Trout and unanimously adopted.
JUVENILE BOMB: The City Attorney submitted a written report advising
that it has been brought to his attention that Resolution No. 207BS authorizing
agreements relative to the use of the Juvenile Detention Home inadvertently
failed to list the name of Roanoke County as one of those jurisdictions mith
whom agreement might be entered Jato, therefore, he has prepared a ReSolution
which would expressly authorize the same type of arrangement to be extended to
the proper authorities of Roanoke County and, if such services be desired by
those authorities, would formally authorize execution of the same agreement
with Roanoke County as was expressly authorized in the case of the Counties of
Befozdo Rote*our*, Franklin, Henry and Patrick and the Cities of Martinsville
and Salem,
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the report of the City
Attorney and offered the followin9 Resolution authorizing an agreement to be
entered into with Roanoke County relating to its use of the Roanoke Juvenile
Detention Home in Rote*our* County:
(~2091B) A RESOLUTION authorizing an agreement to be entered into
with Roanoke County relatin9 to its use of the Roanoke Juvenile Detention Home,
in Botetourt County.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book naB, page 143.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Resolution, The motion was
seconded bI Br. Hubard and adopted by the ~llowing vote:
AVES: Bessrs. Garland. Bubard. Lisk. Taylor, Trout and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None .......... O. (~r. Thomas absent)
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
SALE OF PROPERTy: Br. David K. Link, Chairman of the Real Estate
Committee, submitted the following report in connection with the sale of surplus
¢itl properties at auction on Hay 23, 1973:
32.5
326
'Ma~ 29, 1~73
The Honorable Mayor and Rembers
o~ Meaaoke City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
Gentlemen:
The undersigned committee reports to the Council that,
as heretofore nuthurfzed and directed by resolution and
ordinance of the Council. an auction sale or 93 separate
parcels of surplus land held by the City mas conducted on
Ray 23rd at the Roanoke Civic Ce~er under arrangements
made by this committee, at mhich auction sale gross pur-
chase prices of $73,200.00 were bid end accepted for all
such properties. The advertised terms of sale requiring
that the full amount of the purchase price bid be paid on
the day of sale, there mas actually paid to the City in
cash end by chechs the gross sum of $73,050.00. One pur-
chaser of a small parcel of land ut a high bid of $150.00
failed to make payment of the amount bid on the day of
sale.
In the opinion of the committee the auction sale mas
well advertised, was well attended by persons interested
in the acquisition of one or more of the properties offered
for sale. amd lb. hJgb prices bid end accepted were, in all
instances, properly accepted.
Originally, sene 111 separate parcels of land had been
intended and authorized to be sold; however, as the Council
knows, several of those properties have been separately sold
by ordinance of the Council sioce the concept of an auction
mas settled upon. Additionally, and for various reasons
appearing good to the committee, several of the parcels o£
land mere not included in the list o£ properties advertised
for sale and of the 9S parcels contained in the first of the
City*s advertisements, two parcels were withdrawn and not sold.
In a number of instances with the individual sale of separate
adjoining properties, those properties were offered for sale
as a whole, or in combination, and Jn all such instances
brought higher prices than as bid for separately.
There is transmitted heremith a list showing the
individual prices bid and accepted at the auction sale. the
aggregate Sum of mhich is $73.200.00. as stated before.
with all but $150.00 of that amount having now been paid
into the City Treasury.
The properties having been advertised as at absolute
auction of the properties exposed to sale and the under-
signed committee considering that all prices bid and received
are to the best interest of the City to accept, it is recom-
mended that such be done by the Council and that the City
Attorney be directed to prepare for the next Council meeting
such ordinance as is in order to provide for the City°s con-
veyance of title to the purchasers Of the properties at the
auction sale upon the terms advertised by the City and prices
bid at the auction sale.
Respectfully,
S/ Oavid K. List
David K. Link, Chairman
S/ Roy L. Webber
Roy L. Mebber
S/ H~ron E. Hurter
Byron E. Hauer
S/ William S. Hubard
William S. Hubard
S! J, N- Kincan0n --
S/ James N. Kincaflon
S/ A. N, Gibson
A. N. Gibson"
Mr. Link moved that Council concur in the report of the Real Estate
Committee and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for preparation of
the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
L~FINISHED BUSINESS:
ZONING: Council having deferred action on a report of the City
Planning Commission in connection with the request of Mr. C. Govdon Hunter to
rezone property located off the south side of Melrose Avenue, N. W., described
Lots 5, 6 and the westerly fifty feet of Lot 7, Map of H. £. Roberts, Official
Tax NOS. 2530231 and 25302320 from C-l, Office and Institutional District. to
C-2, General Commercial District. pending notification from the attorney
representing Mr. Ilunter as to whether or not his client desires a public hearing
on the request for rezoning, the matter was again before the body.
In this connection, a communication from Mr. John H. Wennett, Jr,,
Attorney, representing Mr. Hunter, advising that his client desires a public
hearing on the request for rezoniag, was before Council.
Dr, Taylor moved that Council hold a public hearing on the request
for rezooing at 7:30 p.m., Monday. June 25, 1973, lc the Eocncii Chamber. The
motion was seconded by Mr, Lisk and unanimously adopted,
ZONING: Council having deferred action off a report of the City
Planning Commission in connection with the request of Mr. Carl E, Coleman, et
ox.. and Ms. Alice F. Ferguson that property located on Stewart Avenue, S. E..
and 13th Street, S. £., and Dale Avenue, S. E., and 13th Street, S. E.,
described as Lots 1, 2 and 13, and the west seven feet of Lot 14, Dlock 7,
Map of Oakridge Land Company, be rezoned from RD, Duplex Residential District,
to C-2, General Commercial District, pending notification from the attorney
representing Mr. Coleman and Ms. ForMosan as to whether or not his clients
desire a public hearing on the request for rezoning, the matter was before
the body.
In this connection, a communication from Mr. Richard Lee Laurence,
Attorney, representing the petitioners, advising that his clients desire a
public hearing on the request for rezoning, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council hold a public hearing on the request
for rezoning at 7:30 p.m., Monday, June 25, 1973, in the Council Chamber.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
LANDMARKS: Mr. Garland offered the following Resolution recognizin9
the designation of the city's Fire Station No. Omens a Virginia Historic
Landmark and authorizing the city's acceptance of an official plaque to be
installed on said property:
(~20919) A RESOLUTION recognizing the designation of the city's Fire
Station No. One as a Virginia Historic Landmark, and authorizing the city's
acceptance of an official plaque to be installed on said property. *
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Trout and
Mayor Webber .................... 6.
NAYS: None .......... O. (Mr. Thomas absent)
· (For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Rook ~38, page 144.)
327
328
ZONING-STREETS AND ALL£YS: Council having directed the City Attorney
to prepare the proper measure waiving enforcement of the building setback pro-
visions of Resolution No. 11447, adopted May 26, 1952, os said building setback
restrictions relate to properties situate on both sides of Melrose Avenueo
N. W.. between 13th Street, N. W.. and 22nd Street. N. ~,. he presented sane;
whereupon, Hr, Bubard offered the following Resolution:
(#20920) A RESOLUTION waiving enforcement of the building setback
provisions of Resolution No. 11447, adopted Pay 26, 1952, as said building
setback restrictions relate to properties situate on both sides of Melrose
Avenue, N. W** between 13th Street,
(For full textof Resolution, see Ordinance Book #30, page 145)
Mr. Bubard moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lish and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, List, Taylor, Trout and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Thomas absent)
ROTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
COUNCIL: Mr. Rubard moved that Council meet in Executive Session to
discuss a real estate matter relative to the Regional Corrections Facility, The
motion was seconded by Mr. Lish and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, lJubard, Limb, Taylor, Trout and
Rayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Nr. Thomas absent)
Yhere being no further business, Mayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday, June 4, 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular me,tin9 in the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, June 4, 1973, at 2 p.m.,
the regular meeting hour, with Mayor Roy L. Mebber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmep Robert A, Garland, William S. Hubard, David M.
Lish, Noel C. Taylor, Hampton M. Thomas, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L.
Mebber .........................
ABSENT: None ..........O.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Byron E. Hamer, City Manager, Mr. Samuel H.
McGhee, III, Assistant City Manager; Mr. H. Ben Jones, Jr., Assistant City
Attorney; and MC A. N. Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by Mr. Charles T.
Whitacre, Director, Offender Aid and Restoration of Roanoke.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY-INDUSTRIES: Pursuant to notice of advertise-
ment for bids on the construction of an industrial access road for Appalachian
Power Company in the Roanoke Industrial Center, said proposals to be received
by the City Clerk until.2 p.m., Monday, June 4, 1973, and to be opened before
Council nt that hour, Mayor Webber asked if anyone had uny questions about the
advertisement for bids and no representative present raising any question, the
Mayor instructed the Deputy City Clerk to proceed with the opening of the bids;
whereupon, the Deputy City Clerk opened and read the folloming bids:
John A. Hall & Company, Incorporated - $ 5],lbl.B5
Adams Construction Company 5H,364.00
Virginia Asphalt Paving Company,
Incorporated 59,193.75
Mr. Thomas moved that the bids be referred to a committee to be
appointed by the Mayor for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Webber appointed Messrs. Samuel Ho McGhee, III, Chairman, O. C.
Kennedy, and J. H. Brewer as members of the committee.
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids
on the construction of storm drains on Walnut Avenue, S. W., and. at the inter-
section of Jefferson Street and Elm Avenue, said proposals to be received by
the City Clerk until 2 p.m., and to be opened at that hour before Council, Mayor
Webber asked if anyone had any questions about the advertisement for bids and
no representative present raising any question, the Mayor instructed the Deputy
City Clerk to proceed with the opening of the bids; whereupon, the Deputy City
Clerk opened and read the one bid received from Branch and Associates, in the
amount of $70,250°00.
Mr. Link moved that the bid be referred to a committee to be appointed
by the Mayor for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted,
329
33O
Mayor Webber appointed Messrs. Samuel H. McGbee, III, Chairmnn, Charles
Gatahall and J. H~ Dremer as members or the committee.
SER£RS AND STORM DRAINS: Mr. Donald R. Shelton, 942 Hnrtsook Boulevard,
S, E** appeared before Council and presented n petition signed by 147 residents
or Mill Mountain Estates mhD have either been damaged or have apprehension of
damage to their homes or property as n result of construction on the bach side of
Mill Mountain (Garden City Section) by the James E. Long Construction Company,
Incorporated, causing diversion of mater from its normal course upon their pro-
perty, and respectfully requested that Council revoke any building permits in
existence issued to the James E. Long Construction Company, Incorporated. until
such time as adequate drainage facilities have been erected to prevent further
damage to their property and homes or totake such other action as may he
appropriate to protect their homes and property from the water, debris and mud
resulting from the construction.
In this connection, Mr. Shelton presented photographs of his home mhich
has been danaged to a great extent by the water, mud and debris.
After a discussion, Mr. Thomas moved that the matter be referred to
the City Manager and the City Attorney for a report by the next regular meeting of
Council on Monday, June 11, 19{3, as to what action, if any, will be proper. The
motion mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Hubard moved that the City Planning Commission be requested to
report to Council as to what effect a flood plain Ordinance would have had if it
had been adopted prior to this occurance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas
and unanimously adopted.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting that $154.326.00 be appropriated to Section ~94000. "Schools - Title
I Summer Program under Public Law 89-10," of the 1972-73 budget of the Roanoke
City School Board, advising that 100 per cent of expenditures for this project
will be reimbursed from the State Department of Education, Public Law 89-10
funds, was before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanoke City
School Board and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
requested funds:
(~20921) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section #94000, "Public
Schools - Title I Summer Program Under Public Law 6g - 10," of the 1972-73
Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for un emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book naB, pa9e 149.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption Of the Ordinance. The motion mas seconded
by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ........... O.
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A connunlcation from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting that $6,ebl.6e be appropriated to Section #93000, 'Schools - Library
Books and Audio-Visual Materials,' of the 1972-73 budget of the Roanoke City
School Board, to provide funds for* the fourth quarter under Public Lam BO-lO,
Title II to be used primarily for the purchase of audio-visual materials and
100 per cent of expenditures will be reimbursed from Title II funds, mss
before Council.
Hr. Trout moved that Council concur lo the request or the Roanohe City
School Board and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the
requested funds:
(n20922) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section a93000. "Schools
Library Books and Audio Visual Materials." of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance
and providing for an emevgmcy.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~SB, page ISO.)
Rt. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion was
seconded by Mr. Llsk and adopted by the following vote:
AVES: Ressrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisko Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Nebber ................ ?.
NAYS: None ...........O.
BUDGET-SHERIFF: A communication from Sheriff Paul J. Puckett request-
ing that $1,S00.00 be appropriated to Automobile Allowance under Section ~23.
"Sheriff," of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for the remainder of the
fiscal year, was before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the request of Sheriff Puckett
and offered the follomin9 emergency Ordinance appropriating the requested funds:
(~20923) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~23, "Sheriff,"
of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
{For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~39, page 150.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Taylor. Thomas. Trout
and Mayor ~ebber ...............
NAYS: None .......... O.
AUDITS-CITY TREASURER: A communication from Mr. Joseph S. James,
Auditor of Public Accounts, advising that he has audited the accounts mud records
of the City Treasurer as related to revenues collected for the Comnonueulth of
Virginia for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1972, and that the examination
disclosed that proper accounting had been made for all recorded receipts and
that the records had been prepared in an excellent manner, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that the communication and audit be received and
filed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
332
HUSTINGS COURT: A communication from Judge Ernest E. Ballou ndvisJn9
that after numerous conferences with Hr. David Snarl and his group concerning
computerizing the system In the Courts of Record and the Courts Hot of Record of
the Twenty-Third Judicial Circuit (effective July 1. 1973) it became apparent
that one of the first needs to implement such n system would be the acquisition
of an employee to overuse the procedures necessary for the changes desired.
therefore, he is requesting that Council add a position to the staff or the Clerk
of the COUrtS, that the person desired will be hired for his proficiency as a
systems analyst, that It is believed that the pay range for a Programmer Il will
be sufficient to attract an employee with this capability, that the amount of
funds requested will be $11.112.00, that the position proposed to be established
will be Grade 25. Step 2 and that it is requested that this position be added
effective July 1, 1973, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication from Judge Ballon be referred
to the City Manager and the City Auditor for report and recommendation to Council
at such time as the City Manager is in a position to coordinate said request with
the results of the management study. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and
unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-SENERS AND S~ORM DRAINS: The City Hanager submitted the following
report in connection with supplemental appropriations and transfer of funds:
*June 40 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Subject: Supplemental Appropriations and Transfer of Funds
Additional funds need to be provided as indicated in the
following accounts in order to provide sufficient funds for
the remainder of this fiscal year:
Account 13 - Retirements - Group Insurance billings to
the City by the Commonwealth are inconsistent. It is
necessary to appropriate $2°400 to this account.
Account 14 - Personnel, 235 - Advertising. It is ·
necessary to provide additional funds in this account to
cover the costs of advertising for personnel to fill vacancies
in certaia critical City positions. It is recommended that
$600 be transferred from Account 14 - 210; Fees for Special
and Professional Services, to Account 14 - 235, Advertising,
in order to provide sufficient funds for the remainder df
this fiscal year.
Account 22 - Commonwealth*s Attorney. 210. Fees for
Professional and Special Services. Three hundred dollars
($300) was recently transferred from this account to the
Printing and Office Supplies Account. It has since been·
learned that all monies in this particular account are
applicable to a law clerk grant program. 'It is, therefore.
necessary to reappropriate $300 to Account 22-210.
Account 23 - Sheriff. City Council recently authorized
the employement of three paramedics for use by the Sheriff
in the Jail. It is necessary that $1,600 be appropriated to
the Personal Services account in order to cover the payroll
expenses of these employees for the remainder of this fiscal
year.
Account 90 - Sewage Treatment. City Council recently
authorized the estobllshment o£ S Chief Operator positions
nt the Sewage Treatment Plant. It is necessary that a total
of $6,000 be appropriated to the Retfreme,t Contributions and
Social Seccrity Codes of the Personal Services Account in
order to provide these fringe benefits for these employees.
It is recommended that City Council-approve the above
appropriations or transfer by the adoption of the appropriate
ordinances.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Byron E. Honer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager'
Mr. Trout moved that Coaocll concur in the report of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance providing for a
certain transfer of funds and appropriation of funds:
(#20924) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
1972-T3 Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book ma0. page IS1.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard. Lisk. Taylor. Thomas. Trout
and Mayor Mebber ................
NAYS: None ...........O.
Mr. Lisk then offered the followin9 emergency Ordinance appropriatin9
$6,000.00 to Personal Services under Section agO, "Sewage Treatment Fund."
of the 1972-73 Sewage Treatment Fund Appropriation Ordinance:
(~20925) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~90. "Sewage
Treatment Fund," of the 1972-73 Sewage Treatment Fund Appropriation Ordinance,
and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =JO, page 1§1.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Mebber ................ 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a written report in connection
with a grant request from Bethany Hall to the Division of Justice and Crime
Prevention for continuation of funding for the Halfway House for Alcoholic
Women, advising that this grant request has been approved in the total amount of
$39,230.00, ulth $28,280.00 of the grant coming from federal funds and $10,950.0C
(of which $5,150.O0 is in-kind and $5,800.00 is cash) local matching funds,
that the program will be administered by Bethany Hall and will have no city
fonds, that the city mill make paymects to Bethany Hall upon receipt of
proper requests, that it is recommended that the City Manager be authorized to
execute the appropriate forms for acceptance of this grant and agreeing to
333
334
the provisions and conditions contained therein and that it is also recommended
that $28,280.O0 be approprioted to this grant account,
Or. Taylor moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the requested funds:
(s2o926) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section m91, "Non-
Departmental," of the 1972-72 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text or Ordinance. see Ordinance Book ~38, page 152.)
Dr. Tailor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Hr. Bubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Hessrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Tailor, Thomas, Trout and
Wayor Mebber .................... ?*
NAYS: None ........... O.
Mr. Garland then offered the following Resolution authorizing the
acceptance, execution and filing Of the "Special Conditions for Action Grant
Awards" with the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention for an action grant
of federal funds for implementation of a halfway house for alcoholic women in
the city.
(~20927) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance, execution and
filing of the *Special Conditions for Action Grant Awards' with the Division of
Justice and Crime Prevention for an action grant of federal funds for
implementation of a halfway house for alcoholic women in the city.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~38, page 153.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption Of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Webber ................ T.
NAYS: None ...........O.
Mr. Garland moved that the City Manager be requested to report to
Council as to the number of women treated at Bethany Hall and the cost per
person. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a written report advising that in
the 1972-73 budget, Council allocated $29,500.00 in the Traffic Engineering and
Communications budget for the modification of the Police Communications System to
provide a second police radio channel and add voice Scramblers, that it was
noted at that time that L. E. A. A. funding might be expected to aid in this
project, that on April 10, 1973, he submitted a grant application in the amount
of $12,9gb.00 ($9,747.00 federal share, $3,249.00 state/local share) to cover the
second police radio channel (by administrative decision, the voice scramblers
were deleted), that he has received confirmation that on Way 3, 1973, the Council
on Criminal Justice of the Divisisn of Justice and Crime Prevention approved the
grant application of the city with the deletion of $60.00 for printing and office
snpplies which was intended to cover preparation of designs and specifications and
putting the proposal out for bids, that the approved amounts are $12,936.00,
total, $9,702.00 federal share and $3,234,00 local share, that it is recomaended
that the City Manager be authorized to execute the appropriate forms for
acceptance or this grant and agreeing to the provisions and conditions con-
tained therein end that it is further recomgended that Council authorize the
use of $3,234.00 of funds previously appropriated in the 1972-73 budget as the
local share of this grant,
Mr. Hubard moved that Council concur in the report of the City
Hanager and offered the following Resolution:
(n20920) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance, execution, and
filing of the 'Special Conditions for Action Crant Auards" with the Division
of Justice end Crime Prevention for an action grant of federal fonds for
implementation of a new police radio channel in the city.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Rooh nSC, page IS4.)
Mr. ,ubard moved~e adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Limb, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Nebber ................ T.
NAYS: None ...........O.
BUDGET-CIVIC CENTER: The City Manager submitted a written report
advising that sometime during the month.of April, 1973. an electric typewriter
and a calculator were stolen from the Roanoke Civic Center, that since this
equipment is required for normal operation of the Civic Center, it has been
necessary to rent replacement equipment until such time as these items have
been replaced, that the Civic Center account for this fiscal year contained
funds for office furniture under account 450-3R0, that favorable bids have been
received for the equipment contained in this account and as a result, there
exists $2,145.00, a portion of which could be utilized to replace the typewriter
and the calculator and recommendin9 that Council authorize a budget amendment
approving the purchase of one electric typewriter at a cost of $450.00 and
one calculator at a cost of $275.00 from the Civic Center Account 450-380
since this would not require an additional appropriation as the funds exist
within that account.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and offered the following emergency Ordinance providing for the requested
funds:
(g20929) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~440, 'Civic
Center Fund - Administrative Expenses,' of the 1972-73 Civic Center Fund
Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook n38, page 155.)
Mr. Trout moved the *adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
335
336
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Habard. Lisk, Taylor, Thanes, Trout
and Mayor ~ebber ................
NAYS: None .......... O,
ZONING: Conncil having referred to the City Manager for study, report
and recommendation the request of Mr. Daniel S, Braun, Attorney, representing
Mr. Carl E. Dillon. et ux.. and Mr. Richard S. Minstead, et ax,, for authorization
rot the Building Commissioner to issue a certificate of occupancy for nonconforming
use for three apartment units located at llZg-llal Nasena Avenue, S. N.. and
1133-113S lasena Avenue, S. U.. the City aanoger submitted a mrJtten report
advising that ns the properties in question were existing prior to the adoption
of the hem Zoning Ordinance. the use of the property would have been regulated
by the Zoning Ordinance in effect prior to 1966, mhich Ordinance zoned the
subject property as Deneral Residential (permitting only one and two family
dwellings), therefore, if any building was being utilized for more than tug
dwelling units it would have been in violation of the then existing Zoning
Ordinance. that based on the aforementioned zoning regulations, it would be
recommended that Council deny the use of this structure for three apartments
and authorize the Building Commissioner to issue a non-conforming certificate of
occupancy for the properties in question to be used only as two-family units
in each building since this would have been the maximum lawful use under the
Zoning Ordinance in effect prior to
In this connection, Mr. Daniel S. Brown, Attorney, representing the
petitioners, appeared before Council and advised that his clients were using
both buildings as three-apartment units prior to the adoption of the 1966 Zoning
Ordinance and that both buildings have been used as three-apartment units since
1966, houever, the district in which these buildings are located was zoned RD,
Duplex Residential District, and no certificate of occupancy for nonconforming
use was acquired thereafter by the petitioners* predecessors in title.
The City Manager replied that he was not aware that the three apartments
were in use prior to the adoption of the 1966 Zoning Ordinance, that it was his
understanding that only two apartments were in use and that it now is a question
of uhether or not Council desires to grant this waiver to the Zoning Ordinance.
gr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the request of Mr. Brown and
offered the following Resolution authorizing the issuance of permits to authorize
continuance of nonconforming use of premises located at 112g-1~31Nasena
Avenue, S. #., and at 1133-1135 Wasena Avenue, S. W., the improvements whereon
consist, in each case, of three-unit apartment dwellings:
(n20930) A RESOLUTION authorizing the issuance of permits to authorize
continuance of nonconforming use of premises located at 1129-1131 lasena Avenue,
S. ~., and at 1133-1135 Masena Avenue, S. #., being Official Tax Nos. 1230817 and
1230816, respectively.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book :38, page 155.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion mas
seconded by Yr. Garland and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: #essrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout
and Mayor Webber ................ 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE-S'fATE HIGIIWAYS: The City Manager sub-
mitted a mritten report advising that the 1967 bond issue referendum provided
funds for the city*s share of the costs of improving Route lis from the inter-
section of Bennington Street, S. £., and Nount Pleasant Boulevard to the
intersection of Hollins Road at Wlugfield Avenue, N. E., that the segment of
this project which is now programmed is that segment from the intersection of
Rennington Street, S. E., and Riverdale Road to the intersection of 13th Street
and Dale Avenue, S. E., that in discussions held recently with representatives
of the Virginia Department of Highways, the Highway Department representatives
indicated that they would be receptive to programming the segment from the
intersection of ]Stb Street and Dale Avenue, S. E.. to the intersection of
9th Street and Orange Avenue, N. E., including a bridge over Lick Run and the
Norfolk and Western Railway upon receipt of an appropriate Resolution from
City Council, recommending that Council, by Resolution, request the Virginia
Department of Highways to program for design, right of way acquisition and
construction, that segment of Route 115 from the intersection of 13th Street
and Dale Avenue. S. E.. to the intersection of 9th Street and Orange Avenue,
N. E., including a bridge over Lick Run and the Norfolk and Western Railway
with the City of Roanoke agreeing to pay 15% of the project costs.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager/~
and offered the following Resolution:
(c20931) A RESOLUIION recommending and urging the initiation by the
Department of Highways of a project to improve State Route lis from the
intersection of 13th Street and Dale Avenue, S. E., to the intersection of
9th Street and Orange Avenue. N. E., including a bridge over Lick Run and the
Norfolk and ~estern Railway, setting out the need therefor; and committing
the city to pay its proportionate part of the cost of such project.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book =38. page lSb,)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Llsk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carload, Hubard. Lisk. Taylor, Thomas. Trout
and Mayor Webber ................ 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
STATE HIGHWAYS: The City Manager submitted a written report advising
that the 1957 bond issue referendum provided funds for the city's share of the
costs of improving loth Street both southwest and northwest, that the segment
of this project between Patterson Avenue. S. W.. and Gilmer Avenue, N. W., is
33'/
338
under construction 'including the new bridge over the Norfolk sad Mestern
Rsllwny, that in discussions held recently with representatives of the Virginia
Department of Nlghmays, the Highway Department representatives indicated that
they mould be receptive to programming the remaining segment of this project
betmeen Gllmev Avenue, N, ~.o end Nilliumson Road, N. ~.. upon receipt of an
appropriate Resolution from City Council, recommending that Council, by appropriate
Resolution, request the Virginia Department of Ilighmays to program for design,
right of way acquisition and construction that segment of lOth Street. N.
between Gllmer Avenue and ~illiamson Road, with appropriate consideration being
given to the construction, as a part of this project, of interchanges or other
grade separation structures at Orange Avenue and at Interstate 581, with the
city agreeing to pay 15% of the project costs.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and offered the following Resolution:
(#20932) A RESOLtrflON recommending and urging the initiation by the
Department of Highmays of a project to improve lOth Street. N. ~.. between Bilmer
Avenue, N. R., and [illiamson Road, N. W., in the City of Roanoke; setting out the
need therefor; and committing the city to pay its proportionate share of the
cost of such project.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book =38, page 157.)
Rr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion mas
seconded bi Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Ressrs. Garland, Hubard, List, Taylor, Thomas, Yrout
and Mayor Nebber ................
NAYS: None ........... O.
CORPLAINTS: Council having previously referred to the City Manager
for report a complaint from Mrs. ~. G. Nelson, 1409 3rd Street, S. ~., in
connection with a vacant house at 1415 3rd Street, S. N., advising that the
doors are left open and people are coming in and out of the house at their
pleasure, the City Manager submitted a written report advising that the citI's
investigation reveals that structurally the house is in very 9god condition,
that the steps and porches need some general repairs and the house needs
painting, that the grass needs to be cut and a room under the porch needs to be
secured as it is apparent that it has been utilized by intruders, that the city
has been in contact with the owner of this residence and this matter has been
brought to his attention, that he has assured the city that all entrances to
the house mill be secured and repairs will be started immediately, that the grass
mill be cut and that follomnp action will be taken by the city to assure that
all necessary actions have been taken.
Hr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
~339
HOUSING-SLUR CLEARANCE: The City Reneger submitted a written report
advising that he has received e communication from Mr. Russell R. Henley,
Executive Director of the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority,
under date of May 23, 1973, concerning a summary of city costs for the Homntomn
East Redevelopment Project, that an analysis of the cost summary reveals that
the local cash share of the project has increased $305,146,00, the ineligible
on-site project improvements costs have increased $110,646,00 and the necessary
off-site Improvement costs have increased $100,127.00 with the city*s total
cash participation in this project mom estimated at $627,~36.00 as opposed to
the initial estimate of $11io219.00. that at this time there is $i15,627.0g
remaining in the Domntmon East account and $65,000.00 remaining in the Second
Street, S. E., Storm Drain account, both amounts being applicable toward the
total project cost, that this leaves unfunded $446,710.81, that Hr. Henley
has expressed the opinion that the Housing Authority in anticipating the
actual proceeds from the sale of land to be higher than estimated, that this
would reduce the city's cash participation in the "Local Share of Project
Cost* Category and recommending that this matter be referred to budget study
for favorable consideration of funding in the 1973-74 fiscal year budget.
Mr. Trout moved that the report be referred to 1973-74 budget study.
The motion was seconded by ar. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
AUDITORIUM-COLISEUM: The City Rnn~ger submitted a written report
advising that the Roanoke Civic Center and Stadium Advisory Commission has
once again initiated a request for improvements to the Civic Center Exhibit
Hall which they feel will make this facility more adaptalbe to its intended use.
that a portion of the proposed work is aesthetic in nature while other changes
are functional, that on numerous occasions the Exhibit Hall is utilized for
private dances, that the concrete floor of the Exhibit Hall does not have the
proper surface and does not provide suitable dancing quality, that the request
of the Commission includes a 3g foot by 39 foot Slco dance floor, transmitting
a list of changes that the Roanoke Civic Center and Stadium Advisory Commission
would like to see accomplished and the estimated costs for each change, point-
ing out that there exists within the Civic Center Capital Improvement Account
sufficient funds for the accomplishment of this work, however, the work
contained in this request was not initially envisioned in the construction of
this facility, therefore, it would require Council*s concurrence before bids
could he taken for these modifications, that at the request of the Commission,
he is formarding this request to Council for consideration and whatever
action Council deems appropriate.
In a discussion of the matter, Mr. Lisk advised that the Commission
felt that this is an area which should receive immediate attention and that
it is the unanimous opinion of all the members of the Civic Center Commission
that this is the number one need at the Roanoke Civic Center.
340
Hr. Garland expressed the opinion that anyone who has visited the
Roanoke Civic Center knows the Exhibit Hull locks the decor it needs for certain
functions nad recommended that Council take immediate action since the necessary
fonds sro available.
Mr. Thomas expressed the opinion that he has no objections to tbs
proposed Improvements but he feels that the proper time to discuss the matter
will be during the 1973-74 budget study deliberations.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanoke
Civic Center and Stadium Advisory Commission and that the matter be referred to
the City Attorney for preparation of the proper measure to proceed with the
proposed project. The motion was seconded by Or. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
TOTAL ACTION ACA1NST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEY: The City Manager sub-
mitted a written report in connection with the Public Employment Program, advising
that It has been determined that within the normal PEP Program there will be
approximately $20,735,00 which will not be spent this year, that this is due to
an increase in tho number of permanently authorized positions within the city,
the transfer of PEP employees into full-time positions and the phasing down of
portions of the PEP Program, that it is his opinion that these funds can best be
utilized for the summer employment of youth rather than the regular PEP Program,
that he has checked out the possibility of using these funds in the PEP summer
program mith the Department of Labor and has been advised that this proposal is
satisfactory, that he has informed Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke
Valley of the availability of these additional funds for the employment of youth
this summer, that these funds will permit the hiring of approximately 35 to 40
additional youths, the number varyln9 somewhat dependent upon the number of
hours of employment, that this makes available a total of $g5,736.00 for payrolls
which will permit the employement of a total of approximately 215 youths this
summer and that this report is submitted to the members of Council for its
invormatJon.
Mr. Lisk moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: The City Manager submitted the following report
in connection with a study in reference to installation of portable toilet
facilities at various parks during the summer season, advising that there
a great deal of reticence on the part of the administration to recommend installa-
tion of portable toilets in park areas, pointing out that city parks are generally
remote from inhabited areas and it would be expected that such a toilet would be
highly susceptible to vandalism, that costs to rent and service these outdoor
facilities would range from $500.OO to $600.O0 per month, that it is not felt
that utilization of portable toilet facilities should be encouraged over a Ion9
term basis, and that it would be to the city's advantage to program the installa-
tion of permanent facilities in all city parks as expeditiously as possible:
"June 4, 1973
Honorable Hnyor and City Council
Hnauoke, ¥irgfofa
Gentlemen:
Subject: Portable Toilet Facilities
At Its meeting mn Monday, April 16, 1973, City Council
received a request with respect to the need for toilet
facilities at Eureka Path. The following meek a report was
submitted to City Council recommending that the facilities
were needed and that they could be procured and installed
by this summer.
At that time, Council approved the proceeding with the
permanent installation at Eureka Park and recommended that a
study be made with reference to lnstallalJon of portable
toilet facilities at various other parks during the summer
season. As a result of these instructions, several local
dealers of these products have contacted the City Manager's
office expressing interest in having their portable toilets
installed in the City porks.
A report mas requested and received from the Director
of Parks and Recreation listing paths and recreational
facilities at mbich portable toilets could be utilized.
In most instances, they would be prnposed for utilization
near athletic fields or areas of high useage.
There is a great deal of reticence on the part of the
administration to recommend installation of portable toilets
in our pork oreos. Cenerally our parks are relatively
remote from inhabited areas and it could be expected that
such a toilet would be highly susceptible to vandalism.
Although we have not actively soli~ted bids, we have
received qaotations for estimating purposes to indicate
that should City Council desire to install two of these
portable toilets at each of ten different locations, it
mould necessitate an expenditure of from $500 to $600 a
month to rent and obtain service for these facilities.
lhey are available on one day*s notice.
Under such an agreement it would be expected that the
company providing these portable toilets would be responsible
for normal wear and tear but should severe or complete damage
occur, the City would be responsible, In addition, the City
would be responsible for staking the units down to deter or
prohibit the overturning of the toilets.
It is not felt that the utilization of portable toilet
facilities should be encouraged over a long term basis. It
is felt that it would be to the City's advanta9e to program
the installation of permanent facilities in all of our parks
as expeditiously as possible. However, should it be the
desire of City Council to install these portable toilets
in these recreational areas daring the current fiscal year,
it would be necessary for City Council to appropriate $500
to Account 75, Object Code 245, for the month of June and
that an additional $3,000 be added to next fiscal year's
budget to permit continued rental of these facilities durin9
six months of next fiscal year. It would be programmed to
phase these down each year as permacent toilet facilities
become available at these recreational areas.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Hyron E. Honer
City Manager~
After a discussion of the matter, Mro Thomas moved that the City
Ranager be requested to provide information as to the number of parks in the
City Of Roonoke that are in critical need of toilet facilities und recommendatiol
for moving forward on a temporary basis until more permanent facilities can be
tnstulled. The motion was seconded by Br. Trout and unanimously udopted.
341
342
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: ,' *
MATER DEPARTMENT: The Mater Resources Committee submitted e written
report in connection with the matter of water rates for the Town of Vlnton,
advising that the Comwittee recognizes that this ia a matter of grave concern to
the Town of Vinton and they further recognize that the City of Roanoke being the
major provider of water for the valley has no desire:to charge excessive prices
for Its water and services, that n reevaluation of the cost of producing and
providing water as compared to the rate charged to the Town of Vinton of $ .SO per
hundred cubic foot reveals that this charge is not exorbitant, however, the /
analysis of costs figures does indicate that a ten per cent reduction in charge is
possible with the water rate being reduced to $ .45 per hundred cubic feet,
pointing out that both the City of Roanoke and the members of the Committee have
been assured that any reduction in charges to the Town of Vinton will be passed
on to the Vinton citizens and that in the spirit of cooperation within the Valley,
the Committee recommends that Council give consideration to lowering the water
rate to the Town of VJnton to $ .45 per hundred cubic feet with the stipulation
that this reduction be passed on to the citizens and that in order that the Vinton
Town Council may take the proper steps to advise their citizens of this proposed
cost reduction and that thin cost reduction might be included in their proposed
budget for the next fiscal year, early action on this matter will be needed by
Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report of the Mater Resources Committee be
received and filed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and nnanimously adopted.
Mr. ~. M. Nicks, Mayor, Town of Vinton. appeared before Council and
requested favorable consideration,by the members of Council toward the recommenda-
tion of the Mater Resources Committee.
Mr. Thomas further moved that Council concur in the report Of the
Mater ResourcesCommittee and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and
unanimously adopted.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
COOPERATIVE AREA MANPORER PLANNING SYSTEM PROGRAM: Council having
previously deferred action on the participation by the City of Roanoke in the
Cooperative Area ManpowerPlanning System Program for this region due to the
request of Mr. James M. Colby, Executive Director, Fifth Planning District Com-
mission, to discuss thin and other pertinent matters with the City Manager, the
matter was again before the body.
In this connection, gr. Colby appeared before Council and presented the
following prepared statement of concern, advising that at this time the lack
of information upon which to base sound recommendations and decisions and the
areawide nature of this planning function concern him, pointing out that should
the City of Roanoke take the areawide manpower planning function in house, he
would plead for a realization of its intent to be areawide in nature nnd would
hope that the city administration would find it possible to be fully sensitive
to zll manpower needs in the area and would also find it possible to plan with
all thirteen Jurisdictions Jn wind as full partners:
'June 4. 19T3
TO: The Mayor and Members of Roanohe City Council
FROM: James M. Colby S/ James M. Colby
RE: Statement Relative to Proposed Resolution concerning
CAMPS
A STATEMENT OF CONCERN
Mr. Mayor and Members of Council:
Council has before it a proposed resolution effectuating
certain changes in the administration of the Cooperative Area
Manpower Planning System. The Fifth Planning District Commis-
sion has been administering this planning effort in the past
at the request of the City of Roanoke. This Is because,
although it has been an areawtde planning function, the pro-
gram was designed so that this responsibility was to be
discharged in the manner so chosen by the Mayor.
At this time, I have two concerns about the proposed
change:
Lack of Information l~non Which to Base Sound
Recommendations and Decisions
Very little information does exist concerning the
nature of this program. In an air mail, special delivery
letter to the Regional Manpower Administrator of the U. S.
Department of Labor sent by me in the middle of last mouth,
I posed the following questions:
(1) If the City of Roanoke assumes the CAMPS program,
must the City plan for the thirteen jurisdictions
which comprise the present service area?
(2) If the City does not assume the CAMPS program, will
the City jeopardize its position for obtaining future
funds?
(3) What is the advantage to the City of assuming the
CAMPS rather than continuing to have the Planning
District Commission do it for them?
(4) Since the Planning District Commission is a creation
of the City of Roanoke (along with eight other
governments), what would he the appropriateness of
the City subcontracting the CAMPS thereto?
(5) Would it be wise for the City, in its consideration
of this matter, to attempt to plug in the unknown
factor of proposed legislation? If so, can this be
done on other than speculation?
(6) If MRS legislation is pas~ed at sometime in the
future, is there any way to anticipate desired
action on the part of the City now in reference
to CAMPS which would be nocessary and required to
ensure the City its full funding?
(?) Since the Planning District Commission is a creation
of and an agent for the City, is it correct to say
that, under the current arrangement, the City Js
not ultimately fulfilling the CAMPS responsibility?
My letter remains unanswered. This, I believe, indicates the
confusion and uncertainty surrounding the CAMPS program. The
fact is that we have, during the past sixty days, received
contradictory verbal answers to all of those questions but
have no written answers. This is because new rules are still
being made and, thus, written definitive answers are not pos-
sible. Being of the mind that [ecommendations should be based
upon fact and not indications, I cannot recommend any particu-
lar course of action on the part of the City.
343
34'4
Regardless of Council'a action of the proposed resolution.
the City will bave responsibility for a planning function which
is areawlde Jn nature, My cqncern is that the City of Roanohe
continue its demonstrated appreciation of and sensitivity to
this areamide characteristic of the CAMPS Program. One manner
of accomplishing this mould be for the City to subcontract this
ereawide planning function to Its Planning District Commission,
Dy enabling legislation, the Planning District Commission is
designed to be your agent to legally accomplish may required
ereamlde planning activity, if you choose to utilize this
mechanism. I believe that the established relationships
with regard to the CAMPS program mhich the Fifth Planning
District Commission have established ensure a full apprecia-
tion of and sensitivity to the manpower needs of the entire
area comprising the thirteen jurisdictions. I also believe
that, should the City of Roanoke decide to subcontract this
oreawide planning function to the Fifth Planning District
Commission, the Fifth Planning District Commission could most
effectively and efficiently carry out the intended responsi-
bilities of the effort and would concurrently be most respon-
sive to the interests of the City of Roanoke. Of course, the
Planning District Commission could eot become directly
involved ia the administration of funds should manpomer
revenue sharing become a reality in the future. Only the
planning could be subcontracted to the Planning District Cum-
Should the City of Roanoke take the areawide mannower
of its intent to be areamide in nature and I would hope that
the City administration would find it possible to be fully
find it possible to plan with all thirteen jurisdictions in
mind as full partners.
I shall be available at the Council meeting to answer
· ith reference to the matter, the City Manager submitted a written
report under date of Ray 21, 1973, transmitting a proposed Resolution whereby the
city will actively participate in the Cooperative Area Manpower Planning System
Program for this region.
In a discussion Of the matter, Mr. Lisk questioned Mr. Colby as to
whether or not the Fifth Planning District Commission would be willing to assist
the city in the operation of the CAMPS Program if the city accepts sponsorship
and leadership for said program.
Mr. Colby replied that the Fifth Planning District Commission exists
at the pleasure of Council and for any activity chosen by Council, that the Plannin
District Commission would like for Council to think of it just like any other
municipal department, and that they are in essence like the City Planning Depart-
ment except that they represent eight localities.
After a further discussion of the matter, Mr. Lisk offered the following
Resolution:
¢~20933) A RESOLUTION stating the intent of the City of Roanoke to
sponsor and accept lead responsibility for the Cooperative Area Manpower Planning
System (CAMPS) program and to accept, receive and administer CAMPS grant funds;
designating and authorizing and directing Byron E. Hamer, City Manager of the City
of Roanoke, to act as chairman of the Manpower Area Planning Council; and designat-
ing and authorizing and directing A. N. Gibson, City Auditor of the City of Roanoke,
to act as fiscal agent for the Manpower Area Planning Council.
(For full text or Resolution, see Ordinance Book n38, page 15S.)
Hr. Llsk moved the odoption of the Resolution. The motion ual seconded
by Hr. Habord and adopted by the follouJng vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Rubard, Lisk. Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber--~ ................. ?.
NAYS: None ...........O.
Mr. Llsk moved that the statement from Mr. Colby be received and
filed. The motion was secooded by Or. Taylor and unonimoualy adopted.
CONSIOERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
ZONING: Ordinance No. 20909 rezoning all property lying east of
the centerline of Peters Creek of a certain described 4.97 acre tract of land,
being 2.?33-acres. Official Tax No. 2?70102. from C-l, Office and Institu-
tional District. to C-2. General Commercifll DIstrict, baring previously been
before Council for its first reading, read and laid over. was again before tbe
hod,, Mr. Garland offering the following for its second reading and final
adoption:
(~20909) AN OROINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet No. 277, ~ectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zonin9.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~38, page 146.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of tbe Ordinance. Tbe motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Webber ................
NAYS: None ...........O.
STREETS ANO ALLEVS: Ordinance No. 20910, vacating, discontinuing and
closing an unopened alley running in an easterly direction from another
existing alley between Franklin Road and Luck Avenue, S.'W., as shown on
Sheet 101 of the Appraisal Map of the City of Roanoke, having previously been
before Council for its first reading, read and laid over, was again before the
body, Mr. Trout offering the following for its second reading and final
adoption:
(=20910) AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and
closing a certain map alley or roadway, bein9 12 feet wide and 54.3 feet long,
running in an easterly direction from another existing alley between Franklin
Road and Luck Avenue, S. W., in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as shown on
Sheet*lOl of the Appraisal Map of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, in the Roanoke
City Engineer's Office.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #38, Pa9e 14~.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
;345
346
AYES: Wessrs, Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
end Mayor Webber ............... 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
BASEMENTS-SEWERS AND S~ORM DRAINS: Council having directed the City
Attorney to prepare the proper measure relating to the acquisition of temporary
and permanent easements in certain land situate on the north line of Springhill
Drive, N. W., relating to the proposed new Springhill Drive, N. W., Storm Drain
Project, and providing for the cJty*s acqui~tion of said easements in land by
condemnation, and authorizing that the city make motion for the award of an
immediate right of entry on said property for the purpose of commencing its work,
he presented same; mhereupoo, Mr. Lisk offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(n20934) AN ORDIN~C£ relating to the acquisition of temporary and
permanent easements in certain land situate on the north lime of Springhill Drive,
N. W., relating to the proposed aew Springhill Drive, N. W., Storm Drain Project,
and providing for the clty*s acquisition of said easements in land by condemnation;
authorizing that the city make motion for the award of an immediate right of
entry on said property for the purpose of commencing its murk; and prorJding
for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book =3O, page 159.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Webber ................
NAYS: None ........... O.
SALE OF PROPERTY-CITY PROPERTY: Council having directed the City
Attorney to prepare the proper measure authorizing and directing the city*s
conveyance of ninety-three seporate parcels of laud hereinafter more specifically
described, sold to the highest bidder at public auction on May 23, 1973, upon the
terms and conditions designated by Council in Ordinance No. 20227. heretofore
adopted by Council on May 1, 1972. he presented same; mhereupon, Mr. Lisk moved
that the following Ordinance be, placed upon its first reading:
(~20935) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and directing the city*s conveyance
of ninety-three (93) separate parcels of land hereinafter more specifically
described, sold to the highest bidder at public auction on Nay 23, 1973, upon the
terms and conditions designated by Council in Ordinance No. 20227, heretofore
adopted by the Council on May 1, 1972.
WHEREAS, the City is the owner of ninety-three (93) separate parcels
of land hereinafter described mhich, being held ns surplus property and not
needed for public purposes, were the subject of offers of purchase made to the
City at public auction sale held May 23, 1973; and
WHEREAS. the Council's Real Estate Committee, through which the said
offers were directed to the Council, bas reported to the Council under date of
347
Hay 29, 1973, and has recoaaended that said offers should be accepted and that
conveyance of the title to said property to the offerors be authorized end
directed on the terms set forth in Ordinance Ho. 20227.
THEREFORE, 8E IT OROAIHEO by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
the sale ond conveyance of the following described parcels of land situate in
the City of Roanoke, viz:
Purchaser Official
Hack Aheron 3221110
3221116
3221133
3221214
3221221
C. E. Bane 3341027
4320411
T. M. Boitnott 1120911
Raleigh Co Childresso Jr. 2150401
George L. OeHaven. Sr. 1221013
1311002
Raymond J. Fox 1421635
1421636
1421637
1421638
1421640
1421641
1421642
I421643
1421644
1421645
1421646
1421647
1421640
1421649
0. O. Guthrie 4142621
4142622
4142623
Uanie B. Hudsoa 4123016
Roger L. Ingram 2211009
2211010
2211011
2211012
Rarvtn E. Jacobs 4123018
John A. Hall C Co., lac. 1312705
132O413
132O414
1320415
1320416
C. F. Kefauver 2212113
2212325
4221328
4221329
4221408
4221409
4221410
Garrett E. RcGuire 2031604
2220422
2220423
2771311
3220301
4011609
4040925
4041805
4111501
4111502
Ho.
Amount
$1,000.00
1.150.00
1o250.00
850.00
800.00
600.00
1,400.00
300.00
3,000.00
75.00
175.00
7,000.00
1,650.00
725.00
2,000.00
600.00
4,000.00
600.00
TO0.O0
1,250.00
1,125.00
550.00
1,050.00
375.00
225.00
350.00
1,275.00
1,350,00
800.00
:348
Purchaser Official NO. Anount
Garrett E. McGoire 4111509 $ 275.00
4111604
4111605 750.00
4230421
4230422 575,00
Philip Malouf 2010504 100.00
~eter H. Moeller 1390620 7,100.00
Susan Wall Reynolds 2220418 1,100,00
2220419
C. J. Rose 2231822 575.00
W. l. 5aunders 1421670 800.00
1421671 800.00
Saunders ~ Johnson, Inc. 1320408 1,000.00
1320508
1320509 2,325.00
A. M. Simmons 4041104
4041105 1.450.00
4111106 550.00
4430601 13,000.00
J. B. 7ankersley III 1440419 1,000.00
Emory T, Thurman 233031? 300.00
Herbert D. Ward 4011124
4011125
4011126
4011127
4011128
4011129
4011130 1,300.00
B. J. Webb 3230808 350.00
John 8. Windel 1322102 725.00
4111912 125.00
C. K. Mright 4011120 125.00
4011121 300,00
4112307 225.00
4211807 175.00
to the aforesaid purchasers, for and in consideration of the above set out sums
heretofore paid be, and is hereby approved, ratified and confirmed upon the terms
and conditions provided in Ordinance No. 20227 adopted May 1, 1972.
DE l~ FURTHER ORDAINED that the Mayor be, and he is hereby authorized
and empowered, for and on behalf Of the City, to execute deeds of conveyance
prepared by the City Attorney conveying to said purchasers or to whomever said
purchasers nay designate, in writing, the fee simple title to the aforesaid
parcels, such deed to contain the City's Special Warranty of Title; and that the
City Clerk be, and is hereby authorized and directed to affix to the aforesaid
deeds of conveyance the City*s corporate seal and to attest the same, said
officials to thereafter acknowledge their signatures as provided by law.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Webber ..... 0 .......... 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
JAIL: Dr. John Jofko nppenred before the body and advised that on
September 180 1972, he presented to Council a concept for consideration of a
functional unit in the matter or medico-legal investigations, detention (Jail)
and courts, that this concept was completely free of any political considerations
and considered valid at its original presentation and more so at the present
time because of the hassle going on in the valley governments, that the big
failure in the valley government, the Planning Commissions and politicans was
and is their obstinancy to *ask and consult the people who work in and operate
the system** advising that Dr, E, po Sharp, of the American Corrections
Association is proposing a jail on the concept of function but has not taken
the idea to its logical conclusion which should include the following since
all of the above matters are closely inter-related and by necessity must be
functional to operate efficiently, that briefly stated, the regional crime
detection laboratory, the regional medical examiner*s system, police investiga-
tions, detention and courts should operate as a unit and not be scattered all
OVer town making waste and excessive expenditures of taxpayers money and promot-
ing greater inefficiency, thereby endangering the public safety in the
apprehension, conviction and detention of offenders, that the valley jail
should be designed for locat needs for detention prior to trial and for
short-term incarcerations, that a long term sentence is a function of state
government with recourses for rehabilitation, security and can be formulated
on a basis to take care of the needs for the entire Sou*hues* Virginia and that
in conclusion, it does not matter whether the structures are located in the
Kimball area or Downtomn Roanoke as long as the functional unity is preserved
and the cost reasonable.
Mr. Lisk moved that the statement made by Dr. Jnfko be referred to
the Roanoke Valley Regional Corrections Board to evaluate said suggestions and
that Dr. Jofko be invited to attend a meeting of the Corrections Board in
order to present his suggestions in more detail. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
COMMITTEES: Mr. Hubard presented the following prepared statement
in connection with amending the ~Statement of Policy on Appointments by
Roanoke City Council to Boards, Authorities, Commissions and Committees,*
recommending that said policy be emended by adding the following language to
Section VII, *MEETINGS,' *Unless otherwise provided by law: (a) all such
bodies shall give at least five days public notice of special or regular
meetings, except that in case of a stated emergency a special meeting may be
called upon twenty-four hours public notice and (b) notice posted in the office
of the City Clerk of Roanoke 'shall be considered such public notice', and
that the meetings of such bodies shall be 'open meetings' under the terms Of
Virginia Freedom of Information Act, except as otherwise provided in that Act*:
349
350
#Jaoe ~, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. #ebbev end
Members of Roanoke City Council.
Rosaote, Vlrginio.
Gentlemen. on Jenuery 29, 1973, this Council tomb the
very sound and progressive position of adopting n 'Statement
of Policy on Appointments by Roanoke City Council tm Hoards,
Authorities, Commissions. end Committees#. There ere current-
ly in existence approximately fifty (50) such bodies appointed
by Council. The valuable study, recommendations, and action
of these bodies greatly enhances the effectiveness or Council.
,omever, it has been my observation that the deliberations of
a number or such bodies bare not been aa open to the public
as is desirable.
The Virginia Freedom of Information Act requires that
authorities, boards and commissions appointed by city councils
shall be subject to the provisions of the Act. (It does pro-
vide that study commissions end committees, unless composed
entirely o! council members, are exempt from the Act.)
Although the Act provides that the time and place of meetings
must be guvnlshed when requested, it fails to establish any
guidelines fey the giving of due notice of the meetings of such
appointed bodies. It is obvious that the salutnry effect of
the Act can be circumvented unless the public receives such
due notice. It is of little value to have the Tight to attend.
if one knoms nothing of the time and place of n meeting.
Theregore. it is my recommendation that the nbovementioeed
'Statement of Policy' be amended by adding the follewJng lan-
guage to Section VII. 'MEETINGS,' 'Cnless otherwise provided by
law: (a) all such bodies shall give at least five (5) days
public notice of special or regular meetings, except that in
case of a stated emergency a special meeting may be called
upon twenty-four (24) hours public notice and (b) notice posted
in the office of the City Clerk of Roanoke "shall be con-
sidered such public notice". The meetings of all such
bodies shall be "open meetings" under the terms of the
¥irginia Freedom of Information Act, except as otherwise
provided in that Act**
S! ~m, S. Hubard
Councilman"
Hr. Bubnrd moved that this proposed amendment in relation to the
#Statement of Policy on Appointments by Roanoke City Council to Boards. Authori-
ties, Committees and Commissions," be adopted by Counc~. The motion mas
seconded by Hr. Lisk.
In a discussion, Mr. Thomas called attention to certain committees
that will be almost inoperable if this amendment is adopted.
The Assistant City Attorney advised that Council should review each
committee before the proposed five day notice is established.
Mr. Hubard requested that he be authorized to withdram this motion and
advised that he will return to Council at a later date mith another recommends-
tion pertaining to the matter.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the request of Mr. Hubard for
permission to withdraw the motion. The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and
unanimously adopted.
ROANOKE VALLEY: Mr. Hubard presented a prepared statement advising that
last year Council received a "Report of the Study Committee on Environmental
Quality, June 1972" prepared by a committee of the Roanoke Valley Council of
Community Services; and. on July 24, 1972. Council endorsed the prime recommenda-
tions of that report, i.e.o the Establishment of a Citizens* Council on Environ-
mental Quality, pointing out that said Citizens' Council is currently being
j
advocated by the Roanoke Valley Council of Community Services end, to that end,
on application is being made to the Slale of Virginia for funds to sustain such
a Council for one year, that he is advised that all other valley governments
as well os namerous local civic organizations have formally endorsed this
endeavor and further advising that Councll*s re-endorsement or the establishment
or a Citizens* Council on Environmental Quality in the Roanoke Valley with an
indication or considering the making available of some office space in said
Citizens* Council is respectfully requested.
Mr. Rubard then offered the follouing Resolution:
(a2093hl A RESOLUFIO~ reeendorsing the establishment of a Citizens'
Conncil on Environmental Quality.
(Ear full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Rook :38, page 161.)
Mr. Bubard moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Nubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Rebber ................ 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
Mr. Edward V, Spurgeon, Chairman, Environmental Council Steering
Coemittee, appeared before Council in support of the matter.
JAIL: Ur. Hubard presented the following communication in connection
with the location for a regional corrections facility, advising that the
Roanoke Valley Regional Corrections Board at its meeting on May 2g, 1975,
unanimously agreed to recommend Site 13, located in the northeast quadrant of
Peters Creek Road and Interstate 581 as the site for the Regional Corrections
facility and respectfully requesting that careful and favorable consideration
be given to locating this facility in the northeast quadrant of Peters Creek
Road and Interstate 581, subject to approval by the other valley governme~ s
responsible for funding:
"June 4, 1973.
The Honorable Mayor Roy L. Rebber
and Members of Roanoke City Council,
Roanoke, Virginia.
Site for Regional Corrections Facility
Gentlemen, Roanoke City Council bT formal action taken
on January 29, 1973, endorsed, in principle, the concepts for a
'Regional Corrections Program for Roanoke Valley, Ylrginia*
(July 1972). This program contained 12 possible sites for a
regional corrections facility in our Yalley. These sites
were scattered throughout our Valley.
Our commitment to this regional approach to corrections
in our Valley was formalized on February 12, 1973, by the ~
execution of the 'Roanoke Valley Corrections Center Agree-
ment** This agreement established the Roanoke Valley Cor-
rections Board and charged this Hoard with the responsibility
of acquiring a site upon which to construct and opezate a
Roanoke Valley Corrections Center.
Yhe Board did recommend, as such a site, a parcel of
laod owned by the City of Roanoke located adjacent to
Roodrum Field. On April lb, 1973, this Council by formal
action, while declining to sell that land for this purpose,
351
352
end stating its prefernece for a site in the Kimball Urban
Renewal Area, expressed 'its willingness tO cooperate in
locating a regional corrections facility on,some other site
selected by the Roanoke Valley Corrections Board os a loca-
tion for a regional corrections facility providing same be
acceptable to the parties to the aforesaid agreement and said
site can be lawfully used for such purpose on and after
Jane 1, 1973.'
That Board did on Bay 29, 1973, unanimously (including
the four members representing Roanoke City) agree to recommend
Site 13, located in the northeast quadrant of Peters Creek
Road and Interstate 581 as the site for the regional correc-
tions facility. I am advised that this site can be lamfully
used as the location for such o facility.
It is respectfully requested that careful and favorable
consideration be given to this Site 13 as the location for tm
regional corrections facility, subject to approval by the
other Valley governments responsible for funding the aforemen-
tioned agreement. Xf members of Council have any concerns as
to this site being consistent with the purposes of the
Regional Corrections Program, endorsed by Council, it is
hoped that these concerns mill be stated with some degree of
certainty. Since ue previously have rejected one site
recommended to us by the Board, the rejection of another
site, without clearly stated and sound reasons, could call
into question our good faith in intending to fulfill our
obligations under the aforementioned agreement.
I remind Council that this agreement provides that
the City of Roanoke is obligated to pay only 50% of the cost
of constructing a regional corrections facility, although our
percentage of Valley prisoners is currently approximately
B0%. On current estimates of approximately $3,000,000 for
such a facility, this represents a capital savings of
approximately $900,000 to Roanoke City. Setting aside for
a moment our moral and legal obligation under that agree-
ment, with this value to the City in this agreement, it
would not appear to be an approprJ~e exercise of our
stewardship as councilmen to lightly repudiate this agree-
ment.
Councilman
P.S. Attached is the report to the Corrections Board Of its
Site Selectlon and Design Committee, which report was
approved by the full Corrections Board."
Mr. Bubnrd moved that the City Attorney be directed to prepare the
proper measure citing the concurrence of the Council of the City of Roanoke in
the Peters Creek site subject to proper appraisal of said site. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor.
In a discussion of the matter, Mr. Lish expressed the opinion that
only the City of Roanoke is being asked to give on the whole question and that
he thinks the Valley governments should not play games but state their positions
openly.
Mr. Thomas expressed the opinion that regionalism is desirable but not
at any price, that it would be foolish to agree to this site only to find the
county courthouse beside it and the county with all the advantages and that that
would leave the city faced with the high operating cost of transporting its
eighty per cent of the jail inmates to court Jn the city.
Mr. Lisk then offered a substitute motion that the Reglonal Courthouse
Committee be requested to explore and get a committment from Roanoke County to
J
I
AYES: Messrs. Link, Taylor, Th,nas, Trout end Mayor
Webber ........................................................
NAYS: Messrs. Garland and Hubard ...................
Mr. Garland called the substitute notion intimidation and a waste of
tine, that with existing city court facilities, he cannot see the need for a
regional courthouse.
With reference to the Roan,he Valley Regional Corrections Hoard, Mr.
Trout advised that he will be attending the Virginia Municipal League - 1974
Legislative Preparation Meeting on Wednesday. June 6, 1973, in Richmond,
Virginia, whereupon, Mr. Link moved that Mr. Trout be requested to bring to the
attention of the Virginia Municipal League a suggested amendment of
of the 19S0 G,de of Virginia, as amended, to prnvide that the word "shall' be
deleted and the word 'may" inserted in order for said section to read as
follows:
§SS.20b.$. Members of jail or jail farm board. --
Each such regional jail or jail fern shall be controlled
by a board to consist of at least one representative
from each county and/or city participating therein, who
shall be appointed by such county and/oF city. Such
represeutatfves shall be entitled to necessary expenses
incurred in attending meetings of the board and in
addition each 9hn~ nay, nhen authorized by the governing
body appointing such representative, receive an allonance
of twenty dollars per day for each day t~at he shall be
in attendance on the board. Such allowance, however, not
to exceed in any one year the sun of two hundred forty
dollars, to be paid by the county and/or city
respectively. The accounts for such expenses and allow-
ances shall be made out and verified by affidavits of
the representatives and attested by the secretary Of the
board.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Hubard moved that Mr. Trout also be requested to bring to the
attention of the Virginia Municipal League the fact that the Council of the
City of Roanoke favors enactment of enabling legislation for regional court-
houses. The notion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
BUBGET: Council having previously decided to make a tour of certain.
city installations on Tuesday, June 5, 1973, and it appearing that several
members of the body did not find it convenient to conduct this tour on said
date, it was decided to reschedule the tour for Monday, June 11, 1973, beginning
at B:O0 a.n.
There being no further business, Mayor Webber declared the
meeting adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
353
354
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Mondeye Jane 11, 1973.
The Council of the City of goanohe met in regular meeting tn the Council
Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, June 11, 1973, at 2 p.m** the regular
meeting hour, uith Vice-Mayor David K, Llsh presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, William So Hubard, Noel C.
Taylor, Bampton M. Thomas, James O. Trout, Mayor Roy L. #ebber (Mayor ~ebber did
not arrive until approximately 4 p.m.) and Vice-Rayov David K. Llsk ........
ABSENT: None ..................................................... O.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Byron E. Hamer, City Manager; Mr, Samuel H.
McGhee, III, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Kincanon, City Attorney; Mr.
N. Ben Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorney; and Hr. A. N. Gibson, City Auditor'.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend
Carroll Brooke, retired minister.
BINtffES: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Tuesday,
Ray 2g, 1973, having been furnished each member of Council, on motion of Mr.
Thomas, seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof was
dispensed with and the minutes approved as recorded.
BEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
SHERIFF-PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOYEES: Sheriff Paul J. Puckett appeared
before Council and presented a prepared statement respectfully requesting that
Council approve the supplementation of salaries for certain employees in his
office for the fiscal year 1973-74 in order to effect the inclusion of these
employees under the City Pay and Classification Plan, the total supplement being
$aB4,52B.O0, advising that the State Compensation Board authorized 66 2/3 per
cent state participation in the total approved salary allowance of
whereas, $394,52B.O0 is required, thus creating a deficiency of $24,736.00, that
this total salary reguirement of $384,528.00 reflects an anticipated 7 1/2 per
cent cost of living increase to the existing Pay Plan salary steps and also
provides for an automatic progression increase from Step 1 to Step 2 during the
fiscal year 1973-74 for applicable employees, that it is felt that supplementation
will be needed for only one year and vequesting that Council act favorably upon
the request.
Mr. Thomas moved that the matter be referred to the City Manager and the
City Auditor to review the classifications assigned to employees in the Office
of the Sheriff versus salaries approved by the 5rate Compensation Board and advise
Council as to whether or not it is necessary to contact the State Compensation
Board to ascertain whether or not they can appropriate more funds toward the
salaries of employees in the Office of the Sheriff for the fiscal year 1973-74.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
355
COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE-PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOYEES: Mr. J. $.
Howard, Jr.. Commissioner of the Revenue, appeared before Council and requested
that Council approve the supplementation of salaries for certain employees in
his or[lee in an amount totaling $1o.226.oo for the fiscal year 1973o74 in order
to effect the inclusion of these employees under the City of Roanoke Pay and
Classification Plan, advising that the Compensation Hoard approved SO~ state
participation in a total approved salary allomunce of $131,8g$.00, whereas.
$142.161.00 is required thus creating a deficiency of $1o.226.oo. that it is
bis opinion that this salary supplementation will be needed only for the
1973-74 fiscal year and requesting that Council act favorably upon this
request.
Hr. Thomas coved that the matter be referred to the City Manager
and the City Auditor to review the classificasions assigned to employees in
the Of/ice of the Commissioner of the Revenue versus salaries approyed by the
State Compensation Board and advise Council as to whether or not it is
necessary to contact the 5rate Compensation Board to ascertain whether or not
they can appropriate core funds toward the salaries of employees in the Office
of the Commissioner of the Revenue for the fiscal year 1973-74. The motion
was seconded by Mr. ?rout and unanimously adopted.
JAIL: Sheriff Paul J. Puchett, appeared before Council and read a
prepared statement in connection with the corrections facility, advisiog that
he is in no way opposed to the construction of a correctional facility
anywhere in this area but that he questions whether or not Roanoke should
provide such a facility, that it see~s to him that the city may be shoulderin9
a responsibility that rightfully belongs to the State of Virginia. advising
that the City of Roanoke is required to provide a jail to be used for the detent
of prisoners being held for trial and hopefully for a brief period after trial
pending transportation to a state institution or serving their sentences.
that in short, a jail is not intended to be a sentence serving institution
except in brief periods of thirty days or less and cities have never been
required to provide facilities for serving sentences, that a proposal prepared by
the Fifth Planning District Commission reveals that basically Roanoke is being
asked to build two facilities, namely, a very costly correctional facility to
be located a distance from the Courthouse and a jail or holding facility to
accommodate 35 to 50 inmates near the Courthouse. that should the City of
Roanoke construct the necessary holdin9 facility and assuce a major part of the
cost of constructing a correctional facility, it would appear that the city
is duplicating its expense by assuming respopsibiltty normally accepted by the
state, that in his opinion, when a holding facility is built to accommodate 35
to 50 inmates one third to one half of the actual needs of the City of Roanoke
have been met and that he has heard that there may be a possibility that the
federal government mill provide funds to build a regional corrections facility.
356
that this would be a very desirable and inexpensive way to acquire the needed
facilities for Roanoke but probably tn unlikely probability.
In a discussion of the matter, Mr. Ruberd advised that the Roanoke
Valley Regional Corrections Board met on Thursday. June 7, 1973. and voted to
recommend that the Kimball Urban Renemal Area be selected os the site for the
construction of a corrections facility; mhereupon, Mr. Uabard expressed the opinion
that it would be appropriate for Council to reaffirm its preference of the Kimball
site la order to determine ham the other governing bodies will respond.
Mr. Robard then moved that Roanoke City Council reaffirm its preference
as a site for a regional jail under the terms of the Roanoke Valley Corrections
Center Agreement. dated February 12, 1973, the Kimball Redevelopment Area in
Roanoke, Virginia. subject to subsequent approval by Roanoke City Council of,
(1) the precise location, size and cost of that site, (2) the design, size and
cost of any improvements constructed on that site, and that the City Attorney
be instructed to prepare an appropriate Resolution consistent with this for
formal approval by Roanoke City Council. The motion was seconded by Br. Taylor.
After a discussion of the motion, Mr. Thomas moved that Mr. Hubard*s
motion be amended to provide that at the time the proposed Resolution reaffirming
the Council's preference of the ~imbal area is being considered, that the Roanoke
Valley Regional Corrections Board be requested to present to Council for its
consideration a report as to the precise or exact location of the recommended
site. the approximate cost of said site and the number of prisoners to be
accommodated at said site. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout.
At this point, the Vice-Mayor requested that the City Clerk call the
roll on the amendment to the motion made by Mr. Hubard; whereupon, the following
vote WSS recorded.
AYES: Messrs. Carland, Taylor, Thomas and Trout ..........4.
NAYS: Mr. Hubard and Vice-Mayor Lisk .....................
(Mayor Webber absent)
Mr. Thomas moved that the City Clerk be requested to call the roll
on the motion, as amended, to provide that Roanoke City Council reaffirm its
preference, as a site for a regional jail under the terms of the Roanoke Valley
Regional Corrections Center Agreement, dated February 12, 1973, the Kimball
Redevelopment Area in Roanoke. Virginia, subject to subsequent approval by
Roanoke City Council of, (1) the precise location, size and cost of that site and
(2) the design, size and cost of any improvements constructed on that site and
that the City Attorney be requested to prepare the appropriate Resolution con-
sistent with this for formal approval by Roanoke City Council with the under-
standing that when this proposed Resolution is considered by Council that the
Roanoke Valley Regional Corrections Board be requested to submit a report as to
the precise or exact location of the recommended site, the approximate cost of
said site and the number of prisoners to be accommodated at said site. The
motion was seconded by Mr, Trout and unanimously adopted; whereupon, the following
vote #os recorded upon the motion mode by Mr. Hubord and amended by Mr.
AYES: #essrs. Taylor. Thomas, Trout and Vice-Mayor Llsk---4.
NAYS: Messrs. Garland and Hubard ..........................2.
IMayor Yebber absent)
BUILDINGS: Council at its meetin9 on Monday, January 2~, 1973, havin9
The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adapted,
was again before the body.
357
358
.Mr. Garland expressed tho opinion that this matter has been.o misunder-
standing from its very inception, that he is going to take Mr. Roupas at his
word that he did not receive the letter in question end moved that the City
Attorney be instructed to prepare the proper measure releasing this lien of
$294.00 against the property ,maud by Mr. Rumpus located at ?07 Gilmer Avenue,
N. #. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Hubard,
Mr. Thomas offered a substitute motion that the matter be referred to
the City Attorney and the City Homager for recommendation and report to Council
on the basis of the latest communication from Mr. Roupas. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the foil,ming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Webber and Vice-Mayor Lisk--S.
NAYS: Bessrs. Garland and Trout ................................... 2.
BUDGET-COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE-CITY TREASURER-SHERIFF-UOMBONWEALTH*S
ATTORNEY: Copies of communications from the State Compensation Board tentatively
fixing the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Attorney for the Commonuealth,
the Treasurer, the Commissioner Of the Revenue and the Sheriff for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1974, were before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communications he referred to lq73-74 budget
study. The notion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
TAXES-LEGISLATION-SMOKE: A communication from BF. Sam Bairston,
President, Lightweight Block Company, advising that the General Assembly in 19T2
passed legislation to exempt pollution control equipment and facilities from
state taxation and to permit localities to exempt such equipment from local
taxation provided this property is certified by the State Water Control Board or
the Air Pollution Control Board or any interstate agency authorized to act in
place of state regulatory agencies for water and air pollution control, that the
enormous cost of these necessary pollution control facilities will not increase
productivity, will require a heavy drain on corporate resources and at the
same time will represent a substantial cost increase to the public as consumers
of the products, that some local governin9 bodies have already adopted such
legislation and urging that Council also adopt this legislatlon, was before the
body.
Mr. Thomas moved that thecommanicatlon be referred to the City
Manager for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
S~REET LIGHTS: Copy of a communication from the Appalachian Power
Company transmitting a list of street lights installed and/or removed during
the month of May. 1973. was before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that the communication and list be received amd filed.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: Council having referred to tke City Manager
and the City Attorney for report a petition signed by residents of Mill Mountain
Estates concerning damages which occurred during a severe rainstorm in which the
city experienced approximately four inches of rainfall during a period of
approximately tmelve hours on the morning of May 28, 1973, the City Manager
and the Assistant City Attorney submitted the following joint report:
"June 11, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Storm Drainage - Mill Mountain Estates
A report and a petition were presented to City Council
at the regular meeting on June 4, 1973. by residents Of the
Mill Mountain Estates concerning damages which occurred
during a severe rainstorm, in which the City experienced
some four inches of rainfallduring a period of approximate-
ly twelve hours, with a concentration of some 2 1/2 inches
in a three~hour period, on the morning of Monday, May 2B.
1973. This item was referred to the City Manager and the
City Attorney for investigation and report bach to City
Council.
After a review of the situation as described to City
Council by Mr. Donald R. Shelton. the following statements
and recommendations can be made:
1. The storm drainage system approved by the City in
accordance with then existing subdivision regula-
tions and installed as a part of the required sub-
division improvements in Mill Mountain Estates
within the storm drainage easement adjacent to Mr.
Shelton*s property, as well as for the entire sub-
division was and is adequate with respect to the
design criteria in effect in 1956 when the storm
drainage facilities and the subdivision were develop-
ed. The existing storm drain constructed as a part
of the required improvements in the easement
adjacent to Mr. Shelton's property consists of a
24-inch diameter concrete pipe installed on a
grade of 8.41 percent with a capacity of 65 cubic
feet per second. This pipe was installed from a
point beyond the back of the houses on the lower
side of Hartsook Boulevard, across Bartsook Boulevard,
to a point just beyond the back of the houses on
the upper side of Hartsook Boulevard adjacent to
Mr. Shelton's property.
2. At some time after final inspection of the subdi-
vision*s required improvements by the City the
upstream end of this storm drain was extended,
without the knowledge or approval by the Cit~, for
some distance adjacent to Mr. Shelton's property.
The storm drain extension was made by installing
unconnected 14-inch diameter steel barrels. These
barrels are not considered a proper drainage conduit,
359
360
for strength reasons, Iud, more signiricnntiy, ore
considerably snoller than the existing 24-Inch
diameter storm drain. On the night in question,
the extreme upper end of the storm drain barrel
extension becnne clogged moth debris during the
storm. One barrel section mas removed by the
Department of Public Works fol~omJng the storm and
a msrhed decrease in ponding at the upstream end
of the pipe wis observed, During our inspection of
the remaining barrel installation on Tuesdsy,
June 5. 1973, it was noted that the barrel mom
existing at the upper end of the storm drain hsd
been crushed someuhat nnd that the;opening diameter
was only 12 Inches. Based on the gradient of the
.barrel installation and the inlet size of only 12
inches, this pipeline has a capacity of only 9.5
cubic feet per second. This section of pipeline,
therefore, in effect created a bottleneck to the
flow in this watershed, based on the capacity of a
24-inch pipe being 66 cubic feet per second and the
capacity of the 12-inch line being only 9.5 cubic
feet per second, a reduction in capacity of 56.5 cubic
feet per second or a reduction in capacity of 85.5
percent. We cannot state postively that the original.
unextended, 24-inch pipe mould not bare become
clogged but we can state that had it not been
extended by use of small barrels, it mould have
carried a significantly larger amount of runoff.
An evaluation of the existing and proposed storm
drainage installation within the subdivision being
developed by the James E. Long Construction Company,
Incorporated. indicates that the storm drainage
capacity, when completed, is more than adequate
for the drainage areas involved and that the storm
drainage system existing in the Will Wountain
Estates into which this particular storm drain
would empty is adequate for the flow from that
portion of the James E. Long Construction Company
development. The storm drain installation being
pr*tided by the James E. Long Construction Company
is in conformity with the City's existing subdivision
ordinance, and is being completed in accordance with
the terms and conditions of the subdivision agreement
and bond.
Existing City ordinances do not provide for specific
controls to be exercised during development lathe
areas of erosion and sedimentation control. The
existing subdivision ordinance is speciflc,'however,
with respect to what the developer must provide as
a completed project and the time within which the
total public improvements must be completed.
Legislation enacted as Chapter 4§6 hI the 1973
Session of the General Assembly provided, as
Article 6.1, Chapter 1, Title 21, codified as
Sections 21-89.1 throu9h 21-89.15, of the 1950
Code of Virginia, as amended, an *Erosion and
Sediment Control Law.' This article provides,
basically, that the Commonwealth shall develop
and adopt by July 1, 1974, guidelines for erosion
and sediment control. The City would then be in
a position to develop and adopt a soil erosion and
sediment control program consistent with the State
program and guidelines and should do so within
18 months after the adoption of the State guidelines.
The undersigned would recommend, however, that the
City proceed to develop appropriate regulations as
soon as possible, by coordinating standards with
those in progress at the State level. Implementa-
tion of such controls would tend to reduce damages
due to erosion and sedimentation which occur during
construction; however, no regulations can absolutely
guarantee against a similar occurrence. Under the
enabling legislation, cities are permitted to adopt
more stringent standards than those established by
the State. The legislation also provides that any
project commenced prior to the adoption of the con-
servation standards shall not be affected by the
6. Inrestigation reveals that the present owner of
the property on mhich the storm drain extension was
installed (utilizing barrels rather than pipe) pur-
chased the property with that condition existing.
and mas not aware of the faulty design of SUCh
structureb until the recent unfortunate events.
In view of the above, it is recommended that City
forces remove the substandard section of barrel
storm drain and replace that extended section with
24=loch dlamete~ concrete pipe.
7. It is further recommended that the City Plannin~
Department, in conjunction with the City Planning
Commission, the Engineering Department, the Depart-
ment of Buildings, the Department of Public ~orks and
the City Attorney*s office develop and prepare, as
soon as is practicable, an appropriate ordinance for
the control of erosion and sediment la conformity
with the State erosion and sediment control lam
recognizing that it may have to be amended from
tine to time as the state guidelines are developed,
approved and adopted.
8. Although the requirements of any City ordinance
could not be made retroactive to current develop-
ment, it would be urged that all developers take
such action as necessary in order to comply with
the basic intent of the law, possibly by utilizing
methods recently developed by the State Bighway
Department. The City will contact those developers
with projects underway in an effort to urge them
to cooperate with us in this program.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Baner
City Manager
S/ B. Ben Jones, Jr.
B. Ben Jones, Jr.
Assistant City Attorney-
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed and that a
copy of sane be forwarded to Mr. Donald R. SheJton, 942 Hartsook Boulevard,
S. E.. for his information. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and unani-
mously adopted.
Mr. Thomas further moved that Council concur in the recommendations
of the City Manager and the Assistant City Attorney as contained in said report.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET: The City Manager submitted the folloming report recommending
the transfer of certain funds in order to provide sufficient funds in these
accounts for the remainder of the fiscal year:
"June 11, 1973
Bonorable Mayor and City
Council
Roanoke, Virginia.
Gentlemen:
Subject: Transfer of Funds
It is recommended that funds be transferred as itemized
below in order to provide sufficient funds in certain accounts
for the remainder of this fiscal year.
Account 58 - Street Construction and Repair. The exist-
ing air conditioner in the office space at the Street Department
362
is not in good working condition and it is recommended that
the air conditioner be replaced rather than being repaired.
It is recomwended that SRS0.be transferred from ObJect Code
330, Supplies and Haterlals - Construction, to ObJect Code
395, Other Equipment ~ New, fn order to pro,fda sufficient
funds for this purchase.
Account 69 - Sanitation. Last fall the landfills
along Tinker Creek from and including the Hells Furniture
Company property to Nine Avenue were seeded at a total cost
of SO,SOO. This work uaw accomplished after the June 1972
flood. It was anticipated that all of these costa could be
charged to the Special Flood Damage Account with reimburse-
ment being made by the Federal government. He have since
learned that only $2,000 of this cost is reimbursable and,
therefore, chargeable to the Flood Damage Account. It is
therefore necessary to provide an additional $6,500 in the
Sanitation Object Code 330, Supplies and Haterials - Con-
struction. It is recommended that this $6.500 be transferred
from Account 69-101. Personal Services. to Account 69-330
in order to cover the cost of this seeding.
Account 340 - Airport. It is recommended that $100 be
transferred from ObJect Code 24S. Menials. to Object Code
300. Printing and Office Supplies. and that $400 be transferred
from Object Code 24S, Menials, to Object Code 311. Housekeeping.
in order to provide sufficient funds in these accounts for
the remainder of this fiscal year.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Darter
City Manager"
Or. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20937) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~58, "Street
Construction and Repair," amd Section ~bg, "Sanitation Division," of the 1972-73
Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book 336, page 164.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Outland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Vice-Mayor Link ................. 6.
NAYS: None ........... O. (Mayor ~ebber absent)
Dr. Taylor then offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20938) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~340, "Hunicipal
Airport Fund," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
¥ice-Muyor Link ................. 6.
NAYS: None ........... O. (Mayor Hebber absent)
BUDGET-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a written report in connec-
tion with a grant request from the Virginia Juvenile Officer Association to the
Division of Justice and Crime Prevention for partial funding for the Development
of In-Service Training Programs for Adult and Juvenile Correctional, Porbation
and Parole Personnel, advising that said grant has been approved by the Division
363
Of Justice and Crime Prevention, that the total amount of said grant is
$1,?gO,O0 with $1,340.00 coming from federal funds, that this program will be
administered by the Virginia Juvenile Officers Association nnd will involve no
city funds, that the city will make payments to the Virginia Juvenile Officers
Association upon receipt of proper requests, recommending that the City Manager
be authorized to execute the appropriate forms for acceptance of this grant nnd
agreeing to the provisions and conditions contained therein and further recom-
mending that $1,340,00 be appropriated to this grant account.
Mr. Hubard moved that Council concur in the recomaendations
the City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
$1,340.00 to Virginia Juvenile Officer Association under Section ~91o "Non=
Departmental," of the 1972-73 budget:
(xROg39) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~91, "Non-
Departmental," of the 1g~2-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book ~3§, poge 165.)
Mr. Bubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Nubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Vice-Mayor Lisk ................
NAYS: None ............O. (Mayor Mebher absent)
gr. Garland then offered the following Resolution authorizing the
acceptance, execution and filing of the "Special Conditions for Action Grunt
Awards" with the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention for an action grant of
federal funds for Development of In-Service Trait/ag Programs for Adult and
Juvenile Correctional, Probation and Parole Personnel in the city:
(~20940) A RESOLUTION uuthorizing the acceptance, execution, and
filing of the "Special Conditions for Action Grant Awards" with the Division of
Justice and Crime Prevention for an action grant Of federal funds for Develop-
ment of In-Service Training Programs for Adult and Juvenile Correctional.
Probation and Parole Personnel in the city.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~30, page
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
Vice-Mayor Lisk ................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mayor Webber absent)
364
Division of Justice nnd Crime Prevention should it be approved, that the project
will be produced by the Blue Ridge ETV Association which is the licensee of
MRRA-TV end will involve no city funds, that application for these 'funds are
accepted only from governmental subdivisions, that the city will administer
the funds, make paytents to the Blue Ridge £TV Association upon receipt of
proper requests and recommending that the City Manager be authorized to make
application for this 9runt end also be authorized to sign the agreement with the
State Department of Planning and Community Affairs upon approval of the grant.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation or the
City Manager and offered the following Resolution:
(#20V41) A RRSOLUIION authorizing the filing of an application for
urban assistance incentive funds by the city for the Blue Ridge ETV Association
(RRRA-TV) and Indicating the city*s willingness to serve as the receiving agent
for such funds.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book ~3B. page 16T.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Darland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Vice-Mayor Lisk .................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mayor ~ebber absent)
AIRPORT: The City Manager submitted the following report in connection
with holding area rooms at Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport:
"June Il, 19T3
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Airport Holding Rooms
Implementation of Federal security rules as they apply
to airport transportation necessitates the separation of in
transit passengers from other citizens utilizin9 the Airport
facilities. In light of this requirement and as a further
expansion of the Airport Terminal, Piedmont Airlines with the
concurrence of the City of Roanoke had proposed to construct
holdin9 rooms as a portion of each concourse. Piedmont
Airlines has had architectural drawings prepared and has
secured a negotiated price from Matts and Breakell, Inc.,
current contractors for the City of Roanoke Airport Termi-
nal, to construct these holding rooms. The bids as obtained
from ~atts and Breakell, amounts to $191o~6S for holdln9
rooms and another $59,000 for enclosing the remainder of
the concourses and security rooms off the lobby.
After Piedmont Airlines had obtained these bids some
concern was generated amongst the City administration with
respect to joint ownership and joint operating rights
within the Airport Terminal. Past experience with joint
ownership has proven to be somewhat unsatisfactory.
The Airlines desire the construction of holding rooms
to facilitate the control of passengers as well as to make
their job easier and more automatic in nature, thus requiring
fewer personnel to check boarding passengers. Since the
holding area concept is in support of the Airlines, it is
reasonable that the Airlines pay the cost for such a facility
either by paying for the initial construction or through
additional charges such as rent. Under revised Federal
procedures the Airlines have available to them not only
s
their own funds but goveruwent funds to make iwprovewents
which affect passenger security. Should Piedmont Airlines
wuhe the capital expenditure roy these holding rooms, which
will actually be a part of tbs Clty-owued lermianlyo they
would expect to use these facilities free for at least
twenty years while they write orr the construction costs.
Additionally. they would expect exclusive use of these
facilities. In other words, the airport operator loses
control of portions of his own facility.
It is recognized that an expenditure of this scope was
not envisioned at the time the contract was let to expand
the Airport Terminal. As a matter of fact. the City
received bids to enclose the walhways as a part of these
expansion bids; however, this portion of the contract was
eliminated when it became known that Piedmont wanted to
build holding rooms. The Watts and Breahell*s bid was
reduced by $64,000 as a result of this action.
Construction of these holding rooms by the City and
rental of the areas with the retentiou of advertising and
concession rights would result in an anticipated annual
revenue of not less than $25.000 per year. Althuugh this
does not provide a large return on the Clty*s investment,
coupled with the administrative differences, it would be
to the City*s benefit to construct these holding rooms.
Accordingly, it would be recommended that the City
authorize the City Manager to enter into a change order
with the current terminal enlargement contractor to proceed
with this work.
In a similar instance some years ago, City Council
authorized the borrowing of funds for the Piedmont Hangar
from the Water Department Replacement Fund. Adequate
balances exist in that account to permit this to be accomplish-
ed again.
It would be recommended that City Council authorize the
boarrowJng of $250.000 from tbs Water Account Replacement
Fund for the construction of the holding rooms. Yhis loan
is to be repaid orera period of 25 years, at 6 percent
interest.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Bauer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager#
After a discussion of tbs report, Mr. Trout offered the following
emergency Ordinance appropriating $250,000.00 to Terminal Building Expansion
under Section u550, "Airport Capital Improvement Program,* of the 1972-73
budget:
(~20942) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section =550, *Airport
Capital Improvement Program" of the 1972-73 Municipal Airport Fund Appropriation
Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~38. page 167.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Barlando Hubard. Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
Vice-Mayor Lisk ................6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mayor Webber absent)
Mr. Trout then moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney
for report as to the feasibility of accomplishing this work through a change
order to the contract with Watts and Breakell, Incorporated, versus, any other
procedure which the City Attorney feels should be followed. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
365
366
HANDICAPPED pERSONS: The City Manager submitted n mritten report advis-
ing that on Monday, October 2H, 1972, Mr. Ricbard L. Mengher, representing the
Rayor*s Committee for the Employment of the Physically Handicapped, suggested
that certain improvements be made to the sidemalhs at intersections Jn order that
pedestrian movement by the physically handicapped might be improved, that it was
suggested that a trial installation be made at the intersection of Jefferson
Street and Campbell Avenue, that after much study and discussion by the Engineer-
ing Department, the Department of Public Murks and the Mayor's Committee for
Employment of the Handicapped, the sidemalk at the northnest corner of the inter-
section of Jefferson Street and Campbell Avenue has been modified, that this
modification is being evaluated prior to proceeding mJth an installation on
the other three corners of this intersection, that it is anticipated that each
of the other sidewalk modifications will differ slightly from the installation
which has been made due to conflicts with existing utilities on the other corners.
that following the completion of the other three corners, a further report will
be submitted to Council commenting on the recommended design of these ramps and
the actual cost of the installation and recommendations will be made as to
extending this program to other intersections in the downtown area and that it
should be noted that in conjunction with the Kimball Crban Renemal Project
these ramps are being provided at certain intersections where pedestrian traffic
is anticipated to be of some significance.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
HCDGET-CITY PROPERTY: The City Manager submitted the following
connection with expenses incurred in the auction sale of city-owned
report in
)roperty:
*June 11. 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, ¥irginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Expenses of Auction Sale of City-Owned Properties
The Council of the City of Roanoke by Ordinance No.
20227 dated May 1, 1972, authorized and directed that cer-
tain surplus City-owned real estate be sold at public auction
and to that end authorized the City Manager to enter into
an agreement math the auctioneer.
On April 20, 1973. such an agreement mas entered into
betHeen the City of Roanoke and Hylton Howell Real Estate
and Auction Company which spelled out 12 conditions, tho of
which Hill require appropriation of funds. One, the City
agreed to pay to the auctioneer as a commission for conducting
the sale ten (10) percent of the Dross sale price of all the
lots sold. Two. the City agreed to have published in a
newspaper having general circulation in the City a proper
and sufficient advertisement of the sale for at least two
(2) editions of the newspaper at the City's expense.
Proceeds of Sale $?3,200.00 - 10~ Commission - $7,320.00
Times-World fee for Advertising -
Total Expense - $7,995.26
The breakdown percentage wise is:
~oter Department Fund 13,02% of $7,995.20 = $1,104.95
General Fund 06.10~ of $7,g95.20 = 6.890.33
Total $T,995.20
It is recommended that $1,104.95 be appropriated to the
Mater Oepartment General Expense Account No. 320 to fees for
professional end special services and that $6,890.33 be
appropriated to the Engineering Department Account No. 55
to fees for professional and special services in order to
meet the abovespecified expenses.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Myron E. Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
City Manager'
Mr. Hubard moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20943) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~55, 'Engineering,
of the 19T2-T3 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #30. page 168.)
Mr. Hubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, llubard, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Vice-Mayor Lisk .................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mayor Webber absent)
Dr. Taylor then offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20944) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~320, "Water -
General Expense," of the 1972-73 Water Fund Appropriation Ordinance, and pro-
riding for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =30, page 160.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Vice-Mayor Lisk .................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mayor Webber absent)
TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEy: The City Manager sub-
mitted a written report advising that Conncil previously has been advised of the
availability of an initial $75,000.00 federal' allocation for the summer jobs
program and of the city*s allocation of an additional $20.736.00 from current
PEP funds in the summer jobs program, that the city has received confirmation
from the Department Of L~bor of an additional allocation to this summer program
of $27,g00.00 which makes a total amount of $123,636.00 in federal funds, that
this program will last for a period of nine weeks with three weeks or one third
of the program occurring during the fiscal year 1972-73. that this would amount
to u cost of $41.212.00 during this fiscal year, that at this time, there is
only $22.g51.00 of federal PEP funds appropriated which can be utilized in this
summer program this fiscal year, that it is necessary that an additional
367
368
$18,261,00 be appropriated to the PEP account in order to completely fund the
program for the remainder of this fiscal year0 that all or these fonds ore reim-
bursable from the federal government, that it is recommended that Ordinance No.
2009T be amended to permit the total amount of the city's subcontract with Total
Action Against Poverty in Roonohe Valley to be increased from $T$.000.00 to
$123,636.00 and that $18,261.00 be appropriated to PEP,
Mr. 8ubard moved that Council concur in the recommendations of the
City Manager and offered the following emerg~cy Ordinance appropriating $18,261~00
to Personal Services under Section ~72, "Public Employmeat Program," of the
1972-73 budget:
(~20945) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section z73, ~Public Employ-
meat Program.# of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency. (For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book ~38o page 169.)
Mr. Hubard moved the adoption of tho Ordinance. Yhe motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. 6arland, Rubard. Taylor, Thomas and
Vice-Rayor Lisk ................. 5.
NAYS: Mr. Trout ......1. (Mayor Webber absent)
Mr. Hubard then moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney
for preparation of the proper measure amending Ordinance No. 20897 to permit the
total amount of the city*s subcontract math Total Action Against~Poverty in
Roanoke Valley to be increased from $75.000.00 to $123,636.00. The motion was
seconded by Mr. '~arland and unanimously adopted.
AIRPORT: The City Attorney submitted a written report in connection
with advertising at Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport, advising that Ordinance
No. 20827 authorized the award of a non-assignable concession for advertising
activities at the airport, the advertising contract providing, among other things.
that it not be effective as a contract unless and until a bond. in cash or with
corporate surety approved as to form and sufficiency by the City Attorney and
in the penalty of $1,000.00 be posted with the City Clerk simultaneously with the
concessionaire's execution of the written agreement with the city. that while a
form of contract was subsequently executed by the concessionaire, Creative
Advertising Agency. Incorporated. no such bond has, as of June 7, been offered or
posted with the City Clerk. furthermore, accounts carried in the local press now
indicate the inability of the concessionaire to carry out the commitments of ~ e
proposed agreement with the city, that having discussed the matter with the City
Manager and the Airport Manager, it is their recommendation that 0rdinance No.
20827 be repealed and that the City Manager be authorized and directed to adver-
tise for new bids for the award of a contract for advertising privileges at
Roanoke Municipal (Moodrum) Airport.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the report of the City Attorney
and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
~369
(z20946) AN ORDINANCE repealing Ordinance No. 20827, awarding n
contract rev certain advertising privileges to be exercised at the Roanoke
Municipal (~oodrum) Airport; directing that advertisement be made for new bids
for the award of such contract; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook marl, page 170,)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Carland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carland. Hubard. Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Vice-Hayer Lisk .................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mayor Mebber absent)
ANNEXATION-CONSOLIDATION: The City Attorney submitted a written
report advising that arguments of counsel in the pending annexation proceedings
were made before the Supreme Court of Virginia on June 5~ 1973. that the con-
sensus of counsel participating in the cases is that the court will have decided
the cases and will hand down o decision Of the same at the September Term Of
the Supreme Court.
Mr. Hubard moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
HANDICAPPED pERSONS: The Assistant City Attorney submitted a written
report advisin9 of certain new legislation passed by the 1973 General Assembly
regarding special parhin9 privileges for handicapped persons, pointing out that
the new code provisions Section 4b.1-104.1 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as
amended, establishes a state wide program for special parking privileges for
handicapped persons and preempts the field as to regulation, that the City
Traffic Code contains similar regulations but On a much more restrictive basis,
that it is his opinion that the City Traffic Code should be amended to conform
with the provisions of the state law. therefore, he has prepared an Ordinance.
for the consideration of Council to amend the Traffic Code to conform to the
provisions of Section 46.1-104.1, Code of Virginia. 1950. as amended.
Rt. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout.
After a discussion as to the wording of the proposed Ordinance. Mr.
Thomas offered a substitute ~otion that said proposed Ordinance be referred back
to the City Attorney and the Mayor*s Committee on Employment of the Handicapped
for the purpose of clearing up certain interpretation and terminology in said
proposed Ordinance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted
PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Auditor submitted a written report
transmitting an Ordinauce to increase the salories for the clerical employees
of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and the Municipal Court of the
City of Roanoke, advising that the effect of this Ordinance is to increase the
salaries by 7 1/2 per cent which is the amount of increase proposed for other
city employees.
370
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the report of the City Auditor
nnd offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(x20947) AN ORDINANCE providing for an increase of 7 1/2 per cent in
the annual compensation of clerical personnel in the Munlcipnl Court or the city
of Roanoke and the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court of the City of Roanohe,
to become the General District Court of the City of Roanohe and the Juvenile and
Domestic Relations District Court of the City of Roanoke, respectively, effective
July 1, 1973.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book naB, page 170.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Hr. Thomas and adopted by the follomin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, flubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Vice-Mayor Lisk .................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mayor Mebber absent)
Mr. Trout then offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(=20948) AN ORDINANCE providing for an increase of 7 1/2 per cent in
the annual compensation of all employees of the city, commencing with the pay
period beginning July 1, 1973; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book a38, page 171.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the follomin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Vice-Mayor Lisk .................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mayor Webber absent)
pENSIONS: The City Auditor submitted a written report advising that
in order to insure that all of the employees who are members of the Employees*
Retirement System now uorking will receive equal treatment under the provisions of
Ordinance No. 20907 which the Council adopted improving the benefits for retired
employees, it will be necessary to change the effective date of said Ordinance,
and transmitting a proposed Ordinance providing for said change.
In a discussion of the report, the City Auditor advised that Council
adopted the Ordinance prior to June 1 and he feels it was his mistake in not
providing for a June I effective date.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the report Of the City Auditor
and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(ff20949) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain subsection (9) Disposition
of accumulated contributions upon retirement or termination of service, of Sec. 7.
Benefits, of Chapter 1. General Provisions, of Title III, Pensions and Retirement,
of the Code of the ciaI of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, by advancing the effective
date of a recent amendment to said subsection from July 1, 1973, to June 1, 1973,
so as to avoid undue hardship to a beneficiary whose retirement is imminent; pro-
viding for the effective date of this Ordinance; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook x38, page 172.)
371
Nr. 7rout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. 7he motion mas
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted b7 the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, flubard, Yaylor, Thomas, Yrout end
Vice-#ayor Lisk ................. 6.
NAYS: Nose ..........O. (Mayor Mebber absent)
ZONING: 7he City Planning Commission submitted a written report in
connection with the request of Nr. Cerald A. Dechow, Attorney, representing
Mr. Oliver C. Thomas, that a portion of Lot 12, Block 1, Map of the Cundiff
Addition, Official Tax No. 4140501, located in the 1200 block of 95h Street,
S. E., be rezoned from RD, Duplex Residential District, to C-2, Oeneral
Commercial Oistrict~ recommending that the request be denied.
la this connection, a communication from Mr. Dechom advising that
his client desires a public hearing on the request for rezoning was before
Council.
Mr. ~homas moved that Council hold a public hearing on the request
for rezooing at 7:30 p.m., Monday, July 30, 1973, in the Council Chamber. The
motion was seconded by Mr. ~rout and unanimously adopted.
ROANOKE VALLEY: Council having referred to the City Planning Com-
mission for study, report and recommendation the request of Mr. Michael K.
Smeltzer, Attorney, representing Branch ~ Associates, Incorporated, that
Council order the Building Commissioner to issue permits for the construction
of the remaining improvements to the property to be known as JaAestown Plaza
in the vicinity of Riverland Road and Bennington Street, S. E., said property
being located in the Regional Intermediate Flood Plain, the City Planning
Commission submitted the following report recommending that the request be
granted:
?June 7, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Mebber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of June 6, 1973.
Mr. Smeltzer appeared before the Planning Commission
and stated that Branch ~ Associates purchased this eight
acre tract of land this past September for construction of
a shopping center, noting that it was one of the largest
undeveloped tracts of land left in the City of Roanoke. He
further stated that this shopping center is to be built in
phases and at present, a Mick or Mack store is nearing
completion and they have applied to the Buildin9 Commissioner
for a building permit before starting construction on the
remain/ag buildings but are unable to obtain a building
permit because of the moratorium.
Mr. Smeltzer noted that the filling of the property
had already been accomplished on this property before any
construction started and before the moratorium was put into
effect and that because of the filling, the four buildings
'will be above the floodplain. Be further noted that they
had built the sides of the river up and that there was very
little water on the land in the last flood. Be stated that
they have also constructed a dike and vegetation will be
planted on the dike.
372
Mr. Kathy appeared before the Planning Commission and
stated that this propertF has already been filled, a dike
built and vegetation mill be planted on the dike and bunh
for stabilization under the moratorium; there ere no addi-
tional requirements that can be imposed nam since the struc-
tures have been vertically removed from the Intermediate
Regional Floodplain. He further stated that the building
mould have required waterproofing bad abe site not pre-
viously been filled. He noted that they do have check
valves In the dike mhich mill prevent a pondlug of the
muter into a lake and that they mill stablize the bank math
planting.
After discussion by the Planning Commission members,
it mas generally agreed that the petitioner had kahan the
necessary and.proper measures to insure for a sound and
viable development mithJn the floodplain area.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and
approved unanimously recommending to City Council that
this request be approved.
Sincerely,
S/ Henry a. Royntun by LM
Henry B. Hoyflton
Chairman*
Mr. Hubard moved that the report of the City Plannin9 Commission be
referred to the City Attorney for preparation of the proper measure. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout amd unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
INDUSTRIES-APPALACHIAN POMER COMPANY: The Committee appointed for the
purpose of tabulating bids received for the construction of an industrial access
road for the Appalachian Pomer Company in the Roanoke Industrial Center Complex
submitted a written report udvisiug that three bids sere received with the lam
bid in the amount of $51,1&1,85 being submitted by John A. Hall ~ Company,
Incorporated, that an agreement has been entered Jato betmeen the City of Roanoke
and Appalachian Power Company for the construction of this roadway providing for
both the city and Appalachian Power Company tn share in the cost of the construc-
tion, that based on the unit prices submitted by John A. Hall ~ Company, incor-
porated, the cost for Appalachian Power Company is estimated at $33,68~.50 and
the cost of the City of Roanoke is estimated at $17,475.35 with all costs to be
adjusted based on actual as-built quantities, transmitting copy of a communication
from Rt. Duncan C. Kennedy. Division Manager, Appalachian Power Company, concurring
ia the low bid, recommending that a contract be awarded to John A. [fall ~
Company, Incorporated, in the amount of $51,1&l.H5 and that $51,1hl.H5 be
appropriated to this project, recognizin9 that Appalachian Power Company will
reimburse the city in the amount of approximately $33,868.50 and that all other
bids be rejected.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
committee and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating $51,161,85
to Appalachian Power Company Access Road under Section ~89, "Transfers to
Capital Improvements Fund," of the 1972-73 budget:
(#20950) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section #89, "Transfers
to Capital Improvements Fund,* of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and pro-
viding for an emergency.
(For full text of OrdJmonce, see Ordinance Book aSO, pome 173.)
Hr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr, Trout and adopted by tko following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Yfce-Bayor Lfsk ................. 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mayor Mebber absent)
Mr. Troat them offered the following emergency Ordinance accepting
the proposal of John A. Ball C Company, Incorporated:
(m20951) AN ORDINANCE accepting the proposal of John A. Hall
Company, Incorporated. for the construction of an industrial access road in
the Roanoke Industrial Center. from gth Street. S. E.. to property of Appalachian
Power Company; authorizing the proper city officials to execute the requisite
contract; rejecting certain other bids made to the city; and provi~ ng for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Boob naB. page IT4.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Vice-Mayor Lisk .................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mayor ~ebber absent)
CITY MARKET: Council having referred to a committee for tabulation.
report and recommendation bids received for electrical alterations to the City
Market Building, the committee submitted the following report:
"June 11, 1973
Honorable Bayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
After proper advertisement, bids were received and
publicly opened and read at the regular meetin9 of City
Council on May 29, 1973, for constructing electrical
alterations at the City Market building.
Three bids were received as shown on the attached
tabulation, with the low bid being submitted by Jefferson
Electric Company, Inc. The bid was broken down into
four bids as follows:
Hid I - Provide new electric service, distribution
system and reconnection of all existing
branch circuits and equipment to the new
system.
Bid II - Provide new electrical outlets in each of the four quarters of the meat market area.
Bid Ili - Provide all other electrical work covered by the plans and specifications.
Bid IV - A lump sum bid for providing all of the work
covered by Bids I, II, and III.
Also attached is a letter dated June d, 1973, from Rt.
Ronald #. Britt of Sowers, Bodes ~ ~hitescarver advising
that their firm has reviewed the bids and that the prices
submitted by Jefferson Electric Company, Inc., are proper
for the required work.
373
374
Jefferson Electric Company, Inc.~ wes leu bidder on
all fonr bids including the totu~ !uep sun bid submitted for
Bid IV in the amount of $40,443.
sary to review the report dated February 15, 1960. prepnred
by $omera, Redes 6 Mhitescnrver entitled "Report on
Mechanical and £1ectricnl Facilities'rot Ronno~e City Hnr-
ket Building'. This report made recommendations with
geratio~ the plumbibg system, and the electrical system. To
Outer Stalls - Difficulty in pinpointing the exact
collectioa of an additional $19,655 e~er and above that
schedule.
It is recommended that u Single contract be entered
into mith Jefferson Electric Company, Inc** in the amount
of $35,803 (Bid I¥ ot.$40,443 minos Unit C and Unit U Bt
Bid II at $4,640). It is further recommended that nil
other bids be rejected.
There is available in account 64-255 the amount of
$17,?18.11 mhich can be applied tomard this pro]ecto It
is recommended that the additional $180084.89 be trans-
ferred from account 63
Utilities In order to fund this project us this time.
It should be pointed out that the proposed budget
for fiscal year 1973-74 includes the sum of $14,$00 in
account 64-255 for a continuation or electrical improve-
nents at the Uity Marhet. It is recommended that the
$14.500 be left la the 1973-T4 budget for use at the City
Mather, but that the amount include only $800 for elec-
trical improvements with there remaining $13,700 going
toward the necessary plumbing improvements.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Sam H. RcGhce. Ill
Sam H. McGheeo
S/ Joseph N. Brewer, Jr.
Joseph H. Brewer, Jr.
S/ Lewis G. Leftwich
Lewis G. Leftwich"
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the report of the committee
and offered the following emergency O~dtnance transferring $1§,0§4.B9 from
Utilities under Section #63, "Municipal Building," to Maintenance of Buildings
and Property under Section u64, "Maintenance of City Property," of the 1972p73
budget:
(~20952) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section u63. "Municipal
Building." and Section ~64. "Maintenance of City Property." of the 1972-73
Appropriation Ordinance. and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book a38, page 175.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Bubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Vice-Mayor Lisk .................... 6.
NAYS: None ............O. (Mayor Webber absent)
Mr. Trout then offered the following emergency Ordinance accepting
the proposal of Jefferson Electric Company, Incorporated, for electrical alteratiot
to the City Market Building:
(g20953) AN ORDINANCE accepting the proposal of Jefferson Electric
Company. Incorporated. for the furnishing of all labor and'materials necessary
for constructing electrical alterations at the City Market Building; authoriz-
ing the proper city officials to execute the requisite contract; rejecting certain
other bids made to the city; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book #3B. page 176.)
375
376
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas seconded by
Mr. Garland and adopted by the follomlng vote:
AYES: Messrs. Gnr~nnd, Hubard, Tnylor, Thomas, Trout and
Vice-Ma~or Link ................ 6.
~AYS: Hone ...........O, (Mayor Jebber absent)
SEWERS AND STORM BRAINS: Council buying referred to u Committee for
study, report and recommendation the hid received from Branch and Associates
for the constrnction of storm drains on Walnnt Avenue, S. mo, from Jefferson
Street to Maple Areome, So W.o and at the ietersection of Jefferson Street and
Elm Avenue, the committee subnitted n writte~ report adrisin9 that only one bid
was received on this project from Branch & Associates in the amonnt of $?0o2S0.00,
that it is the opinion of the committee that the amount of this bid is excessive
for the worh to be performed and reconmendin9 that this bid be rejected mith the
construction work to be accomplished by city forces, further recommending that
if the work is accomplished by city forces that the material costs for this
project be charged to this particular account.
Mr. Bubard moved that Council concur in the reconmendation of the com-
mittee and offered the following Resolution:
(~20954) A RESOLUTION rejecting a certain bid received for the oonstr~-
lion of storm drains on ~alout Avenue, S. ~., from Jefferson Stree~ to Maple
Avenue, S. W., and at the intersection of Jefferson Street and EI~ Avenuei and
directing the City Manager to cause said project to be constructed and
plished by city forces.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Boo~ ~38, page
Mr. Hubard moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion mas seconded
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Vice-Mayor Lisk--~ .............
HAYS: None .......... O. (Mayor Webber absent)
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
CI~Y PROPERTY-SALE OF PROPER~y: Ordinance No. 20935 authorizing and
directin9 the conveyance by the City of Roanoke of ninety-three separate parcels
of laud hereinafter more specifically described, sold to the highest bidder at
public auction on May 23, 1973, upon the terms and conditions designated by
Council in Ordinance No. 20227, baying previously been before Council for its
first reading, read and laid over, was again before the body, Mr. Trout offering
the following for its second reading and final adoption:
(~20935) AN ORDINANCE authorizing and directing the conveyance by the
City of Roanoke of ninety-three separate parcels of land hereinafter ~ore
specifically described, sold to the highest bidder at public auction on May 23,
1973, upon the terms and conditions designated by Council in Ordinance No. 20227,
heretofore adopted by the Council on May 1, 1972.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n38, page 161o)
Mr, Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion was
seconded by Or. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Vice-Rayor Llsk ................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mayor Webber absent)
MATER DEPARTMENT: Council having directed the City Attorney to pre-
pare the proper measure amending and reordaining subsection (b) of Rule
Section 5. Chapter 1. Title XII, of The Code of the City of Roanoke. 19S6. as
amended, relating to the rates and charges for surplus mater furnished to other
incorporated municipalities, by fixln9 a new rate therefor and providing for the
effective date of said Ordinance, he presented same; mhereupon, Mr, Trout
offered the follomin9 emergency Ordinance:
(~20955) AN ORDINANCE ameudiu9 and reordaining Subsection (b) of
Rule 39, Section 5, Chapter 1, Title XlI. of The Code of the City of Roanoke,
1956, as amended, relating to the rates and charges for surplus water furnished
to other incorporated municipalities, by fixing a new rate therefor; providing
for the effective date of this Ordinance; and providin9 for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book nSO. page 178.)
Nr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubord and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Borland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Vice-Mayor Lisk ................
NAYS: None ..........
At this point, Mayor Mebber entered the meeting.
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES: Mayor Webber offered the following Resolution
requesting the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board to amend its regula-
tions relating to the times at which alcoholic beverages may be sold in the
City o£ Roanoke:
(=20956) A RESOLUTION requesting the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage
Control Board to amend its regulations relotia9 to the times at which alcoholic
beverages may be sold in the City of Roanoke.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~30, page 1TS.)
Mayor Webber moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Hubard, Thomas, Trout, Webber and Vice-Mayor
Lisk ........................................5.
NAYS: Messrs. Garland and Taylor---2.
AUDITORIUM-COLISEUM: Council haven9 directed the City Attorney to
prepare the proper measure concurring in certain recommendations of the
Roanoke Civic Center and Stadium Advisory Commission relating to improvements
to the Roanoke Civic Center Exhibit Hall and directing the City Manager to
377
378
a d V · r t I · · for bids for such improvements, he presented same; ubereupon,
Mr. Trout offered the folloulng Resolution:
(s2OgST) A RESOLUTION concurring in certain recommendations of the
Ronnohe Civic Center and Stadium Advisory Commission relating to improvements
to the Roanoke Civic Center Exhibit Ball; ·nd'directing the City Manager to
advertise for bids for such improvement.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book #afl, page 179,)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion mas seconded
bT MFo Garland and adopted by the follomJn9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout, lebber
and Vice-Mayor Lisk ............ 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
ROANOKE VALLEY: Mr. Michael K. Smeltaer, Attorney, representing Mr.
Russell L. Short, appeared before Council and presented a petition requesting
that Council order the Building Commissioner to issue permits to his client in
order to continue construction of a nine unit apartment building and a six
unit apartment building fronting on MestsJde Boulevard, N. N., said property
lying in the Regional Intermediate Flood Plain.
Mr. Huhard moved that the petition be referred to the City Planning
Commission for study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
pENSIONS: Mr, Garland presented a written statement advising that
recently Council adopted an Ordinance whereby ,the city assumed lO0 per cent of
the cost of the city employees retirement contributions, that this was a
gigantic step forward and a benefit that the city employees deserved, moreover,
the Ordinance further provided that any monies paid into this fund by current
employees would be refunded with interest, that this would seen a logical step,
however, it is his understanding that this plan applies only to current employees
and not to those already retired, that this action taken by Council has received
the attention of previously retired city employees, that as a result, he has had
numerous calls concerning this matter, that it would appear unfair to make this
refund available to current employees and not give equal consideration to those
already retired, that perhaps he has overlooked some factors that he is not
aware of that could not justify such a position, accordingly, he would like for
this matter to be referred to the Board of Trustees of the Employees' Retirement
System for study, report and explanation.
In a discussion of the matter, the City Auditor advised that every
new benefit is effective from the date of enactment.
Mr. Thomas moved that the Board of Trustees of the Employees' Retirement
System be requested to provide o computation of costs of refunding contributions
plus interest made by retired city employees still living into the Employees'
Retirement System and the Police and Fire Pension System and present said
computation of costs to the members of Council. The motion uss seconded by
Mr, Trout and adopted, Mayor Mebber and Mr. Hubard voting no,
In a discussion of the motion, Mayor Nebber expressed the opinion
that the city would become Involved in litigation mith potential heirs and
suggested that the idea.of refunding be entirely abolished.
Vice-Mayor Lisk agreed mith the comments made by Mayor Mebber and
suggested that the contributions already made by the employees could be used
to increase their retirement benefits mhich would give something to all workers
instead of providing some with a double benefit and others with nothing.
Hr. Hubard expressed the opinion that you have ~ dram the line
somewhere and no matter where you dram the line there will be people who are
not satisfied.
Yhere being no further business, Mayor Mebber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPRO~£O
ATTE~: P~L~
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
379
880
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday, June 18, 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday. June 18, 1973, at 2 p.m., the
regular meeting hour,.mlth Mayor Roy L. Mebber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A, Garland, Milldam S. Hubard. Noel C.
Taylor, Hampton M. Thomas and Mayor Roy L. Mebber ............. ~-S.
ABSENT: Councilmen David K. LJsk and James O. Trout--2.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Byron E. Hamer, City Manager; Mr. Samuel B.
#cGhee, III, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Kincanon, City Attorney; Mr.
N. Hen Jo*es, Jr., Assistant City Attorney; and Mr. A. N. Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting mas opened with a prayer by th*Reverend
James H. Ott, Pastor, Green Hill Church of the Brethren.
MINUTES: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday,
June 4, 1973, havin9 been furnished each member of Council. on motion of Dr.
Taylor. seconded by Mr. Nubard and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof
mas dispensed with and the minutes approved as recorded.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUOL1C MATTERS:
pENSIONS: Mr. D. W. Brown appeared before Council and made reference
to a communication written by him under date of January 2, 1973, with regard to
ten firemen and sixteen policemen who fell mlthin the twenty-five to thirty-five
year category and who did not participate in the pension adjustment granted
other former city employees of this group, advising that when he appeared before
Council on January 2. 1973, he sas advised that he would be notified of Council's
action in this matter sometime during February, that to date he has heard
nothing, that he is again bringing this matter to the attention of Council mith
the hope that something can be done for his group, that they feel they should
be granted the $15.00 pension increase which was granted to those with over
thirty years of service and that they also feel they should be included in any
cost of living increase that may be granted to other retirees.
In a discussion of the matter, the City Auditor expressed a preference
that Council toke no action on the matter at the present time until the Board of
Trustees of the Employees* Retirement System can return to Council with a recom-
mendation mltb regard to merging the Police and Fire Pension System and the
Employees* Retirement System.
Mr. Hub*rd then moved that the communication from Mr. Brown be referred
to the Board of Trustees Of the Employees* Retirement System for consideration in
connection mith their study of the Police and Fire Pension System and the
Employees* Retirement System. The motion was seconded by Mr. Garland and unani-
mously adopted.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
JAIL: Mr. Garland presented the following prepared statement in
comnecticn with the jail facility, advising that based on certain reasons con-
tained ia his statement, he feels that the most sensible and reasonable course
of action for the city to take at this time would be to obtain options on the
old Lewis Gale property, and in addition to that, the property west of the
Reid and Cutsball Building and recommending that Council rpoceed forthwith
with the remodeling and refurnishing of the old courthouse facility along the
lines that have been presented by Mr. Julian F. Birst, former City Manager,
prior to his leaving the city,
*June 14, 1973,
Mayor Roy L. Mebber
and Members of
Roanoke City Council.
Gentlemen:
From the reaction received thus faf on the recommendation
by the Regional Corrections Board for the location Of the
Regional Corrections Facility on the Kimball site, it
would appear to ne that it is going to be virtually
impossible to agree on that site. It seems almost a futile
predicament. I see this not without some justification,
mainly:
1. the recent action by the Roanoke County Board of
Supervisors instructing their Executive Officer to
take an option on the Peters Creek site:
2. statements made by members of Salem City Council which
seems that they are at best lukewarm on that particular
site:
3. but most importantly, by the recent actions on the past
two Mondays of the Roanoke City Council. it would now
appear that we ourselves are hedging and reluctant on
that site, eventhough se had previously endorsed it.
! think that this has come about because of recent statements
made public last Monday by our own Sheriff Puckett and the
fact that the price now seems exorbitant and in excess of
what was previously quoted. Moreover the Council has second
thoughts on this site because of the resultant tax loss by
taking this very expensive and desirable property off the
tax roles.
For all of these reasons it would appear that the most
sensible and reasonable course for the city to take at
this time would be to obtain options an the old Lewis-Gale
property, and in addition to that, the property west of the
Reid and Cutshall building. Once this property is obtained
the Council should subsequently decide based on a study by
our own administration and our own law enforcement officers
· (judges, police chief, sheriff, medical examiner, etc.).
The remainder of the property not used for the jail could
be utiliaed for future expansion of the municipal complex,
parking facilities for city employees, and the relocation
of the Public Welfare Department. Once all of this has
been decided, the city should invite the other governing
units to utiliae our facility on a l~er diem basis calculated
on a fair and equitable formula by taking into consideration
the original investment of the land, the building plus
yearly operational expenses. A tunnel could be constructed
which have been the primary objections of locating the
facility away from the courthouse. Accordingly. I would
$/ Robert I. Garland
Robert A. Garland.#
381
382
Mr, Carload moved that the city administration be instructed to try
to obtain options on the Lemls Gale properties and on that p~operty west o~ the
Reid and Cutshall Ruilding fronting on Campbell Avenue, and submit a written repot
to Council. The motion was seconded by Hr. Thomas.
In a discussion of the matter. Rt. Thomas expressed the opinion that
the options should be pursued irrespective to what approach the city takes toward
a regional jail and that the city is not committing itself to anything, ft 15 only
inquiring as to the terms of an option.
Mayor Mebber expressed ~he opinio~ that any land in or near the Municipal
B~ildiog Complex would be advantageous for the cit~ to own and that he would
support the notion of Hr. Garland to try to acquire options on the land in question.
Mr. Ilubard expressed the opinion that Council should give the other
jurisdictions an opportunity to state whether or not they will go along with
the Kimball area as the site for the regional jail, that Roanoke County is still
considering the Kimball site, that he hopes any action taken towards the acquisi-
tion of options on the land in question will not close the door to the other
jurisdictions, that the city has a contract with Roanoke County, that in all
fairness to Roanoke County the city should deal with them in the best of faith,
that the cost of the Kimball land is approximately $1.50 per square foot ns com-
pared to $10.00 per square foot for the Lewis Gale properties and $?~50 per
square foot for the property behind tho Reid and Cut shall Building.
In reply to the remarks made by Mr. Hubard, Mr. Thomas advised that he
does not feel ~that the city is ah.winR bad faith in trying to obtain the options
on the two parcels of land, that Council has a duty to the citizens of the City
of Roanoke to inquire as to the availability of this land.
Mayor Rabbet then requested that the Deputy City Clerk call the roll
on the motion of Mr. Garland, seconded by Mr. Thomas that the city administration
be instructed to try to obtain options on the Lewis Gale properties and on the
property west of the Reid and Cutshall Buildin9 fronting on Campbell Avenue;
whereupon, the foil.ming vote was recorded:'
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor Mebber ...... -4.
NAYS: Mr. Hubard .......................................... 1.
(Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
T/LXES: Mr, Garland presented a copy of a communication written by him
to Relvin 5. Raikes. Postmaster, advising that the City of Roanoke has certain
deadlines for the payment of taxes, that the quarterly payment for the real
estate tax is due on April 5. June 5, September 5 and December 5, that there have
been several recent occasions whereby the taxpayer alleges that he has deposited
the payment on the day in question before the last pickup and the postmark applied
the next day or even the day' after, that this has happened particularly in the
resideutial areas, that this puts the city in a very embarrassing circumstance
of doubting the taxpayer's veracity and at the same time applyin9 the ten per cent
penalty which the Ordinance provides, that if this situation has been caused by
the post office personnel0 by either their failure to pick Ih. mall.up or their
failure to have it subsequently postmarked, then the city is put in a position
of creating ill mill ns the City Treasurer must be governed by the actual
postmark, that the most recent case involves a resident in the lB00 bloch of
Westover Avenue, S, We, that the taxpayer depostted his payment on June 5, and
the letter was postmarked June 7, that this resulted in his having to pay the
ten per cent penalty, that he would like for Wv. Raikes to check into this
matter and if he has uny suggestions as to how this situation might be alleviat-
ed, he would be pleased to hear them.
After a discussion of the matter, Mr. Thomas moved that the communica-
tion be received and filed. The motion was seconded by WV, llnhard and adopted,
WV. Garland votJn9 no.
B~BOET-SCBOOLS: A com=unication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting that $1,691.60 be appropriated to Personal Services under Section
n2100o 'Public Schools - Instruction," of the 1972-73 budget of the Roanoke City
School Board, in connection with the salary of a Basic Skills Teacher, mas
before Council.
Br. Taylor moved that Cnuucil concur in the request of the Roanoke
Citl School Board and offered the follomia9 emergency Ordinance appropriatin9
the requested funds:
(~20958) AN ORO1NANCB to amend and reordain Section ~2000, 'Public -
Schools - Instruction," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and providing
for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~38, page 180.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion sas
seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYBS: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Taylor, Thomas and Bayer
Webber .........................
NAYS: None ......... -0. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke CitI 5chon1 Board
requesting that $302.204.00 be appropriated to Section
Emergency School Aid Act," of the 1972-73 budget to the Roanoke City School
Board, advising that these funds will be used in the area of Adjustment and
Skills Development, Teacher Aides, Basic Skills and Reading Improvement during
the 1973-74 school year and one hundred per cent of expenditures under the
project will be reimbursed bI the Department of Health, Education asd Welfare,
was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanoke
City School Board and offered the follouin9 emergency Ordinance appropriating
the requested funds:
(~20959) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ggSO00, "Public
Schools - Emergency School Aid Act," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance. and
providing for an emergency.
383
384
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book a39. page 181.)
Mr, Th*sas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the foil*wing vote:
AYES: Measrs, Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Nebber ...................... 5.
NAYS: None ........-~. (Messrs. Link and Trout'absent)
ZONING: Mr, J. W. Mebb, omner of Webb Lumber Company. appeared before
Council and presented a communication advising that recently his buildings mere
deatroyed by fire and requesting permission tO continue to operate with a small
shed type building where he plans to house machinery, was before Council,
Mr, Garland moved that the matter be referred to the Clay Planning
Commission for study, report and reconmeodatioo to Codncil. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted,
SIGNS: A communication from the Turner Memorial Baptist Church request-
in9 authorization to erect two signs on city property to be located on the south-
east side of Memorial Avenue and Roanoke Avenue, S. M., and on the curve of the
northwest side of Houlevard and Patterson Avenue, S. ~., was before Council.
Mr. Ilubard moved that the matter be referred to the City Manager for
study, report and recommendation to Council. The motion mas seconded by Mr.
Garland and unanimously adopted.
ZONING: A communication from Mr. Claude D. Carter, Attorney, represent-
lng Rosalind Homes, Incorporated, requesting that a public hearing which has been
scheduled for June 25, 1073, in connection with rezoning property on Lansing Drive,
S. M., from RS, Single - Family Residential District. to RG - 1, General Residential
District, be referred back to the City Planning Commission for reconsideration
toward fez*nih9 the property to RD. Duplex Residential District, instead of
RD - 1, General Residential District, was before Council.
Mr. Hubard moved that the communication from Mfr. Carter be treated as
an amended applkation for fez*nih9 of said property on Lansin9 Drive, S. ~., and
the amended application for rezoning be re-referred to the City Plannin9 Commissim
for consideration and recommendation after public hearing; that the public hearing
scheduled fur 7:30 p.m., Monday, June 25, 1973, on the oTiginal application be
canceled, and that the City Clerk be instructed to notify, in writing, the persons
shown on the list accompanying the original application as 'affected owners' of
the cancellation of the public hearing advertised to be held on June 25, 1973,
advising those persons that the matter has been re-referred to the City Planning
Commission on the applicant's amended petition that the property be fez*ned to
RD, Duplex Residential District, rather than RD-I, General Residential District.
The motion mas seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET-RECREATION DEPARTMENT-PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: The City Manager
submitted a written report requesting that $516.00 be appropriated to Operating
Supplies and Materials under Section ~75, *Recreation, Parks and Recreational Areas
;I
of the 1972-73 budget, said funds having been contributed by the city's softball,
baseball and.tennis'teams and deposited with the City Treasurer.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance=
(t20960) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordaln Section u75, 'Recreation,
Parka and Recreational Areas," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book u38, page 181.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion wes
seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber .........................S,
NAYS: None .......... O. (Beasts, Llsk and Trout absent)
BUDGET-CLERK OF TBE COL~TS: The City Manager submitted a written
report recommendin9 that $625.00 be transferred from Food, Medicaland House-
keeping Supplies to Other Equipment = New under Section ~63, "Municipal
Building," of the 1972-73 budget, to provide funds for the purchase of two air
conditioners for two offices in the Clerk of Courts Department.
Mr. Hubard moved that Council concur iu the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance transferring the
requested funds:
(~2Og61) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section #63. "Munici-
pal Building." of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providin9 for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u3o, page 102.)
Mr. Hubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the follomin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard. Taylor. Thomas and Mayor
Rubber .......................... 5.
NAYS: None .......... O. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
BUILDINGS: Council having referred to the City Manager and the City
Attorney for report a communication from Mr. Frank G. Roupas in connection
with the demolition of a house omned by him at ?07 CAlmer Avenue, N. M., the
City Manager and the Assistant City Attorney submitted u joint report in
connection With the matter.
In this connection, Mayor Webber advised that Mr. Roupas has requested
that action on this matter be deferred until the next regular meeting of Council,
on Monday, June 25, 1973.
Mr. Bubard moved that Council concur in the request of Mr. Roupas that
action on the joint report of the City Manager and the Assistant City Attorney
be deferred until the next regular meeting of Council on Monday, June 25, 1973,
1973. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
385
386
SALE OF PROPERTYt Council having referred to the City Manager for
study, report and recommendation a communication from Mrs, Audrey M. Boyd with
reference to a lot situated on the northeast corner of 24th Street,.N.M., and
Centre Avenue, N. M., the City Manager submitted a written report advising
that at this time, the only plans existing for the improvement of 24th Street,
N. M., are the field inspection plans for the TOPICS project, that the current
plans indicate that only a snail section mould need to be acquired from the
property in question, that these plans are not final and are still subject to
some changes prior to formal approval, that based on these plans, it mould
be bis recommendation that only the necessary right of may be acquired rather
than the entire parcel, that he has written Mrs. Boyd advising her of the status
of the highmny project and further advising her that until such time as the
plans for the project are finalized he cannot acquire the right of may and that
unless there is a jamor change in the alignment of 24th Street at this location
it would not be necessary for the city to acquire the entire parcel of land.
Mr. Garland moved that the report be received and filed. The notion
was seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE-CITY OF ROANOKE JUYENILE AND
DOMESTIC RELATIONS COURT: The City Manager submitted n written report advising
that a grant request is being made to the Urban Assistance Incentive Fund for
lundin9 of a project in Child Support Research and Services, that $2B,g32.00 is
being requested, that Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley is supplying
$3,150.00 as in-king contributions, that no city funds are required or requested,
that the purpose of the project is to improve the rate of compliance with court
orders far child support and to develop a data base upon which a model system for
court administration of child support can be developed, that the project sill be
divided with TAP providing and supervising the research aspects and the Juvenile
and Domestic Relations Court providing and supervisin9 the service aspects, that
the city will administer the funds, that the applications are accepted only from
local governments for these funds and that it is recommended that the City Manager
he authorized to make application for this grant and to sign the agreement with
the Division of State Planning and Community Affairs upon approval of this grant.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur fn the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution:
(;20962) A RESOLUTION authorizing the filing of an application by the
city for a grant of Urban Assistance Incentive Funds for funding a project in
Child Support Research and Services; and indicating the city's willingness to
serve as the receiving and disbursing agency for such funds.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~38, page' 182.)
Mr, Thomas moved th~ adoption Of the Resolution. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Bubard and adopted by the following vote:
,!
AY£S: Messrs. Garland, Hnbard, Taylor. Thomas and
Mayor Webbor 5,
NAYS: None .........-0, (Messrs. Lilk and Trout absent)
PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a written report
in connection with Phase II of the Management Study, advising that on May
1973, Coancll uss presented with a written repart on the progress of the
Management Study being performed by Albert Ranond and Associates, that
Council was asked to Indicate their intention with regard to proceeding with the
second phase which deals with the implementation of those aspects of the
Management Study with which Council concurred, that this report went on to
state that Council would be requested at a lurer date to authorize the contin-
uance of this study, that the funds for the continuance of Phase II have
already been approved in a 701 grant from HUD in the amount of $30.726.00.
that these funds are included in the 1973-74 badger, that on Friday, June O,
1973, he transmitted to each member of Council an advance copy of a summary
report prepared by said firm, that he feels there is a need to go into the
implementation phase as soon as possible, that by doin9 so, Albert Ramond and
Associates will retnJn on this job the same individuals who conducted the study
phase to assist in the implementation phase, that having observed the city's
operation for the last four months, they are eminently qualified to assist in
this implementation, that it would be recommended that Council. by Ordinance.
authorize the employment of Albert Ramond and Associates to proceed with Phase
II of the Management Study to assist the city in the implementation of the
various aspects of that study at n cost not to exceed $30,726.00, and that it
would be further recommended that Council authorize the City Manager to enter
into a written agreement with Albert Ramond and Associates, Incorporated, to
perform this work.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the report of the City
Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(~20963) AN ORDINANCE authorizing continuance of the employment of
Albert Bamond and Associates for performin9 Phase II services in implementin9
certain recommendations of a management study made pursuant to the provisions
of Ordinance No. 20?23, upon certain terms and conditions; and providing for
an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~3§, page
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber ..........................
NAYS: None .........~-O. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
In this connection, the City Manager submitted a further written
report advising that he realizes that there might be some hesitancy on the
387
J '388
part of Council to authorize Phase II of the Mznagemeat Study mlthout more know-
ledge of the report and advising that Albert Ramond and Associates mill present
the final report to Council on Monday, June 25~ 1973, that this 250 page report
mill be detailed, however, because its implementation mill deal math personnel
matters, zany aspects of the:Implementation should he discussed by Council in
executive session, recommending that Council authorize proceeding mlth the
implementation of the management study findin~ at this time and that Council
schedule a tmo to three hour executive session on Tuesday, June 26, 1973, to
hear 3 full briefing from the Management Study representatives.
Mr. Hubard moved that Council concur in the report of the City Ranager
and that Council meet with representatives of Albert Ramond and Associates at
4 p.m** Tuesday, June 26, 1973. in the Executive Session Conference Room to
discuss Phase I1 of the Management Study. The motion mas seconded by Dr. Taylor
and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-MUNICIPAL BUILDING: The City Manager submitted a written report
recommending that $4,200.00 be appropriated to Maintenance of Buildings and
Property under Section ~64, 'gaintenance of City Property," of the 1972-73 budget.
to provide /ands for necessary repairs to the air conditioning which serves the
area occupied by Social Security in the old'Reid and Cutshall Building.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur l~the report%of the City Manager
and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating the requested funds:
(g20963) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~6d, "Maintenance
of City Property." of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #30. page 183.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Rubard. Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Mebber .......................... 5.
NAYS: None ..........-0. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
AIRPORT: The City Attorney submitted the following report in connection
with enclosing of concourses and construction of holding rooms and related work
amounting to alterations or modifications of work in progress under contract at
Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport and may be accomplished by change order to
"June 18, 1973.
The Honorable 'Mayor ~nd gembers
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
At the meeting of the Council held June 11, 1973, and
on question raised by the undersigned, I was asked to advise
whether or not the Council might, by change order made to
the City*s existing contract for certain major improvements
and enlargements to the Airport Terminal Building. provide
passenger balding areas and other related work in said
Terminal Building, uithaut baying previously advertised for
bids for ibc work proposed to be accomplished under change
the propbsals recommended by the City #annger in his June
llth report to the Council may, if ordered by the Council.
be lawfully accomplished by change order to the city*s
further advertisement or competitive bidding.
By Ordinance ~o. 206~9, adopted January 1~, 1973. a
and additions to the Clty*s Airport Terminal Building; a
between the parties under date of January 17. 1973; and
the $1,061.000.00 worth of work contemplated by the
received five competitive bids for ~ e performance of
the City.
Accordingly, and if the Council concurs. I shall
$/ J. N. Kincanon
389
39O
$106,000.00 be appropriated to an account in the 1973-74 fiscal year budget of
the City of Roanohe to fund a portion of the TAP request and further recommending
that the contributing localities name a'completely independent committee to
review the operation of TAP to determine alternative means for future accomplish-
sent of these poverty programs through either private agencies or local
government:
'June 12, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
At its regular meeting on April 2, 1973, City Council
received a request from Total Action Against Poverty in
Roanoke Valley, Inc. (TAP) for the local 9ovevnments to
contribute funds to sustain TAP*s functions at a reduced
level.
City Council appointed the undersigned committee to
review and analyze this request, investigate the need,
and report bach to City Council in budget study. Council
also referred the matter to the Roanoke Valley Council of
Community Services, Incorporated, for review and comments.
At the request of the City administration an evaluation
of TAP functions was made, with two policy questions evolving.
They are:
1. Should poverty programs exist in the City?
2. If so, how should they be run?
[ith respect to the first question, your committee*s
response, after analyzing both the Council of Community
Services' report and the report prepared for the City
administration, mould be an unqualified yes, poverty
programs should exist in the City.
The ansmer to the second question is not quite so
clear cut. Both reports received appear to question the
effectiveness of TAP and leave a question in the minds
of the committee as to bow these poverty programs should
be operated. The Council of Community Services, Inc.,
recommends TAP funding by local governments; however, it
also suggests the establishment of a committee to observe
TAP*s operation during the 8-month period of funding.
Tl~s committee would observe and evaluate TAP*S effective-
ness and report back with suggestions on the future of
TAP. Should TAP*s continuance not be recommended, the
committee would decide mhat should become of the poverty
The report of the City Administration poses several
possible courses of action. These include the removal
of certain programs from TAP, with these programs being
undertaken by other agencies (such as Roanoke Valley Council
of Community Services or Fifth Planning District); the City
assuming responsibility for these poverty programs; or
partial lundin9 of TAP with some restraints or controls, as
these would be City funds.
There is little question that many of TAP*s ~rograms
would and should survive, should TAP itself disappear. In
in assumin9 some of these programs, and that action should
One prime consideration City Council might consider
is what if any action the other participating governments
take with respect to funding the TAP request. Any action
Council takes should be predicated on this being a coopera-
Vour committee, after analyzing the facts available,
mould suggest that TAP be partially funded by the local
government with the stipulation that should Federal or
other funds become available, the local contribution would
be returned to the City Treasury. In ~onJanctlon with this
funding, the City Council should accept the Council of
established to observe and analyze TAP*I operation, with
the thought of transferring some or all of the poverty
oriented programs to other agencies capable of assuming
them.
Recognizing that the need still exists for poverty
oriented programs,-lt would be your coumlttee*s recommenda-
tion that $106,000 be appropriated to an account In the
Clty*s Fy 73-74 budget to fund a portion of the TAP request.
It mould further be recommended that the contributing
localities name o completely independent committee to
review TAP*$ operation to determine alternative means for
future accomplishment of these poverty programs through
either private agencies or local government.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Milldam S. Hubard S/ A. N. Gibson
Milldam So Bubard Aa N. Gibson
S/ James O. Trout S/ Byron E. Honer
James O. Trout Byron E. Boner'
Mr. Rubard moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
In this connection, the City Auditor submitted a minority report
advising that he cannot concur in the recommendation of the majority of the
committee members, that he does not think that Council would be well advised
to transfer its stewardship of any funds to another organization when
Council, along with its administration, is in a position to perform the
functions mithin the present city organization without the attendant duplica-
tion of administrative costs and total loss of control over the expenditures of
the funds.
Mr. Rubard moved that the minority report be received and filed.
The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
PENSIONS: The Board of Trustees of the Employees' Retirement System
submitted a written report advising that on May 21. 1973. Council adopted
Ordinance No. 20907 which in effect made the Employees* Retirement System
of the City of Roanohe noncontributory, with the City of Roanoke paying the
entire cost of this employee benefit and with the added provision that those
funds contributed by the employees on the payroll mould have returned to them,
with interest, their contribution which had accumulated at the time of their
retirement, that this benefit was a result of requests made by various groups
of employees and principally those employees in the Police and Fire Departments,
that the Board of Trustees of the Employees' Retirement System recommended this
benefit to Council for employees now working as additional compensation and
because this benefit has become quite widespread in other systems, that sub-
sequently, there has developed a limited amount of controversy among retired
employees who, quite naturally, wo~ld like to have been availed of this benefit.
but inasmuch as the original recommendation was based on additional compensation
to the employees, it is the recommendation of the Board Of Trustees that this
action of Council not be changed with the further recommendation that Council
give consideration to a possible increase in the benefits being received by
391
392
retired members of bath retirement systems and that if Council desires, the Board
of Trustees of the EmploYees' Retirement System will mahe u recommendation to
accomplish this increase,
Mr. Hubard moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
mas seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted..
BUDCET-PAY PLAN: The Judicial Salaries Committee submitted the following
report in connection with the salaries of the Judges of the Courts of Record,
the Courts Not of Record and the Commonmealth*s Attorneys:
-June 18, 1973.
Mayor Roy L. Webber and Members
of Roanoke City Council,
Roanoke, Virginia.
Gentlemen:
The Judicial Salaries Committee met an Monday, June 18,
1973, ut 11:00 a.m. for the purpose of reviewing the
salaries of the Conmonmeulth*s Attorneys, and the salaries
of the judges of the Courts of Record and the Courts not
of Record.
After considerable discussion with the Council in executive
session during Budget hearings and meetings mith representa-
tives of the Roanoke Bar Association, the committee makes
the following recommendations:
1. Zhat the state salary of the Commonwealth's Attorney in
the amount of $16,500 be supplemented by the City of Roanoke
$6.000 annually for a total salary of $22.500 on condition
that if said supplement is accepted the Commonwealth's Attor-
ney will not actively engage in the private practice of lam
nor will he maintain a separate office for the private prac-
tice of lam while receiving said supplement.
2. That the present supplements by the City of Roanoke for
Assistant Commonmealthts Attorneys be renewed for the year
1973-74 uu condition that if said supplement is accepted, the
Assistant accepting such supplement will not uctiuely
engage in the private practice of lam nor will he maintain
u separate office off .be private practice of law while
receiving said supplement.
3. The committee recommends that the City of Roanoke continue
to provide supplements to the salaries of the judges of the
courts of record at their present level of $10,169 annually,
subject to the concurrence in sane by the uther governing
bodies within the 23rd Judicial Circuit, and further 'subject
to the mutual agreement by the said governing bodies gar
sharing the amounts so paid.
The committee notes that the present supplements are shared
by agreement with the governing bodies and requests that
Council direct the City Manager to contact said governing
bodies in regard to sharing the payment of same as regards
the new 23rd Judicial Circuit and to report back to Council
at the earliest possible date.
4. In respect to the matter of the City of Roanoke providing
supplements for the Judges of the District Courts within the
23rd Judicial Circuit, the committee requests the Council to
direct the City Manager to contact said governing bodies in
regard to ascertaining the folloming:
(a) Do the governing bodies desire that said
judges be supplemented locally?
(b)If so. mill they be willing to share in the
payment of such supplements.
(c) If so, what mutual agreement cae be had
for arriving at the amouut Of such payments.
It is requested that the City Manager report such information,
if so directed by Council, directly to the committee in
order that the committee may arrive at a recommendation and
report its recommendations back to Council prior to the
I
393
adoption of the budget on Monday, June 25, 197~, If possible,
and not later than Friday, June 29, 1973, in any event.
Yery truly yours,
S/ fl. R. Thomas,
H. Wo Thomas, Chalrnan,
S/ Robert A. Garland
Robert A. Garland,
~/ Mm. S. Hubard
William S. Hubard"
Mr, Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber .......................... 5.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Messrs. List and Trout absent)
Mr. Thomas moved that the City Attorney be instructed to prepare
the proper measure providing that the state salary of the Commonmealth*s
Attorney, in the amount of $16,500.00. he supplemented by the City of Roanoke
by ~6,000.00 annually for a total annual salary of $22.500.00 on condition that
if said supplement is accepted, the Commonwealth's Attorney will not actively
engage in the private practice of law nor will he maintain a separate office
for the private practice of law while receiving said supplement. Th~ motion
was seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the follomin9 vow:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor and Thomas---4.
NAVS: Mayor Webber .................................1.
(Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
Mayor Mebber spoke in opposition to the motion, advising that
Council has no jurisdiction over the Office of the Commonwealth°s Attorney,
that he cannot see why Council should take the money of the taxpayers Of the
City of Roanoke and spend it for something that is considered n state function
and that if the salar~ of the Commonwealth's Attorney is supplemented by the
citl, there sill be more requests to supplement the salaries of other state
employees.
Messrs. Garland and Thomas expressed ~he opinion that no experienced
lawyer will remain on the job of Commonwealth's' Attorney at a salary level of
$16,500.00 and that other Virginia cities gr~nt such supplements.
Mr. Thomas further moved that ~he City Attorney be instructed to
prepare the proper measure to provide that the present supplements by the City
of Roanoke for the Assistant Commonwealth's Attorneys be renewed for the year
1973-74 on the condition that if said supplements are accepted, the Assistants
accepting such supplements sill not actively engage in the private practice o£
law nor will they maintain separate offices for the private practice of las whit
receiving said supplements. The motion sas seconded by Mr. Rubard and adopted
by the follosing vote:
39~
AYES: Eessrs. Garlandu Hubard, Taylor and Thomas ...... 4.
MATS:. Mayor Webber 1,
(Messrs. Llsh and Trout absent)
Mr, Thomas further moved that the City of Roanoke continue to provide
supplements to the salaries of the Judges of the courts of record at their
present level of $10,16fl.00 annually, subject to the concurrence in same by
the other governing bodies within the 23rd Judicial Circuit and further subject
to the mutual agreement by the said governing bodies for sharing the amounts so
paid, noting that the present supplements are shared bT agreement with the
governing bodies and that the City Homager be requested to contact said governing
bodies in regard to sharing the payment of same with regard to the new 23rd Judi-
cial Circuit and submit his report to Council at the earliest possible date. The
motion was seconded by Mr. llubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber .......................... 5.
NAYS: None ..........-0. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
Mr. Thomas further moved that the City Manager be requested tn contact
the other governing bodies With reference to scppIements for the Judges of the
District Courts within the 23rd Judicial Circuit to ascertain the f,Il,win9
information:
1.
2.
3.
Do the governin9 bodies desire that said judges
be supplemented locally?
If so. mill they be willing to share in the payment
of such supplements?
If so, what mutual agreement can be had for arrivin9
at the amount of such payments?
and that the City Manager be requested to report such information, direct'ly to
the Judicial Salaries Co'mmittee in order that the Committee may arrive at a recom-
mendation and report its recommendations back to Council prior to the adoption
of the budget on Monday, June 25, 1973, if possible, and no later than Friday,
June 29, 1973, in uny event. The motion was seconded by Mr. Eubard and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber .5,
NAYS: None ........ -0, (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: None.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
JAIL: Council having previously instructed the City Attorney to pre-
pare the proper measure reaffirming the Council*s preference, amongst the sites
thus-far proposed,' of the Kimball Urban Renewal Project area as a site for
construction and erection of a regional corrections facility by parties to the
Roanoke Valley Regional Corrections Canter'Agreement subject to subsequent appro-
val by Roanoke City Council of, (1) the precise l,catiOn, size and cost of that
site. and (2) the design, size and cost of any improvements constructed on
tbnt site. he presented sase.
Mr. Thomas moved that action on the measure be deferred pending
receipt of a report from the City Homager with reference to the-precise or
exact location of the recommended site in the Eisbull oreo. the approximate
cost of said site and the number of prisoners to be accommodated at said site.
The motion sas seconded by Hr. Bubard and unanimously adopted.
SPECIAL PERMITS-ROANOE£ VALLEy: Council having directed tbs City
Attorney to prepare the proper measure authorizing issuance to Branch and
Associates. Incorporated. of certain permits'to allow for construction of
certain improvements on property in the vicinity of Riverlaod Road. S. E..
and Bennington Street. S. E** in the Intermediate Regional Flood Plain. he
presented sane; whereupon. MF. Bubnrd o~fered the following Resolution:
(a20~65) A RESOLUTION authorizing issuance to Branch ~ Associates,
Incorporated, of certain permits to allow for construction of certain improve-
meats on property in the vicinity of Riverlond Road. S. E.. and Beonington
Street. S. E.. in the Intermediate Regional Flood Plain.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book a38, page 185.)
Mr. Hubard moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the follm~g vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Taylor. Thomas and
Mayor Mebber
NAYS: None ...........O. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEY-SCSOOLS: Council
having directed the City Attorney to prepare the proper measure amending
Ordinance No. 20897 providing for subcontracting of performance of certain
administrative services in connection with the PEP Program. by increasing
the amount of funds expendable under said program, he preseoted some; where-
upont Mr. Hubard offered the following emergency 0rdinance:
(~20966) AN ORDINANCE amending Ordinance No. 20897, providing for
sub-contracting of performance of certain administrative services in connection
with PEP Program, by increasing the amount of funds expendable under said
Mayor Webber .................... 5.
:395
396
1700 block of Stannton Avenue, No ¥.e that at that tibet Mr. Hlrst assured her
that the lights mould be installedt that in 1972, she appeared before Council
with a group of taxpoying citizens to make another plea for the Zlghta, that at
that time Mr. Hirst stated that he did 'not know mhy the lights had not been
installed and that he would take care of it immediately, that in her last con-
versation with the Mayor, she was told that Appalachian Power Company hsd the
purchase order for.thc light, that she has checked.with the Appalachian Power
Company and the Company advises her that they do not have an order for a
street light in the 1700 block of Stnunton Avenue, N. M., that she feels as a
taxpaying citizen for 33 years she should be able to get some action on this
matter, that the lights will help protect the lives and property in this area,
and that she realizes that Council is burdened with a number of largeproblems
and perhaps has forgotten this small one, but, requesting that Council give this
matter the earliest possible consideration.
After a discussion of the matter, the City Manager advised that a
complete study has been undermay of all street lights in the northwest area of
the City of Roanoke, thai the study is now complete and purchase orders for the
neb lights will be issued to the Appalachian Power Company within the next
several weeks and that.he will check math the Appalachian Power Company to
ascertain whether or not they can expedite the installation of the lights at the
corners of 17th Street and loth Street, N. W.
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: Or. Taylor presented a prepared statement
recommendin9 that Mayor Mebber call n special meeting of the members of the Fair
Housing Hoard and the Administrator for the purpose of oroanizing the Fair
Housing Hoard, advising that he feels it is very important that a Chairman and
Secretary be elected as soon as passible and Further suggesting that the time and
plane of the meeting be determined by Mayor Webber.
Dr. Taylor then offered the follouing Resolution:
(~20967) A RESOLUTION providing for organization of the Fair Housing
Board.
(For full text of Resolution. see Ordinance Book n3H, page 165.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas and Mayor
Webber .......................... 5.
NAYS: None ......... --0. (Messrs. Lisk and Trout absent)
Pursuant to the above Resolution, Mayor Webber called afl organizational
meeting of the Fair Housing Board for Wednesday, June 27, 1973, at 7 p.m., in
the Council Chamber Executive Session. Conference Room.
JUVENILE D£YENTION HOME: Dr. Taylor presented the folloBin9 prepared
statement in connection with providing additional Juvenile Detention facilities
needed in the Fifth Planning District area:
~June IS, 1973
The Honorable #ayor Roy L. Webber
end Members of Roueohe City Council
Hunicfpel Huflding
215 Church Avenue, S.I. ..
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On June 20, 197~, at 2:00 P.M. the Regional Juvenile
Detention Committee will meet at the ¥lncastle Presbyterfam
Church for the purpose of determining how we may provide the
additional Juvenile Detention facilities needed Jn the Fifth
Planning District Area. It is believed that the State may
recommend the expansion of the present facility which is
owned by the City of Roanoke. This could be accomplished in
two (2) ways:
1. The City of Roanoke may continue its sole ownership
of the Juvenile Detention Dome and charge the other
9DY*rum*uts on the basis of building cost and per
diem. The building cost could be amortized over
a period of twenty (20) years enabling the City to
regain most, if not all, of its funds.
The State will pay one half (~) of the construction
cost up to $2000,000.00. In addition, other funds
may be received through the Fifth Planning District
in the form of a L. E. A. A. Grant that would be
requested by the City of Roanoke. It is my under-
standing that the grant can be used as part Of our
local matching funds, as far as the State is con-
cerned. The City would have to spend the money at
2. The second method of expandin9 the Juvenile Detention
Dome would be to establish a commission with at least
three (3) jurisdictions participating and paying on
the basis of population.
It is the opinion of this writer that the length of
time in the Juvenile Detention facility will be
considerably reduced with the services of two (2)
full time judges as of July 1. This may have some
Local Officials it is my opinion that the City of
Roanoke would prefer assuming the responsibility of
expanding the facility and charging the other govern-
ments on the basis of building cost and per diem.
on the assumption that we will receive a Federal
funds are not available.
! trust that I have fairly stated Council's position.
If not, I would be pleased to receive further direction at
20, 1973, meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Noel C. Taylor
Noel C. Taylor"
Mr. Thomas moved thatDr. Taylor be authorized to present to the
Regional Juvenile Detention Committee the proposals as outlined in his state-
ment to Council under date of June 15, 1973, including expansion of the present
Juvenile Detention facilities and the sewage treatment facilities. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Garland and unanimously adopted.
There being no further business. Mayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
397
398
COUNCIL, R£GuLAR MEETING,
Monday, June 25, 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular me'ting in the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Building. Monday, June 25, 1973, at 7:30
*.m** mith Mayor Roy L. Mebber presiding.
PRESENT:' Councilmen Robert A. Garland, Mllliam S. Hubard, David E.
Llsk, Noel C. Taylor, Hampton M. Thomas, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L.
Mebber ............................ 7.
ABSENT: None ...........O.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Byron E. Hamer, City Manager; Mr. Samuel H.
McGhee, III, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James N. Kincanon, City Attorney;
Mr. H. Ben Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorney; and Mr. A. No Gibson, City
Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend
Vincent Marner, Rector, St. J~hn*s Episcopal Church.
MIN~ES: Copies of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday,
June 11, 1973, and the regular meeting held on Monday, June 16, 1973, having
been furnished each member of Council, on motion of Mr. Thomas, ~econded by
Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted, the readin9 thereof was dispensed with and the
minutes approved as recorded.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids
on remodeling the Norwich Park Recreation Center, said proposals to be received
by the City Clerk until 2 p.m., Monday, June 25, 1973, and to be opened before
Council at 7:30 p.m., Mayor Mebber asked if anyone had any questions about the
advertisement for bids and no representative present raising any question, the
Mayor instructed the City Clerk to proceed with the opening Of the bids; where-
upon, the City Clerk opened and read the following bid~:
Piedmont Construction Company $ 29.880.00
Hodges Lumber Corporation 35,500.00
Mr. Thomas moved that the bids be referred to a committee to be appointed
by the Mayor for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council. The motion
mas seconded by Br. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Webber appointed Messrs. Samuel H. McGheeo III, Chai~mafl, and
Rex T. Mitchell, Jr.. as members of the committee.
AUDITORIUM-COLISEUM: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids on
catering and concession services at the Roanoke Civic Center, said proposals to
be received by the City Clerk .until 5 p.m.. Monday, June 25. 1973, and to be
opened before Council at 7:30 p.m., Mayqr Webber asked if anyone had any questions
about the advertisement for bids and no representative present raising any question,
the Mayor instructed the City Clerk to proceed with the opening of t~e bids; where-
upon, the City Clerk opened and read the following bids:
American Motor Inns,
Incorporated
B. T. Shortt
Basic Rent Percentage From
Per Month er Operation of Catering
$300,00
Basic Rent Percentage From Percentage Fro~
Name Per Month or Catering SaleS ~ C~ncession Sale~
B, T. Shortt 20% of gross 30% of gross
receipts receipts
Ogden Food Services 12 1/2% of gross 27 1/2% of gross
receipts receipts
American Motor Inns,
Incorporated $1,000.00 10% of gross 2? 1/2% of 9ross
receipts receipts
ARASER¥,
Incorporated 1,000.00 16% of gross 16% of gross
receipts receipts
Kennys Franchise
Corporation 15% of gross 15% of 9ross
receipts receipts
10% of gross receipts
20% of gross receipts
Dr. Taylor moved that the bids be referred to a committee to be
appointed by the Mayor for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Nebber appointed Messrs. Byron E. Ilanero Chairman, A, N.
Gibson, John A. Kelley and James K. Campbell as members of the committee.
EASEMENTS: Council having set a public hearin9 for 7:30 p.m,, Monday,
June 25, 1973. on the application of Mr. Billy H. Branch to vacate and re-
establish a part of a drainage and public utility easement as shown on the
Map of Section No. 2, Edgehill Estates. the center line of said easement being
the northerly line of Block S as more particularly shown on the Map of
Section No. 2, Edgehill Estates. the matter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follom-
lng report recommending that the request be granted:
'May 3, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. #ebber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of May 2, 1973.
Mr. Smeltzer appeared before the Planning Commission
and stated that this property is located on Franklin Road
at the southern City limits and adjacent to this property
is a motel and a re~aurant. Be further stated that this
property was formerly part of Edgehill Estates and that cer-
tain utility and drainage easements were written in it and
that State law requires that one of these easements must be
closed, that of the drainage easement. He noted that there
is a 20 foot side drainage and utility easement and that
Appalachian Power Company has waived their rights to the
easement because they felt that they had no need for it.
He further noted thatthe position of the drainage easement
shown on the map is not actually how the water floms as
it comes down off the hill diagonally and then on to 220
and into a highway catch basin. Be stated that Mr. Branch
has submitted his plot plan to the City Engineer's office
and that it has been approved but that when he was preparing
a certificate of title, it showed the building had been
built on the easement and it goes directly under the build-
inf. Be further stated that they have installed a pipe at
399
400
the top of the hill nad presented the Planning Commission
with photographs delineating the catch basin at 220 and the
drainage flow. Mr. Sueltzer noted that the building is now
under roof nad that it is two-thirds completed.
Some of the Planning Commission members expressed con-
cern with some of the technical features included in this
petition. Hr. Lawrence ashed what size pipe nas used. Hr,
Cutsboll, Acting City Engineer answered that the pipe had
net City specifications and stated that Mr. McShee did
realize there was n drainage easement end hud Instructed
them of the proper procedure to institute closing of the
easement.
Er. Durham stated that there would be a great amount of
erosion. Mr. Smeltaer answered that the property omner
directly behind this property had agreed to the planting
of pine trees to prevent his lot from eroding. Mr. Thurman
Wttt, Hr. Branch*s building manager stated that they are
presently building a wall coming down at an angle into
the bank that would be 5 foot. Hr. Outshall stated that
the Engineer's office approved of this plan and that Jt
would be a definite improvement over mhat they had there
nam,
After much discussion bythe Planning Commission men-
berm, it was generally agreed that this request would not
be detrimental to the surrounding area.
Accordingly, motion was made. duly seconded and
approved unanimously, recommending to City Council that
this request be approved.
Sincerely,
S/ Lucian A. Durham, Jr., by LM
Lucian A. Durham, Jr.
Acting Chairman"
No one appearing in opposition to the request. Mr. Trout moved that
the followin9 Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(~20968l AN ORBINANCE to vacate the westerly portion of a drainage
and public utility easement as shown on the Map of Section No. 2, Edgehill
Estates, the center line of said easement being the northerly line of Block 5,
more partlcularly shown on the Rap of Section No. 2, Edgehill Estates, which
plat is recorded in the Clerk*s Office of the Circuit Court for the County of
Roanoke, Virginia, in Plat Book 3, page 265, and authorizing the acquisition of
certain perpetual drainage easement in land adjacent to the easement herein
vacated in order to provide for the relocation of a portion of said first-mentioned
WHEREAS. application has been made to the Council of the City of Roanoke
have the above drainage and public utility easement vacated from u point on
the easterly right of way line of U. 5. Route No. 220, and fromthence to a paint
the westerly line of Block 6, according to the Map of Section No. 2, Edgehill
Estates. said point being the northwesterly corner of Lot 3, Block 3. accordin9
to the Plat of Section No. l, Edg~bill Estates, and the owners of the land through
which said easement lies have offered to grant to the City a perpetual drainage
easement, 20 feet in width, through a portion of their property adjacent to the
sought to be vacated for the purpose of relocation; and
MHEREAS, said petition was filed at a regular meetin9 of this Council
held on April 16, 1973, at which meeting said petition mas referred to the Planning
Commission of the City of Roanoke for its recommendation, in accordance with
the provisions of the 19SO Code of Virginia, as amended; and
WNEREAS. said Planning, Commission by a Report adopted st the meeting
held on Ray 2e 19Y3e after hearing evidence touching on the merits of said
Petition, recommended to this Council that said portion of the public utility
easement requested be vacated end relocated; and
WHEREAS, this Council did by a resolution on May 7, 1973, direct
the Clerk of the City of Roanoke forthwith to set the same down for public hearin*
to be held on the 25th day of June, 1973, and give notice thereof by publication
in accordance with Section 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended;
and
WItEREAS, the notice required to be published by Section 15.1-431 of
the Code of Virginia of 19§0, as amended, has been published for the time
provided by said section; and
WHEREAS, the hearing as provided for in said notice mas held on the
25th day of June, 1973, at 7:30 P.M. before the Council of the City of
Roanoke, at which bearing all parties in interest and citizens were 9ivan un
opportunity to be heard, both for and against the proposed vacation and relo-
cation of a pert of said drainage and public utility easement; and
WHEREAS, this Council, after c~nsidering the evidence as herein
provided, is of the opinion that the hereinafter described easement should
be vacated and relocated, as herein provided.
HE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City Of Roanoke that that portion
of that certuin 20 foot drainage and public utility easement, the center llne
of mhich is the northerly line of Block 5, us more particularly sbomn on the
Map of Section No. 2, Edgehill Estates, mhich said plat is recorded in the
Clerk*s Office of the Circuit Court for the County Of Roanoke, Virginia, in
Plat Book 3, page 265, from a point on the easterly right of way line of
U. S. Route No, 220, and from thence to u point on the masterly lifle of Block
6, according to the Map of Section No. 2, £dgehill Estates, said point being
the northwesterly corner of Lot 3, Block 3, according to the Plat of Section
No. 1, Edgehill Estates, be, and is hereby vacated, discontinued and abandoned
insofar as the Council is empowered so to do, The force and effect'of the
recordation of the Plat of Section No. 2, £dgehill Estates, is hereby destroyed
as to that portion of the public utility easement hereby vacated and the fee
simple title to the vacated portion of the public utility easement is vested in
the owners of the abutting lots free and clear of any rights of the public or
other owners of lots shown on the plat, but subject to the rights of the owners
of any public utility installations which have been previously erected therein;
and
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the City doth hereby accept the offer of
Billy B. Branch and Betty R. Branch, his wife, to 9rant and convey to the City
a certain perpetual drainage easement, 20 feet in width, through property in the
40~
4O2
City of Roanoke, as more particularly shown on e'plat prepared by Buford T.
Lunsden ~ Associates, Certified Land Surveyors, dated March 27, 1973, entitled
'Plat Showing Property of Dilly D. Dranch". for a nominal consideration of ONE
DOLLAR ($i.00} cash, and that the proper City offlclnl~ be, and they are hereby
authorized and directed to accept for the City, the deed of easement in the
premises, approved as to form by the City Attorney,
BE XT FURTHER ORDAINED that an attested copy of this ordinance be
placed of record in the current deed book of the Clerk*s Office of the Hustings
Court for the City of Roanoke at the cost of the Petitioner, together with a
copy of the plat of said property, dated March 27, 1973, by Buford T. Lumsden ~
Associates, Certified Land Surveyors. indexing the same on the general index
in the name of the City of Roanoke as Grantor and Billy H, Branch as Grantee;
and
BE IT FINALLV ORDAINED that the Clerk of the Bustings Court of the
City of Roanoke is directed to comply with the provisions of Section 15.1-4DS
of the Code of Virginia of 1950. ns amended, and write in plain, legible letters
across that portion of the plat of Section No. 2, Edgehill Estates, affected,
the word "VACATED", and also make a reference on the plat to the volume and page
in which this ordinance is recorded.
The motion mas seconded by Mr. Link and adopted by the followin9
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Link, Taylor. Thomas. Trout
and Mayor Mebber ...............7.
NAYS: None .......... O.
ZONING: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m., .Monday, June
25, 1973, on the request of the Richard R. Danlett Construction Company, Incorporate,
that a certain parcel of land containing 0.301 acre, located in the 2600 block
of Stephenson Avenue, S. R., designated as Official Tax No. ll60laO, be rezoned
from R$-3, Single-Family Residential District, to RD, Duplex Residential District,
the matter was before the body.
In this'conuection, the City Planning Commission submitted the following
report recommending that the request be granted:
"May 17, 1973
Yhe Honorable Roy L. Nebber. Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City Plan-
ning Commission at its regular meeting of May 16, 1973.
Mr. James Apostolou appeared before the Planning Com-
mission and stated that the adjoining property was just
recently rezoned to a RD designation from a single-family
residential designation and that a similar situation
occurred on another lot along Stephenson Avenue. Mr.
Apostolou further stated that his brother had talked with
Mr. Martin Barks, a resident on Stephenson Avenue, about
Mr. Dark's concern for a buffer zone betmeen the proposed
duplex dwelling and the businesses on Franklin Road and
after John Apostolou's assurance that it would be
buffered, Mr. Barks had no objections.
After discussion by the Planning Commission members,
it was generally agreed that this request was in keeping
with the general character of the area and that the duplex
would not have a detrimental environmental impact on the
general area.
Accordingly, motion was made. duly seconded and
approved unanimously recommending to City Council that
this request be approved.
Sincerely,
S/ Henry fl, Boynton by LM
Henry H. Boynton
Chairman"
Ho one appearing in opposition to the request for resuming, Hr. Trout
~oved that the folloming Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(a20969) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1o Section 2o of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet NO. 116, Sectional
1966 Zone Hap, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
NHEREAS, application has been made to the Council of the City of
Roanoke to have the following described property situate in the City of
Roanoke. Virginia, to=mit:
BEGINNING at an iron Stake on the northwesterly line of
Stephenson Avenue, Southwest, at the southerlycorner
of the property conveyed to Elizabeth C. Shoal by deed
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the llustings Court of
the City of Roanoke, Virginia. in Deed Dunk 723, Page
490. said beginning point being 969.62 feet soathmesterly
from the southmesterly corner of Droadway and Stephenson
Avenue; thence leaving the above described beginning point
and with the northwesterly line of Stephenson Avenue
S. 37° 15' [. 73.77 feet'to an iron stake at the easterly
corner of the property conveyed to P. A. Wallenborn, Jr.,
recorded in the aforesaid Clerk*s Office in Deed Rook 1125,
Page 438; thence leaving Stephenson Avenue and with the
lines of the Nallenborn property N. 52° 45' I. 91.00 feet
to a point in a branch; thence up a branch the following
four (4) bearings and distances: N. 63° 40' R. 26.00 feet,
S. 69° 33' W. 22.50 feet. N. 52° 45' N. 10.00 feet and N.
19° 50' I. 1.33 feet; thence with a new division line
through the ~roperty of #. Price Fields and Estelle C.
Fields N. 46° 56' E, 119.43 feet to a point on the line
of the Shoal property; thence with the same, crossin9 the
branch S. 42° 57' E. 121.33 feet to the point of BEGINNING
as shown by Plat made by David Dick and }larry A. Rail,
Civil Englneers and Land Surveyors, dated January 13,
1969. (Shown on the Roanoke City Tax Rap as No. 1160130)
rezoned from RS-3, Single-Family District to RD, Duplex Residential District;
and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission has recommended that the
hereinafter described land be rezoned from RS-3, Single-Family Dist./ct to
RD, Duplex Residential District; and
WHEREAS, the mritten notice and the posted sign required to be
published and posted, respectively, by Section 71, Chapter 4.1. Title
of The Code of the City of Roanoke. 1956, as amended, relating to Zoning,
have been published and posted as required and for the time provided by said
Section; and
NREREAS. the hearing as provided for in said notice was held on the
25th day of June, 1973, at 7:30 p.m., before the Council of the City of Roanoke,
at which hearing all parties in interest and citizens were given an opportunity
403
404
to be heard, both for and against the proposed rezooing;
and
RBEEEAS, this Council, after cossideriog the erideece ns herein
provided, is of the opinion that the hereinafter described land should be
rezoned.
THEREFORE. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke
that Title X¥, Chapter 4.1, Section 2. of The Code of the City of Roanoke,
19S6, as amended, relating to Zoning. and Sheet No. 116 of the Sectional 1966
Zone Rap, City of Roanoke, be amended in the following particular and no other,
Property located on Stephenson Avenue, southwest, south of Broadway
Street, described as a certain parcel of land containing 0.301 acre. situated
in the 2600 block of Stephenson Avenue. S. W.. designated on Sheet 116 of the
Sectional 1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, as Official Tax No. 1160138, be, and
is hereby, changed from RS-3, Single-Family District to RD, Duplex Residential,
and that Sheet No. 116 of the aforesaid Mop be changed in this respect.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Hubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
NAYS: None .......... O. (Mr. Lisk not voting)
ZONING: Council having set a public hearing for T:30 p.m., Monday,
June 25, 1973, on the request of ~r. Bonald O. Berglund taat property located
at 135 Maddock Avenue, N. E., described as Lots 53 and 54, Block C, Map of
Williamson Groves, Official Tax No. 3080909 and the two Vacant lots adjacent
thereto, described as Lots 51 end 52, Block C, Map of Williamson Groves, Official
Tax No. 3080908, be rezoned from RD, Duplex Residential District, to C-Z, General
Commercial District, the matter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follow-
ing report recommending that the request be granted and further recommending that
the City Planning Department be authorized to conduct a study of this general
area to determine the advisability of rezonin9 it, or a portion thereof, to a
C-2, General Commercial District:
"May 3, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at both its regular meetings of April
16, 1973, and gay 2, 1973.
At the April 18, 1973, meeting, Mr. Viar appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that Hr.
Berglund was requesting this rezoning so as to provide
more space adjacent to his property for parking purposes
and that the house situated on the two lots adjacent to
his business would be razed and the four lots paved.
4O5
Some objections were voiced by the residents concerning
the changing nsture and character of the area end the aesthetic
considerations. Mr. Roy. E. Scott, 16IS West Slde~lvd**
appeared before the Planning Commission and stuted'thut he
objected to this rezonfng because the property in question
is adjacent to property~which he owns, housing a duplex unit
that he rents, He further stated that cutting these lots
within u foot of the paved driveway at the duplex would
make the driveway rail in and since he does rent this p~operty,
people with children mill be hesitant to rent now because
of the steep cliff left from the 9Fading. Mr. Berglund
stated that they would stay about 10 feet out from the
drlvemay when cutting the bank and would provide any fencing
and assume all liability.
Mr. H. R. McCoy, 2423 Windsor Avenue, S. W., appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that this entire
block is becoming hemmed in with C-2 districts, with Berglund
Chevrolet at one end and the City of Rounoke*s property for
the service center at the other end, end since there are only
seven 50 foot lots, including two apartment houses left
in a residential designation on this side of the street, he
would like the Planning Commission to rezone this entire
side of the street. Mr. Hoynton suggested that Mr. McCoy
talk with the Planning Director and he mould instruct him
as to the procedure for rezoning of this entire street.
Mr. Don Ragland, representing his father, Leonard E.
Ragland, 120 Maddock Avenue, M. E., appeared before the
Planning Commission and stated that he would like to ask
the Commission if there was anything that could be done
about screening wrecked cars that are parked beside of this
father's house while they are waiting to be fixed at
Derglund's body shop. He further stated that this did not
where the wrecked cars are sitting, is already zoned
cars but because this is a case of the cars bein9 parked
temporarily for repairs, he knew of nothing that could be
ordinance statin9 this. Mr. 8erglund stated that he intended
to fence across this property and if Mr. Ragland would like,
he could plant climbing vines on the fence that would screen
his home from the body shop and parking area.
Mr. Boynton then exI~ined to the petitioner that since
a sign mas not posted 10 days prior to the Planning Commission
meeting on the lots proposed for rezouing, it would not be
possible to act on this petition at this meeting. Accordingly,
this Jtme be tabled until the next meeting of the Planning
Commission so that the sign may be posted.
At the May 2, 1973, meetin9 of the Planning Commission
it wai noted that the proper posting procedures had been
followed on this rezonin9 petition and the Planning Cum-
Again, opposition was voiced to the petition. Mr.
Roy Scott, 1615 West Side Blvd., M. W., noted the noise
element associated with this type of use and the resultant
disturbance to his tenants; Miss Jean Boyd, 127 Maddock
during all hours of the day and evening, not only creating
excessive noise but blocking her driveway; and Mr. Leonard
D. Ragland, 128 Maddock Avenue, M. E., cited both the noise
Some of the Plannin9 Commission members generalIy
noted that the points raised by the residents were valid
ones but not within the purview of the Planning Commission.
desionation.
Accordingly, motion was ~ade, duly seconded and approved
with u vote of four (4) ayes and two (2) nays, recommending
to City Council that this request be approved.
unanimously that the Planning Department conduct a study
406
of this general area to determine the sdvisabilityof rezoni~J
it, or a portion thereof, to a C-2, commercial district or
· ri.more appropriate designation,
Sincerely,
S/ L, A. Ourham, Jr, by LR
L. A. Ourhsmo Jr.
Acting Chairman'
Mr. Richard £o ¥iar, Attorney, representing the petitioner, appeared
hefre Council in support of the request of his client.
No one appearing in opposition to the request for resorting, Mr. Thomas
moved that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
¢~20970; AN ORDINANCE to a~efld Title X¥, Chapter 4.1, Section 2,
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet NoD 303, Sectional
1966 Zone Rap, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
NaER£AS, application has been made to the Council of the City of
Roanoke to have 135 Raddock Avenue, N. E., being Lots 53 and 54, 0loch C, Rap
of Willfamson Groves, Official Tax Number 3000909, and the tmo vacant lots adjacent
thereto, being Lots 51 and 52, Block C, Map of Williamson Groves, Official
Tax Number 3000908 rezoned from RD, Duplex Residential District, to C-2q General
Commercial District; and
WRER£AS, the City Planning Commission has recommended that the herein-
after described land be rezoned from RD, Duplex Residential Distri'ct, to
General Commercial District; and
WaEREAS, the mritten notice and the posted sign ~quired to be published
and posted, respectively, by Section 71, Chapter 4.1, Title X¥, of The Code of
the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, relating to Zoning, have been published
and posted as required and for the time provided by said section; and
WHEREAS, the hearing as provided for in said notice was held on the
25th day of June, 1973, at 7:30 p.m., before the Council of the City of Roanoke,
at uhich hearln9 all parties in interest and citizens were given an opportunity
to be heard, both foF and against the proposed resorting; and
WHEREAS, this Council, after considering the evidence as herein provided,
is of tho opinion that the hereinafter described land should be rezoned.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
Zitle X¥, Chapter 4.1., Section 2, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as
amended, relating to Zo~ng, and Sheet No. 30B of the Sectional 1966 Zone Wap,
City of Roanoke, be amended in the following particular and no other, viz.:
Property located on the south side of Raddoch Avenue, N. E., described
as Lots 53 and 54, Block C, Map of Williamson Groves, and Lots SI and 52° Block
C, Map of Nilliauson Groves, designated on Sheet 308 of the Sectional 1966 Zone
Map, City of Roanoke, as Official Tax Nos. 3080909 and 3080908, be, and is
hereby, changed from OD, Duplex Residential District, to C-2, General Commercial
District, and that Sheet No. 308 of the aforesaid map be changed in this respect.
The motion mua seconded by Hr. Trout aud adopted by the follouing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Dubard, Llsk. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Nebber ....................
NAYS: None ..........
ZONING: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m., Monday.
June 25, 19730 on the request o! Hr. Milliam T. Dalton, Jr.. end NFo Freddie S.
Dalton. that property located on the northerly side of the DO0 bloch of Jamison
Avenue, S. E., described as Lots 17 and 10, Section 13, Map of Belmont Land
Company, Official Tax Nos. 4120117 and 412011D, be rezoned from R6-2, General
Residential District, to'C-2, General Commercial District, the matter was
before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the follow-
ing report recommending that the request be granted and further recommending
that the City Planning Department be authorized to conduct a study of Jamison
Avenue from Nth Street to Interstate Route 501 to determine if this frontage
facing on Jamison Avenue should be rezonned or a portion thereof rezoned to
a C-2, General Commercial District, or some more appropriate alternate zoning
designation:
"May 3, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Mebber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at both its regular meetings of April
10, 1973 and Ray 2, 1973.
At 'the April 16, 1973, meeting, Mr. Bounds appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that the peti-
tioned property is located adjacent to the Dooth Supply
Company and that there is a growing visible tendency on
Jamison Avenue for property to become commercially designated,
sith a service station on one corner and the nes Advance
store on another. Re further stated that the existing resi-
dential area is deteriorating; and that one of the petitioned
lots is vacant and the house will be razed on the other lot
with the suggested use of this lot being to use the O0'
frontage for a car lot.
Mr, Doynton explained to the petitioner that because
a sign mas not posted 10 days prior to the Planning Commis-
sion meeting on the lots proposed for rezoning, it would not
be possible to act on this petition at this meeting. Accord-
ingly, ~otion was made, duly seconded and approved unanimously
that this item be tabled until the next meeting of the Plan-
ning Commission so that the sign may .be posted.
At the May 2, 1973, meeting of the Plannin9 Commission,
it sas noted that the proper posting procedures hud been
followed on this rezoning petition and the Planning Commis-
sion was in a position to nos take action.
Discussion at this meeting of the Planning Commission
centered on the changing character of the area and the
ingress and egress features associated with this rezonin9
petition, Some of the Planning Commission members noted that
the proposed use was in keepin9 with the general character
of the area but that there was a particular need tp study
the Jamison Avenue corridor (frontage) and determine the
feasibility of rezoning a larger portion of it to a commer-
cial designation.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and approved
with a vote of five (5} ayes and one (1) nay, recommending
to City Council that this request be approved.
407
lotion was ·lso made, duly seconded and ·pproved with a
vote of five ($) ayes and one (1) nay recommending that the
Planning Dep·rtment conduct · study or Jamlson'Avenue from
9th Street to Interstate 581 to determine if this frontage
racing om JamJson Avenue should be rezoned, or a portion
thereof rezoned, to a C-2, Commercial District or some more
appropriate alternate zoning designation.
Sincerely.
S/-L. A. Durham, Jr** by LM
L, A. Durham, Jr,
Acting Chairman"
Mr. Joseph P. Bounds, Attorney, representing the petitioners, appeared
before Council in support of the request of his clients.
No one appearing in opposition to the request for rezoning, Mr. Trout
moved that the folloming Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(u20971) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV. Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of
The Code or the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet No. 412, Sectional
1965 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
MHEREAS, application has been made to the Council of the City of
Roanoke to have
Parcel ~1
BEGINNING at a point 120 feet west of Belmont
Boulevard on the north aide of Jamison Avenue;
thence north 130 feet to an alley; thence with
said alley west 40 feet to a point on same;
thence south 130 feet to Jamison Avenue; thence
with Janisou Avenue east 40 feet to the place
of the BEGINNING, and being Lot 17, Section 13,
according to the Rap of Belmont Land Company,
Roanoke, Virginia, and being Official Tax
Number 4120117.
Parcel =2
LOT 18, SECTION 13, according to the Map of
Belmont Land Company, and bean9 Roanoke City
Offici al Tax Plat Number 4120118.
rezoned from aG-2. General Residential District, to C-2, General Commercial
District; and
MREREAS. the written notice and the posted sign required to be published
and posted, respectively, by Section 71, Chapter 4.1. Title IV, of The Code of
the City of Roanoke. 1956, as amended, relating to Zoning, have been published
and posted as required and for the time provided by said section; and
MIiEREAS, the hearing as provided for in said notice mas held on the
2$th day of June, 1973, at 7:30 p.m., before the Council of the City of Roanoke,
ut which hearing all parties in interest and citizens were given an opportunity
to be heard, both for and against the proposed rezoninq; and
MHEREA5, this Council, after considering the evidence as herein provided,
is of the opinion that the hereinafter described land should be rezoned.
THEREFORE. BE IT ORDAINED by theCouncil of the City of Roanoke that
Title IV, Chapter 4.1, Section Z, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as
amended, relating to Zoning, and Sheet No. 412 of t~*Sectional 1966 Zone Map,
City or Roanoke, be amended in the following particular and no other, viz:
409
Property located on the northerly side of Jamlson Avenue. S. E.,
City of Roanoke,, Virginia, and described as Lot. 17, Section 13 and Lot 10,
Section 13, Mop of Belmont Land Company designated on Sheet 4!2 of the
Sectional 1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke. as official Tax Nos. 4120117 and
4120118. be, and is hereby, changed from RG#2, General Resident'iai District, to
C-2o General Commercial District, and that Sheet No. 412 of the aforesaid map
be changed in this respect.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the folloming
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor ~ebber ................ 7.
NAYS: None .........
ZONING: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m., Monday,
June 25, 1973, on the request of Mr. Carl E. CoJemsnj et uxJ, and M~. Alice
F. Ferguson, that property located on Stemart Avenue and 13th Street, S.
and Dale Avenue and 13th Street, S. E., described as Lots 1, 2 and 13, and
the west seven feet of Lot 14. Block 7, Map of Oakridge Land Company. be
rezoned from RD. Duplex Residential District, to C-2. General Commercial
District. the matter mas before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the
follouin9 report recommending that the request be denied:
~May 17, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Mebber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City Plan-
ning Commission at its regular meeting os gay 16, 1973.
Mr. Lawrence, Attorney for the petitioner, appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that Mr. Cole-
man, the petitioner, has built a duplex on the two lots
in question and mould like to use part of the structure
for the storage of coin-operated machines. He further
stated~that he plans to utilize the basement of the
duplex for storage purposes that sill not be used during
the evenin9 hours or on weekends. Mr. Lawrence noted
that it had been pointed out to him by the Planning
Director that the proposed Route 115 mould take one of Mr.
Coleman*s lots and also the adjoining lot owned by Mr.
Ferguson.
Mr. Coleman, the petitioner, appeared b~fore the
Planning Commission and stated that he had been using
this building for the storage of some machines and that
be was contacted by Mr. Reed in the Building Commissioner's
office that he mas in violation of the'zoning ordinance.
Mr. Lawrence noted that Mr. Ferguson agreed to join
in on this rezoning request since his lot does abutt a
C-2 designation and is located in close' proximity to the
Coleman's parcels. He further stated that Mr. Ferguson
has no plans for using his C-2 designation, if approved,
and that his only specific use of the property mould be
for the storage of the machines.
Mrs. Hazel Hodges, 1305 Stemart Avenue, S. E.,
appeared before the Planning Commission and presented
the members with a petition signed by four of the
adjoining property owners in opposition to this rezoning.
She stated that Mr. Coleman had not disturbed the neighbors
410
by using this building bat that they did not want I
designation next door to their homes because it mould
devalue their property.
Mrs, Leths #. Johnson, 1306 Dale Avenue, S, E,, appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that she was also
npposed to this rezoning for the reasons mentioned by Mrs.
Hodges.
After some discussion by the Planning Commission mem-
bers, it was generally agreed that this proposed use was
not compatible uith the area and that commercial development
should be limited to the southerly portion of Dale Avenue.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded, and approved
unanimously recommending to City Council that this request
be denied.
Sincerely,
S! Henry B. Doynton by LM
Henry B. Boynton
Mr. Jack O. Trout, 1306 Stewart Avenue, S. E., appeared before Council
in opposition to the request, advising that if the rezoning is permitted it
will devalue the neighboring property, that the residents have no idea shat type
of business will be established and with Route 115 cumin9 through southeast
Roanoke the property will be of note value if it is zoned for business purposes.
appeared before Council in support of the request of his clients, advising that
out of five residents who originally signed a petition in opposition to the
rezoning, he now has letters from three o£ these people advising that they no
longer are against the proposed rezoning, that the anticipated use of the
building will be for apartments in the upstairs portion and for the storage of
coin operated vending machines in the basement portion of said building.
1306 Dale Avenue. S. K.; Mr. G. C. Johnson. 1306 Dale Avenue, S. E.; Mrs. Hazel
Hodges, 1305 Stewart Avenue, S. K.; Mr. J. H. Bibb, 1224 Stewart Avenue, S.
Mr. L. G. Chewning, 509 13th Street, S. E.; Mr. C. R. Dratton, 1302 Tazewell
Avenue, S. E.; Mr. G. R. Bratton, 1307 Tazewell Avenue, S. E.; Mr. Curtis L.
LaPrnde, 1312 Stewart Avenue, S. E.~ Mr. Melvin Crowder, 1302 Stewart Avenue,
S. E.; Mr. Clifton H. Hrier, 312 13th Street, S. E.; Mr. S. J. Truman, 513
13th Street, ~. E.; Mr. A. A. Chewning, 509 13th Street, S. E.~ Mr. S. C. Fisher,
512 13th Street, S. E.; Mr. Windel I. Wimmer, 1221Tazewell Avenue, S. E.; Mr.
Elbert S. Brinkley, 1237 Stewart Avenue, S. E.; Mr. S. D. Robertson, 1309
Stewart Avenue, S. E.; and Hr. A. C. Doyerus, Jr., 1240 - 1242 Tazewell Avenue,
S. E.; advising that they are in favor of rezontng the proper,yin question
from RD, Duplex Residential District, to C-2, General Commercial District.
In a discussion of the matter, the City Planning Director advised that
After a discussion of the matter, Mr. Trout moved that the following
Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(#209?2) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title'XV,.Chopter 4.1, Section 2,
of the Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, us amended, and Sheet No. 411,
Sectional 1966 Zone Mop, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
MBEREAS, application has been made to the Council of the City of
Roanoke to have property located on Stewart Avenue, S, E., and 13th Street,
S, E., and Dale Avenue,.S. E** and 13th Street, S. E., described as Lots 1, 2
and 13, and the west seven feet of Lotl4o Block 7, Map of Oakridge Land
Company, and Official Tax Nos. 411,32-13, 411-31-01 and.411-31--02 rezoned from
Duplex Residential District, to General Commercial District; and
~HEREAS, the City Planning Commission has recommended that the
hereinafter described land not be rezoned from Duplex Residential District,
to General Commercial District; and
· HEREAS, the written notice and the posted sign required to be
published and posted, respectively, by Section 71, Chapter 4.1, Title XV,
of The Code of The City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, relating to Zoning,
have been published and posted as required and for the time provided by said
MHEREAS, the hearing as provided for in said notice was held on the
2Stb day of June, 1975, at 7:30 p.m., before the Council of the City of
Roanoke, at which hearing ~11 parties in interest and citizens were §lyon an
opportunity to be heard, both for and against the proposed rezoning; and
NHEREAS, this Council, after considering the evidence as herein
provided, is of the opinion that the hereinafter described land should be
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke
that Title XV, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of The Code of the City Of Roanoke,
1956, as n~ended, relating to Zoning, and Sheet 411 of the Sectional 1966
Zone Map, City of Roanoke, be amended in the following particular and no
Property located on Stewart Avenue, S. E. and 13th Street, S. E.,
and Dale Avenue, S. E., and 13th Street, S. E., described as Lots 1, 2 and 13,
and the west seven feet of Lot 14, Block 7, Map of Oakridge Land Company,
designated on Sheet 411 of the Sectional 1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, as
Official Tax Nos. 411-31-13, 411-31-01 and 411-31-02, be, and is hereby
changed from Duplex Residential District, to General Commercial District,
and that Sheet No. 411 of the aforesaid map be changed in this respect.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and the following vote was
NAYS: Messrs. Hubard, Lisk and Taylor .a.
Based upon the above roll call vote, Mr. Thomas moved that the City
Manager and the City Attorney be requested to render an opinion as to the number
411
412
of votes required for adoption of 0rdlnnnce No. 20972 on its first reading by
the next regular meeting of Council on Ronday, July 2, 1973, The motion wns
seconded by Hr. Trout and unanimously adopted,
ZONING: Coancil having set a public hearing for 7:30 p,m** Mandny,
June 25, 1973, on the request Of Mr. Co Gordon Runter thBt property located
on the south side of the 3000 bloch of Melrose Avenue, H. M,. described as Lots
5, 6 and the westerly fifty feet of Lot ?, Rap of N, £. Roberts, Official Tax
Nos. 2530230 and 2530232, be rezoned from C-I, Office and Institutional District.
to C-2. General Commercial District, the matter was be~re the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the folloming
report recommending that the request be denied:
"Ray 17, 1973
The Honorable Roy L, Mebbero Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roaooke. ¥1rgiola
The above cited request wos considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of May
1973.
Mr. Kennett. Attorney for the petitioner, appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that he is
representing Mr. C. Gordon Hunter. who bas sold this
petitioned property to Rr. Ray Goad* and Hr. James
for the purpose of building a Ray*a Restaurant on this
property. He then presented the Planning Commission
members with a photograph of a standard Ray's Restaurant
and also the standard plans and specifications.
Rt. Ray Goad*, P. O. Box 126H, Mount Airy, North
Carolina. appeared before the Planning Commission and
stated that this is to be a family-type restaurant which
will discourage teen-age patronage. He further stated
that they will have no curb service and that facilities
will be maintained inside to accommodated approximately
60 people. Mr. Goade stated that they would use a beige
brick and a brownish beige trimwork that would blend in
with any other surroundings and be stated that he felt
Rt. McBride, Assistant Director of Administration
for t~e Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority
.appeared before the Planning Commission and stated that in
the 24 years of existence ~r the Housing Authority, they
have never opposed a renaming and that they generally
encourage systematic and orderly development of the City.
In this situation, however, they are opposed to the rezoning
petition of this lot. Re noted that Relrose Towers represents
an investment of approximately $3.6 million and has 250
senior citizens living there who do most of their general
shopping in this area and that with this proposed commercial
use, probIems will be created for the senior citizens in
the form of excessive traffic and noise generation. He
further noted that this request has been discussed by the
Rousing Authority's Board of Commissioners and that they
have authorized him to make their position known and that
the Rousing Authority would like to go on record as being
in opposition to this rezonin9 request.
Mr. Boynton asked if the Housing Authority had made
an attempt to purchase this land before. Mr. McBride
answered that they had and that they would still like to
acquire this land but the price prohibits it at this time.
Mr. O. M. Nemell, 3038 Melrose Avenue, N. M., Resi-
dent Manager of Melrose Towers, appeared before the Planning
Commission and stated that he represented the 250 senior
citizens living at Melrose Towers. He noted that the
resident community take a great deal of price in the Melrose
Towers since it has a park-like atmosphere with beautiful
landscaping. Also, it was pointed out. that many of the
senior citizens walk down the walkway past the petitloner'*s
lot In order to get tnthe MoMsrt shopping center and that
they Would no longer feel safe with the increased amount of
traffic generated by tl/~ use and that math the overflow
of people and the increased traffic, the Melrose Tomers
would lose its pleasant atmosphere. He stated that they
also have a gazebo close to this lot and that the people
would no longer feel free to sit in It or walh around the
grounds and that because of 811 of the yearsof contributing
to this City, consideration should be given to these people
in their later years. He noted that the Burger King down
the street is alr~od~ a problem to the Melrose Towers
because so many people use their parking area as a shortcut
to the Burger King.
Nr. Newell noted that on behalf of the 200 senior
ladies and 50 senior men living at the Melrose Towers,
he would like to officially go on record in opposition to
this rezoning request. He made it clear that they mere
not in opposition to this landbeing used either as a
doctor's clinic or some other professional office use.
Mr. Parrctt stated that he didn't see bow the noise
level would be increased by this use and Mr. Coleman
stated that he felt that it mouldn*t be fair for the people
on both sides of Melrose Avenue to be made to hold on to
their property for sale for maybe years waiting for n
professional office to come into the area. Mr. Coleman
further stated that Ray Dobbins Lincoln Mercury recently
was given a rezoning for operating a body shop for
working on cars 24 hours a day. Mr. Bradshaw stated that
there are a number of stores along this street that ore
vacant and that he felt that ~ ey mould be making a mistake
to grant this renaming.
After a discussion by the Planning Commission members,
it was revealed that some felt that this rezoning request
was compatible with the surrounding area while others
felt that this rezonlng was not compatible with the area
and would do much harm to the character and atmosphere
of Melrose Towers.
Accordingly. motion was made, duly seconded, that
recommendation be made to City Council to approve this
request with a vote of tug (2) ayes and three (3) nays.
As this recommendation did not carry the required majority.
recommendation is made to City Council that this request be
denied.
Sincerely,
5/ Henry B. Boynton by LM
Henry B. Boynton
Chairman"
Mr. Harry Moran, Chairman of the Melrose Toser~ Civic League, appeared
he.re Council and presented o petition signed by 107 resident s of Melrose
Towers in oppoiition to the rezonlng Of the property Jn order to construct a
Ray*s Restaurant, advising that they feel that the restaurant will cause
traffic congestion problems, security problems, and trash, noise and safety
problems.
Approximately twenty Melrose Towers residents were in attendance
in opposition to the proposed rezoning.
Mr. Ray Boade, Jr., Chairman of the Board of Ray*s Restaurants,
appeared before Council and presented a photograph of the proposed building,
advigng that he would like to feel that the operation of a Ray's Restaurant at
this location would be a convenience to the people in the area rather than a
hindrance to them and that most of their trade will be toward family cIientele.
413
414
Mr. Lisk expressed concern as to the additional aaount o'f traffic which
will be generated if the construction of the restaurant is'permitted.
Mr. JohnH. Kennett, Jr** Attorney, representing the petitioner, appeared
before Council in support of the request of his client, advising tbat ~e heavy
traffic congestion already exists on Melrose Avenue and that Jf the restaurant Is
constructed it will neither increase nor decrease the traffic situation, that
he feels the construction of a Ray*s Restaurant would be an asset to the com-
munity, that he has talked with other neighbors in the area who do not reside at
Heir*se Towers and there has been little or no opposition to the proposed
rezoning expressed by them.
Mr. Kennett then presented a petition signed by 31 residents of
Melrose Towers advising that they desire that a Ray's Restaurant he located
on the south side of the 3000 block of Melrose Avenue, N. N., and also presented
comaunlcatlons from Mr. Million L. Foster, Mr. and Mrs. William G. Merritt,
Mr. and Rrm. James £. Ilumphries and ga. Ollie F. Bowman advising that they have
no objection to the fez*ming of the property for the purpose of construction o
Ray's Restaurant.
gr. Roy N. Johnson, a resident of Reit*se Toners, appeared before
Council and expressed the opinion that be would like for a Ray's Restaurant to
be constructed at this location.
The City Planning Director advised that a C-2, General Commercial
Distr~t, designation would have an adverse affect on the area and that the
request for rezoning should be denied on that basis.
gr. Garland expressed the opinion that this is a situation nhere the
rezoniog has certain advantages and certain disadvantages, however in this case,
the disadvaotages outneigb the advantages and moved that the request for fez*ming
be denied. The motion was seconded by gr. Hubard and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: gessrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas and Trout---6.
NAYS: guyot Webber ........................................ 1.
ZONING: Council having set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m., Monday,
June 25, 1973, on the question of an amendment of Chapter 4.1. Zoning, of Title
XV, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956. as amended, relating to the issuaoce
of certificates of occupancy for nonconforming uses under the provisions of the
city's zoning reRulations providin9 tbat the Board of Zoning Appeals shall have
the authority to and may, upon the procedures provided in Section BO of the Zoning
Ordinance as for authorization of variances, upon appeal of an applicant to the
administrator for such certificate and upon showing made to the board that the
nonconforming use was existing on or prior to August 29, 1966, that it has not
been discontinued for a period of time exceeding one year after the aforesaid
date, and that such use is not detrimental to the immediate neighborhood, direct
the issuance by the administrator of a certificate of occupancy for such noncon-
forming use, the matter nas before the body.
No one npp~s~lng in opposition to the proposed amendment Mr. Lisk
offered the follomlng ~nergency Ordinance: '
(#R0973) AN ORDIN~qCE unending nnd reordalning Sec. 49~ Certificate
of occupancy ~or nonconforming uses.? of Chapter 4.1. Title X¥. Zoning, of
the Code of the ci~y of Roanoke, 1956, as auended, regulating the use of land,
buildings, structures and peen!scs and providing for Issuance of certificates
of occupancy for certain nonconforming uses, under the City's zoning regula-
tions as set out In said chapter; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #aR, page 107.)
Kr. LIsk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The notion mas
seconded by Mr. Barland nnd adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber .................... ?.
NAYS: done ..........-0.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Council having set a public bearing for 7:30
p.m., Monday, June 25, 1973, on the request of Liberty Terminal Corpsration that
the uesterly portion of Louisiana Avenue (an unopened street) a distance on
the north side of said street of 114.15 feet, and on the south side of said
street 125 feet. more or less. and 50 feet in width, be vacated, discontinued
and closed, the matter was before the body.
In this connection, the City Planning Commission submitted the
following report recommending that the request be granted:
~Kay 3, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Nebber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at both its regular nee{fags of April
lB, 1973 and Kay 2, 1973.
At the April 18, 1973, meeting, Mr. John L. lpostolou
appeared before the Planning Commission and stated that
Liberty Terminal Corporation owned the property on both sides
of this small section of Louisiana Avenue. N. E., with the
exception of three lots on the northerly side, Lotl 13, 14
and 15 and that these are under contract by Liberty Terminal
for their purchase, but that two are tied UP by estates and
one mill be finished shortly. He further stated that this
section Of Louisiana Avenue has never been used for practical
purposes. He noted that the proposed plan for the use of
this property, if the street is closed, is for parking but
that it would not become a truck terminal.
· Mr. Arthur Nichols, Jr., 542 Louisiana Avenue, N. E..
Mr. and Hrs. Sam Harris, Jr** 532 Louisiana Avenue, N. E.,
and Mr. and Mrs. Nillie Lee Thomas, 538 Louisiana Avenue,
N. E., appeared before the Planning Commission and stated
that the closure of this portion of Louisiana Avenue and the
proposed Kimball Interchange would produce a situation
that would landlock these specific properties with no means
of ingress and egress.
After discussion by the Planning Commission members, it
was agreed that this petition should be tabled until the
next meeting of the Planning Commission in order that the
Planning Director could neet with thes~ interested persons
and explain the plans for the area.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded and
unanimously approved that this item be tabled until the
next meeting of the Planning Commission.
415
At the May 2, 1973, ~e~timO~#r,',~rthur Nichols, Jr,,
542 Louisiana Avenue, N. E** appearedberore the Plunning
Comwission and stated that he had met with the Plmnning
~lrector several times since the, last Beefing to discuss ·
the access problem~ He further slated that he wanted'assur-
ance that m right*of-wa! would be granted for the neighbors
for ingress and egress to their prhperties after the Kimball
lnterchonge is built. The Planning Olrector noted that the
Kimbell Redevelopment Project Plan does provide (or an access
road for these properties to be constructed rot this portion
o~ Louisiana Avenue to 6th Street, N. ~., ut such iime us the
Kiwball Interchange is constructed. It was also pointed
out that these three specific properties Involved here were
not purchased by the ~onsJug Authorft! because they did not
fall within the Kimball interchange right-of-uny.
After discussion by the Planning Commission members, it
was agreed that the closing of this portion of Louisiana
Avenue would not result in any landlock situation nor would
Jt have any detrimental effects on the surrounding area.
Accordingly, motion was made, duly seconded end approved
unanimously recommending to City Council that this request
be approved.
Sincerely,
$/ L. A. Outhano Jr., by LM
L. A. Durham, Jr.
Acting Chairman# - '
The viewers appointed to view the street submitted a written report
advising that they hare viewed the street in question and the surroundiug
property and they are unanimously of tan opinion that no inconvenience would
result, to any individual or tn the public, from vacating, ldscontlnuing
e~ther
ii and closlng~ .....
No one appearing in opposition to the request, Mr. Trout moved that
the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(~20974) AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing
the Nesterly portion of Louisiana Avenue (an unopened street) in the Northeast
section of the City of Roanoke, bein9 50 feet wide, a distance on the north
side of said street of 114.15 feet and the south side of said street I25 feet
more or less and shown on Sheet 304 of the Appraisal Rap of the City Of Roanoke,
Virginia, in the Roanoke City Engineer*s Office.
WHEREAS, James D. Apostolou. has heretofore filed his petition before
the Council of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, in accordance with law, requesting
the Council:to permanently vacate, discontinue and close the above-described
unopened street, the filing of which petition due notice was ~iven to the public
as required by law; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the prayers of said petition, viewers
were appointed by the Council on the 2nd day of April, 1973, to view the property
and to report in writing whether in their opinion any inconvenience would result
from permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing said unopened street; and
NH£REAS, it appears from the written report of the viewers filed with
the City Clerk that no inconvenience would result to any individual or to the
public from permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing said unopened street;
and
MHEREASo it appears from the written,report of the viewers filed
with the City Clerh that no inconvenience mould result to any lndivudaal or to
the public from permanently vacating, di~continuing and closing said unopened
street; and
NHEREAS, Council at its meeting on April 2, Ir?3, referred the Petition
to the City Planning Commission, which Commission in its report before the
Council on May 7, 1973, recommended that the request to close the said
unopened street as hereinafter described be granted; and
MHER£AS, a public hearing mas held on the q~estioos before the
Council at its meeting on the 2Sth day of June, 1973, at 7:30 P.M., after due
and timely notice thereof published in the Roanoke Morld Nemso at mhich
bearing all parties in Interest and citizens mere afforded an opportunity to
be heard on the question; and,
· HEREAS, from all of the foregoing, the council considers that no
inconvenience will result to an individual or to the public from permenently
vacating, discontinuing and closing the unopened street as recommended by
the Plannin9 Commission, and that accordingly said unopened street should be
permanently closed.
THEREFORE, HE IT ORDAINED, by the Council of the City of Roanoke
that the unopened street described as follows:
BEING the westerly portion of Louisiana Avenue
(an unopened street) in the northeast Section of
the City of Raanoke, being 50 feet wide, a distance
on the north side of said street of 114.15 feet and
the south side of said street 125 feet more or less
and shown on sheet 304 of the appraisal map of the
City of Roanoke, Virginia, in the Roanoke City
Engineer*s Office.
be, and it hereby is, permanently vacated, discontinued and closed and that
all right, title and interest of the City of Roanoke and of the public in and
to the same be, and it hereby is, released insofar as the Council of the City
of Roanoke is empowered so to do, the City of Roanoke reserving unto itself
however, a perpetual easement for sewer lines, drains, water lines and other
public utilities which may now be located in and over the aforesaid unopened
street.
DE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the City Engineer be, and he hereby
is, directed to makr #permanently closed' on the unopened street above
described on all maps aod plats on file in his office on which the said unopened
street, referring to the book and page of Ordinances and Resolutions of the
Council of the City of Roanoke wherein this Ordinance shall be spread.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the Clerk of the Council deliver to the
Clerk of the Hustings Court for the City of Roanoke, Virginia, a certified
copy of this Ordinance in order that the Clerk of said Court nay make proper
notation on ali maps or plats recorded in his off/ce upon which are shomn the
said unopened street, as provided by law, and that if so requested by any
party in interest, be say record the same in the deed book tn his office
417
418
indexing the same in the name of the City of Rosnoke as grmtor and in the name
of any party in interest mhd may request ii us grantee.
The motion mas seconded by Hr* Lish and adopted by the following vote:
AY£5: Messrs. Garland, flubsrdo Lish, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Mebber-~ .............. 7.
NAYS: None ...........O,
~TRE£TS AND ALLEYS: Couucll haviu9 set a pubiic hearing fur 7:30
p.m., Honday, Jnne 25, 1973, on the request of Hr. Daniel H~ Monaco, et ax., and
Mr. Jimmy L. Heddle, et ax., that an unused portion of Hontvale Road, S. W., at
the intersection of Spring Road, S. H., be vacated, discontinued and closedt the
matter was before the body.
In this conDec,Ion, the City Planning Commission submitted the following
report recommending that the request be granted:
'May 3, 1973
Thn Roaorable Roy L. Hebber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Commission at its regular me*tin9 of Hay 2, 1973.
Mr. Copenhover appeared before the Planning Commission
and stated that this street is 42 feet wide and runs a
distance of approximately 222 feet along Montvale Road
and that the only persons affected by this street closure
would be Hr. Heddle. facing on Sprin9 Road and Mr. Honaco
latin9 on Hontvale Road. He noted that this street situa-
tion was the result Of two developers planning to develop
this property and evidently one developer had intentions of
running this street through but never did and. consequently,
this resultant situation of a 92 foot street at this loca-
tion.
Mr. Copenhaver noted that the petitioners had requested
that the City sell this part of Rontvale Road as surplus
property but that Mr. Kincanon had advised that until the
street was closed and 21 feet given to the petitioners, the
street could not be sold as surplus property but with th'e City
owning only 21 £eet, they would be able to sell the 21 feet
as surplus property after the street closin9, if approved.
. Hr. Lawrence stated that there is a utility pole
carryin9 3 power circuits and a very large telephone cable
located on the property that would be very expensive to
have moved. Mr. Copenhaver stated that the property would
carry a reservation for City easements and utility ease-
ments. Mr. meddle appeared before the Planning Commission
and stated that he would not ask the utility companies
to move the pole and that he was sure that Mr. Monaco mould
not either,
Mr. Dradshaw asked mhat the petitioners planned to do
about the drainage that looked as though it comes diagonally
across the street and across the land. Mr. meddle stated
that this a natural drainage that comes down Spring Road
and then follows Moa,ual*Road down past this property and
actually doesn't cut across it because of the slope.
After discussion by the Planning Commission members, it
was agreed that the closing of this portion of Montvale
Road would not be detrimental to the surrounding area.
Accordingly, motion was made. duly seconded and
approved unanimously recommending to City Council that
this portion of Moa,vale Road be vacated, discontinued and
closed with a reservation of all City and public utility
easements.
Sincerely,
S/ L. A. Durham, Jr** by LM
. A. Durham, Jr.
cting Chairman-
The viewers nppoleted to view the yard submitted a written report
advising thut they have viemed the rood ia question and the surrouodiug pro-
perry nod they are of the oploiou that ua lecouvenieuce would resnlt, either
to soy lndlvlduul or to the public, from vucutieg, dlscoutieuiug nod closing
same.
~o one appearing in opposition to the request, Mr. Trout moved that
the follouing Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(~20~75) A~ ORDINANCE vacating, discontinuing and closing that
unused portion of Rontvale Road, $. U., at the intersection of Spring Road,
S, ~** which parcel is designated as Official Tax ~o. 1550311, located in the
City of Roanoke. Virginla~
· HEREA5, Jimmy L. Neddle and Mildred C. ~eddle, husband and Mile,
aod Oaniel ~. Monaco and Louella Ronaco0 husband and wife, have hereto fore
filed their petition before Council in accordance mtth §15,1-364 of the Code cf
¥irginiu of 1~0 requesting Council to permanently vacate, discontinue and
close the abnve described portion of said streets; and
~H£REAS, in accordance mith the prayer of said petition, eJemers
mere appointed by Council on the 16th day of April, 1973, to view the property
and report in writing mhether or not in their opinion any, and if any, what
inconvenience would result £rom pe£mauently vacating, discootinufflg and closing
said portion of said streets; and
~HEREAS, it appears from the duly verified report of three of said
viewers filed with the City Clerk on the 1st day of June, 19T~, that nc incon-
venience would result either to any individual or to the public from permanently
vacating, discontinuing and closin9 said portion of said streets; and
RHEREAS, it further appears that petitioners agree to bear all expense
of this proceeding; and
#HEREAS, it further appears from a communication filed with the Clerk
of the Council on the 3rd day of Ray, 1973, that the City Planning Commission
recommends the granting of the prayer of the petition, the City retainin9 all
· utilities; and
RHEREAS, on the 25th day of June, 1973, a public hearing to consider
the closing of salad portion of said streets herein requested ~as held before
City Council and no ob~ection was heard fro~ any citizen to the request for
closing.
THEg£FOR£, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke,
Virginia, that the following portion of said streets:
That unused portion of Montvale Road, S. Mo, lying between
Spring Road, S. ~., and the corporate limits of the City of
Roanoke, extending a distance of approximately 222 feet South
of Spring Road. and being the parceldesignated as Official
Tax No. 1550311 in the City of Roanoke, Ylrpinia.
be, and they hereby are, permanently vacated, discontinued and closed and
that all right, title and'interest of the City of Roanoke and the public therein
is hereby released insofar as the Council is so empowered to do, reserving,
41.!.9
420
homerer, u~to the City of Roanoke in easement for any semer lines or water mains
that may mow be located across said property, together with the right of ingress
and egress for the'maintenance of such ~lnes and mains.
RE IT FURTHER OROAINEO t~at the Clerk of this Council do forthmlth
certify to the Clerk of the Hustings Court for the City of Roanoke, Virginia,
a copy of this Ordinance for recordation in the deed books of his office and
n like copy to the City Engineer so that he may sham on all maps in his office
the closing of said portion of said streets.
The motion was seconded by Mr. C~rl~nd and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber
NAYS: None ..........~-0.
COMRONMEALTH~S ATTORNEy: Council at its last regular mee~Jng on
Monday, June 18, 1973. having directed the City Attorney to prepare the proper
measure supplementing the salary of the Commonwealth's Attorney by $6.000.00,
for a total annual salary of $221500.00; supplementing the Chief Assistant
Commonwealth's Attorney by $3.000.00. for a total annual salary of $15,100.00;
and supplementing the three other Assistant Commonwealth's Attorneys by $2.000.00
each. for a total annual salary of $14.100.00 for Mr. Jack V. Altizer acd
$12,450.00 eachfor Mr. Charles ¥. Hoback and Mr. Entry M. Tatel. provided
that, upon the acceptance of such supplement by the above named persons, it is
understood and agreed that such person shall devote his full time to the duties
of his office; that he will not actively engage in the private practice of law,
and he will not maintain a separate office for the private practice of lam while
receiving such supplement, Mr. Robert Fo Rider. Commonmealth's Attorney, appeared
before Council in connection with said salary supplements and requested that he
be allowed to discuss said supplements with the members of Council in executive
session.
~ayor Webber advised that the subject iS a public ~atter and should be
handled as such.
Mr. Rider then proceeded to advise the members of Council that the
State Compensation Board has never se~n fit to treat the Office of the Common-
wealth's Attorney as it should be treated, that when Council granted the first
of such supplements in January it left to the discretion of the Comnonmealth's
Attorney the amount of private practice which was to be maintained in that office.
that private practice has been kept to a bare minimum as requested by Council.
that he has just hired another Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney mith the under-
standing that his private p~actice can be kept to a bare minimum, now Council
has placed the ~tipualtion in a proposed Ordinance which says that there can be
no private practice i~ a supplement is accepted, that for the f~rst tine since
November, 1972, he has a full complement in his office, that if this proposed
Ordinance is adopted discontinuin9 private practice he is afraid he will be faced
uith the resignations of some of his nssistnnts,-that speaking for himself
he cannot give up his private practice on the basis of.$22,500.00 per annum
but assuring Council that the affairs of the Office of Commonmenlth*s Attorney
mill come first and foremost and requesting that Cocncil reconsider the pro-
posed Ordinance to delete that portion pertaining to the elimination of
private practice of lam and allom the amount of private practice to. be left to
the discretion of the Conmon#ealth*s Attorney.
Mr. Dobby R. Osborne, Chief Assistant Commonmealth*s Attorney,
appeared before Council and advised that he cannotbe a public servant all his
life with the salaries that are being paid, that his private practice is
limited to his lunch hoar and after 5 p.m** that at no time since he has been
mlth the Office of the Commonuealth*s Attorney has his work suffered because of
any private practice and that he does not feel that be can continue to do the
job he has been doing if the supplement is removed.
Mr. Charles ¥. [Ioback, Assistant Conmonwealth*s Attorney, appeared
before Council and advised that his private practice is done on his oma
time and at his own expense.
body.
prepared in 9ood order, mas before Council.
422
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS-LIBRARIES: A communication from Mrs, Susie E,
Leonard expressing her opposition to appropriating funds for repairs to the Mill
Nouutnfo Playhouse, advising that the people using the
uaw copying uachine and requesting that sold copying machine be included in the
next fiscal year budget, was before Council,'.
' Mr, Trout.moved that'the communication be received sod filed end that
the City Clerh be instructed to advise Mrs, Leonard that the copying machine
for the Roanoke Public Library is included in the 1973-74 fiscal lear budget.
The motion was seconded by Br. Bubard and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
BUDGET: The City BarteRer submitted a written report in connection with
insurance premiums, advising of increased limits for the Employee Blanket Bond,
the reevaluation of fire insurance for city buildings and their contents, and
premiums on the paddle boats and train at Nasena Park.
Bt, Taylor moved that Council concur in the report of the. City Manager
and offered she following emergency Ordinance providing for certain transfers
in connection with said insurance premiums:
(u20976) AN ORDINX~C£ to amend add reordain certain sections of the
19;2-T3 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u38, page 166.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion Was
seconded by Mr. Bubard and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lis£. Taylor, Thomas, Trout arid
Mayor Nebber .................. 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted a written report
advising that the Environmental Protection Agency has authorized the city to
award a contract to Pizzagalli Corporation for the construction of a thirty
million gallon retention basin at the Semage Treatment Plant under Contract
Sewage Treatment Plant Additions, that site preparation for construction of the
basin will require the city to empty the old existing sludge pond and haul the
sludge to a disposal area, that the disposal site proposed by Alvord, Burdich
Dawson, Consulting Engineers, and approved by the Health Department, the Sta%e
~ater Control Board and the Environmental Protection Agency is the area previously
used for sludge disposal and owned by the Roanoke Industrial Development Company,
that this is the fifty acre tract of land on the west side of Roanoke River
opposite the Sewage Treatment Plant, that the city has reached an acceptable
agreement between the owner, Roanoke Industrial Development Company and Mr~
Darnell Vinyard, lessee of the property, for the use of the land and recommending
that Council authorize the Cityganager to enter into a one year agreement,
ns approved as to form by the City Attorney. with the Roanoke Industrial Develop-
meat Company and Mr. Darnell Vinyard to use their property as a temporary sludge
disposal site.
423
Hr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Homager end offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(u20977} AN ORDINANCE authorizing agreement to be entered into
between the City of Roanoke and ~. Oarnall Yinyard and C. ~. Francis and Sons,
Inc., Agents for Industrial Development ~ Investment Company, et al, providing
for the City's use of certain property on the north side of Roanoke River for
the purpose of · sposing of sludge from the City*s Sewage Treatment Plant,
upon certain.terms and conditions; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance nook zaH, page lO9.}
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by My. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Mebber
NAYS: None ..........--0.
COMRISSIONER OF THE REyENI~-SHERIFF-PAy PLAN: Council having referred
to the City Manager and the City Auditor for report communications from the
Commissioner of the Revenue and the Sheriff in connextion with supplementation
of salaries of employees in their offices, the City Manager submitted · written
report advising that Council requested the City Manager to review the classifi-
cation assigned to these employees versus salaries approved by the State
Compensation Board and advise Council as to whether or not the salaries shown
in the two offices correspond with the grade structures previously approved
by Council, advising that the communications have been reviewed and the pro-
posed grade structures as contained in Council's budget Ordinances do
correspond with the grades and rates previously approved by Council.
Mr. Ilubard moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
FIRE DEpARTMENT-POLICE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a
written report on the status Of personnel in the Police Department and Fire
Department as of May 31, 1973.
Mr. Lisk moved that the report be received and files. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a written report request-
ing that an item be reserved on the ageud~ for Monday, June 25, 1973, for the
submittal of the Management Study by Albert Ramond and Associates, Incorporated.
In this connection, the City Manager introduced General Henry J.
Stehling, Principal Director, Washington Operations, Albert Ramond and
Associates, Incorporated.
General Stehling introduced Mr. Edward Hedlund and Mr. Herb
Heckendorn, the two consultants who have been working on the management report
and very briefly summarized the contents of the Management Study, whereupon,
each member of Council vas presented with a 250 page copy of the Management
Study report.
'424
In concluding, General Stehlfug advised that the City of Monnohe
displays the required resources and attitudes of I city thatcan be a leader
and pacesetter of municipalities in the SO,O00 to'250,000 population range.
Council at. its meeting on Monday, June 10, 1973, having nnanimonaly
voted to meet uith representatives of Albert Remand and Associates, Incorporated,
in executive session on Tuesday, June 26. 1973, at 4 p~m., to discuss the con-
tents of the Manngenent Study, Mr. Thomas moved that said meeting be open to
the public. The motion was seconded by Br. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
. GRABTS: Council having previously requested that the City Manager
submit a report ns to the ~pproximate number of alcoholic women tvented at
Betbany Ball and the approximate cost per person, the City Manager submitted a
written report advising that Bethany Ball has a capacity of ten persons, that
during the last year 94 individuals mere treated at a total cost of $31,000.00
and that this averages out to $912.00 per person per ~ear.
Mr. Garland moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Llsk and unanimously adopted.
AIRPORT: The City Manager submitted a written report advising that
the city has contracted mith John A. Ball ~ Company, Incorporated, for the
reconstruction of roadway at Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport under a contract
dated August 2, 1972, that this project will upgrade the roadway and provide
needed storm drainage, that during the excavation for the roadmayo the under-
ground electrical services were encountered in two locations, however, these
lines were not encased in conduit and concrete as his records show nor were
they buried as deep as his records indicate, that it is therefore necessary to
relay these 12,000 volt lines, that this relaying will include installing con-
duits encased in concrete and new No. 2 wiring installed therein, that sufficient
funds have been allocated to the project and no additional appropriation will be
oecessary, however, it is necessary that a change order be executed and recom-
mending that Council authorize the City Manager to execute Change Order No. 1
in the amount of $5,000.00 to the contract with John A. Hall G Company, Incorporated
with no change of contract time to accomplish this work.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for preparation of the
proper measure providing for .the recommended change order to the contract with
John A. ~all ~ Company, Incorporated. The motion was seconded by Wr. Garland and
unanimously adopted.
AIRPORT: The City Msnager submitted a written report in connection
with the issuance of Change Order No. 1 to the contract with Matts and Breakell,
Incorporated, ~or the construction of holding rooms at RoanOke M'anicipal
(Moodrum) Airport, transmitting au Ordinance setting fo~th the details of Change
Order Bo. I which provides for enclosing the concourses, b'uilding the holding
to the original contract price of $1,061,000,00 or a new total of $1,311,163.00,
that said change order also provides for an additional sixty calendar days for
the contract time and recommending that Council approve said proposed Ordinance.
Mr. Nubard moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following emergency Ordinance providing for the
Chango Order No. I to the contract mith Matts and Breahell. Incorporated:
(#209?0) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the issuance of Change Order No.
1. to the City's contract with ~atts and Breukell, Inc., authorized by Ordi-
nance No. 2065g, for certain alterations and additions to the Terminal Building
at Roanoke Municipal Airport, upon certain terms and conditions; adding sixty
(60) additional calendar days to the working time provided in the aforesaid
contract; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~30o page lgl.)
Mr. Bubard moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisko Taylor, Thomast Trout
and Mayor ~ebber ................
NAYS: Node ........... Oo
GARBAGE REMOVAL: The City Manager submitted a written report trans-
mitting copy of a communication written by him to the ¥irginia Deportment of
Health requesting that the City of Roanoke be permitted to continue its opera-
tion of the sanitary landfill activity in Vinton, Virginia, until such time as
the city is able to make the regional landfill site n reality.
Mr. Trout moved that the report and communication be received and
filed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
WATER DEPARTMENT: The Assistant Cit~ Attorney submitted n written
report advising of the developments in the two cases styled Byrd Millls
Hopkins, et al., v. City of Roanoke. and Sharon Boone, et al., vo City of
Roanoke, heretofore instituted in the Circuit Court of Botetourt County,
Virginia, which actions contested the city's right to divert portions of the
waters of Tinker and Catawba Creeks into the Carvins Cove watershed, that by
similar final decrees, entered on June 21, 1973, both said cases were dismissed
by the Court, said final decrees having set forth certain terms and conditions
whereupon the city may divert certain of the waters of said creeks and other
matters agreeable to the parties and their counsel and that such credit for
the satisfactory culmination of these cases should go to Mr. Eft O. Kiser,
425
426
petitioner, a civil action for damages against Police Sergeant R. D. Shields and
Sheriff Paul J. Puckett. the same belno bused on'certain actions alleged to have
occurred mhile the petlti°ne~ mas in the city Jail while auaitlng trial in the
aforementioned court, upon charges'of bank robbery, said alleged actions being
in the nature of violation of the petitioner's civil rights, that investigation
of the matter having been necessary due to a similar civil octlo~ heretofore
filed against th~ City of Roanoke such action having been dismissed on May 29,
1973. and reported to Council by letter of June 1, 1973, it is the opinion of the
Assistant City Attorney that the allegations ute totally and completely without
merit and border upon the frivolous, that Officer Shields. through the Chief of
Police. has requested that Council give consideration to the granting of authoriza-
tion of the City Attorney's Office to act as his defense counsel in said proceed-
ings, accordingly, should Council desire to provide such authorization, there has
been prepared and is trzflsmitted a Resolution which would authorize such repre-
sentation.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the report of the Assistant
City Attorney and offered the following Resolution:
(~20979) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Attorney to represent a
certain member of the City's Police Department in certain civil proceedings
brought against said officer, upon the said police officer*s request for such
representation.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Rook ~38, pgae 192.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Rt. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout
and Mayor Webber ................
NAYS: None .......... O,
AUDITS: The City Auditor submitted a monthly financial 'report of
the City of Roanoke for the month of May. 1973.
Mr. Oubard moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Link and unanimously adopted.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE: The City Auditor submitted a monthly
statement of expenditures for public welfare for the month ended May 31. 1973.
Mr. Lisk moved that the report be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
BUDGET-MUNICIPAL COURT-JUVENILE AND DOMESTIC RELATIONS COURT: The City
Auditor submitted a written report advising that the State of Viroinia is taking
over the payment of the employees in the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court
and the Municipal Court, effective July 1, 1973. that these employees will then
become state employees and will, in effect, terminate employment with the City
of Roanoke, that in 1969, the City of Roanoke began holding back an employee*s
in order to properly process the documents necessary to generate a payroll, therefor
there will be a need for an appropriation t~ these two departments tO pay these
employees to ~une 30, 1973.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the report of the City Auditor
and offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(#209B0) AN OROINANCE tn amend and reordain certain sections of the
1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance nook n3B, page 192.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion.nas
seconded by Mr. Lish and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carload, Nubard, Lish, Taylor, Thomas, Trout aid
Mayor Mebber ...................T.
NAYS: None ..........--0.
BUDGET: The City Auditor submitted a written report advising that
there will be a need for a supplemental appropriation and an appropriation in. a
number of accounts, that to accomplish this, he is submitting Ordinances
necessary for the various funds and recommending that Council give the City
*~Maoager the authority to make transfers within the departments or divisions up
Ito $1,000.00 so that the continual need for these appropriations, particularly
such small amounts, will not be necessary.
Hr. Trout moved that the matter of authorizing the City Manager to
tmake transfers within the departments or divisions up to $1,000.00 be referred
~to the City Attorney for preparation of the proper measure. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Trout then offered the following emergency Ordinance amending
certain sections of the 1972-73 budget:
(=20901) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordaJn certain sections of the
1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =38, page 193.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded
by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trqut and
Mayor Webber ...................
NAYS: None ...........O.
Dr. Taylor offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
~2,400.00 to Data Processing and $619,50 to Terminal Leave under Section ~90,
"Semage Treatment Fund," of the 1972-73 Se~age Treatment Fund Appropriation
Ordinance:
(=20982) AN ORDINANCE to amend and r~ordain Section ~90, "Semage
treatment Department,' of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing
(For full text of. Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =38, page l~b.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The moti~ was
seconded by Mr. Lish and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:. Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Llsk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Webber ...............
' NAYS: None .......... --0.
Mr. Link offered the foil*wing emergency Ordinance appropriating
$2,?11.05 to Retires~nt Contributions, $1,786.12 to Terwlnnl'Lenve and $236;4T
to Operating Supplies and Materials under Section m440, *Civic CenteR,' of the
1972-73 Civic Center Fund Appropriation Ordinance:
(a20983) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reorduin Section n440, "Civic
Center," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, nnd providing for an emergency.
· (For full.text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #30, page
Mr. Link moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Webber ................ T,
NAYS: None ..........-0.
Mr. Trout offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
$73.01 to Terminal Leave under Section a340o *Airport** of the 1972-73
Municipal Airport'Fund Appropriation Ordinance:
(n20904) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section n340, *Airport**
of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Boor a30, page 197,)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Link and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Webber ........... 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
Mr. Trout offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
$3,000,000o00 to Repayment of Temporary Loans under Section a92, "Temporary
Loans," of the 1972-73 budget:
(~20985) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section #92, "Temporary
Loans," of the 1972-73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~30, page 197.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded b~ Mr. Thomas and adoptedb~ the following vote:'
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Webber ............. 7.
WAYS: None
Mr. Link offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
$35,000.00 to City Operatin9 Supplement under Section n77, "Civic Center," of
the 1972-73 Civic Center Fund Appropriation Ordinance:
(a20986) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section n77, "Civic
Center," of the 1972~73 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Boor ~38, page 19B.)
Mr. Link moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubard. Lisk. Taylor. Thomas. Trout,
and Mavor #ebber
NAYS: None ....... ---O.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
CITIZENS* ADVISORY COMMITTEE: Reverend Calvin O. Fulton. Chairman
of the Citizens' Advisory Committee. submitted a written report advising that
the Citizens* Advisory Committee is about to become involved in certain work
with the City Planning Department and recommending that the three vacancies
on the Citizens' Advisory Committee be left open until it can be determined
as to what occupational field the Committee should look toward for new members.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the report of the Citizens'
Advisory Committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously
adopted.
UNFINISIIED BUSINESS:
BUILDINGS: Council having previously deferred action on a joint
report of the City Manager and the Assistant City Attorney in connection with
the reconsideration Of a claim of Mr. Frank G. Roupas regarding the demolition
was again before the body.
In this connection, the City Manager and Assistant City Attorney
submitted the following joint report advising that it is their opinion that the
$294,00 llen filed against the demolition of the property should remain in
full force and effect until satisfied as required by lam:
"June lB. 1973
Of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Pursuant to your direction, this office in conjunction
with the office of the City Manager. has reviewed the
above referenced claim and makes the following supplemental
report in reference thereto. Your attention is called to
the report of this office dated January ~9, k973, a copy
of which is attached hereto. The factual context out of
which the issue for consideration arises, is fully stated
in that report and documented by exhibits attached to
said report. There are two additional factors which we
would like to call to your attention, viz.:
(1) The deed conveying the property in question
to Mr. Roupas was dated May IT, 1972, and
recorded in Deed Book 1316, at page 229. in
the Clerk's Office of the Bustings Court of
the City of Roanoke, Virginia; and
(2) A lien against the real estate for $294.00
demolition costs was duly filed for record
in the Clerk*s Office of the Hustings Court
of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, on June
6, 1973.
These two additional factors do not in any way alter the
conclusions of the undersigned with reference to the question
of the specific liability of ?07 Gilmer Avenue for payment
of the aforesaid $294.00. The lien filed is, in the opinion
of the undersigned, a valid lien having the same force and
effect as a tax lien. Council is reminded, hnwever, that
satisfaction of this lien can only be derived from the
property in question and therefor, there is no personal
liability on Mr. Roupas to pay same.
429
'430
In consideration of the foregoing, ltis the opinion of the
undersigned that the lien filed as aforesaid should remain
in full force and effect until satisfied as required by law.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Byron E. Hamer
Byron E. Honer,
City Manager
S/ James E. Bucbboltz,
James E. Buchholtzo
Assistant City Attorney"
Mr. Frank G. Roupas appeared before Council and advised that this
matter has been pending for quite some time and requested that someone make a
motion on the matter in order for it to be voted upon.
Mr. Thomas moved that the request of Mr. Roupas that Council release
the $294.00 lien against his property at TO7 Gilmer Avenue, N. E.. be denied.
The notion failed for lack of a second.
Mr. Garland then moved that the City Attorney be instructed to prepare
the proper measure .alvin9 the lien of $294.00 against the property owned by
Rt. Roupas at 707 Gilmer Avenue, N. E. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor
and adopted by the £ollowlflg vote:
AYES: Messrs. Darland, Lisk, Taylor, Trout and Mayor Mebber---5,
NAYS: Messrs. Bubard and Thomas ...............................
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
COMMONREALTH*S ATTORNEy-COMMISSIONER OF TIlE REVENUE-CITY TREASURER-SHERIFF
Mr. Lisk offered the following Resolution electing to pay. for the period com-
mencing January 1, 1974, and thereafter, the entire amount of the salaries,
expenses and other allowances fixed for the offices of the Attorney for the
Commonwealth. the Commissioner of the Revenue, the City Treasurer and the Sheriff,
Of the City of Roanoke, the City of Roanoke to be reimbursed directly by the state
for the state's proportionate share of all such salaries, compensation and bene-
fits under Section 51-111.36 of the 1950 Code of Virginia. as amended, and
other expenses allowance:
(=209B7) A RESOLUTION electing to pay, for the period commencing
January 1, 1974. and thereafter, the entire amount of the salaries, expenses and
other allowances fixed for the offices of the Attorney for the Commonwealth. the
Commissioner Of Revenue, the City Treasurer and the Sheriff, of the City Of
Roanoke, the City of Roanoke to be reimbursed directly by the State for the State's
proportionate share of' all such salaries, compensation, benefits under ~51-111.36
of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and other expense allomances.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book n38, page
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Trout and adopted by the folloming vote:
431
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hobard, Lisko Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Jebber ..... ~ ........7.
NAYS: None ..........-0.
PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOYEES: Mr. Trout offered the following eneroency
Ordinance adopting and providing a new System of Pay Rates and Ranges for the
employees of the City of Roanoke, effective July l, 1973:
(z20989) AN ORDINANCE to adopt and provide a new System of Pay
Rates and Ranges for the employees of the City of Roanoke effective July 1,
1973; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Rook ~30, page 200.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Llsk and,adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Rubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Mebber ................ 7..
NAYS: None ...........
CITY EMPLOyEES-AUDITORIUM-COLISEUM:
.Mr. Garland offered the follow-
ing Resolution repealing, effective July 1, 19~3, Resolution No. 20039
adopted on January 10, 1972. making special provision for compensating the
city's employees in the Civic Center Departuent for overtime services:
(n2oggo) A RESOLUTION repealing, effective July 1, 1973, Resolution
No. 20029 adopted January 10, 1972, making special provision for compensating
the City's employees in the Civic Center Department for overtime services.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Oook g3fl, pagq 207.)
(~20991) AN. ORDINANCE amending and reordaining Sec. 7. Unclassified
NAYS: None O.
432
Connection of certain properties outside corporate limits;charges, of Article
II, Sewage Disposal, Chapter 7, Seuers and semnge disposal, of Title XVII.
Streets, Sidewalks nad Semers, of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as
amended:
(n20992) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaJnlng Seg. 14. Charoes for
~cientific treatment and disoosal - lmnosition, and subsections (b). (c) and
(d) of Sec, 22, COn~e~ion of certain ~ronerties outside corporate limits: charaes.
of Arltcle II. Sewane Disoosal, Chapter ?. Sewers and Sewane disposal, of Title
XYIlo $~reets. Sidewalks and Sewers, of the Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956,
as amended; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text.of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~JO, page209.}
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Link and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: lessrs, Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Webber ................ 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
PAY PLAN--CITY EMPLOYEES: Mr. Trout offered the following emergency
Ordinance fixing the annual compensation of certain unclassified officials and
employees of the City of Roanohe:
(m20993) AN ORDINANCE fixing the annual compensation of certain
unclassified officials and employees of the City; and providing for an emergency.
{For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book n3§, page 211.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the follouing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................ 7.
NAYS: None ...........O.
BUDGET: Mr. Trout offered the following e~ergency Ordinance making
appropriations from the General Fund of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal
year beginnin9 July 1, 1973, and ending June 30, 1974:
(~20994) AN ORDINANCE making appropriations from the General Fund
of the City of Roanoke forthe fiscal year beginning July 1, 1973, and ending
June 30, 1974; and declaring the existence of an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =38, page 211.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance.. The motion was seconded
by Nr, Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hnbard, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Webber ?.
NAYS: None O.
BBDGET-SEBERS AND STORM DRAINS: Mr. Trout offered the following
emergency Ordinance making appropriations from the'Sewage Treatment General Fund
and the Sewage Treatment Replacement Reserve Fund for the City of Roanoke for t~
fiscal year beginning July 10 1973o.and ending June 30, 1974:
i
.e
I
I
(n20995) AN OROINANGE making appropriations from the Sewage Treat-
ment General Fund and the Sewage Treatment Replacement Reserve Fund for the
City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1973, and ending June
30, 1974; and declaring the existence of on emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =38, page 23~)
Hr, Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Hr. Thomas and adopted by the toll,wing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Nubard, Llsk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Rayor Nebber ................ 7.
NAYS: None ........... O.
BUDGET-NiTER DEPARTMENT: Dr. Taylor offered the following emergency
Ordinance making appropriations from the Namer General Fund and the Namer
Replacement Reserve Fund for the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning
July 1. 1973, and ending June 30, 1974:
(32099~) AN ORD1RARCE making appropriations from the ~ater General
Fund amd the Namer Replacement Reserve Fund for the City Of Roanoke for the
fiscal year beginning July 1, 1973, and ending June 30, 1974; and declaring
the existence of an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book #30. page 234.)
(g20990) AN ORDINANCE making appropriations £rom the Civic Center
433
434
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the foil*ming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Mebber .......... ; ..... 7.
'NAYS: None ......... -0.
BUDDEY: Mlth reference to the 1973-74 fiscal year budget; the City
Auditor submitted the following tabulation of figures:
TOTAL REVENUE
Deneral Fund $44,070,10~.~S
Schools 7.000.976.00
Total General Fund ~51.071.0B4.65
Municipal Airport Fund $ 805,450.00
Civic Center Fund l,?g4.DO0.O0
Mater Department 2,616,550,00
Sewage Treatment Department 1,809,500.00
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$33,604,429.65
17.466.655.00
~51.071.084.65
$ 800,660.00
1,792,271.50
2,616,232.00
1,802,766,55
Also with reference to the adoption of the 1973-74 fiscal year budget,
the City Auditor submitted a certificate advising that in accordance with
paragraphs (h) and (i) of Section 25 of the Charter of the City of Roanoke,
1952. he certifies that funds required for the 1973-74 General Fund, Mater Fund,
Sewage Treatment Fund, Roanoke Civic Center Fund and Airport Fund.budgets are
or will be available for appropriation.
Mr. Thomas moved that the certificate be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
JUVENILE DETENTION HOME: Dr. Taylor presented the following communica-
tion in connection with the detention needs of · e eight jurisdictions composing
the Fifth Planning District and the steps needed to be taken to meet those needs
and that considering all factors involved it was agreed by the Juvenile Detention
Committee that the Juvenile Detention Home should be increased by an additional
ten beds to provide for both present and future needs in the area:
"June 21, 1973
The Honorable Mayor Roy L. Webber
and Members of Roanoke City Council
Municipal Building
215 Church Avenue, S. W.
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The Juvenile Detention Committee met on Wednesday, June
20, 1973, at 2:00 P.M. to determine the detention needs of
the eight (D) jurisdictions composing the Fifth Planning
District and the steps needed to be tahen to meet those needs.
It was agreed that without adequate court and intake func-
tions, probation, police and other allied services the
effectiveness of any juvenile detention facility is seriously
hampered.
A very significant ~actor that should reduce the average
lengt~ of stay is the nam Juvenile District Court System that
mill become effective July 1, 1973. This system provides two
(2) full-time Juvenile District Court Judges for the Roanoke
Valley and it is hoped that the length of time prior to the
preliminary hearing will be reduced considerably.
Aftek considering all of the factmrn involved, It wus
agreed thut the Roanoke City 3uvenlle Detention Hone should
be increased by un sdditional tea (i0) beds; It is felt
this ~111 provide for both present nad future detention needs
in the area. The reports of the consultmts revealed that
Roanoke City. Roanohe County and Salem need five (5) addi-
tional beds end a like number is needed rot the five (5)
Jurisdictions composing the northern section of the Fifth
Planning District, namely; Allegheny Countyo'Dotetourt
County. Craig County end the Cities of Clifton Forge end
Covington.
The meeting resulted in the following actions:
1. A committee was appointed to bring in a compre-
hensive plan for the expanded facility and other
related functions.
2. The five ($) new jurisdictions that will use the
expanded facility were asked to give the City of
Roanoke a statement of their intention to enter into
a contractual agreement for using the same.
The committee is requesting that the City of Roanoke
will give an expression of its intention to expand
the Juvenile Detention Ilome to serve the needs of
the Fifth Planning District area.
I wish to recommend that our City Attorney he instructed
to draft the proper resolution.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Noel C. Taylor nt
Noel C. Taylor"
Dr. Taylor moved that the City Attorney be instructed to prepare
the proper measure expressing the intent of the City of Roanoke to add ten
additional beds at the Juvenile Detention Ilome. The motion nas seconded by
Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
COMMO~REALTH*S ATTORNEY: Earlier in the meeting Council took under
advisement as a CoMmittee of tbe Hhole the request of the Commonuealth*s
NAYS: None ..........-0.
435
436
engage In the private practice of law, or to maintain a separete office rot the
private practice of lau:while receiviag such supplement If in the opinion of the
¢ommon~ealtb*s Attorney it will he detrimental to the pers~a*s performance of his
duty to the office of the Commonmealth°s Attorney on a first priority basis. The
motion nas seconded by Mr. Eubard and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Lisk then offered the following emergency Ordinance as amended:
(nRo98D) AN ORDINANCE supplementing the salaries set by the State
Compensation Board for the Attorney for the Common#ealth of theClty of Roanoke.
and for his Assistants. upon certain terms and conditions; and. providing for
au emergency.
{For full text of Ordinance. see Ordinance Book n30, page 199.)
Mr. Lisk'moYed the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion Has seconded
by Mr. Ilubard and adopted by the follomieg vote:
AYES: Messrs. 6ar~and, Hubard. Lisk. Taylor. Thomas. Trout
and Mayor Webber ................
NAYS: None ..........
CITY ATTORNEY-PAY PLAN: The City Attorney submitted the follouing
report respectfully requesting that the Pay Plan Ordinonce be omended to
provide that the position of Assistant City Attorney (presently filled) be
classified at Range 31. Step 1. $1,24].00 per month or $14.B92.00 p~r annum;
and that the additional Assistant city Attorney position (now vacant} be classi-
fied at Range 27, Step 1. $1.ORO.O0 per month or $1~40.00 per ann~m:
"June 2~.
· he Honorable ~ayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke. Virginia
GentXemen:
Prior to the Council°s adoption of the proposed classi-
fied Pay Plon ordinance which will be before the Council at
its meeting on June 2Sth. I respectfully request that you
consider the following recommended change in two of the
positions provided for assistants in ny office.
Under Code Position 12S1. provision is nude fOF the two
lomer-salarted positions of assistant city attorney eaoh of
which positions are placed in Pay Range 20 and one of which
is Vacant at the moment but with a yoong, inexperienced
applicant pending for the position. As proposed by the Pay Plan
before you. the vacant position, which ! had hoped to fill by
employment of the inexperienced applicant ! om now considering,
would carry on annual salary of $12,0S2.00 with the possibi-
lity of a one step increase after six months of satisfactory
employment. The Assistant City Attorney now occupying th~
next position is, under the Pay Plan before you. placed in
the same puy range, namely 20. at Step 2. with an annual
salary of $13,476.00 and would not, as I understand the
Plan. be ellgi~le for any advnncement within .1~ months.
The incongruous result of the above is that, after
six months enp!oyment in the vacancy now in this office and
needed to be filled, the Jnexperieflced attorney would, as
! understand it. be eorning precisely the same salary as
that provided by the proposed plan for the assistant now
employeed and who bas nine months of actual experience in
employment in this office, who bas approximately six years
prior thereto worked closely with this and other departments
of the City in annexation matters and who has now been in
motive general lum practice for twelve years. ~his, ! do
not believe is intended by the Pay Plan.
la the salary schedule recently adopted for lawyers in
the Commonmealth*s Attorney's ofriCeo none of mhich are as
experienced as the second assistant attorney in this office,
the salaries of assistant commonwealth's attorneys range as
follows: $12.450 to $14,100 to $15,100. At least a similar
range should, I submit, be provided for this office, since
the lowest position Is intended to be attractive to graduate,
licensed lawyers but without great experience, with the
other tug positions designed for those with greater exper-
Ience and proven satisfactory sqrvJce.
I therefore, respectfully, request that the Council, Jn
adopting the ordinance which will bring the assistants in
this office into the City's Classified Pay Plan. direct that
provision be made for the tmo lowest legal positions as
follows:
Range Siep Per Mo. Per Yr.
Assistant City Attorney
(presently filled) 31 1 $1241 $14,982
Assistant City Attorney
(vacant) 27 I $1020 $12,240
This, as will.be.no,ed, provides for a small reduction in
the coneencement salary ietended for the vacant position and
for a more reasonable differential between that position
and the next one which is held by a capable, experienced
lawyer, and follows, in general, the schedule approved by
the Council for assistants in the Gommonwealth*s Attorney's
Office. Further, it mahes little change in the total sum
proposed to be appropriated for Personal Services in this
office and such increase as may be made can be more than
offset by not filling the vacant position i~mediately upon
the commencement of the new fiscal year.
1 trust that tho propriety of this request mill be
recognized by the Council in the adoption of the proposed
new Pay Plan,
Respectfully,
S/ J. N. Eincanen
J. N. Kincanon'
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Attorney and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for pre-
paration of tho proper measure amending the Pay Plan. The motion was seconded
by Ore Taylor and unanimously adopted.
There being no further business, Mayor Webber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
437
438
' COCNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday, July 2, 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting in the
Council Chamber in thc Municipal Building, Monday, July 2, 1973, at 2 p.m., the
regular meeting hour, mith Mayor.Roy L. Webber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A~ Garland, Milldam S. Hubard, David K.
Llsk, Noel C. Taylor, Hampton M. Tbomaso James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L.
Webber 7
ABSENT: None ............O.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Byron E. Haner, City Manager; Mr. Samuel H.
McGhee, III, Assistant City Manager; Mr. James H. Kincanon, City Attorney; Mr.
H. Ben Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorney; and Mr. A. N. Gibson, City Auditor.
Mayor Webber called to the attention of Council that former Mayor
and Councilman Molter L. Young died on Sunday, July 1, 1973, and requested that
a moment of silence be observed in memory of Mr. Young.
INVOCATION: The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend
Milldam R. Shiflet, Pastor, Christ Episcopal Church.
M1NUI£S: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday,
June 25° 1973, having been furnished each member of Council, on motion of Dr.
Taylor, seconded by Mr, Lisk and'unanimously adopted, the reading thereof was
dispensed with and the minutes approved as recorded.
HEARING OF CIYIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids
on the construction of a wlldfloser garden on gill Mountain north of the Children*s
Zoo, said proposals to be received by the City Clerk until .2 p.m., Monday, July
2, 1973, and to be opened at that hour before Council, Mayor Webber asked if
anyone had any questions about the advertisement for bids and no representative
present raisin9 ~ny question, the Mayor instructed the Deputy City Clerk to pro-
ceed with the opening of the bids; whereupon, the Deputy City Clerk advised that
no bids had been received on the above described project.
Mayor Webber advised that the matter will be referred back to the City
Manager for consideration.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
ALCOHOLIC HEVERAGES: Council having previously adopted a Resolution
requesting the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board to amend its regulations
relating to the times at mhich alcoholic beverages may be sold in the City of
Roanoke, a communication from Mr. Robert L. Garian, Assistant Secretary. Depart-
ment of Alcoholic Beverage Control, advising that the ABC Board has invited
the comments of the Legislative Study'Commission concerning the matters of hours
of sale generally and, as a consequence, the Board feels that it should await
any commeflts the Commission Mould core to make before it considers granting any
further variances from the general hours. ~as before Council.
'm
439
#r, Thomas moved that the comnnnlcation be received nad filed, The
motion was seconded by Dr, Taylor and unanimously adopted,
JAILS: Copy of a communication from Mr, J, U, Pugh, Jails Superin-
tendent, Depgrtwent.of Melfare and Institut!ons, in connection with a routine
inspection of the Roanoke City Jail on June 13,.1973, was before Council,
Mr, Garland moved that the communication be received and filed, The
motion was seconded by Or, Taylor and unanimously adopted.
MATER DEPARTMENT: Copy of a Resolution adopted by the Council of the
Town of Vinton on June 4, 1973, requesting permission to resell surplus water
purchased from the City of Roanoke Muter Department to certain parties residing
beyond the corporate limits of the Town of Vinton, was before Council,
In this connection, the City Manager submitted a written report
advising that the area referred to in the Resolution from the Town of Vinton
and more specifically described in a communication under date of June 2S, 1973,.
from Hr. Donald Smith, Tomn Manager of the Town of Vinton, is so remote from
the existing city water system as to make it impractical for the city to
vide the water service directly and recommending that Council 9rant permission
to the Tuna of ¥inton to resell city water as requested in Resolution No. 528
adopted by the Town Council of the Town of ¥1nton.
Mr. Thomas moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the p~oper ~e~sure. The motion was.seconded by Mr. Lisk and
unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CiTY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a written report advising
that on Monday, June 25, 1973, Council received copies of the Management
Study as prepared by Albert Ramond and Associates. Incorporated, that on June
2&, 1973, members of that firm briefed the members of Council in detail on the
various aspects of said ~eport, that since this briefing, the city administra-
tion has had.the opportunity to review the report and findings in detail, advis-
ing that his office endorses the report of .the management consultants and it is
his opinion that Council should accept the recommendations of the management
consultants and implement those aspects of their recommendations which fall mithi
the authori'ty of Council, recommending that the Police and Fire Departments
retain their current organizations but that they be placed under a directorship
Of Safety and Security, further 'recommending that Council refer the aspects of
the consultants findings mhich require acceptance by the citizens to a referen-
dum and the legislature and that Council authorize the City Attorney to prepare
the necessary City Code revisions to implement those aspects of the Management
Study which Emil within Council's prerogative.
Mr. Thomas moved that those matters pert'aiming to reorganization of
the city administration be referred' to the City ~anager for study, report and
recommendation to Council at the next regular meeting of the body on Monday,
July 9; 1973, as 2o the number of recommendations he would like to implement and
44O
the manner of implementation nnd that the other matters contained in the Ynnlge-
meat Study report be taken under advisement until the regular meeting of Council
on Monday, July 9,'1973,.or.the regular meeting of Council on Monday, July 16,
1973. The motion mas seconded by Yr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
In this connection. Mr.'Hubard presented a communication expressing
the opinion that it mould be mel~ for Council to reviem the manner in which it
performs its responsibilities as the legislative body for the City of Roanoke,
recommending that Council appoint a committee to study the functions, responsi=
bill*les and operations of Council and to make recommendations to Council as to
ham it can (1) more efficiently fulfill the same and (2) be more responsible to
the citizens; that some matters which such u committee could study mould be (1)
the manner of preparing Council*s agenda (2) the relationship of Council to the
City Clerk and the City Attorney (3) the number and function of authorities.
boards, commissions and committees (4) the Virginia Freedom of Information Act
(5) the need to amend the City Code or Charter as to matters affecting Council
and (6) other relevant matters; advising that such a committee should be composed
of two or three members of Council, an attorney from the City Attorney*s Office,
two or three citizens and the Mayor as un ex officio member.
Mr. Hubard then moved that Council establish a seven member committee
to be appointed by Council to perform a study of the operations of City Council.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
With reference to the matter, Mr. James A. Ford, Chairman, Citizens'
Study Committee, appeared before Council and presented the following repays* on
a study of the Offices of the City Attorney, City Auditor and City Clerk:
"Draft of Citizens Study Committee 8eppFt
Office of City Attorney
The duties of this Office are many and varied. Some are
peculiar to the problems of municipal government and are of
u continuing nature while others occur less frequently and
are matters mhich require a high degree of specialization.
Examples of the latter Would include annexation Suits and
those involving integration. For these reasons we would
encourage Council to continue the practice of referring
particularly time consumin9 and specialized work to private
specialized firms. This would insure that other important
matters will receive necessary attention from staff members
who already have a great deal of items requiring their time.
As in the case of the other Offices studied, we would
recommend the decentralization of duplicating equipment
so that this office has its own. Also, we believe a more
thorough study than me are qualified to make might mall
develop the need for automatic typewriters capable of
accurately preparing more routine matters. This should
provide an overall savings to the City and assure accurate
work promptly.
The re*nation of competent attorneys mbo find private practice
more appealing will likely be u continuing problem. Ne note
favorably salary adjustments have been made since this Cam-
mi*tee'was appointed. Of course, this is a matter mhich mill
require continuing attention in order to attract and retain
competent attorneys for this Office.
Offic~ of C~tT apd~tor
of all the three Offices this Committee was asked to study.
this Office is the largest and its activities affect and
relate to most every function of city government. As in the
come of the two other offices, Committee members found n
cooperative spirit on the pert o! staff nad were favorably
impressed with their competency. Our study indicated to
us, as did that of the Council Audit Committee composed
of CPA's as well as Albert Rawond and Associates. that a
restructuring o! this Office should result in improved
efficiency, better controls, and more effective long-term
planning. ?berefore we recommend the dlrldlng of this Office
to three new departments: (1) Internal Auditing, (2) Finance
and budgeting, and (3) Data Processing. He should point
out that this proposed hem organization might well be more
expensive fuitfalIy than the present one.
The department responsible for internal auditing would
report directly to City Council. Me believe Council
already appreciates the obvious need for this function,
In the area of finance and budget, expert management is
critical. Continued close controls ever expenditures are
necessary. Hut so is the ~anagenent and investment of
funds which can generate additional return on capital.
It is in the area of data processing that much needs to be
done. Me believe the City needs a long-tern plan for data
processing, seven or eight years. This plan is a management
responsibility and shoeld not be delegated to consultants
or data processing people. At present considerable reliance
is placed upon experts employed by the companies that
manufacture and market the equipment. This may not result
in the mast efficient, economical system.
Me suspect many departments have no idea how this relatively
new *tool* can work for them. Only informed administrators
can make necessary long-range decisions relating to utiliz-
ing data processing equipment. Me therefore recommend that
a training program for key city administrators be instituted
utilizing Virginia Western Community College or the University
of Virginia Extension facilities,
Office of City Cl??k
In general, we find this Office to be well operated with a
competent staff. However, this Office bas, over a period of
years, acquired numerous functions which do not seem to be
consistent with the responsibilities assigned to it. A
list of proposed changes as prepared by this Office and con-
curred by this Committee, is attached to this Report.
Specifically there are a number of other changes which we
believe would also contribute to the efficiency of this
Office. They are:
1. Summarizing the minutes of Council*s meetings should
result in considerably less preparation and time spent
by members of Council in reviewifl9 these minutes.
2. Authorizing the City Clerk to be able to remove and destroy
much of'material stored, such as extra copies and old
routine reports. Further we believe an investigation of
newer methods of retainie9 records by such things as
computers and nag cards would prove worthwhile.
3. Acquiring an automatic typewriter and a snail duplicating
machine which would eliminate much ti~e spent in taking
items only requiring one or two copies to the present
central machine. '
4. Reducing copies of routine letters of notice to citizens
441
;442
Mr. Thomas moved that the repot'ts of the Citizens* Study Committee
be referred to the seven member committee to be appointed by Council to study
the operations of City Council, said committee to take Into consideration the
reports of the Citizens° Study Committee when It reviews the entire City Council
operation. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Hubard and unanimously adopted.
MATER DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a written report advis-
ing that mhen the city purchased a private water company to form mhat is now
the Mater Department included in that purchase mas a boiler and pump house
containing a massive steam pump manufactured by the Snow Steam Pump Murks of
Buffalo, New York, that the boiler house portion of the building mas razed and
the hook value of the Snow Pump, originally placed at $49,323.51 mas retired in
1956, that the part of the building containing the pump still stands on the land
omned by the City at Crystal Spring, that the building is in need of extensive
repairs, that the essence of the situation is that no appreciable use can be
made of the building due to the presence of the pump and the pump cannot be
removed without seriously damaging the building, that the only purpose of this
building is to house this massive pump mhicb has some historic and perhaps
sentimental value but which is of no use in the operation of the Water Department,
requestin9 the concurrence of Council to raze the building and sell the pump to
whomever and for whatever purpose can be found at the best price and that the
other realistic alternative is to continue routine maintenance year by year with
major repair work forseen in the very near future.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the request of the City
Manager to raze the building and sell said pump. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Trout and unanimously adopted,
TRAFFIC: The City Manager submitted a written report advising that
by letter of June 1, 1973, the city requested the approval of the Vir!~ia Depart-
ment of Highways for the installation of a traffic signal at the main entrance
to the Parkside Plaza Shopping Center on Dale Avenue, $. E.. that by communica-
tion under date of June 22, 1973, the city has been advised by the Virginia
Department of Highways that the request of the city for this traffic signal
installation has been denied.
Mr. Trout moved that the matter be referred back to the City Manager
for the purpose of exploring other possibilities that may provide greater
justification for the installation of a traffic signal at the Parkside Plaza
Shopping Center. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
In this connection, Mr. Thomas moved that the City Manager be requested
to institute proper procedures to afford the city the opportunity of expressing
its opinion as to the matter of ingress and egress before building permits are
issued for large developments. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Lisk and unaei-
measly adopted.
At this point, Dr. Taylor left the meeting.
MATER DEPARTMENT-SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT: The City Manager submitted
· mrltten report concurring in the recommendation of a committee that the
proposal of Suffolk Chemical Company, Incorporated, for supplying chlorine
to the City of Roanoke Mater Treatment and Semage Treatment Plants for the
period beginning July 2, i973, and ending June 30, 1974o be accepted.
Mr. Trout moved that Cooncil concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and offered the follomlng emergency Ordinance:
(~20999) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the purchase of supplies of liquid
chlorine to the Cltyts Mater Department and to the SeMage Treatment Plant for
the period beginnin9 July 2, 19T3, and ending June 30, 1974, upon certain terms
and provisions, by accepting a certain bid made to the City; rejecting certain
other bids; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~38, page 250,)
Mr, Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the.follomin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, llubard, Liak, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Nebber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ..........-0. (Dr. Taylor absent)
MATER DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a mritten report
concurring in the recommendation of a committee that the bid of Allied Chemical
Corporation for furnishing and delivering standard ground alum to the Mater
Department for the period from July 2, 1973. to June 30. 1974, be accepted.
providing for an emergency.
443
444
'June 20, 1973
The Honorable Roy L. Webber, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia '
Gentlemen:
· On November 6, 1972, City Council requested the Plan-
ning Commission to conduct a floodplain management study.
This proposed ordinance represents the first step in this
process.
The issue of floodplain zoning has been discussed by
the City Planning Commission on nc~eroos occasions an to
both intent und substance. The Planning Commission meetings
on this subject toot place on April 4, 1973. May 16. 1973.
June 6, 1973, June 12, 1973. June 21. 1973 and June 27,
1973. and un official public hearing being held on June 27,
1973. Close coordination was maintained at all times with
the Hayor's Flood Plain Committee and many productive work
sessions were held with this group and many other groups
and concerned individuals. .Modifications and amendments
mere made throughoot these meetings.
The Mayor's Flood Plain Committee endorsed the ordi-
nance as a necessary first step in the floodplain management
program. Other areas of concern of the Committee related
to the need for physical structures such as dikes and dams
and the need for the flood insurance program, both the
emergency and the regular program, to cover daeage by
flooding.
Areas of controversy relating to the floodplain
ordinance centered on the non-conforming provision, the
economics of floodproofing, the generalities of the flood-
plain lines as delineated by the Corps of Engineers and the
harmful effect on industrial development in the City as a
result of land devaluation resulting from the floodproofin9
requirements of the ordinance.
Much discussion by the Planning Comuission members
centered on the intent and a section by section analysis of
this ordinance. AS noted by the Commission and its staff,
the major intent of this ordinance is to protect life and
property, guide development within the floodplain areas and
to provide the mechanism for the residents of the City to
be able to qualify for federally-assisted flood insurance.
Additionally, the floodplain zonln9 ordinance generally
recommends the following provisions to carry out this stated
intent:
Land use permitted by right in flood prone areas are
only open uses (those not involving buildings).
Ail uses generally which would have been permitted
prior to the imposition of floodplain zoning are
permitted as special exceptions if the new structure
is elevated two (2) feet above the maximum elevation
of mhat is knomn as the one-hundred year flood (Inter-
mediate Regional Floodline).
Commercial and industrial uses are also permitted in
areas where they would have been permitted prior to
these regulations either.by elevating the structure
two (2) feet above the one-hundred year floodline or
if the buildings are floodproofed.
Existing structures must be floodproofed to the extent
practicable within a period of five (5) years mhere
other property may be damaged or lives endangered by
flooding.
The provisions of the floodplain district are waived
if physical improvements, such as by diking, can be
made to provide protection without causing a raising
of flood waters or adversely affecting other properties.
The specifices of floodproofing as noted in the proposed
ordinance have been taken from the proposed State Uniform
Building Code and are those contained in the recommended
Buildin9 Code amendment.
An important element of the ordinance relates to flood-
plain insurance. #lth the passage of this ordinance, the
residents of the City will be in a position to be eligible
for snbsldized flood insurance. However, the Corps of
Engineers will need to redefine and update the-lO0 yqar
floodplain areas prior to this being effectuated. It is
for this reason that the Planning Commission is recommending
that the City consider entering the Emergency Flood Insurance
Program, which provides almost immediate subsidized coverage,
although the coverage to be obtained 15 only at a level of
one-half the regular program. It should he noted thai under
the Emergency Flood Insurance Program, the City would still
be required to latium the same review procedures as contained
Jn this proposed ordinance uith the exception of the non-
conforming uses provision.
After considerable discussion of this proposed ordi-
nance at the public hearing on June 27. 1973, the Planning
Commission members supported the proposed Floodplain
Ordinance, the amendment to the Building Code relating to
floodproofing and considered essential the immediate adoption
by Council of the Emergency Flood Insurance Program.
Accordingly, motion mas made, duly seconded and
approved unanimously, recommending to City Council that
they adopt the recommended Floodplain Ordinance, adopt
the recommended amendment to the Huilding Code relating to
floodproofing, and finally that Council request tho City
Maoager*s office to develop such documentation as may be
necessary to qualify residents of the City to purchase
subsidized flood insurance.
Sincerely,
S/ Henry B, Boynton by LM
Ilenry B. Boynton
Chairman~
After a discussion of the matter, Mr. Lisk moved that Council hold a
public hearing on Monday, July 30, 1973, at 7:30 p.mo, on the question of adop-
tion of the floodplain Ordinance, said public hearing to include amendments to
the Zoning Ordinance and the Building Code. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Thomas and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Lisk further moved that the matter of documentation to qualify
residents of the City of Roanoke to purchase subsidized flood insurance be
referred to the City Manager for study, report and recommendation to Council.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
HOUSING-SLUR CLEARANCE: Council having appointed a committee com-
posed of Messrs. David K. Lisk, Chairman, Byron E. Baner, James N. Kincanon,
A. H. Gibson, and R. R. Uenley to work with the City of Roanok~ Redevelopment
and Housing Authority and the utility companies in an effort to work out agree-
ments with regard to the matter of underground utilities in the Kimball Urban
Renewal Area, the committee submitted the following report transmitting a
Resolution formally recognizing, on the part of the city, that the question as
to underground utilities in the Kimball Urban Renewal Area is unresolved and
that the two utility companies, by going ahead with construction Of their under-
ground facilities when and as the same are needed in the renewal area, would
not, by so doing, be estopped from looking to some other party, including the
city, for reimbursement of their additional costs, Should they be held entitled
it:
445
446
*Jnly 2, 1973'
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, ¥lrgJnio
Gentlemen:
The Council will recall that by Ordinance No. 20395
adopted July 24, 1972, Jt mas ordered and required that
electric and telephone mires and facilities to be lnatalled
in the public streets and mays tn the Kimball Urban Renewal
Project area, now under redevelopment, be placed underground
by the public service companies owning and operating the same.
Since that time, considerable discussion has been conducted
between representatives of the utility companies, the City
and the Housing Authority regarding the question of responsi-
bility for payment o£what is understood to be the additional
cost of installing underground facilities rather than over-
head facilities, both utility companies taking the.position
that each should be reimbursed by some party for their
actual additional costs.
The question was later referred to the undersigned
committee with direction to mark out agreement, if possible,
between the parties with regard to the responsibility for
such additional costs. The members of that committee, in
conference with officials and representatives of both
utility companies, requested the City Attorney and the
attorneys for the utility companies to confer and attempt
to agree upon the form of an understanding to be had between
the parties so that installation of underground utilities
in the Kimball Urban Renewal area not be delayed. Repre-
sentatives of both companies extended assurance of their
willingness to comply with provisions of the ahoy*mentioned
ordinance and in a manner so as not in any way to delay
development within the renewal area but have insisted,
throughout, that they should be reimbursed by either the
City or by the Housing Authority for their cost differential.
The attorneys have now a§reed upon the form of a resolution
which would be proposed to be adopted by the City Council,
a copy of which is transmitted mith this report.
Shile the resolutions would not, of itself, settle
the question of ultimate responsibility for payment of the
difference in cost of underground versus overhead electric
and telephone facilities in the Kimball Urban Renewal area,
it would formally recognize, un the part of the CitI, that
that question is unresolved and that the two utility com-
panies, by going ahead with construction of their under- .
ground facilities when and as the same are needed in the
renemal area, would not, by so doint, be estopped from
looking tO some other party, in*lading the City, for reim-
bursement of their additional costs, should they be held
entitled to it.
The undersigned committee respectfully recommends the
adoption of the ahoy*mentioned resolution.
Respectfully,
S/ Oavid K. Lisk ·
David K. Lisk, Chairman
S! Byron E, Hamer
Byron E. Hamer
~! J. N. Rincanon
James N. Klncanon
SI A. N. Gibson
A. N. Gibson
~/ ~. R. Henley
R. R. Henley*
Rr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the report of the committee and
offered the following Resolution:
(~2100i) A RESOLUTION reaffirming the City's established policy and
order with respect to telephone and telegraph wires and wires and cables carrying
electricity now or hereafter to be installed in the public streets, avenues,
alleys, ways and public places in the Kimball Urban Renewal Area of the City,
as contained in Ordinance No. 20385 of the Council, adopted July 24, 1972; and
recognizing that the question of payment of the difference in cost of instal-
ling undergronnd rather than overhead utilities in said area is unsettled and
remains to be resolved.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book zSO, page, 253.)
Mr. Link moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Link, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Nebber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ........... O. (Dr, Taylor absent)
MARKET-TRAFFIC-PLANNING: Council havin9 referred to the Central
financial and operational aspects of the Downtown Roanoke Parking Garage,
Mr. Nilliam R. Hill, Secretary, Central Roanoke Development Foundation,
Foundation in connection with financing, constructing and operating the Church
Avenue Parking facility.
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
part the proper measure providin9 for the issue of 9enernl obligation bonds
not to exceed fire million dollars. The motion was seconded by Mr. Link and
unanimously adopted.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES ANO RESOLUTIONS:
EASERENTS: Ordin~ce No. 20968, vacating and reestablishing a part
of a drainage and public utility easement as shown on the Map of Section No.
2, Edgehill Estates, the center line of said easement being the northerly
line of Block 5 as more particularly shown on the Map of Section No. 2,
Edgehill Estates, having previously been before Council for its first reading,
read and laid over, was again before the body, Mr. Link offering the folloming
for its second reading and final adoption:
(z20968) AN ORDINANCE to vacate the westerly portion of a drainage
and public utility easement as shown on the Map of Section No. 2. Edgehill
Estates, the center line of said easement being the northerly line of Block 5,
as more particularly shown on the Map of Section No. 2. idgehill Estates, which
plat is recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court for the County of
Roanoke, Virginia, in Plat Book 3, page 265, and authorizing the acquisition
herein vacated in order to provide for the relocation of a portion of said
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book :38, page 241.)
447
4zl8
Rt. Llsk moved the adoption o£the Ordinance; The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garlnod'and adopted by the follouin9 vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hnbord. Lisk, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Yebber .............~ .....
NAYS: None ...........O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
ZONING: Ordinance No. 20969, rezonin9 that certain parcel of land
containing 0.301 acre. 15cared in the 2600 block of Stephenaon
described as Official Tax No. 1160138. from RS-3. Single-Family Residential
District, to RD, Duplex Resideutihl District, having previously been before
Council for its first reading, read and laid over, mas again before the
body. Mr. Thomas offering the folloming for its second reading and final adoption:
(#20969) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1. Section 2. of
The Code of the City of Roanoke, 19§6, as amended, and Sheet No. 116, Sectional
1966 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in relation to Zoning.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~36, page 243,)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Dubard, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Nebber ...................
NAYS: None ..........-0. (Mr. Lisk not voting) (Dr. Taylor absent)
ZONING: Ordinance No. 20970, rezonlng property located at 135 Maddock
Avenue, ~. E., described as Lots 53 and $4, Block C, Map of Williamson Groves,
Official Tax No. 30D0909. and the tag vacant lots adjacent thereto, described
as Lots 51 and 52, Block C, Map of Milliamson Groves, Official Tax No. 3060900,
from RD, Duplex Residential District, to C-2, Ceneral Commercial District,
having previously been before Council for its first reading, read and laid
over. was again before the body, Mr. Trout offering the followin9 for its
second reading and final adoption:
(~20970) AN ORDINANCE to amend Title X¥, Chapter 4.1, Section 2, of
The Code of the Citl of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet No. 308, Sectional
1966 Zone Map. City of Roanoke. in relation to Zoning.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~D. page 244.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor #ebber ...............
NAYS: None .......... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
ZONING: Ordinance' No. 20971, rezonin9 property located on the northerly
side of the DO0 block of Jamlson Avenue, S. E,, described as Lots 17 and !6,
Section 13, Map of Belmont Land Company, Official Tax Nos. 41201I? and 4120118,
from RG-2, General Residential District, to C-2, General Commercial District,
having previously been before Council for its first reading, read and laid over,
was again before the body, Mr. Nubard offering the following for its second reading
and final adoption:
(~20971) ~ ORDINANCE to amend Title XV, Chapter 4.1. Section 2,
of The Code of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, and Sheet No. 412,
~ectional 1966 Zone Nap. City of Ronnoke. in relation to Zoning.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Rook u3R, page 245.)
Mr. Rabard moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion wes
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Rubard. Llsk. Thomas, Trout and
Nayor Mebber ................
NAYS: None ..........-0. (Dr, Taylor absent)
ZONING: Council at its last regular meeting on Monday, Jnne 25,
1973, having requested that the City Attorney render an opinion as to the
number of votes required for adoption of Ordinance No. 20972 on its first
reading rezoning property on Stewart Avenue and 13th Street, S. E. and Dale
Avenue and 13th Street, S. E., the Assistant City Attorney submitted a written
report advising that examination of the records of the City Clerk's Office and
of those of the City Planning Commission indicate that, of the four property
owners expressing written opposition to the proposed rezoning at the City
Plannin9 Commission hearing, only one mas the owner of propperty ~buttin9 that
proposed to be rezoned, further, two of said objecting owners, including the
abutting owner, have subsequently expressed, in writing, a change in attitude
and as of this moment, apparently favor the rezoning, that in view of the
above information and considering the provisions of paragraph (5) of Section
62 Of the City Charter, it must be determined that the twenty per cent
requirement in said Charter is not applicable in this situation, and,
accordingly, Ordinance No. 20972, which received four affirmative votes and
three negative votes upon its first readin9 at the meetin9 of Council on June
25, 1973, should be considered as validly adopted.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
District, fo~ its second reading and final adoption:
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Bock =~8, page 246°)
449
'450
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Thorns, Trout nnd Mayor Mebber ..... -4.
· NAYS: Messrs. Hubard nnd Lisk ...........................
(Dr. Taylor absent)
· STREETS AND ALLEYS: Ordinance No. 20974. vacating, discontinuing and
closing ~he masterly portion of Louisiana Avenue (an unopened street) a distance
on the north side of said street of 114.15 feet, and on the south.side of said
street 12§ feet: more or less. and 50 feet in width, having previously been
before Council for its first reading, read and'laid over, mas again before the
body, Mr. Thomas offering the follouing for its second reading and final adoption:
(u209T4} AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing
the masterly portion of Louisiana Avenue (an unopened street) in the northeast
section of the City of Roanoke, being 50 feet wide, a distance on the north side
of said streetof 114.15 feet and the south side of said street 125 feet more
or less and shown on Sheet 304 of the Appraisal Map'ofthe City of Roanoke,
Virginia, in the Roanoke City Engineer's Office.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book a38, page 247.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Bubard, Lisk, Thomas, Trout
and Mayor Webber ................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Ordinance No. 209?5, vacating, discontinuing and
closing an unused portion of Nontvale Road. S. N.. at the intersection of Spring
Road, S. W., having previously been before Council for its first reading, read
and laid over, Mas again before the body, Mr. Trout offering the follomin9 for
its second reading and final adoption:
(~20g75) AN ORDINANCE vacating, discontinuin9 and closing that unused
portion of Montvale Road, S. Mo, at the intersection of Spring Road'. S,
which parcel is designated as Official Tox No. 1550311, located in the City of
Roanoke. Virginia.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~30. page 249.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Rabbet .................... 6.
NAYS: None .......... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
AIRPORT: Council havin9 directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure authorizing the issuance of Change Order No. I to the city's
contract mlth John Ag Hall 8 Company, Incorporated. authorized by Ordinance No.
20403. for the reconstruction of the loop roadway in front of the Terminal Build-
ing at Roanoke Municipal (Woodrum) Airport, he presented same; whereupon. Mr.
Trout offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(z21002) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the issuance of Change Order No.
I to the City's contract with John A. Hall ~ Coupany, Inc~, authorized by
Ordinance No. 20403, for the reconstruction of the loop roadmay in front of
the termignl building at the Roanoke Municipal Airport; upon certain terms and
conditions; and proriding.for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Hook aao, page 254.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance..The motion was
Seconded by Mr. LJsh and adopted by the follomiug vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubardo Lisk, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber .................
NAYS: None--~ ....... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
BUILDINGS: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure directing the City Attorney to makr waived and released a cer-
tain demolition lien docketed against real property knomn as TO? Gllmer Avenue,
N. M., Official Tax No. 2111111° in the City of Roanoke, he presented same;
whereupon, Mr. Trout offered the following Resolution:
(a21003) A RESOLUIION directing the City Attorney to mark waived
and released a certain demolition lien docketed against real property known as
707 Gilmer Avenue, N. W., Offi~ al Tax No. 2111111, in the City of Roanoke.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Hook #38. page 255.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption Of the Me$olution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Llsk. Trout and Mayor
Mebber l.
NAYS: Messrs. Hubard and Thomas~-2. (Dr. Taylor absent)
JUVENILE DETENTIOH HOME: Council having directed the City Attorney
to prepare the p~oper measure relating to expansion of the facilities of the
Juvenile Detention Home at Coyner Springs. he presented same; whereupon, Mr.
Trout offered the following Hesolution:
(~21004) A RESOLUTION relating to expansion of the facilities of
the City's Juvenile Detention Home at Coyner Springs.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Hook ~O, page 25b.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Hr. Lish and adopted by the folloming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber
NAYS: None .0. (Dr. Taylor absent)
AIRPORT-BUDGET: Mr. Trout offered'the following emergency Ordinance
appropriating $163.00 to Terminal Building Expansion under Section ~$50, *Airport
Capital Improvement Program,' of the 1973-74 Municipal Airport Fund Appropriation
Ordinance, to proride funds in connection with the construction of holding rooms
at Roanoke Municipal (Moodrum) Airport:
*(w21005) 'AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section nssO,'Airport
Capital Improvement Progrnn,' of the 1973-74 Municipal Airport Fund Approprintio]
Ordinance, and providing for an ewergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book u38, page 256.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion was
seconded by Hr, Link and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland. Hubardo Llsk, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor ~ebber ................
NAYS: None ........... O. (Ur. Taylor. absent)
Br. Link offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
$2~0,163.00 to Replacement Reserve under Section #500, "~ater Fund - Approprfatio~
for Capital Outlay - Replacement Reserve," of the 1973-74 Rater Fund Appropria-
tion Ordinance, to provide funds In connection with the construction of holding
rooms at Roanoke Runicipal (Roodrun) Airport:
(~2]B06) A~ ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~SO0, "Rater
Fund - Appropriations for Capital Outlay - Replacement Reserve," of. the 1973-74
Mater Fund Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #38, page 257.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. Themotion was seconded
by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Ressrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Thomas, Trout and
Rayor ~ebber .................
NAYS: None ......... O. (Dr. Taylor absent)
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
COMMITTEES: Mr. Uubard presented the followin9 communication in
connection with amending the "Statement of Policy on Appointments by Roanoke
City Council to Boards, Authorities, Commissions and Committees":
"July 2, 1973.
The Honorable Roy L. Nebber and
Rembers of Roanoke City Council,
Roanoke, Virginia.
Gentlemen, on-June 4, 1973, I suggested to this
Council that our *Statement of Policy on Appointments by
Roanoke City Council to Boards, Authorities, Commissions
and Committees' be amended to require that at least five
(S) days public notice be given for meetings of such bodies.
Apparently such a procedure would cause substantial incon-
venience for these appointive bodies conducting their
affairs, particularly as to the function of bid committees.
Thus, I would suggest shat the amendment to Section
VII of that 'Siatement of Policy' be phrased as follows:
'~EETING$~' 'Unless otherwise provided by law:
(a) all such bodies, required, under the terns of the
Virginia Freedom of Information Act to have "open
meetings", shall give at least twenty-four (24) hours
public notice of special or regular meetings, and (b)
notice posted in the office of the City Clerk of Roanoke
"shall be considered such public notice".*
This amendment would do three (3) things:
(1) It would give the public and the press more convenient
access to notice of such meetings, to which they are currently
entitled to nowunder the Virginia Freedom of Information Act
by inquiring.
(2) Place all information as to time, place and purpose
of meetings' in one convenient place, l,e** in the City Clerk°s
office..
(3) Call attention to the fact that the Virginia Free-
dom of Informa'tlon Act' requires such meetings be 'open
meetings' unless exempt under that Act, such as certain study
committees, ioe.o bid committees,
S! Yilliam S. HubaFd
Councilman'
Hr. Hubard moved that the communication be amended to read as Vellums:
'H£BT1NGS,' 'Unless othermise provided by lam: (a) all such
bodies, required, under the terns of the Virginia Freedom of
Information Act to have 'open meetings0 shall give at least
tuelve (12) hours public notice of special OF regular meetings,
and (b) notice posted in the Office of the City Clerk of Hnanuke
and furnished to media un record in that office as desiring to
receive such notification 'shall be considered such public
The motion mas secsnded by Mr. Lisk and adopted, Mr. Trout voting no.
MFo Bubard then moved that Council COnCUr in his communication as
amended. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted, Mr. Trout voting no.
SCHOOLS: A communication from Mrs. Frank W. Rogers, Jr., uroing that
Council consider Mrs. Robert G. Hagan to fill the vacancy on the Roanoke City
School Board created by the resignation of Rt. Herman H. Pevler.
l notion Mr. Lisk moved that the communication be received and filed. The
Mas seconded by Mr. llubard and unanimously adopted.
SCHOOLS: A communication from Mrs. Lelia C.
Bagbey
Iname of Mrs. Robert C. Hagan for the consideration of Council la filling the
vacancy on the Roanoke City School Board created by the resignation of Mr.
Mr. Lisk moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion mas seconded by Mr. flubard and unanimously adopted.
LIBRARIES:
Mayor #ebber called to the attention of Council that the
as members of the Roanoke City Public Library Board expired on June 20, 1973,
and called for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Mr. Garland placed in nomination the names of Hrs. Elizabeth M.
There being no further nominations, Mrs. Elisabeth M. Dremry, Mrs.
City Public Library Board for terms of three years each ending June 50, 1976, by
the ~ollowin9 vote:
FOR MRS. DREMR¥, MRS. MORROW AND HR. JESSEE: MeSsrs. Darland, Hubardo
Lisk, Thomas, Trout and Mayor Webber 6. (Dr. ~aylor
absent)
PLANNING: Mayor ~ebber called to the attention of Council that the
David H. Noodbury, John H. Parrott, James O. Trout and Hampton ~. Thomas as
Imembers of the Fifth Plannin9 District Commission expired on June 20, 1973, and
called for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Mr. Lizk placed in nomination the names of Messrs. John D. Copenbaver,
Dsvid H. Moodbury. John M. Parrntt, James O. Trout and Hsnpton M. Thomas.
There being aD further nominations, Mr. John D. Copenhsver uss
reelected os a member of theFifth Planning District Commission for a term
of two years ending June SO, 1975, and Messrso David M. Woodbury, John H.
Parrott, James O. Trout and Bsnpton #. Thomas mere reelected as members of the
Fifth Planning District Commission for terms of three yesrs each ending June
30, 1976, by the folloming vote:
FOR MESSRS. COPENBAVER, MOODHURy AND PARROTT: Messrs. Garland, Bubard,
Lisk, Thomas. Trout and Mayor Mebber ................... 6. (Dr. Taylor absent)
FOR MN. TROUT: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Thomas and
Mayor Webber 5 (Dr. Taylor absent)
(Mr. Trout not voting)
FOR ~. THOMAS: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. LJsk, Trout and
Mayor Webber ........................................ 5. (Dr, Taylor absent)
(Mr. Thomas not voting)
PENSIONS: Mayor gabber called to the attention of Council that the
four year term of Mr. Milliam R. Battle as a member of the Board of Trustees
of the Employees* Retirement System expired on June 30, 1973. and called for
nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Trout placed in nomination the name of Mr. lilliam R. Battle.
There being no further nominations, Hr. Million R. Battle Mas
System for u term of four years ending June 30, 1977, by the folloming vote:
FOR MR. I~ATTLE: Messrs. Garland, Hubard. Lisk, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ..................................... b. (Dr. Taylor absent)
HOUSING-SLUM CLEARANCE: The Deputy City Clerk reported that Mrs.
Mabel N. Marmion, Mr. Lewis G. Leftwich and Mr. Clark M. Thomas have qualified
for terms of one year each endin9 March 31, 1974; the Reverend Metz T. Coker
and Mr. Robert P. Burchfield have qualifed for terms of two years each ending
March 31 1975; and Mrs. Vernice J~ law and Mr. Joseph Mo Francis have qualified
for terms of three years each ending March 31, 1975, as members of the Fair
Housing Board.
gr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
There being no further business, Mayor gabber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST: .
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday. July g, lC?3.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular meeting In the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Bailding, Monday, July 90 19T3, at 2 p.m**
the regular meeting hour, uith Mayor Roy L, Rebber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, David R. Lisk, Noel C. Taylor,
Hampton M. Thomas, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L. Webber .....
ABSENT: Councilman RiIliam S. Bubard ...............1.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. ~yron E. Boner, City Manager; Mr. Samuel B.
McGhee, III, Assistant City Manager; Mr. A. No Gibson, City Auditor; Mr. James
N. Elocon*no City Attorney; and Mr. H. Ben Jones. Jr°, Assistant City Attorney.
INVOCATION: The meeting mas opened with a prayer by the Reverend
Benjamin Sanders, Pastor, St. Elizabeth*s Episcopal Church.
MINUTES: Copy of the minutes of the regular meeting held .on Monday,
July 2. 1973, having been furnished each member of Council, on motion of Dr.
Taylor. seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof was
dispensed with and the minutes approvedas recorded.
BEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
AUDITORIUM'COLISEUM: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids on
a Civic Center Sign and Message Board. said proposals to be received by the City
Clerk until 2 p.m.. and to he opened at that hour before Council, Mayor Webber
asked if anyone had any questions about the advertisement for bids and no repre-
sentative present raising any question, the Mayor instructed the City Clerk to
proceed with the opening of the bids.
In this connection, the City Clerk pointed out that one bid had been
presented to her at 2:02 p.m., and raised'th~ question as to whether or not it
is the desire of Council to accept said bid.
by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
~am? Amount Number of Workino Days
Sky Marquee, Incorporated $ 3B,220.00 35
American Sign and Indicator
Corporation 6B,TTI.T6 120
Roy C. Kinsey Sign Company,
Incorporated 71,9g5.00 120
Sasser Signs, Incorporated H5,000.o0 100
Information Concepts,
Incorporated 197,600.00 150
Mr. Thomas moved that the bids be referred to a committee to be
appointed by the Mayor for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Webber appointed Messrs. Byron £. Honer, Chairman. James K.
Campbell and John A. KeXley as members of the committee.
455
456
Mltb reference to the matter. Mr. Lisk presented copy of a proposed
agreement betmeen the City of Norfolk. Virginia, and Information Conceptso Incor-
porated, in reference to the procedure followed by the City of Norfolk for an
outdoor information display system and moved that copy of said agreement be
referred.to the committee for its Information in connection with its study o!
the matter, The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas nnd unanimously adopted.
PETITIONS AND CO#MGNICATIONS: ·
SEWERS .AND STORM DgAINS: Mr. Garland presented copy of a communication
written by him to the City Manager calling attention to a bad drainage problem
in the 1600 block of Oluemont Avenue, S, M., advising that this is a particularly
bad situation during heavy rains and it appears that the time is appropriate
the city to take proper corrective measures and proposing that Council direct the
City Manager to make a determination os to the cost to correct this reoccurring
problem, was before the body.
Mr, Garland moved that the City Manager be instructed to provide a cost
estimate to correct the drainaoe problem in the 1600 block of Bluemont Avenue,
S.W. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
SIDEWALK, CURB AND GUTTER: Mr. Garland presented the following com-
munication written by him to the City Manager with reference to damages to
property owned by Mrs. Anne Foster at 2322 Oakland Boulevard, N. W., as a result
of a sewer line connection from an adjoinin9 residence:
'July 3, 1973.
Mr. Byron B. Haner,
City Manager,
goanoke, Virginia.
Dear Mr. Haner:
This communication is in reference to the property located at
2322 Oakland Boulevard, N. #. I perscoally visited the pro-
perty in question at the request of the owner, Mrs. Ann
Foster, in order to view at first hand certain damages that
have been done to her property as a result of a sewer line
connection from an adjoining residence. I have reviewed
rather voluminous.file concerning these allegations which-
date back to the spring of 1972. According to Mrs. Foster
the curbing which she paid 50~ of .the cost of installation
was damaged at both driveway entrances to her property as
well as the space between them. Although it is not exten-
sively damagedo in fairness to the taxpayer it should be
restored to its original condition and at no expense what-
soever to her. She has received an estimate of $285.00 to
replace the two driveway entrances. Moreover she had pre-
pared her two driveways for paving and hsd these under
contract during this period. However, when the driveway
and sidewalk were dug up in order to connect the sewer line
for the property adjoining hers, these areas were left in
such a condition that it made it impossible for her to
finish the driveway.
Mr. Hamer, there are obviously some discrepancies in this
series of unfortunate events and it appears that no one
wants to accept responsibility of the expense that it
would take to straighten this entire matter out. It has
caused Mrs. Foster a great deal of grief and anxiety.
From some of the correspondence that I have carefully
examined the city has been unwilling to step in and do the
work ourselves OF require the contractor or subcontractor,
whichever were at fault in not leaving the areas as they
found them.
.Accordingly,,l would therefore respectfully request that
you make every effort to resolve this problem once and for
all restoring the area in question to Mrs. Foster*s liking
and at no expense to her. It would appear to me that this
would be the only fair and equitable thing to do under the
circumstances. I would hope that the contractors would
accept their share of the responsibility and at least share
in this expense.
Respectfully submitted for yOUr prompt consideration.
S/ Robert A. Garland js
Robert A. Garland.'
Mr. Garland pointed oat that this matter.has been pending for some
time and that in fairness to Mrs. Foster a decision should be made as whether or
not the city Is going to take care of the repairs.
The City Manager presented photographs of the condition of the curb
and 9utter prior to the sewer line construction, pointing out that he does not
feel that the city should accept the responsibility for replacing the curbing
and made reference to a communication written by the City Manager to Mrs. Foster
advtsin9 her of his feelings in the matter.
In view Of the communication from the City Manager stating the posi-
tion of the City of Roanoke regarding the matter, Mr. Garland moved that his
communication be received and filed. The motion was seconded by M~. Thomas and
unanimously adopted.
REAL ESTATE ASSESSOR: A communication from Mr. John A. Hillman
complaining of the manner in which he was treated by the Real Estate Assessor
when he telephoned him on Saturday. June 16, 1973. regarding the value of his
residence located at 634 Mountain Avenue, S. E.. was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
TRAFFIC: A petition signed by thirteen residents of Eden Drive, N. N.,
r~questing that stop signs be erected on .Gornell Avenue. at a point where it
crosses Eden Drive, N. W., was before Council.
Mr. Trout moved that the petition be referred to the City Manager for
consideration. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
JUVENILE DETENTION HOME: A communication from Mrs. R. G. Nelson. Jr.,
in connection with the continued use of Youth Haven as a correctional institu-
tion at 1325 Third Street, S. M., was before Council.
Mr. Ltsk moved that the communication be received an~ filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Yrout and unanimously adopted.
PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOYEES: A communication from Mrs. W. G. Nelson, Jr..
pertaining to that po'rtion of the Management Study report proposing the collec-
tion of trash at the curb rather than from alleys and from behind houses, was
before Council.
Mr. Llsk moved that the .communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
457
458
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: A comeunicetion from Mr..Grnnville M, Llles,
of "bike enthusiasts' in Roanoke to nllom a bi'ke day on the Hlue Ridge Perkmay
next fall nad requesting that he be advised of uny reaction or support of this
ldee, mas before Council.
In this connection, the City #manger celled attention to a communication
mritten by him to Mr. biles edvising that the City of Roanoke mholeheartedly sop-
ports this proposal and would concur in such an endeavor and that the city mill
cooperate in any may possible.
Hr. Lisk moved that Council concur in.the communication from the City
#anager to Mr. Liles. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
S~REET LIGHTS: Copy of a communication from the Appalachian Po~er Com-
pany transmitting a list of street lights Installed and/or removed during the
with the
~July 9, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
City Council at its regular meeting on May 7, 1973,
requested that the City Manager prepare a response to the
request of elderly citizens of Melrose Tomers for the erec-
approaching traffic that elderly people cross the street at
that location. It was further indicated that this mas a
dangerous intersection and that numerous automobile accidents
had taken place at this intersection. Council asked that.
this be studied.
The request for signs to inn cute that elderly people
cross the street ut this location would be somewhat con-
trury to provisions of the uniform manual or traffic control
devices which apply to this Federal route. Neither the
Virginia Motor Code nor the City. Traffic Code recognize any
differential as to age, sex, color or physical impairment
of a pedestrian. Ronever, there is n standard sign for
pedestrians, and this standard pedestrian sign has been
installed.
As there might be some doubt as to the ability of a
vehicle operator to recognize a pedestrian crosswalk, and
as regulations and policies based on law provide that a
crosswalk be marked mlth a four=inch mhite line. this nas
accoupllshed. Additionally, parallel zebra stripping has
been requested to accentuate the marking of this crossnalk.
The actions undertahen to date for marking this crosswalk
generally exceed the attention given to faf more active
pedestrian crossings.
Mlth respect to the vehicle traffic situation, further
traffic studies mere accomplished, and copies of this study
are attached. On the basis of this study traffic volumes
indicate that a need exists for changes at this intersection
and for the installation of traffic signals and controls.
The changes to the intersection to correct the deficiencies
in design should be accomplished before the intersection is
signalized. The deficiencies ore:
1. Victoria Street, N. W., intersects Melrose Avenue
approximat~ly 110 feet east of 31st Street. This
offset creates unnecessary conflicts betneen turn-
ing traffic in the median area, thus increasing
the probability of accidents.
2. The eastbound lanes on Melrose Avenue at 31st
Street differ in elevation from the westbound
lanes by approximately three feet. This creates
a grade or a ramp problem between the through
traffic lanes in a narrow median area. This
probably contributes to accidents at this loca-
; tion. The difference in elevation makes it
virtually impossible to construct left turning
lanes Jn the median necessary to protect traffic
wishing to turn into either Victoria Street or
31st Street from Melrose Avenue.
The presence of Appalachian Power Company poles
carrying high tension lines on their own right of
nay in the center of Melrose Avenue poses un addi-
tional problem as any relocation would have to be
at the expense of the City.
There are two possible solutions to this problem and
they are depicted by the attached dramtngs. Either scheme
is workable; however, Scheme I is the simpler and would
prove less expensive to build. It has the disadvantage of
limiting traffic movements into and out of Victoria Avenue
on the north side of Melrose Avenue to two right-hand turn-
ing movements. Both schemes are workable and associated
with the trnfficstgnals will facilitate traffic movement
into and out of 31st Street with a greater degree of safety.
Funds were not provided in the 1g73-74 budget for this
project; homever, it is felt that the occident rate at this
location justifies immediate consideration of City Council.
Should City Council concur, I would ask that ~ e City
Engineer*s office in conjunction with the Traffic Department
prepare complete engineer drawings for revisions to this
intersection and it would be recommended that Scheme I be
adopted.
Ne would further endeavor to obtain permission fJ~om
the State Highway Department for the installation of a
traffic signal at this location and at such time as permis-
sion is granted, the design is complete, and up-to-date
estimates are at hand, we ~ould return to City Council for
permission to advertise the project mith funding to follon.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer
By~ n E. Hamer
City Manager"
q-Sq
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager. The motion mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted,
CITY EMPLoXEESz The City Manage~ submitted the folloming report
enumerating those desired organizational changes contained in tbs Albert Ramond
and Associates Management Study report mhich could be accomplished within the
City Manager's prerogative, listing those revisions which mill require either
City Code or City Charter changes, establishing salary grades for the proposed
management positions and listing the selection of incumbent personnel to fill
those new positions:
#Jul! 9, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
SubJect: Implementation of Management Stndy Findings
At its nesting on Monday. July 2. 1973. City Council
directed that the City Manager prepare a report to City
Council enumerating those desired organizational changes
contained in the Albert Ramond and Associates* Management
Study which could he accomplished within the City #anager's
prerogative and also to list those revisions which will
require either City Code or Charter changes. City Council
asked the City Manager to establish salary grades for the
proposed management positions and to list the selection of
incumbent personnel to fill those nam positions.
As previously stated to City Council. basically tbs
administration concurs with the proposed division of
functions as outlined in tbs Albert Hamond and Associates'
report with a few variations, There is submitted to City
Council a revised organizational chart showing ~ose changes
which include some variation in titles. These title revi-
sions have been node so that where possible proposed titles
will coincide with current titles, thereby reducing Code or
Charter amendments.
The following is a list of proposed positions with the
recommended appointment, the grade and step and the beginning
salary:
Deptt Code
3 Assistant City Manager, Samuel H. McGhee, IIio
Grade 38, Step 1 $20.940
3 Assistant City Manaqer for Technical and Admin-
istrative Planning, Vacant, Grade 3T, Step I 1q,944
37 Director of Human Services, Bernice F. Jones,
Grade 32, Step 2 16,416
44 Director of Safety and Security. Vacant,
Grade 36, Step I 18,996
55 Director of Public Works, Vacant. Grade 37.
Step I 19,944
73 Director of Civic Enrichment, Vacant,
Grade 36, Step I 16,996
320 Director of Utilities and Operations,
Kit B. Kiser, Grade 34, Step 1 17.232
It ls anticipated that at least the following sections
of the City Code will require amendment to coincide with the
revised organization. Yhe administration can determine
nothing in the Code or'Charter to preclude these cbsuges.
The revisions needed ute: Title 2, Chapter 11.1; Title 12,
which deals with inter; Title 16, which deals with the Plan-
ning Commissiun~ Title 17, mhich deals with Sewage Disposal
nad Title 22, which deals mith Weights and Measures. Addi-
tionally, new Code sections will be needed to establish the
fcnctJonal responsibilities of various new directorships and
the functions of the Assistant City Manager for Technical
and Administrotfve Planning.
Immediate approval or the above listed positions is
recommended. It mould further be recommended that City
Council approve a budget appropriation to establish these
positions in the grades shown. To accomplish this the fol-
lowing appropriations are needed to the following accounts:
Dent. Code Oblect Code Increase
3 101 Personal Services $20,448
37 101 Personal Services 1,774
44 101 Personal Services 19,470
56 101 Personal Services 2,34b
73 101 Personal Services 19,470
320 101 Personal Services 040
$64,340
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Daner
Byron E. Haner
City Manager"
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Yrout and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Thomas further moved that Council concur in the report of the City
Manager and that said report be referred to the City Attorney for preparation
of the proper measure to include the Assistant City Manager and the six
directors as set forth in the report of the City Manager and confirming said
appointments and salaries as set forth by the City Manager. The motion was
seconded by Mr. LiSh and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Thomas then offered the following emergency Ordinance appropria-
ting necessary funds in connection with the solaries of the Assistant City
Manager, the Director of Human Services, the Director of Safety and Security,
the Director of Public [orks and the Director of Civic Enrichment:
(~21007) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 1973-74 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =aD, page 256.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of tho Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
461
#v. Thooas then offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
$840.00 to Personal Services under Section a320, 'Niter - General Expense," of
the 1973-74 budget to provide necessary funds in connection with the salary of
the Director of Utilities and Operat~ns:
(m21OOe) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reorduin Section as2o. 'Nater -
General Expense,' of the 1973-74 #ater Fund Appropriation Ordinance, and providing
for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Boob m38, page 25e.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr, Lash and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lash, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Nebber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ........... O. (Mr. Dubard absent)
The City #anager submitted a further report math regard to the Depart-
ment of Finance, recommending that Council establish a Financial Department under
the direction of the City Manager and a separate Internal Audit Department under
City Council and further recommending that the Office of the City Auditor be
designated as both the City Auditor and Assistant City Manager for Finance and
continue for the present to answer to Council while developing a financial
organization within the City Manager's framework mhich would be responsive to
the city's needs:
"July 9, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Department of Finance
The complexity of complying with that portion of the
Albert Ramond and Associates Management Study which deals
with the establishment of a Department of Finance within
the City Manager*s organization is recognized. Nevertheless
the need for change within the City's Financial setup was
recognized and commented upon not only in the Albert Ramond
and Associates Management Study but in the Audit Procedure
Report prepared by Andrews, Burkett and Company and by
City Council's Citizen Study Committee report.
To provide for better finnncial management within the
City Manager's organization, recognizing that the Cityes
spendin9 is highest within that department, it would be
recommended that City Council establish a F~nancial Depart-
ment under the direction of the City Manaoer and a separate
Internal Audit Department under City Council.
To enable the accomplishment of the change in finance
administration proposed by the Management Study in an orderly
. fashion, it is recommended that the office of the City Auditor
be designated as both the City Auditor and Assistant City
Manager for Finance and continue for the present to ~nswer
to the City Council while developing a financial organization
within the City Manager*s framework wbich mould be respon-
sive to the City's meeds.
At the direction of the Council, the changes in the
Code and City Charter necessary to complete this reorgani-
zation can be accomplished by the establishment of an Internal
Auditor for auditing purposes to ansmer to the City Council
on an independent basis. The duties and responsibilities
which pertain to finance would be assumed by the Assistant
City Manager for Finance who would answer to the City Manager.
0
0
It is anticipated that the necessary legal steps can be
finalized so that this portion cf the reorganization moold
become effective July 1, 1974.
City Council will hare to make n decision on the
offices of the Treasurer and Commissioner of Revenue as
to the continuance of these departments as they now exist,
or mhetheF to place these responsibilities under the Finance
Department, and whether the Finance Bepartuent ultimately
answers to the Manager. This action mill perhaps need a
referendum election by the voters. The Council and the
voters are in the unique position at this time of being able
to make this decision when both of the encunbants in these
offices are unopposed. This removes the complication of
not knowing who the office holder will be after the upcoming
election.
The decisions to be made by the City Council in this
matter are the key to the realignment of the handling of
finances for the City. and the decision needs to be made
as soon as possible.'
Should City Council concur with these recommendations.
it would be proposed that the Assistant City Manager for
Finance position be established with A. N. Cibson as the
incumbent at a Grade of 37, Step 1, and with a starting
salary of $19,944. This would necessitate an appropriation
Of $65§ to the current City Auditor Personnel Account,
Object Code 101.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Bauer
Byron E. Bauer
City Manager*
Mr. Thomas offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
$650.00 to Personal Services under Section =10, *City Auditor** of the
1973-74 budget:
(c21009) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ~10, *City
Auditor** of the 1973-74 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text Of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book =36. page 259.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Br. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber ...................6.
NAYS: None .......... O. (Mr. Rubard absent)
Mr. Thomas further moved that the Department of Finance aspect Of
the report of the consultants be taken under consideration by Council as a
Committee of the Whole to be reported at a later date. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Jack B. Coulter, Attorney, appeared before Council in connection
with that portion of the management report which deals with combining the
Offices of Treasurer and Commissioner Of the Revenue, and advised that he is
not appearing so much for the individual, J. Il. Johnson. as he is for the
office he represents, that the Office of the Treasurer should remain treasurer
for the people, not the exchequer for the administrator, that it is the money
of the public that the Treasurer holds'and it is to the public that he should
be responsible, that the Treasurer should be totally independent of City Hall
-464
politics, pointing out that the report of Andrews, Hurket and Company, Certified
Public Accountants, clearly recognized the Justification for the separation of t~
assessment and collection functions end that their recommendations did not
include the consolidation of these offices and urged that mere study be made on
the matter irrespective of personalities end that the Office of City Treasurer
and Commissioner of the Revenue be kept separate, independent, apart and elected.
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted the following
report Jn connection with the acquisition of lands needed in connection with
expansion of the Sewage Treatment Plant:
"July 9, 1973
Ilonorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Subject: Land Acquisition - Sewage Treatment Plant
As you are aware the City has received verbal notifi-
cation from the Environmental Protection Agency of the fact
that EPA has approved a grant for the construction of the
secondary facilities, expansion and the advanced waste
treatment facilities at the Semage Treatment Plant. The
City has not yet received the confirming letter and the
grant offer and acceptance forms. These are anticipated
to be received momentarily.
A portion of the sewage treatment plant expansion pro-
ject involves the acquisition of certain properties, mhich
acquisitions have been previously approved by City Council.
Those properties approved for acquisition are within the
block bounded by Dennington Street, S. E., Dnderhill Avenue,
S, E., Kindred Street, S. E., and Hrosalee Avenue, S. i.
Aeration and settling basins will be constructed on these
properties as a part of the expansion program. The acquisi-
tion of these properties represents the minimum property
acquisition requirements in order to construct these
facilities.
At this time four of the properties within this block
have been purchased with the remaining five properties
awaiting evaluations with respect to relocation payments.
During the City's negotiations for the acquisition Of these
properties several facts were brought to our attention as
follows:
1. The City is required to make relocation payments
to the property owners and businesses that are to
be moved from these properties. The costs of the
relocation payments can be as high as the costs of
actual property acquisition in this particular area.
2. There are several businesses operating mithin this
block that are operating under a grandfather clause
special use permit. These businesses could pur-
chase adjacent property which is operating under
the same grandfather clause and could continue in
business in this vicinity. The City would have to
make the required relocation payments.
$o The Virginia Department of Health stated that there
should be at least a 600-foot buffer between any of
the Sewage Treatment Plant units and adjacent dwell-
ings.
4. There will continue to be a need for additional pro-
perty in this area which could be used for the
expansion of the City's Sewage Treatment Plant.
Having received the notification of the grant award, it
is anticipated that we will receive approval to advertise this
project in the very near future.
465
This being the case, and considering the other comments
outlined above, It is imperative that the City'cceplete the
acquisition of that property bounded by Bennington Street,
Cnderhill Avenue, Kindred Street, and Brownlee Avenue Just
ns soon ns possible. This time schedule could perhaps
require that some of the properties be acquired by condem-
nation procedures.
It will also be necessary to close Uaderhlll ~venue, S. E.,
between Bennington Avenue, S. E., and Kindred Street, S. E,,
as well as that alley parallel to and between Underhill Avenue,
S, E., and Bromnlee Avenue, S. E., from Benningtoa Street,
S. E., to Kindred Street, S. £.
It is recommended that City Council authorize the City
Attorney to proceed with condemnation procedures as might
be necessary in order to expedite the acquisition of the
remaining parcels within this particular block, as well as
instituting the necessary procedures for the closing of
that portion of Underhill Avenue and the alley full,win9
the acquisition of the remaining parcels by the City.
As the next phase in a planned program of land acqui-
sition for future sewage treatment plant expansion and
buffer zone requirements, it is recommended that certain
other properties be acquired at this tine. These pro-
perties mould be within the blocks bounded by Underhlll
Avenue, S. E., 16th Street, S. E., Brownlee Avenue, S. E.,
and Kindred Street, S. E., plus two parcels of laud located
mJthin Roanoke County and contiguous to existing sewage
treatment plant properties. One of these parcels is located
on Underhill Avenue immediately adjacent and east of the
National Guard Truck Park. The second parcel is located
immediately adjacent to sludge lag,ca No. 4 and is in fact
almost completely surrounded by semage treatment plant
property, Rithin the two blocks within the City it is
recommended that the vacant land and the business pro-
perties operatln9 under special use permit be acquired
first, with residential properties being acquired ns they
are made available to the City for purchase or a sale is
negotiated.
It is recommended that City Council authorize the City
Manager to negotiate for the acquisition of these properties,
to have any necessary appraisals made~ and to obtain options
for the purchase of the property, such options to be subject
to the approval of City Council for actual purchase.
This matter has previously been discussed with the
Nater Resources Committee and the Real Estate Committee.
Ne have available maps of the particular propertie~
involved for your inspection.
Respectfully submitted,
$/ Byron E, Hurler
Byron E. Haner
City Manager~
Mr. Lisk offered the following Resolution relating to the acquisition
by the City of Roanoke of certain additional lands wanted and needed by the
city for the purpose of enlarging the facilities at the Sewage Treatment
Plant:
(=21010) A 8E$OLUTION relating to the City's acquisition of certain
additional lands wanted and needed by the City for the purpose of enlarging the
facilities at the City*s Sewage Treatment Plant.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book a38, page 260.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion sas
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by thd follow/fig vote:
466
AYES: Messrs. Gurloud, Llsk, Taylor, Th*mss, Trout
and Wayor Webber ............... 6.
WAYS: Wone ......... -4). (Wr~ ~ubard absent)
Wro Llsh offered the following emergency OrdJnooce directing and pro-
riding for'the acquisition of certain percels of land in fee simple, wanted and
needed by the City of Roan*he for the enlargement of facilities at the Sewage
Treatment Plant; pr*riding for the cJty*s acquisition of said lands by condemna-
tion, under certain circumstances; and directing that motion be made for the award
of a right of entry on said properties for the purpose of commencin9 its uorh of
improvement:
lc21011) AW ORDIWANCE directing and providing for the acquisition
of certain parcels of land in fee simple, wanted and needed by the City for the
enlargement of facilities at the City's Sewage Treatment Plant; providing for
the City's acquisition of said lands by condemnation, under certain circumstances;
directing that motion be made for the award of a right of entry on said properties
for the purpose of commencing its work of improvement; and providing for au
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book 339, page 251,)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion Was seconded
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the foil*ming vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Dubard absent)
WATER DEPARYMENT: The City Manager submitted a written report con-
CUFFing in the recommendation of a committee that the bid of Lyncbburg Foundry
Company for supplying ductile iron water pipe for the twelve month period begin-
ning July 2, 1973, be accepted.
Mr. Llsk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
(~21012) AN ORDINANCE accepting the proposal of Lynchbur9 Foundry
Company for furnishing and supplying certain ductile iron water pipe to be used
by the City's Mater Department for the period beginning July 2, 1973, and ending
June 30, 1974, authorizing the proper City officials to execute the requisite con-
tract or purchase orders; rejecting all other bids; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~30, page 263.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Trout und adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ....................
WAYS: None .......... Oo (Mr. Hubard absent)
467
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS-SCHOOLS: Yhe AsSistant City Attorney submitted
a Rrltten report advising that pursuant to the terms of Resolution No. 20?80,
proceedings uere instituted in the Court of Lau and Chancery of the City of
Roanoke to construe certain of the conditions contained in the deed of conveyance
to the city of certain lands in the westerly.portion of Fallon Park So ns to
quiet title in the city for the purpose of construction of n public elementary
school on a 3 1/2 acre lmrcel of said lands, informing Council that on June
29, 1973, said Court entered a decree confirming fee simple, unencumbered title
to that certain 3 1/2 acre parcel of land in the city for the purpose of per-
mitting construction thereon of said schoel and assuming that Council mill mish
to grant formal authorization to the Roanoke City School Board for the construc-
tion o£ said scheoi, a form of Resolution to that effect has been prepared and
is transmitted for the recommended adoption by Council.
Mr. Gar/and moved that Council concur in the report of the Assistant
City Attorney and offered the following Resolution:
{=21013) A RESOLUTION relating to the construction of a public
elementary school in Fallon Park.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book #30, page 265.)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. List and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, List, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Rubard absent)
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
RADIO-TELEVISION: The Cable Antenna Television Committee submitted
the following report recommending that Council authorize Atlantic Research
Corporation and Foster Associates, Incorporated, to proceed mith Phase II of
their study ~or a regional CATy system for this area. conditioned upon similar
approval by Roanoke County and the To~n of Vinton and further recommending that
the sam of $8,?00.00 be appropriated as the share of the City of Roanoke for
Phase II study costa:
"July 9, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
'Gentlemen:
Subject: Cable Antenna Television Study
The City of Roanoke, the County of Roanoke, and the
Town of Vinton have previously jointly entered into agree-
ment with Atlantic Research Corporation and Foster Associates,
Incorporated. for a feasibility study of aregional CATV
system for this area. This study bas been completed and a
report has been published and presented to the regional
committee.
On May 30, 1973, the regiona~ committee was given a
briefing on the findings and recommendations of the con-
Sultants.
468
On June 28, 1973, the regional committee met again to
decide whether or not to proceed with Phase II cf the study
(the actual preparation of franchise ordinances and bidding
June 28:
the three Jurisdictions.
3. The committee generally agreed on utilizing the
nomic feasibility for the installation of the
within the cordon limits should be iqciuded as a
mental jurisdictions.
$/ Hampton ~. Thomas
$/ Noel C. Taylor
$/ B~ron E. Hamer
S/ James N. Kincanon
committee and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropr~tin9 $0,700.00
mmmmsmssm
AYES: Hessrs. Garland, Link. Taylor. Thomas, Troat and
Mayor Mebber ....................
NAYs: None ...........O. (GF. Nubatd absent)
SALE OF PROPERTY: The Real Estate Committee submitted a mritten
report in connection with a communication from Hr. John C. Tomlere Attorney.
representing Hr. Garry Haasacn, offering to sell to the City of Roanoke a
building located on the northwest corner of Third Street and Campbell Avenue.
S. ¥,, ~econmending that the property not be purchased by the city at this time.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the Real
Estate Committee that the offer be denied.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
la this connection, Mr. Barry Hausman appeared before Council and
advised that the building mould be especially suitable for a police academy
since it bas classrooms.
Gr. Thomas moved that the matter be referred back to the Real Estate
Committee for further consideration of the offer. The motion was seconded
by Gr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
UNFINISHED GUSINESS: NO~E.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES ANn RESOLUTIONS:
/BUDGET: Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare the
proper measure amending and reordaining Section 2, Powers and duties, generally,
of Chapter 5, The City Manager, Title II, Administration, of The Code of the
City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended, authorizing the Eity Manager to make transfers
of funds not exceeding $1,000.00 within the several departments and divisions
Mr. Thomas offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(=21015) AN ORGINANCE amending and reordaining Sec. 2. P~wers and
duties, aenerally, of Chapter S. The City Manaaer, of Title II. Administrotion,
of the Code of the City of Roanoke, 195b, as amended, authorizing the City
Manager to mote transfers of funds not exceeding $1,000.00 within the several
departments and divisions set forth in the annual appropriation ordinance; and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~30, page 266.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ...................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Ilubard absent)
WATER DEPARTMENT: Counoil having directed the City Attorney to pre-
pare the proper measare defining an area beyond the corporate limits of the Town
of ¥inton within which the Town of ¥inton may resell surplus water purchased
469
47O
from the City of Roanoke pursuant'to the service authsrized by Rule 39 of the
Rules and Regulations for the operation of the'city*s Water Department, he pre-
sented sane; whereupon, Mr. Thomas offered the'following Resolution:
(u21016) A RESOLUTION defining an 'area beyond t~e corporate limits of
the Tomn of ¥inton within which the Town of ¥inton may resell surplus water
~urcbased from the City pursuant to the service authorized by Rule 39 of the
Rules and Regulations for the operation of the City's Water Department.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book n3O, page 267.)
Hr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Ressrs. Carland, List, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor ~ebber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
MARKET-TRAFFIC-PLANNING: The City Attorney submitted a Resolution
approving, generally, the report and certain recommendations made to Council by
the Central Roanoke Development Foundation On the financing, construction and
operation of an off-street parking facility in the city and implementing certain
Of the aforesaid recommendations.
Mr. Trout advised that there are citizens who would like an opportunity
to be heard in reference to the proposed parking garage and moved that adoption
of the proposed Resolution be deferred until the next regular meeting Of Council
on Monday. July 16, 1973, end that Council hold a public hearing on the matter at
that time. The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor.
Mr. Thomas pointed out that Council could proceed with the adoption Of
the Resolution as prepared by the City Attorney at the present time, that a public
hearing could still be set for a later date and that the Ordinance authorizin9
the issue of the bonds could be adopted at the public hearing.
As a substitute motion, Mr. Thomas offered the followin9 Resolution:
(#21017) A RESOLUTION approving, generally, the report and certain
recommendations made to the Council by Central Roanoke Development Foundation On
the financing, construction and operation of au off-street parking facility in
the City; and implementing certain of the aforesaid recommendations.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book a3fl, page 26B.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
Mr. Trout then moved that Council hold a public hearing on Ronday,
July 30, 1973, at T:30 p.m., On the questions of whether the City of Roanoke
should undertake a project to provide, acquire, construct and equip off-street
parkie9 facilities and whether the city should a~thorize, issue and sell under the
Virginia Public Finance Act not exceeding five million dollars general obliga-
tion bonds of the city to pay the coats of such project. The motion nas
seconded by Dr. Taylor and unanimously adopted.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
SCHOOLS: A communication from Mrs. Murray A. Stoller endorsing
Mrs. C. T. Ashby to.fill the vacancy un the Roanoke City School Board created
by the resignation of Mr. Merman H, Peylero Jas before Council,
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
There being no further business, Mayor Mebber declared the meeting
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
471
;47.2
COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING,
Monday, July 16, 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met ia regular meeting in the
Council Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, July 16, 1973, at 2 p.m.,
the regular meeting hour, uith Mayor Roy L. Webber presiding.
PRESENT: Councilmen Robert A. Garland, David K. Lisk, Noel C. Taylor,
Hampton W. Thomas. James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L. Webber .... 6.
ABSENT: Councilman Nilliam S. Huhard .............. 1.
OFFICERS pRESENT: Mr. Hyron E. Hamer, City Manager; Mr. James No
KJncanon, City Attorney; Mr. If. Hen Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorney; and
Mr. A. N. Gibson. City Auditor.
INVOCATION: The meetin9 was opened mith a prayer by the Reverend
Jerre M. Peagin, Jr., Assistant to the Rector, St. John's Episcopal Church.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
CITY EMPLOYEES: Mr. Raymond C. Equi, Jr., appeared before Council
and presented a memorandum and analysis as to certain shortcomings in the manage-
ment study report as prepared by Albert Ramond and Associates, Incorporated,
pointing out that he is very concerned with the "push ahead" attitude that
everyone seems to have adopted in regards to implementing the report, that he
feels there are different and better methods to accomplish these ends and that
he does not feel that the recommendations should be adopted without some con-
sideration of alternative approaches.
Mr. Thomas moved that the memorandum and report be received and filed
and that a copy of same be forwarded to the City Ranager to take into considera-
tion wherever he deems said report to be of assistance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting that $26.368.00 be appropriated to Section a96000, "Public Schools -
Student Job Placement Service," of the 1973-74 budget of the Roanoke City School
Board, advising that these funds will be used to establish and operate a student
ijob placement service at Nllliam Fleming High School for the 1973-74 school year,
100 per cent of actual expenditures under this project to be reimbursed by the
Commonwealth of Virgi~a, was before Council.
Mr. Lisk moved that Council concur in the request of the Roanoke City
School Board and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriatin9 the
requested funds:
(#21018) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section n96000, *Public
Schools - Student Job Placement Service,' of the 1973-74 Appropriation Ordinance,
and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Hook 33H, page 269.)
473
Mr, Link moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion was seconded
by Mr, Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Ressr$, Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
aayor Mebber ..................
MAYS: Mane ...........O. (Mr, Hnbard absent)
· . BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Hoard
requesting that $45,76H.35 be appropriated to Section ~97000, *Public Schools -
Vocational Education for the Handicapped Program," of the 1973-74 budget of
the Roanoke City School.Hoard, advising that these funds will be nsqd for
educable and trainable mentally retarded children for the purpose.of develop-
ing skills which will enable them to become prepared for.elementary-level
employment and to prepare them so they might undertake activities which contri-
bute to their own economic welfare, 100 per ce~t of actual expenditures
under this project to be reimbursed by the CommonMealth of Virginia, was
before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur ia the request of the Roanoke
City School Board and offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriating
the requested funds:
(~2101g) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section ug?O00, 'Public
Schools - Vocational Education for the Ilandicapped Program** of the 1973-74
Appropriation Ordinance, and providin9 for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~30, page 2~0.)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance, The motion Mas
seconded by Mr, Trout and adopted by the following vqte:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber--V ................. 6.
NAYS: None ..........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE: A communication from Mr. Cecil
Simmons, 1405 19th Street, N. E., in connection with the small amount of
money he receives as a recipient of public.welfare, Mas before Council,
Mr. Trou~ moved that the communication be received and filed, The
mntion was seconded By Mr. Lisk and unanimouslY adopted.
JAIL: Copy of a communication written by Sheriff Paul.J. Puakett
to Mr. Richard R. Eagle, Bureau of Prisons, requesting that the present con-
tract with the federal government be revised to compensate the city at the rate
of $5.00 per inmate day instead of t~e current $3.50 rate, WaS before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
REPORTS OF OFF~CE~S:
BUDGET-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a w~Jtt, en report in con-
nection with Law Enforcement Grant Mo. ~2-AIGHO, R.A.D.A,C.C., recommending
474
thor the City Manager be outhorized to execute the appropriate forms for acceptance
of this grnnt Dad agree'lng ~to the pro'Anions and c~nditions contoined therein
Dad that $4B,063.00 be appropriated to thJ~ groat account,
Or, Taylor moved that Council concur.in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the folloming emergency Ordinance:
(s21020) A~ ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section u540,
of the 1973-74 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for aa emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book #aB, page 270,)
Dr. Taylor moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. LJsk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Link, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mn~or Webber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ........... O. {Mr. Rubard absent)
CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a written report advising
that on June 16 and June 25, 1973, Council received a report from.the City
Manager regarding the second phase of the Albert Rom*nd and Associates, lncor-
*orated, Management Study, that in both instances Council concurred with pro-
ceeding with the second phase at o total cost of $~0,726.00, that these funds
are provided under n 701 Grant from the Department of Bousiag and Urban Develop-
ment. that the City Attorney is being requested to prepare a contract with
Albert Ramond and Associates for Phase II of this study and that this work is
presently underway and recommending that Council authorize the City Manager to
enter into a contract with Albert Ramond and Associates, Incorporatedt for
accomplishment of this work.
Mr. Thomas moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure. The motionwas seconded by Mr. Trout and
unanimously adopted.
TRAFFIC-STREETS AND ALLEYS: The City Manager submitted a written
report ia connection with a petition received from residents of the 1200, 1300
and 1400 blocks of Maple Avenue, S. W., the 1300 and 1400 blocks of Second
Street, S. W., a resident of the 200 block of Woods Avenue, S. W., and a resident
of the first block of Walnut Avenue, $. W., requesting ,that that section of
Maple Avenue, S. W., between Woods Avenue and Walnut Avenue, be made into a
one-way street in the direction from Woods Avenue to Walnut Avenue. recommending
that Council approve making Maple Avenue, S. W., between Woods Avenue and
Walnut Avenue, a one-way street, northbound.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the recommendation-of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution concurring in the prohibition of
south-bound motor vehicle traffic on Maple Avenue, S. W., between Woods Avenue
and Walnut Avenue, S. W., effective July IT, 1973:
(321021) .A RESOLUTION concurring in the City Manager*s prohibition of
south-bound motor vehicle traffic, on Maple Avenue, S. W., between Woods Avenue
and Walnut Avenue, S.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book =aB, page 271.)
475
Mr. Trout waved the adoption of the Eesolutiqn, The.watSon was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following rote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, LIsh, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and.
Mayor Nebber .......... ~-~ ....... 6,.
NAys: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
RADIO~TELEVISION: The City Manager submitted a written report recom-
mending that Council, by Resolution, formally concur in the recommendations
of the CAYV Study Committee as submitted to Council on July 9, 1973, and
formally authorize the consultant to proceed with Phase 1I, A, of the study
upon similar approval being also given by the Doard of Supervisors of Roanoke
Cosoty and the Town of Vioton.
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the report of the City
Manager and offered thq following Resolution concurring in recommendations made
by a committee of the Council of the City of Roanoke and authorizdng, upon
similar authoriration to be given by certain other political subdivisions,
additional services to be performed by consultants studying the feasibility
of an area type cable antenna televisioosystem:
(u21022) A RESOLUTIgN concurring in recommendations made by a
committee of the Council and curb*firing, upon similar authorization to be
given by certain other political subdivisions, additional services to be per-
formed by consultants.studying the feasibility of an area type cable antenna
television system.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book ~38. page 272.)
Mr. Trout moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Nebber ...................
NAYS: None ...........9- (Mr. Hubard absent)
SEMERS AND SI*EM DRAINS: The City Manage~ submitted a written report
advising of the award of both a federal 9rant and a state grant for.the con-
struction of an additional 14.O MOO secondary treatment facility and a 35.0
MOD advanced waste treatment facility, the federal grant value bean9
$11,d71,250.00 which is 75 per cent of the estimated project costt and the
state grant*fief not to exceed $1,529,500.00 constituting approximately 10
per cent of the estimated cost of $15,295,000.00, and recommending the
adoption of a Resolution accepting the federal offer.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
City Manager and offered the following Resolution:
(~21023) A RESOLUTION ratifying and adopting the City*s project
application made to the United States of America. through the State Mater
Control Board. for a grant of funds under the Federal Mater Pollution Control
Act nod f~om the Commonwealth of Virginia; accepting a certain grant offer in
476
the amount of $11,471,250.00 made to the City by the United States of America
under date of July 3, 1973, for Project No. C-510442 for'construction of the
addition of 14.0 mgd secondary treatment facilities at the existing 21 mgd
semage treatment plant and the addition of 35.O mgd A.M.T. facilities, this
constituting the second and final split of Project C-510370, the eligible pro-
Ject including allowable associated costs as defined in 40CFR 35.940-1 up to the
amounts shown in Part Il of the Grant Agreement; authorizing the City Manager
or the Assistant City Manager to execute the City's acceptance of the aforesaid
grant offer as evidence of the Cityts acceptance thereof, and to enter into a
Grant Agreement on behalf of the Clty wltb the United States of America In the
*remises.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Book u30, page 272.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ........... O. (Mr. Ilubard absent)
BUSES: The City Manager submitted a written report recommending
that Council grant a new franchise to Virginia Outdoor Display, Incorporated,
to retain park benches throughout the city primarily at bus stops, and that
the agreement be revised so that the city would receive $5.00 for each bench
with a minimum annual payment to the city of $250.00, the city-administration
to have the authority to approve or disapprove each bench installation.
In a discussion, the City Attorney advised that it would not be
)roper to award this franchise to Virginia Outdoor Display, Incorporated, without
first legally advertising for bids.
Or. Taylor moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney to
work out the necessary procedure to be followed. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Lisl and uflafli=ously adopted.
Mr. Garland moved that the matter of construction of bus shelters in
lieu of benches at certain key locations throughout the City of Roanoke be
investigated by the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unani-
mously adopted~
PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS: The City Manager submitted a written report
recommending that the city be authorized to enter into a new lease agreement With
the Mill Mountain Playhouse Company for the lease of Rockledge Inn atop Mill
Mountain, said lease to cover the 1972 season, the current season and the 1974
and 1975 seasons.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Manager and that the following Ordinance be placed upon its first reading:
(s21024) AN ORDINANCE'providing for the lease to Mill Mountain Play-
house Company of the premises known as Rockledge Inn. on Mill Mountain. for
terms comprising a portion of four (4) calendar years, upon certain terms and
conditions.
.!
477
MHEREAS. Mill Mountain Playhouse Company, sponsoring a pro(essional
theatrical group and operating a summer theatre atop Mill Mountain, has
requested that it be granted a nam lease of the Clty*s Rockledge Inn premises
on Mill Mountain being, at the time, delinquent in payment to the CiW of
certain rentals reserved under written lease betmeen the City and said Company
which expired September 15, 1971; and
MHEM£A$, the Council considers that, notwlthstaudfug said Company's
default in rental payments covenanted to be paid under said prior lease, said
Company, in mahing professional drama available to the community during summer
months, provides to a degree an aspect of cultural life essential to the
development of the community; is recognized by and receives financial support
and encouragement from respected citizens of the community; and is worthy of
encouragement by the local government.
THEREFORE, I~ IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Mo~nohe that
the City Manager be, and he is.hereby authorized and directed, for and on
behalf of the City, to enter into written lease agreement with Mill Mountain
Playhouse Company, a corporation, leasin9 to said Company the premises known
as Mockiedge Inn, on Mill Mountain, for terms comprising a portion o( the
calendar year of 1972, and the current year and of each of the *mo (2) follow-
ing ~alendar years, the first of which said terms shall have commenced as of
May 1, 1972, and shall have expired on September 15, 1972, with likq terms
commencing and terminating au the same days of the same mooths of each of the
next three (3) consecutive years, namely 1973, 1974 and 1975; such written
lease to be upon such form as is prepared and approved by the City Attorney
and to include provision, amongst other of its terms, for the following:
1. That the premises shall be occupied and used by Mill Mountain
Playhouse Company, lessee, solely for the purpose of a summer theatre and as
a temporary residence for officials, employees and engaged actors and personnel
appearing or assisting in the produc%ions presented by said summer theatre,
which productions shall he made available to and for the benefit and enjoyment
of the residents of the City and others; and
2. That said lessee*s use and occupancy of said premises shall at
all times be subject to the order and regulation of the City Manager; and
3. That said lessee will comply with all applicable lams and
ordinances; and
4. That said lessee will keep in a manner satisfactory to the City
Auditor accurate entries and records of all moneys received through the exercise
of the rights and privileges herein granted; and will permit said entries and
records to be inspected, examined or audited, at all reasonable times by the
City's representatives; and, farther, will furnish and deliver to the City
ClerR a cash bond or bondwlth corporate surety in the amount of $500.00 con-
ditioned upoe the:full and complete performance of the terms and conditions
agreed to in this paragraph; and
478
$, That said lessee will keep the leased premises clean cad attractive
before and during perforeances nnd will remove all refuse therefrom uithin
tuelve (12) hours following 'each performance; mud
6. That said lessee will save the City harmless from and against nny
and all claims for daaages or Injuries to persons or property which may, in any
manner whatsoever, arise out of or be caused by the notlvJties of the lessee
hereunder; andt Jn n~ may limiting its personal liability hereln assumed therefor,
lessee will obtain (and deliver unto the CitT evidence thereof) such insurance
as the City Manager may require, further protecting the City of and from all such
claims, damages or injuries; and
7. That said lessee will not assign, in mhole or in part, this lease;
nor remove, alter or change any fixture or appurtenance upon the premises
without first obtaining the written consent of the City Manager to do so; and
6. That said lessee will preserve and maintain the interior of the
leased property and return the same to the City at the termination of each four
and one-half months* portion of the term of this lease in its present condition,
subject, however, to the usual wear and tear; and
9. That said lease shall be at all times subject to any concession
rights or privileges which the City may have awarded or granted to others for
the sale of any food or beverages on Mill Mountain or at Rockledge Inn; and
10. That, in event the City should authorize the making of a lease of
said property to a department of the federal government, or should authorize
and direct the use of the leased premises for any specified public purpose, it
may terminate this lease upon two (2) months* written notice to the lessee; and
11. That in event of any breach by the lessee, or by any party
acting with the consent or authority of the lessee, of any agreement.or covenant
provided to be performed, kept or observed by said lessee, this lease may, at the
sole option of the City and without prior notice to lessee, be terminated
forthwith and thereafter shall be deemed null and void for all purposes whatso-
ever except the City's right to recover any money in default; and
12. That the lessee shall be solely responsible for and shall pay
all costs and expenses attendant upon its use and occupancy of the leased
)remises for the purposes bereinabove provided and that, after payment of all
such costs and expenses, including accrued capital indebtedness and including
nil State. Federal and local taxes which are properly assessable on said lessee,
said lessee will pay over and deliver to the City, by payment to the.City Treasurer
on or before the 20th day of September of each year during the term of this
lease, and following the last year hereof, all of %he net revenue of the said
lessee derived from its operations on the leased premises, its revenue to
include income to the lessee from all sources from which the same may be received
or earned, until the total amount of such net revenue so paid to the City shall
have equalled said. lessee's accrued indebtedness of unpaid rental to the City as
479
of the commencement of this lease; thereafter, lessee shall pay to the City, as
rental for the demised premises during the remainder Of the term of this
lease fifty per centom (50~) of ill of the' lessee*s net revenues;
13. That the City agrees that the lessee shall have quiet enjoyment
14. That the City agrees that it mill maintain the outside of the
premises in good and attractive order; and
15. That the City agrees to supply to the lessee without charge
mater reasonably sufficient for the normal needs of the lessee in its occupancy
of the demised premises; and
16. That it be stipulated and agreed between the parties that the
condition of the premises is satisfactory to the lessee and that the same are
being leased "as is", and mithout
City; the lessee to have right of
annual occupancy of the premises.
The motion was secended
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland,
warranty as to condition or fitness by the
inspection of the premises prior to each
by Mr. ThOmas and adopted by the following
List. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Ilubard absent)
CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a written report request-
ing to reserve time on the agenda for an executive session to discuss a per-
Mr. Trout moved that Council concur in the request of the City
Manager. The motion was seconded by Mr. List and adopted by the followin~ vote:
AyEs: Messrs. Garland. Lisk, Taylor, Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........On (Mr. Hubard absent)
SALE OF PROPERTY-SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: The .City Attorney submitted
the following report advising that ~r. afld,~rs. Clyde M. Welch, Sr., have
tendered to the city a contract of sale for their property located adjacent to
the Sewage Treatment Plant and needed for the expansion of said S~wa§e Treat-
ment Plant. for the price of $32,500.00, that the question of relocation paymenti
as may be due to the sellers as provided by law will remain open. that while
the price is somewhat greater than previously fixed by appraisal and autho-
rized by Council. it is recommended that the purchase be authorized and said
ings:
*July 16, 1973
The Honorable Mayer and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
PXease be advised that Mr. and Mrs. Clyde M. Welch, Sr.,
hare tendered to the City a contract of sale for the nine
48O
(9) lots comprising the property~omned by them adjacent to
the Sewage Treatment Plant, on one o£ which they reside and
on others of which their business is operated; the proposed
purchase price being $32°500,00° combo The contract mould
provide for delivery of full possession of the property to
the City within 60 days from the date of its acceptance by
. the City, mith all personalty removed from ~he land, and .
would reserve to the present owners the right, but not the
obligation, to remove any or all of their existing buildings.
Rhile the consideration offered to be accepted by the pro~'
perry owners is somewhat greater than that previously fixed
by appraisal and authorized by the Council, largely because
of the tine element involved, it is the recommendation of
both the City Hanager and the undersigned that the purchase
be authorized and the said agreement be entered into, thus
averting the necessity of condemnation proceedings in this
instance. FOr that purpose, an appropriate ordinance has
been prepared end is transmitted herewith.
The purchase price provided in the contract, namely
$32,500.00, mould obtain for the City fee simple title
to the property, but there will remain open the question of
such relocation payments as may be due the sellers, as ia
provided by lam. The amount of allowable relocation
expenses cannot be determined until such time as the
same are incurred, but, at a later date, the City nay be
called upon to pay other sums to which they may hem me
entitled.
It is recommended that the attached ordinance receive the
affirmative action of the Council.
Respectfully,
S/ J. N. Kin¢onon
J. N. Kincanon
City Attorney~
Rt. Thomas moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City
Attorney and offered the folloming emergency Ordinance:
(~2102S) AN ORDINANCE approvin9 the purchase of certainparcels of
land situate in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, adjacent to the existing City of
Roanoke Sewage Treatment Plant, and needed for said plant*s expansion, upon
certain terms and provisions; providin9 for execution by.the City Manager of a
written purchase agreement; providin9 for payment of the purchase price thereof
upon delivery to the City of a deed nod for recordation of such deed; and pro-
viding for an emergency.
(For full'text.of Ordinance. seeOrdinonce Book mS§, page 2T4.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Rt. Lisk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor~ Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ...................
NAYS: None .......... O. (Rt. Huoard absent)
PENSIONS: The Eity Auditor submitted a written report formardlng the
'Report of the Actuary on the Twenty-Fifth Valuation Together with a Statement
of the Results of the Fifth Investigation of the Wortality, Service and Compensa-
tion Experience of Wembers and Beneficiaries of the Employees' Retirement System
of the CitI of Roanoke Prepared as of June 300 1972'.
Wt. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
48.1.
REPORTS OF C~R#ITTE£S:
£RANCHISES-ROANOKE GAS CO#PAN¥: Council having referre~ to the
Franchise Study Committee .for study, report end recommendation a communication
from the Roanoke Gas Company advising that the franchise of the Roanoke Oas
Company expires on September 1, 1973, and. that ~hey mill be pleased to meet
with Council or the Franchise Study Committee to discuss this matter, the
Franchise Study Committee submitted the follouin9 report transmitting a Resolu-
tion for the adoption of Council which sets out the terms of a new twenty-year
gas franchise such as would be recommended by the Franchise Study Committee to
Council and which provides for public advertisement for bids for said franchise:
"July 16, 1973
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The City's current franchise permitting the operation of
the gas works and of gas distribution lines and pipes in
the public streets and public ways of the City, amarded by
the Council in 1953 to Roanoke Cas Company for a term of
twenty (20) years commencing September 1, 1953. terminates
by its oma provisions on August 31. 1973. Continuity of
gas service under a franchise appears advisable and makes
it necessary that provision be nude for taking a bid or
bids for a new gas franchise to commence as of the first
day of September, 1973. The amard of any franchise to
use the public streets of the City for a period of more
than five (5) years must, by Constitutional provisions, be
preceded by advertisement of the terms of the proposed
herewith transmits to the Council a re~olution which sets
would be recommended by the committee to the Council and
mhich provides, also, for public advertisement for bids
for said franchise. It mould be contemplated that, as
heretofore~ bidders for the new franchise would, in their
bids, offer and agree to pay to the City annually aggregate
payments based upon the number of miles of 9as distribution
mains of Ynrious sizes in service at the end of each preceding
calendar year of tke franchise.
The terms and provisions of the proposed new 9as franchise
bare been made aa nearly consistent as is ream nably possible
to other existing franchises awarded by the City; and it is
recommended that, if the same meet with approval of the
CounciI. the resulution transmitted herewith be adopted at
the meeting of the Council to be held July 16, 1973.
Respectfully,
S/ Robert i. Garland st
Robert A. Garland. Chairman
S/ ~9v L. Webber
Roy L. Webber, Ex-officio
S! Rvron E, Honer
Hy~on E. Haner
S/ J. N. Ki~canon
James N. Kincanon
'S/ Jerome S. Howard. Jr.
S/ James E. Cart
James E, Carr"
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the report of the Franchise
Study Committee and offered the following Resolution:
(~21026) A RESOLtYIION directing advertisement for bids for award of
a franchise to use the streets, alleys and other public ways of the City of
Roanoke for a g~s distribution system, upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of Resolution, see Ordinance Oooh ~30, page 275.)
482
Mr. Garlsad moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Hr; Trout and adopted by the following rote:
AYES: Messrs, Garland. Llsk, Taylor. Thomas. Trout and
Mayor Webber .................6.
NAYS: None ........... O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
BUSES: The Transportation Study Uommittee submitted the following
report In connection mith certain recommended changes to the Glty*s agreement
mith Wilbur Smith and Associates for a Roanoke Regional Area Technical Transit
Study:
"July 16. 1973
Iloaorable Rayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
The City administration has corresponded with the
Virginia Department of Ilighwaya requesting that the Iligh-
way Department participate in Roanoke"s transit technical
study. The Highmny Department has reviewed the scope of
service to be provided by the transit technical study as
provided for in the agreement betmeen the City of Roanoke
and Wilbur Smith and Associates. The Highway Department
has adrised the City that certain clarifications should be
made in the agreement in order to cover certain UMTA guide-
line requirements which were nat specifically mentioned in
the agreement.
The City administration has subsequently met with
representatives of Wilbur Smith and Associates in order
to draft the required amendments to the agreement. Repre-
sentatives of Wilbur Smith and Associates have since met
with representatives of the Virginia Department of llighways
in order to insure that these amendments are satisfactory
and that they cover the requirements of the Virginia
Department of Ilighmays.
Basically, the Highway Department is requiring that
Wilbur Smith and Associates evaluate the services being
provided by the other transit bus lines in, the Roanoke
area; that they eraluate the past and current assistance
programs to these bas lines (if any); and that an evaluation
be made of research and development activity programs for
these bus lines. This additional mark mould result in an
additional cost of $3,000 and would require an additional
30 days to complete the study. This would mean that the
draft of the report would be published sometime prior to
September 14 instead of August 13 and that the final report
would be published 30 days after notice by the City of
approval of the draft report.
It is recommended that these changes be made to the
contract in order to receive OS percent participation in
this study by the Virginia Department of Highways.
It is additionally recommended that certain survey
analyses be performed by the consultant rather than by the
City as in-kind serrtces. These ttems are provided for in
Section 7. Page 7 of the existing agreement. It is recom-
mended that $1,000 be reserved for local costs or services
and that $4,000 of the evaluation work actually be provided
by the consultant.
A cost breakdown based on the existing contract with
no possibility of State participation and based on the pro-
posed amended contract with State participation is itemized
below:
Present Agreement Costs
(No 5tame Participation)
Wilbur Smith and Associates $33,000
· City of Roanoke ('in-kind* costs) ~.OO0
Total Cost (City of Roanoke) $38,000
Proposed Agreement Costs
(With State Participation)
483
II
Milbar Smith and Associates $33,000
~ Additional UMTA Requirements 3,000
~ Consultant'S*trices in lieu of City
kind* costs 4.000
$40,000
City of Roanoke (tin-kind, costs) i.O00
Total Cost $41,000
- Virginia Dept. of Higbmays cost
of $40,000). : 34.000
Net City of Roanoke Cost
It is recommended that all of the above recommended
contract changes be approved. Attached is a copy of the
recommended contract amendments.
Respectfully submitted.
S/ Robert A. Garland S/ Roy L. Nebber
Robert A, Garland, Chairman Mayor Roy L. Webber
S/ Hampton N. Thomas S/ Byron E. Baner
Hampton W. Thomas Byron E, limner
S/ A. N. Gibson
A. N. Gibson"
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the report of the Trans-
portation Study Committee and offered the following emergency Ordinance pro-
riding for an amendment to the agreement dated March 13, 1973, berm*mn the City
of Roanoke and Nilbur Smith and Associates, providing for a regional area techni-
cal transit study, so as to conform to certain UMTA guideline requirements:
(=21027) AN ORDINANCE providing for an amendment to the agreement
dated March 13, 1973, betmeen the City of Roanoke and Silbur S~Jth and Associates
providing for a regional area technical transit study, so as to conform to
certain ~MTA guideline requirements; and providin9 for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Haok =30, page 285.)
Mc. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber
NAYS: None ...........O, (Mr. llubard absent)
AUDITORIUM-COLISEUM! Council having referred to a committee for
tabulation, report and recommendation bids received for both catering and con-
cession services at the Roanoke Civic Center, the committee submitted the
foil,ming report recommending that the proposal Of American Motor Inns, Incor-
porated, for catering and concessions be accepted and that both the concessions
and catering be placed on lease:
"July 16, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
On Monday, June 25, 1973, after due and proper advertise-
ment, the City Council received and opened bids for both
catering and concession services at the Roanoke Civic Center.
Five bids mere received and your committee, based on the
information contained in the proposals received, reduced the
consideration to two bids, that of the American Motor Inns
of Roanoke and Frontier Restaurant of Roanoke.
.484
committee
In reviewing the bids of these two concerns, considern~
tiaa mas given to several other aspects contained In the
proposals submitted. Considerable weight was placed an the
consents aa submitted under Proposal C by both American Hotor
Inns end Frontier Restaurant. AR! specifically indicated
that they mould provide additional equipment rot both con-
cessions and catering mhich mould include rout portable
vending units, five hamburger units and vents, two soft
serve unitSo seven burrer stations and so forth. The -
dollar value placed on these items of equipment exceeds
$13,000. The bid from Frontier Restaurant only indicates
that they will purchase and supply any and all equipment
necessary to perform services. Additionally, A#I proposes
a monthly guarantee of $1,000 pe~ month against the per-
centages of gross business, uhile Frontier Restaurant made
no monthly guarantee.
Your committee nas greatly concerned mith respect to
the possibility 5f the same catering firm servicing both
the Salem and the Roanoke Civic Centers, as the Centers
are somewhat competitive in nature. Certainly, me cannot
pinpoint that any conflict of interest might exist as a
result of the same caterer~ however, as the development of
increased convention business for the entire City is
directly related to the ability or the Civic Center to
perform its role and it is anticipated that'the catering
service could have a great deal to do with bringing addi-
tional business to either of the Centers, it is not incon-
ceivable that some conflict could arise. The fact that
American Rotor Inns, for both civic and pecuniary reasons,
is extremely active in marketing our City for conventions is
a strong factor in their behalf. It mould appear that the
Civic Center mould benefit nationally by inclusion in their
national advertising program that they have been selected
as the official caterer. The qualified marketing and sales
staff retained by AMI and its program of national propor-
tions could greatly assist in selling our Center and its
services. Your committee after meighin9 all of these fac-
tors feels that the rental guarantee and these other
factors outweigh the 2~% difference in bids for the con-
cession sales and the 10% difference in catering sales bids.
It would be your committee*s recommendation that City
council accept the proposal of American Motor Inns, Incor-
porated, to provide their services for catering and for the
concessions, as contained under Proposals B and C. Both the
bid committee and the Civic Center Advisory Commission
recommend that both the concessions and the catering be
placed on lease. It is the opinion of all concerned that
the profits from this mill equal or quite possibly far
exceed those profits that could be expected if the Civic
Center operated its concession stands as in the past.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Hamer S/ John A. Kelley
Byron E. Bauer, Chairman John A. Kelley
$! A. N. Gibson S! James K. Campbell
A. N. Gibson James K. Campbell~
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the
and that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for preparation of
the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously ado~ ed.
TAXICABS: Council having referred to the Franchise Study Committee
for study, report and recommendation the request of Yellom cab Company of Roanoke,
Incorporated, Checker Cab Company of Virginia, Incorporated, Liberty Cab Company,
B. P. ~ No Cab Company and Ballou Cab Company for an increase in taxicab rates,
the committee submitted a written report recommending that the new taxicab rates
be approve~, effective as of August 16, 1973.
Mr. Carland moved that Council adopt the report or the Franchise Study
Committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
SALE OF PROPERTY: The Real Estate Committee submitted the following
report inviting the concurrence of Council that the city offer to tell to
Roanoke.Memorial Hospitals o certain parcel of land betneen Hellevlew Avenue
and Hamilton Terrace, S. E** lying in n northerly direction from the hospital
along with the old street car line property which ia adjacent nad runs behind
property mblch ia presently owned by the hospital, said land to be used to
construct n parting facility, for the estimated fair market value of $37,000.00:
*July 16~ 1973
Honorable Rayor and City Council
Roauoke, Virginia
Gentlemen:
By letter to the City Manager dated May IS, 1973,
Mr. Milllam 11. Flannagan, Director, Roanoke Memorial
Hospitals, requested that attention be brought to the
Real Estate Committee that Roanoke Memorial is desirous
of the City donating the parcel of land between Relleview
Avenue and Ilamiltou Terrace, S, E** lying in a northerly
direction from the hospital along with the old street car llne
property which is adjacent and runs behind some property
which is presently owned by the hospital. The land is to
be used to construct a parking facility.
Mr. Ilaner presented this to the Real Estate Committee
at its meeting on June IS, 1973. After some discussion it
mas decided to carry it over until more could be learned
concerning the proposed facility.
At its meeting held on July 5, 1973, the Committee
agreed that the City-owned land should be offered for sale
to the Hospital at its fair market value to be estimated by
the City Real Estate Assessor. Since the meetin9 it has
been determined that there are two parcels of land, Official
Tax Ho. 4040833 containing 30,000 square feet, the estimated
market value being $18,000.00 and Official Tax No. 4060201
containing 19,000 square feet with the estimated value placed
at $lg,O00.O0
The Real Estate Committee invites the Council*s concur-
Fence that the City offer to sell to the Roauoke Memorial
Hospitals the land as requested to be donated by Mr. Flannagan's
letter for the sun of $37,000.00 which is the estimated fair
market value.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ David K. Lisk
David K. Lisk
Chairman
Real Estate Committee'
Mr. Trout moved that the report of the Real Estate Committee be taken
under advisement. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Trout cited various industries and other facilities throughout
the Roanoke Valley in which the City of Roanoke has made contributions toward
their support and expressed the opinion that it is only right for the city to
give aupport to Roanoke Memorial Hospitals.
Mr. Trout then moved that that certain parcel of land between Helleview
Avenue and Hamilton Terrace, S. E., lying in a 'northerly direction from the
hospital along with the old street car line property which is adjacent and runs
behind property which is presently owned by the hospital be donated to Roanoke
Memorial Hospitals. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Link moved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper meosaredonntl&g said land to Rooeohe Memorial
Hospitals. The motlom mas seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE~ ....
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMSt NONE.
I I~RODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDIWANC£S AND RESOLUTIONS:
BUDGET-PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOY~ES~CITY ATTORNEYs Council having directed
the City Attorney to prepare the proper measure amending ~rdinnnce No. 20989
providing a System of Pay Rates and Ranges, by changing the Range and Pay Rate
of Code Positions 1250, 1251 and 1252, Senior Assistant City Attorneyt Assistant
City Attorney II and Assistant City Attorney I. respectively, as set out on
page 2 of Schedule 2 of the Clty*s Pay Plan, he presented same; whereupon, Mr.
Trout offered the following emergency Ordinance:
(m21028) AN ORDINANCE amending Ordinance No. 20989, heretofore
adopted on June 25. 1973, providing a Systemof Pay Rates and Ranges, by
changing the Range and Pay Rate of Code Positions 1250, 1251, and 1252, Senior
Assistant City Attorney, Assistant City Attorney l! and Assistant City Attorney
I. respectively, as set out on page 2 of Schedule 2 of the City*s Pay Plan; and
providing for un emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Dank ~8, page 288.)
M~ Trout moved the'adoption o~ the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. List andadopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Ca rla~d, Lash. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Mebber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
Mr. Thomas then offered the following emergency Ordinance appropriat-
ing $1,?DB.O0 to Personal Services under Section ~4, 'City Attorney," of the
1973-74 budget, to provide funds in connection with changing the Range and Pay
Rate of Code Positions 1250, 1251 and 1252, Senior Assistant City Attorney.
Assistant City Attorney II and Assistant City Attorney I of the Pay Plan:
(~102q) ~N ORDI~NCE to emend and reordain Section ~4, 'City
Attorney,* of the 1973-74 Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Boot #30, page 2D9.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lash. Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ........... O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
CITY EMPLOYEES: Mr. Thomas offered the following emergency ~rdinance
amending Ordinance No. 20993 fixing the annual compensation of certain.unclas-
sified officials and employees of the city by deleting therefrom certni~ names,
positions and amounts of annual compensation:
(#21030) A~ ORDINANCE amending. Ordinance No. 20993, adopted Jane 25,
1973, fixing the annaal compensation of certain unclassified officials and
employees of the City; and proriding for an emergency.
(For fall text of Ordinance, see Ordinnnce Book ~30, page 2B9,)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion mas
seconded by Or. Taylor and adopted by the follouing vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, LJsk, Taylor, Thomas, TFOOt and
Mayor Webber .................... 6.
NATS: ~one ........... O. (Mr. Bobard ahseat)
Mr. Thomaa offered the follouin9 emergency Ordinance amending and
reordalning Section ?, Unclassified service, Chapter 13, Personnel, Title
II. Administration, of Yhe Code of the City of Roanohe, 1956, as amended:
(u21031) A~ ORBINANCE amending and reordaining Sec. T. ~
~.~. of Chaplet ]3, Perso.n¢~, of Title Il. Administration, Of the Code
of the City of Roanoke, 1956, as amended; and providing for an emergency.
(For fall text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~30. page 290.)
Mr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. Yhe motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Lisk, Taylor. Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ....................
NAYS: None ...........O. (Mr. Hubard absent)
Mr. Thomas called attention to another Ordinance before Council which
provides for the addition of certain positions to the System of Pay Rates and
Ranges and moved that the title City Auditor and Assistant to the City Manager
for Finance be changed to City Auditor and that the title of Assistant to the
City Manager for Technical and Administrative Plaoning be changed to Director
of Technical and Administrative Planning. The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout
and unanimously adopted.
Mr. Thomas then offered the following emergency Ordinance as amended:
(u21032) AN ORUI~LtNCE to amend Ordinance No. 20989, providing a
System of Pay Rates and Ranges for the employees of the City of Roanoke. by
adding to Schedule 2 of said System of Pay Rates and Ranges nam code positions
for Assistant City Manager, City Auditor. Director of Technical and Administra-
tive Planning, Director of Human Services, Director of Safety and Security,
Director of Public Works. Director of Civic Enrichment and Director of Utilities
and Operations; and providing the ranges and pay steps applicable to each said
hem position; proyiding the effective date of the changes herein ordered; and
providing for an e~ergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~aB, page
Mr. Thomas ~oved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the folloming vote:
487
488
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Llsk, Taylor, Thomss, Trout and
Mayor Webber .................... 6.
NAYS: None ........... O. (Mr. Hubord absent)
Mr. Thomas further moved that the City Attorney be directed as
follows:
1. To immedJhtely amend the proposed Ordinance to designate
positions in the City Ply Plan of *City Auditor* and
*Director for Technical and'Administrative Planning# at
the present time;
Research and advise Council of the enact legal steps, and
timetable for same, required to permanently change the title
of City Auditor to *Assistant City Manager for Finance* and
the other position to *Assistant City Manager for Technical
and Administrative Planning#;
Research and advise Council of the legal steps necessary
and the timetable for same in order to submit the matter of
the status of the Office of the Commissioner of the Revenue
and City Treasurer to a referendum in the November general
election;
4. Research and advise Council as to the legal obligations of
the City of Roanoke to continue to maintain the Office of
Commissioner of the Revenue and City Treasurer for the
period of four years from the date of the nee terms of the
newly elected officers and also advise if a referendum which
so directs can establish an earlier date of discontinsance
for said offices;
5. Report back to Council on items 2, 3 and 4 on or before
Monday, August 6, 1973.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
MATER DEPARTMENT: Council having previously concurred in the recom-
mendation of the City Manager to raze a building which houses a steam pump
manufactured by the Snow Steam Pump Works of Uuffalo, New York, and that the
steam pump be sold to whomever and for whatever purpose can be found at the best
price, Mr. Lisk pointed out that the pump is unique and has historic value and
moved that Council reconsider its previous action taken on Monday, July 2, 1973.
In this connection, Mr. M. Carl Andrews appeared before Council and
*resented data as to the history of the Snow Steam Pump.
Mr. Lisk moved that the City Manager be requested to present figures
to Council as to the costs involved in keeping thc building in proper maintenance
in order to establish it as a historic site and to submit a further report as
to whether or not the motor to the steam pomp could be electrified. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
JAIL: Mr. Ltsk called to the attention of Council that the other
valley governing bodies are waiting for the City of Roanoke to act on the recom-
mendation Of the Roanoke Valley Regional Corrections Board as to whether or not
it wants a regional facility Jn the Kimball Redevelopment Area, that the time
has come to make a decision, that he feels the City of Roanoke has tried to
cooperate in selecting a regional site, that Council was not aware as to the
financial cost of acquirihg the laud in the Kimball site and that he feels Council
would be doing a disservice to the citizens of the City of Roanoke to support the
'1
489
Kimball site uitb the cost of the lasd being in the neighborhood of $60~000,00
per acre.
Hr. Llsk then moved that Council go un record in reference to
pinning domn a regional Jail and regional courthouse site adJacent to the
Municipal Building In lieu or the tmo recommended sites &a proposed by the
Roanoke Valley Regional Corrections Board because of the distance or economic
cost and to advise the Regional Corrections Board that the city can no longer
delay the time and cost to its citizens by continuing to negotiate sites that
will not he feasible and to request that the Roanoke Valley Regional Corrections
BOard Join with the city ir they decide to participate in either one of these
two functions on properties adjacent to the present Municipal Building, The
motion nas seconded by Mr. Trout.
Mr. Thomas pointed out that Councilman Mllliam S. Ilubard mbo is
Chairman of the Roanoke Val]e7 Begioca] Corrections Board man not present
and that a vote on the matter Should be delayed until Councilman Ilubard is
present.
Mr. Thomas then Offered a Substitute motion that the matter he referred
to the City Manager for report by the next regular meeting of Council on
Monday, July 23, lg?3, regarding thc matter of a regional jail and/or correc-
tions center. The motion was seconded by Mr. Link and unaoimously adopted.
There being no further business, Mayor Webber declared the meetln~
adjourned.
APPROVED
ATTEST: ~0.~,~
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
49O
P. EGU--..AR 'N~ETIN(~ ~
July 23, 1973.
The Council of the City of Roanoke net in regular meeting in the
~ouncll Chamber in the Municipal Building, Monday, July
the regular meeting hour, with Mayor Roy Lo Webber presiding.
pI~ESENTz Councilmen Robert A. Garland, William S. Nubard, David K.
Llsk, Noel C. Taylor, Hampton W. Thomas, James O. Trout and Mayor Roy L.
~ebber ................................. 7.
ABSENT~ None ................ 0.
OFFICERS PRESENTs Mr. Byron E. Haner, City Manager, Mr. James N.
Kincanon, City Attorney; Mr. H. Ben Jones, Jr., Assistant City Attorneyj'and Mr.
Ao N. Gibson, City Auditor.
INVOCATION~ The meeting was opened with a prayer by the Reverend
George K. Bowers, Pastor, St. Mark's Lutheran Church.
MINUTES: Copies of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Monday,
July 9, 1973, and the regular meeting held on Monday, July 16, 19?3, having been
furnished each member of Council, on motion of Mr. Trout, seconded by Mr. Huhard,
and unanimously adopted, the reading thereof was dispensed with and the minutes
approved as recorded.
HEAPING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC HATTERS=
AIP~ORT: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids on the operation
of an aviation fuel service business a~d certain related services at Roanoke
Municipal (Woodrum) Airport, said proposals to be received by the City Clerk
~ntil 2 p.m., Monday, July 23, 1973, and to be opened at that hour before Council,
~ayor Webber asked if anyone had any questions aboutthe advertisement for bids and
ho representative present raising any guestion, the Mayor instructed the City Clerk
to proceed with the opening of the bids; whereupon, the City Clerk opened and read
the following bids:
Name Gasoline Turbine Fuel Gross Monthly Receipts
~ir Transport Associates,
Incorporated
$5.1 cents 5.1 cents
p.g. p.g. 10%
Airport Services, Woodrum
Incorporated .042 p.g.
.042 p.g. -
.047 over
550 M. 15%
Piedmont Aviation,
incorporated .028 p.g. .028 p.g. 10%
Mr. Thomas moved that the bids be referred to a committee to be appoint-
~d by the Mayor for tabulation, repo~t-and'reco~endation to Council. The
aotion was seconded by Mr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
Mayor Webber appointed Messrs. Byron E. Haner, Chairman,.Marshall L.
Harris, David K. Lisk, and James O. Trout as members of the committee.
PETITIONS AND COHHU~ICATIONS~
SCHOOLS~ A conenunication from The P.T.A. President~e of S.E, and the
S.E. Neighborhood Alliance requesting that Council delay its appointment o£ the ne~
Roanoke City School Board member to fill the vacancy crested by the resignation of
~tr. Herman H. Pevler, was before the body.
Itc. Trout moved that the comnunicatlon be received and filed, The
mOtion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and unanimously adopted.
JAIL~ Copy of a con~mlication from Sheriff Paul J. Puckett to H~. J. U.
Pugh, Superintendent of Jails, Department of Welfare and Institutions~ requesting
that the salary of Dr. John Jofko, Jail Physician, be increased from $300.00 to
$400.00 per month, was before Council.
H~o Thomas moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Hr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
JUVENILE DETENTION HOME: A Communication from Mr. W. A. Taylor, Jr.,
~ayor~ City Of Covington, expressing the willingness and desire of the Council
of the City of Covington to use the expanded Roanoke Juvenile Detention
Facility on a per diem basis to meet the needs of juveniles requiring detention,
was before the body.
Dr. Taylor moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
JUVENILE DETENTION NOM~= Copy of a commmlicatlon from Mr. David L.
Waters, Chair~an, Alleghany County Board of Supervisors, advising that at a regu-
lar meeting Of the Alleghany County Board of Supervisors on July 16, 1973, the
Board voted to accept the offer made by the Council of the City of Roanoke as
contained in Resolution No. 21004 relating to the Juvenile Detention Home, was
before the body.
Dr. Taylor moved that the communication be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Hr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
JUVENILE DETENTION HOME= Copy of a Resolution adopted by the Roanoke
County Board of Supervisors at its meeting on July 16, 1973, indicating the
desire of the Board of Supervisors to work with the City of Roanoke in the
city's constr~ctlon of a ten bed expansion of the Juvenile Detention Home facil~
ity Of the city and requesting that at least five beds in said detention home
be reserved for the use of Roanoke County~ unless extenuating circumstances
exist so as to make this impossible, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor ~ved that the Resolution be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Hr. Lisk and unanimously adopted.
TRAfFIC-MARKeT-PLANNING= A coml~unication from Hr. Richard L. Meagher
respectfully requesting that Council consider the fir~ of Wells, Meaghsr &
McManama, /trchitects, to execute the architectural work for the proposed
municipal garage at First Street and Church Avenue, S. W., was before the body.
491
'492
~, f~onas moved that t~e co~unication be referred ~o ~e Cl~y ~ageF
for consideration at ~e appropriate t~e. The ~t~on was seconded by ~. Trout
~d ~usly adoptS.
BUS~s A c~lcation from ~. ff. W~star Stowe, P~es~dent, ~anoke
~ty Lines, Inco~ated~ advising of additional costs to ~anoke C~ty Lines
~gl~ing Jul~ 14~ 1973, If a contrac~ ~s entered Into ~ ~lg~ted
Fransi2 Union~ and r~uest[ng an additional appropr~ation of $22~900.00 to
~eir present agre~ent with ~e City of ~anoke to car~ ~is cost from July
~4~ ~973, through Sept~er 30, 1973, w~ $4,900.00 to be paid ~n July for ~7
~ays of operation and $9,000.00 each In August and Sept~er, was before
~. Garland moved that the co~[cat~on be referred to ~e Trans~rta-
tion Study Co--tree for study, re~rt and reco~endat~on to Co~c~l. The
~t[on was seconded by Dr. Taylor and ~an~usly adopted.
~PORTS OF OFFICE~
BU~E~HUSTINGS COURT-G~S-AI~ORT= The C~ty ~ager s~m~tted a
~[tten re~rt reco~end[ng that $55,000.00 be reappropr~ated to Court Studies
~d that $~4,070.00 be reappropr~ated for Ai~ort Security Equipment since
action on these federal grants was not accomplished dur~n9 the 1972-73
~scal year budget, sal] f~ds to be offset by a ~tch~ng revenue ~= in
rants.
~. Lisk ~ved that Council concur ~n ~e reco~endation of ~e
ity ~nager and offered the following ~ergency Ordinance appropriating
~14,070.00 to Capital ~tlay from Revenue ~der Section %450,
~rt F~d,' of the 1973-74 M~[c~pal A~rt F~d A~propr[at[on Ordinance=
(~21033) ~ O~IN~CE to ~end and reordain Section %450, 'M~ic~pal
(For fuZZ text of Or~ance, see Or~ce ~ok %38, page 295.)
~. L~sk ~o~ed the aao~tJo~ o[ ~e Ordinance. The motion was secon~e~
~y ~. Trout ~d adoptea by ~e follow~ng vote=
AYe= Messrs. Garland, H~ar~, L~sk~ Taylor, Tho~s~ Trout anQ ~yor
~ebbe~ ......................................................................
NAYS= None ........................................................0.
~. L[~k the~ offere~ ~e following ~ergency Ordinance appropriating
;55,000.00 to Fees for Profess~ona~ an~ Spec~a~ Se~ices ~der Section %545,
Court S~u~y Grat,' of the 1973-74 Appropriation Ordinance=
(%2~034) ~ O~N~CE to ~e~ an~ reor~ain Section %545~ 'Court
;tu~y Grant,' o~ ~e 1973-74 Appropriation Ordinance, an~ prov~ng for an
~ergency.
(For full text of Ordinate, see Ordinance ~ok %38, page 295.)
~. L~sk ~ve~ the adoption of ~e Ordinance. The ~t~on was secon~eQ
~y~. Trout a~ adopte~ by ~e fo11~i~ vote:
493
AYESs Messrs. Garla~ld~ Bubard~ Lisk~ Taylor~ Thomas, Trout and Hayor
Webber .......................................................................
NA¥Ss None 0
CITY ~MPLOYEES-CITY ENGINEERs The City Hanager submitted a written
report recon~nending that Council approve the appointment of Mr. Richard B.
Turpln to the position of Director of public Works, effective September It 1973.
The City Manager submitted a further written report recon~nending that
Council concur in the promotion of Mr. Charles L. Gutshall to the position
of City Engineer.
Mr. Trout m~ved that Council concur in the reco~endations of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolutions
(%21035) A RESOLUTION confirming the City Manager's appointment of
Charles L. Gutshall as City E~gineer and, as such, Director of the City's
Engineering Department~ and of Richard B. Turpin as Director of the City's
Department of Public Works.
{For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book ~38, page 296.}
Mr. Trout moved the adoption cE the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Garland and adopted by the following vote=
AYES: Messrs. Garland~ Hubard, hisk, Taylor~ Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber .......................................................................
NAYS: None .........................................................
SHOKE= The City Hanager submitted a written report reccn~uending
the adoption Of a revised Ordinance in connection with updating the Roanoke
City Air Pollution Control Ordinance, Title 15, Chapter 5, Sections 3, 8 and 12,
order to make it comply with the State Ordinance.
Hr. Thomas ~oved that the report be referred to the City Attorney for
preparation of the proper measure. The motion was seconded by Hr. Trout and
unanimously adopted.
POLICE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a written report
recommending that Council authorize another sixty-day period or necessary
portion thereof of extended salary to Patrolma~ William L. Bowling, a police
officer who was injured in the line of duty on May 27, 1972.
Mr. Liskmoved that Council concur l~ the reco~enda21on of the City
Manager and offered the following Resolution=
(%21036) A RESOLUTION authorizing and directing that William L.
Bowling, a me~ber Of the Police Department who is unable to perform hls regular
duties by reason of ~ersonal injury received in line of duty, be paid his
regular salary for all additional period of sixty (60) days beginning July 22,
~973.
(For full text of Resolution, sen Resolution Book %38, page 296.)
Mr. Lisk moved the adoption Of the Resolution. The motion was
by Mr. Thomas and adopted by the following vote=
494
AYES: MessEs. GaEland~ Hubard, Lisk~ TayloE~ Thomas~ Trout and Mayor
WebbeE ....................................................................... ?.
NAYS: None 0
STATE HIGHWAYS: The Clty Manager submitted a written re~ort recommend-
lng that Council authorize the DepaEtment of Highways to prepare the appropriate
plans and specifications foe water line ~mprovements for Route 115 and Il6 along
13th Street and Bennington Street, S. E., along with their design of this'
segment of the new highway and to assure the Depa=tment of Highways of the in-
tent of the City of Roanoke to pay the cost of euohwork.
Hr. Thomas moved that Council concur in the report of the City Manager
and offered the following Resolution:
(J21037) A RESOLUTION requesting the Commonwealth of Virginia,
Department of Highways, to accomplish, at the Clty*s expense~ the reconstruc-
tion of a portion of the City's large water lines along 13th Stree~ and Bennington
Street, S. E.t in connection with the proposed construction of Routes ll5 and
116 along said streets.
(For full text Of Resolution, see Resolution Book J38, page 297.)
Mr. Thomas ~oved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was
seconded by Hr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: ;~essrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas~ Trout and
Mafor Webber ................................................................
NAYS: None ........................................................ 0.
PARK~ AND ~LAYGROU~DS: The City Manager submitted a written report
requesting that Cou~oil authorize the acceptance of the bid of Otto Sales
Company, in the total amount of $26,188.00, to provide four Super Secure
Comfort Stations in various city parks in compliance with the provisions of
the 197~-74 budget.
In this connection, the City Manager verbally requested per~t[sslon to
withdraw the above report.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concu~ in the request of the City Manager
for permission to withdraw the report. The motion was seconded by Hr. Lisk and
tu3animously adopted.
POLICE DE~ART~E/TF-F/RE-DE~ART~F2~T::'The'clty'Manager subm~tte~ a
written report as to the status of personnel in the Police Department and the
Fire Departmentas of Ju~e 30, 1973.
Mr. Trout moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Hr. Lisk and ana~imously adopted.
JAIL= The City Manager submitted the followlng report in con~ection
with ~a[1 and court facilities, advising that the City of Roanoke now owns the
150 foot by 150 foot parking lot at the corner of Third Street and Church
Avenue, S.W., that there are two vacant lots to the west which are utilized as
parking lots, that it would be proposed that Council purchase the adjoining
property to the west and to the northwest and construct a new co~bination jail
and courthouse facility on that property adjoining the Police and Juvenile and
Domestic Relations Court, and reco~ending that Council resolve this longstand-
ing and much debated question by approving this plan and rescinding all
previous agreements, Resolntions and Ordinances regarding the jail and courts
and further reconunending that Council authorize the Clty Hanager to proceed
with the purchase of the parcels of land in question and at such time as the
land has been obtained an agreement be renegotiated with Hayesv Seayv Hattern
and Hattern, Architects and Engineers, to design either the local or regional
jail on this site in conjunction with local court facllities~
'July 23, 1973
Honorable Hayer and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
~entlemen=
Subject: Jail and Court Fac£11ties
For a number of months City Council through its represent-
atives on the ROanoke Valley Correctiens Hoard has been
endeavoring to find an equitable solution with respect to
~he location and construction of regional jell facilities
needed to replace the existing jail in the old Courthouse
~uilzl/~. .This has been a matter of great co,item, not
only t~ the Roanoke City Council melabers,:-nU~_~tSta
members of all governments-of the Roanoke*Valley.- '
As a result of this interest and at the request
of the Fifth Planning Oistrict Commission, in June
1972, HelLmuth, Obata and Kassabaum, Architects; and
~ilbur, Smith and Associates, Planners, submitted a report
with regard to the need for a Regional Correctional Program
for the Roanoke Valley. Chapter VII of this Regional
Corrections report placed emphasis on the correctional
aspects and rehabilitatlon of the individual prisoner rather
than just the warehousing of offenders.
It would appear that from the date of receipt of this
report the various Valley governments assumed the findings
contained in this report to be 'gospel' and established the
Roanoke Valley Corrections Hoard which had as its main task
the search for a suitable site large enough on which to
construct a regional correctional facility. The concept
contained in that report and accepted by this Board did
not include the possibility that various aspects of a
correctional program could be carried out from a jell as
well as from a correctional facility.
The Corrections Board worked long and hard endeavor-
ing to locate a site for a regional correctional facility
which would be mutually acceptable and economically feasi-
ble to the various governmental entities. No agreement
was reached until finally the Board recommended the uti-
lization of a portion of the Kimball property. At that
time the matter was referred by the Roanoke City Council
to the City Hanager for a determination as to the exact
location, the size of the site needed, and the cost of
said site and to determine the approximate number of
prisonirs to be housed. Answers to these questions are
still awaiting the determination of land values by the
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority.
A week after this matter was referred to the City
Hanager, city Council, upon receiving a report from
CounciLman Garland, also referred to the city Hana~er
the matter of obtaining options for 'the former Lew~s
Gale Hospital property, for land located to the west
495
'496
of the £or~er Reid and Cutshall Bullding~ and for land
directly west of the City parking lot at the co~ner o£
Third Street and Church Avenue, S. W.
Option papers have been prepared by the City Attor-
ney~ and the various property owners have been contacted.
Not all o~ners are receptive to a proposal to sell this
property, and appraisals have ~een solicited for the var-
ious parcels of property.
In the interim, the City Hanagsr initiated a study
of the situation so that he might submit his analysis and
solution to City Council at the proper time. Prior to
completion of this analysis and obtaining the appraisals~
City Council asked for an lm~ediate report as of this
date.
The writer of this report does not pretend to be an
expert on either ~alls or correctional facilities. Because
of his relatively small kno~ledge~ discussions were held
with various Judges~ the City Sheriff, police and with
various Councilmen. It was discovered that a rather
strong inclination still exists among those knowledgeable
persons contacted to retain the jail concept in lieu of
e~barking upon the correctional facility approach. Stronger
still was the feeling that this facility should be located
near the courts.
In 1969 the U. S. Bureau of Prisoners, Department of
Justice, published a booklet entitled "New Roles for ~ails.~
This publication~ whose intention is to assist in taking
out of ~ails the great number of people who do not belong
there~ states that from a program standpoint, the ~ail
should be as close to thc contcrs of business, industry,
schools, medical facilities, welfare se~vlce agencies and
the courts as circmastances Permit and accessible to pub-
lic transportation. Not only will this facilitate the use
of such resources, but problems of staffing are simplified
when there are not tiring or complicated daily trips to
and from the ~ob.
The individuals queried pointed out that with a new
iall facilities, a program could be continued which would
incorporate many of the correctional activities, such as
pretrial release, alcoholic rehabilltatlon, d~ug rehabi-
litation, juvenile programs, work release programs, etc.
These can be carried on in a ~ail as well as a correctional
facility.
As an estimated 80 percent of the irmates in a
regional facilitywould be City of Roanoke prisoners, the
location of the place of incarceration with respect to the
site of the trlal is an important economic factor. That
factor coupled with the City Council's determination to
retain the local courts within theClt~ while the County
is equally determined not tO have their courts located
within the City of Roanoke imposes a difficult problem.
~hile your administration subscribes to the policy
of regionalizatlon whenever possible and plausible and when
dete~ained to be in the best inter, st of our citizens, it
cannot recon~aend that City Council build a'correotional
facility and most particularly not a correctional facility
located away from the courts; For this reason I cannot
rec~end any site away from the down~own municipal complex.
Tho Roanoke Valley Corrections Board could not resolve
this matter to eye.one's satisfaction. Xt is possible that
my reco~endatlons might not be well receivedl however, I
have been asked to submit my recommendations, and they
follow.
~xtensive remodeling of the existing cou~ts building
for courts use would be a difficult, time consuming and an
extremely expansive process. Some sources have recommended
removal of the existing structure an~ replacing it with a
new courts building and jail. The present building is a
beautiful, structurally sound facility which can, ~ith
minor improvements, serve the City for many additional
years, if properly utilized. More importantly, it can
be used as a jail and courts facilitywhile new facilities
are being constructed for either the City, or for the City
and any of our neighbors should they desire to participate.
! ~Ould refer City Cotmcll ~ack to the eCou~ts~ Jail and
Related Fac~llties~ study prepared In September 1970~ by
Hayes, Heay. Hattern and Hat,em. This re~rt rec~ended
H~ pro~sal ~uld ~ s~ha2 differ~k ~d ~e s~ ~uld
~ reduced as ~e Clhy Is pr~vidinq a new.lice facility
~d ~uvenlle ~d ~s~lc Relations
~s2 of ~e ~nfo~tion con~ained ~n ~ls
Is still valid~ h~eve~ ~e cos2 ~r s~a~e f~t quite
naturally has Increased. The City oE Ro~oke ~s ~e
150 f~t by 150 f~ parking lo2 a2 the corner of Third
S2ree2 ~d Ch~ch Avenue~ S. ~. There are t~ vac~
l~ts to ~e ~est ~hich are u2~lized as packing lots.
~uld be pro~s~ ~a2 Clt~ Co~c~l purchase ~e ad~oining
probity to ~e ~esh ~d to ~e nor~est ~d const~ch a
ne~ c~lnahton ~all and cour~ouse facility on ~at pro-
~rty adjoining ~e ~l~ce and ~uvenlle ~d ~mestic Rela-
tions Co~h. The p~chase oE ~ parcels of land [s
necessa~ to provide suit~le accessibil~ty to the ne~
facll~2y ~d to p~ovlde for l~dscaping ~d ~e fl~ of
traffic. The costs of const~c~ing ~is facility have been
dis~ssed ~1~ representa2ives of Hayes. Sea~. ~tern and
~ttern. The cos~ of the ~ail f~cllity ~ill va~
respec~ to the n~r of i~tes ~hich ~lll de,nd on
~hether it ~as a purely local fac~lit~ or a ~eqional
l~t[. A purely local jail ~ould cosh ap~ox~tely
~llion ~h~le an est~hed fl~re for a regional
~uld be $4.2 mill~on. The est~ted cost f~r conskrucking
~e Dl~tr~c2 and C~rcu~2 Cour~ fac~l~2~es and ~e ad~ct
Clerk oE Cou~ts ~uld be ~ est~ted $2.8 million
furnishing and ~[pping this facility ~uld entail another
$0.5 m~ll~on. Thus a new court and jail facility could
construct~ adjacent to the ex[st~ng m~[c~pa[ complex for
~e approx~te cost of between $6.5 and $~.~ m~ll[on aside
from ~e co~t of ~e land.
~ would call to City Co~cil~s attention ~e fact
~at on page 15 of the Hayes, Seay~ ~ttern and Mattern
re~rt, ~e ~st~ted cost ~n ~9~0 to reh~l~ta2e the
ex[st~ng courts facility was $2,685,000. The
~st to construct ~e new courts and clerk facilities
a~ve a new ja~l ~s $2,800,000. It ~uld a~pear that
[s the more logical route to follow.
C~ty Co~c~ at the present t~e has $3,608,000
available for ~e const~ct~on of the Ja~l and court
~ac~lit~es. Should C~ty Cocci1 concur w~ ~e construction
of ~e new [ac~lit[es, upon completion the exlst[ng st~c-
ture ~uld ~e retained for other m~[c~pal users~
~l[ce acad~y, ~1[c assistance facilities, a~n[~tra-
t~ve offices and so for~. Th~s facility could be retained
[n use for a~ln[strat~ve ~u~ses w~th a m~n~ of re~a[rs
~d changes.
It would be reco~en~e~ ~at C~ty Cocci1 resolve
[ongst~d~ng ~d much ~ebated ~est~on by approving ~s
pl~ and rescinding all previous agre~ents~ resolutions
~d ordinates regarding ~e jails and co,ts. It ~uld
f~er ~ rec~nded ~at C~ty Co~c~l au~or~ze ~e C~ty
~ager to ~roceed wi~ ~e p~chase of the parcels of l~d
~n question ~d at such t~e as ~e l~d has been obtained
~ agre~ent be r~negotiated w~ Hayes, Seay, ~ttern an~
~ttern to design el~er the local or regional ~a[1 on
~[s site [n conj~ct~on wi~ new local court facilities.
~espectfu[ly s~tted,
S/ Byron E. H~er
Byron E. H~er
City ~nager'
In a discussion of ~e ~tt~r, ~. H~ard e~ressed regret ~at
Co~c[~ led the Regional Correct~ons Board to be~[eve that ~e
facility would b~ locate~ [n ~he Kimball area and n~, w~out any
sold reasons, Cocci1 [s pull~n~ out of ~at location, ~at he does not know
~e reaction of the ~ar~ w~ll be to that decis[on~ ~at no ~tter what type
497
:498
facility 18 b~llt, vhether it be a regional facility or a facility to be
used only by the City of Roanoke, he hopes that said facility will Include a
corrections program.
Dr. Taylor also expressed the opinion that he hopes If the facility
is constructed In a downtown location that a corrections program will be
included.
~ro Llsk expressed the opinion that the concept envisioned by the
21tyHanager Is a viable one and that he does not think the matter can be
~$1ayed any longer.
Hr, Trout ~oved that the matter be referred to the City Attorney for
~reparation of the proper measure carrying out the requirements to purchase the
~wo parcels of land as contained in the report of the City Manager.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
With reference to the matter of a regional corrections facility,
co~/~ication fro~ Hr. William F. Clark, County Administrator, transmitting
Resolutlon adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors on July 10,
973, respectfully requesting that the City Of Roanoke state prior to August 14,
1)73, its position on the location of the Regional Corrections Center at either
Cie Kimball site or the Peters Creek Road site, was before the body.
Hr. Garland moved that the City Attorney be instructed to prepare the
proper measure stating that after very careful consideration, the Council of the
:ity of Roanoke feels that it is in the best interest of the City of Roanoke
· at the jail facility he located adjacent to the municipal complex and that
· ~ City of Roanoke extend to the other localities an invitation to join with
~ city in this endeavor and to utilize it on a per diem basis or some other
~rrangement. The ~otlon was seconded by Hr. Trout.
After a discussion, of the motion, Mr. Thomas offered a substitute ~otion
:e~ly to the Resolution from the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors that the
~tter he taken under consideration until such time as an additional report is
~ubm~tted by the City Manager in reference to the land needed and an estimate
~f the cost Of said land, said report to he presented to Council at the
text regular meeting of the body on Monday, July 30, 1973, if feasible. The
~tlon was seconded by Hr. Lisk and adopted by the followlng vote=
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Rubard, Lisk~ Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayor
~ber-~ ...................................................................... ~.
NAYS: None .........................................................0.
In reference to the report of the City Manager, Hr. Trout moved that
aid report be referred to the Real Estate Committee for study, report and
to Council at the earliest possible time. The motion was
~econded by Mr. Lisk.
1
After a discussion of the ~otion, Mr. Llsk offered a substitute motion
that the report of the City ~anager be taken under consideration at this t~me
and that said report be referred to the Real Estate Com~tttee for its considera-
tion and report to Council at the next regular meeting of the body on Monday,
July 30, 1973, If feasible. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas and adopted
by the following vote=
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Llsk, Taylor, Thomas~ Trout and Mayor
Webber ......................................................................... ?.
NAYS= None ...........................................................0.
CITY F2tPLOYEES: The City Hanager submitted a written report
requesting that Council grant him an executive session to discuss the matter of
personnel.
Mr. Trout ~oved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager.
The motion was seconded by Dr. Taylor and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................................................................... ?.
NAYS: None ........................................................... 0.
MARKET-TRAFFIC-pLANNING: The City Attorney submitted a written report
transmitting for the consideration of Council prior to the public hearing set on
the matter for July 30, 1973, an Ordinance whichwould authorize the sale and
issuance under provisions of the Public Finance Act of not to exceed $5,000,000
of general obligation bonds of the City of Roanoke to provide, acquiref construct
and equip off-street parking facilities for the city as intended to be con-
stln/cted on the location heretofore indicated by Council on Church Avenue,
S. W., advising that it is not intended that the bond Ordinance be introduced
before Council until the time of the July 30, 1973f public hearing.
Mr. Thomas moved that the report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Hr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
ZONING= Council having referred to the City Planning Co~mission for
study, report and recommendation the request of Hr. Howard E. Si~mon that
certain parcels of land located on the west end of Lansing Drive, S.W.,
containing approx~nately 2.2 acres, according to the ~ap dated February 23,
1973, by C. B. Malcolm & Sons, S. C. E., be rezoned from RS-3, Single-Family
Residential District, to ~D, Duplex Residential District, the City planning
Co~nfssion submitted a written report reeo~aendlng that the request be denied.
In this connection, a co~unlcatlon from Mr. Claude D. Carter,
Attorney, representing the petitioner, advising that his client desires a public
hearing on the matter, was before Council.
Mr. Thomas moved that Council hold a public hearing on the request for
rezoning at 7:30 p.m., Monday, August 27, 1973, in the Council Chamber.
The motion was seconded by Hr. Trout and unanimously adopted.
499
5OO
ZONING: The City planning Commission submitted the following report
in connection with the request of Hr. Billy N. Branch that property located
in the 900 block of Whitney Avenue, N. W.~ described as ~ots 16~ 17 and 19, Block
8, Hap of Alrlee Cou~t, being part of Official Tax Nos. 2190602 and 2190603, and
all of Official Tax No. 2190616, be rezoned from RS-3, Slngle-Pamily Residential
District, to C-2~ General Commercial District, reco~nendlng that tho request be
deniedz
'July 19, 1973
The Honorable Roy ~. ~ebber. Hayor
and Members of City Conncl!
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen~
The above cited request was considered by the City
Planning Cc~nisslon at both its regular meetings of June 6,
1973 and July 18, 1973.
At the June 6, 1973 meeting, Nr. Smeltzer appeared
before the Planning Co~nission and stated the following
pertaining to this petition:
Mr. Branch, the petitioner, owned thin property
extending from Whitney Avenue to Williamson
Road.
that the property fronting on Williamson Road was
presently zoned C-2 but that the site was not of
adequate space for its intended use without attach-
ing the three back lots on Whitney Avenue to the
two lots on Williamson Road.
that Mr. Branch planned to build a retail dry
cleanlng establishment and a restaurant on this
parcel of land, that the restaurant would not be
of the drive-in type.
that this petition would not represent spot zoning
because there are business establishments and
comnercial property already located in this area
and that the rezoning of these three lots repre-
sented the highest end best use of the property.
MrS. Homer Austin, 928 Whitney Avenue, N. W., appeared
before the Planning Commission and presented to them a peti-
tion bearing the names of the immediate owners of property
on Whitney Avenue that were opposed to this rezcning petition.
She stated that Whitney Avenue is entirely residential with
the exception of a church in the next block and that the only
con=nercial property was on Williamson Road, not on Whitney
Avenue. She further noted that the neighbors were already
experiencing severe flood problems there because of the poor
drainage and that even more water would be dumped into their
basements if the property is blacktopped. She noted that
there are 15 children living in the 900 block of Whitney
Avenue, that the street is only 40 'feet wide and that it is
already a heavily traveled street causing them problem~ now
and that with additional co~ercial property located there,
the traffic situatlonwould be aggravated.
Mr. Lawrence asked if there would be any egresa or
ingress on to Whitney Avenue. Hr. Smeltzer stated that
they could limit access to Williamson Road. Mrs. Austin
stated that there was a hedge of over 6 feet tall there now
that causes a sight proble~with the neighbors. Mr. Smeltzer
stated that he was not aware that the hedge was all the way
around the lot.
Mr. Boynton asked if the neighbors would be opposed if
proper protective screening measures were undertaken at this
location. Mrs. Austin stated that they would still he opposed
since some of the homes are on a sllght grade end that the
front of their homes would still look directly into the rear
of these establishments. Mr. Parrott asked if the hedge pro-
vided screening and Mr$. Austin answered that it did not.
Excess noise and bright tights were also given as reasons for
opposition to this rezonxng.
Rr. Boynton asked how ~he petitioner planned to protect
the adjoining property owners. Hr. Smeltzer answered that
they were willing to do anything reasonable. Hr. i~oynton
asked if ~heywould be wllling to leave 12 to 15 feet along
Nhithsy Avenue for planting to obstruct the view. Hr.
Smeltzer stated that he was sure thlswould be considered
reasonable by the
The Planning Commission me,bars generally noted that the
providing of a buffer strip by the petitioner would make this
use more palatable with the general area. It was then decided
to instruct the Planning Director to determine If the City
would accept a 12 to 15 foot strip of land so as to provide
for a buffer zone between this property in question and the
residential units located nearby and to determine if the
petitioner would be willing to revise his rezoning request
to a C-l designation.
At the ~uly 18, 1973 meeting, Pr. Bo~nton stated that
this item had been tabled from the Oune 6, 1973 meeting in
order to determine the possibility of the petitioner
requesting a C-l, Office and Institutional District,
instead of a C-2, General Commercial District, or the
possibility of the City acquiring a 15 foot strip of land at
the rear of this property on Whitney Avenue to pruvlde a
buffer zone of plantings between the conu~ercial property
and the residential area.
At the ~uly 18, 1973 meeting, Hr. Smeltzer again appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that the petitioner
wishes to utilize this property for a combination restaurant
and dry cleaning establishment, which requires a C-I classi-
fication and that the petitioner could not, therefore,
petition for a C-1 designation. He further stated that most
of the opposition to this rezoning centered around the drain-
age problem that the neighbors have and that he felt that this
rezoning would not add to it, but, perhaps, may even help the
problem. He noted that a buffer etripwould be agreeable
with the petitioner for the rear of the property since there
is no proposed co~nercial entrance onto the property from
Whitney Avenue.
The Plannlng Director stated that he had contacted the
city Engineer about the possibility of acquiring a strip
of land for a buffer zone and was told that the City does
not, as a matter of policy and practice, purchase land to
maintain it for a buffer zone between two zoning designations.
Hrs. Homer Austin, 928 Whitney Avenue, N. W., again
appeared before the Planning Commission stating the neighbors
opposition to this rezoning because of drainage problems, the
increased amount of treffic on Whitney Avenue and the noise
problem.
Hrs. Roy Stanley, 922 Whitney Avenuem N. W., appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated that she is
opposed to this rezoning because of the safety factor,
and the detrimental effect of this commericel use on the
residental properties of the neighbors.
Hrs. Booth, 824 Whitney Avenue, N. W., also appeared
before the Planning Cc~miesion stating the increased
drainage problem that this rezoningwould contribute to
the neighborhood.
After much discussion by the Planning
members, it was generally agreed that this is a prime
residential area and should be kept in its present residen-
tial designation.
Accordingly, metion was made, duly seconded and
approved unanimously recommending to City Council that
this request be denied.
Sincerely,
S/ Henry B. Bolnlton by LM
Henry B. Boynton
Chairman'
In this connectlon~ a co~aunication f~omHro Hiehae! X. Smeltzer~
Attorney~ representing the petitioner~ requesting ~hat the request for rezonin,
~e withdrawn, was before Council.
Dr. Taylor moved that Council concur in the request for ~e~m~ssion
withdraw the petition for resoning. The motion was seconded by ~ro Trout and
unan/~ous ly adopted.
REPORTS OF COMHITTEES~
.AUDITORIUM-COLISEUm= Council having referred to a committee for tabu
tion, report and recom~endation the bids received for the fabrication, selling,
delivering and Installation of an OUtdoor sign and me,sage board at the Roanoke
Civic Canter, the cormuittee sul~nitted the following raport recommending
that the proposal Of American Sign and Indicator Corporation, for the sum of
$68,??1.78, be accepted=
mJuly 23, 1973
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Gentlemen=
On Monday, July 9, 1973, after due and proper
advertisement, the City Council received and opened
bids for the installation of an outside sign and
message board for the Roanoke Civic Center. Five
bids were received and your Committee, based oh the
information contained in the proposals received,
reduced the consideration to a comparison of four bids.
Tha proposal Of Sky Marquee, Inc., of Burbank,
California was el/minated because insufficient infor-
mation was provided for consideration.
It was the contention of Information Concepts, Inc.,
that their technology offered sufficient savings especially
in power consumption and purchase of light bulbs to Off-
set the difference in cost between their product and that
offered by the apparent low bidder, American Sign and
Indicator Corporation, a difference of $128,828.22.
Analysis of the power consumption rates and other factors
by City persomnel did not substantiate their claim. While
their technology did offer a savings in operating costs,
the differenca was totally insufficient to~ake up the
difference in investment.
Both American Sign and Indicator Corporation and
Information Concepts, Inc., propose, as an alternate
plan of financa, the formation of an organization to
sell commercial advertising space and t/me to offset
costs. Your Co, tree feels that the City would have
insufficient control over such an advertising sales
program. Further, your Committee feels that the ques-
tion of selling advertising should be taken up by
Council as a matter of policy and notmade a part or
condition of the purchase of tha sign and message board.
After analyzing the bids and weighing the factors
listed above, your Committee recon~nands that Council
accept the bid of American Sign and Indicator Corpora-
tion for the fabrication and installation of the outdoor
sign and message board.
Respectfully submitted,
S/ Byron E. Haner S/ 3ames K. Campbell
Byron E. Haner, Chairman James K. Campbell'
S/ 3ohn A. Kelley
John A. Kelley
l~ro Garlandmoved that Council concu~ In the recommendation of the
conm~ttee and offered the following e~ergency Ordinancet ~ ~
(t21038) A~ ORDINANCE providing for the fabrication and installa-
tion of an outdoor sign and message board at the Roanoke Civic Center by
accepting the proposal of American Sign and Indicator Corporation, upon
certain terms and conditions! rejecting all other bids to the city~ and
providing for an emergency.
{For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book [ 38, page 298°)
Mr. Garland moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mrlr. Trout and adopted by the following vote~
AYESz Messrso Garland, Nubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
ltayor Webber ....................................... i ........................ 7.
NA¥Sz None ........................................................
FAR~S AND pLAYGROUNDS: Council having referred to a coatttee for
tabulation, report and recomendation the bids received for the remodeling
of the Norwich Park Recreation Center, the committee submitted a written repoI
advising that the committee has met with members of the Building Ccn~is$ioner's
Office, the City Engineer's Office, the City Planning Department, the
Health Department, the Fire Department a~d the Deputy State Fire Marshal
in considera tion of the life, use and safety Of this structure, that
a report and reco~u~endations concerning this structure will be presented
to Council as soon as the departments have concluded their reports and
reco~uending that Council reject the two bids received for the re-~odellng
of the Norwich Park Recreation Center.
Mr. Garland moved that Council concur in the report of the commit-
tee a~d that the ~atter be referred to the City Attorney for preparation
of the proper measure rejecting the two bids. The motion was seconded
by ~r. Trout and u~a~imously adopted.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
CONS IDERATION OF CLAIMS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS=
pARKS AND pLAYGROUNDS= Ordinance No. 21024, providing for the
lease to Mill Mountain Playhouse Company of the premises know~ as Rockledge
ID~I, on MillMou~taln, for terms comprising a portion of four calendar
years, upon certain terms and conditions, having previously been before
Council for its first reading, read and laid over, was again before the
body, Mr. Lisk offering the following for its second reading and final
adoption=
(t21024) AN OI%DINANCE providing for the lease to Mill Mountain
Playhouse Company of the premises kno~rn as Nockledge Inn, on ~lill ~ou~tain,
for tern~ comprising a portion of four (4) calendar years, upon certain
terms and conditions.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book ~8, page 292.}
Hr. Llsk~oved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Hro Garland and adopted by the £ollmeing vote~
AYES~ Messre, Garland, N~bard, Llsk, Taylor~ Thomas; Trout and Hayor
Webber 7
NAYS~ Hone .......................................................... 0o
~t~T'~-~-Sz Hr. Nubard offered the following Resolution providing
for public notice of meetings of certain Boards, Authorities, Commissions and
Committees established by the Council of the City of Reanokez
(J21039) A RESOLUTION providing for public notice of meetings of
certain Boards, Authorities, Commissions and Connuittees established by the
Council of the City of Roanoke.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book J38, page 299.)
Mr. Hubardmoved the adoption of the Resolution. 'The motion was
seconded by Mr. Ltsk and adopted by the following vote:
AYES= Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Ltsk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ..................................................................?.
NAYS: None ..........................................................0.
BUDGET-SALE OF PROPERTY-SEWERS AND STOR/t D~AINS= Mr. Thomas offered
the following emergency Ordinance appropriating $83,800.00 to Sewage Treatment
Plant Expansion under Section %550, 'Sewage Treatment Capital Improvements
Fund,s of the 1973-74 Sewage Treatment Fund Appropriation Ordinance, to provide
funds for the acquisition of certain property from Clyde M. and Annie May Welch,
Sr., needed for the expansion of the Sewage T~eatment Plant:
(J21040) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain Section J550, 'Sewage
Treatment Capital Improvement~Fund,' of the 1973-74 Sewage Treatment Fund
Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book J 38, page 300.)
Hr. Thomas moved the adoption of the Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following vote:
· AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylori Thomas, Trout and Mayor
Webber ..................... J ...... ~ ............ ~ ......... ' .................... 7.
NAYS: None ..................................[ ....................... 0.
CITY EMPLOYEES: 'Council having directed the City Attorney to prepare
the proper measure approving and authorizing the implementation of certain
changes reconunended i~ the city*s 'administrative and management organization and
structure in a report made to the Council dated June 22, 1973, he presented
same; whereupon, Mr. Thomas offered the following Resolution~
(%21041) A RESOLUTION approving and authorizing the implementation
of certain changes recommended in the city's administrative and management
organization and'structurein a report made to the Council dated June 22, 1973.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution ~ook % 38, page ~00.)
Mr; Thomas moved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion wes
seconded by Mr. Trout and adopted by the following votel
AYESI Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Llak~ Taylor~ Thomas, Trout and Mayol
Webber---" ................................................................... 7.
In a discussion as to any policy changes in city government as a
result of certain recc~mendatlons contained in the management study, the
City Hanager assured Council that he will return to Council with his
reconn~endations and. proposed changes and that the final decision will be left
to the discretion of Council.
GRABTS= Mr. Trout offered the following Resolution authorizing the
acceptance, execution and filing of the 'Special Conditions for Action Grant
Awards' with the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention for Action Grant No,
72-1688 for federal funds in the amount of $48,083.00 for implementation of a
clrtlg abuse prevention, treatment and control program tn the city=
(/21042) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance, execution, and
filing of the "Speclal Conditions for Action Grant Awards' with the Division
of Justice and Crime Prevention for an action grant of federal fends for imple~
/
~ntation of a drug abuse prevention~ treatment and control program in the cit~.
(For full text of'Resolution, see Resolution Book %38, page 301.)
Mr. Troutmoved the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Lisk and adopted by.the following vote=
!
AYES= Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Lisk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and Mayo!
Webber
NAYS= None ....................................................... 0.
AUDITORIUH-COLISEUM= Councll having directed the City Attorney to
prepare the proper measure accepting a certain proposal for the operation of
catering' and concession services at the Roanoke Civic Center, upon certain terms
and conditionsl authorizing the proper city officials to execute the requisite
agreement therefor~ rejecting certain other proposale~ and providing for the
effective date o~ ~hls Ordinance, he presented samei whereupon, Hr. Trout move¢
that the following Ordinance be placed upon 'its first reading=
(%21043) AN ORDINANCE accepting a certain proposal for the opera-
tion of catering and concession services of the Roanoke Civic Center, upon
certain terms and conditions~ authorizing the proper city officials to
execute t~e requisite agreement thereforl rejecting certain other proposal$l
and providing for the effective date of this ordinance.
WHEREAS, on June 25, 1973, and after due and proper advertisement
had been~ade therefor, five bids for the operation Of catering and conces-
sion services at the Roanoke CiVic Center were opened and 'read before the
Council, whereupon all said bids were referred to a co==aittee appointed by
the Council to tabulate and study said bids and tomake report and recommenda-
tion thereon to the Coth~cill and
~AS, said co~m~tttee has reported to the Council ln wrlting
its tabulation and rec~endations on said Bids, fro~which it appears
to the Council that the proposal hereinafter accepted'represents the best
hid meeting all of the specifications, mede to the City, and should be
accepted; and that the other bids should be reJected~ and that this ordi-
nance should take effect upon the date hereinafter provided.
THEREFORE, BE IT OItDAINEDby the Council of the City of Roanoke
that the proposals B and C made under date of June 25, 1973, by American
Motor Inns, Inc., for the operation of catering and concession services at
the Roanoke Civic Center for a two-year term c~mmenclng as of August
1973, and with certain provisions for a two-year extension and renewal, in
full accordance with the City's terms, conditions and specifications made
therefor, and with said bidder's proposal, said bidder having proposed
to pay to the City the su~ of ~l,000.00 per month as basic rent or
of gross receipts from catering sales, and 27%% of gross receipts from
concession sales, whichever amount is larger, for the privilege of pro-
viding such services, be and said proposal is hereby ACCEPTED; subject to
the transfer and assignment by.the City to American Motor Inns, Inc., of
all rights and obligations of the City under those t%~ certain agreements wi
Coca-Cola USA, a division of The Coca-~01a Company, a/id Roanoke Coca-Cola
Bottling Works, Incorporated, both dated July l, 1970, and the consent to
such transfer and assigement by said lastmentioned companies.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the proper City officials be and
ars authorized to execute, on behalf of the City, the requisite agreements
and documents, incorporating into said documents the City's aforesaid
specifications, the tufas of said bidder's proposals, and the terms and
provisions of this ordinance, the same to be upon form approved by the
City Attorney.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the City's Purchasing Agent be and
is authorized to effect the sale and transfer to said successful bidder
such of the City's current inventory Of concession stock and goods on
hand at the City's cost therefor, the seme to be listed and valued at the
City's cost prices.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the Other bids ~ade to the City
for the Operation of said services be and ars hereby REJECTED; the City
Clerk to so notify said other bidders and to express to each the City's
appreciation of said bids.
BE IT FINALLY ORDAINED that this ordinance shall be in force
and effect u~on and after August l, 1973.
The motion was seconded hy Hr. Lisk and adopted by the following
AYES: Messrs. Garland, Hubard, Ltsk, Taylor, Thomas, Trout and
Mayor Webber ................................................................
NAYS:
HO~IONS ~HD~L~$~L?~NEOUS BUSINESS~
CI~ F-2~LOYEESt ~. Ber~ Ely appe~ed before Co~cil in reference ko
~e rec~ndaklons confined In ~e ~ag~n~ skud~ re~rk as prepared by
Alberk ~nd ~d ~sociakes~ Inco~raked~ ~d verbally re.asked ~ak
~st~c~ ~e C~ty ~ager to presen~ a detailed re~rt as to ~e
~hich he plus to ~ec~end ~pl~tation ~d ~at ~e C~ty ~age~ also be
r~ested to presen~ a ~eal~stic estate o~ cos2 savings to ~ achieved b~
reorganization.
~. H~ar~ ~ve~ ~at ~e verbal r~rks ~de by ~. Ely be received
~ f~led w~ tha~s. ~e ~tion was seconde~ by ~. Llsk an~ ~usly
PEYOTL DEP~= The C~ty Clerk re~rte~ ~at Messrs.
B. ~ Jonas G. Eller~ J~es M. Roe, Jr., J. C. C~tchf~eld, ~lph K.
~les ~d WIll~A. ~rt~n have qual~f~e~ as m~ers o~ ~e Pe=so~el
for te~ o~ t~ years each ending Februa~ 28, 1975.
~. Tho~s ~ved ~at the re~rt be received ~d file~. The ~t~on
was seconded by ~. Llsk ~d ~usly adopted.
P~SIONS: The C~ty Clerk re.fred that ~. W~II~ R. Battle has
~allf~ed as a m~er of ~e ~ard of T~stees oE ~e ~ployees~ Ret[r~ent
Syst~ for a te~ of fo~ years ending J~e 30~ 1977.
~. Tho~s mov~ ~at ~e re~rt be received ~d filed. The ~t~on
was seconded by ~. L~sk ~d ~ously adopte~.
There being no further business, ~yor Webber declared ~e meeting
adjo~ed.
APPROVED
Deputy City Clerk ~yor
C;OH~tONWEAL'rW OF ~6~Nl.~'
~IRGINI~ ~rAll~' LIBRARY
RICH~OI~ID 25~1~
PIICROFILH CA~IERA OPERATOR'S CERTIFICATE
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE HICROPHOTOGRAPHS
APPEARING ON THIS REEL ARE TRUE AND--ACCURATE REPRODUCTIONS OF
THE RECORDS LISTED ON THE TITLE SHEET PRECEDING EACH VOLUHE OR
-'C *..'. SERIES OF RECORDS ~IICROFILHED THEREON$ THAT THE RECORDS tiERE
NICROFIU~ED ON THE DATE, OR DURING THE PERIOD, AND AT THE
REDUCTION RATIO IHDICATED$ AND THAT t~-IEN HICROFIU4ED THE RECORDS
t'IERE 1H THE CUSTODY OF THE DEPARTUENT,, OFFICE, OR INDIVIDUAL
LISTED ON THE TITLE SHEET,
[~'~O F'I I.VVCA~EEA UP~R~,TO R