The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMins 01/03/05 - 07/18/05ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL January 3, 2005 9:00 a.m. The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday, January 3, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., in the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Regular Meetings, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 36762-070604 adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 6, 2004. PRESENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. ABSENT: Council Member Brian J. Wishneff- ............................................... 1. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to §2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Mr. Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ......................................................................................................................... 5. NAYS:None ...................................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent and Council Member Dowe was not present when the vote was recorded.) CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Council Member Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Chair, City Council Personnel Committee, requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss the mid-year performance of three Council- Appointed Officers, pursuant to §2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Mr. Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Ms. McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Lea, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harris ......................................................................................................................... 5. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent and Council Member Dowe was not present when the vote was recorded.) CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to §2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Mr. Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Ms. McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Lea, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................................ 5. NAYS:None ...................................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent and Council Member Dowe was not present when the vote was recorded.) ITEMS LISTED ON THE 2:00 P.M., COUNCIL DOCKET REQUIRING DISCUSSION/CLARIFICATION, AND ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO 2:00 P.M., AGENDA: NONE. TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: Council Committee Assiqnments: COUNCIL-COMMI'I-I'EES-PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS-ROANOKE ARTS COMMISSION-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-RAIL WALK-RADIO/TELEVISION- SCHOOLS- SISTER CITIES- HOTEL ROANOKE CONFERENCE CENTER-AIRPORT-GREENWAYS: Roanoke Arts Commission: Council Member Cutler advised that the Roanoke Arts Commission is pleased with the recent action taken by Council to adopt a policy with regard to procurement of art from the City Art Show. He inquired about the status of the contract for the Public Arts Plan. 3 The City Manager responded that the contract was awarded to the firm that was recommended by the Roanoke Arts Commission; the Chair of the Arts Commission is of the impression that Council authorized a full time employee to staff the activity; however, the City Manager advised that that was not her understanding of the Council's position, therefore, a member of the City's Communications staff was assigned to work with the Arts Commission on the Public Arts Plan. She advised that the Chair of the Arts Commission has asked to review the credentials of the staff person, however, the City Manager stated that it is her position that the staff assignment will be made by the City Manager. She noted that the contract has been approved and the City is ready to proceed with the Public Arts Plan. Mill Mountain Zoo: Council Member Cutler inquired about the status of parking at Mill Mountain Zoo; whereupon, the City Manager advised that a meeting was held to discuss various options and a plan is proposed that would add a sufficient number of parking spaces. She stated that the Executive Director of the Mill Mountain Zoo reports that the challenge exists with regard to daily parking for visitors to the Zoo and special event parking can be addressed by using shuttle buses; and the Executive Director is of the opinion that between 1 O0 - 150 additional parking spaces are needed. The City Manager advised that the proposed plan would include the area that is currently blocked off, it would require trucks to come in through the rear entrance in order to provide "soft parking", and it would also require employees to park in the rear area, thereby allowing current employee parking at the entrance to the Zoo to be used for visitor parking. She stated that the proposed plan will be presented to the Board of Directors of the Mill Mountain Zoo and to the Mill Mountain Advisory Committee. Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that he serves as Council's liaison to the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA). He called attention to discussions regarding the need to reach a consensus on the role of the City of Roanoke and the Redevelopment and Housing Authority with regard to housing; the RRHA has adopted a Memorandum of Understanding; the City Manager has reviewed the City's role in housing as perceived by the City; and the RRHA has been requested to provide its concept as to how the Housing Authority perceives housing in order to determine if a collective plan can be developed. Rail walk: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that the rail walk is envisioned to be a walkway that takes visitors from Center in the Square on the City Market to the Virginia Museum of Transportation and vice versa; and initial discussions involved the inclusion of artifacts regarding the rail history of the Roanoke Valley; however, no such artifacts were included in the design of the rail walk. He stated that an effort is underway to connect the railroad element of Roanoke's history with various kinds of railroad artifacts; Norfolk Southern Railway has offered various kinds of railroad artifacts such as equipment and signals, etc., and a flatcar was recently accepted from Norfolk Southern that will become a stage. He added that work continues on the rail walk which will tie in with the Henry Street area; also under consideration is a profile of African-American and Caucasian railroad workers depicting their job functions, along with the various railroad artifacts; Norfolk and Western Railway Iogos that have been donated to the City will be appropriately displayed and the goal is to extend the rail walk past the Norfolk and Western Shops to Shaffer's Crossing, including an explanation of the function of the yard. In a discussion of the matter, the City Manager advised of plans to bring the Lick Run Greenway up and across The Hotel Roanoke property and over to the O. Winston Link Museum; and two options have been discussed; i.e.: over the pedestrian bridge at The Hotel Roanoke or across the Second Street Bridge. She stated that the most logical location would be the pedestrian bridge at The Hotel Roanoke. Roanoke Regional Cable Television Committee: Council Member Lea reported on his appointment as a member of the Roanoke Regional Cable Television Committee and advised that major issues that have been discussed relate to leases He stated that he has been pleased with the progress of cable television in the Roanoke Valley. Schools: The Mayor advised that he, the City Manager, the Chair of the Roanoke City School Board, and the Acting Superintendent of Schools, continue to hold monthly breakfast meetings to discuss administrative issues and ways that the Council and the School Board may be of mutual assistance. The Mayor invited Council Members to provide him with any items that they would like to address with the School Board. He stated that in January 2005, 12 middle school students will visit the City of Roanoke for approximately three weeks from Roanoke's Sister City of Wonju, Korea; and host families have been arranged and students will participate in the International Baccalaureate (lB) Program at William Ruffner Middle School and other extracurricular activities. He advised that during the summer of 2005, the City of Roanoke will send 12 students toWonju for three weeks as a part of a student exchange program. The Mayor explained that a committee will explore ways in which to provide similar student exchange programs in conjunction with Roanoke's other Sister Cities; and a future press conference will be held to highlight the 12 Wonju exchange students, to discuss the opportunity for Roanoke's students to visit Korea in the summer of 2005, and to address a student exchange program with Roanoke's other Sister Cities. The City Manager called attention to two administrative support functions that are currently being explored with the school administration; i.e.: a committee of technology staffs from the City and the School system will submit recommendations regarding future technology needs of the two organizations; the City's Human Resources staff will conduct a review of classified school personnel and the Roanoke City Public Schools will provide a small amount of funds to help defray the cost of staff for the study. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick suggested a review of the feasibility of combining City and School Human Resources functions. The Mayor noted that there is a hesitancy on the part of the School Board to make major decisions until the new Superintendent of Schools is hired. Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission: The Mayor advised that he serves as a member of The Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission. He stated that Virginia Tech is currently involved in the construction of a small conference center on the campus, The Inn at Virginia Tech, and called attention to a plan involving the sharing of staff of The Hotel Roanoke Conference Center and The Inn at Virginia Tech as a way to guard against the two facilities competing against each other. He added that if Council Members would like more information on the arrangement, he would be pleased to respond. Roanoke Regional Airport Commission: The Mayor called attention to discussions with representatives of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors with regard to establishing regular meetings with the three regional boards that are composed of representatives of the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County; i.e.: Roanoke Valley Resource Authority, Western Virginia Water Authority and the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission. He stated that a meeting will be held in 2005 with the Western Virginia Water Authority; it has been some time since a meeting was held with representatives of Roanoke City, Roanoke County and the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, and the Chair advises that the Airport Commission would welcome the opportunity to hold regular meetings with the Members of City Council and the Board of Supervisors. Therefore, he stated that a meeting of Council and the Board of Supervisors with the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission has been scheduled for Monday, March 7, 2005, at 12:00 p.m. Among other things, he advised that the Airport Commission would like to address what would happen if U. S. Air goes out of business. Dr. Cutler reported on information he received from Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) staff during a recent tour of the airport control tower in which it was stated that the radar equipment at the Roanoke Regional Airport is less than the best. He asked that the matter be discussed with the Airport Commission at the joint meeting; whereupon, the Mayor requested that the item be added to the agenda. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that the Airport Commission has requested approval by the Virginia General Assembly to change the name of Roanoke's regional airport to an international airport. He explained that Roanoke would qualify as an international airport because some international flights are routed through Roanoke, and there could be some future benefits for Roanoke to be known as an international airport, while not changing the regional flavor and continuing to carry the name of Woodrum Field. The Mayor advised that five persons currently serve on the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, three from the City of Roanoke and two from Roanoke County; and in order to strengthen the connection between the Roanoke Valley and the New River Valley, he stated that it has been proposed that membership on the Airport Commission be increased by two positions from the New River Valley. He requested that the City Attorney research the founding documents for the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission and advise as to actions that need to be taken to expand membership. The Mayor reported that he, the City Manager, the Chair of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator held regular meetings during the year 2004. He noted that Michael W. Altizer will serve as incoming Chair of the Board of Supervisors and meetings will continue to be held to discuss avenues of joint cooperation between Roanoke City and Roanoke County. He stated that issues regarding Explore Park, convergence of the public library administrations, a joint Fire/EMS facility, and an amphitheater at Explore Park have been discussed. Dr. Cutler referred to a map showing the Roanoke River Greenway which was prepared by City staff and requested a staff briefing on the feasibility of designating the entire length of the Roanoke River throughout the City of Roanoke as one park, or parkway, or river walk. He stated that the City of Roanoke should take advantage of the Roanoke River as a recreational and conservation opportunity. The City Manager advised that the briefing is scheduled for the month of February 2005. The Mayor advised that the General Services Administration (GSA) has made a decision with regard to the relocation of the new Social Security Administration office to a location near the Roanoke Regional Airport and not at the site that was previously offered by the City in downtown Roanoke. He stated that at some point in the future, GSA representatives will brief City representatives on factors that led to the GSA's decision. 7 The City Manager requested that the Mayor and a Member of Council of the Mayor's choosing attend the meeting with GSA officials, and Congressman Goodlatte, or his representative, has indicated an interest in participating in the meeting. The City Manager called attention to previous concerns expressed by Council regarding consolidation of State offices which could be a precursor to moving some State offices out of downtown Roanoke. She stated that Delegate William Fralin has discussed the matter with the State Secretary of Administration, and has arranged for her to meet with the Secretary to discuss plans which are currently in the beginning stages. Council Member McDaniel inquired as to the total number of employees that would be leaving the downtown Roanoke area if the Social Security Administration office moves to another location. The City Manager responded that the issue involves more than Social Security Administration employees inasmuch as plans for the building include the Department of Rehabilitative Services, the Social Security administration and a third entity. She stated that staff will tally the numbers which will most likely be in the range of 200 employees. COUNCIL-SCHOOLS: Items for discussion at the joint meetinq of Council and the School Board on Monday, February 7, 2005, at 9:00 a.m.: Council Member McDaniel requested a report on the Roanoke City Public Schools Education Foundation, Inc., and Council Member Lea advised that he previously submitted a list of questions to the School administration with regard to the Education Foundation. Ms. McDaniel also requested a briefing on the status of school uniforms. The Mayor suggested that any additional agenda items be submitted to the City Clerk. COUNCIL-ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD: Items for discussion at the joint meetinq of Council and the Architectural Review Board on Monday, February 7, 2005, at 12:00 p.m.: No agenda items were submitted. HOUSING/AUTHORITY-HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: Council Member Cutler inquired about applying and implementing City of Roanoke architectural standards to homes constructed by Habitat for Humanity in the Roanoke Valley. 8 The City Manager responded that Council might wish to schedule a meeting with local Habitat for Humanity representatives to present the City's expectations with regard to future Habitat homes. She stated that at a recent meeting with officials of the State Department of Housing and Community Development officials were surprised and disappointed at the appearance of Habitat for Humanity homes that are being constructed in the City of Roanoke; and State officials presented impressive photographs of attractive Habitat for Humanity homes that have been constructed in other urban areas throughout the State. She added that the City of Roanoke hopes to enlist the assistance of the State Director of Habitat for Humanity with local Habitat officials to encourage a different type of housing design for the Roanoke area. She explained that it would be hoped that Habitat homes would not be constructed in a particular section of the City, because the City is more interested in Habitat homes that are constructed as infill housing in the various neighborhoods; and she expressed a concern with regard to the density with which Habitat houses are constructed in some neighborhoods which is out of keeping with the character of the neighborhoods. Question was raised as to how Council could be of assistance in addressing the concerns; whereupon, the City Manager called attention to a meeting which is scheduled in the near future with the Executive Director of the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority and Gregory Feldmann, a member of the Board of Directors of Habitat for Humanity in the Roanoke Valley and a Commissioner of the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, to discuss ways in which to move past the impasse that seems to exist with Habitat for Humanity and following the meeting she will be in a better position to respond to the question of Council. Briefings: Trolley update: TROLLEY SYSTEM: David A. Morgan, General Manager, Valley Metro, advised that some time ago, the City Manager requested that the Greater Roanoke Transit Company conduct an analysis on the proposed concept of reinstituting historic trolleys to downtown Roanoke. As a result, he stated that Greater Roanoke Transit Company partnered with the Roanoke Valley/Alleghany Regional Commission and engaged the services of Wilbur Smith and Associates and the LOMARADO Group to conduct a study, the final results of which were submitted to the City in September, 2004. He introduced James H. Graebner, representing the LOMARADO Group. Mr. Graebner advised that: Heritage trolleys currently operate in Memphis, New Orleans, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, San Jos&, Kenosha, San Pedro, Tucson, Dallas, Lowell, Tampa, Galveston and Little Rock; and the heritage trolley concept is under study in over 20 additional localities. Trolleys work because they attract new riders, provide shuttle service, help neighborhoods to develop and spark economic redevelopment. Trolley lines in San Francisco generate 19,OO0 riders per day; and Fisherman's Wharf has been extended, with further extension under study. The St. Charles trolley line has existed since 1831 in New Orleans, the River Front line was added, the Canal was reinstated in 2004, expansion is planned and residential property values have increased sharply in expectation of the Canal Line opening. Tampa has experienced $500 million in new development, trolley ridership is 27 per cent over the estimate, and passengers/miles double the bus system. Kenosha has experienced $51 million in new development, the trolley line cost $5 million, another $50 million in new development is committed and another trolley line is under study. Roanoke's trolley system could operate at Jefferson Street between Norfolk and Salem Avenues, Jefferson Street at Church Avenue, Jefferson Street at Bullitt Avenue, Jefferson Street at Elm Avenue, Jefferson Street at Highland Avenue, Jefferson Street at Albemarle Avenue, Jefferson Street at Walnut Avenue, Jefferson Street between Green Street and Whitmore Avenue and Jefferson Street just south of Reserve Avenue. Trolley costs: capital costs - $1 7 million (includes 30 per cent contingency) and annual operating cost would be in the range of $137,000.00 - $377,000.00. Mr. Morgan advised that the next steps include submittal of an application for planning funds to conduct an environmental study and impact on utilities and other infrastructure; once the information is available, the City would file for Federal funds to begin the Federal project, at which time the City would be placed on a project list and the City's ranking on the list will depend upon the level of local support. He added that if the local match, which is typically 50 per cent, is available the City could move to the top of the project list. Discussion/comments by Council: · Compliance issues with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 10 · How does a trolley operation blend with traffic, vehicles, parking, etc.? · How do trolleys help neighborhoods to grow? · The availability of classic street cars. · The level of acceptance by the community of a trolley system. · Does a trolley system maintain its appeal after the novelty wears off?. · How does a trolley system affect bus lines? · What is the reaction of the community to trolley infrastructure, etc? · Are there communities that have implemented trolley systems that were not successful? Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that he initiated the concept of reinstituting a trolley system for downtown Roanoke; and from a preliminary standpoint, the City should consider the trolley as a transit investment that will allow the City of Roanoke to provide a service that will provide another alternative to the transit opportunity if the system is properly, connected. He stated that the greatest asset that the City has to offer is Mill Mountain, however, the City has not done enough to promote the importance of Mill Mountain. He added that if, over time, it is discovered that the transit component helps the Central Business District and the downtown area to grow and serves as a connection to the middle of the City, with some ingenuity, insight and funds, the trolley system could be extended to Crystal Spring Park, the incline could be reconstructed allowing the City to have interconnect capability to several types of transit and suddenly there is another way to access Mill Mountain. He stated that there would be adirect return to the City from this kind of investment, and expressed appreciation to Council for considering the pros and cons of a trolley system which could provide the opportunity to view Roanoke in a much different level of notoriety for its transportation options, for the way it understands growth in an independent city and for the investment of tax dollars that will encourage others to invest in the community. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick asked that Council authorize City staff to proceed to the next step and apply for planning grant funds in order to obtain additional information. He also asked that the private sector be brought into the concept to determine if there is an interest in co-sponsoring a future public/private partnership. The Mayor inquired if there was any objection to the General Manager of the Greater Roanoke Transit Company submitting an application for planning grant funds, to which no objection was expressed by any Member of Council. 11 BUSES: The City Manager requested that the General Manager of Valley Metro report on the progress of the Smart Way bus service between the City of Roanoke and the Town of Blacksburg. Mr. Morgan advised that for the month of November and the majority of December 2004, 100 passengers per day road the Smart Way bus, and more ridership was generated to and from the Roanoke Regional Airport than was anticipated due in large measure to serving the Virginia Tech Corporate Research Center. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick inquired about the feasibility of providing a closer location for the Smart Way bus to the baggage loading/unloading area at the Roanoke Regional Airport; whereupon, Mr. Morgan expressed concern that if the bus stops too close to the baggage loading/unloading area, its operation could be impeded. He stated that passengers go to the end of the airport terminal, stand inside, and wait for the bus, and passengers have not expressed a concern about the current arrangement. The Mayor requested that the matter be included on the agenda for the joint meeting of Council, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission on Monday, March 7, 2004. The City Manager reported that two fire-related deaths occurred in the City of Roanoke on January 1 and 3, 2005. She stated that at the 2:00 p.m., Council meeting she would remind citizens of the importance of having properly working smoke detectors in their homes and the importance of checking space heaters and kerosene heaters. Fire Station No. One Update: FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager advised that the Fire Station No. 1 project has taken longer than was originally anticipated due to false starts on the location for the fire station and actual design of the station. Chief James Grigsby reviewed the following history of Fire Station No. 1: · A Strategic Business Plan for Fire/EMS was adopted by Council on December 27, 2001. · The Fire/EMS Resource Association and Response Model provides for Fire/EMS response times, as follows: Fire - 90 per cent/four minutes EMS/ALS - 90 per cent/eight minutes EMS/BLS - 90 per cent/12 minutes 12 A three phase construction and consolidation of Fire/EMS stations: Phase I: construct a new Station No. 1 - consolidate the present No. 1 (Church Avenue) and No. 3 (6'h Street) stations, as well as Fire/EMS Administration (Jefferson Center). Phase I1: construct a new Station No. 3 - consolidate the present No. 5 (12th Street and Loudon Avenue) and No. 9 (24'h Street and Melrose Avenue) stations into the new facility, with a potential community center concept. Phase II1: construct a new Station No. 10 - Relocate the residential component currently assigned to the airport station to the new facility. Phase I construction bonds were purchased in October 2004. Franklin Road and Elm Avenue site: An architectural firm was selected in June 2003 (Spectrum). The site was acquired in August, 2003. Pros: Correctly located City owned adjacent property Land cost was lower than budget, although it was recognized that additional funds would be required for site work. Cons: Odd shape requiring substantial site work/retaining walls After drilling, some construction issues for foundation (karst seams between thin rock shelves) Removal of contaminated top soil and old fuel tanks Due to shape of the lot, unique building design which required additional circulation space A 24,000 square foot building was projected. 13 Employee/community group input was received; the basic design was completed in August 2004, final bid documents are anticipated to be ready in early spring 2005, minimum estimated additional resources needed is $301,740.00, independent cost estimates exceed this amount by at least an additional $400,000.00, and the project was reduced by $865,000.00 to meet basic department needs. Reasons for the cost increase are: the project was developed in year 2000 dollars and the Building Cost Index has increased 19.6 per cent since 2000; steel prices have doubled since March 2004, and concrete prices have increased by over ten per cent; the site required major excavation and retaining walls, with cost estimates showing an additional $308,000.00 $ 521,000.00 over the original $600,000.00 budget for the site; technology (fiber optic) was not available at the time of design (an additional $144,000.00 will be needed for fiber optic components); and site configuration drove the building design, requiring additional square footage for internal circulation space. A site plan of the building was reviewed showing Fire/EMS station operations on the first floor, sleeping quarters on the second floor, and Fire/EMS Administration on the third floor. · An artists rendering of the west and south elevations of the building was reviewed. The City Manager advised that the project has been studied by staff, it is believed that all items have been removed from the project that can be deleted, and with approximately $860,000.00 in deductions, at least an additional $300,000.00 - $400,000.00 will be needed for the facility, with an independent estimate indicating that even more funds will be necessary; therefore, City staff was hesitant to advertise for bids without alerting Council as to their concerns. She explained that when the fire station project was initially conceived, a revenue stream was identified that would fund debt service; i.e.: a change in Federal law that would allow the City to increase the amount billed to recipients for emergency medical services. She explained that revenue for emergency medical services is coming in at a better pace than was initially anticipated and will continue to grow based upon the escalator clause in the Federal legislation, but funds will be generated later in the sequence, time wise, than staff is comfortable with when bidding the fire station project. Therefore, with the concurrence of Council, the City Manager proposed to temporarily borrow the difference in monies from the Roanoke River Flood Reduction project, which has approximately $5 million that will not be spent for the next four to five years since the funds were allocated for the greenway component, with the understanding that the funds will be repaid in more than sufficient time for the greenway project from additional revenue generated by the City as a result of emergency medical services billings. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick asked that Council be kept current on the status of the Fire Museum as plans more forward on Fire Station No. 1. The City Manager advised that Council has not made a decision, nor has the City administration offered a recommendation to this point. Following discussion by Council, the Mayor inquired if the site is of such value that it is worth taking $865,000.00 worth of deductions from the building. The City Manager responded that government has the luxury of choosing the easiest sites on which to build, but if government builds on all of the clear and easy sites, the private sector will not take on a challenging site, such as the site under consideration for development. She stated that the site clearly met the definition of the fire administration in terms of location; and another location in close proximity was also desired, but the Council indicated that it did not wish to pursue condemnation proceedings in order to acquire the site. She further stated that when the City is limited to only sites that can be made available through friendly negotiation, opportunities for potential sites are then taken away; the proposed location is a gateway to the City and the Council has indicated an interest in controlling what happens at gateways to the City, and constructing a building on the site will control what happens at that location. The City Manager advised that Council could engage in further discussion with regard to whether or not some of the $865,000.00 in deductions will genuinely harm the project; her position as City Manager is that the City will live within established budgets; and because of the way that architectural contracts are currently worded, some persons in the profession believe that they have a ten per cent leeway on design costs, and that assumption will be corrected before the next design construction project is awarded by the City. She stated that given the limitations and restrictions, she continues to believe that the proposed site is the best location on which the City should build a fire station, it is a challenging site which involves additional costs, and if Council is concerned about the long term appearance of the building, it is suggested that City staff be permitted to provide Council with more details regarding the impact of the $865,000.00 in deductions. She stressed the importance of the Fire Administration function being located in the No. 1 Fire Station. The Mayor advised that the body of the building will exist for the next 50+ years, therefore, he would prefer that additional funds be appropriated that would architecturally enhance the appearance of the building. The City Manager requested that staff be permitted to present another briefing on exterior design of Fire Station No. 1 to reflect the $865,000.00 in deductions, and for the purpose of receiving input from the Council with regard to building design. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick asked that schematic drawings be aesthetically comparable with architecture in old southwest. 15 It was the consensus of Council that the City Manager will present a briefing on Fire Station No. 1 exterior building design to reflect the $865,000.00 in deductions. The Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess at 12:05 p.m., to be reconvened in Closed Session at 12:15 p.m., in the Council's Conference Room, Room 452, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, to conduct mid year performance evaluations of the Municipal Auditor, Director of Finance and City Clerk. At 2:00 p.m., on Monday, January 3, 2005, the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S.W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. PRESENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ....................................................................................................... 6. ABSENT: Council Member Brian J. Wishneff- ............................................... 1. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Council Member Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led by Mayor Harris. PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: NONE. CONSENT AGENDA The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. ENTERPRISE ZONE: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council schedule a public hearing for Tuesday, January 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, to consider amendment application for two Enterprise Zones within the City of Roanoke, was before the body. 16 The City Manager advised that staff has recently identified a need to amend provisions for the two Enterprise Zones within the City; as part of the amendment for Enterprise Zone One A, the City proposes adding Parkside Plaza, the East End Shops and an area bordering Williamson Road south of Elm Avenue and east of the railroad tracks to Enterprise Zone One A; adding these properties, some of which are in the floodplain, could stimulate additional opportunities for revitalization where buildings are currently vacant or underutilized; in addition, the City would seek modification of the water, sewer and fire connection fee incentive for both Enterprise Zone One A and Enterprise Zone Two; and recent adoption of new fees by the Western Virginia Water Authority to equalize Roanoke City and Roanoke County rates, combined with the possibility of further increases, necessitates a change in the incentive. In order to submit the applications, at least one public hearing affording citizens or interested parties an opportunity to be heard must be held; therefore, the City Manager recommended that Council authorize the scheduling and advertisement of a public hearing on Tuesday, January 18, 2005. Mr. Dowe moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Mr. Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ............................................................................................................. 6. NAYS:None ...................................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) BRIDGES: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council schedule a public hearing for Tuesday, January 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, to consider the use of property rights in connection with the proposed pedestrian bridge at 204 Jefferson Street, Official Tax No. 4010801, was before the body. Mr. Dowe moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Mr. Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ............................................................................................................. 6. NAYS:None ...................................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) REGULAR AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: NONE. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: CITY MANAGER: ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION: BUDGET-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-DISABLED PERSONS-FIFTH PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Fifth Planning District Commission Disability Services Board (DSB) is responsible to local governments and serves as a critical resource for needs assessment, information sharing and service opportunities for citizens with disabilities, their families and the community; the following jurisdictions in the Fifth Planning District have enacted resolutions establishing participation in a regional effort and have appointed a local official to serve: the Cities of Roanoke, Salem and Covington; the Counties of Roanoke, Craig, Botetourt and Alleghany and the Towns of Clifton Forge and Vinton; and other members of the DSB include representatives from business and consumers. It was further advised that Council authorized the Director of Finance to serve as fiscal agent for the Fifth Planning District Disabilities Services Board on September 25, 1995, pursuant to Resolution No. 32675-092595. The City Manager explained that the State Department of Rehabilitative Services has allocated funds in the amount of $15,000.00 for a one-year period to provide training at no cost to any blind or vision/print impaired person desiring training in the use of computer based assistive programs; the required cash match from local jurisdictions in the Fifth Planning District is $1,666.00; and the cash match that has been committed by the City of Roanoke and other jurisdictions is actually $4,301.00. The City Manager recommended that Council appropriate $15,000.00 in State grant funds and $4,301.00 in local match for the Disability Services Board and establish corresponding revenue estimates in accounts to be established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund. Mr. Cutler offered the following budget ordinance: (#36929-010305) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the fiscal year 2005 Fifth Planning District Regional Disability Services Board Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 General and Grant Funds Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 226.) 18 Mr. Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36929-010305. motion was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote: The AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ............................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) BUDGET-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-GRANTS-FDETC: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke is the grant recipient for Marketing Communications Outreach Pilot program funding, thus, Council must appropriate funding for all grants and other monies received in order for the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board to administer grant programs. It was further advised that in an effort to increase public awareness of the Virginia Workforce Network (VWN) and One-Stop Centers among employers, the Virginia Workforce Council, through the Virginia Employment Commission, implemented the Marketing Communications Outreach Pilot Program to selected Local Workforce Investment Boards (LWIB); the LWIB must incorporate the VWN logo and identity in all LWlB products and services in an effort to promote VWN brand awareness among program components listed below; and the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board will work to develop its own marketing initiatives and develop targeted marketing tactics to include but not limited to the following: · Public relations and news media strategies · Radio and television public service announcements · An electronic newsletter for business customers A workforce summit event including economic development, educators, development professionals local businesses, and workforce It was explained that critical to the project is the development and deployment of a strategic marketing implementation plan that creates and communicates a favorably branded corporate culture among One-Stop delivery centers, while empowering the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board as the leader in local workforce development. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute all appropriate documents, upon form approved by the City Attorney, related to acceptance of funding for the Marketing Communications Outreach Pilot Program; and accept Marketing Communications Outreach Pilot funding of 19 $10,000.00 for the period October i, 2004 through June 30, 2005, appropriate funds to accounts to be established in the Grant Fund by the Director of Finance, and establish a corresponding revenue estimate in the Grant Fund. Mr. Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#36930-010305) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board to administer the Marketing Communications Outreach Pilot program, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 227.) Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36930-010305. The motion was seconded by Ms. McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ............................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) Mr. Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#36931-010305) A RESOLUTION authorizing acceptance of a grant award for the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board Marketing Communications Outreach Pilot Program, for the development and deployment of a strategic marketing implementation plan by selected Local Workforce Investment Boards that promotes awareness of the Virginia Workforce Network, and authorizing execution of any and all necessary documents to comply with the terms and conditions of the grant. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 228.) Mr. Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36931-010305. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ............................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) 20 BUDGET-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke is the grant recipient for Workforce Investment Act (WlA) funding, thus, Council must appropriate funding for all grants and other monies received in order for the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board to administer WlA programs; and the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board administers the Federally funded Workforce Investment Act (WlA) for Area 3, which encompasses the Counties of Alleghany, Botetourt, Craig, Franklin and Roanoke, and the Cities of Covington, Roanoke, and Salem. It was further advised that WIA funding is intended for four primary client populations: · Dislocated workers who have been laid off from employment through no fault of their own; Economically disadvantaged individuals as determined by household income guidelines defined by the U. S. Department of Labor; · Youth who are economically disadvantaged, or have other barriers to becoming successfully employed adults; and · Businesses in need of employment and job training services. It was explained that the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board has received a third Notice of Obligation (NOO) from the Virginia Employment Commission allocating an additional $187,157.00 for the Adult Program, which serves economically disadvantaged persons; $203,365.00 for the Dislocated Worker Program, which serves persons laid off from employment through no fault of their own; and $192,069.00 for the Youth Program, which serves economically disadvantaged youth for Program Year 2004 (July 1,2004 - June 30, 2006); and ten per cent of the aforementioned totals are to be allocated to the administrative function of the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board. The City Manager recommended that Council accept Western Virginia Workforce Development Board Workforce Investment Act funding of $582,591.00 for Program Year 2004 and appropriate the funds to accounts previously established in the Grant Fund by the Director of Finance and establish corresponding revenue estimates in the Grant Fund. Mr. Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#36932-010305) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board Programs, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 228.) 21 Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36932-010305. The motion was seconded by Mr. Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ............................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) Mr. Dowe offered the following resolution: (#36933-010305) A RESOLUTION accepting the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board Workforce Investment Act funding of $582,591.00 and authorizing the City Manager to execute the requisite documents necessary to accept the funding. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 230.) Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36933-010305. The motion was seconded by Mr. Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ............................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ...................................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that military leave at full pay is limited to 15 work days per Federal fiscal year for employees of the City of Roanoke who are military reservists/national guard called to active duty; Council approved Special Military Pay on November 5, 2001, to provide supplemental pay for military reservists/national guard called to active duty and service related to the war on terrorism; special action by Council was effective through September 30, 2004, and benefited 11 City employees called from the reserves/national guard to active duty; these employees received a total of $52,769.90 in supplemental pay as a result of Council's action; and there are 33 reservists/national guard members in ten departments within the City of Roanoke full time employment. The City Manager recommended that Council approve a special policy to pay military reservists who are called to active duty between October 1,2004 and September 30, 2005 the difference between their military base pay (including any other related compensation received from the military) and pay with the City of Roanoke in their current job; covered employees would be those reservists/national guard members who are called to active duty related to the country's war on terrorism subsequent to the employee's employment with the City of Roanoke; and supplemental pay will be provided upon request and with necessary documentation to the Department of Human Resources. Mr. Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#36934-010305) A RESOLUTION authorizing payment of supplementary compensation and restoration of certain benefits to certain employees called to active military duty. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 231.) Mr. Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36934-010305. The motion was seconded by Ms. McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ............................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ...................................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that on May 13, 2004, Council adopted and established a Pay Plan for officers and employees of the City, effective July 1, 2004; the adopted ordinance included a new pay stipend of $100.00 per month, or $1,200.00 annually, paid monthly, to members of the Architectural Review Board upon attainment of certification through the Virginia Certified Architectural Review Program; new appointees to the Architectural Review Board would be required to attain certification within one year of the date of appointment; and Council approved compensation based on the certification program being developed by the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Historic Resources (VDHR) so that Architectural Review Board members would be trained and certified. It was explained that the Virginia Department of Historic Resources intended to develop a statewide certification program for Architectural Review Board members similar to the City Planning Commission (CPC) and Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA); only certified City Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals members received a monthly stipend during the current fiscal year; the Virginia Certified Architectural Review Program has not been fully developed and may not be until next fiscal year; and the ordinance provides that members of the Architectural Review Board cannot receive the pay stipend until certification through the program has been attained. 23 The City Manager recommended that Council amend Paragraph 14 of the ordinance regarding the Pay Plan for Officers and Employees of the City of Roanoke - Architectural Review Board (ARB) Stipend, adopted by Council on May 13, 2004, to suspend the certification requirement, until the Virginia Certified Architectural Review Program is established, allowing current Architectural Review Board members to receive the stipend, to commence on January 1, 2005, until the certification program is developed, at which time members will have one year in which to obtain certification or the stipend will cease. Mr. Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#36935-010305) AN ORDINANCE amending Ordinance No. 36693- 051304, adopted May 13, 2004, adopting and establishing, among other things, a Pay Plan for officers and employees of the City effective July 1,2004, by amending Paragraph 14 which provides for a pay stipend for members of the Architectural Review Board upon attainment of certification through the Virginia Certified Architectural Review Program, by suspending the requirement for certification until the Virginia Certified Architectural Review Program is fully developed and made operational by the Virginia Department of Historic Resources (VHDR); and dispensing with the second reading by title paragraph of this ordinance. (For full text. of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 232.) Mr. Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36935-010305. The motion was seconded by Ms. McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ............................................................................................................. 6. NAYS:None ...................................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Director of Finance submitted the Financial Report for the month of November 2004. (For full text, see report on file in the City Clerk's Office.) Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the Financial Report for the month of November would be received and filed. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: NONE. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. ;?4 INTRODUCTION RESOLUTIONS: NONE. AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: BUSES: Council Member Cutler reported on the progress of the Smart Way transit bus and advised that 1,616 passenger trips were made between the Roanoke Valley and the Town of Blacksburg from December 1 - 24, 2004, averaging over 100 passengers per day. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-LANDMARKS/HIST. PRESERVATION-FIRE DEPARTMENT: Council Member Cutler recognized the City of Roanoke and Hill Studios, recipients of one of the four Gabriella Page Historic Preservation Awards from the Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities, in connection with restoration of the Bell Tower Facade at Fire Station No. 1. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-VIRGINIA TECH-SPORTS ACTIVITIES: Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick commended the Virginia Tech football team who will compete in the Sugar Bowl on January 3, 2005, at the New Orleans Superdome. He called attention to the close connection of the Roanoke Valley to colleges and universities in the region and the importance of understanding the economic impact and the role of the Roanoke Valley in continuing to establish good relationships with such colleges and universities. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-SPORTS ACTIVITIES: Council Member Dowe congratulated the Roanoke Dazzle basketball team, the only team in the National Basketball Association Developmental League that has experienced an increase in attendance of approximately between 25 - 30 per cent. He stated that the Roanoke community is to be commended for supporting the Roanoke Dazzle and is encouraged to continue its support of not only the Roanoke Dazzle, but all other sports entities throughout the community. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MA'II'ERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. COMPLAINTS-TAXES-CITY EMPLOYEES: Mr. Robert Gravely, 727 29th Street, N. W., quoted Bible scripture. He expressed concern with regard to the use of City taxpayers' money to support private businesses and downtown Roanoke businesses, and insufficient wages for City employees. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: REFUSE COLLECTION-STREETS AND ALLEYS: The City Manager advised that the City's neighborhood leaf collection program was completed prior to December 31, 2004, and private contractors who are working on arterial streets will complete leaf collection within the next seven to ten days. RECYCLING: The City Manager reported that for the month of December 2004, the City of Roanoke once again exceeded the required tonnage to receive free recycling, which saved the citizens of Roanoke $10,384.00 for the month of December. FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager called attention to two fire related deaths in the City of Roanoke on January 1 and 3, 2005. She encouraged citizens to check their smoke detectors to ensure that they are in proper working order and advised that City residents may obtain a free smoke detector/batteries at any of the City's fire stations. She also encouraged citizens to take advantage of free chimney inspections and space heater and kerosene heater inspections that will be performed upon request by the Fire Department. She asked that those persons who lost their lives by fire be remembered in prayer. OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER: The Mayor advised that there is a vacancy on the Roanoke Civic Center Commission created by expiration of the term of office of Robert C. Poole, and called for nominations to fill the vacancy. Mr. Lea placed in nomination the name of Daniel E. Wooldridge. There being no further nominations, Mr. Wooldridge was appointed as a member of the Roanoke Civic Center Commission, for a term ending September 30, 2007, by the following vote: FOR MR. WOOLDRIDGE: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris .......................................................................... 6. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) At 2:35 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for one Closed Session. At 2:50 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, with all Members of the Council in attendance, except Mr. Wishneff, Mayor Harris presiding. COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meetingjust concluded, Mr. Dowe moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, and Mayor Harris ......................................................................................................................... 5. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was out of the Council Chamber when the vote was recorded.) At 2:52 p.m., the Council meeting was declared in recess until Thursday, January 13, 2005, at 8:30 a.m., at The Hotel Roanoke and Conference Center, Jefferson Board Room, for the City Council's Planning Retreat. The January 3, 2005, meeting of Roanoke City Council reconvened on Thursday, January 13, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., in the Jefferson Board Room, The Hotel Roanoke and Conference Center, 110 Shenandoah Avenue, N. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. PRESENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. ABSENT: Council Member Brian J. Wishneff- ............................................... 1. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; Mary F. Parker, City Clerk; Rolanda B. Russell, Assistant City Manager for Community Development; and George C. Snead, Jr., Assistant City Manager for Operations. OTHERS PRESENT: Dr. Bruce Blaylock, Professor at Radford University, Facilitator. The Mayor welcomed Dr. Blaylock who facilitated the Council's last retreat on September 5, 2003. He advised that the goalofthe day would be to review the City's Strategic Plan, to make the necessary revisions inasmuch as three new Members of Council were elected since the last retreat, the day's structure would be informal, and encouraged the Members of Council and staff to participate. The Mayor advised that Council Member Wishneff would not be present for the proceedings; however, he had forwarded to each Member of Council an e-mail containing various suggestions that he would propose for discussion had he been present for the day's activities. The City Manager advised that while the Council's retreat is an important activity for the Council, it is of equal importance to the overall City organization because the retreat will set the tone and direction for various individual City operations over the next 12 months, City departments have scheduled a follow up meeting as a result of the retreat to talk about improvements in department operations, much significance is placed by staff on the work that Council does during its retreat, and the entire City organization is interested in Council's direction for the City. Dr. Blaylock expressed appreciation for the opportunity to work with a Council that has found a way to make strategic planning work and has stated agoal to build on past accomplishments. He reviewed the agenda for the day; i.e.: ground rules, goals, successes from 2004, and Council/City Manager reaffirmation of Vision 2012. He advised that each Member of Council brings different perspectives to the table and stressed the importance of understanding each other's perspective; and there will be some issues that Council Members are passionate about, therefore, discussion will center around whether those issues should be included in the City's Strategic Plan. He stated that he had no intention of inserting himself into the process since he is not familiar with the business of the City, but reserved the right to ask questions and to probe deeper in an effort to provide clarification. Dr. Blaylock explained that the day will end with the necessary information to build a strategic plan; therefore, it will be necessary to affirm or reaffirm Council's vision for Roanoke in the year 2012; it will then be necessary to look at objectives attached to each goal in order to affirm, adjust or add new objectives, and then to look at actions that will be required to accomplish the various objectives. He stated that Council will be asked to participate in an exercise to determine who will be responsible for carrying out the various objectives; i.e.: Council, City Manager, or a combination of Council/City Manager, and Council and the City Manager will also participate in an exercise to prioritize the actions. Council Members participated in an exercise in which they listed the following City accomplishments and successes that occurred in 2004: Development and adoption of neighborhood plans Completion of the new zoning ordinance is on schedule Reconstruction of Patrick Henry High School Appointment of a committee of citizens to study the future of Victory Stadium Increase in downtown condominium development and traffic realignment Additional studies for the downtown market area Recent improvements to the Civic Center Discussions regarding the importance of appearances at gateways to the entrances to the City, including 1-581, and the assistance of Virginia Department of Transportation officials to make improvements Implementation of geographic policing to better meet the safety needs of citizens Development of properties inside the City (Ukrops) Continued progress on the rail walk development Commitment to work with the school system Collaboration with Roanoke County on mutually beneficial projects Establishment of a safety task force for schools and implementation of some of the recommendations submitted by the task force Proactive approach to economic development and the contribution of sports to the City's economic development Creation of the Western Virginia Water Authority Assumption of responsibility by the Parks and Recreation Department for Carvins Cove Preparation of a master plan for the Civic Center and Mill Mountain Park by the Department of Parks and Recreation Regional cooperation in connection with studying issues regarding a regional library system Moving responsibility for the Real Estate Assessor position to the Department of Finance Continued good relations with State legislators Excellent lobbyist representing the City's interests in Richmond Development of Colonial Green as a "mixed use" project Full occupancy of Warehouse Row 29 Participation in the Cradle to Cradle Housing project Adoption of an Urban Forestry Plan Working on a Public Arts Plan Growth by developers in creating high end residential housing Housing study that is almost complete Improved image of City Council and its function Receipt of the "Livable Community" Award Selection as the 11th best community in the United States as a place to live Promotion and expanded use of the City's new brand Implementation of the Smart Way Bus system between Roanoke and the New River Valley Implementation of street calming activities, particularly on Williamson Road Completion of the Grandin Road improvements project Passage of a utility cut and restoration policy Recycling efforts exceeded goals saving the City approximately $5O,OOO.OO Opening the new Social Services facility on Williamson Road Naming of the First Street Bridge in honor and memory of the late Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Quality appointments to the School Board and other boards and commissions Council Member Dowe entered the meeting (11:15 a.m.). The City Manager reported on the status of relocation of the Social Security Administration office from downtown Roanoke. The City Manager also reported on the $500,000.00 that was previously allocated to the City by the Federal government to be used for the First Street Bridge project. Inasmuch as the funds were intended to be used for a vehicular bridge, the City Manager advised that Council made a decision to return the money to the Federal government when it was decided to construct 3O a pedestrian bridge. She explained that the City has been informed by the Federal government that the funds may now be used for a pedestrian bridge and amenities; however, the City will be required to go through a Federal review process which will slow the project down; and unless there is an objection by Council, she would proceed accordingly. No objection was expressed by any Member of the Council. There was discussion with regard to Council Member relationships; whereupon, the following observations were made: Council Members frequently engage in discussions, while being respectful of the opinions of each other. Council Members have the same goal with regard to many decisions, but they respect the individual perspectives of their colleagues. With any new Council, there is a "maturation" process accompanied by growing pains. Council's job is to govern, and disharmony has not affected the Council because of a mutual respect for each other. There is a diverse array of experience represented on the Council and if issues come up that require a certain level of expertise or experience, Council Members can look to their colleagues for guidance. The 9:00 a.m., Council work sessions have been helpful because the meeting takes place in a less formal setting and a more relaxed environment and provides Council Members with the opportunity to delve into various issues as they deliberate on policy decisions. Whenever a new Council takes office, there is a learning curve and a trust issue that resolves itself over time. The first six months for the present Council has been a great beginning in the midst of making certain difficult decisions, and there has been much collegiality and a sense of humor among the Council. Dr. Blaylock advised that as a new group, there will be some growing pains for the Council; first will be the "storming" stage, then the "norming" stage and then the "performing" stage while each Member of the Council is discovering his or her individual role on the Council. There was discussion with regard to the method of appointment by Council of persons to serve on authorities, boards, commissions and committees. The following observations were made: 31 Appointments are limited to the slate of persons who apply for a specific vacancy. Council conducts interviews of persons who apply for appointments to the School Board, City Planning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals, Architectural Review Board, Industrial Development Authority, and Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority; however, persons applying for vacancies on other committees do not participate in an interview process. If a Council Member takes on the assignment of recommending a person to fill a specific vacancy, it is assumed that the Council Member has given serious thought to the appointment and has some knowledge of the person who is recommended to fill the vacancy. Due to the large number of boards and commissions, if Council spends a considerable amount of time on every appointment to every committee the process would virtually come to a halt. Council does not seem to take advantage of staff expertise or knowledge by inquiring of staff if they know of individuals who would be willing to serve on various committees. Following discussion of the process for filling vacancies on authorities, boards, commissions and committees, Dr. Blaylock suggested that there be a formalization to improve the process; whereupon, he suggested that Council Member McDaniel, the City Manager, City Attorney and City Clerk serve as members of a subcommittee to review the process for making appointments to the City's boards and commissions. The City Attorney referred to a previous communication in connection with refining the process for electing Trustees to the Roanoke City School Board which is currently set forth in Chapter 9, Education, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by eliminating certain time frames established in the City Code. He reviewed the procedure set forth in the Code of Virginia for electing School Trustees which requires that Council shall, seven days prior to the appointment of any School Board Trustee, hold one or more public hearings to receive the views of citizens. Following discussion, it was the consensus of Council that the City Attorney be instructed to prepare the proper measure for consideration by Council at its meeting on Tuesday, January ! 7, 2005, adopting the procedure set forth in the State Code for electing School Trustees. Dr. Blaylock opened the floor for discussion with regard to Roanoke Vision 2012 - Principles to Guide the Future. Upon consensus of the Council, the following was approved: 32 Roanoke Vision 2012 Principles to Guide the Future We will be recognized for: Being the "Capital of Western Virginia" through a healthy economy, supportive local government, quality municipal services and an attractive cultural environment 2. Having strong neighborhoods through quality City infrastructure, livable homes 3. Having educational excellence in our public schools Maintaining a strong City connectivity with universities and colleges in the region 5. Protecting the natural beauty and resources of our environment Encouraging business, individual investment and retail development in Greater Downtown Roanoke 7. Establishing Roanoke as a destination point for entertainment, major events, sports and festivals Creating an inclusive environment with a reputation as a community that welcomes and celebrates diversity Having ease of travel to, from and within Roanoke via air, rail and highway 10. Having a City with strong community pride 1 1. Maintaining a financially sustainable City government with cost effective service delivery 12. Maintaining working relationships with other local governments throughout the region including the Roanoke and New River Valleys, the Allegheny Highlands, and Smith Mountain Lake Council then engaged in a discussion with regard to the City's goals and objectives. Upon consensus of the Council, the following was approved: GOAL NO. 1: HEALTHY LOCAL ECONOMY Objectives: 1. Support the retention and expansion of local businesses 2. Aggressive economic development strategy to attract new businesses 3. More unique, distinctive retail opportunities 4. Promote development of upper end housing opportunities 5. Actively promote and market "Roanoke" - our brand 6. Diverse local economy: medical, government, tourism, small business 7. Recognize the importance of regionalism to a healthy economy GOAL 2: STRONG NEIGHBORHOODS Objectives: 1. Involving citizens as responsible partners in enhancing quality of neighborhoods and addressing neighborhood problems 2. Developing and using realistic, usable neighborhood plans that link to Comprehensive Plan and guide the future of the neighborhood 3. Improving property maintenance through prevention and enforcement including removal of blighted/worn-out structures 4. Funding significant improvements in specific targeted neighborhoods 5. Protecting the integrity of the neighborhood through design/development standards, standards for infill 6. Maintaining/improving City infrastructure: traffic calming, streets, streetscapes, trees and greenways 33 :34 GOAL 3: VIBRANT GREATER DOWNTOWN Objectives: 1. Increasing including residential opportunities in downtown area, attracting support businesses supermarket, drugstore, other retail 2. Developing reputation as center for culture and arts 3. Protecting quality of downtown development through zoning, development standards, quality infrastructure 4. Supporting major projects: education center, riverside center and Henry Street -job opportunities, building/infrastructure development 5. Expanding entertainment and sports opportunities 6. Increase in occupancy of office and institutional space 7. Support and enhance unique characteristics of the City Market area GOAL 4: QUALITY SERVICES: RESPONSIVE COST EFFECTIVE Objectives: 1. Developing and retaining productive, motivated workforce with well-trained, competent and diverse employees 2. Maintaining processes of continuous improvement and empower employees to offer ideas and try new approaches 3. Investing in and using technology in service delivery 4. Having City facilities that tangibly demonstrate our commitment to service excellence 5. Customer service valued and demonstrated by our City employees 6. Pursue regional cooperation for services The Council meeting was declared in recess at 12:1 5 p.m. The Council meeting reconvened at 1:15 p.m., in the Jefferson Board Room, The Hotel Roanoke and Conference Center, with all Members of the Council in attendance, except Council Member Wishneff. 35 The afternoon session consisted of a review of the above referenced objectives. The facilitator requested that Council Members and the City Manager form groups of three to review objectives and to recommend actions to accomplish objectives listed under each goal. Council Members were then asked to identify whether the actions should be taken by the Council as a group, or by the City Manager, or by a combination of the Council and the City Manager, or championed by a Member of Council. Staff was requested to review the actions reported by Council Members/City Manager and identify barriers, if any, to accomplish the various actions. Following a review of actions listed by Council Members and the City Manager, under the various objectives, the facilitator requested that Council Members and the City Manager individually rank the actions, one through four in order to prioritize those actions that will become the City's priorities for 2005. (For full text of actions to accomplish objectives listed under Goals Nos. 1 - 4, and a compilation of top and high priority actions for 2005, see summary prepared by the facilitator on file in the City Clerk's Office.) There was discussion with regard to providing a promotional message about the Roanoke community on televisions in local hotel guest rooms; whereupon, the City Manager advised that she would work with the Executive Director of The Hotel Roanoke and Conference Center with regard to including a welcome message from the Mayor on those televisions in guest rooms at The Hotel Roanoke. The City Manager advised that City staff will continue to work on the various actions listed by Council. She asked for Council's guidance with regard to ways in which to communicate the results of the retreat to the general public; i.e.: the City Magazine, etc. The Mayor engaged the Council in a discussion with regard to Council meeting protocol; whereupon, the following was the consensus of Council: The present time limits for persons speaking at City Council meetings will continue to be enforced: i.e.: one to four speakers will be allotted five minutes each and five or more speakers will be allotted three minutes each. Ten minutes will continue to be allotted to those persons making presentations under Petitions and Communications. The sponsorship of two Members of the Council or the City Manager will be required for any person or organization to address the Council under Petitions and Communications. 36 Hearing of Citizens will continue to be held following Comments by the Mayor and Members of Council. Briefings will be scheduled as follows: if one to two Members of the Council request a briefing, the briefing will be conducted informally by the City Manager and not during a formal Council meeting or 9:00 a.m. work session. If more than two Members of the Council request a briefing, the briefing will be scheduled during a regular session or 9:00 a.m. work session of the Council. The invocation will continue to be delivered by the Mayor and Members of Council on a rotating basis, with the understanding that Council Members will be mindful of ecumenical and sensitive issues relative to various religious beliefs. On behalf of the Council and City staff, the Mayor expressed appreciation to Dr. Blaylock for facilitating the retreat. There being no further business, the Mayor declared the Council meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m. APPROVED ATTEST: ~~ Mary F. r City Clerk C. Nelson Harris Mayor 37 REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION----ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL January 18, 2005 2:00 p.m. The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Tuesday, January 18, 2005, at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the Roanoke City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Reqular Meetinqs, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 36762-070604 adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 6, 2004. PRESENT: Council Members Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ............................................................................................ 7. ABSENT: None ................................................................................................ O. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led by Mayor Harris. PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The Mayor advised that Shining Star Awards are presented to persons who go above and beyond the call of duty to be of service to their community. On behalf of the Members of Council, he stated that he was pleased to recognize Mr. Jerry L. Dunnavant. The Mayor explained that a police officer responded to the Memorial Bridge in reference to a subject who was going to jump off the bridge; as the officer arrived on the scene, he observed the man disappear over the bridge; when the officer reached the man, he was hanging over the side of the bridge by a sheet that was tied to his neck and he was approximately 60 feet above the water; he officer then began to pull the man back to safety while placing his own safety and well being in jeopardy by reaching over the side of the bridge without the aid of a safety harness; and upon attempting to reach the man who was two feet from his reach, Mr. Dunnavant held onto the officer's 38 legs enabling him to reach the victim. The Mayor commended Mr. Dunnavant for his assistance, which enabled the police officer to hold onto the victim, preventing him from falling and relieving the strangling pressure from the victim's neck in order to free him from the bridge. CONSENT AGENDA The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was desired, that item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. He called specific attention to three requests for Closed Session. MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meetings of Council held on Monday, November 15, 2004, were before the body. Mr. Fitzpatrick moved that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Mr. Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the Mayor to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Council Member Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Chair, City Council Personnel Committee, requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss the mid-year performance of two Council- Appointed Officers, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. 39 Mr. Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Session as above described. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Mr. Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Session as above described. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. OATHS OF OFFICE-BUILDINGS/BUILDING DEVELOPMENT-ZONING-PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES-ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER-COMMUNITY PLANNING: A report of qualification of the following persons, was before Council. Harry F. Collins, Sr., as a member of the Local Board of Building Code Appeals, for a term ending September 30, 2009; Kermit E. Hale and Benjamin S. Motley as members of the Board of Zoning Appeals, for terms ending December 31, 2007; Gwendolyn W. Mason as a member of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, for a term ending March 31, 2007; Paula L. Prince and Richard A. Rife as members of the City Planning Commission, for terms ending December 31,2008; and Daniel E. Wooldridge as a member of the Roanoke Civic Center Commission, for a term ending September 30, 2007. 40 Mr. Fitzpatrick moved that the report of qualification be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members W|shneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. REGULAR AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: MISCELLANEOUS-CITY COUNCIL: William D. Elliot, President, Christene Poulson, Executive Director, and Gini Cooper, Community Solutions Chair, Conflict Resolution Center, spoke with regard to services offered by the Conflict Resolution Center. Mr. Elliott advised that: The Conflict Resolution Center has operated in the City of Roanoke for i 5 years, providing mediation and other conflict resolution services and training. Community Solutions is one of the Center's newest initiatives, it is believed that community mediation centers are the perfect organizations to assist with issues that affect communities, community mediation centers know the community and are committed to it, centers provide the necessary follow-up, they help to resolve conflicts, they are impartial and maintain confidentiality. Increasingly, it seems that citizens want to participate in decision-making and especially when decisions involve issues that are important to them such as renovation of public use facilities, where to construct housing developments and office parks, and how to share resources such as parks and recreation facilities. Citizens are becoming better at blocking those initiatives that they object to and they do so because there is no other mechanism for becoming involved in decision-making or for having their issues heard. 41 The Community Solutions Program was created because good decisions can be made with a good public participation process; i.e..' people involved in such a process can more easily understand the complexities of issues and consider broader interests that combine environmental, social and economic goals; people will support alternatives they do not especially like when they feel the process that led to the decision was fair and all points of view were considered; good solutions to community issues can be created when people work together; and communities are strengthened when the values of people are understood and validated. Participatory problem-solving should occur when issues are high priority and a decision is needed, costs of not building consensus are high, outcome is in doubt, continuing relationships are important, and no single entity has complete decision-making power. The reasons to build community consensus are to reduce/heal community rifts, build "social capital" and trust, foster commitment to the implementation of a decision and generate/create an idea. Public participation processes may not need to be as extensive when the level of concern about an issue is not great, an emergency decision is required, ajudicial precedent is needed to clarify a law or guide future conduct, and constitutional rights are at stake. The Conflict Resolution Center provides access to persons who have expertise in designing and delivering public participation processes such as public meetings, public workshops, public dialogues, and collaborative problem solving processes involving mediation and consensus-building, and training in communication and conflict resolution skills that can help persons who work with the public. Mr. Elliott encouraged the City of Roanoke to use the services of the Conflict Resolution Center and the Community Solutions Program. The City Attorney was requested to respond with regard to the feasibility of using mediation as opposed to instituting court proceedings on various issues that affect the City of Roanoke. The City Attorney advised that from time to time he has brought up the concept of mediating land use issues because he has become dissatisfied with litigation as a means of solving public policy issues, alternative dispute resolution is viewed as an alternative, and persons in the legal profession are increasingly being certified in dispute resolution. He referred to recent 42 instances in which he suggested mediation which is less expensive and time consuming than litigation and the parties involved have more control over the outcome, as opposed to aiudge or iury deciding the issue, and mediation also allows the opportunity to work out a mutually beneficial solution. BUDGET-CITY EMPLOYEES-PENSIONS: C. R. Martin, 155 Huntington Boulevard, N. E., representing the Roanoke City Retirees Association, requested a pay increase for City retirees due to the high cost of living, and a health insurance supplement for retired employees 65 years of age and older. He stated that some retirees over the age of 65 are currently paying as much as $700.00 per month, or $8,400.00 per annum, for health insurance. Mr. Martin referred to work-related health and safety issues that affect Police and Fire Department employees and weather-related working conditions that affect Solid Waste Disposal and Water Department employees, many of whom are now elderly and suffer from various types of work-related illnesses. He asked that Council give consideration to these employees during fiscal year 2005-2006 budget study. Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the request would be referred to fiscal year 2005-2006 budget study. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: CITY MANAGER: BRIEFINGS: See pages 54-58. ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION: STATE HIGHWAYS-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT-STREETS AND ALLEYS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that on November 18, 2004, the Commonwealth Transportation Board adopted a resolution which changed the location of the limited access right-of-way line at the interchange of Route 220 and Wonju Street, and also approved conveyance to the adjacent property owner, the developer of the Ivy Market Project, of a small portion of VDOT-owned property adjacent to the existing Wonju Street right-of-way at the same location; and such action was taken in response to a request by the developer of the Ivy Market Project in order to provide vehicular access to the site from Wonju Street between the Route 220 interchange and Franklin Road. It was further advised that in order for the change in limited access limits to be effective, and the conveyance of land to be executed by the Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner, the City of Roanoke must take formal action discontinuing such limited access features, pursuant to Section 33.1-58, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. 43 The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution discontinuing the limited access features along a portion of Wonju Street as a part of Route 220. Mr. Dowe offered the following resolution: (#36936-011805) A RESOLUTION discontinuing the limited access feature along a portion of Wonju Street as part of Route 220, pursuant to §33.1-58, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 233.) Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36936-011805. The motion was seconded by Mr. Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Fire Programs Fund was established by the General Assembly, effective October 4, 1985, pursuant to Section 38.1-44.1, Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended; and the sunset clause requiring expiration of the Fund on July 1, 1990 was removed, thus, the City's annual allocation of State funds will continue indefinitely. It was further advised that program guidelines require that funds received are non-supplanting and may not be used to replace existing local funding; funds must be used in accordance with provisions established by the State Department of Fire Programs; and the City of Roanoke's allocation of $186,914.76 was deposited in Account No. 035-520-3235-3235 from the Department of Fire Programs. It was explained that the City's portion of the Roanoke Regional Fire-EMS Training Center debt service is $60,000.00, which was paid annually from the revenue source; and action by Council is required to formally accept and appropriate the funds, to authorize the Director of Finance to establish revenue estimates and to appropriate accounts in the Grant Fund, in order to purchase equipment and supplies in accordance with provisions of the program. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to accept the grant, to accept and file any documents setting forth conditions of the Fiscal Year 2005 Fire Programs Funds Grant, to furnish such additional information as may be required and to appropriate grant funds in the amount of $186,914.00, with corresponding revenue estimates, in accounts to be established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund. Mr. Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#36937-011805) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funds for the Fire Program Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 234.) Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36937-011805. The motion was seconded by Ms. McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. Mr. Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#36938-011805) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of the FY2005 Fire Programs Funds Grant made to the City of Roanoke by the Virginia Department of Fire Programs and authorizing the execution and filing by the City Manager of any documents required by the grant. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 235.) Mr. Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36938-011805. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................................................................... -0. AIRPORT-TRAFFIC-BUDGET: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that during Council's December 6, 2004 briefing session, Transportation Division staff presented information on potential transportation projects; i.e.: Aviation Drive and Towne Square Boulevard. The proposed improvement will signalize and align the Airport's entrance opposite Towne Square Boulevard and will facilitate at Aviation Drive; allowing westbound movements on Towne Square Boulevard and aligning the Airport's entrance at a signalized intersection is expected to relieve traffic congestion in the vicinity of Hershberger Road and will help to clear up motorists' confusion of the area between Thirlane Road and the Airport's main entrance; planning level cost estimate for the project is $1 million, however, funding of $250,000.00 would enable preliminary engineering work to begin and would help to facilitate potential private funding from businesses within the vicinity of the project. Huff Lane Streetscape improvements. The project would improve the streetscape and add parking to Huff Lane between Cornell Drive and Avalon Avenue; the project will improve the neighborhood environment by reducing traffic speeds and providing additional parking for the recreation facilities along Huff Lane; the reduction in speed will be facilitated by a narrowing of the existing travel lanes and the addition of on- street angled parking; the corresponding reductions in traffic speeds will improve the safety of pedestrians visiting the school and the recreation facility along Huff Lane; additional parking will reduce the parking demand within the neighborhood during athletic events at the ball fields; and staff is ready to proceed toward design and implementation of the project, at an estimated implementation cost of $250,000.00. It was further advised that funding for each of the projects is available in existing Capital Projects Fund accounts and may be transferred to establish budgets for the projects. The City Manager recommended that Council transfer funds in the amount of $250,000.00 from VDOT Highway Projects, Account No. 008-530- 9803, to an account to be established by the Director of Finance in the Capital Projects Fund entitled, "Aviation & Towne Square Boulevard Improvements"; transfer funds in the amount of $150,000.00 from VDOT Highway Projects, Account No. 008-530-9803, and funds of $100,000.00 from Roadway Safety Improvement Program, Account No. 008-052-9606, to an account to be established by the Director of Finance in the Capital Projects Fund entitled, "Huff Lane Streetscape Improvements". Mr. Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: (#36939-011805) AN ORDINANCE to transfer funding for Aviation Drive, Towne Square Boulevard and Huff Lane Streetscape Improvements Projects, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book 69, Page 236.) Mr. Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36939-011805. The motion was seconded by Ms. McDaniel. Mr. Chris Craft, 1501 East Gate Avenue, N. E., spoke in support of including funds in future budgets to complete the bridge over 1-581 in order to provide better access to Valley View Mall. Ordinance No. 36939-011805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... 0. STATE HIGHWAYS-STREETS AND ALLEYS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Section 33.1-41.1, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, establishes eligibility criteria of localities for receiving funds from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) for street maintenance; the State Code section specifies two functional classifications of roadways (Principal/Minor Arterials and Collector/Locals) and establishes a base payment rate per lane mile for each classification or roadway; rates are adjusted annually by VDOT based upon a statewide maintenance index of unit costs for labor, equipment and materials used by VDOT on roads and bridges; City eligibility for fiscal year 2004-2005 is approximately $9,835,330.00 in street maintenance payments from VDOT; and funds are to be used for eligible maintenance expenditures that the City incurs for streets, sidewalks, curb and gutter, traffic signals, bridges, signs and pavement markings. It was further advised that City staff has found certain streets that have not previously been identified for VDOT funds that should be submitted to VDOT to enable their eligibility for payment in the next fiscal year; and approval of additions to the street inventory is expected to increase street maintenance payments to the City by approximately $15,527.00 at current year payment rates. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to submit the list of streets to the Virginia Department of Transportation for approval by the Commonwealth Transportation Board to enable State Maintenance Payment eligibility. Mr. Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#36940-011805) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to submit a street inventory for State maintenance payment eligibility to the Virginia Department of Transportation ("VDOT"), upon forms prescribed by VDOT for approval by the Commonwealth Transportation Board, in order to ensure the City's eligibility for State maintenance funds. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 69, Page 237.) Mr. Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36940-011805. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................................................................... -0. BUDGET-GREENWAY SYSTEMS-ISTEA: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke was previously notified by VDOT that a $200,000.00 transportation enhancement grant was approved for the Roanoke River Greenway through the Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century (TEA-21 ); appropriate documents have been forwarded to City of Roanoke staff; a project development agreement must now be executed between the City of Roanoke and VDOT, which will define the responsibilities of each party for the project; funds would be applied to a portion of Phase 2 of the Roanoke River Greenway Project (Wasena Park to the City of Salem); the City of Roanoke will be responsible for the match requirement of $50,000.00 which is available in Greenway Project Account No. 008-620-9753; and the $200,000.00 of TEA-21 Enhancement funds must be appropriated to the project account. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute an agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation; that Council appropriate $200,000.00 to Greenway Project Account No. 008-620-9753; and establish a revenue estimate in the same amount for TEA-21 Enhancement funds to be funded by VDOT. Mr. Cutler offered the following budget ordinance: (#36941-0! 1805) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate TEA-21 Enhancement Grant funding to be provided by VDOT for the Roanoke River Greenway Project, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book 69, Page 237.) Mr. Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36941~011805. The motion was seconded by Ms. McDaniel. The City Manager was requested to respond with regard to a potential timetable for greenway construction. She advised that the plan for the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project, which is to be done in two phases, includes a greenway for the entire length, and a significant portion of the cost of greenway construction involves local dollars as opposed to Federal dollars; the actual timetable for construction of the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project continues to be an elusive issue because there appears to be another complication in connection with awarding the construction contract, even with the $5 million that Congressman Bob Goodlatte was successful in securing for the City of 48 Roanoke; and the City has been advised that it must identify a portion of the project that would equate to the amount of money that is actually available, rather than the previous process used by the Federal government to award the entire contract and then build only as much as was available dollar-wise in any given year with the understanding that future funds would become available. She stated that now that the City is required to select projects along the route rather than create a continuous portion at a single time, it would be difficult to predict a time-frame when the greenway would be constructed for the entire length of the Roanoke River Flood Reduction project. She added that the choice of this particular segment was an attempt to match up with greenway work that is occurring within the City of Salem in order to provide a continuous stretch, but does not diminish the City's desire to complete the entire portion of the greenway at some point in the future. Upon question, the City Manager advised that it will be communicated to the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers that the City plans to use the approximately $3 million for one to two bench cuts and certain other smaller and related activities that would directly benefit flood reduction. Ordinance No. 36941-011805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. Mr. Cutler offered the following resolution: (#36942-011805) A RESOLUTION requesting that the Commonwealth Transportation Board establish an enhancement project for the Roanoke River Greenway. (For full text of resolution, see resolution Book 69, Page 238.) Mr. Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36942-011805. The motion was seconded by Ms. McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... 0. CITY ATTORNEY: CITY CODE-SCHOOLS: The City Attorney submitted a written report advising that pursuant to the request of Council, he has prepared an ordinance which would amend the City Code to simplify the procedure used by Council to select School Board Trustees; Council has had in place for many years a procedure which includes numerous requirements and specified time periods that have proven to be cumbersome to comply with; the process that has been used by Council is much more detailed than that which is required by law; and Section 22.1-29.1, Code of Virginia, (1950), as amended, provides as follows: "At least seven days prior to the appointment of any school board member pursuant to the provisions of this chapter,....the appointing authority shall hold one or more public hearings to receive the views of citizens within the school division. The appointing authority shall cause public notice to be given at least ten days prior to any hearing by publication in a newspaper having a general circulation within the school division. No nominee or applicant whose name has not been considered at a public hearing shall be appointed as a school board member." The City Attorney further advised that Council has adopted a procedure for making appointments to the City's major boards and commissions which will ensure opportunities for citizen participation in the process of selecting School Board trustees. Mr. Cutler offered the following ordinance: (#36943-011805) AN ORDINANCE amending Article II, Procedure for Election of School Trustees, of Chapter 9, Education, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by repealing §§9-16 through 9-23, relating to the election of school trustees, and by adding a new §9-24, Fillinq of vacancies on school board, in order to simplify the process of filling such vacancies; and dispensing with the second reading by title paragraph of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book 69, Page 239.) Mr. Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36943-011805. The motion was seconded by Ms. McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... 0. DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: BRIEFINGS: See pages 59-61. 5O REPORTS OF COMMI'I-I'EES: BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School requesting appropriation of the following funds: $! 5,000.00 for the Chess Program to pay for chess materials and tournament participation costs, which continuing program has received a private donation; $1,000.00 for the Autism Spectrum Disorders program to fund supplies for professional development activities related to autism spectrum disorders, said program to be reimbursed 100 per cent by Federal funds; · $162,543.00 for the Blue Ridge Technical Academy to provide a business and technical training program for a diverse population of students, said appropriation representing the final allocation of fiscal year 2004-2005 local match funds; $ ! ,600,000.00 for Fallon Park Elementary School improvements including electrical, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning upgrades, said funding to be provided from the Virginia Literary Fund and Qualified Zone Academy Bonds; $3,850,000.00 for the Westside Elementary School renovation project to be used for construction of renovations and additions, said funding to be provided from the Virginia Literary Fund; $186,000.00 for the design of heating and air conditioning system upgrades for Raleigh Court and Monterey Elementary Schools, said funding to be provided from Capital Project Reserve Funds; and $130,500.00 for the Preschool Incentive program to provide additional diagnostic assessment services for handicapped students who will be entering the public schools system for the first time in the fall, said new program to be reimbursed 100 per cent by Federal funds. A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in the request of the School Board, was before the body. Mr. Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: 51 (#36944-011805) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Chess Program, Autism Spectrum Disorders Program, Blue Ridge Training Academy, Fallon Park Elementary School and Westside Elementary School Renovations, and heating and air system upgrades for Raleigh Court and Monterey Elementary Schools, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004- 2005 School and School Capital Projects Funds Appropriations and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book 69, Page 243.) Mr. Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36944-011805. The motion was seconded by Ms. McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: NONE. MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: BUSES-CITY COUNCIL-SCHOOLS: Council Member Cutler called attention to the popularity of bus service between the City of Roanoke, Ferrum College, Roanoke College and Hollins University, and the Smart Way Transit service between Roanoke and the New River Valley has generated considerable ridership. BRIDGES: Council Member Cutler advised that the $500,000.00 secured by Congressman Bob Goodlatte from the Department of Transportation for the Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Bridge, which was originally restricted to a vehicular bridge, may now be used for a pedestrian bridge; however, procedural requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation may slow the process down. The City Manager advised that it is intended to erect signage at both ends reflecting the official name of the bridge inasmuch as approval has been received from the Martin Luther King, Jr. Foundation, and signage will incorporate not only the name of the bridge but that the project is under design. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL: Council Member Dowe congratulated various entities within the City of Roanoke for hosting celebrations honoring the life of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., on Monday, January 17, 2005. He also congratulated Council Member Lea who served as keynote speaker at the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) Freedom March program on January 17. He commended the citizens of the City of Roanoke on continuing to grow in various areas of diversity and encouraged citizens to examine themselves to ensure that they are a part of the solution in order to make a difference in their City. COMPLAINTS-METHADONE CLINIC-CITY COUNCIL-SCHOOLS: Council Member Lea expressed appreciation to the Members of Council for their attendance at various Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. activities which were held throughout the weekend. With regard to the proposed methadone clinic on Hershberger Road, he inquired if the City of Roanoke can regulate operating hours of the clinic so as not to conflict with operating hours of schools in the area; can the City enact legislation that would prohibit drugs from leaving the premises of the methadone clinic; and has the City received notification of the official opening date of the methadone clinic. The City Attorney responded that the City of Roanoke has no direct regulatory control over the methadone facility in question; if it were a facility that was just locating in the City of Roanoke, a special exception permit from the City's Board of Zoning Appeals would be required; the methadone clinic was required to obtain three permits from the City; i.e.: a business license which was issued for the first time in November 2003 and renewed by the Commissioner of the Revenue for 2004; a zoning certificate which was issued in November, 2003; and a Certificate of Occupancy to occupy the building which was issued in December, 2003, and no other licenses are required to be obtained from the City. He stated that regulating the hours of operation would require specific enabling legislation from the General Assembly because operation of the clinic is regulated by State and Federal governments, none of which are within the City's control. He added that his only knowledge with regard to hours of operation of the methadone clinic was included in a recent newspaper article which indicated that the clinic would open for business before the opening of schools in the area. Council Member Lea inquired if the City has been officially notified of the opening date of the methadone clinic. The City Manager responded that the Police Department has received information relative to a possible opening date, but to the best of her knowledge, the City has received no official notice. She advised that she, as well as the Council, have stated on a number of occasions that the City is not pleased with the presence or location of the methadone clinic in the community, but given the fact that there appears to be no way to prevent its opening, the Council and the City Manager have 53 given assurance to the community that the City will monitor the performance of the facility to ensure compliance with all City of Roanoke laws and regulations. She added that the City has undertaken preparatory steps to look at traffic issues and security issues in the Hershberger/Cove Road area. Council Member Dowe stressed the importance of continuing to look for alternative locations for the facility. CITY COUNCIL: The Mayor expressed appreciation to Council Members and Council Appointed Officers for their participation in the Council's Planning Retreat which was held on Thursday, January 13, 2005, at The Hotel Roanoke Conference Center. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The Mayor commended all persons who participated in the Cradle to Cradle housing program. He advised that the reception was well attended and called attention to the geographic diversity of those persons who submitted applications; the competition showcased the City of Roanoke; judges were stellar in their individual areas of expertise; and an interest has been expressed with regard to building on this year's competition. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY EMPLOYEES: The Mayor called attention to a luncheon which was held on Tuesday, January 11, 2005, recognizing City employees for their years of service. He commended the Members of Council for their attendance and support of those employees who serve the citizens of City of Roanoke. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. PARKS AND RECREATION-ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Chris Craft, ! 501 East Gate Avenue, N. E., spoke in support of the installation of a soccer field in East Gate Park. He asked that Victory Stadium not become a part of Roanoke's past and that the facility be renovated for present and future generations of Roanokers. AIRPORT-BRIDGES-ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia, spoke in support of the renovation of Victory Stadium. He commended Council on the decision to make the First Street Bridge a pedestrian bridge as a tribute to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., in lieu of razing the structure. He suggested that the former airport terminal building be used for office space. COMPLAINTS-ARMORY/STADIUM-CITY EMPLOYEES-SNOW REMOVAL: Mr. Robert Gravely, 727 29th Street, N. W., spoke in opposition to the City engaging the services of private contractors to remove snow from City streets; an inadequate pay scale for City employees; indecision regarding the future of Victory Stadium; the loss of the City's population base; and the lack of entertainment opportunities/attractions in downtown Roanoke. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The City Manager reported on the Cradle to Cradle housing design competition that attracted over 1000 visitors to the Art Museum of Western Virginia. She referred to public exposure of the competition; i.e.: an article in the New York Times and two film companies recorded the entire process for a PBS television special. She called attention to the need to proceed to the next step which is to ensure that some of the homes are constructed in the City of Roanoke; while there were approximately 220 designs that were judged, eight were selected as winners; a pattern book will be prepared containing all 220 plus designs, with the goal of generating interest among private citizens and developers toward construction of homes in an effort to create a new sense about future housing in the City of Roanoke and how the Roanoke area can serve as a model. She noted that jurors have encouraged the City to replicate the competition on an annual basis and a recommendation will be submitted to Council in the near future. She stated that the next phase is to identify resources, both public and private, with regard to construction of several of the homes this summer and efforts are underway to welcome back to the community those students who participated in the competition so that they may witness the process of moving from a design concept to actual construction. At 3:30 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for two briefings and three Closed Sessions in the Council's Conference Room. The meeting reconvened in the Council's Conference Room at 3:35 p.m. TAXES: Susan S. Lower, Director of Real Estate Valuation, advised that citizens will receive a notice of change in the value of their real estate on January 18, 2005, and in accordance with the Code of Virginia, Ad Valorem Taxation, the Office of Real Estate Valuation has completed the Annual General Reassessment for Fiscal Year 2005-2006 and Change of Assessment notices were mailed to 43,107 property owners on January 17, 2005. She advised that: The City's real estate tax base increased approximately 7.46 per cent due to this year's annual reassessment, which is subject to appeals and excludes new construction. Nearby localities experienced similar increases in property values, with Roanoke County assessments having increased by 7.15 per cent this year and values increased in the City of Salem 11.5 per cent over the two-year assessment cycle. New construction in the City of Roanoke totals $51.5 million and will add another 1.03 per cent to the tax base for fiscal year 2005-2006, which is down from last year's 1.23 per cent increase. Residential new construction totals $29.4 million and commercial new construction totals $22.1 million, while last year's projections for new construction totaled $57.1 million, or $33.6 million for residential and $23.5 million for commercial. Overall, general reassessment and new construction indicate an increase of 8.49 per cent in the real estate tax base for fiscal year 2005-2006, while last year's increase was 7.97 per cent before adjustments. Values will be adjusted for appeals, tax freezes, tax abatements and other miscellaneous items to arrive at a revenue estimate for fiscal year 2005-2006. The Office of Real Estate Valuation is charged with appraising all real property in the City of Roanoke at 100 per cent of market value. · The downward trend in mortgage interest rates contributed greatly to an active real estate market again this year. As demands for residential housing continued to reach unprecedented levels and building costs increased significantly, the sales price of housing increased and was one of the primary factors in the overall increase in assessments for the 2005-2006 fiscal year. · Individual property assessments may vary widely from the City-wide average of 7.46 per cent. Most assessment increases will range from five per cent to nine per cent, with a majority at 7.5 per cent; however, if an owner has made significant improvements to a property during the year, the property owner may receive an increase greater than the average. · Assessment appeals will be conducted from January 17 - February 14, 2005. In further explanation of the reassessment process, Ms. Lower advised that: 56 · Market value is defined as the amount a typical, well-informed purchaser would be willing to pay for a property. · The Mission Statement for the Department of Real Estate Valuation is: "As a team of dedicated professionals, we strive to provide fair and accurate assessments on all real estate. We pledge to deliver extraordinary customer assistance and serve as a comprehensive information source. We will accomplish this through a collaborative effort, with continuous learning, an emphasis on hard work, and a commitment to excellence." · Proval, which is a new mass appraisal system, was purchased in 2001. Proval conversion was set up in three phases: Phase I - digital photos and sketches (2002) Phase II - walked half the City (2003) Phase III - walked other half of the City (2004) City of Roanoke Residential Sales Data Comparisons: Year Total Sales Percentage Change in Number of Sales Total Sale Percentage Price Change In Sale Price 2001 4509 N/A 2004 4527 4.0 % $354,765,345 N/A $752,375,047 112.08% Council Member Wishneff asked that new home sales be separated from the total. In a later response, Ms. Lower advised that there were 159 new home sales in 2001 totaling $27,905,295.00, or an average value of $175,505.00; and there were 111 new home sales in 2004, totaling $17,261,954.00, or an average value of $155,513.00. · What is sales ratio? The ratio of an appraisal or assessed value to the sale price or adjusted sale price of a property. Assessment = $140,000.00 Sale Price = $150,000.00 Sales Ratio = 93% ($140,000.00/$150,000.00 = .93) Target Sales Ratio for the City of Roanoke is 93% to 95%. Department of Taxation Sales Ratio Study: Year Preliminary Ratio Posted Ratio 2004 92.2 2003 91.5 2002 87.2 88.80 2001 91.0 91.12 2000 94.3 92.08 1999 94.9 92.93 1998 93.8 94.03 1997 92.6 93.01 1996 94.6 94.54 1995 95.1 90.30 1994 90.6 93.30 1993 94.5 94.50 1992 88.5 92.30 1991 N/A 93.40 1990 N/A 92.20 Preliminary Ratio is based on four months of sales from November- February Preliminary Ratio is used for public utilities only Posted Ratio is Roanoke's Assessment Ratio The 2002 Posted Ratio compares the 2003 sales to 2002 assessments 2002 Sales Ratio Study for other jurisdictions: Cities/Counties No. Parcels Median Ratio Roanoke City 45,468 89% Roanoke County 42,920 91% Charlottesville 13,520 81% Fairfax City 8,551 83% Hampton 49,992 92% Lynchburg 29,334 91% Newport News 52,390 92% Norfolk 73,738 86% Richmond 74,356 87% Salem 10,194 83% Virginia Beach 148,591 86% Danville 26,030 86% 57 58 · Areas of concentration: Land Values Most land values increased 10% to ! 5% Targeted residential land to building ratios 20% to 25% Demand for land is high and supply is Iow Neighborhoods with Iow sales ratios Income producing properties · Real Estate Assessment projections for fiscal year 2005-2006: The tax base will increase by 7.46 per cent Projected fiscal year 2004 - 2005 is 6.74 per cent New construction will increase 1.03 per cent Projected fiscal year 2004 - 2005 is 1.23 per cent Total increase overall is 8.49 per cent Projected fiscal year 2004 - 2005 is 7.97 per cent A survey of other reassessment increases in Roanoke County, Salem, Lynchburg, Franklin County, Montgomery County and Botetourt County was reviewed. An increase in real estate assessments is a good thing; neighborhoods are strong and growing; revitalization is taking place; and real estate is a good investment, both in residential and commercial. · National Association of Realtors predictions for 2005 are: Existing home sales will fall 4% and p/u in 2006 New home sales and single family housing will fall slightly in 2005 and 2006 Home sales will bring a more reasonable rate of home price appreciation in 2005 Continue to have an active market · The following tax relief programs are available: Elderly Tax Freeze Disability Tax Relief Program Rehabilitated Tax Abatement Land Use Proposed Solar Energy Abatement TAXES: The City Manager advised that Council approved certain changes in the tax abatement program, pursuant to Ordinance No. 34915- 071700, which was adopted on July 17, 2000, and deferred action on other issues pending further study. She stated that a suggestion was offered to either wait for adoption of the Strategic Housing Plan, or to consult with those persons working on the plan with regard to whether or not to impose a cap on the value of homes that would receive the tax abatement. She advised that various options have been reviewed by a committee composed of the City Manager, Director of Finance, Director of Management and Budget, Director of Planning and Community Development, Director of Real Estate Valuation and others, and the purpose of the briefing was to receive input from Council with regard to a proposed recommendation by City staff. The Director of Real Estate Valuation advised that at the Council briefing on September 7, 2004, she was requested to respond to the following questions: (1) Which localities with similar programs have instituted a dollar cap on the core value of properties that participate in the real estate tax abatement program? Response: No other jurisdictions allow caps. (2) Do other localities target specific neighborhoods or are rehab programs offered city-wide? Response: All but one program is city wide and only three jurisdictions actually target certain areas. (3) To seek input from the Housing Strategic Plan Steering Committee on recommendations for changes in tax exemption requirements for the rehabilitation of residential real property. Response: From a strategic standpoint, the Steering Committee is of the opinion that the intent of the program should be to improve the overall quality of housing in the City, and not necessarily to simply revitalize aging and deteriorating structures; as such, the program should be directed to property owners in all price ranges in the City's housing market; and Steering Committee members opposed the idea of a $200,000.00 cap on assessed value prior to rehabilitation. Although the Steering Committee agreed with eliminating the restriction that total square footage must not be increased by more than 15 per cent; the Steering Committee agreed in concept with the recommendation that would allow demolition of a residential structure with an assessed value below $5,000.00, however, the Steering Committee believes that the dollar figure should be higher and requested that the recommendation be revised to a figure between $10,000.00 and $25,000.00. Ms. Lower referred to information on projected rehab tax revenue foregone on properties greater than $200,000.00 and advised that using projected averages and forecasted averages on existing homes it is believed that the range for foregone revenues of properties greater than $200,000.00 would be in the neighborhood of $200,000.00 - $400,000.00, and if added to the existing program approaching $600,000.00, total revenue foregone by 2008 would be in the $1 million range. Ms. Lower advised that the following recommendations are submitted for consideration by Council: Eliminate the restrictions on increased square footage on residential real property; currently, total square footage must not be increased by more than 15 per cent. For a residential structure with an assessed value below $ I0~000.00, allow an exemption if the structure is demolished provided that the replacement structure is a single-family residence with an assessed value of at least 120 percent of the median value of other dwelling units in the neighborhood; the exemption shall not apply when any structure demolished is a registered Virginia landmark or is determined by the Department of Historic Resources to contribute to the significance of a registered historic district; and currently, an exemption shall not apply when any existing structure is demolished or razed and a replacement structure is constructed. For any residential structure which has an assessed value, prior to rehabilitation, equal to or greater than $300,000.00, the exemption shall begin on July 1 of the tax year following completion of the rehabilitation, renovation, or replacement and shall run with the real estate for three years; and this will apply regardless of its historic designation location or the per cent net reduction in number of dwelling units after rehabilitation. Ms. Lower reviewed the following proposed rehab marketing strategy: Update a brochure that will be included in a "book like" format complete with residential and commercial examples and an application for the Rehab Program which will be distributed to the Building Department, Housing Services, Loan Officers at local banks, etc. · Address neighborhood organizations · Channel 3, RVTV 61 · Citizen Magazine · Advertise through mass mailings similar to advertising for residential real estate transfers in the City · Update the web site with a rehab application button ready to print for all inquiries When appraisers walk their neighborhoods and observe a potential candidate for the Rehab program, the homeowner will be informed about the program When appraisers work their building permits, if a potential candidate for the Rehab program is identified, the homeowner will be informed of the incentive With the concurrence of Council, the City Manager advised that Council will be requested to approve the above referenced recommendations at its meeting on Monday, February 7, 2005. The Council convened in Closed Session in the Council's Conference Room. At 7:00 p.m., on Tuesday, January 18, 2004, the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S.W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. PRESENT: Council Members Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ............................................................................................ 7. ABSENT: NONE ............................................................................................... 0. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney, Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Council Member Sherman P. Lea. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led by Mayor Harris. PUBLIC HEARINGS: STREETS AND ALLEYS: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Tuesday, January 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of Carillon Medical Center and CHS, Inc., that a 15 foot alley running between Whitmore Avenue and Reserve Avenue, S. W., and parallel to Jefferson Street, be permanently vacated, discontinued and closed, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday December 31,2004, and Friday, January 7, 2005. The City Planning Commission submitted a written report recommending that Council approve the request to vacate, discontinue and close the alley, subject to certain conditions as more fully set forth in the report, and that the petitioners not be charged for the property due to adoption of the South Jefferson Redevelopment Plan in which all property acquisition will be carried out by the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority on behalf of the City. Daniel F. Layman, Jr., Attorney, appeared before Council in support of the request of his clients. Mr. Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#36945-011805) AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing a certain public right-of-way in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as more particularly described hereinafter; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book 69, Page 245.) Mr. Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36945-011805. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dowe. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 36945-011805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................................................................... O. 63 COMMUNITY PLANNING-NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS-ROANOKE VISION, COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Tuesday, January 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on amendment of Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan, to include the Fairland and Villa Heights Neighborhood Plan, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, December 31,2004, and Friday, January 7, 2005; and in The Roanoke Tribune on Thursday, January 6, 2005. A communication from the City Planning Commission advising that Vision 2001-2020 recommends that detailed neighborhood plans be developed and adopted for each of Roanoke's neighborhoods; and the plan for Fairland/Villa Heights has been reviewed by the neighborhood, by City staff and by the Long Range Planning Committee of the City Planning Commission. It was further advised that the Neighborhood Plan identifies the following high priority initiatives: Residential Development encourage the design and development of new housing that is compatible with existing structures, attract new homeowners by developing infill parcels and make the neighborhood more attractive by placing greater emphasis on code enforcement violations, and emphasize rehabilitation of substandard housing. Infrastructure - improve storm water drainage, emphasizing Cove Road, Lafayette Boulevard and Fairland Road. Improve streetscapes by providing proper maintenance of trees and shrubs, planting new street trees, and improving sidewalks and curb and gutter systems for the entire neighborhood. Establish traffic safety measures for Lafayette Boulevard, Cove Road, and incorporate alternative transportation corridors for bicycles. Economic Development - identify the areas around the intersection of Cove Road and Lafayette Boulevard and the intersection of Lafayette Boulevard and Melrose Avenue as Village Centers. Consider establishing incentives for small business development within these areas. · Code Enforcement - improve the area's physical appearance by continuing to target the neighborhood for code enforcement. The City Planning Commission recommended adoption of the Fairland and Villa Heights Neighborhood Plan as a component of Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance: (#36946-011805) AN ORDINANCE approving the Fairland and Villa Heights Neighborhood Plan, and amending Vision 2001 - 2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan, to include the Fairland and Villa Heights Neighborhood Plan; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 247.) Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36946-011805. The motion was seconded by Mr. Fitzpatrick. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. Council Member Dowe commended his father, Alfred T. Dowe, Sr., for his outstanding service to the Fairland Civic Organization over the past 25+ years. He also acknowledged, with appreciation, the influence of his mother and father on his life as he observed their steadfast and unwavering commitment to the City of Roanoke. There being no further questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 36946-011805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. COMMUNITY PLANNING-NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS-ROANOKE VISION, COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Tuesday, January 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on an amendment of Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan, to include the Grandin Court Neighborhood Plan, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, December 31, 2004, and Friday January 7, 2005. A communication from the City Planning Commission advising that Grandin Court is a well-defined residential community bordered by Grandin Court to the north, Creston Avenue to the south, Persinger Road to the east, and Roanoke County to the west; the neighborhood is fully developed with re®st of the homes having been built between 1920 and 1960; and Brambleton Avenue and Grandin Road provide access to other parts of the region. It was further advised that the Neighborhood priority initiatives and recommendations: 65 Plan proposes four 1. Reactivate the Grandin Court Civic League: Residents should be involved in neighborhood improvement and advocacy. 2. Strengthen neighborhood identity: Install gateway signs at specific locations on Brambleton Avenue and Brandon Road. 3. Encourage the establishment of vibrant village centers. Located along the western segment of Brambleton Avenue and at the intersection of Grandin Court and Guilford Avenue; village centers should be dense, compact in size, and identifiable; uses in village centers should generally be neighborhood-oriented commercial, but should also contain some businesses that serve a larger market. The village center on Brambleton Avenue should make a distinct change in character when entering from Roanoke County; the development pattern and infrastructure should resemble more of a main street than a continuation of a strip commercial pattern found in the county. 4. Improve corridors and gateways: Streets and gateways should be attractively designed; specific attention should be placed on Brambleton Avenue because it is a major gateway to Roanoke; functionally, streets will accommodate autos, pedestrians, and bicycles; trees should be used to create a canopy over streets, so large species of trees should be used whenever possible. Traffic-calming strategies should be incorporated into improvements; and the priority should be on providing an improved pedestrian environment. The City Planning Commission recommended that Council adopt the Grandin Court Neighborhood Plan as a component of Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance: 66 (#36947-011805) AN ORDINANCE approving the Grandin Court Neighborhood Plan, and amending Vision 2001 2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan, to include the Grandin Court Neighborhood Plan; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 248.) Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36947-011805. The motion was seconded by Mr. Fitzpatrick. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There was discussion with regard to: Whether a football stadium on the Patrick Henry High School campus would be in conformity with the Neighborhood Plan; whereupon, R. Brian Townsend, Director of Planning, Building and Development, advised that the Plan does not recognize a footfall stadium, nor did the Office and Institutional District rezoning that was approved by Council some time ago envision a football stadium for Patrick Henry High School. The reactivation of the Grandin Court Civic League An acknowledgement of appreciation that the Neighborhood Plan referenced the need to be sensitive to the Brambleton Avenue commercial corridor; i.e.: sensitive to not only appropriate commercial development, but also recognizing the area as a gateway not only to the Grandin Court neighborhood, but to the City. Appreciation was expressed for the manner in which City staff responded to the concerns of the neighborhood with regard to the increasing percentage of rental property in comparison to the percentage of property that is owner occupied. Mr. Townsend reported on the status of neighborhood plans. He advised that three neighborhood plans are currently underway; i.e.: Peters Creek South, the East Gate - Hollins Road area which is the Route 460 corridor, and Garden City. He stated that upon completion in the spring, neighborhood plans will be forwarded to the City Planning Commission and to City Council for approval; and upon approval by Council and the City Planning Commission, neighborhood plans will have been completed for all areas of the City. He noted that the goal will then be to upgrade the three neighborhood plans that were prepared in the late 1980's and early 1990's; South Roanoke, Deyerle and Raleigh Court to bring the plans into conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan; and the Mill Mountain area has been removed from the neighborhood planning map since the Parks and Recreation Department will prepare a master plan for the Mill Mountain area that will become a part of the Comprehensive Plan upon completion. Question was raised with regard to the merit of preparing a revised Comprehensive Plan to include all neighborhood plans, the City's Urban Forestry Plan, and the Parks Master Plan; whereupon, Mr. Townsend advised that from a technical standpoint, every time a neighborhood plan is adopted by Council, the Comprehensive Plan is amended; documents are published separately because they are distributed by neighborhood; and a document could be prepared including the various plans which could also be accessed via the City's website. The City Manager pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan will be updated in another year pursuant to a previous commitment to update the plan in five years, to then be followed by ten year updates. Ordinance No. 36947-011805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. AIR RIGHTS-MARKET SQUARE PARKING GARAGE: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Tuesday, January 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a proposal of the City of Roanoke to issue a revocable permit for air rights to Colonial Partners, LLC, across a portion of City owned property known as 204 Jefferson Street for a period of five years, subject to renewal upon mutual agreement of the parties and for the initial consideration of $2,800.00, to allow construction of a pedestrian bridge and associated lighting and security cameras to connect to the City's Market Square Parking Garage, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, January 7, 2005. The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the property owner, Colonial Partners, LLC, has requested a revocable permit for air rights to allow the construction of a pedestrian bridge and associated lighting and security cameras to connect the building to the City's Market Square Parking Garage; the revocable permit for air rights will include the right to construct, maintain, repair, replace and remove the structure to be constructed; the proposed permit will be for an initial term of five years, subject to renewal in five-year terms upon mutual agreement of both parties; permit payment is recommended to be a lump sum fee of $2,800.00 for initial term of the agreement; and the value was established by calculating the fee simple value of the 79 square foot footprint of the permit area and reducing that by 75 per cent. It was further advised that the proposed pedestrian bridge will connect the two buildings between the fourth floors and will be one level, located approximately 35 feet above ground level and extending upward therefrom for a distance of approximately 16 feet. The City Manager explained that City staff recommends authorization of a revocable permit for air rights for the structure, including provision for a performance bond for removal of the structure should the use terminate, should the structure be allowed to deteriorate unreasonably, or be damaged to the point that the owners do not wish to repair it; the performance bond shall be in the amount of $15,000.00, which amount shall be reviewed periodically and adjusted as needed to ensure that the amount is sufficient to remove the structure; the owner shall be responsible for utilities, biennial inspections, maintenance, and installation and maintenance of security cameras and all lighting which may be required under the structure or on the structure in order to provide adequate lighting for the area within and under the structure; and indemnification and general liability insurance, bodily injury, and property damage liability insurance coverage, with the City to be named as additional insured, shall be provided by the owner. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a revocable permit, the form of which shall be approved by the City Attorney, for air rights as above described to allow construction for a pedestrian bridge located approximately 35 feet above ground level and extending upward for a distance of approximately 16 feet, for the initial consideration of $2,800.00. Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance: (#36948-011805) AN ORDINANCE granting a revocable permit for air rights across a portion of City owned property to allow the construction of a pedestrian bridge to connect the building identified by Official Tax Map No. 4010801, commonly known as 204 Jefferson Street, to the City's Market Square Parking Garage, and to permit the installation of lighting and security cameras in the City's Market Square Parking Garage, upon certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 249.) Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36948-011805. The motion was seconded by Mr. Fitzpatrick. 69 The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. Council Member Cutler advised that he has entered into a contract to acquire living space at 204 Jefferson Street and inquired if he should abstain from voting on the ordinance; whereupon, the City Attorney suggested that Mr. Cutler abstain from voting on Ordinance No. 36948~011805. There being no further questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 36948-011805 was adopted by the following vote: · AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ............................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Cutler abstained from voting.) HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. No citizens requested to be heard. COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting concluded earlier in the day, Mr. Dowe moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................................................................... O. OATHS OF OFFICE-ROANOKE NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERSHIP- COMMITTEES: The Mayor advised that there is a vacancy on the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates created by the resignation of Richard Nichols; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy. Mr. Cutler placed in nomination the name of Maurine P. Castern. There being no further nominations, Ms. Castern was appointed as a member of the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates to fill the unexpired term of Richard Nichols, resigned, ending June 30, 2007, by the following vote: FOR MS. CASTERN: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .............................................................................. 7. OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMIq-I'EES-YOUTH SERVICES CITIZEN BOARD: The Mayor advised that there are vacancies on the Youth Services Citizen Board created by the resignations of F. B. Webster Day and Cheryl D. Evans; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancies. Mr. Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the names of Frances L. Craveb and Mark H. Hurley. There being no further nominations, Ms. Craveb and Mr. Hurley were appointed to fill the unexpired terms of Cheryl D. Evans, and F. B. Webster Day, resigned, as members of the Youth Services Citizen Board, for terms ending May 3 i, 2006, by the following vote: FOR MS. CRAVEB AND MR. HURLEY: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .............................................. 7. OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMIq-I'EES-BLUE RIDGE BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE BOARD OF DIRECTORS: The Mayor advised that the three year term of office of Dolores Y. Johns as a member of the Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare Board of Directors expired on December 31, 2004, Ms. Johns is ineligible to serve another term; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy. Mr. Dowe placed in nomination the name of Vincent G. Dabney. There being no further nominations, Mr. Dabney was appointed as a member of the Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare Board of Directors, for a term ending December 31,2007, by the following vote: FOR MR. DABNEY: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .............................................................................. 7. There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. APPROVED ATTEST: /~ Mary F. Parker C. Nelson Harris City Clerk Mayor 71 ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL February 7, 2005 9:00 a.m. The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday, February 7, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., in the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Regular Meetings, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 36762-070604 adopted bythe Council on Tuesday, July 6, 2004. PRESENT: Council Members Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, and Mayor C. Nelson Harris .............................................................. 6. ABSENT: Council Member Alfred T. Dowe,Jr.- ....................... 1. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. SCHOOL TRUSTEES PRESENT: William H. Lindsey, Gloria P. Manns, Alvin L. Nash, Courtney A. Penn, Robert J. Sparrow, David B. Trinkle, and Kathy G. Stockburger, Chair ................................................... 7. ABSENT: None ................................................. 0. OFFICERS PRESENT: Representing the City of Roanoke: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. Representing the Roanoke City School Board: Doris N. Ennis, Acting Superintendent; Cindy H. Lee, Clerk to the School Board; and Timothy R. Spencer, Assistant City Attorney and Legal Counsel to the School Board. SCHOOLS-COUNCIL: The Mayor expressed appreciation to Members of the School Board for taking time from their busy schedule to meet with Council. He called attention to monthly meetings attended by the Mayor, Chair of the School Board, the City Manager and the Acting Superintendent of Schools to discuss issues of benefit to both bodies in an effort to move forward on matters of mutual interest and concern. 72 Chair Stockburger expressed appreciation to Council for meeting with the School Board in a more informal type setting. She reported on the following activities: Superintendent Search: A meeting was held with the search firm last week and the School Board is excited about not only the number of applicants, but the caliber of applicants who have applied for the position. Pursuant to Section 2.2-3712 (b), Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the School Board will conduct a Closed Meeting within the next 15 days for the purpose of interviewing candidates for the position of Superintendent. The School Board is on schedule for interviews, barring any unforeseen inclement weather, and it is hoped to make an announcement regarding the selection of a new Superintendent by February 28. The search process has gone well, the relationship with the search firm has been excellent and the product generated to this point has gone beyond expectations. A specific criteria was developed to discuss which of the 125 inquiries, representing 38 States, would result in the top candidates; not all inquiries resulted in a full application, and over 60 complete applications were received. · The top six candidates have been identified and will be interviewed over the next seven to ten days. · Top candidates will be introduced to the public. The process included public input from the beginning to determine the types of candidates that the School Board was looking for and the Board has not deviated from the established criteria. 73 School District Update: · The Patrick Henry High School renovation project is proceeding on schedule. The same process is anticipated with regard to the William Fleming High School renovation/construction project, with the first pubic input meeting to be held on February 16 at 5:30 p.m., in the William Fleming High School Cafeteria. The William Fleming building will not be the same as the Patrick Henry High School facility, but will be customized to fit the needs of the school. · There is a positive attitude by parents, students and teachers about the Patrick Henry project. The opening for Roanoke Academy of Mathematics and Science (RAMS) has been delayed due to certain construction issues; however, teachers are positive about the brief delay in construction. In view of recent publicity that the fire wall was extended to the ceiling instead of to the roof at the RAMS structure which delayed the opening date, question was raised with regard to the circumstances surrounding the over sight. The Acting Superintendent of Schools responded that in today's society, one cannot be too safe when children will occupya facility. The Chair advised that the RAMS building must be constructed to the specifications that the School Board believes is necessary prior to occupancy. The observation was made that either the architect or the engineer should have discovered the error early on in the construction process. Crystal Y. Cregger, Manager, Purchasing of Contract Services, advised that School officials met with City officials, including the Building Commissioner, all of whom have been most helpful in addressing the situation. She Stated that the contractor did not call for inspections as the work progressed, therefore, the Building Commissioner did not have an opportunity to discover the error; four job superintendents have worked on the project and the Building Commissioner's Office and the City Manager's Office have been supportive of efforts to resolve issues. 74 With regard to Patrick Henry High School construction/renovation, Ms. Cregger reported that the contractor and the architect discovered an error in the specifications for fire proofing which will be addressed through a pending change order. The Chair advised that whenever incidents of this nature occur, the School Board is even more vigilant when looking at the next project. The City Manager advised that a "Clerk of the Works" is assigned to large City projects because the contractor/architect should not also be responsible for inspections. She explained that a third party contractor or employee is present for onsite reviews which is key to major construction projects. An observation was made that the Roanoke Academy of Mathematics and Science is the first new school to be constructed in the City of Roanoke in approximately 25 - 30 years and with completion of Patrick Henry and William Fleming High Schools in the next decade, the three schools should be showcased and publicized as much as possible. Safety Task Force Recommendations: Recommendations are continuing to be implemented which have served as a model of intentional input in a methodological way, resulting in certain changes in some of the schools. It is hoped that a model can be replicated in the schools when various issues demand a level of attention. Conflict remediation training for students has been implemented across the board in elementary schools and it is hoped to implement conflict mediation training for parents as well. A number of hard pieces have been implemented, such as cameras in the schools, enhanced training and de-escalation training is almost complete; 80 teachers have participated in de-escalation training, who, in turn, visit other schools as a team to train staffs. 75 The Acting Superintendent of Schools serves as point person for recommendations of the School Safety Task Force. Youth courts have been established and are successful as a new pilot program; the William Fleming Youth Court will start during this semester; the Patrick Henry Youth Court started last year; the Youth Court is effective because it gives students the responsibility of accountability and is congruent with the mediation process. · Middle Schools have established peer remediation programs. Council Member Lea entered the meeting. Two new alternative education programs have been established; i.e., New Start, which addresses students in the third and fourth grades who are experiencing difficulty in terms of attentiveness, are not academically successful, and have behavior problems, students have the benefit of one on one instruction, and five students participate in the Morningside Elementary School program and eight to nine students participate in the program at Hurt Park Elementary School. As the program continues, Adolescent Uplift will be offered at the middle school level and will provide a ripple effect in terms of students attending the Noel Taylor program. The Noel Taylor Alternative Education Program has approximately 200 students who attend school from 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.; with a dual program year, some students arrive at 2:30 p.m., and they are taught by an adjunct staff from Patrick Henry and William High Schools. Teaching staff work with those students who otherwise might become drop outs or those who have experienced difficulty in a larger school setting. Blue Ridge Technical Academy is doing well. The Chair volunteered to provide Council with a one page summary listing all alternative education programs, with a brief description, including the Governor's School and CITY School, etc. The terminology "alternative education" may be changed to "adjunct education program," or some other terminoloqy because "alternative education" implies behavioral problems which' is not totally true with today's students who are involved in other situation such as jobs that require modified schedules, etc. 76 In addition to safety issues, there is a need to focus on instruction; some schools have not made AYP and some schools are not accredited, therefore, it will take a community effort in conjunction with Central Council PTA Executive staff to involve the entire community, and a detailed presentation will be made at an upcoming School Board meeting. Bench mark testing is done to analyze accomplishments of students in terms of objectives that need to be met at the end of the school year when they take the Standards of Learning test, which provides a diagnostic prescriptive testing of learning in order to focus on individual student needs. Central Council PTA no longer represents all of the schools, some schools are represented by a body that acts on behalf of all students. Central Council PTA will host an annual event including a model night in which they will invite all principals, PTA representatives, and parent representatives from those schools where there is no PTA to address such basic activities as feeding the child a good breakfast, the disadvantage of engaging in family conflicts on the night before a test, the importance of getting to school on time, etc. The Executive staff will present information on the importance of testing and it is hoped that the initiative will become an annual event and that an assessment night will be held in each school in the division. Some of the schools that do not have Parent Teacher Associations have strong parental involvement, each school is defined by a different school culture and those schools that do not have a viable PTA are some of the same schools that have a strong school based leadership team composed of parents who serve on acommittee and make decisions; and school based leadership teams are composed of students, parents, teachers and the PTA President if the school has an active PTA. Research continues to be done by executive staff with regard to the extended school day. When looking at the School schedule, there are enough minutes in the School day, but the question centers around how those minutes are used. Transportation is being reviewed in terms of how much time is used to transport students, i.e.: the feasibility of elementary school, middle school and high school students reporting to school at different times throughout the school day. 77 School Uniforms: There is an ongoing review of school uniforms as well as a school dress code; dress codes vary widely from school to school, a committee will review revamping the dress code, while allowing some flexibility between the uniforms; the committee will review a policy that would allow the individual schools to adopt a uniform with approval by 70 per cent of the parents; the policy would State how uniforms would be adopted at each individual school; it might be easier to initiate the pilot program at the elementary school level with the goal of bench marking those schools against other schools to determine what type of influence a uniform has on school safety, etc. If it can be determined that a school uniform helps education, safety, social environment, etc., the School Board has a responsibility to pursue the issue; it is hoped to have at least two pilot schools and a minimum requirement of time for the uniform program to be in place in order to attain numbers for bench marking purposes. During a discussion it was noted that the Cities of Lynchburg and Norfolk have implemented school uniforms and question was raised as to whether data from those localities have been reviewed for bench marking purposes. It was pointed out that there is not a lot of available data, however, data from the City of Norfolk has been reviewed by the committee. The Mayor advised that it would appear that school uniforms may have deeper impacts in certain areas that may not be quantified, i.e.: those children who do not have avariety of clothing as opposed to those who may not wear the same outfit for the next 15 days, which creates a social disparity among children that could lead to life long scars. He stated that if requiring a uniform could add some equilibrium to that kind of situation, while it does not solve a safety problem or an academic problem, it begins to modify a social stigma that is hard to measure or to quantify; therefore, a school uniform may have certain positive ramifications beyond that which can be measured. 78 The Assistant City Attorney was requested to comment on the threshold percentage for approval by parents of school uniforms, whereupon, he advised that the ranges are between 70- 75 per cent which seems to be the norm in most localities; there is an opt in and an opt out requirement to give parents flexibility; and according to State law, public funds cannot be used to purchase uniforms, therefore, often times criteria is established through the Education Foundation to pay for uniforms for those children who receive free or reduced lunches. Public/Private Education Act (PPEA): Council addressed the PPEA approximately one year ago which provides a way to place private funding and private risks to public projects. The School Board was provided with information on the Act in order to understand the guidelines established by Council and Council will be provided with guidelines to be established by the School Board. Mr. Spencer advised that draft guidelines were modeled after the same guidelines that were adopted by Council and will be considered by the School Board at its March meeting. He referred to major changes at the State level with regard to what constitutes public purpose so that the PPEA can be used for more than just education, and internal guidelines will be developed on how to move various issues through the organization. The City Manager offered the assistance of the City's Engineering staff to the School Board. Roanoke City School Board Education Foundation: An overview of the Public School Foundation was provided, in addition to a compilation from the National School Board Association Library on websites where more information may be accessed, mission Statements from various currently operating Education Foundations, a list of the Board of Directors, By-laws and Articles of Incorporation that were approved by the School Board; and a list of Foundation programs funded by the City of Asheville, North Carolina. 79 The purpose of the Education Foundation is not to provide basic school funding, but to provide for enhancements, scholarships, or those kinds of expenditures that will enhance student achievement. Education Foundations, which are being established all across the country, can provide creative ways to support the school division, and the City of Roanoke is positioning itself to provide an even better climate of learning for Roanoke's students to achieve within the framework of the Foundation. There being no further business, at 10:40 a.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess. The Chair declared the School Board meeting adjourned. ITEMS LISTED ON THE 2:00 P.M., COUNCIL DOCKET REQUIRING DISCUSSION/CLARIFICATION, AND ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO 2:00 P.M., AGENDA: NONE. TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: NONE. COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member McDaniel moved that Council concur in the request of the Mayor to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ........................................................ 6. NAYS: None ................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) 80 CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss acquisition of real property for a public purpose where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ........................................................ 6. NAYS: None ................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss acquisition of real property for a public purpose where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member Cutler moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ........................................................ 6. NAYS: None ................................................... O. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss acquisition of real property for a public purpose where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. 8! Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ........................................................ 6. NAYS: None ................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) BRIEFINGS: · Storm Water Update: SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Engineer advised that approximately one month ago, Council was presented with copy of the Storm Drain CIP needs as prepared by the consultant, AMEC, who has continued to work on what a storm water utility could mean to the City of Roanoke in terms of fees, potential revenue, and how to retire some of the City's CIP needs. He introduced Doug Mosley and Elizabeth Treadway, representing AMEC, to continue the Council briefing. Mr. Mosley reviewed the scope of the study which includes the program phase that will determine the level and extent of storm water management service based upon community needs and Capital Improvement Programming; and data development and analysis which will evaluate data needed to determine an equitable allocation of the cost of service. He noted that the study is designed to help the City reach a decision point concerning implementation of a storm water utility fee. He advised that: Level and extent of service program objectives include: meet community service needs and expectations, address aging infrastructure (CIP backlog and maintenance), enhance flood plain management and flood mitigation capabilities and riparian habitat protection and restoration. 82 Key Areas of Program Needs Reinvestment in the infrastructure Total program costs: CIP needs: $695,000.00 annually $57 million Maintenance and operations needs: Build capacity to maintain infrastructure Increase capital spending: $ 3 - 5 million annually Ensure compliance with regulatory mandates Address water quality needs through CIP · Specific program preliminary recommendations include: Engineering Services; i.e.: target floodplain management- enhance CRS Program and maintain GIS data sets - keep system inventory current Capital Construction; i.e.: address flooding - increase reinvestment program to eliminate backlog over the next 15 years and increase current system capacity through remedial maintenance Operations and Maintenance; i.e.: enhance maintenance capabilities - add one four-person crew; and ensure effective performance by completing the inventory of storm sewer system and identifying current easements General Administration; i.e.: educate the public - provide customer assistance resources. · Preliminary Reinvestment Strategy: Engineering services: $75,000.00 in year one (mapping and GIS support) $97,000.00 in subsequent years to support CRS program and GIS $1 million/annually 83 Capital construction: $3,200,000.00 in year one $4,000,000.00 to $$,800,000.00 in subsequent years Operations and Maintenance: $1,000,000.00 annually General Administration: $103,000.00 annually for customer assistance and education Utility costs annually (billing system) - $75,000.00 · Charts were reviewed explaining billing unit determination methodology - equivalent residential unit (ERU) Solid Waste Utility Fee Schedules from Norfolk, Virginia Beach, Portsmouth, Newport News, Hampton, Chesapeake and Prince William County were reviewed. Council Member Cutler advised that he had numerous questions, however, in the interest of time, he would submit his questions to the consultants, with acopy of the response to Council. Questions/comments by Council: A considerable amount of the City's flood water originates in Roanoke County, the City of Roanoke is surrounded by Roanoke County and the topography is down hill from the County through the City to the river, and anything the County does by way of development will exacerbate flood storm water runoff in the City. This should be closely coordinated with or tied into the study. 84 The By-laws and Articles of Incorporation of the Western Virginia Water Authority provide for assuming responsibility for storm water management for both the City and the County at some future time, as well as the addition of other units of government. Other issues were mentioned such as Iow impact development, protection of water quality, potential day lighting of streams and rain gardens, and new technology that improves the environment while addressing storm water run offthrough easement inventory. The Western Virginia Water Authority has adopted a policy for the extension of utility lines and the Water Authority is encouraged to work with the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission to obtain surface right-of-way for public access at the same time utility lines are extended, and the same should be true with respect to storm water easements, particularly closed pipe systems, with the surface to be opened to the public if possible. A clarification was requested as to what extent a storm water utility fee is required as apposed to optional. The City Engineer advised that the City can meet ail requirements under the NPDES program with current funding allocations for water quality, therefore, a storm water utility is not required in order to meet those obligations. However, he stated that the City has a much larger need for capital projects for which no dedicated funding mechanism has been identified, and the list continues to grow each year. Percentage-wise, what can the current system handle? The City Engineer advised that it would be difficult to venture a guess on the percentage, however, it should be noted that the City of Roanoke is an older community, much of its infrastructure is in need of repair and a substantial need is not being addressed. Is the current requirement for water runoff a local or State requirement? The City Engineer responded that minimum standards are established by the State, and current requirements of the City provide that post development runoff cannot exceed pre development runoff from both the ten year storm and the two year storm in the City of Roanoke, and minimum State standards apply to the two year storm. 85 If the list of CIP storm drainage projects is implemented, how would storm water runoff be impacted? The City Engineer responded that it would provide infrastructure as economic development occurs in the City; and the largest impact would be seen in development credits for those who go above and beyond minimum standards. Are there more regional solutions that CIP funds could be used for that would lessen the need for drainage? The City Engineer advised that staff reviewed the 1996 Valley Wide Storm Water Management Study, and of the $57 million list, $:~7 million of the projects identified in the study are located just within the boundaries of the City of Roanoke; and companion projects in Roanoke County, Botetourt County and Floyd County could be implemented if the storm water utility tax is approved. Would it make sense to bond rather than pay as you go? The City Manager responded that the City could bond, but she would be hesitant to recommend any type of fee that creates funds that the City cannot spend within a given time because the community's expectation, when a project is placed in the capital improvement budget, is to see the results of the project within the year; and quite often the project is not completed that quickly due to design, engineering and sometimes land acquisition issues. The City has started to break some projects into smaller pieces with the intent that in the first year X amount of dollars will be needed because X amount of the project will be completed. With a storm water utility fee, the community will expect fast results, and the start up year would involve a significantly smaller amount of money with the idea of spending funds to design the projects. There have been discussions with regard to how to spread the projects around the community so that more people would have the opportunity to see the impact of this type of fee, however, the real issue is whether the City has the necessary staff resources, both to oversee the design of projects followed by construction. Roanoke County has been invited to participate in the study, but has not indicated a willingness to be partners in the effort to move forward. The opportunity to enhance the value and the resale of homes in the City of Roanoke is impacted by whether or not the City addresses flooding that is occurring in many of its neighborhoods. 86 A storm water management/storm water utility fee should be addressed at meetings of elected officials of the Roanoke Valley. Lick Run Greenway: GREENWAYS: The City Manager advised that an item is included on the formal Council agenda at 2:00 p.m., in regard to a negotiated Memorandum of Understanding that would establish a cooperative effort between the Virginia Department of Transportation and the City of Roanoke for the temporary use of non-limited access rights-of-way along 1-581 between the Orange Avenue interchange and Walker Avenue on the west side of 1-581. The City Manger further advised that the Agreement is for the temporary placement of a portion of the Lick Run Greenway on the VDOT non-limited access rights-of-way pending future roadway corridor modifications; the Memorandum of Understanding requires Council to request VDOT's permission to temporarily place a portion of the greenway on VDOT's non-limited access 1-581 rights-of-way; and Council will be requested to agree to have the City of Roanoke apply all costs associated with removing the greenway at such time as future roadway corridor modifications necessitate its removal, if and when removal is requested by VDOT. L. Donnie Underwood, Parks Planner, advised that a greenway serves as a habitat that may include many different types of geography, such as wet lands, rivers, plants, forests and fields; it is an area in the landscape along which water, animals, plants and people move; it is an area whose filtration prevents the passage of some things, but allows the passage of others; it is a resource within an urban climate that provides an unique edge of open space to adjacent communities; and properly defined and managed greenways can help wildlife overcome the effects of fragmentation by increasing the effective size of protected areas, creating access to different habitats and connecting wildlife populations. He presented photographs of projects that have been completed such as Roanoke River/Wasena Park; Lick Run Phase I which began at Valley View Mall across 1-581, down to Andrews Road that will go to bid in March-April and connect a portion of the greenway through Brown-Robertson Park and Washington Park, wrap around the Holiday Inn and end up at The Hotel Roanoke. 87 Mr. Underwood advised that an agreement has been reached with VDOT to allow the City to use the rights-of-way for the greenwayon atemporary basis and if 1-581 is widened, VDOTwill work with the City to relocate the greenwaywithin the 1-581. right-of-way. He stated that at the location of the Holiday Inn, a significant bench cut/retaining wall system will be installed. He presented slides containing examples of landscaping/architecture proposed for Walker Avenue in order to make the area more compatible with the Civic Center to The Hotel Roanoke, because it is believed that this will be the most used section of greenway in the City of Roanoke. He reviewed the following costs: Estimated Cost: $ 1,368,438.00 Funding Sources: · General Fund · Land Sale · T-21 Grant Transportation Funds · TEA Enhancements 2004 · CDBG Funding for Gainsboro 'o' Total Budget 4,430.00 1.25,11.0.00 875,000.00 75,000.00'(104 St.) 33,000.00 (2"d St.) 127,000.00 $ 1,239,540.00 Photographs were presented of floodway design, timber amenities, markings, pull-outs, timber gating, native landscape, signage, and greenway map/kiosks, way finding downtown, and interpreted signage in Brown-Robertson Park and Washington Park to address the historic significance. (See copy of power point on file in the City Clerk's Office.) Gateway to the Civic Center: ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER: The City Manager advised that Walker Avenue at the rear entrance to the Roanoke Civic Center has been of concern for some time as it relates to improvements to the back area through the Lick Run Greenway. She called upon staff for a presentation on proposed initial improvements to the rear entrance to the Civic Center, with the intent of adding certain other enhancements over time. 88 Brenda D. Landes, representing the City Engineer's Office, advised that: Council is requested to consider a project that would create an upgraded pedestrian connection between the Lick Run Greenway and the Civic Center at Walker Avenue. The existing pedestrian right-of-way is a dark and somewhat foreboding route and most people do not thinkofthe area as a connection to the Civic Center because there are no amenities that would draw a pedestrian to the area. A multi phased project is proposed to create a more attractive, safe and inviting pedestrian way, with the first phase to include areas that would increase safety and awareness: Phase I would attempt to draw pedestrians to the area by increasing the quality and quantity of lighting; extend the sidewalk into one lane of the road; currently,.the road is four lanes wide, but there is no need, traffic-wise, to have more than two lanes, although to accommodate emergency access is advisable to provide three lanes; and remove one of the existing pedestrian bridges and replace it with a bridge that is visually accessible and can be seen from Second Street, with an obvious pedestrian connection. Close off the ledge above the slope protection. Other potential enhancements include: decorative columns with bright colors through possibly a contest involving local artists and schools, etc., possibly covering the columns with mosaic tiles, etc., based on input by VDOT since the columns would have to be tested every two years, and commission a piece of art work or some type of active events board with landscaping. Other phases would serve to more directly connect the Lick Run Greenway and the Walker Avenue area with a more whimsical theme, such as installation of gateway signage at the entrance to Walker Avenue, sidewalk upgrade by installing color stamped 89 concrete to coordinate with that part of the greenway, substantially upgrade landscaping by installing a dry creek bed with stone walls and a boulder scope, install a wooden pedestrian bridge that would be a part of the Lick Run Greenway, while tying back into the connector piece that goes over the dry creek bed and remove the remaining pedestrian bridge. The City Manager pointed out that as staff looked at the rear entrance to the Civic Center, Phase II improvements have been designed to allow entrance to the Civic Center from the rear without having to walk around the building. She stated that this is an area that needs special attention as expansion of the Civic Center occurs, and in an effort to encourage the movement of people between the Civic Center and the downtown area and to capture the opportunity for patrons to use downtown parking as much as possible for events and activities at the Civic Center; and a lighted greenwaywill cause the area to be used in a way that it has not been used to this point. Questions/comments by Council: A formal stone wall surrounds Lick Run and standard lighting similar to lighting currently installed on Wells Avenue should be used. Signage should be placed on the side of the bridge so that there is less obstruction and any lights should be installed on the bridge proper, thereby making the bridge the grand entrance. The City's new branding logo could be placed on the wall with the event board which would create a source of pride. The section between Walker Avenue and Wells Avenue to The Hotel Roanoke will be the one lighted portion of the greenwaywhich ties in with historic Gainsboro and the light poles that are currently in place. There are obvious benefits to respective staffs of the Engineering and Parks and Recreation Departments working together and it is hoped that the relationship will continue. Lick Run should be returned to a live stream with vegetation, and support was expressed for the day lighting of converted streams and returning streams to their natural condition whenever practical. 90 There should be a way to embrace the Gainsboro community by identifying certain historic structures that previously existed. Based upon comments by Council Members, the City Manager advised that it would appear that Council supports the current direction by staff. She stated that the project will be completed in phases, with completion of the first phase to complement the schedule for Civic Center Phase II Improvements. At 12:00 p.m., the Council met in a joint session with the Architectural Review Board, Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris and Chairman Robert N. Richert, Chair, Architectural Review Board, presiding. ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Rupert Cutler, Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ...................................................... 6. ABSENT: Council Member Alfred T. Dowe,Jr. - ....................... 1. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Alison S. Blanton, Barbara A. Botkin, Robert B. Manetta, James Schlueter, JonJ. Stephenson and Chairman Robert N. Richert ............................................. 6. ABSENT: Board Member Donald C. Harwood .......................... 1. OTHERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager, William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; Mary F. Parker, City Clerk; and R. Brian Townsend, Director, Planning, Building and Development; Anne Beckett, Agent; and Martha P. Franklin, Secretary, Architectural Review Board. The meeting was opened with a prayer by Council Member Lea. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD-ANNUAL REPORTS: Following lunch, the Mayor welcomed members of the Architectural Review Board and staff to the meeting, and called on the Chair for presentation of the 2004 Annual Reportofthe Architectural Review Board. 91 Chairman Richert stated that one-haft of the Certificates of Appropriateness that were issued were processed administratively by City staff and approved without consultation; and he was encouraged by infill development that had taken place on several vacant lots in the old southwest neighborhood with regard to the H-2, Historic District. He referenced several trends not reflected in the Annual Report, such as an increased number of applications in the H-2 districts in the Gainsboro, West End, Mountain View and Patterson Avenue neighborhoods. He indicated that property owners in those neighborhoods were not familiar with the historic district guidelines; therefore, the Board and City staff must raise their level of awareness. Anne Beckett, Agent to the Board, advised that information provided by the Office of Real Estate Valuation indicated that between 2001 and 2005, property values in Old Southwest had increased 46% as compared to 32% in the Raleigh Court, Grandin Court and Wasena neighborhoods. The Chair highlighted the following areas of concern: Protection of infrastructure in the H-1 and H-2 historic districts, i.e.: streets, alleyways, etc. The need for legislative action with regard to roofing and siding issues requiring building permits; and It is imperative that inner-City and historic neighborhood property owners be protected, especially the residential neighborhoods on Marshall, Day and Elm Avenues. COMMENTS BY COUNCIL/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS: Mayor Harris inquired about the rate of home ownership in historic districts and whether the rate had increased; whereupon, it was noted that the rate was about 52%. He requested that information pertaining to home ownership in historic districts be provided to the Members of Council. The City Manager Stated that the City's Tax Abatement Program has been part of the trend in the Old Southwest community, and City staff has revised the program to further improve its use on a City-wide basis. She further stated that an additional tax credit of five years is given to a property owner if the property is converted to a lower density. 92 Mayor Harris inquired about the status of legislative updates; whereupon, the City Attorney responded that .legislation authorizing localities to require building permits for installation of replacement siding, roofing and windows in buildings within historic districts was drafted, but because the City did not have a sponsor, the bill was not considered by the General Assembly. Due to the importance of the legislation, Mayor Harris suggested that he and Mr. Richert schedule a meeting with the City's representatives to the General Assembly to discuss the issue. The City Manager suggested that surrounding localities that share an interest on similar issues should be contacted to lend their support and lobbying assistance. In response to increasing public awareness with regard to property in the historic districts, Mr. Richert advised that City staff has initiated the following: Annual notification to all property owners in historic districts that their property is located in a historic district; Notification from the Department of Real Estate Valuation to property owners who have purchased property in historic districts advising of the guidelines applicable to property included in a historic district; and Notification to all contractors in the Roanoke Valley of the requirements for a Certificate of Appropriateness for improvements to property in a historic district. Council Member Cutler expressed appreciation to the Architectural Review Board for its efforts and noted that the increase in property values in old southwest is something that the public should be aware of. He inquired if the Board had viewed the C2C housing projects on display at the Art Museum and if any of the designs would be appropriate in old southwest. Mr. Richert responded that he had viewed the designs, Members of the Board believe that several of the designs have potential, especially on a vacant lot on Day Avenue, S. W.; and the biggest challenge for the Board is the blend that affects the streetscape within a historic district. 93 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick expressed appreciation to the Board for its dedication and commended Old Southwest on its grace and ability to continue to push ahead. He also suggested that a press release be issued with regard to home ownership and information concerning the progress in Old Southwest. With regard to certain concerns in connection with the proposed zoning ordinance, Mr. Richert advised that every parcel of land in the City of Roanoke will be rezoned under the new zoning ordinance. He further advised that most of the residential property in Old Southwest was zoned RM-2, Residential Multifamily, Medium Density District, and Old Southwest is promoting conversion of multi- family structures to single family homes. He stated that Old Southwest, Inc., has proposed that most of the old southwest neighborhood be zoned single-family in order to prevent conversions to multi-family structures. The City Manager advised that the proposed new zoning ordinance will implement new overlay districts and contain legal restrictions with regard to zoning exclusively to one category. Mr. Townsend indicated that the proposed zoning ordinance will change how nonconformities are regulated. Council Member Wishneff questioned the process for adding areas to the historic district; whereupon, Mr. Townsend advised that national and State designation is initiated by the property owner and local designation is approved by the Board or City Council. Chairman Richert added that there are parcels of land in the City of Roanoke that have a historic overlay, but are not included on State or national historic registers. Council Member Wishneff inquired about a historic designation for tax purposes and whether it applied to home ownership; whereupon, Ms. Beckett Stated that very few applications were submitted by homeowners and the tax credits apply primarily to larger projects. Council Member Wishneff suggested that the public be aware that City staff is available to assist with completion of applications. There being no further business to come before the Council and the Architectural Review Board, at 1:10 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess. The Chair declared the meeting of the Architectural Review Board adjourned. 94 The Council meeting reconvened at 1:15 p.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, for a continuation of Council briefings, with all Members of Council in attendance, except Council Member Dowe, Mayor Harris presiding. Fire-EMS Station No. 1: James Grigsby, Chief, Fire/EMS, Stated that the briefing is a followup to questions and concerns raised by Council at the briefing which was held on Monday, January 3, 2005. He advised that: · The current Capital Improvements budget is $5,041,840.00. The Council presentation on January 3, 2005, identified minimum estimated additional resources of $301,740.00 (site construction and additional circulation in building due to site constraints) · Desired "add backs" include: Underground Electric Service $ Additional Fire Pole (2 total) $ Upgrade Exterior Finish (Add Precast) $ Roof Re-Design $ $ 20,000.00 18,000.00 115,000.00 35,000.00 188,000.00 Items to be bid as alternates: Fire Excursion Bay/Storage Additional Stair Flight between 2"* and 3'd floors $ 280,000.00 $ 108,000.00 $ 388,000.00 · Minimum additional resources: $371,740.00 + $188,000.00 = $489,740.00 independent cost estimates exceed this amount by $503,500.00 95 · Funding Available from EMS Fee Revenue: EMS Fee revenues can support over three years Borrow from Flood Reduction Program and repay over three years Building designs identified as Options 1, 2 and 3 were reviewed. Staff prefers Option No. 3 because of the aesthetic appeal of a full gable roof. Discussion/comments by Council: The design will result in the closing of Fire Stations :1 and 3; therefore, Council Member Wishneff advised that he could not support the closing of Station No. :1 on Church Avenue because it is the oldest continuous operating fire station in the country. The Mayor advised that the information provided by staff is responsive to the questions previously raised by Council. He concurred in the recommendation by staff with regard to Option No. 3 which is, aesthetically, the best. He added that the station will bring three elements together; i.e.: Station No. 3, Station No. 1 and the fire administration, and as Council and staff continue to move forward, there is a need for a certain level of sensitivity to old Fire Station No. :1. He stated a preference that Station No. 1 remain a City owned and operated facility, but he would not look with favor upon converting the building into a museum. He advised that he had previously inquired of the City Manager if old Fire Station No. I could be used in keeping with a public safety operation. The City Manager advised that it has been suggested that the consultant engaged to study the City Market area will also look at Fire Station No. ! as a part of the study to help identify the best use of the building in keeping with its historic significance, but not necessarily converting the building into a museum. The Mayor advised that when the fire administration moved into The Jefferson Center, it was intended to be a temporary location and it was the City's way of providing funds to The Jefferson Center project; Fire Station No. 3 is in a deteriorated condition and is ill located, etc., therefore, providing a permanent residence for fire administration, closing Fire Station No. 3, bringing the elements of downtown and Old Southwest fire protection under one roof is the right thing to do, but there is a sensitivity to the future use of old Fire Station No. 1. He reiterated his previous remarks regarding the use of old Fire Station No. i for a public safety function. 96 The Mayor advised that he supports additions to the budget for Fire Station No. 3 which is responsive to the request of Council. Council Member Cutler concurred in the remarks of the Mayorwith regard to the future use of Fire Station No. 1. He spoke in support of Option No. 3 for Fire Station No. 3, and inquired about landscaping and at what point the Roanoke Arts Commission would be involved with regard to art acquisition for Station No. 3. The City Manager advised that it was her understanding that the Roanoke Arts Commission does not wish to address specific recommendations or pieces of art until the Arts Master Plan is completed; the Arts Commission is aware of the project and if the Arts Commission would like to make recommendations for any of the buildings that are under design or construction, they may do so. She stated that the only other decision that the Council has made regarding the Arts Master Plan is an agreement to purchase the Best of Show each year from the Annual Art Show, with funds to be taken from the Percent for the Arts Program. Chief Grigsby advised that with approval by the artist, it is proposed to move the fire fighters memorial from its current location at the entrance to the Virginia Museum of Transportation to Fire Station No. 3 to serve as an anchor art piece. The Mayor left the meeting and the Vice-Mayor presided over the remainder of the work session. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that all options for Fire Station No. ! should be explored, and some persons would prefer that Fire Station No. 1 become a fire and rescue museum since Roanoke was the first location to have a volunteer rescue squad. He stated that he would also prefer to retain the building as a City property, but all options should be explored because Roanoke is beginning to gain a reputation as a transportation mecca in terms of museums. The Vice-Mayor noted that there appears to be a consensus of the Council to approve Option No. 3 for Fire Station No. 3. Prior to her coming to Roanoke, the City Manager advised that a former Mayor had announced that not only would the City give old Fire Station No. 1 to the Julian Stanley Wise Museum, but the City would donate $1 million for that purpose; however, she was advised by the Council that the Council had not participated in the decision, nor was the City Manager to consider such to be the direction by the Council to the City Manager. 97 Roanoke River Right-of-Way Proposed Riparian Corridor Overlay District: Steven C. Buschor, Director, Parks and Recreation, presented information about the potential of developing a Riparian Corridor Overlay District in the City of Roanoke and the benefits associated with the District. He advised that: Internal benefits would allow the City to provide active/passive recreation opportunities, aesthetic and scenic views, environmental/ecological values which would preserve open space, maintain tree canopy, preserve water quality and habitat, serve as flood retention, and minimize erosion. External benefits would link neighborhoods to schools, retail and shopping areas and other parks; and serve as a buffer between land uses, and increased property valuation "Proximate Principle" "Proximate Principle" is defined as follows: In the green strip along the riparian corridor, it has been determined that property associated within 500 feet of a green space will increase in value and one of the benefits is called the "Proximate Principle." The "Proximate Principle" uses an economic method that talks about how natural resources and application of natural resources impact associated property values; secondary benefits occur as the Corridor is developed and there is an opportunity for future economic development growth. The third component of the concept of "Proximate Principle" involves the willingness of persons to pay for higher valued property next to the green infrastructure which increases property values and assessment and ultimately increases property taxes. An example of the "Proximate Principle" is: If the City invests $90,000.00 per year to service construction or renovation of a park, values of properties proximate to the park increase, annual property taxes paid by proximate principles incrementally increase, and the City is fully reimbursed its $90,000.00 annual financial investment by the incremental increases which continues to cycle as properties are acquired. 98 A graph was presented demonstrating the principle in linear fashion which shows that the closer the park is located to residential sections of property, the higher the appraisal value. The following is a short list of localities/organizations that have endorsed the "Proximate Principle:" The National Recreation and Parks Association Dr. John R. Compton, Texas A&M University Frederick Law Olmstead The Conservation Fund Boston Park Commission New York Department of Natural Resources Kansas City Missouri District of Columbia Teton County, Wyoming City of Fort Worth, Texas City of Bellevue, Washington American Planning Association Trust for Public Lands Photographs were shown of unusual development along river corridors throughout the country, such as in Providence, Rhode Island, Reno, Nevada, Kansas City, Missouri, and Asheville, North Carolina. Photographs were shown with regard to the impacts to existing river corridors and on proximate values. Mr. Buschor requested that Council support an effort to secure easements, rights-of-way, and the acquisition of land necessary to establish a "Riparian Corridor Overlay District" for the City of Roanoke. R. Brian Townsend, Director, Planning Building and Development, advised that acquisition of easements and rights-of-way is different than regulating the use of property. He stated that the new zoning ordinance will include a River and Creek Overlay District for all contributories to the Roanoke River and clarified that the zoning ordinance does not acquire land, but restructures how land can be used; therefore, the zoning ordinance should not be perceived as a means of taking use of property. 99 The City Manager suggested that City staff provide Council with a list of currently owned City property, acquired easements and rights-of-way, following which Council could make a decision with regard to establishment of a program for acquiring property and creation of a Riparian Corridor Overlay District. Dr. Cutler advised that he would favor City owned land along the Roanoke River to be designated as park land. The Vice-Mayor advised that the consensus of Council is that the Riparian Corridor Overlay District concept should continue to be explored by City staff and that staff provide additional information with regard to what needs to be done based on the City's land, while taking into consideration the Comprehensive Plan and issues regarding zoning, etc. Mr. Buschor advised that City staffwill present a Council briefing with regard to those parcels of land that are currently owned by the City and those that should be pursued in connection with establishment of a Riparian Corridor Overlay District. So that all processes will be together, the City Manager suggested that information also be included in connection with the proposed River and Creek Overlay District in the new zoning ordinance, in order for Council to see how the 50 foot requirement would affect City owned property, irrespective of easements, etc. At :~:55 p.m., the Vice-Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess until 2:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia. The regular meeting of Roanoke City Council re¢onvened at 2:00 p.m., on Monday, February 7, 2005, in the Roanoke City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with the following Council Members in attendance, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. PRESENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler, Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff, and Mayor C. Nelson Harris .............................................................. 6. ABSENT: Council Member Alfred T. Dowe,Jr.- ....................... ].. 100 The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Mayor Harris. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led by Mayor Harris. PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: SISTER CITIES-ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT-SCHOOLS: The Mayor welcomed and introduced middle school students from Wonju, Korea, Roanoke's Sister City. He advised that students were participating in a student exchange program through William Ruffner Middle School and students from Roanoke's middle schools will visit Wonju this summer as a part of the exchange program. He presented the following students with an Honorary Citizen Certificate: Nam Yurt Kyung Im Jin Sol Klm Dan Bi LeeJe Hun Park Ji Yoon Jeon Sun Min Kang Na Ye Klm Hyung Min Klm Sung Wook KimJong UI Rim Ha Seung Hoon Lee Jae Ho Park EuiJeong ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT-DECEASED PERSONS: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution expressing sympathy upon the passing of Hunter Booker Andrews, former Virginia State Senator, on January 13, 2005: (#36949-020705) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Hunter Booker Andrews, who served as a Senator in the Virginia State Senate for 32 years. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 251.) 101 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36949- 020705. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) The Mayor called for a moment of silence in memory of Mr. Andrews. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT-DECEASED PERSONS: Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution expressing sympathy upon the passing of Eunice R. Poindexter on Thursday, January I3, 2005: (#36950-020705) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Eunice R. Poindexter, a Roanoke native and former school teacher, church historian, and civil rights activist. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 252.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36950- 020705. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) The Mayor called for a moment of silence in memory of Ms. Poindexter. 102 ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT-DECEASED PERSONS: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution expressing sympathy upon the passing of William Armand Sowers, on Thursday, January 20, 2005: (#36951-020705) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late William Armand Sowers, a long-time Roanoke resident, well-known architectural engineer, and member of the Planning Commission for 16 years. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 254.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36951- 020705. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted bythe following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) The Mayor presented a ceremonial copy of the above referenced measure to Mrs. Sowers, and called for a moment of silence in memory of Mr. Sowers. PROCLAMATION-LIBRARIES: The Mayor presented a proclamation to Michael W. Ramsey, President, Roanoke Public Library Foundation, declaring the month of February 2005, as Love Your Library Month. Council Member Cutler called attention to correspondence from Assistant City Manager for Community Development, Rolanda B. Russell, advising that the Comprehensive Library Study is experiencing significant progress in identifying community needs and concerns, the focus of the study was modified to include a regional perspective and staff of Roanoke City and Roanoke County is investigating the viability of a regional library system. He advised that he participated in a field trip to Phoenix, Arizona, with the Comprehensive Library Study Committee on February 3 and 4, 2005, nine libraries were visited by the Committee where they observed great architecture, outstanding programming, particularly for younger children and teens, and library rooms that were designed by teens for teens which have proven to be successful. He assured citizens of the Roanoke Valley that the Library Study is well under way and will lead to an outstanding library system in Roanoke. 103 CONSENT AGENDA The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meetings of Council held on Monday, December 6, 2004, and Monday, December 20, 2004, were before the body. (For full text, see Minutes on file in the City'Clerk's Office.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) EASEMENTS-APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY-ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council schedule a public hearing for Tuesday, February 22, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in connection with conveyance of an easement across City- owned property to Appalachian Power Company at the Roanoke Civic Center facilities, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDanieland adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) 104 PARKS AND RECREATION-CITY PROPERTY-LEASES: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council schedule a public hearing for Tuesday, February 22, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in connection with lease renewal of the Alexander-Gish House, was before the body. The City Manager advised that the original lease of the Alexander-Gish House at 641 Walnut Avenue, S. W., by the Old Southwest Neighborhood Alliance, was authorized pursuant to Ordinance No. 24929 adopted on December 10, 1979; on May 11, 1981, alease assignment transfer to the Old Southwest Neighborhood Foundation, Incorporated, was approved by the City Manager; and Old Southwest, Inc., has resided at the location since December 10, 1979. It was further advised that the lease expired on December 31, 2004, with no provision for an automatic renewal; Old Southwest, Inc., has requested a new lease agreement with similar terms and conditions; and the previous lease contained a five year term at an annual lease rate of $1.00. The City Manager recommended that Council authorize the City Clerk to advertise a public hearing on the above referenced lease for Monday, March 21, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) BUDGET: A communication from the City Manager recommending that Council adopt the following Calendar of Events for Budget Preparation Activities for fiscal year 2005-2006, was before Council. 105 April 11-15, 2005 City Manager briefs City Council on Recommended budget. April 14, 2005 Recommended budget document delivered to City Council members. April 18, 2005 Recommended budget presented to City Council at regularly scheduled meeting; meeting continued to April 28. April 19, 2005 Advertisements of public hearings on recommended budget and tax rates appear in newspapers. Note: State Code requires the for the fiscal year. advertisement of the real property tax rate April 28, 2005 Public hearings on recommended budget and tax rates at 7:00 p.m. May 4 and 5, 2005 Budget Study - 8:30 a.m. - 5:.00 p.m. (continuation of May 2 meeting). May 10, 2005 City Council adopts General Fund, School Fund, Proprietary Fund budgets and an Update to the HUD Consolidated Plan and approves an annual appropriation ordinance at 2:00 p.m. (continuation of May 2 meeting). Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the recommendation of the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) 106 COMMUNITY PLANNING: A communication from the City Planning Commission transmitting the 2004 Annual Report, was before Council. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the Annual Report be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) OATHS OF OFFICE-BUILDINGS/BUILDING DEPARTMENT: A communication from Bobby Lavender tendering his resignation as a member of the Board of Fire Appeals, was before Council. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council accept the resignation and receive and file the communication. The motion was seconded byCouncil Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... O. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMI'I-I-EES-COMMUNITY PLANNING-PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT-ROANOKE ARTS COMMISSION-COURT COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS BOARD-ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD-YOUTH-BLUE RIDGE BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE-ARTS COUNCIL OF THE BLUE RIDGE: The following reports of qualification were before Council: William H. Cleveland as a member of the Court Community Corrections Program Regional Community Criminal Justice Board, for a term ending June 30, 2007; Francine L. Craven to fill the unexpired term of F. B. Webster Day, resigned; and Mark H. Hurley to fill the unexpired term of Cheryl D. Evans, resigned, as members of the Youth Services Citizen Board, ending May 31, 2006; 107 Vincent G. Dabney as a member of the Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare Board of Directors, for aterm ending December 31, 2007; Donald C. Harwood as a member of the Architectural Review Board, for a term ending October 1, 2007; William C. Holland as a member of the Personnel and Employment Practices Commission, for aterm ending June 30, 2007; William B. Hopkins, Jr., as a member of the Roanoke Arts Commission, for a term ending June 30, 2007; and Robert B. Manetta as a member of the City Planning Commission, for a term ending December 31, 2008. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the reports of qualification be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ........................................................ 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) REGULAR AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: FIRST CITIES COALITION: Neal Barber, Executive Director, First Cities Coalition, reviewed the 2005 Legislative Agenda for the organization. He advised that overarching policies include: Realign State policies and funding formulas to reduce disproportionate economic, fiscal and demographic stresses and disparities on Virginia's fiscally stressed cities; The State should meet its funding responsibilities for the education of all students, for public safety, human services, transportation, and the personal property tax; and 108 The State should actively promote conditions to encourage the economic health of cities through employment, neighborhood redevelopment and revitalization of commercial areas. Legislative Priorities: Support new State education funding to restore 100% of the 2004 Federal funds deduction (29.1% of funds, $45 million, were not restored, a loss of $10.7 million to Virginia First Cities. Continue progress toward fully implementing and funding the State Board of Education's SOQ update and JLARC recommendations; Increase funding to assist those students most likely to fail the SOL's. Funds for at-risk programs should be distributed outside the SOQ Local Composite Index based on a 4-1 matching ratio; Eliminate the car-tax funding gap for Spring billing localities; provide adequate funding for previous year delinquencies and required system administrative changes; Dedicate $5 million to the DEQ Brownfield Development Assistance Fund; Reauthorize the Enterprise Zone program; increase funding and expand flexibility; Eliminate the auxiliary grant local match for Medicaid funded elderly and disabled residents in assisted living facilities. Program recipients tend to be concentrated in core cities; and Support measures which raise Statewide non-general fund taxes and fees to adequately maintain and expand the transportation network, especially for maintenance and reconstruction of streets, roads and bridges, public transportation and rail improvements. Legislative positions Education: Support new State education funding to: Restore 100% of the 2004 Federal funds deduction; 29.1% of funds ($45 million) were not restored during the 2004 session, a loss of $10.7 million to the 15 Virginia First Cities; 109 Increase funding to assist those students most likely to fail the SOL's. Funding for at-risk programs should be distributed outside the SOQ Local Composite Index based on a 4-1 matching ratio; Continue progress toward fully implementing and funding the State Board of Education's SOQ update recommendations and the JLARC education recommendations which are not reflected in the State Board of Education update; primarily addressing dropped administrative costs, adequate teacher salaries, capital costs, and prevailing instructional positions; and Support adding a density factor to the composite index to more accurately reflect local ability to pay for education. With a funding add-on, this inequity could be corrected without other localities losing education funds. Tax Restructuring: Oppose efforts to roll back the tax measures passed in 2004. These measures generate revenue necessary to support State and local core services; Eliminate the car-tax funding gap for Spring billing localities; provide adequate funding for previous year delinquencies and required system administrative changes; The State should continue to consider ways to restructure service responsibilities to reduce the disproportionate service costs by any locality for education, public safety, human services and infrastructure. Transportation Priorities: Support measures which raise Statewide non-general fund taxes and fees to maintain and expand the transportation network; especially for street, road, bridge maintenance and reconstruction, public transportation and rail improvements; Increase the State share of capital and operating funds to preserve and expand public transportation; Support State incentives to extend public transportation service to regional employment centers; 110 Continue to fund street maintenance at least at the same growth rate as VDOT maintenance, reducing funding disparities between City street maintenance and State maintained roads; · Increase bridge repair funding; and Dedicate funds for intercity passenger rail, if significant new revenues are raised. Economic Development: Dedicate $5 million to the DEQ Brownfield Development Assistance Fund; Reauthorize the Enterprise Zone program, increase funding and expand flexibility; Dedicate $5 million to the Derelict Structure Fund and Housing Revitalization Zone Program; Support legislation to permit localities to provide a partial exemption from real property taxation for real estate and associated new structures and improvements in conservation, redevelopment, or rehabilitation areas; When State discretionary economic development funds are used in urbanized areas, require coordination between the Secretary of Commerce and Trade, the Secretary of Transportation and the locality to coordinate workforce access transportation plans; and · Support State funding for arts and cultural facilities within cities. Public Safety: Full funding for HB 599. According to the Code of Virginia, 599 funds should increase at same rate as State revenue; · Ensure gang activity reduction funds are directed to core cities; Restore Juvenile Justice funds for local detention facilities and halfway houses. Funding was cut by 50% in 2003; · Increase Jail Per Diems; and 111 Support an enhancement category in the Virginia Sentencing Guidelines to increase penalties for offences committed with firearms in the City of Richmond. Human Services: Reduce the local share for localities that have a disproportionate number of children requiring CSA services; Increase the State share of administrative costs for the Comprehensive Services program. This helps to defray local costs of new data collection requirements and helps to make local program administration more efficient; Eliminate the auxiliary grant local match for Medicaid funded elderly and disabled residents in assisted living facilities. Program recipients tend to be concentrated in core cities; and Support increases in Medicaid eligibility levels and reimbursement rates to keep essential Medicaid services available to needy populations. Urban Policy: The Administration should publish and make publicly available a report of the findings and recommendations of the Governor's Urban Policy Task Force prior to December 2004; and Establish an Urban Policy Commission to track an urban report card on the health of metropolitan areas and progress toward improving urban conditions as required by Code Section 2.2-206. Council Member Wishneff advised that cultural non-State agencies were placed back in the State's budget, and inquired if such action indicates the importance of cultural agencies to the development of communities. Mr. Barber responded that it recognizes that cultural institutions are important to the communities and the agencies have gone for several years without State funding; and secondly, funds represent one time appropriations to be used for improvements to facilities and do not represent a long term obligation by the State. 112 Council Member Lea referred to legislative priorities regarding Public Safety which address support of and enhancement to the Virginia Sentencing Guidelines to increase penalties for offenses committed with firearms in the City of Richmond. He inquired if other cities may participate in the guidelines because violence involving crimes where fire arms are used in senseless ways is taking place all over the country. Mr. Barber advised that the First Cities Coalition is willing to be an advocate on behalf of all of its member cities because of the need to have safe streets and safe communities; it is necessary to address existing crime and to deal with the perception of crime; many citizens of the region often see cities as being more crime ridden than they actually are; if one looks at safety over all, rather than just crime, cities are safer than some of the suburbs, therefore, the challenge is to convey the message not only in a public sense, but in a legislative sense. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: Phillip F. Sparks, Executive Director, Roanoke Valley Economic Development Partnership, advised that: The Regional Partnership was founded in August 1983 by Roanoke Valley business and government leaders; and the first fix partners were Botetourt County, Roanoke County, City of Roanoke, City of Salem and the Town of Vinton; Craig and Franklin Counties joined the Partnership in 1990; Allegheny County and the City of Covington joined in 2004; and the Partnership is supported by approximately 240 private-sector investors; The Mission of the Regional Partnership is to successfully recruit new businesses to the area, while fostering expansion of the existing industrial base; Since 1983, there have been $928 million in announced new investment, 12,090 in announced new jobs and 89 different companies; Since 2000, there have been $206.7 million in announced new investment, 2,657 in announced new jobs and 22 different companies; The average cost per job created since 2000 is $1,580.70 (average salary for the jobs is $27,000.00; 113 For every $1.00 given to the Partnership in the past five years, $49.21 in announced new investment has been created; For every $1.00 given in the past three years, $16.22 in new payroll has been created; and Notable successes include Integrity Windows & Doors, Cardinal Glass, Novozymes Biologicals, Trinity Packaging and expansions at Maple Leaf, MW Windows and Arkay. The Regional Partnership engages in an aggressive market program; i.e.: Advertising - 205 'ads placed, approximately 1,000 inquiries, and reached 6.5 million readers; Trade shows - 47 shows, exposure estimated 92,000 companies, eight with New River Valley and Shenandoah Valley Partnership; and Marketing Missions include: 16 missions, 160 qualified leads, 15 suspects, three prospects, eight with New River Valley Alliance, Toronto, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Detroit, New York/New Jersey and Northern Florida, Boston, Northern California, and Pittsburgh Public Relations - at least 150 placement and reached approximately six million readers; Regionalism includes joint marketing with the New River Valley Alliance (brochure, eight marketing missions and eight trade shows) and 1-81 Corridor (Shenandoah Valley Partnership); and The Regional Brand has taken a leadership role and a billboard is on display at the Roanoke Regional Airport. Council MemberWishneffinquired as to what action(s) the City could take in order to receive a better share of potential economic development prospects; whereupon, Mr. Sparks advised that a goal of the Regional Partnership is to make frequent appearances before marketing managers of the Virginia Economic Development Partnership (VEDP); and eight prospects from the VEDP visited the Roanoke area in 2004 which is an outstanding record inasmuch as some regions in the State did not have any visits. 114 Mr. Wishneff raised questions with regard to the affect of air service to Roanoke on economic development. Mr. Sparks responded that he served on a committee that was appointed to look at economic development in depressed areas and air service represents an issue for localities outside of the Tidewater area; there are no discount air carriers in Richmond, Roanoke or Bristol, therefore, it is necessary to either drive to Dulles, Greensboro, Newport News or Norfolk for lower cost air service; and addressing discount rate air service is a State wide issue. Council Member McDaniel inquired as to what is the one biggest obstacle to economic development for the Roanoke region. Mr. Sparks responded that the biggest obstacle is the 2.6 per cent unemployment rate because when an individual checks the unemployment rate on the web site, there is no opportunity to explain that persons commute from a 60 mile radius to Roanoke. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that when the Regional Partnership learns of a project, information is provided to every government that participates in the Partnership, and the governmental entity decides whether it has a parcel of land, or an existing building, etc., that might be appropriate for the prospect's need; however, in the past, it was not handled in that manner, therefore, he commended current leadership of the Regional Partnership for instituting a more equitable procedure. He stated that the future of western Virginia depends on local government and not on the Virginia Department of Economic Development and the Regional Partnership; therefore, localities must do their homework, determine what is important to make the localities competitive; one of the most difficult issues is that one-third of all persons over 25 years of age in this region do not have a high school education, oraGED diploma, which does not place the localities in the best position ifa prospective business is looking to relocate; the State will not address the education problem at the adult level to the extent that it needs to be addressed; and the issue should be addressed at the local level because of the direct benefits to the region. He called attention to the importance of first impressions that will encourage representatives of prospective businesses to visit Roanoke because at that point the Roanoke Valley will sell itself as a great place to live and work. 115 Mr. Sparks expressed appreciation to the City Manager for her support of the Regional Partnership. The City Manager advised that the Roanoke area needs to do a better job of marketing itself; as a region and as a City, the Roanoke area is not spending the kind of dollars that are necessary to showcase Roanoke; and at some point, either as a single jurisdiction or as a region, a decision will need to be made, whether it be the Roanoke Valley's own brand or a new Virginia brand, etc. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: CITY MANAGER: BRIEFINGS: NONE. ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION: TRAFFIC-STATE HIGHWAYS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that in response to declining transportation funding at the State level, the Virginia Municipal League adopted the following policy Statement at its 2004 annual meeting: "VML ca/is upon the governor and the Genera/Assemb/y to make transportation a primary focus of the 2005 Genera/Assemb/y session. Given the failure of the Genera/ Assemb/? to address this issue during the 2004 session and the consequent dec//ne in transportation funding, the Commonwea/th is experiencing disinvestment in /ts transportation infrastructure. Absent a major infusion of new and sustained investment in transportation, Virginia faces a congest/on and mob///ty crisis that w/ii strangle economic growth and profound/y and negat/ve/y affect the qua//ty of//fe of a// res/dents." (Adopted October 5, 2004). It was further advised that recognizing the importance of transportation within the State and in support of the Statement, a number of local governments have adopted resolutions to make known to the Governor and to the General Assembly their opinions on Statewide transportation issues. 116 The City Manager explained that given the improvements needed along the 1-581 and Route 220 corridors within the City limits and with the number of urban projects included in VDOT's recent update of the Six-Year Improvement Plan, receipt of funding allocated in the Plan is critical; projects important for the City of Roanoke include improvements along Wonju Street in the vicinity of Towers Mall, improvements on 10th Street, and construction of a connection between Hollins Road and 13'h Street; and with Statewide transportation needs estimated at more than $200 billion over the next 20 years, the City of Roanoke should consider all steps necessary to ensure receipt of funding. in addition, it was explained that while the direct financial benefits to the City of Roanoke may be unknown, the transportation industry and municipalities alike should strongly support an emphasis on transportation funding and innovative solutions to transportation concerns; and safe, efficient transportation has a far-reaching effect on many areas of the daily lives of citizens ranging from economic development, recreation, and quality of life to construction and all associated support activities. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution calling upon the Governor and the General Assembly to make transportation a primary focus of the 2005 Session of the Virginia General Assembly. Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#36952-020705) A RESOLUTION urging the Governor and the General Assembly to make transportation a primary focus of the 2005 Session of the General Assembly. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 255.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36952- 020705. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... O, (Council Member Dowe was absent.) 117 CITY CODE-TAXES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that §58.1-3661, Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, allows the governing body of any county, city, or town to adopt an ordinance to grant an exemption from taxation on certified solar energy equipment, facilities, or devices to owners of real estate to which said equipment, facilities, or devices is attached; and in light of the C2C housing competition and the potential that a number of houses planned for construction will incorporate renewable energy systems into designs, it is appropriate that the City consider an ordinance that will allow an exemption for persons interested in operating solar energy equipment to heat or cool real property, which will further signal Roanoke's commitment to preserving its environment by encouraging the use of alternative energy sources. A summary of major components of the program is as follows: The amount of exemption will be determined by applying the tax rate to the value of the certified solar equipment, facilities, or devices and subtracting that amount from the total real estate property tax due on the real property to which such equipment, facilities, or devices are attached, or if such equipment, facilities, or devices are taxable as machinery and tools, from the total machinery and tool tax due on such equipment, facilities, or devices, at the election of the taxpayer. (State law requires that localities offer this election to taxpayers.) The exemption shall be effective for five years, and can apply to properties installing new solar equipment, facilities, or devices as well as to properties with existing solar equipment, facilities, or devices, and The exemption will be administered by the Department of Planning, Building, and Development, the Department of Real Estate Valuation, the Commissioner of the Revenue's Office, and the City Treasurer's Office. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance amending Article II, Real Estate Taxes Generally, Chapter 32, Taxation, Code of the City of Roanoke, (1979), as amended, by the addition of a new Division 8, Tax Exemption for Solar Energy Equipment, Facilities, and Devices, consisting of §§ 32-103.5 - 32-103.17. 118 Council Member McDaniel offered the following ordinance: (#36953-020705) AN ORDINANCE amending Article II, Real Estate Taxes Generally, Chapter 32, Taxation, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by the addition of a new Division 8, Tax Exemption for Solar EnerQv EQuipment, Facilities and Devices, consisting of §§32-103.5 - 32-103.17, in order to provide a tax exemption for equipment, facilities and devices designed and used primarily for the collection and use of incident solar energy for water heating, space heating, cooling or other application which would otherwise require a conventional source of energy; and dispensing with the second reading by title paragraph of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 258.) Council Member McDaniel moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36953- 020705. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... O. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) The City Manager called attention to the cooperation of the City Treasurer who has agreed to take on additional responsibility to ensure appropriate billing. CITY CODE-TAXES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that in the fall of 2004, Council was briefed on proposed changes for participation in the City's program that allows tax exemptions for rehabilitation of residential, commercial, and industrial real property; on October 18, 2004, Council adopted recommendations on commercial, industrial, and multi-use property; and Council requested that the recommendations regarding rehabilitation of residential property be re-evaluated in coordination with development of the Housing Strategic Plan. 119 It was further advised that subsequent to the October 18, 2004 Council meeting, City staff met with the Housing Strategic Planning Steering Committee to obtain comments and to receive input from K. W. Poore & Associates, Inc.; and there was further analysis and research of the previous recommendations. The City Manager explained that as a result, recommended changes to the residential portion of the program now include: Eliminating restrictions on increased square footage on residential real property. Currently, total square footage must not be increased by more than 15 per cent. For a residential structure with an assessed value below $10,000.O0, allowing an exemption if the structure is demolished provided that the replacement structure is a single-family residence with an assessed value of at least 120 per cent of the median value of other dwelling units in the neighborhood. The exemption shall'not apply, however, when any structure demolished is a registered Virginia landmark, or is determined by the Department of Historic Resources to contribute to the significance of a registered historic district. Currently, an exemption shall not apply when any existing structure is demolished or razed and a replacement structure is constructed. For any residential structure which has an assessed value, prior to rehabilitation, equal to or greater than $300,000.00, the exemption shall begin on July 1st of the tax year following completion of the rehabilitation, renovation, or replacement and shall only run with the real estate for three years. This will apply regardless of its historic designation, its location, or the per cent net reduction in number of dwelling units after rehabilitation. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance amending and reordaining Division 5, Exemption of Certain Rehabilitated Real Property, Section 32-95, Eligibility of residential real property, and Section 32-100, Demolition, Chapter 32, Taxation, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by amending the eligibility requirements for tax exemption as above described. 120 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#36954-020705) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining §32-95, Eliqibility of residential real oroDertv, and §32-100, Demolition, Division 5, Exemption of Certain Rehabilitated Real Property, Chapter 32, Taxation, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by amending the eligibility requirements for tax exemption; establishing a limitation on number of years certain exemptions can exist, and by adding an exception to the applicability of exemptions for real property on which demolition of structures have occurred; and dispensing with the second reading by title paragraph of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 262.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36954- 020705. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... O. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) BUDGET-EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Virginia Department of Health, Office of Emergency Medical Services, administers a Rescue Squad Assistance Fund (RSAF) grant program which is awarded twice annually; Roanoke Fire-EMS applied in September 2004 for the grant in order to purchase 12 Lead EKGand Mass Casualty Equipment; the 12 Lead EKG equipment will be used to pilot test, in partnership with Carillon Health Systems and Lewis Gale Hospital, the benefits of performing 12 lead EKGs pre-hospital; and Mass Casualty Equipment will be used to update the City's Mass Casualty Incident trailer capability and modernize the equipment in light of today's needs. It was further advised that in January 2005, the State Office of Emergency Medical Services awarded Roanoke Fire-EMS a grant of $25,000.00 for the project, requiring $13,000.00 in matching funds; matching funds for the grant will be provided from the following outside sources: $4,500.00 from Carillon Health Systems, $4,500.00 from Lewis Gale Hospital and $4,000.00 from the Near Southwest Virginia Prepareness Alliance; and local cash funding from the City of Roanoke is not required. 121 The City Manager recommended that Council accept the grant and appropriate State grant funds of $25,000.00 and local contributions of $13,000.00, with corresponding revenue estimates in accounts to be established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund; and authorize the City Manager to execute any required grant agreements or documents to be approved as to form by the City Attorney. Council Member McDaniel offered the following budget ordinance: (#36955-020705) AN.ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Rescue Squad Assistance Fund Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 264.) Council Member McDaniel moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36955- 020705. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#36956-020705) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of the Rescue Squad Assistance Fund ("RSAF") Grant made to the City of Roanoke by the Virginia Department of Health, Office of Emergency Medical Services, and authorizing the execution and filing by the City Manager of the conditions of the grant and other grant documents approved as to form by the City Attorney. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 264.) 122 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36956- 020705. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted bythe following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... O. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) POLICE DEPARTMENT-BUDGET-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) provides grant funding for programs and activities which increase the al)prehension, prosecution and adjudication of persons committing violent crimes against women; the program, "Virginia Services, Training, Officers, Prosecution Violence Against Women" (V-STOP) has funded the establishment of a Domestic Violence Unit within the Police Department since 1999; the Domestic Violence Unit collects and interprets relevant domestic violence offense data which allows proactive case intervention and cultivation of the cooperative working relationships with clients and service/adjudication agencies; and the program produces more equitable victim-offender criminal justice dispositions related to domestic violence offenses. It was further advised that on December 16, 2004, DCJS awarded the Police Department $34,703.00 to employ a full-time, non-sworn Domestic Violence Specialist, thereby allowing continuation of the Domestic Violence Unit in calendar year 2005; the required City in-kind match of $11,567.00 will be met through salary paid to current Police Department personnel; there is no required local cash match due to an increase of less than one per cent in the grant award amount over last year; and the Police Department will be required to provide a cash match of $4,712.00 to continue to fully fund the salary portion of the Domestic Violence Specialist, which is available in the Police Department's operating budget. The City Manager recommended that Council accept the V-STOP grant and authorize execution of the grant agreement and any related documents, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney; appropriate State grant funds of $34,703.00 and local cash funds of $4,712.O0, with corresponding revenue estimates in accounts to be established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund; and transfer funds in the amount of $4,712.O0 from Account No. 035-640-3302-2035 to provide local cash funds. 123 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: (#36957-020705) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Police Department Domestic Violence Program Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 265.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36957- 020705. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#36958-020705) A RESOLUTION accepting the Virginia Services, Training, Officers, Prosecution (VSTOP) Violence Against Women Grant offer made to the City by the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services and authorizing execution of any required documentation on behalf of the City. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 266.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36958- 020705. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) 124 BUDGET-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Department of Social Services Employment Services Unit has experienced a 50 per cent increase in its Virginia Initiative for Employment Not Welfare (VIEW) caseloads over the past seven months which is attributed to a regional economy that continues to be difficult for the population that Roanoke serves, that often consists of individuals with a poor work history and limited skills that impede employability; cases also remain open for a longer period of time for similar reasons; it is evident that there are more clients with difficult and sometimes hidden barriers, such as mental health problems and substance abuse issues that require more attention and more intense services; and due to these factors, the department is experiencing an increased need for assessments, treatment and other purchased services that help enable customers to become more viable candidates for employment. It was further advised that the foster care unit in the Social Services Department (and typically throughout Virginia and the nation) experiences tremendous staff turnover and burnout; demands on foster care social workers are ever increasing; issues facing foster children and their families are much more complex compared to the past, and interventions require substantial staff time in order to be successful; and the Roanoke Interagency Council has identified staffing concerns as a significant problem, and is developing several strategies to address staffing levels and staff competency. It was explained that State funds for VIEW services pay 100 per cent of all program costs, including direct services for clients, equipment needs and staff salaries and benefits; the State budget for the VlEVV program is in excess of the City's adopted budget for Employment Services; there is an additional $126,500.00 in fiscal year 2005 State funding available for use by the VIEW program; funds can be used to hire two additional employment service workers, purchase the necessary equipment and workspace reconfigurations, as well as meet the increasing needs for purchased services such as work assessments and supplies that are necessitated by the larger client caseload; and incremental personnel cost increase for the remainder of fiscal year 2005 is $13,575.00, with the full year's cost being $80,244.00. It was further explained that the VDSS has allocated City funds this year under the Promoting Safe and Stable Families (PSSF) program that will fund a part- time foster care social worker; and the incremental personnel cost increase for the remainder of fiscal year 2005 is $6,687.00, with the full year's cost being $20,061.00. 125 The City Manager recommended that Council take the following actions: Authorize the Department of Social Services to increase staff complement by two full-time employment services workers (grade 11) and one part-time social worker (grade 11) for foster care. Authorize the Director of Finance to increase the revenue estimate for Employment 'Services, Account No. 001-110-1234-0681, by the amount of $69,175.00, and appropriate funds to the following accounts: 001-630-5316-1002 001-630-5316-1005 001-630-5316-1116 '001-630-5316-1120 001-630-5316-1125 001-630-5316-1126 001-630-5316-1130 001-630-5316-1131 001-630-5316-2020 001-630-5316-3160 001-630-5316-2035 (Regular Employee Salaries) $ (City Retirement) $ (ICMA Match) $ (FICA) $ (Medical Insurance) $ (Dental Insurance) $ (Life Insurance) $ (Disability Insurance) $ (Telephone) $ (Purchased Services) $ (Expendable Equipment) $ 10,001.00 977.00 225.00 782.00 1,180.00 78.00 114.00 26.00 120.00 43,222.00 12,450.00 TOTAL $ 69,175.00 Authorize the Di-rector of Finance to transfer $6,803.00 from Account No. 001-630-5314-3160 (Purchased Services) to the following accounts: 001-630-5314-1002 001-630-5314-1005 001-630-5314-1116 001-630-5314-1120 001-630-5314-1125 001-630-5314-1126 001-630~5314-1130 001-630-5314-1131 (Regular Employee Salaries) $ 5,000.00 (City Retirement) $ 488.00 (ICMA Match) $ 225.00 (FICA) $ 391.00 (Medical Insurance) $ 590.00 (Dental Insurance) $ 39.00 (Life Insurance) $ 57.00 (Disability Insurance) $ 13.00 TOTAL $ 6,803.00 126 Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance: (#36959-020705) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the Commonwealth for increased staffing in the Department of Social Services, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 General Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 267.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36959- 020705. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. Council Member Cutler referred to an additional appropriation of $ 500,000.00 in Social Services expenses, or reimbursement to the City of Roanoke by the Commonwealth of Virginia; whereupon, the City Manager advised than the additional reimbursement from the State was previously considered as a non reimbursable; as of the end of the first six months, the City has significantly decreased the amount of non reimbursables for the current fiscal year and significant progress is being made. Ordinance No. 36959-020705 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... O. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) GREENWAY SYSTEM-STATE HIGHWAYS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has been negotiated that would establish a cooperative effort between the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) and the City of Roanoke for the temporary use of non-limited access rights-of-way along 1-581 between the Orange Avenue interchange and Walker Avenue on the west side of 1-581; the Agreement is for the temporary placement of a portion of the Lick Run Greenway on the VDOT non- limited access rights-of-way, pending future roadway corridor modifications; the Memorandum of Understanding requires Council to request VDOT's permission to temporarily place a portion of the greenway on VDOT's non-limited access 1-58Z rights-of-way; and Council will be requested to agree to have the City of Roanoke pay all costs associated with removing the greenway at such time as future roadway corridor modifications necessitate removal, if and when removal is requested by VDOT. 127 The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the Memorandum of Understanding dated January 20, 2005, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney, between the City of Roanoke and the Virginia Department of Transportation for temporary use of non-limited rights-of-way along 1-581 between the Orange Avenue interchange and Walker Avenue on the west side of 1-581; and that the City Manager be authorized to take such further action as may be necessary to implement and comply with such Memorandum of Understanding, including removal of the greenway, if such becomes necessary. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resoluti, on: (#36960-020705) A RESOLUTION approving a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) and the City of Roanoke for the temporary use of non-limited access rights-of- way along 1-581 in connection with the Lick Run Greenway; authorizing the City Manager to execute such MOU; and authorizing the City Manager to take such further action as may be necessary to implement and comply with such MOU. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 268.) Vice-May. or Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36960- 020705. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler. The City Manager was requested to. PrOvide further clarification of the recommendation and a time frame for greenway completion; whereupon, she advised that the matter involves the completion of Phase II of the Lick Run Greenway which begins at Valley View Mall and currently ends at Andrews Road and will involve the crossing of 10'~ Street through two parks to include Washington Park. She stated that with approval by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), the project will cross Orange Avenue, go behind the Holiday Inn Express and several other businesses, and pick up the greenway on Second Street along the creek bed. Without VDOT's approval, she added that the greenway would have been constructed on concrete or sidewalk for the entire way, therefore, this is a significant enhancement of the greenway itself; and since VDOT has given its approval, the project will be bid as soon as possible with construction and completion of the greenway anticipated to occur during the current calendar year. 128 Resolution No. 36960-020705 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) STATE HIGHWAYS-RAIL SERVICE-INDUSTRIES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that FreightCar Roanoke, Inc., is locating a facility in the former Norfolk' Southern East End Shops in the City of Roanoke to produce aluminum railroad cars; the site needs upgrades to the rail lines costing in excess of $2,000,000.00; FreightCar Roanoke, Inc., has approached the City of Roanoke to support FreightCar!s application to the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) Railroad Industrial Access Program for funds to help defray a portion of the cost; the application must be supported by the City and accompanied by a resolution from the local governing authority in support of the al0plication; and the City of Roanoke will not incur any monetary obligation to provide any part of the funds. It was further advised that the Company will invest $5.545 million and hire 400 employees in the next 30 months; FreightCar Roanoke, Inc., is the same company receiving a $200,000.00 Governor's Opportunity Fund (GOF) Grant, which GOF amount will be matched by the City; as part of the project, the Company is requesting $300,000.00 in Industrial Access Railroad Track Funds from the Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT); and, in addition, if the Company spends an additional $300,000.00 in upgrading the railroad track, the Company is requesting DRPT to grant additional monies equal to $150,000.00. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution in support of the application; authorize the City Manager to execute and/or provide appropriate documents for the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation for the Railroad Industrial Access Program, in connection with the application of FreightCar Roanoke, Inc., to assist the Company in obtaining up to $450,000.00 in Program funds and to State the City's support for FreightCar Roanoke, Inc., to receive such Program funds from the Commonwealth of Virginia. 129 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#36961-020705) A RESOLUTION supporting the application or other documents to be filed with the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation by FreightCar Roanoke, Inc., for up to $450,000.00 in Industrial Access Railroad Track Funds and to State the City's support for FreightCar Roanoke, Inc., receiving such funds. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 269.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36961- 020705. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... O. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) CITY ATTORNEY: INDUSTRIES-LEASES: The City Attorney submitted a written report advising that the City entered into a Lease and Option to Purchase Agreement on July 7, 1983, with Cooper Industries, Inc., with regard to Parcels 2 and 6 at the Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology (RCIT); pursuant to the Agreement, Cooper Industries leased Parcel 2 with the right to purchase for 40 years, and was given the right to lease or purchase Parcel 6 for the same time period; and Cooper Industries, Inc., has requested that the City agree to the assignment of the 1983 agreement to a newly-created subsidiary, Cooper Crouse-Hinds, LLC. The City Attorney further advised that the City Manager concurs in the request. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: 130 (#36962-020705) AN ORDINANCE authorizing execution of a Consent to Assignment and endorsement of an Assignment and Assumption Agreement whereby the City of Roanoke approves the assignment and assumption by Cooper Industries, Inc., of its right, title and interest in, to and under a certain lease and Option to Purchase to Cooper Crouse-Hinds, LLC; and dispensing with the second reading by title paragraph of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 270.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36962- 020705. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ........................................................ 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... O. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) VALLEY VIEW MALL: The City Attorney submitted a communication advising that the City plans to sponsor Citizen Appreciation Day at Valley View Mall on April 30, 2005; the new owners of Valley View Mall, CBL & Associates Management, Inc., require that the City execute an agreement containing a provision which requires that the City agree to indemnify and hold harmless CBL and to defend CBL in the event that anyone is injured or anything is damaged during the City's use of the premises; and only Council can waive the City's sovereign immunity and agree to such provision, which provision CBL has refused to delete. Council Member McDaniel offered the following resolution: (#36963-020705) A RESOLUTION authorizing the waiver of the City's sovereign immunity in connection with the city's use of Valley View Mall for Citizen Appreciation Day, and authorizing execution of an agreement with Valley View Mall, LLC, through its agent, CBL Associates Management, Inc., in connection with such use of Valley View Mall. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 271.) 131 Council Member McDaniel moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36963- 020705. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 6. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Director of Finance submitted the Financial Report for the month of December 2004. There being no questions or comments, without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the Financial Report for the month of December would be received and filed. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: NONE. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: NONE. MOTION AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: LEGISLATION: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick, Chair, Legislative Committee, reviewed the status of the following legislative issues: The transit company sales tax exemption was approved by the House Finance Committee by a 21 - ! vote, and the Senate version of the bill has been approved which allows Valley Metro to again be tax exempt. 132 For the second year, the Senate has approved funds for relocation of the Health Department; and the House of Representatives did not include funds, but allocated $2.9 million in the General Fund for four additional community crisis stabilization units. For cultural agencies, the House approved $4,900,000.00 for the Art Museum and the Senate approved $]. million; Center in the Square received $300,000.00 in the Senate and $100,000.00 in House; Explore Park received $400,000.00 in the Senate and $75,000.00 in the House; Mill Mountain Zoo received $50,000.00 in both the Senate and the House, and the Virginia Museum of Transportation received $400,000.00 in the Senate and $50,000.00 in the House. CITY TREASURER-TAXES: At the request of the Mayor, the City Treasurer announced that on Monday February 14, 2005, the City of Roanoke and the City Treasurer's Office will go live with the first e-government check on the City's web site at Pay Taxes and Bills; all data included on the e-government check will be encrypted and secure; and the e-government check is a convenient, safe and free- of-charge service that will be provided to Roanoke's taxpayers. She expressed appreciation to the City's Department of Technology for its assistance in establishing the on-line program. The Mayor and Vice-Mayor commended the CityTreasurer on the quality of service that her office provides to the citizens of Roanoke HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MAI-rERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. COMPLAINTS-LANDMARKS/HIST. PRESERVATION-GRANTS: Ms. Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue, N, E., advised that history reveals that African-American citizens experienced a major portion of northeast Roanoke having been taken for urban renewal; the same lust for land extended into northwest Roanoke when an 133 entire neighborhood was demolished for the Coca-Cola Bottling Plant, where numerous homes were torn down and two intrusive roads were built for the quick movement of traffic to and from downtown. She stated that struggles continue in the predominantly black neighborhoods and policies of the City of Roanoke have not been responsive or fair to the concerns and needs of African-American communities. She advised that sizeable amounts of taxpayers' moneywere spent or are under consideration to be spent for the Grandin Theatre, the O. Winston Link Museum, upscale housing at 8 North Jefferson Place, and trolleys for the Jefferson Street corridor only, etc. She stated that no effort was made to work with representatives of Carillon Health Systems to seek historic designation for the preservation of Burrell Nursing Center, nor was help offered to save the Harrison Museum of African-American Culture; and the Gainsboro Steering Committee previously requested funds to assist the Oliver White Hill Foundation toward preservation of the former home of Oliver Hill on Gilmer Avenue, but the request was denied. She stated that there appears to be a lack of concern for black history and the accomplishments of African-Americans, such as Oliver White Hill, who grew up in Roanoke on Gilmer Avenue and became one of America's premier civil rights lawyers. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: TAXES-REAL ESTATE VALUATION: The City Manager recognized and commended the assistance of the Director of Real Estate Valuation in connection with amendments to the Tax Exemption Program for rehabilitated real property which was approved by Council earlier in the meeting. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT-CITY EMPLOYEES-SNOW REMOVAL: The City Manager commended the work of City employees in connection with the clearing of City streets following recent snow and ice events. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT-RECYCLING: The City Manager commended the citizens of Roanoke for their efforts in connection with recycling, and reported that for another month, the City will pay no disposal fee for recyclable materials. VIRGINIA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE: The City Manager advised that a dinner was held on Thursday, February 3, 2005, in Richmond, Virginia, as a part of Virginia Municipal League Legislative Day activities, which was attended by representatives of not only the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County, but representatives of the New River Valley. She reported that regionalism continues to grow in the Roanoke Valley. 134 LANDMARKS/HIST. PRESERVATION: In response to the remarks previously made by Ms. Helen E. Davis, the City Manager advised that on numerous occasions the City administration has indicated a willingness to submit a recommendation to Council that the City will participate in the purchase of the Oliver White Hill house on Gilmer Avenue at such time as matching funds and a plan for maintenance of the structure are submitted by the Oliver White Hill Foundation. At 4:00 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for four Closed Sessions. At 5:05 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, with all Members of the Council in attendance, with exception of Mayor Harris and Council Member Dowe, Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick presiding. (Mayor Harris left the meeting during the Closed Session.) COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Council Member Cutler moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick .......................................................... 5. NAYS: None .................................................... O. (Council Member Dowe and Mayor Harris were absent.) At 5:03 p.m., the Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick declared the Council meeting in recess until Friday, February 18, 2005, at 9:30 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., for the Council's Annual Financial Planning Session. 135 The Monday, February 7, 2005, meeting of Roanoke City Council reconvened on Friday, February 18, 2005, at 9:30 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., for the Council's Annual Financial Planning Session. PRESENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler, Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ............................................................. 6. ABSENT: Council MemberAIfred T. Dowe,Jr. - ....................... 1. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. OTHERS PRESENT: TroyA. Harmon, Municipal Auditor; Geo.rge C. Snead,Jr., · Assistant City Manager for Operations; Ann H. Shawver, Deputy Director of Finance; and Sherman L. Stovall, Director of Management and Budget. The City Manager advised that the Financial Planning Session is held on an annual basis in order for staffto provide information to the Council on the budget outlook for the upcoming budget cycle. She stated that input by Council is needed as early as possible in the process once staff has an idea of what State revenue looks like. She added that there does not appear to be as many road blocks tO local funding at the General Assembly level this year, compared to last year, particularly since it is known that the car tax issue has failed for this year. Unlike previous years, she stated that this year, outside organizations have been requested to present budgets and justification for funds that have been requested from the City. The City Manager explained that because a certain amount of funds is dedicated to the payment of debt service in the operating budget, st'affwould also address the Capital Improvement Program, as well as operating budget issues, Mr. Stovall advised that the agenda for the day would focus on five elements of budget development for fiscal year 2005-2006, specifically revenue and expenditures assumptions and relevant issues, capital projects, looking back historically, current projects, and looking to the future. He stated that staff would also review the debt for capital projects, including current and future debt service, as well as review debt capacity, the status of balancing the fiscal year 2006 budget and issues regarding the dedicated use of capital fund interest earnings and a budget stabilization policy. 136 The Director of Finance reviewed projected revenue growth for fiscal year 2005-2006: Real Estate Tax Personal Property Tax Sales Tax Business License Tax Prepared Food Tax Other Local Taxes Intergovernmental Charges for Services Other Revenues Total $ 5,280,000.00 (1,346,000.00) 246,000.00 17,000.00 498,000.00 326,000.00 1,877,000.00 15,000.00 (84,000.00) $6,829,000.00 Mr. Stovall advised that the budget outlook for fiscal year 2005-2006 is generally positive, when compared to this time last year, with a number of challenges to overcome; challenges include maintaining and enhancing service levels, capital funding and employee compensation, and City departments were not asked to submit budgets with expenditure reductions. A chart was reviewed indicating no changes in the following local tax rates: Local Tax Tax Rate Real EState Tax Personal Property Tax Cigarette Tax (20 per pack) Transient Room Tax Admissions Tax E-911 Tax Motor Vehicle License Prepared Food & Beverage Tax Short Term Rental Tax $ 1.21 per $100.00 $ 3.45 per $100.00 $ 0.27 7% 9%/5.5% $ 2.00 $20.00 4% 1% Question was raised with regard to the no car tax legislation that capped the reimbursement to localities which will impact the City of Roanoke in fiscal year 2007. The Director of Finance advised that the State's budget that goes to fiscal year 2006 includes enough money to fully reimburse localities in that particular fiscal year and primarily affects the "spring filers" or those localities that have their tax due date set in the spring. He stated that the City can accrue funds owed into fiscal year 2006, so the primary impact is that the City of Roanoke will not receive about $7 million of cash that would normally be received in the May - June timeframe, but will be moved forward to July or August 2007; therefore, the biggest impact on the City of Roanoke will be the loss of cash flow for about two months at three per cent interest, or approximately $15,000.00 - $20,000.00. 137 Question was raised as to how many years are left on the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center bonds; whereupon, the Director of Finance advised that he would research the question and respond at a later time. Mr. Stovall reviewed priority funding items for fiscal year 2006. Continue sharing of local tax revenues with Roanoke City Public Schools based on the current formula of 36.42 per cent of local taxes - $1.8 million. He advised that the funding formula has served the City well over the years and has also served as a mechanism to keep the governing body and the school division from debating about the level of local support for the school division; and the formula has failed in that it does not take into consideration the level of funding that is provided to the schools in support of capital projects. The Mayor advised that in conjunction with the City Manager and the Director of Finance, he would like to initiate a discussion with the Chair of the School Board, the School's Chief Financial Officer, and the new Superintendent of Schools with regard to how to accommodate the amount contributed by the City toward capital projects and debt service, etc., as a part of the funding formula equation. · Increase in contribution rate for Employee Retirement System (9.56% to 12.61%) - $1.6 million · Increase in cost of Employee Health insurance - $.4 million There was discussion with regard to the City and the Schools participating in an employee health insurance program and other consolidation of services and programs; whereupon, the City Manager advised that a study would be initiated if the Council and the School Board would instruct their respective administrations to engage in an evaluation and investigation of certain services. During the monthly breakfast meetings, the Mayor advised thata number of issues have been discussed; i.e.: health insurance, human resources, finances, general services, building maintenance, fleet maintenance, etc., however, there is some hesitation in moving forward until the new Superintendent of Schools can be involved in the discussions. 138 Continue progress in providing competitive Employee Compensation; pay raise of 4% required to remain competitive - $3.1 million · Continue building debt capacity for planned capital projects - $.6 million. · Increase in funding for community agencies based on growth in discretionary revenue. · Maintaining and enhancing service levels · Other priority funding needs for fiscal year 2006 to fiscal year 2007 include: Continue City Council's priority to budget recurring funding in the operating budget for equipment replacement, building maintenance, paving and technology needs Equipment Replacement Current Funding Goal - $2.5 million by fiscal year 2007 $185,000.00 increase in fiscal year 2006 to $1,760,000.00 Reallocation of funding currently dedicated to vehicle lease will facilitate reaching the target by fiscal year 2008 Target may need to be revised to $3 million · Capital Maintenance of Buildings Funding goal - $750,000.00 by fiscal year 2007 $130,000.00 increase in fiscal year 2006 to $620,000.00 · Key Financial Assumptions Expenditures: Other priority funding needs for fiscal year 2005 to fiscal year 2007 139 Paving Program: Funding goal - $2.5 million by fiscal year 2007 $135,000.00 increase in fiscal year 2006 to $2,364,952.00 Technology- Financial Systems Replacement Project Current funding goal - $1.0 million by fiscal year 2007 $165,O00.00 increase in fiscal year 2006 to $841,247.00 Funding dedicated to financial application integration project through fiscal year 2008 Based on current staging of financial application integration project, there is a funding gap of $2.6 million Based on revised assessment of technology needs, target needs to be revised to $2 million Increased funding over the next four to five years to meet the revised target. Looking back, Mr. Stovall reviewed the 1999 bond issue totaling $36.1 million: · Elementary/Middle School improvements - $5 million · Buildings - $7.8 million Jefferson Center- Phase II Performance Hall - $1.6 million Police Building Phase I - $3.5 million Roanoke Higher Education Center - $2.5 million Miscellaneous Improvements - $.2 million 140 · Economic Development - $10.3 million Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology - $2.5 million Johnson and Johnson - $7.6 million Signalization Airport Road/Towne Square Blvd. - $.2 million · Park Improvements - $4.7 million · Storm Drains - $2.3 million · Bridge Projects - $2.3 million · Streets and Sidewalks - $3.7 million Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk Program - $1.7 million Street Improvements - $2.0 million It was noted that at the March 2000 Financial Planning Session, Council began planning for future capital projects, including discussion of the renovation of the first of two high schools; Council concurred in a recommendation to add $570,000.00 in debt service funding on an annual basis to build debt capacity for future projects, including the first high school; and Council agreed with a recommendation to include additional debt service funding in fiscal year 2001, above the $570,000.00 for Victory Stadium and the Riverside Centre. It was further noted that at the March 2001 Financial Planning Session, Council continued to plan for capital projects and the next bond issue, and discussed the following projects: Police Building - Phase II Riverside Centre Art Museum Park Master Plan/Multi-purpose Recreation Center Rail Passenger Station Human Services Building 141 Civic Center Improvements - Phase I Roanoke River Flood Reduction Greenways YMCA Aquatic Center Patrick Henry High School William Fleming High School Roanoke Academy for Mathematics and Science Crystal Spring Filter Plant Water Pollution Control Plant Mr. Stovall advised that Patrick Henry High School improvements increased from $35 million to $38 million and the cost of the William Fleming High School project was established at $40 million; the consensus of Council at that time was that there was a need to identify a funding source for the City's share of the debt service that would be required for William Fleming; and at that time the meals tax was identified as the possible source to fund debt service for William Fleming. He stated that these planning efforts resulted in the 2002 bond issue which totals approximately $56.2 million and included funding for: Schools - $4.6 million Roanoke Academy for Mathematics and Science Roanoke River Flood Reduction - $7.5 million Economic DevelOpment - $14.5 million Gainsboro Parking Garage - $2.5 million Riverside Centre for Research and Technology - $12 million Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk - $5 million Civic Facilities - $19.2 million Stadium/Amphitheater- $17 million Roanoke Civic Center Phase I - $2.2 million Crystal Spring Filtration Plant - $5.4 million 142 Mr. Stovall advised that during the March 2002 and March 2003 Financial Planning Sessions, Council discussed new capital projects under consideration and the planned issuance of debt and use of cash funding; and projects discussed included: Civic Center Phase II Fire-EMS Facilities Public Works Service Center Municipal North Renovation Storm Water Management Elementary School Renovations Council subsequently authorized debt issuance for Civic Center Phase II and Patrick Henry High School. Mr. Stovall advised that Council also discussed the increase in cost of the Patrick Henry High School project from $38 million to $46.7 million and the William Fleming High School Project from $40 million to $44.7 million, and Council subsequently authorized the debt issuance for the Civic CenterPhase II project and the Patrick Henry High School project. In March 2004, he stated that Council finalized projects to be included in the next bond issue, as well as projects to be cash funded; agreed to delay and move to out years the planned issuance of debt based on project status and focus on minimizing the increase in required debt service for the Art Museum, Multi Purpose Recreation Center and Roanoke River Flood Reduction; reviewed a potential increase in the cost of high school projects and subsequently agreed to an increase in the cost of the two high school projects - $13.5 million. Also at the March 2004 Financial Planning Session, he Stated that Council agreed to move forward with Phase II of the Civic Facilities project, with the assumption that the General Fund would absorb a portion of the cost of debt service given the pending status of the Victory Stadium/Amphitheater project, and subsequently Council authorized the issuance of debt for the Riverside Center for Research and Technology- $5.5 million, Patrick Henry High School - $8.7 million (additional funding required), Police Building Phase II - $6.7 million and Fire-EMS Facilities - $4.4 million. 143 For fiscal year 2004-2005, Mr. Stovall advised that an issuance of $79.7 million was planned. Patrick Henry High School - $46.8 million, Riverside Center- $5.5 million, Police Building Phase II - $6.7 million, Fire-EMS Facility - $4.4 million, Downtown West Parking Garage - $2 million, and Civic Center Phase II - $14.3 million; and issued $46 million of the planned $79.7 million based on cash flow needs, with the remaining $33.7 million to be issued during fiscal year 2005- 2006, which reduced the amount of debt service that would be needed in the upcoming fiscal year. Current CIP for fiscal year 2005-2009 reflects the following investment by the City: Buildings and Facilities: Fire/EMS Facilities - $9.9 million Municipal North Renovation - $2.0 million (cash funded) Police Building- Phase II - $7.1 million Public Works Service Center - $2.0 million (cash funded) Civic Facilities Phase II - $15.7 million Victory Stadium - $18.2 million Market Building - $2.1 million (cash funded) Economic Development: Art Museum - $4.0 million Church Avenue West Parking Garage - $7.2 million Riverside Center for Research and Technology - $21.6 million Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology - $4.9 million Flood Reduction: Roanoke River Flood Reduction -$64.3 million Parks: Greenways - $3.4 million Neighborhood Park Improvements - $2.8 million Multi-Purpose Recreation Center - $7 million Schools: Elementary School Improvements - $10.6 million High School Facility Improvements - $91.5 million 144 Storm Drains: Neighborhood Storm Drains - $4.0 million Streets, Sidewalks and Bridges: Bridge Renovation Program - $2.1 million Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk Program - $6.6 million Martin Luther King Bridge - $2.3 million (Primarily cash provided) When looking to the future, Mr. Stovall advised that Council was previously briefed on the status of existing projects that require additional funds: Fire/EMS Facilities - Phase I Borrow funding from Roanoke River Reduction Project and repay over three years from additional Fire/EMS revenues Public Works Service Center- Phase III- $3 million with the intent that the project will consist of 5 - 6 phases Municipal North - budgeted at $2 million and may need additional funding; i.e.: Funding currently budgeted will accommodate the planned relocation of City offices to Municipal North, but will not accommodate the total renovation of Municipal North. Potential new capital projects include: Streetscapes and Traffic Calming - $250,000.00 (per year) beginning in fiscal year 2006 - 2011 Library Facility - planning study results to be presented on April 12, 2005 Jail HVAC and Security - $2.5 million Courthouse Renovation/Expansion Housing Strategies Upgrade of Radio system - $10 million 145 The City Manager advised that the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority has been encouraged to consider moving its administrative offices into Municipal North and a floor plan was provided that would enable the Housing Authority to have first choice of available space; and over the past six to eight months the Housing Authority has indicated less of an interest in locating in the downtown area and has expressed an interest in establishing a satellite or outreach office which would be staffed on a part time basis. She further advised that some individuals have suggested that there could be a significant advantage to the Housing Authority, the School administration and the City administration offices being housed together, or in close proximity to each other, and depending upon the wishes of the Council, space requirements could be accommodated; however, it would not be possible to include all of the activities that were initially planned for Municipal North if the School administration and theHousing Authority administration were to be accommodated. She stated that the plans for Municipal North have not been presented to Council in the hopes of receiving a decision from the Housing Authority. An observation was made by a Member of Council that the School Board is paying a significant amount of rent for space occupied by the Noel C. Taylor Alternative Education program at 3601 Thirlane Road, N. W. It was noted that those funds could be used toward renovation of the current School administration facility on Douglass Avenue, in order to house the Noel C. Taylor Alternative Education program, and the School administration office could be moved to a downtown site. The Mayor advised that the matter could be added to the list of items to be discussed with the new School Superintendent. The City Manager advised that if Council would like to pursue the matter, she would delay any further addition of tenants to the Municipal North site. There was discussion with regard to courthouse expansion and renovation; whereupon, the City Manager advised that a master space needs study was completed approximately seven years ago that identified and prioritized space needs of the City; first on the list was the need for new and expanded space for the police department, the second priority was space for Social Services which was leased on Williamson Road, and the third priority was the courthouse. She called attention to recent correspondence from the Judges of the Circuit Court indicating that now that the Police building is under construction, they would like to see initial planning for courthouse renovation and expansion, therefore, funds will be included in the fiscal year 2006 budget to address the issue of space planning. 146 Question was raised as to whether the City of Roanoke was approached by Roanoke County with regard to participating in the regional jail project and whether the Roanoke City Jail could be expanded. The City Manager stated that the Sheriff has advised that the regional jail concept was not mentioned in conjunction with the Roanoke City Jail. She advised that to her knowledge, the City of Roanoke was not contacted; if the City has future needs, it could approach the regional entity and ask for participation in the same way that the Western Virginia Water Authority was established; and a method to buy in at some point in the future would have to be determined. The Mayor advised that at a monthly breakfast meeting with Roanoke County officials, it was stated by the City that no inquiries had been made to the City by any of the participants of the regional jail with regard to whether the City had an interest in participating in a regional jail, of indicating that the City would be open to considering any inquiries. Mr. Stovall reviewed planned future City (paid for by the City) bond issues to be approved: FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 Art Museum $3.7M Downtown West Garage $2.6M $2.6M (First downtown garage in 2006 will be located around the Campbell Avenue and Salem Avenue area and the second downtown garage is planned for the area around The Jefferson Center in 2008) Multipurpose Rec. Cntr. $6.7M Fire/EMS Facilities $3.8M Roanoke River Flood Red. 4.5M William Fleming $20.0M Total $6.3M $37.6M 147 Planned future School (paid for by the schools) Bond Issues to be approved include: FY06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 09 Fallon Park Improvements (Literary Loan $1.2M Monterey/Raleigh Ct. Improvements (VPSA) $2.0M William Fleming (VPSA/GO/Literary Loan $17.3M $6.8M Total $1.2M $2.0M $17.3M $6.8M Outstanding debt as of February 1, 2005: · City General Obligation Bonds · Enterprise Fund Debt: - General Obligation Bonds: · Civic Center Fund · Parking Fund Total Enterprise Fund Debt · Capital Leases · School General Obligation Bonds · Qualified Zone Academy Bonds (QZAB) · Virginia Public Schools Authority (VPSA) Bonds · Literary Fund Loans Total Schools · Section 108 Loan · General Obligation Debt Issued for Utilities Total Debt as of February 1, 2005 $115,535,483.00 9,870,000.00 8.006.556.00 7,876,556.00 930,673.00 48,332,891.00 1,800,683.00 32,965,344.00 5.438.000.000.00 88,536,918.00 3,530,000.00 33,43 S,000~00 $256,314,630.00 · Less: Parking Fund Debt ConsideredSelfSupporting (8,006,556.00) · Less: Section 108 Loan (3,530,000.00) · Less: General Obligation Debt to be Paid byWVWA (33.435,000.00) Outstanding Tax Support Debt $211,343,074.00 148 Assumptions on Debt and Funding of Debt Service: The City has traditionally funded debt service on General Obligation bonds, whether for City or School projects. The Schools have traditionally funded debt service on VPSA Bonds and Literary Fund Loans. Capital Leases are considered tax supported debt of the City and are typically funded by the General Fund. (The Social Services Building lease is not considered tax supported debt since funded by the Commonwealth) In analyzing tax burden, all such debt (including that of the schools) is considered tax supported debt of Roanoke due to vesting of taxing authority in the City. Debt of Enterprise Funds (Civic Facilities and Parking) is considered self supporting and excluded from debt burden calculations to the extent such debt is supported by revenues generated by the Enterprise Funds. General Obligation and Virginia Public School Authority bonds amortized using level principal and an interest rate of six per.cent. Literary Loans amortized at an interest rate of three per cent. All debt amortized over 20 years. Funding for debt service increases based on the following assumptions: Increased funding of debt service of an additional $570,000.00 per year through fiscal year 2009; and Dedication to debt service funding of incremental increases in EMS fees through fiscal year 2007. 149 The following graphs were reviewed on Current and Future General Fund Debt Service, Future General Fund Debt Service Requirements and Projected Funding Available for Debt Service and Future City and School Debt Service. Includes all debt funded by the General Fund (City, School, Leases) IExcessCapadty(Shortage) I 0.~'~ I ~.~,2 I~.0"1 2.03, IL~.0,~I-0.7~010.~,61 150 The Mayor advised that what the City does on its side of the budget to service the school debt should be captured as a part of the funding formula. The following debt policies were reviewed: Non-proprietary general obligation debt service will not exceed ten per cent of General Fund expenditures. Net bonded debt will not exceed five per cent of the assessed value of real estate. Net Bonded Debt is general obligation debt for the City and School Board, exclusive of self-supporting Enterprise Fund debt and the amount available in the Debt Service Fund. Tax-supported debt will be structured such that not less than 50 per cent of aggregate outstanding debt will be retired within ten years. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick entered the meeting. 151 Ms. Shawver reviewed the following graphs: Ratio of Debt Service to General and School Fund Expenditures (10 per cent), Debt Service Compared to General and School Fund Expenditure Ten Per Cent Limit, Ratio of Net Bonded Debt to Assessed Value of Real Estate (five per cent), Reduction of Aggregate Debt Within Ten Years (50 per cent) which reflects issuance of planned future debt, and Debt Statistics of Urban Cities. Ratio of Debt Service to General And School Fund Expenditures (10%) City School Proiects Proiects Overall · FY 2002 4.2% 2.4% 6.6% · FY 2003 6.0% 2.9% 8.9% · FY 2004 4.6% 2.5% 7.1% · FY 2005 4.5% 2.6% 7.1% · FY 2006 4.8% 3.4% 8.2% · FY 2.007 4.8% 4.0% 8.8% · FY 2008 4.6% 3.8% 8.4% · FY 2009 4.9% 4.8% 9.7% · FY 2010 4.6% 4.7% 9.3% · FY 2011 4.1% 4.4% 8.5% Note: Assumes annual expenditure growth of 4% 152 153 Ratio of Net Bonded Debt to Assessed Value of Real Estate (5%) City School Projects Projects Overall · FY 2002 2.8% 1.7% 4.5% · FY 2003 2.5% 1.5% 4.0% · FY 2004 2.1% 1.5% 3.6% · FY 2005 2.3% 1.9% 4.2% · FY 2006 2.2% 2.2% 4.4% · FY 2007 1.9% 2.0% 4.0% · FY 2008 2.0% 2.5% 4.5% · FY 2009 1.7% 2.4% 4.1% · FY 2010 1.4% 2.1% 3.6% · FY 2011 1.2% 1.9% 3.1% Note: Assumes growth of 4% in assessed value of real estate. Reduction of Aggregate Debt Within Ten Years (50%) (Reflects Issuance of Planned Future Debt) City Schools Overall FY 2005 72% 66% 69% FY 2006 72% 65% 69% FY 2007 75% 68% 71% FY 2008 74% 65% 70% FY 2009 77% 68% 72% FY 2010 81% 71% 75% 154 Debt Statistics of Urban Cities Source: 6/30/04 CAFRs Net Bonded Debt to General Debt Service Assessed Net Bonded Obligation to General Value Debt Per Locality Bond Rating Fund Expenditures Real Estate Capita Roanoke AA 7.13% 3.60% $1,754.00 Richmond AA/A 1 7.11% 3.34% $2,274.00 Hampton AA 4.44% 2.36% $1,035.00 Lynchburg AA 7.12% 3.27% $1,616.00 Newport News AA 7.26% 5.37% $2,408.00 Norfolk AA/A 1 11.20% 3.97% $1,647.00 Portsmouth AA/A I 6.67% 5.25% $2,218.00 Roanoke Co. AA 5.63% 2.32% $1,480.00 The Mayor declared the meeting in recess at 12:15 p.m. Council Member Lea left the meeting. The Council's Financial Planning Session reconvened at 1:00 p.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, with all Members of the Council in attendance except Council Members Dowe and Lea, Mayor Harris presiding. Mr. Stovall advised that building debt capacity in advance of meeting a certain level of funding for debt service creates excess debt funding that may be used for one time capital items; and for fiscal year 2006, the following projects are candidates for the use of debt excess funding: Jail HVAC and Security Streetscapes and Traffic Calming Architectural Planning - Courthouse Housing Strategies Technology Enhancements 155 The following is the current status of attempts by staff to balance the fiscal year 2006 budget: Preliminary Projection Revenue Growth Priority Expenditures Balance $6,829,000.00 10,040,000.00 ($3,211,000.00) Mr. Stovall advised that in connection with closing the budgetary gap, staff will look at potential revenue enhancements and explore potential cost savings; City departments were not asked to submit budgets with expenditure reductions as has been done in prior years, but departments were requested to provide a list of potential cost saving ideas. Prior Year Revenue Enhancements: Fiscal year 2005 Miscellaneous Fee Adjustments Fiscal year 2004 Admissions tax: Increased from 6.5 per cent to 9 per cent for events held at City-owned Civic Center and Stadium to support Civic Facilities Phase II Reduced from 6.5 per cent to 5.5 per cent for events held at facilities not owned by the City. Implemented Short-Term Rental Tax Increased E-911 Surcharge from $1.45 to $2.00 Miscellaneous Fee Adjustments 156 Fiscal year 2003 Miscellaneous Fee Adjustments Admissions Tax (increased from 5 per cent to 6.5 per cent) Fiscal Year 2002 Cigarette Tax - increased $.10 to fund curb, gutter and sidewalk projects Transient Lodging Tax - Increased I per cent to provide additional funding to Convention and Visitors Bureau to market Roanoke as a tourist destination Revenue options with regard to the current rate of various taxes, and the impact of a change in tax rates, are as follows: Current Maximum Rate Change Rate I m pact Real Estate $1.21 None $0.01=$. Personal Property 3.45 None $0.01=$ Utility Consumer 12% 20% 1%= $ Cigarette (20 per pack) $0.27 None $0.01=$ Transient Occupancy 7% None 1%= $ Admissions 5.5% None 1%= $ Prepared Food & Bev. 4% None 1%= $ E-911 $2.00 $3.00 $0.01= $ Motor Vehicle License $20.00 $28.50 $1= $ Cable TV Utility 7% 1%= $ Storm Water Mgt. Fee None 518,000.00 62,000.00 1,116,000.00 67,000.00 21,000.00 85,000.00 8,000.00 87,000.00 207,000.00 $1/month=$500,O00.00+ A one per cent .increase in the prepared food tax would result in additional revenue of approximately $2.1 million. With respect to closing the gap for fiscal year 2009 to provide funding for the City's share of debt service for bonds to be issued for William Fleming High School, Mr. Stovall advised that staff previously recommended the meals tax as the funding mechanism; revenue derived from the meals tax comes from the fact that 157 restaurants that are located within the City of Roanoke serve as a regional attraction and the City captures approximately 49 per cent of the' prepared food sales within the local area, including the City of Salem and Roanoke County; it is suggested that Council give consideration to increasing the meals tax three years early which would provide approximately $! million that could be dedicated to one time capital projects until the time that debt funding is needed for the bonds that were issued for William Fleming High School and the remaining portion could be used to address recurring operating expenditures and close the current budgetary gap. Question was raised as to whether the City Manager plans to submit a recommendation on a source of funding for cultural agencies; whereupon, the City Manager called attention to an arts summit which is intended to bring certain options to the community for review, given what appears to be a movement by the General Assembly this year to look at funding some of the arts, as well as a proposed bond issue; therefore, this might not be the year to ask the General Assembly for legislative changes. She stated that at the art summit, Dr. Edward Murphy, President/CEO, Carillon Health Systems, has been requested to make a presentation on a survey that was conducted by Carillon in the Roanoke Valley and the New River Valley to determine the interest of the private sector in the arts as a component of economic development, and Whether businesses in the two communities saw themselves 'as being more closely .aligned with the arts. She advised that local arts organizations have indicated an interest in going through the activity and have requested the City's involvement and participation. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick expressed concer, n that the City of Roanoke does not have a formal policy on allocation of funds to the various organizations, and it is the City's responsibility to determine local funding to the extent that Council believes that the funding is an appropriate use of taxpayers dollars. He encouraged that Council review the issue of funding and develop a policy that is in the best interest of Roanoke's taxpayers. It was noted that there should be a way to show a connection between cultural arts funding and hotel room nights and/or restaurant sales. The City Manager advised that if Council suppo'rts an increase in the transient room tax, staff can address some of the pending issues and prepare information focusing on a strategy to provide funding to arts/cultural organizations, the hotel/motel industry, a reduction in'the real estate tax rate, and housing/housing initiatives in an effort to weave all of the issues together, with the understanding that they are directed toward expanding the City's tax base. 158 The Mayor advised that Council should keep in mind that during each budget cycle, the City has adjusted certain tax rates and imposed various fees, etc.; therefore, certain City fees and taxes are significantly higher than surrounding jurisdictions. There was discussion with regard to reducing the City's real estate tax rate, and that any increase in the meals tax would also be paid for by persons who reside outside of the City of Roanoke. The City Manager advised that Council could give consideration to reducing the real estate tax rate by a certain per cent in year one followed by further reductions, assuming that revenues stay at a certain percentage of growth over the next five years. She stated that this would set forth a plan of action that would ask the citizens of Roanoke to bear with the City while the City gradually starts to reduce the real estate tax rate by x number of cents over a period of two to five years. The City Manager requested that staff be permitted to propose various options for consideration by the Council. Council was asked to engage in a discussion with regard to other suggestions in connection with budget development as staff moves forward with the budget development process. Question was raised with regard to future meetings to address budget issues; whereupon, it was the consensus of Council that the subject of budget balancing and other budget issues will be discussed at the March 7 and April 4, 2005, 9:00 a.m. Council work sessions. Dr. Cutler expressed an interest in the completion of Master Plans and/or Management Plans for Mill Mountain Park and the Carvins Cove Natural Reserve, the Roanoke River potential park, and coordination by the City's Engineering and Parks and Recreation Departments. The Mayor suggested that Dr. Cutler request a one on one briefing through the City Manager's Office with regard to the function(s) of certain City departments. 159 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick referred to Main Street through the Wasena area and the adjoining commercial district; and street lighting and sidewalks on Crystal Spring Avenue that would be designed along the same theme as Grandin Road to create more of a village center concept. Dr. Cutler addressed the importance of coordination among various initiatives that are currently underway, such as the Public Arts Plan, the Library Plan, the Parks and Recreation planning process, the new zoning ordinance, the Cradle to Cradle housing project, the downtown master plan, and the housing study. He stated that there should be a vision for the City as a whole that makes the entire City a landscape for good art and good architecture, etc.; and the various plans should fit together and not be done prepared piecemeal. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick encouraged the City to follow up on the second phase of the street car issue and identify economic benefits, etc. Mr. Stovall addressed funding for economic development and community development funding .initiatives. He advised that much discussion has centered around positioning the City for capital projects, completion of the housing strategic plan, and looking to the future, there is no dedicated funding source for economic development or community development initiatives. Therefore, he Stated that it is recommended that Council consider designating capital fund interest earnings and proceeds from the sale of property for economic development/community development initiatives; current capital funding balance interest earnings is approximately $1.5 million; the City accrues interest at a rate of between $50,000.00 - $6S,0OO.00 per month, depending upon the balance in the capital fund; therefore, it makes sense at this time to designate capital funds interest earnings as a funding source for such projects. The City Manager advised that if Council is receptive to the proposal, staff will proceed accordingly as the budget is prepared for fiscal year 2005-2006. Council Members spoke in support of the proposed funding initiatve. The Director of Finance presented information with regard to a Budget Stabilization Reserve Policy. He advised that current fund balance policies are encompassed within the City Code and the Council-adopted debt policy which includes a reserve for self-insured liabilities, capital maintenance and equipment replacement program (CMERP), and a reserve for debt service; fund balance policies do not include a budget stabilization reserve and finance best practices and bond rating agencies strongly encourage a Budget Stabilization Reserve Policy. 160 The Director of Finance presented the following summary of a recommended Budget Stabilization Reserve Policy: · Establishes a reserve floor for the City's Budget Stabilization Reserve of five per cent of the adopted General Fund budget · Establishes a reserve target of eight per cent of the budget Stipulates that the reserve may be used only upon authorization of Council or unforeseen emergencies or significant declines in revenues Stipulates that growth in the reserve would come from interest earned on the balance in reserve, as needed; other.funding would be added from current year revenues in excess of expenditures · Provides guidance in replenishing the reserve should it be utilized for an emergency or revenue shortfall; restoration to the floor would be made within three fiscal years; continued emphasis would be made on increasing the reserve to the eight per cent target Additionally, he advised that: The reserve will be funded from debt service fund balance with no new funds required Applying the new policy, the June 30, 2004 reserve would be $15.1 million or 7.1 per cent of the fiscal year 2005 adopted budget. · The CMERP ordinance would be repealed. What was previously referred to as "CMERP" would become undesignated reserve; this balance could continue to be used on one- time purchases such as capital equipment. · The self-insured reserve would continue to be maintained. Working capital in Proprietary Funds could continue to be used for asset/equipment replacement. 161 The City Manager advised that if Council concurs in the recommendation, a measure approving a Budget Stabilization Reserve Policy would be submitted to the Council for consideration at the Special Meeting of Council to be held on May 10, 2005, at which time Council will be requested to adopt various measures approving the City's fiscal year 2005 - 2006 budget, effective July 1,2005. The Mayor inquired if there were objections, questions or comments with regard to the proposed Budget Stabilization Reserve Policy. No questions or comments were raised. The Mayor expressed appreciation to staff for their presentations which provided a good overview of the City's financial status. There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 2:00 p.m. APPROVED ATTEST: Mary F. Parker City Clerk C. Nelson Harris Mayor 162 REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION----ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL February 22, 2005 2:00 p.m. The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Tuesday, February 22, 2005, at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the Roanoke City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Regular Meetings, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 36762-070604 adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 6, 2004. PRESENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe,Jr., BeverlyT. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneffand Mayor C. Nelson Harris ....................................................................................................... 7. ABSENT: None ........................................................................................... O. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led by Mayor Harris. PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-DECEASED PERSONS: Mr. Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution memorializing the late Irvin (Earl) Cannaday, Jr.: (#36964-022205) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Irvin (Earl) Cannaday, Jr., a Roanoke native and former Assistant Principal at Woodrow Wilson Middle School. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 272.) Mr. Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36964-022205. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote: 163 AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ................................ : .............................................................. 0. The Mayor called for a moment of silence in memory of Mr. Cannaday. CONSENT AGENDA The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was desired, that item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. He called specific attention to two requests for Closed Session. MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting of Council held on Monday, January 3, 2005, and recessed until January 13, 2005, were before the body. Council Member Dowe moved that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ..................................... : ........................................................... 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. BUSES-AUDIT COMMITTEE: Minutes of meetings of the Audit Committee which were held on Thursday, October 7, 2004, and Monday, December 20, 2004; and the Greater Roanoke Transit Company Audit Committee on Monday, December 20, 2004, were before the body. Council Member Dowe moved that the minutes be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. COMMI'I-rEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. 164 Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the request of the Mayor to convene in a Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss a special award, being the Shining Star Award, pursuant to Section 2.2- 3711 (A)(10), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the request of the Mayor to convene in a Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. ELECTIONS: A communication from the General Registrar advising that in order to better comply with changes implemented by HAVA and ADA requirements, the Electoral Board requests a change in the type of voting equipment used for In-Person Voting in the Absentee Precinct to DRE (Direct Recording Electronic) device, effective with the Primary Election to be held in June 200S; currently paper ballots are used for both In-Person and Mail Absentee voting; on Election Day, ballots are fed into a reader that records the votes by mark sense; and currently ES&S (Election Systems & Software) and DRE devices are used in regular precincts on Election Day, was before Council. It was further advised that the change would allow all In-Person Absentee votes to be cast on the same equipment and allow individuals with disabilities to vote in private with ADA units, if desired; and the requested change complies with Section 24.2-626 of the Virginia Election Laws and has been forwarded to the City Attorney for submission to the Department of Justice. Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the request and receive and file the communication. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. 165 OATHS OF OFFICE-ROANOKE NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERSHIP: A communication from Althea L. Pilkington tendering her resignation as a member of the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates, was before Council. Council Member Dowe moved that the resignation be accepted and that the communication be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... OATHS OF OFFICE-ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD: A communication from Robert B. Marietta tendering his resignation as a member of the Architectural Review Board, was before Council. Council Member Dowe moved that the resignation be accepted and that the communication be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................... : ............................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-COMMUNITY PLANNING-NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERSHIP-VIRGINIA'S FIRST REGIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY AUTHORITY: The following reports of qualification were before Council. Maureen P. Castern as a member of the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates to fill the unexpired term of Richard Nichols, resigned, ending June 30, 2007; Bryan Grimes Creasy as a member of the Fair Housing Board, for a term ending March 31,2007; Fredrick M. Williams as a member of the City Planning Commission, for a term ending December 31,2008; and Brian J. Wishneff as a City representative to Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority, and as a member of the New River Valley Commerce Park Participation Committee. Council Member Dowe moved that the reports of qualification be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDanieland adopted by the following vote: 166 AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. REGULAR AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: NONE. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: CITY MANAGER: BRIEFINGS: NONE. ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION: BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Roanoke Fire-EMS was interviewed in January 2005 by representatives of the Virginia Department of Fire Programs for consideration i.n becoming the Division VI State Heavy and Tactical Rescue Team; partnering with Roanoke County Fire and Rescue to form a regional team, Roanoke Fire-EMS' was selected; seven teams in Virginia will play a vital role in statewide response to technical rescue incidents; and in an effort to further enhance each selected team's capability, a one time grant in the amount of $42,857.00 will be awarded to purchase specific equipment, with no local match funds required. The City Manager recommended, that Council appropriate State grant funds, in the amount of $42,857.00, with corresponding revenue estimates in accounts to be established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund; and that the City Manager be authorized to execute the required grant agreements, to be approved as to form by the City Attorney. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: (#36965-022205) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Fire Programs Heavy and Tactical Rescue Team Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 274.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36965-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: 167 AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#36966-022205) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of the Heavy and Tactical Rescue Team Grant made to the City of Roanoke by the Virginia Department of Fire Programs and authorizing the execution and filing by the City Manager of the conditions of the grant. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 275.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36966-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. MINORITY/WOMEN OWNED BUSINESSES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that. solicitation and award of City contracts must comply with the City Charter and the City's Procurement Policy, as well as the Virginia Public Procurement Act; in general, public procurement requires the City to obtain bids and award contracts on City projects to the "lowest responsive and responsible bidder"; and determination of whether the bidder is "responsible" must be made upon considerations solely related to job performance. It was further advised that a proposed plan provides that when bids or proposals are solicited directly from potential contractors, solicitations include, whenever possible, appropriate businesses from lists maintained and/or available in the Purchasing Division, including but not limited to a list from the Virginia Department of Minority Business Enterprise; the City of Roanoke currently maintains a separate database of small, minority and women-owned businesses, from which all City departments are encouraged to solicit a MBE/WBE/SB vendor in all procurement transactions; meet and greet events are held for large construction projects to provide small business contractors with an opportunity to meet large business owners in an effort to become subcontractors on City projects; the City continues to reduce the scope of projects, if possible, to reduce the need for bonding and large insurance requirements; and the annual Regional Building New Partnership Conference which is hosted by the City is intended to educate MBE/WBE/SB vendors to improve bidding and responsiveness to request for proposals and invitations to bid. 168 It was stated that Council and the City Administration recognize the need for improving opportunities for small, minority and women-owned business enterprises to participate in City contracts; and with adoption of the plan, improved business opportunities should result as the City makes clear to the community its policy to encourage opportunities for small, minority and women- owned business enterprises to participate in City contracts. The City Manager recommended that Council repeal Resolution No. 31012- 051892, Minority and Women-Owned Business Enterprise Plan, and adopt a Plan for Participation in Procurement Transactions of Small Businesses and Businesses Owned by Women and Minorities; and that the City Manager be authorized to take appropriate measures to implement the above referenced Plan, effective immediately. Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution: (#36967-022205) A RESOLUTION repealing Resolution No. 31012-051892, which adopted a Minority and Women-Owned Business Enterprise Plan; and adopting and endorsing a Plan for Participation in Procurement Transactions of Small Businesses and Businesses Owned by Women and Minorities. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 275.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36967-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. STATE HIGHWAYS-BRIDGES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) requires resolutions adopted by Council documenting the City's support of a project before funding can be made available; therefore, Council must adopt a resolution for the recent Federal award of $497,050.00 (VDOT UPC #72794) to be made available for improvement of the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Bridge (formerly First Street Bridge); approval of the resolution must include the City's agreement to pay a 20 per cent match ($124,262.00) to Federal funds and to reimburse VDOT for the total amount of costs expended by VDOT, if the City subsequently elects to cancel the project; and local match funding is available in Account No. 008-052- 9754-9003 from funds previously appropriated to the project. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution endorsing improvement of the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial Bridge (formerly First Street Bridge), agreeing to pay the 20 per cent match ($124,262.00) to Federal funds, and agreeing to reimburse VDOT for the total amount of costs expended by VDOT 169 if the City subsequently elects to cancel the project; and that the City Manager be authorized to enter into any and all necessary agreements with applicable Federal and State agencies or other affected parties to complete the project, such agreements to be approved as to form by the City Attorney. Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#36968-022205) A RESOLUTION expressing the support of the Council of the City of Roanoke to the Virginia Department of Transportation for the improvement of the First Street Bridge. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 69, Page 276.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36968- 022205. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. COMMITTEES-TRAFFiC: The City Manager submitted a communication advising t. hat the Commonwealth of Virginia once required local jurisdictions to appoint an active Transportation Safety Commission in order to be eligible for certain Federal highway safety funds; the requirement was eliminated many years ago and most localities abolished their local Commissions; in the summer of 2004, while reviewing issues with regard to the City's boards and commissions, Council indicated that the current Transportation Safety Commission could be abolished and the functions could be appropriately managed by City staff; and City staff could utilize a less formal working committee when needed to ensure thorough consideration and evaluation of transportation safety issues which would be similar to the current process used to manage transportation planning activities, such as development of the City's Long Range Transportation Improvement Plan. It was further advised that the Transportation Safety Commission has not been active since Council provided the above referenced direction, although official action to abolish the Commission has not been taken and the members of the Commission have not been notified that their services are no longer necessary. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution abolishing the City of Roanoke Transportation Safety Commission and expressing appreciation to members of the Commission for their service. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: 170 (#36969-022205) A RESOLUTION Transportation Safety Commission. abolishing the City of Roanoke (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 69, Page 277.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36969-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. ROANOKE VISION, COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN-COMMUNITY PLANNING: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that in order to receive Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESC) funding, the City of Roanoke must submit a five-year Consolidated Plan and Annual Updates to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and substantial amendments to the Plan must undergo a 30-day public review and comment period, followed by approval of Council. It was further advised that the City has unexpended funds in several previously planned activities; several activities of importance to the community have been identified for use of the funds, which are summarized in an attachment to the communication; in order to implement proposed uses, each activity and associated funding must be added to the current plan; and individually and collectively, the activities constitute a substantial amendment to the Plan that must be approved by Council prior to implementation. It was noted that the 30-day public review and comment period was conducted from January 21 to February 21,2005; no comments objecting to the intended amendments were received; implementing use of the funds during the current year will have the added benefit of assisting the City to maintain compliance with HUD's requirements concerning timely expenditures; and several fund transfers will be needed and can be accomplished administratively through City Manager budget transfers. The City Manager recommended that Council approve amendments to the 2004/2005 and 2002/2003 Annual Updates to the Consolidated Plan; and authorize the City Manager to execute documents required by HUD to accept funds, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: 171 (#36970-022205) A RESOLUTION approving certain amendments to the 2004/2005 and 2002/2003 Annual Updates to the City of Roanoke Five-Year Consolidated Plan. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 278.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36970-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. BUDGET-STATE HIGHWAYS-TRANSPORTATION FUND: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Virginia Department of Transportation's (VDOT) Six-Year Improvement Program (SYIP) includes funding for the following projects that are to be locally administered: Riverland Road, Bennington Street, & Mt. Pleasant Boulevard Intersection Improvement (UPC No. 71740)- Total project funding of $1,080,000.00 which includes a FYO5 allocation of $220,000.00; 10th Street Pedestrian & Bicycle Crossing Improvements (UPC No. 71725) - Total project funding of $75,000.00, all of which is allocated in FY05; and City-wide Signal & ITS Improvements (UPC No. 71741) -Total project funding of $1,100,000.00 which includes a FYO5 allocation of $543,000.00. It was further advised that because the projects are to be locally administered, Council is requested to appropriate funds to project accounts for disbursement against project development and implementation expenses; VDOT projects require a local match of two per cent and funding for the local match is available in VDOT Highway projects, Account No. 008-530-9803. The City Manager recommended that Council take the following actions: Appropriate $220,0OO.00 of VDOT project funding to an existing project Account No. 008-530-9512 entitled, "Riverland Road/Mt. Pleasant/Bennington Street", and establish a revenue estimate of the same for State reimbursement through VDOT's Six-Year Improvement Program; 172 Appropriate $75,000.00 of VDOT project funding to a new project account to be entitled, "10'h Street Crossing Improvements", and establish a revenue estimate of the same for State reimbursement through VDOT's Six-Year Improvement Program; Appropriate $543,000.00 of VDOT project funding to a new project account to be entitled, "Signal & ITS Improvements", and establish a revenue estimate of the same for State reimbursement through VDOT's Six-Year Improvement Program; and Authorize the City Manager to enter into any and all necessary agreements with applicable Federal and State agencies or other affected parties to complete the projects. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: (#36971-022205) AN ORDINANCEto appropriate funding to be provided by the VDOT Six-Year Improvement Program for the Riverland Road, Mt. Pleasant Boulevard Intersection, Bennington Street, lOth Street Crossing Improvements and Signal & ITS Improvements Projects, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 279.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36971-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. Mr. Chris Craft, 1501 East Gate Avenue, N. E., inquired if funds were being appropriated for a new bridge over the Hollins Road Railroad track and the timeframe for completion of the project; whereupon, the City Manager advised that she was not aware of any funds being appropriated for a bridge in the Hollins Road area, however, she would ask staff to investigate the inquiry and communicate their findings to Mr. Craft. Mr. Craft also inquired if the Virginia Department of Transportation Six-Year Improvement Program included project funds for the Hollins Road bridge; whereupon, the City Manager advised that none of the appropriated funds listed in the Program would be used to construct a bridge in the Hollins Road area. Ordinance No. 36971-022205 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: 173 (#36972-022205) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to enter into any and all necessary and appropriate agreements to complete certain projects in the City of Roanoke which are in the Virginia Department of Transportation's Six- Year Improvement Projects. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 280.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36972-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that World Changers, avolunteer ministry of the North American Mission Board, Southern Baptist Convention (World Changers), brings together youth and adults from across the nation to participate in housing and related community service projects; last year, under a subgrant agreement with Blue Ridge Housing Development Corporation, Inc. (BRHDC), which provided Community Development Block Grant (CDBC) funding for materials and other support, approximately 400 World Changers volunteers assisted in repairing approximately 40 homes in the City; and during the project, housing for workers was provided by the Roanoke City School Board. It was further advised that given the success of the project in 2004 and in the prior year and the productive working relationships that have been established, the City, BRHDC and World Changers are looking to conduct another project during the summer of 2005; atotal of $80,000.00 in CDBG funds is to be committed to the 2005 project, as set forth in a subgrant agreement attached to the communication; use of funds is requested for authorization by Council through a separate report, which amends the City's Consolidated Plan to add the 2005 World Changers and other projects; and the appropriate City Manager budget transfers may be made administratively following approval to include funds in designated accounts. It was pointed out that a proposed subgrant agreement will outline activities to be undertaken by BRHDC and World Changers; housing for World Changers volunteers will again be provided by the Roanoke City School Board, and arrangements will be finalized by BRHDC and City staff directly with school officials. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a CDBG Subgrant Agreement with Blue Ridge Housing Development Corporation, Inc., subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney. 174 Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#36973-022205) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to enter into a 2005 Community Development Block ~rant (CDBG) Subgrant Agreement with the I~lue Ridge Housing Development Corporation, Inc., regarding the World Changers project, upon certain terms and conditions. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 281 .) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36973-022205. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. BUDGET-SNOW REMOVAL: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that due to limited resources within the City's snow removal operating budget, the three storms experienced earlier in the winter depleted the City's stockpile of salt for snow removal operations; in an effort to remain adequately stocked and prepared for winter weather, additional salt was obtained; a budget transfer of $130,000.00 is needed to cover the additional expense; and because the transfer is more than $75,000.00, action by Council is required. The City Manager recommended that Council authorize transfer of funds, in the amount of $130,000.00 from City Manager Contingency, Account No. 001- 300-9410-2199, to Snow Removal Chemicals, Account No. 001-530-4140-2045. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: (#36974-022205) AN ORDINANCE to transfer funds for snow removal, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 General Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 281 .) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36974-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted bythe following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. CITY A~-I-ORNEY: NONE. 175 DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: NONE. REPORTS OF COMMI'I-FEES: BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board requesting that Council approve the following appropriations, was before the body. $15,000.00 for the GED Testing Fast Track program to provide advertising and instructors to increase participation in the GED examination, said program to be 100 per cent reimbursed by State funds; and $8,000.00 for the GED Expanded Testing program to provide additional instructors and supplies for GED preparation classes. and for administration of the GED examinations, said program to be 100 per cent reimbursed by State funds. A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in the request of the School Board, was also before the body. Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#36975-022205) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the GED Fast Track Program and GED Preparation Classes, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 School Funds Appropriations and dispensing With the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 282.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36975-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel~ Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: NONE. MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: 176 ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL: Council Member Wishneff commended Council Member Lea, who represented the City of Roanoke on Monday, February 21,2005, by hosting members of the Tuskegee Airmen, an all- black aviation unit whose pilots never lost a bomber to enemy fire in more than 1,500 missions during World War II. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY EMPLOYEES: Council Member Lea commended the City Manager and City employees in connection with the City's first talent show which was held on Friday, February 18, 2005, at the Roanoke Civic Center. POLICE DEPARTMENT: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick expressed appreciation to the City Manager for completion of the installation of lighting around the memorial to Roanoke's fallen police officers on Campbell Avenue, S. W. FIRE DEPARTMENT-REGIONAL COOPERATION: Council Member Cutler called attention to a press conference which was held earlier in the day announcing that the Roanoke County Fire and Rescue Department and the City of Roanoke Fire/EMS Department will expand regional cooperation to include the Mount Pleasant and north Williamson Road areas. He stated that this represents another example of cooperation by Roanoke City and Roanoke County. HOUSING/AUTHORITY-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: Council Member Cutler called attention to continuing progress on the Colonial Green development, and expressed appreciation to the developer for working with reside.nts of the area to protect and increase the width of the buffer between existing housing and the new development, while retaining the mixed use character of the project. CITY SHERIFF: The Honorable George M. McMillan, Sheriff, presented a communication advising of two new programs that have been implemented in the Roanoke City Jail to enhance and improve the community; i.e.: the Offender Reentry Program, which is a cooperative effort between the Roanoke Sheriff's Office and the Virginia Department of Corrections, to provide life skills training to soon-to-be released prison inmates from the Roanoke Valley; instead of being traditionally released from prison to the local streets, inmates will be placed in the program while they are still incarcerated in the Roanoke City Jail for approximately 45 to 90 days prior to release, and each inmate will be trained in cognitive thinking, employability skills, substance abuse resistance, anger management, money management, domestic violence avoidance, and other general life skills; the cooperative effort would provide offenders with the opportunity to reintegrate into the community with a foundation upon which to build productive lives; and the program will provide another measure of income to the Sheriff's Office, which is estimated to generate approximately $154,000.00 during fiscal year 2006. He further advised that a contract was executed with the Virginia Department of Corrections to house up to 25 inmates as part of the Jail Contract Bell Program, which would also generate approximately $204,000.00 of additional revenue in fiscal year 2006; the Department of Finance and the Sheriff's Office project that the Offender Reentry and Jail Contract Bed Programs and other 177 programs in operation at the Roanoke City Jail would generate approximately $4 million in revenue to offset the Sheriff's Office budget request for fiscal year 2006; and with an increase in State funds and revenues generated by the Sheriff's Office, the City's cost will be reduced to approximately $3 million for fiscal year 2006. Without objection by the Council, the Mayor advised that the communication would be received and filed. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MA~I'ERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. REFUSE COLLECTION: Ms. Rhonda Conner, 1509 Patterson Avenue, S. W., advised that real estate taxes on several of her rental properties have increased annually. She stated that bulk trash collection is provided at all of her properties, with the exception of her largest investment property; therefore, she questioned why she is not afforded the same bulk trash collection at all of her properties. She advised that real estate investors and property owners pay more in real estate taxes per year to the City than single-family homeowners, yet they do not receive the same City services; and if she must pay additional taxes each year, the City of Roanoke should provide solid waste collection at all her properties. In order to respond to her concerns, Mayor Harris requested that Ms. Conner provide specific information to the City Manager. REFUSE COLLECTION: Mr. Chris Craft, 1501 East Gate Avenue, N. E., extended an invitation to the Members of Council to attend the annual Easter Egg Hunt sponsored by First Baptist Church on March 26, 2005, at Victory Stadium. He called attention to the need to remove debris from an area along Tinker Creek and 13'h Street, N. E. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: FIRE DEPARTMENT- CITY MANAGER-CITY' EMPLOYEES-MINORITY/WOMEN OWNED BUSINESSES-REGIONAL COOPERATION-PROCUREMENT CODE: The City Manager commended City employees who participated in the City's first annual talent show on Friday, February 18, 2005, which provided an opportunity to showcase the many talents of Roanoke's employees. She advised that it is anticipated that a second talent show will be held in 2006. The City Manager advised that the City of Roanoke has been invited to make a presentation at the next meeting of the Minority Supplier Development Council in March 2005 in recognition of Roanoke's efforts to promote small business application of the procurement policy. 178 The City Manager pointed out that expansion of Fire/EMS services to the Mount Pleasant and north Williamson Road areas is another example of regional cooperation by the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County that will improve the level of service for both City and County residents. She commended the Chiefs of Fire/EMS in Roanoke City and Roanoke County for their efforts to promote further regional cooperation. At 2:50 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for two Closed Sessions in the Council's Conference Room. At 4:10 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, with all Members of the Council in attendance, Mayor Harris presiding. COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Council Member McDaniel moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-ROANOKE ARTS COMMISSION: The Mayor advised that there is a vacancy on the Roanoke Arts Commission created by the resignation of Courtney A. Penn; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy. Council Member Wishneff placed in nomination the name of Cathy C. Greenberg. There being no further nominations, Ms. Greenberg was appointed as a member of the Roanoke Arts Commission, to fill the unexpired term of Courtney A. Penn, resigned, ending June 30, 2007, by the following vote: FOR MS. GREENBERG: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, and Mayor Harris .................................................................. 7. OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-INDUSTRIES: The Mayor advised that there is a vacancy on the Industrial Development Authority created by the resignation of William L. Bova; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy. Council Member Wishneff placed in nomination the name of Stuart H. Reve rco m b. 179 There being no further nominations, Mr. Revercomb was appointed as a member of the Industrial Development Authority, to fill the unexpired term of William L. Bova, resigned, ending October 20, 2005, by the following vote: FOR MR. REVERCOMB: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneffand Mayor Harris .................................................................. 7. OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT: The Mayor advised that there is a vacancy on the Personnel and Employment Practices Commission created by expiration of the term of office of Stephen L. Jamison on June 30, 2004; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy. Council Member Wishneff placed in nomination the name of Stephen S. Willis. There being no further nominations, Mr. Willis was appointed as a member of the Personnel and Employment Practices Commission, for a term ending June 30, 2007, by the following vote: FOR MR. WILLIS: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneffand Mayor Harris ................................................................................... 7. OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMI~-rEES-LEAGUE OF OLDER AMERICANS: The Mayor advised that the one year term of office of Vickie F. Briggs as the City's representative to the League of Older Americans Advisory Committee will expire on February 28, 2005; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy. Council Member Wishneff placed in nomination the name ofVickie F. Briggs. There being no further nominations, Ms. Briggs was reappointed as the City's representative to the League of Older Americans Advisory Committee, for a term ending February 28, 2006, by the following vote: FOR MS. BRiGGS: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneffand Mayor Harris .................................................................................. 7. OATHS OF OFFICE-PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMI~-rEES: The Mayor advised that the three year terms of office of Robert C. Jones, Thomas Pettigrew, Christene A. Montgomery, Sharon L..Stinnette, and Sherley E. Stuart as members of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board will expire on March 31, 2005; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancies. Council Member Wishneff placed the following names in nomination: Robert C. Jones, Thomas Pettigrew, Christene A. Montgomery, Sharon L. Stinnette, and Sherley E. Stuart. 180 There being no further nominations, Mr. Jones, Mr. Pettigrew, Ms. Montgomery, Ms. Stinnette, and Mr. Stuart were reappointed as members of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, for a terms ending March 31,2008, by the following vote: FOR MR. JONES, MR. PETTIGREW, MS. MONTGOMERY, MS. STINNETTE AND MR. STUART: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD: The Mayor advised that there is a vacancy on the Architectural Review Board created by the resignation of Robert B. Manetta; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy. Council Member Wishneff placed in nomination the name of Lora Katz. There being no further nominations, Ms. Katz was appointed as a member of the Architectural Review Board, to fill the unexpired term of Robert B. Marietta, resigned, ending October 1,2006, by the following vote: FOR MS. KATZ: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneffand Mayor Harris ................................................................................... 7. At 4:15 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess until 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber. At 7:00 p.m., on Tuesday, February 22, 2005, the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. PRESENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe,Jr., BeverlyT. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneffand Mayor C. Nelson Harris ....................................................................................................... 7. ABSENT: None ........................................................................................... O. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M, Hackworth, City Attorney, Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Americawas led by Mayor Harris. 181 PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: PROCLAMATIONS: The Mayor presented a proclamation to Seth Sprinkle, Senior Counselor, Roanoke Valley DeMolay Chapter, declaring the month of March 2005 as DeMolay Month. PARKS AND RECREATION-BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that over the past year, the Blue Ridge Parkway has been working in concert with the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), the Department of Conservation and Recreation, Scenic Virginia, three other National Park Service sites in Virginia (George Washington Memorial Parkway, Colonial National Historic Park, and Shenandoah National Park), and other related organizations to prepare four nominations for the National Scenic Byway/Ali-American Road Program; and currently, Virginia has no National Scenic Byways featured on certain maps and websites used by potential tourists from all over the world. It was further advised that the Blue Ridge Parkway would be one of the four byways nominated; the National Park Service is seeking support for the nomination from localities through which the Parkway is located; while the designation is one of recognition only, it is sought in order to raise awareness of the significance of the Parkway and to potentially leverage other resources to aid in the protection of the Parkway as a scenic, cultural, and historic resource; and the designation could aid in obtaining National Park Service funding for continued regional planning efforts and could also leverage various grant applications made by local public and private stakeholder groups. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution expressing the City of Roanoke's support for the nomination of the Blue Ridge Parkway for the · National Scenic Byway/All American Road program. Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#36976-022205) A RESOLUTION supporting the designation of the Blue Ridge Parkway for the Scenic Byway/All American Road Program. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 283.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36976-022205. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. Gary Johnson, Superintendent, Blue Ridge Parkway, expressed appreciation to Council, the City Manager and the Director of Planning, Building and Development for the City's support of the nomination of the Blue Ridge Parkway for the National Scenic Byway All American Road Program. There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Resolution No. 36976-022205 was adopted by the following vote: 182 AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. PUBLIC HEARINGS: STREETS AND ALLEYS: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Tuesday, February 22, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of The Scott Robertson Memorial Fund that the easternmost 250 feet of Densmore Road, N.W., be closed and discontinued by barricade, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday February 4, 2005 and Friday, February 11,2005. The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that the portion of Densmore Road in question is adjoined by parcels zoned Residential Single - family, High Density District; the grounds of the Roanoke County Club surround the subject potion of right-of-way along the parcel owned by the Scott Rebertson Memorial Fund; and Westside Elementary School for the Performing and Visual Arts is located to the west. It was further advised that the petitioner proposes to install a locked gate over the right-of-way and provide access to the Roanoke Country Club, the City, and all utility providers, as necessary since the subject portion of right-of-way does not serve any other property owner; the location of the barricade will be approximately at the westernmost boundary of Official Tax No. 2670906; and the petitioner advises that the gate will allow security of the site and prevent the right- of-way from being used by motorists late at night. The City Planning Commission recommended that Council deny the request to close the subject portion of Densmore Road, N.W. It was noted that the. Planning Commission was of the opinion that the applicant had other options for addressing security of the site that should be pursued, including fencing of the site parallel to the existing right-of-way or by seeking vacation of the portion of the right-of-way in its entirety. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#36977-022205) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the alteration and closing by barricade of certain public right-of-way in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as more particularly described hereinafter; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (Fer full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 284.) 183 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36977-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. Richard B. Burrow, Volunteer Spokesperson, representing the petitioner, appeared before Council in support of the request. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be heard in connection with the public hearing; whereupon, the following persons addressed the Council.. Jennifer Blackwood, Executive Director, advised that First Tee of Roanoke Valley is one of seven chapters in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and one of 200 nationally that utilizes golf to teach life skills, character education, etc. She further advised that approximately two years ago, The Scott Robertson Memorial Fund, which is the parent organization that is creating the First Tee Chapter in Roanoke, purchased land on Densmore Road and spent approximately $500,000.00 to convert an abandoned house and three acres of land into a golf learning academy consisting of a large teaching putting green, a driving range using a restricted flight ball, and a short game area with sand hazards and tees; and the program is available to children who would not otherwise have access to golf. Ms. Blackwood stated that the First Tee Program recently conducted a nation wide study of parents, teachers and children using a life skills curriculum and over 76% of parents surveyed reported an increase intheir child's confidence level, grades in school, social ability and display of respect as a result of participation in the program. With regard to the request for the barricade closure, Mr. Burrow advised that The Scott Robertson Fund has spent a considerable amount of money on landscaping, installation of special turf and the driving area; and because of concerns regarding vandalism atthe dead-end of Densmore Road, the Foundation would prefer to control access to the property for security purposes. Council Member McDaniel inquired about the City's position concerning the barricade closure; whereupon, R. Brian Townsend, Director of Planning, Building and Development advised that Planning staff recommended approval of the request to close a portion of Densmore Road, by barricade, with the petitioner to be responsible for erecting a gate with a lock system that would allow access to the right-of-way by Roanoke Country Club, the City of Roanoke, or any party representing or acting on behalf of the City of Roanoke, and all public utility companies; however, the City Planning Commission disagreed with Planning staff and the petitioner in terms of how to address the situation. Mr. Townsend explained that the Planning Commission believed the better alternative was either to vacate the right-of-way by street closure process, which would remove the City's rights to the public right-of-way, or request First Tee to fence the perimeter of its 184 property as opposed to barricading the right-of-way; and the Planning Commission's rationale for not recommending approval of the application was due to the fact that there were two other viable options that would accommodate the needs of First Tee. Council Member McDaniel asked if the right-of-way could be permanently vacated and closed; whereupon, Mr. Townsend stated that since First Tee is not the owner of the entire property on either side of the right-of-way, it would involve coordination of the closure with other adjoining properties. Council Member McDaniel inquired about the liability issue of barricading the right-of-way; whereupon, the City Attorney expressed concern with regard to the erection of the barricade across the public right-of-way and the assurance of public safety access to the area. The City Manager commended the Board of Directors and Tom Robertson for constructing the facility in the City of Roanoke. She called attention to the significant contribution that the program will offer to underserved young people in the Roanoke area. There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed. There being no further discussion by Council, Ordinance No. 36977~022205 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. STREETS AND ALLEYS-WATER/RESOURCES: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Tuesday, February 22, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of the Western Virginia Water Authority that portions of Bennington Street, Brownlee Avenue, Kindred Street, and Underhill Avenue, S. E., and associated alleys south of the Roanoke Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant be permanently vacated, discontinued and closed, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday February 4, 2005, and Friday, February 11,2005. The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that the petitioner requests vacation of portions of Bennington Street, Brownlee Avenue, Kindred Street, and Underhill Avenue, S. E., and associated alleys to allow for expansion of the Roanoke Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (RRWTP); and the City of Roanoke and the Western Virginia Water Authority own the adjoining parcels of land. 185 The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the request to vacate, discontinue and close the subject portions of streets and alleys, subject to certain conditions. Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance: (#36978-022205) AN ORDINANCE permanentlyvacating, discontinuing and closing certain public rights-of-way in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as more particularly described hereinafter; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 285.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36978-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. Michael T. McEvoy, Executive Director, Western Virginia Water Authority, appeared before Council in support of the request. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be heard in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no discussion or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 36978-022205 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS-ZONING-STREETS AND ALLEYS: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk advertised public hearings for Tuesday, February 22, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matters may be heard, in the City Council Chamber, on the following: Request of Rockydale Quarries Corporation that the Southern Hills Neighborhood Plan, acomponent of Vision 2001 - 2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan, be amended to accommodate a recent boundary line adjustment and other changes in the text of the Plan. Request of Rockydale Quarries Corporation that properties located on Franklin Road, Old Rocky Mount Road, Welcome Valley Road and Van Winkle Road, S. W., bearing Official Tax Nos; 5380106, 5380107, 5380108, 5380123, and 5380110, zoned C-1, Office District; Official Tax No. 5380125, zoned RS-l, Residential Single Family District; Official Tax Nos. 5390110, 5390117, 5390109, 186 5390108, 5390106, and 5390105, zoned RS-3, Residential Single Family District, be rezoned to HM, Heavy Manufacturing District; and Official Tax Nos. 4530202, 4530203, and 4530205, zoned HM, Heavy Manufacturing District, be rezoned to RA, Residential Agricultural District, subject to certain conditions proffered by the petitioner. Request of Rockydale Quarries Corporation that the following streets be permanently vacated, discontinued and closed: (1) Draper Road from its intersection with U. S. 220 North (Franklin Road) to its terminus at Old Rocky Mount Road; (2) Old Rocky Mount Road from its'terminus on the westerly side of Official Tax No. 5370109, north approximately 1032.66 feet to Official Tax No. 5370106; and (3) Welcome Valley Road, from its intersection with Old Rocky Mount Road east for an approximate distance of 130 feet along Official Tax No. 5390110. Legal advertisements of the above referenced public hearings were published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, February 4, 2005 and Friday, February 11,2005. The City Planning Commis.sion submitted a written report advising that the petitioner proposes the following changes to the Southern Hills Neighborhood Plan:. In the Community Design section, under Land Use Patterns (p.3), strike the reference to the Rockydale property west of Old Mountain Road. On the Future Land Use Map (p.4), change the designation ofTax Map No. 5380106 from a Mixed Density Residential use to an Industrial use. On the Future Land Use Map (p.4), change the designation of Tax Map Nos. 5380107, 5380108, 5380110, 5380123, 5390105, 5390106, 5390108, S390109, 5390110, and 5390117 from Single Family Residential uses to Industrial uses. On the Future Land Use Map (p.4), designate the property recently brought into the City of Roanoke's jurisdictional boundaries, known as Tax Map No. 5380125, as an Industrial use. In the Residential Development section under Trends and Opportunities (p.6), strike the subsection reading: "Rockydale has a 30+ acre property to the west of Old Mountain Road. A portion of the property is very steep, but a large portion may be appropriate for residential development." 187 On the Residential Development Opportunities map (p.7), remove the Mixed Density Residential designation on Tax Map No. 5380106 and the New Single-Family designation on Tax Map Nos. 5380107, 5380108, 53801 t0, 5380123, 5390106, and 5390108. On the Economic Development Opportunities Map (p.9), designate Tax Map Nos. 5380106, 5380107, 5380108,5380110, 5380123, 5390105, 5390106, 5390108, and 5390109 as Industrial. It was further advised that Planning staff believes that the request to revise the recommended land use to industrial is reasonable, given the fact that the companion rezoning petition limits the potential uses and many aspects of the quarry operation on the parcels; proposed changes support an expansion of the existing use and do not attempt to increase production on the overall site, but extends the life of the quarry; and, in addition, there are no other industrially designated properties within the neighborhood, and possibly throughout the City, that would be a feasible and appropriate site for a unique use such as a quarry. It Was noted that Section 15.2-2224, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, requires localities to consider mineral resources in the comprehensive planning process that are identified and surveyed by the Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy (DMME); and the existing quarry and proposed expansion area contain mineral resources identified by DMME. The City Planning Commission recommended Council approve amendment of the Southern Hills Neighborhood Plan as a component of Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan. With regard to the above referenced rezoning of properties located on Franklin Road, Old Rocky Mount Road, Welcome Valley Road and Van Winkle Road, S. W., the City Planning Commission submitted awritten report advising that the proposed rezoning of the subject parcels is consistent with the following actions of Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan: Roanoke will protect the steep slopes, ridge tops and view sheds within the City as important environmental and scenic resources and will cooperate regionally to protect such resources located outside of the City. Protect Blue Ridge Parkway corridors adjacent to the City limits through coordination with adjacent localities and careful planning. It was noted that Planning staff believes that potential visual and acoustical impact of the quarry expansion has been adequately studied and addressed by the petitioner. 188 The City Planning Commission recommended approval of the request for rezoning; and advised that with its associated proffers, the petition is a reasonable request to rezone the subject parcels of land for a long term expansion of the quarry facility and the protection of views and land uses immediately adjacent to the Mill Mountain Spur of the Blue Ridge Parkway. With regard to vacating, discontinuing and closing Draper Road from its intersection with U. S. 220 North to its terminus at Old Rocky Mount Road and Old Rocky Mount Road from its terminus on the westerly side of Official Tax No. 5370109 north to a distance of 1032.66 feet to Official Tax No. 5370106, and Welcome Valley Road from its i.ntersection with Old Rocky Mount Road east for approximately 130 feet along Official Tax No. 5390110 as above described, the City Planning Commission advised that the petitioner is requesting the street vacations to allow for expansion of its facilities; the petition is concurrent with a rezoning petition and an amendment to the Southern Hills Neighborhood Plan; and the petitioner has proposed the following uses of the vacated rights-of-way: Draper Road: Draper Road will become a private means of ingress/egress for the petitioner. Old Rocky Mount Road: The vacated portion of Old Rocky Mount Road will be used as part of the petitioner's expansion. Welcome Valley Road: The petitioner agrees to realign Welcome Valley Road and dedicate it to the City, after which the subject portion of right-of-way will be vacated. The City Planning Commission recommended approval of the request to vacate, discontinue and close the subject portions of rights-of-way, subject to certain conditions as more fully set forth in the report, and further recommended that the petitioner not be charged for the vacated rights-of-way due to improvements that the petitioner will be required to make and then dedicate to the City and the Virginia Department of Transportation. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#36979-022205) AN ORDINANCE approving the amendment of the Southern Hills Neighborhood Plan, and amending Vision 2001- 2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan, to reflect the amendment of the Southern Hills Neighborhood Plan; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 288.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36979-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. Maryellen F. Goodlatte, Attorney, appeared before Council in support of the requests of the client. 189 The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with amendment of the Southern Hills Neighborhood Plan, the request for rezoning, and the request for closure of streets; whereupon, the following persons addressed Council. The Reverend David Derrow, 4117 Welcome Valley Road, N. E., Senior Pastor, New Hope Christian Church, advised that the Church held meetings with representatives of Rockydale Quarries Corporation to address concerns with regard to traffic issues from Mount Pleasant to Route 220 (Franklin Road). He stated that the petitioner was responsive to their concerns, therefore, the Church does not oppose the rezoning. Charles Reed, 4150 Welcome Valley Road, N. E., advised that since the rezoning will benefit the entire neighborhood, he supports the petitioner's request for rezoning and expansion. Michael A. Loveman, representing Lanford Brothers Company, spoke in support of the petitioner's proposal. He advised that Lanford Brothers is proud of the work of the highway industry to better the community and Rockydale Quarries has served as an ally for highway construction; Lanford Brothers Company is proud of the highway industry's Partners in Education Program, the objectives of which are to make students aware of the importance of maximizing the opportunityto obtain an education in Roanoke Valley high schools, to make students aware of career opportunities that exist in the highway industry, and to make students aware of the importance of businesses being good corporate citizens. He commended Rockydale Quarries Corporation for being leader in all three of the objectives; and through the Partners in Education Program, Lanford Brothers Company has constructed three sections of the Murray Run Greenway. He pointed out that Rockydale Quarries Corporation donated thousands of dollars worth of stone to various projects, and shared driving safety tips in work zones and career opportunities in the highway industry with high school students from the Roanoke Valley. Lucy Lowe, 5043 Franklin Road, S. W., advised that she has lived near the Rockydale Quarries site for over 50 years. She encouraged Council to approve the proposal. Carl Cooper, 3160 Round Hill Avenue, N. W., Chair, Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates, (RNA), advised that the RNA has not taken a position on the merits of the petitions submitted by Rockydale Quarries Corporation; however, the organization objects to the process due to the lack of communication with the neighborhood relating to proposed changes to the Southern Hills Neighborhood Plan. He stated than any changes should be a collaborative effort between the City and residents of the area. (See communication on file in the City Clerk's Office.) 190 Edward Kennedy, 4097 Welcome Valley Road, N. E., spoke in support of the petition for rezoning and urged Council to approve the recommendation of the City Planning Commission. He stated that the proposed rezoning would protect the character of the neighborhood and the view from the Blue Ridge Parkway. Sandra Carroll, Executive Director, Greenvale Nursery School, spoke in support of the request for rezoning. She advised that the primary and targeted population at Greenvale Nursery School consists of at-risk, disadvantaged children and their families, and without the support of civic-minded businesses like Rockydale Quarries Corporation, vital community programs would no longer be available; therefore, it is important that local civic and community-minded leaders be encouraged to continue to operate in the Roanoke Valley. She stated that the proposal of Rockydale Quarries is a balanced plan that will allow the company to double its remaining life in the Roanoke Valley; and it was a refreshing experience to see business and residents working together in partnership for the common good. Gary Wright, President, Adams Construction Company, advised that during the past three years, Adams Construction Company produced an average of 81,000 tons of hot mixed asphalt, and approximately 30,000 tons went to the City of Roanoke for maintenance overlay, with the remaining tons going to various commercial projects in Roanoke City and Roanoke County. He stated that Rockydale Quarries has operated for approximately 77 years and Adams Construction Company, has operated for about 60 years; and Rockydale Quarries provides a competitive source of aggregate necessary for economical growth and development for the community and approval of the rezoning will ensure a tax base to Roanoke City and a source of materials to Adams Construction Company for an additional 20 years. He pointed out that the petition for rezoning does not increase the intensity of the Rockydale Quarries operation. Willia M. Daley, Senior Vice-President, J. W. Burress Inc., spoke in support of the expansion of Rockydale Quarries. He advised that J. W. Burress Inc., has operated since 1934 and Rockydale Quarries shares a similar history; and the Roanoke Valley has benefited from grass root job opportunities provided by both companies. He stated that Rockydale Quarries Corporation provides economic opportunities to the Roanoke Valley, not only as a good corporate citizen, but as a provider and buyer of services; and its business relationship as a member of the City relies on strong community roots. He indicated that expansion of Rockydale Quarries will benefit the community by providing additional jobs, other opportunities, and continued prosperity for citizens. Roger B. Holnback, Executive Director, Western Virginia Land Trust, spoke in support of the petitions of Rockydale Quarries Corporation. He advised that the Land Trust provides voluntary conservation outreach and education to support the quality of life for all citizens in the Roanoke Valley; Rockydale Quarries owns a very critical piece of viewshed property associated with the Blue Ridge Parkway and the Fishburn Bypass going up to Mill Mountain; and a condition proffered by the petitioner includes a scenic easement on the 10 ½ - 11 acres of land facing the Fishburn Parkway. 191 Jack Jordan, 4237 Griffin Road, S.W., an employee of Rockydale Quarries Corporation, spoke in support of the petition for rezoning. Sandra D. Slone, 4219 Yellow Mountain Road, spoke in support of the petition for rezoning and commended Rockydale Quarries on the proposal to install a traffic light at the intersection of Draper Road and U. S. Route 220 (Franklin Road). Daphne Depuy, 2719 Rosalind Avenue, S. W., spoke in support of the proposed rezoning and proffered conditions to protect the scenic watershed submitted by Rockydale Quarries. She commended the petitioner for preserving the view and advised that the proposed traffic improvements will have a positive impact on the Southern Hills neighborhood. James M. Turner, Jr., President, advised that J. M. Turner Construction Company has done business with Rockydale Quarries Corporation for over 50 years; they are a model corporate citizen, and the proposal will be awin-win for everybody. James Dearing, 1502 Westover Avenue, S. W., spoke in support of the request for rezoning. Margaret Lester, 4013 Welcome Valley Road, N. E., spOke in support of the proffer to install atraffic signal at the intersection of Draper Road and U. S, Route 220 (Franklin Road); and asked that Council support the petition for rezoning. Ann B. Paris, 3789 Sandlewood Road, Roanoke County, spoke in support of closing the street for expansion of the Rockydale Quarries Corporation. She expressed appreciation for the conservation easement on the watershed property on the Blue Ridge Parkway and the Fishburn Bypass. Gary Johnson, Superintendent, Blue Ridge Parkway, Asheville, North Carolina, spoke in support of the expansion project and expressed appreciation for the opportunity to be a part of the planning process from the beginning. Council Member Dowe requested a clarification of Mr. Cooper's concerns with regard to the process of amending neighborhood plans; whereupon, Mr. Cooper advised that there is no formal process that neighborhoods are aware of. He pointed out that a Neighborhood Plan is an agreement between the neighborhoods and the City of Roanoke, and ifa Neighborhood Plan is revised, the neighborhoods should be included in the process. Council Member Lea inquired if the neighborhood received notification and engaged in dialogue with representatives of Rockydale Quarries Corporation; whereupon, Ms. Goodlatte advised that several meetings were held with neighborhood groups in the City of Roanoke and Roanoke Countypriortothe City Planning Commission's public hearing on January 20, 2005. She further advised that Mr. Cooper shared his concerns during the Planning Commission's public hearing, and the Planning Commission determined that Rockydale Quarries and 192 staff had followed the proper procedure. Due to concerns expressed by Mr. Cooper at the Planning Commission's meeting, she stated that City staff and representatives of Rockydale Quarries held several meetings with the Southern Hills Neighborhood Association to address other issues and/or concerns, and at the conclusion of the meetings, no objections were raised regarding amendment to the Southern Hills Neighborhood Plan. There being no further speakers or discussion by Council Members, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed on the Southern Hills Neighborhood Plan. Ordinance No. 36979-022205 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#36980-022205) AN ORDINANCE to amend Section 36.1-3, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet Nos. 538, 539 and 453, Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, to rezone certain property within the City, subject to certain conditions proffered by the applicant; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 289.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36980-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. The Mayor inquired if there were other persons.who wished to be heard in connection with the request for rezoning. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no further comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 36980-022205 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. Council Member McDaniel offered the following ordinance: 193 (#36981-022205) AN ORDINANCE permanentlyvacating, discontinuing and closing certain public rights-of-way in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as more particularly described hereinafter; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, See Ordinance Book 69, Page 291 .) Council Member McDaniel moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36981-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. The Mayor inquired if there were other persons who wished to be heard in connection with the request to vacate, discontinue and close the above referenced streets. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no further comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 36981-022205 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. ENTERPRISE ZONE: Pursuant to action taken by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Tuesday, February 22, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the proposal of the City of Roanoke to amend the boundaries of Enterprise Zone One A, Enterprise Zone One A local incentives, and Enterprise Zone Two and its Subzone local incentives, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Monday February 7, 2005 and Monday, February 14, 2005, and in The Roanoke Tribune Thursday, February 10, 2005. The City Manager submitted a communication advising that since the approval of Enterprise Zone One A, retroactive to January 1,2004, certain events have necessitated an amendment to the zone boundary and certain local zone incentives; Zone One A boundary amendment includes addition of the East End Shops, Parkside Plaza in Southeast Roanoke and approximately 100 acres along the east side of Williamson Road south of Elm Avenue; and adding the properties, some of which are in the flood plain, could stimulate additional opportunities for revitalization where buildings are currently vacant or underutilized. It was further advised that the City of Roanoke also proposes to amend local incentives for both Enterprise Zone One A and Enterprise Zone Two and its Subzone to cap local incentives providing grants through the Industrial Development Authority of the City of Roanoke, Virginia (IDA) for water, sewer and 194 fire hookup fees; such amendments are needed due to the assumption of all assets associated with water and sewer by the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) on July 1,2004; and the limit for the maximum amount of such hookup fees is equal to the amounts adopted by the WVWA. It was stated that as part of the amendment to Enterprise Zone Two and its Subzone, such local incentives will be by grants through the IDA as opposed to the former rebates since the City no longer receives such fees; Ordinance Nos. 35820- 041502 and 36782-071904 need to be amended to reflect such changes; Ordinance No. 35820-041502 needs to be amended to extend the period of availability of all local incentives, as amended, for Enterprise Zone Two and its Subzone from June 30, 2007, through December 31,2015; in accordance with the Department of Housing and Community Development's Virginia Enterprise Zone Program regulations, the local governing body must hold at least one public hearing affording citizens or interested parties an opportunity to be heard on such matters before submitting an amendment application to the department for consideration; and amendments are subject to approval by the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development (VDHCD). Lacking comments at the public hearing that would require further consideration, the City Manager recommended that Council adopt the appropriate measures, including amendment of the above referenced ordinances, to extend the boundary of Enterprise Zone One A and to amend certain local incentives for Enterprise Zone One A and Zone Two and its Subzone, subject to approval by the VDHCD, effective April 1,2005, for the amended local incentives; and that Council authorize the City Manager to apply to the VDHCD for approval of the above referenced amendments and to take such further action and/or to execute such additional documents as may be needed to obtain or confirm such amendments and to establish appropriate rules and regulations as may be needed to implement and administer such local incentives once approved. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#36982-022205) A RESOLUTION authorizing the proper City officials to make a boundary amendment to Roanoke's Enterprise Zone One A that will add certain areas not currently in Enterprise Zone One A; and authorizing the City Manager to apply to the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development for approval of such boundary amendment and to take such further action as may be necessary to obtain and implement such boundary amendment. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 294.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36982- 022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. 195 There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Resolution No. 36982-022205 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Cutler was not present when the vote was recorded.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#36983-022205) AN ORDINANCE amending Ordinance No. 36782-071904, adopted by City Council on July 19, 2004, by modifying certain local incentives contained therein for Enterprise Zone One A; authorizing the City Manager to apply to the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development (VDHCD) for the approval of the above amendment and/or to take such further action as may be necessary to obtain or confirm such amendment; establishing an effective date; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 296.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36983-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#36984-022205) AN ORDINANCE amending Ordinance No. 35820-041502, adopted by City Council on April 15, 2002, by modifying certain local incentives contained therein; by extending the availability of such local incentives for Enterprise Zone Two and its Subzone through December 31,2015; authorizing the City Manager to apply to the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development (VDHCD) for the approval of the above amendments and/or to take such further action as may be necessary to obtain or confirm those amendments; establishing an effective date; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 299.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36984-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: 196 AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. EASEMENTS-ROANOKECIVIC CENTER-AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER: Pursuant to action taken by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Tuesday, February 22, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a proposal of the City of Roanoke to convey an easement across City-owned property to Appalachian Power Company at the Roanoke Civic Center facilities, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, February 11,2005. The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Appalachian Power Company has requested a variable width utility easement across City-owned property identified as Official Tax Nos. 3024004 and 3014003 to extend an existing power line on the site to provide electric service to the facility; and the extension will utilize both overhead and underground lines, the location of which shall be approved by the City. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the appropriate documents granting an easement as above described to Appalachian Power Company, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#36985-022205) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the conveyance ofavariable width easement on City-owned property known as the Roanoke Civic Center, identified by Official Tax Nos. 3024004 and 3014003, to Appalachian Power Company, to extend an existing power line at the Roanoke Civic Center to provide electric service to that facility, upon certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 304.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36985-022205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. ' The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 36985-022205 was adopted by the following vote: 197 AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. OTHER BUSINESS: ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD: A petition filed by Jessie and Margaret Taylor appealing a decision of the Architectural Review Board, which was rendered on December 9, 2004, that no Certificate of Appropriateness be issued with regard to property located at 34 Gilmer Avenue, N. E., for a metal carport, was before Council. Mrs. Taylor advised that the request to install a carport at 34 Gilmer Avenue, N. E.,was denied by the Architectural Review Board; and although her residence is located in a historic neighborhood, she did not understand the rationale of the Board in denying the request to install a carport to protect a new vehicle from the outside elements. Robert N. Richert, Chair, Architectural Review Board, advised that: In July 2004, Mr. Taylor requested a Certificate of Appropriateness for a metal carport at his residence at 34 Gilmer Avenue, N. E., which is within the H-2, Neighborhood Preservation District. The Agent to the Architectural Review Board (ARB) met with Mr. Taylor to discuss the project and to arrange for the required design review. The two-story, Folk Victorian frame house was built in 1910 and remains in good condition. Staff advised Mr. Taylor that the metal carport would not be in keeping with the historic district guidelines and suggested a design that would be more compatible with the design of the house. Mr. Taylor investigated the possibility, but maintained his original request. Mr. Taylor filed an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness which was considered by the ARB on August 12, 2004, at which time he stated that he wanted to erect a temporary carport until he had funds to build agarage. ARB members expressed concern about the design of the carport and suggested that Mr. Taylor consider a permanent garage or a carport attached to the house; and Mr. Taylor stated that he intended to build a garage later when finances 198 allowed; he needed the carport to protect his wife's new vehicle. The Board believed that the proposed design would not be compatible with the character of the historic district and requested that he work with staff for a better design. At the request of the applicant, the application was tabled until the September Board meeting. Mr. Taylor requested that the application be tabled again until the October Board meeting; and at the October Board meeting, Mr. Taylor failed to appear. The Board decided to table the application until the November Board meeting; however, just prior to the November meeting, Mr. Taylor again requested that the matter be tabled until the December Board meeting for personal reasons. Mr. Taylor appeared before the Board at the December 9, 2004 meeting with the same request. The staff report recommended denial because the application was not consistent with the H-2 guidelines or the intent of the historic district. The Board expressed concern again that the metal carport was not in keeping with the historic district guidelines or the character of the neighborhood because of its shape, material and design. Mr. Richert further advised that: The H-2 Architectural Design Guidelines adopted by the ARB and endorsed by Council state that the design and placement of accessory structures can have an important influence on a building's overall appearance. The guidelines further recommend that the following be considered for accessory structures: Adopt a compatible style or use design motifs of the original building. Locate as inconspicuously as possible on the side or rear of building. Choose materials that are compatible with the existing structure and are appropriate to the residential character of the historic district. Use roofing forms and material that are compatible with those of the main building. Staff did not identify any other similar appeals to City Council, or any recent applications for carports, or any other accessory structures that are analogous to these circumstances. 199 On behalf of the Architectural Review Board, Mr. Richert recommended that Council affirm the decision to deny issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness. Council Member Wishneff inquired if anyone from the Gainsboro neighborhood had objected or expressed an opinion with regard to the request; whereupon, the Director of Planning, Building and Development responded that no testimony or comments other than the applicants, was received at the meeting of the Architectural Review Board on December 6, 2004. Council Member Wishneff questioned the appearance of the carport; whereupon, Mr. Townsend advised that the Building Code requires that a structure be permanently attached to the ground. Council Member Dowe inquired as to how long the proposed carport will be in place; whereupon, Mr. Taylor indicated that due to financial reasons, he could not provide a definitive answer. Council Member. Lea inquired if Mr. and Mrs. Taylor were aware of the requirements of living in a historic district; whereupon, Mr. Taylor advised that although he has resided at the location for 18 years, he was not aware of the historic district requirements. Council Member Lea inquired if there are any available grant programs for historic neighborhoods; whereupon, Mr. Townsend advised that he was not familiar with any State or Federal grants; and upon adoption of the historic neighborhood designation on the State and Federal registers, some opportunities may be available to property owners in the Gainsboro neighborhood through historic tax credits for rehabilitation of properties that are owner occupied. Based upon the evidence presented to the Council, Council Member Cutler moved that the decision of the City of Roanoke Architectural Review Board on December 9, 2004, as set forth in aletter dated December 14, 2004, be affirmed, and that no Certificate of Appropriateness be issued to allowa metal carport at 34 Gilmer Avenue, N. E., to be constructed as requested in the petition for appeal on the grounds that the proposed shape, material and design of the carport would not be in keeping with the historic guidelines or character of the neighborhood. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. Council Member Wishneff advised that since the standard procedure followed by the Architectural Review Board is subjective, and since no neighbors appeared before the Board or the Council to oppose the request, he would vote against the motion to deny a Certificate of Appropriateness to be issued to Mr. and Mrs. Taylor to allow construction of a metal carport at 34 GilmerAvenue, N. E. There being no further discussion or comments by Council Members, the motion offered by Council Member Cutler, seconded by Council Member McDaniel was adopted by the following vote: 200 AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Cutler and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 5. NAYS: Council Members Lea and Wishneff- ................................................. 2. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MA'I-FERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. COMPLAINTS-POLICE DEPARTMENT-CITY CODE-TOWING CONTRACT: Mr. Thomas Ruff, 731 Wildhurst Avenue, N. E., expressed concern with regard a tow truck that is parked in the neighborhood and noise at all hours of the day and night which has disrupted the quality of life in the neighborhood. He requested that the City Code be amended to prohibit the parking oftowtrucks in residential neighborhoods. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick requested that the City Manager determine if other complaints have been filed with regard to the parking of tow trucks in residential neighborhoods. Mayor Harris suggested that Mr. Ruff provide information to the City Manager with regard to the number of times that the tow truck exits and enters the neighborhood and that City staff meet with the owner of the vehicle to discuss the matter. CITY MARKET-TAXES-REAL ESTATE VALUATION-OUTDOOR DINING: Mr. Robert Craig, 701 12'h Street, S. W., commented about the previous discussion regarding the decision of the Architectural Review Board to deny a Certificate of Appropriateness for installation of a carport in a historic neighborhood, yet a double wide tin building valued at $22S,000.00, was constructed in another historic neighborhood. He extended an apology to Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick for his remarks which were published in The Roanoke Times regarding the return of trolley cars to Roanoke City, and acknowledged with appreciation the polite response by Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick. Mr. Craig stated that businesses in the City Market Building Food Court were not aware of the recent decision by Council to not allow franchise vendors to operate in the City Market Building. Mr. Craig questioned real estate assessments for residential property in the City of Roanoke, and noted that no action was taken by the Council with regard to his previous suggestion that the City engage an outside assessor to assess all City property at 100% of the current market value. He called attention to language on the Real Estate Assessor's website indicating that all residential property is assessed at 100 per cent, which he believes to be false information. 201 Mr. Craig inquired if there is a conflict of interest with the Director of Real Estate Valuation reporting to the Directo~ of Finance, since one position involves the raising of revenue and the other position deals with the expenditure of the City's revenue. He stated that the City's budget planners previously advised ora revenue shortfall in the near future; and tax revenue for the City is declining in every category except real property, yet real estate assessments continue to increase. There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m. APPROVED Mary F. Parker City Clerk (~ "~C. Nelson Harris~ Mayor 202 ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL March 7, 2005 9:00 a.m. The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday, March 7, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., in the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Regular Meetings, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 36762-070604 adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 6, 2004. PRESENT: Council Members Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. (arrived late), Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff (arrived late), M. Rupert Cutler and Mayor C. Nelson Harris .......................................... 7. ABSENT: None ..................................................................................... O. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Ann H. Shawver, Deputy Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. COMMI~-~EES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to §2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Cutler and Mayor Harris ............................................................................................................ 5. NAYS: None .......................................................................................... O. (Council Members Dowe and Wishneff were not present when the vote was recorded.) 203 PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss acquisition of real property for a public purpose, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Cutler and Mayor Harris ............................................................................................................ 5. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0I (Council Members Dowe and Wishneff were not pres'ent when the vote was recorded.) CITY COUNCIL-CITY PROPERTY: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to §2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Cutler and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................... 5. NAYS: None .......................................................................................... 0. (Council Members Dowe and Wishneff were not present when the vote was recorded.) ITEMS LISTED ON THE 2:00 P. M., COUNCIL DOCKET REQUIRING DISCUSSION/CLARiFICATION, AND ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE 2:00 P. M., AGENDA: NONE. TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: NONE. 204 At the appropriate time, the City Manager advised that she would like to include a briefing on the temporary closure of Crystal Spring Avenue at McClanahan Street and Evans Mill Road, S. W., as requested by Carillon Health Systems. BUDGET: The City Manager advised that at the Council's Financial Planning Session on Friday, February 18, 2005, staff requested input from Council with regard to additional budget issues that the Council would like to address in connection with the fiscal year 2005-2006 budget, and it was agreed that an item would be included on the March 7 and April 4, 2005 City Council agendas for further discussion. The City Manager explained that it was identified at the Financial Planning Session that there is a gap that must be closed in the budgetary process; there is a commitment to debt service, employee compensation and associated benefits have been suggested to the Council for review, and an increase in the meals tax has been mentioned as an opportunity to provide funding for William Fleming High School renovations. She asked that the Council identify any items on which either more or less resources should be expended. No suggestions were offered by the Council; whereupon, the Mayor suggested that Council Members forward any additional suggestions to the City Manager for review prior to the Council's 2005-2006 budget study. Council Member Lea advised that he would e-mail his suggestions to the City Manager. CITY MARKET: The City Manager advised that the City Market Building has been owned by the City of Roanoke for a number of years; for 20+ years, the facility was operated by Fralin and Waldron, with the City receiving a nominal rent and, in return, the management company retained all revenues; and when the City took over operation of the Market building several years ago, significant cleaning and maintenance activities were required that were quite costly. She stated that it was believed to be a short term effort by the City, and in subsequent years, the Market Building would become self-sufficient, with the exception of major repairs such as replacement of the heating and air conditioning system, both of which are almost complete. Because expenditures and revenues are not in sync, she advised that for the last few years, the City has subsidized operation of the Market building because revenue from vendors has been insufficient to meet ongoing maintenance and operating expenses, exclusive of heavy maintenance items. She further advised that it appears, based upon the latest analysis by the budget committee, that the need for an operating subsidy will continue, particularly in light of an issue that has been discussed over the past 12 months with regard to the payment of the Common Area Maintenance (CAM) fee by building tenants. 205 Therefore, prior to initiating a new CAM fee arrangement with Market building tenants, staff would like to brief the Council on what is involved and an anticipated operating subsidy. She called on R. Brian Townsend, Acting Director of Economic Development, to lead the discussion. Mr. Townsend introduced Lisa Poindexter-Via, a new employee in the Department of Economic Development, who will be responsible for disposition and leasing of City owned property such as the Market building. He advised that: Over the past two years, there have been ongoing maintenance issues with the Market building, primarily related to maintaining the heating/air conditioning system, which will not be an issue in fiscal year 2005-2006 with completion of the new system. Maintenance costs could decrease by as much as $20,000.00, but the City could still be faced with a net operating deficit of approximately $58,000.00 for the Market building. Utility expenses will likely remain the same as last year. On the revenue side, approximately 1500 - 2000 square feet of space is available on the first floor that could be re-tenanted and leased; and the third floor is a separate issue involving future investment in the building, therefore, the third floor will not produce revenue for fiscal year 2006. A feasibility study for the Market building and the entire Market area will be prepared in the spring/summer and will address the third floor. The revenue side could be improved if vacant space were released on the first floor during the course of the year. Another issue relates to the Common Area Maintenance Fee (CAM). The Market building has more common area as a percentage than the leaseable square footage of the average building, and the building contains a common area that is highly intensive in terms of maintenance because the food court must be cleaned frequently during the course of the day. Previously, the CAM fee involved a flat fee for the course of the tenant's year and at the end of the year, CAM costs were divided among tenants on a pro rata basis under an arrangement referred to as a "true up". 206 During the past several years, the "true up" has consisted of a considerable amount of money and many businesses could not afford to pay a large sum of money at the end of the year to cover the Common Area Maintenance fee. An issue of concern to tenants in November 2004 was their desire for a flat Common Area Maintenance fee which has now been addressed with Advantis, the current management company; and Advantis is in the process of finalizing a new base lease for the entire building which sets the CAM fee at a flat rate for the course of the year, with no "true up" at the end of the year. There is a question as to whether the fiat rate fee of $125.00 per month for retail tenants and $250.00 per month for food tenants will cover all Common Area Maintenance costs. If true Common Area Maintenance costs are spread among food court tenants, costs are likely to be beyond what tenants are willing or able to pay given the amount of square footage in the building. Under current projections, if the first floor of the building were fully occupied, if the CAM fee was readjusted to $125.00 and $250.00 respectively, per month, and if there were no costs outside of routine maintenance costs, there could be an operating income of as much as $38,000.00, however, the figure does not take into consideration any new capital expenditures. At 9:20 a.m., Council Members Dowe and Wishneff entered the meeting. The $250.00 flat CAM fee for the term of any lease contains a three per cent annualized increase based on the length of the term of the lease. The $125.00 and $250.00 figures were provided by Advantis based on what was paid under the old system; however, the $125.00 and $250.00 are not likely to cover all ongoing repairs and maintenance, but represents a rate that tenants understand, does not involve a "true up", and captures as much of the maintenance cost as the tenant base can sustain at this point. The City Manager explained that the purpose of the briefing was to advise Council that the Market building is currently operating in a subsidy situation and is likely to continue in that mode for some period of time if the same rental basis is maintained and if the proposed approach to the CAM fee is approved by Council; and the purpose of engaging a consultant to study the 207 Market building and the entire Market area is to receive recommendations on how the facility could be operated differently in the future. She clarified that it is important for the Council to understand at this point the Market building cannot be revenue and budget neutral under existing arrangements. Discussion by Council: Dr. Cutler inquired about the current relationship between Market building tenants and the management company; whereupon, Mr. Townsend responded that the big issue that the management company has resolved relates to the new base lease that contains a new Common Area Maintenance fee proposal and an exclusivity clause. Dr. Cutler inquired about uses for the third floor; whereupon, Mr. Townsend responded that the third floor involves identifying a reasonable range of marketable uses, and various infrastructure needs, in addition to an elevator and restroom facilities which are estimated to cost in the range of $50,000.00. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that the Market building does not contain enough square footage to create the critical mass, therefore, a study is needed to look at the overall building, and the best that can be hoped for at this point is a redirection in the subsidy. He commended staff on the agreement between tenants and the management company regarding the CAM fee and the exclusivity clause for the short term that will protect local tenants. He stated that the City will most likely be required to spend some money in the Market area in order to maintain the Market as a part of Roanoke's downtown and it is hoped that the consultant's study will address actions that the City should take. He added that when one looks at what downtown Roanoke has become since 1979, it is important to continue the momentum and the Market building is the main catalyst. Council Member Dowe advised that some generations of Roanokers have a loyalty to the City Market area; however, he expressed concern with regard to future generations who may or may not share that same loyalty. He stated that the Market building, the City Market area and the entire downtown corridor has offered a snippet of vibrancy to the extent that some of Roanoke's young people are willing to visit the Market area; therefore, it is necessary to build on the vibrancy of the area in order to create a level of loyalty. He requested realistic numbers from the consultant in connection with extending operating hours of the City Market, and/or a 24 hour operation. 208 He stated that in five to ten years, the Market building may look entirely different than the way it looks today~ and there is a certain degree of vibrancy that the building can create for itself and subsequently for the downtown area that could help to create a level of loyalty by future generations. Council Member Wishneff suggested that a request for proposals for local management of the City Market building be advertised for bid as soon as possible. The City Manager advised that Advantis currently operates the City Market building on a month to month management lease, all maintenance activities are performed locally, the City pays an annual maintenance/management fee to Advantis, the City pays all direct expenses, and the management firm collects rents and maintains direct contact with tenants in terms of tenant issues. Council Member McDaniel advised that this is an area where it is hoped that the City will not cut corners because there is an opportunity to make exciting things happen in the City Market area that will benefit the City of Roanoke as a whole. She inquired about the time frame for a consultants study; whereupon, Mr. Townsend responded that requests for proposals are due this week, it will take approximately two weeks for interviews to be conducted with the consultants to be followed by a recommendation to the City Manager; and the study process could take approximately six months to complete, therefore, it could be approximately August/September before submittal of the first stage of recommendations. He stated that the consultants study will include more than just the Market building, and will address urban design of the area around the Market building, issues regarding the Farmers Market such as operation and maintenance, and the area at the end of Market Street around Century Garage, etc. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that no local entity has the expertise to manage a professional market place, therefore, the question becomes, should the Market building be managed locally in the short term and should a different kind of operation be addressed for the long term; and if it is the desire of the City to turn the Market area into a revenue producing operation on a regular basis, an entity with a certain level of expertise will be required. Council Member Wishneff reiterated his previous suggestion that the City advertise for bids from local companies to manage the Market building. 209 Following discussion of Council Member Wishneff's suggestion, Mr. Townsend advised that there now appears to be some consistency in the relationship between Advantis and Market building tenants; progress has been made in connection with new leases, Common Area Maintenance fees and the exclusivity clause, therefore, if Council gives the indication that it plans to explore a new management team, the wrong message could be sent to Market tenants. The City Manager advised that an advantage of engaging Advantis on a month-to-month basis is in the fact that there is no long term relationship while the consultant's study is underway; and if the consultant's study is completed within a six month time frame, the recommendation could be an entirely different approach to operation of the Market building. She expressed concern about the message that could be sent to tenants of the Market building if another management team is engaged on a month-to-month basis. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the current month-to-month agreement with Advantis for management of the City Market building be continued, pending completion of the study by the consultant. The motion was seconded by Dr. Cutler and adopted, Council Members Lea and Wishneff voted no. STREETS AND ALLEYS: At the request of Council Member Wishneff, the City Manager introduced a briefing on the temporary closure of Crystal Spring Avenue at McClanahan Street and Evans Mill Road, S. W. Robert K. Bengtson, Director of Public Works, advised that: A request was submitted by Carilion Health Systems to close Crystal Spring Avenue between McClanahan Street and Evans Mill Road, S. W. As Carilion moves forward with major construction and renovation projects in the area of the hospital and the cancer center, they have experienced problems with regard to space availability in terms of staging and storing of materials, construction, delivery, etc. Conceptually, Carilion is also looking at certain improvements that would effectively make use of Crystal Spring Avenue as the Hospital continues to improve upon the parking deck, as well as improvements to facilities on the other side of the street. The City requested that Carilion initiate a traffic study to address the closing of Crystal Spring Avenue in order to determine traffic patterns as a result of the potential closure. 210 Some time ago, when the parking deck was under construction, the area was closed for an extended period of time with no impact on the surrounding street system. The City has agreed, on a temporary basis, that Crystal Spring Avenue between McClanahan Street and Masons Mill Road could be closed through October 2007. If traffic flows smoothly, Carillon will likely petition for permanent closure of the street at some time in 2007. Mr. Bengtson was asked to respond to a question with regard to standard notification to the public on street closures; whereupon, he advised that information is disseminated through the City's Public Information Office and advisory signage is placed at or near the street in question. He stated that temporary closure of Crystal Spring Avenue will allow the City to identify problems that could occur over a period of time in anticipation of a request by Carillon to permanently close the street. Upon question with regard to line of site at the pedestrian underpass to Rivers Edge Sports Complex, Mark D. Jamison, Traffic Engineer, advised that the City is currently working with Norfolk Southern to move the fence back and to remove over grown brush within railway property, and Norfolk Southern appears to be agreeable to cleaning out the brush and to relocating approximately 200 feet of the fence to improve the line of site. There were questions as to whether meetings were held with representatives of the neighborhood/neighborhood association; whereupon, it was noted that no meetings were held. Council Member Wishneff expressed a preference that City staff meet with residents of the area before Crystal Spring Avenue is temporarily closed. Because the matter is a traffic-related issue, the City Manager requested guidance from Council as to how staff should conduct business in the future inasmuch as staff does not typically seek input from the neighborhood on temporary street closure(s). She stated that the request of Carillon has been studied by City staff for several months. The Mayor suggested that City staff meet with the Neighborhood Association at its next meeting to provide an explanation regarding the temporary closure, the time frame, etc., and if a future request is submitted by Carillon to permanently close Crystal Spring Avenue at McClanahan Street and Evans Mill Road, the matter would routinely go before the City Planning Commission for a public hearing, followed by a recommendation to Council for consideration at the Council's public hearing; and at that point, citizens and the Neighborhood Association would have an opportunity to express their views. Following discussion, it was the consensus of Council to concur in the Mayor's suggestion. 211 The City Manager advised that City staff will closely monitor the closure of Crystal Spring Avenue, particularly since Carillon has indicated that a request for permanent closure may be submitted at a later time. She stated that temporary closure gives the City a test period in which to evaluate the situation before making what could be a permanent decision. At the 2:00 p.m., Council session, the Mayor advised that Council Member Wishneff would request the City Manager to present a summary of the temporary closure of Crystal Spring Avenue. PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-TAXES-FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL-CITY PROPERTY-EASEMENTS: The City Manager advised that the briefing is a follow up to the February 7, 2005, Council briefing with regard to a staff recommendation that Council consider the development of a Riparian Corridor along the Roanoke River. She stated that the briefing would identify both public and private real estate holdings along the river corridor in an effort to seek input on whether or not Council would like for staff to pursue the issue. She noted that some easements might be obtained without compensation by those persons who are supportive of a plan to create the riparian corridor along the river and other instances may require appropriation of funds to acquire land. Steven C. Buschor, Director, Parks and Recreation, presented maps identifying the floodway and those locations where a Riparian Corridor Overlay District could be developed, identification of properties within the riparian corridor that are currently publicly held and those properties that are privately owned and the assessed value of properties; and based on the "proximate principal" and utilizing a 500 foot barrier on either side of the floodway, property values have been assessed inside the 500 foot buffer that are both City held and publicly held. He presented the following spread sheet identifying property values. ITEM VALUE -3% 1% 3% 5% Inside Floodway City Owned Property $5~084,443.00 Privately Owned $49,960,020.00 Inside 500' Floodway Buffer City owned $26,258,281.00 Privately Owned $314,437,675.00 ($9,433,130.00) $3,144,377.00 $9,433,130.00 $15,721,884.00 212 Mr. Buschor advised that: Using the "proximate principle" for City owned property inside the 500 foot buffer area, the assessed value is approximately $26.5 million and $314 million in assessed value for those properties that are privately held. No City department has been assigned a responsibility regarding the Roanoke River, except in those situations where flooding occurs. If one makes the assumption that if a riparian corridor of a linear park is developed, the "proximate principle" indicates that there will be an increase in proximate valuations, and a one per cent increase in privately held properties has the potential of raising $3.2 million annually in proximate values. Council discussion: Dr. Cutler advised that as work proceeds on the greenway, the City should take advantage of opportunities to provide for a wider linear park than 50 feet. Dr. Cutler inquired as to steps that need to be taken by the City to make the Riparian Overlay District more of an official vision of the City over the next five to ten years, in order to take advantage of opportunities to acquire land along the Roanoke River and to encourage private development along the public rights-of-way. The City Manager advised that assuming the Council concurs in the establishment of a riparian overlay, Council will be requested to adopt an official policy for development of the corridor over time, which would then trigger staff time and involvement by approaching various property owners along the Roanoke River to explain the benefits that will be afforded to them as individual property owners as well as benefits to the City of Roanoke; and through development of the policy, the City would have the potential to condemn land in the event that the City was not successful in acquiring land through donation or negotiated sale. She stated that the City would need to systematically begin the acceptance of donations, and development of a policy would further reinforce a coordinated approach by various City departments; and the policy would be a number of years in the making. She explained that current practice provides that individual property owners along the Roanoke River are responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of their portion of the river and no individual or organization is 213 responsible for the upkeep of the river. She stated that when the Roanoke River Flood Reduction project is completed, the City will have an ongoing responsibility for the river bed itself and there will be better off site and more significant aesthetics to the river that will enhance property values. Dr. Cutler spoke in support of the establishment of a "river keeper". With the concurrence of Council, the City Manager advised that a measure would be presented to the Council for consideration that will officially establish a Riparian Overlay Corridor; and staff will develop a policy statement that could be incorporated into the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Mayor advised that two issues should be considered; i.e.: a long term issue which includes the entire river linear park concept as a part of the City's Comprehensive Plan that would encompass property rights and acquisition of land, etc., and (2) a short term issue that would involve maintenance of the Roanoke River -- an administrative strategy that sets forth who is responsible within the structure of City government for maintenance and periodic cleanup of the river. He called attention to the need to address the public areas along the river; i.e.: along Wiley Drive to remove debris hanging from trees and brush along the river, which deters from the aesthetics of the park and the overall area. Given that Roanoke is a City that has a river running through its boundaries, he advised that there should be some responsibility or coordination of river maintenance, such as a "river keeper", or a department, or a group of staff within the City that would take responsibility for river clean up. Dr. Cutler commended the Assistant City Manager for Operations who informed the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers that landscaping must be addressed at the same time that bench cuts are made for the Roanoke River Flood Reduction project. In addition to suggestions offered by the Mayor, the City Manager advised that the City needs a public information/public relations campaign that addresses the responsibilities of all parties relative to the Roanoke River. She stated that one of the advantages of a riparian corridor is to identify owners of property along the Roanoke River, to communicate with those owners regarding their individual responsibilities and to solicit their assistance with regard to river clean up projects that might be held on a more frequent basis. The Mayor requested that the City Manager report to Council on a Roanoke River Maintenance Plan. The City Manager advised that different types of equipment, other than that which is currently in the City's inventory, will be required to perform river maintenance; therefore, knowing the interest of Council will help City staff to prioritize those needs along with other requests when finalizing the recommended fiscal year 2005-2006 City budget. 214 The Mayor suggested that equipment purchases be reviewed on a regional basis in an effort to share costs since the Roanoke River flows through other Roanoke Valley jurisdictions. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick suggested discussed at regional meetings Managers/Administrators to determine participation. that the riparian corridor issue be of the Mayors/Chairs and if there is an interest in regional SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Engineer introduced a briefing on the storm water utility feasibility study which is currently being conducted by AMEC. He advised that: · This is the third Council briefing on the topic. At the first briefing, information was provided on Roanoke's location in the watershed, its location with respect to jurisdictional boundaries, a current $57 million list of capital projects needs and general terms to the concept of a storm water utility. The second briefing included more detail on the storm water utility, a review of funds currently spent from the operations budget and capital expenditures on storm drains, a review of GIS analysis to establish the equivalent residential unit, and a review of experiences by other cities in Virginia that have adopted a storm water utility fee. · Today's briefing will focus on a fee for Roanoke in terms of a service level. Doug Mosely, representing AMEC, advised that project review consists of: · Program Phase: To determine the level and extent of storm water management service based upon community needs and Capital Improvement Programming; and Data Development and Analysis to evaluate the data needed to determine an equitable allocation of the cost of service. The study is designed to help the City reach a decision point concerning implementation of a storm water utility fee. 215 Key areas of program needs include reinvestment in the infrastructure: Total program average expenditures: $695,000.00 annually CIPneeds: $57 million Maintenance and operation needs: $1 million/annually Build capacity to maintain infrastructure Increase capital spending: $3-5 million annually Ensure compliance with regulatory mandates Address water quality needs through CIP Billing unit determination Residential Unit (ERU) Recommended Billing Unit: Reinvestment Strategy Options methodology House area: Other impervious area Total - Equivalent 1,450' 470' 1,920' Scenario No. 1 - Utility funding for capital only Assumptions: Current staffing levels can support $3 to $5 million in new capital projects No utility support for billing, administrative costs, database management, GIS, maintenance and operations and GIS mapping All capital projects will be cash funded (pay as you go) Capital Only Scenario Year 1 to Year 6 Estimated Annual ERU Revenue Range $3.2 to $5.8 million Range of Monthly Charge per ERU $2.70 to $4.50 Scenario No. 2 - Comprehensive I Assumptions: New resources will address: CIP, new maintenance and operations crew, dedicated FPM resources to lower CRS rating, administrative support for billing and customer service, and support for updating GIS data for storm water programming. 216 All capital projects will be cash funded (pay as you go) and CIP growth is identical to Capital only scenario. Comprehensive I Scenario Estimated Annual ERU Revenue Range Range of monthly charge per ERU Year 1 to Year 6 $4 to $6.7 million $3.30 to $5.1 0 Scenario No. 3 - Comprehensive II Assumptions: New resources will address: Comprehensive I list plus completed inventory of drainage system (open channels), new work order system for maintenance program, GIS-based inventory of easements, and new equipment and manpower for internal inspection of pipe system. All capital projects will be cash funded (pay as you go) and CIP growth is identical to Capital Only scenario. Comprehensive II Scenario Estimated Annual ERU Revenue Range Range of Monthly Charge per EUR Year 1 to Year 6 $4.3 to $6.9 million $3.60 to $5.20 SWU Fee Schedules Around Virginia (2004) Single-Family NPDES Stormwater Commercial Total Annual Phase I/ Fee (per Stormwater Fee Revenue Locality Phase II month) (per month) Generated City of $0.124 per 2,000 sq. Norfolk, VA Phase I $5.40 ft. of impervious area $7.4 million City of Virginia $4.29 per 2,269 sq. ft. Beach, VA Phase I $4.29 of impervious area $12.7 million City of $3.S0 per 1,877 sq. ft. Portsmouth, VA Phase I $3.50 of impervious area $2.6 million City of Newport $3.10 per 1,777 sq. ft. News, VA Phase I $3.10 impervious area $5.5 million City of $3.50 per 2,429 sq. ft. Hampton, VA Phase I $3.50 of impervious area $3.7 million City of $2.55 per 2,112 sq. ft. Chesapeake~ VA Phase I $2.55 of impervious area $4.2 million Prince William $0.84 per 1,000 sq. ft. Count¥~ VA Phase I $1.73 of impervious area $2.8 million Mr. Mosley advised that the above scenarios were not intended to be a formal recommendation, but were submitted to help understand the impact that program decisions can have on revenue needs and to provide a potential way to finance the revenue need. 217 There was discussion with regard to how the consultant calculated building units. At 11:15 a.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be reconvened in the Council's Conference Room at 11:30 a.m., for a continuation of the briefing/discussion on stormwater management. The Council meeting reconvened at 11:30 a.m., in the Council's Conference Room, Room 451, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, with all Members of Council in attendance, Mayor Harris presiding. Discussion by Council: Dr. Cutler inquired as to what extent a storm water management fee/program is required based on Federal and State mandates. The City Engineer responded that based upon the current storm water quality program, under NPD£S it is believed that the City is current with existing resources; however, any future requirement on the water quality program is unknown at this point due to the fact that it is a continuing and evolving area and it is expected that there will be greater emphasis on water quality in the future. Council Member Cutler expressed an interest in the use of Iow impact development storm water management techniques similar to what the developer of Colonial Green has proposed with rain gardens and open streams, and similar to the Ivy Market proposal using a storm water cleaning device to remove debris before water flows into the Roanoke River, which could provide an opportunity to improve the beauty and environmental quality of the City while at the same time, addressing storm water management issues. He expressed an interest in a regional approach to storm water that would be administered by the Western Virginia Water Authority which currently has a storm water management provision in its Articles of Incorporation and By-laws, and encouraged the Mayor and the City Manager to address the matter at future meetings with the Chair of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator. Council Member Lea inquired as to how long storm water utility fees have been in effect in the Tidewater area; whereupon, the consultant advised that the fees have existed for approximately eight to ten years. 218 The City Manager advised that when Federal regulations regarding storm water management were first enacted, the Federal government identified different tiers that were required to be in compliance; and the first tier involved communities that were over a certain population, as well as those communities that were located near heavily impacted water sheds and water areas which included several of the Tidewater communities that had populations in excess of the 250,000 threshold. She further advised that when the City of Roanoke filed for a permit, the City made certain commitments that would be performed on a regular basis which have been incorporated into the City's General Fund budget, but the City has not, with any consistency, been able to address actual capital needs that existed before Federal regulations were in place; and as a largely developed community, Roanoke does not have a lot of opportunity to address Iow impact development unless it is addressed through redevelopment. She stated that the City of Roanoke has recently been required to come under Federal guidelines, as opposed to other communities that have operated under the guidelines for at least eight years. Council Member Dowe stated that once capital needs are addressed, it appears that annual revenue will exceed annual operating cost; whereupon, he inquired as to how additional funds would be used. The City Manager responded that the utility fee is available to localities for the express purpose of meeting storm water needs, if the City were successful in the ten year period going to the maximum dollar amount and assuming that the $57 million in capital project needs is a moving target, the monthly utility fee would be reduced to a level that would be needed to maintain and operate the system, and the City would not collect money in excess of its needs. Council Member Dowe inquired if there might be a point at some time in the future when the utility fee could be eliminated; whereupon, the City Manager advised that the utility fee should not be any higher than actual expenditures. She stated that the City of Roanoke and other communities have erred in not properly maintaining infrastructure, whether it be buildings or storm drains, etc.; if the utility fee were to be instituted, after making a $57 million investment, Council would want the assurance that the system would be properly maintained, therefore, a fee should be dedicated to ongoing maintenance. 219 Council Member Wishneff advised that at some point, Council briefings on storm water management should be presented as a part of the Council's regular proceedings on RVTV Channel 3 so that citizens will be adequately informed. He inquired if the $57 million in capital projects pertain to City projects solely, or do they address valley wide solutions. The City Manager responded that the $57 million is intended to address projects within the City of Roanoke; however, projects totaling $17 million of the $57 million were identified in the Valley-wide Storm Drain Study. On a parallel track, Council Member Wishneff spoke in support of addressing the matter with the Counties of Roanoke, Montgomery, Floyd and Botetourt and the City of Salem. The City Manager responded that approximately three years ago when the City prepared its permit application for NPDES, at the Fifth Planning District Commission level, her counterparts discussed the need for a study on a regional basis; as the City has addressed the matter with its consultant, representatives of Roanoke County and the City of Salem have been invited to participate, but they prefer to remain in a "wait and see" mode. She stated that there was a recent indication that Roanoke County might be interested in participating in a work session on storm water in an elementary way and the City would be willing to make the consultant available for that purpose. In response to Council Member Wishneff's statement with regard to public briefings on storm water management issues, the City Manager advised that the City is at the point where public input would be desirable, but staff has not been willing to solicit public input until there is direction from the Council to proceed with a specific scenario that staff could take to the public for comments. The Mayor advised that he was in full agreement on the need for storm water improvements; however, he stated that he was lukewarm to the idea of the City of Roanoke proceeding as the lone jurisdiction to impose a storm water utility fee for the following reasons: (1) as a jurisdiction, the City of Roanoke has the highest real estate tax rate in the region and a storm water utility fee would create another financial responsibility for a homeowner in the City of Roanoke that no other Roanoke Valley homeowner is required to pay; (2) the storm water issue is a regional problem and not just germane to the City of Roanoke, therefore, it should be addressed on a regional level; and (3) the Western Virginia Water Authority has the legal capacity within its 220 By-laws and Articles of Incorporation to address storm water issues. He spoke in support of referring the issue of storm water management on a regional level to the Western Virginia Water Authority, of which the City of Roanoke is a member, to develop a more regional approach to storm water management. He stated that for the City of Roanoke to proceed as the lone jurisdiction to impose a storm water utility fee will exacerbate the inequity in terms of what homeowners and businesses pay in the City of Roanoke versus their counterparts in other Roanoke Valley jurisdictions. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the Mayor's remarks and refer the issue of addressing storm water management on a regional level to the Western Virginia Water Authority. The motion was seconded by Council Member Wishneff. In response to a question raised by Council Member Dowe with regard to whether there is an urgent need to implement a storm water utility fee, the City Manager replied that the problem has existed for the past two to three years, therefore, to wait another 12 - 18 months will not cause undue harm. She stated that she supports the Mayor's remarks regarding the need for a regional solution to storm water and the cost impact; the City of Roanoke must take a leadership role and if the Western Virginia Water Authority is to be used as the interim solution, it should be done with the clear understanding that Roanoke City and Roanoke County will be engaged in the discussions, with the potential of the City of Salem as the next appropriate entity. The Mayor advised that the matter could be discussed at a future meeting of the Mayor/Chair and the City Manager/County Administration of Roanoke City and Roanoke County, the consultants report could be made available to the WVWA, and since the matter is considered to be a regional issue, the City would encourage involvement by the Roanoke Valley Regional Chamber of Commerce. There was discussion with regard to educating the community on the benefits of a storm water utility fee; whereupon, Mr. Mosley advised that a storm water advisory committee, which is citizen based and consists of key stakeholders from throughout the community such as environmentalists, the Chamber of Commerce, developers, homeowners, etc., is typically recommended. There was discussion with regard to the need for General Assembly action on a regional storm water management fee; whereupon, the City Manager advised that it could be beneficial to receive recognition by a regional entity because long term, it would be easier if rates could be established by the Western Virginia Water Authority in lieu of individual localities approving a rate. 221 The motion offered by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick, seconded by Council Member Wishneff, to refer the issue of addressing storm water management on a regional level to the Western Virginia Water Authority, was unanimously adopted. At 12:00 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess for a joint meeting of Council, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission. The Council meeting reconvened at 12:00 noon on Monday, March 7, 2005, in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., for a joint meeting of the Roanoke City Council, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris, Chairman Michael W. Altizer, and Chairman James M. Turner, Jr., presiding. ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ............................................................. 7. ABSENT: None ..................................................................................... 0. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PRESENT: Richard C. Flora, Joseph P. McNamara, Michael A. Wray, and Chairman Michael W. Altizer .......... 4. ABSENT: Supervisor Joseph B. Church .................................................. 1. ROANOKE REGIONAL AIRPORT COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Jane Milliron, J. Granger Macfarlane, Claude N. Smith, Arthur M. Whittaker, Sr., and Chairman James M. Turner, Jr. - ...................................................................... 5. ABSENT: None .................................................................................... 0. STAFF PRESENT: Representing the City of Roanoke: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Ann H. Shawver, Deputy Director of Finance; Mary F. Parker, City Clerk; Troy A. Harmon, Municipal Auditor; George C. Snead, Jr., Assistant City Manager for Operations; James Grigsby, Chief, Fire/EMS; and Sherman M. Stovall, Director of Management and Budget. Representing Roanoke County: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Richard E. Burch, .Ir., Chief, Fire/EMS; and BrendaJ. Holton, Deputy Clerk. 222 Representing the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission: Jacqueline L. Shuck, Executive Director; Efren Gonzalez, Deputy Executive Director and Treasurer; Dan Neel, Director of Finance and Administration; Mark A. Williams, General Counsel; Amanda DeHaven, Marketing and Communications Coordinator; Roger Bohm, Network Administrator; and Cathy Pendleton, Secretary. The invocation was delivered by Council Member Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. On behalf of the City of Roanoke, the Mayor welcomed the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission and their respective staffs. FIRE DEPARTMENT: Mayor Harris advised that there were a number of items to be addressed primarily pertaining to the Roanoke Regional Airport and the Airport Commission. However, he called attention to one non-Airport related matter; i.e.: County/City Mutual Automatic Aid Agreement for Fire/EMS operations. The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke and the County of Roanoke currently have fire "mutual aid" agreements with each other, as well as a co-staffing agreement for the County's Clearbrook station; additionally, both jurisdictions are part of a statewide mutual aid agreement; and except for the Clearbrook area, the agreements have specific provisions which require the jurisdiction needing assistance to make a formal request to the providing agency. It was further advised that a proposed agreement takes mutual aid one step further to "automatic aid"; automatic aid is defined as the appropriate predetermined response to an incident, initiated through the 9-1-1 system of the jurisdiction in which the incident occurs, without being specifically requested; response zones are pre-determined and resources committed based on terms of the agreement, usually response time or distance; and as required by law, each party will be required to indemnify the other party from all claims by third persons for property damage, personal injury, or debt which may arise out of the activities of the assisting party. The City Manager explained that the Roanoke Fire-EMS Department will respond into Roanoke County from Appleton Avenue Station No. 3 into the North Lakes/Montclair area for first responder medical and fire calls; and the City of Roanoke will also respond into the Mt. Pleasant area of the County from Garden City area Station No. ] 1 for fire calls; Roanoke County will reciprocate by providing full-time firefighter/emergency medical technicians to staff an engine 24/7 in the Hollins station; the engine will provide backup to City- related fire responses in the North Williamson Road area; and, in addition, the County will staff a 24/7 ambulance in the Mt. Pleasant station which will respond to medical calls into the Garden City area of the City. 223 The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a Memorandum of Agreement for Mutual Automatic Aid for Fire and EMS Protection Services with Roanoke County, such agreement to be approved as to form by the City Attorney. Roanoke City Chief James Grigsby advised that the Mutual Automatic Aid Agreement would benefit both the City and the County because there would be a predetermined response to an incident initiated through the 9-1-1 system of the jurisdiction in which the incident is occurring without being specifically requested, thereby generating a quick response from the closest fire station. He stated that after reviewing recorded data, there would be a fairly even split of reciprocity, and the agreement would be another success by Roanoke City and Roanoke County. Roanoke County Chief Richard Burch stated that regional cooperation has a proven track record, and cited the regional Fire/EMS plan and the Clearbrook co-staff operations as examples, in addition to the Automatic Aid Agreement under consideration. Chairman Altizer advised that no one should argue that jurisdictional boundaries should jeopardize response time to save lives, and a person in a life threatening situation would not care whether the rescue personnel are from Roanoke City or Roanoke County, because the main objective is to help those in need. He stated that citizens expect this type of cooperation from their elected officials. Supervisor Flora advised that the agreement represents a win-win situation for citizens in both the City and the County, and both Fire Chiefs are to be commended for their efforts. He noted that the experimental project at Clearbrook was successful, the effort under consideration is a natural progression, and there will be other opportunities for future joint cooperation by the City and the County. Supervisor Wray commended the Clearbrook relationship and reiterated the remarks of Chairman Altizer. He commended Roanoke Valley leadership upon taking the necessary steps toward regional cooperation. Supervisor Flora moved approval of the Mutual Automatic Aid Agreement; whereupon, the motion was approved by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Wray, Flora, and Chairman Altizer ........... 4. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0. (Supervisor Church was absent.) 224 Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#36986-030705) A RESOLUTION authorizing execution of an agreement with Roanoke County for Fire and Rescue Automatic Aid in Station 11 and Station 13 service areas of the City of Roanoke. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 305.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36968- 030705. The motion was second by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, and Mayor Harris ................................................................................ 7. NAYS: None Mayor Harris expressed appreciation to the staffs of Roanoke City and Roanoke County. AIRPORT: Mayor Harris advised that as a result of monthly meetings with the Chairman of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, the County Administrator and the City Manager, it was determined that it would be mutually beneficial for City and County elected officials to meet with the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority, and the Western Virginia Water Authority, thus the meeting with the Airport Commission was scheduled for today's session. Chairman Turner expressed appreciation for the opportunity to meet with the Board of Supervisors and City Council, and introduced members of the Airport Commission. He gave the following overview of the history of formation of the Roanoke Regional Airport: In the early 1980's, there was a push for a new airport terminal, which was later determined to be a regional operation. In 1986, the General Assembly approved legislation that established the Airport Commission as an independent governmental body in the Commonwealth of Virginia. In 1987, the City of Roanoke transferred Airport property to the Airport Commission, and Roanoke County pledged $2.6 million dollars to the Airport Commission which was paid over a ten year period. · The City of Salem donated $1 million toward construction of a new terminal. 225 The Airport Commission issued bonds for construction of a new terminal and supportive facilities and the grand opening of the facility was held in 1989. At the time the Airport Commission was established, the City of Salem did not wish to be represented on the Commission, therefore, legislation was approved providing for the appointment of five commissioners, three to be appointed by City Council and two to be appointed by the County Board of Supervisors, which were then either members of the Board of Supervisors or employees of the City of Roanoke. The understanding was that eventually the Airport Commission would be composed of City and County citizens; and with the appointment of Jane Milliron in the late 1990's, the Airport Commission has become a committee of citizens serving at the pleasure of the Board of Supervisors and City Council. Chairman Turner introduced Jacqueline Shuck, Executive Director, for an update on Airport operations. Working from an outline, Ms. Shuck gave the following presentation: Background and facilities: Airfield and Terminal Based on 800 acres (new airports are based on 2,000+ acres) (land boundaries mirror the runways; hemmed in by roads and a shopping mall) Terminal meets today's needs and reasonable future needs 96,000 square feet terminal was completed in 1989 Has six gates, four jet bridges, 1,882 total available parking spaces Employees Commission employs or contracts 76 persons to keep the facility safe, clean and financially secure which include: 10 Roanoke City firefighters who provide aircraft rescue and fire fighting services 35 security, law enforcement, safety and operations personnel 226 27 facilities and airfield maintenance personnel 16 finance and administration personnel 1 legal personnel Other Airport Businesses Airport serves as home to 30 companies and agencies Nearly 1,000 persons are employed or based at the airport 30 different employers provide services to public or aviation users Economic Impact Results of the 2004 Virginia Airport System Economic Impact Study: Airport provides a total economic impact of nearly three- quarters of a billion dollars (wages - $94,981,000; economic activity $252,728,000; direct economic impact $347,709,000) Airport .has indirect economic impact of nearly $290,000,000. (wages - $67,984,000; economic activity - $217,299,000; indirect economic impact from airport dependent businesses in community - $285,283,000) Travelers' spending has an additional indirect economic impact of $80,000,000 (total air carrier visitors - 133,904; average visitor spending - $79,806,000) Funding: Operatinq Budqet Airport has an Operating Budget of nearly $7,000,000 Sources of Operating Revenue: 31% 7% 4% 19% 26% 7% 6%- passenger airlines cargo carriers general aviation terminal tenants and concessions parking non-operating revenue other 227 Capital Proiects and Revenue Sources Successful in competing for Federal discretionary airport funds Since 1998, received $14.5 million of Federal entitlement funding and $46.8 million of discretionary funding Funds are derived from 10% ticket tax imposed on airline passengers Nearly $60 million of improvements have been constructed at no direct cost to the airlines Since 1998, the Commission's capital program has virtually rebuilt the airfield Airport Aviation Sectors: General Aviation Includes private and corporate aviation and fixed base ope rato rs As of January 2005, the Airport is home to 125 general aviation aircraft, 91 single engine aircraft, 19 multi-engine piston aircraft, 9 multi-engine turbo prop aircraft, and 6 business jet aircraft General aviation area currently consists of 12 hangars and one general aviation terminal New general aviation hangars are being built 14 unit T-hangar was fully leased before the certificate of occupancy was issued in September 2004 February 2005, the Commission working through the Virginia Resource Authority was issued $1.4 million in bonds to fund an 18,000 square feet storage hangar capable of storing larger corporate jet aircraft Millions of dollars are being invested to rehabilitate and upgrade the general aviation area infrastructure Redevelopment of the north side of the general aviation area began in 2001 with a $2.3 million project to upgrade utilities, drainage and paved surfaces 228 Building sites have been created for up to four hangars Second phase of redevelopment begins in the spring at a cost of $2,000,000 All paved surfaces should be rehabilitated by 2006 or 2007 Carqo and Larqe Aircraft Maintenance Three national cargo carriers operate at the airport with large aircraft major cargo carriers: Airborne Express ten flights per week (DC-9 aircraft), 2,411,068 pounds of air freight in 2004 Federal Express - ten flights per week (Boeing 727 aircraft), 13,406,155 pounds of air freight in 2004 UPS - 18 flights per week (Boeing 757 aircraft), 9,739,945 pounds of air freight in 2004 After experiencing the same decreases in air freight that started to occur nationally in 2000, activity has been gradually increasing In addition to national cargo carriers, the Airport accommodates the needs of many small haulers Falling somewhat outside of the three sectors is maintenance facility for larger aircraft currently operated by Piedmont Airlines In 2000, the Commission invested over $800,000 to rehabilitate a 49,296 square foot maintenance hangar built in the 1960's Piedmont Airlines maintains DeHavilland Dash eight turbo prop aircraft, mostly at night, and employs 65 mechanics Passenqer Carriers and Air Service Airport Commission tracks the air traveling habits of persons living within its primary and secondary air service catchment areas Regional affiliates of four airlines operating at the Airport provide service through eight major hubs 229 US Airways Express: Charlotte -eight flights, four jets, four turbo prop, 387 seats New York LaGuardia - three flights, all turbo prop, 111 seats Philadelphia - four flights, all turbo prop, 274 seats Northwest Airlink: Detroit - four flights, two jets, two turbo prop, 166 seats United Express: Chicago - three flights, all jets, 150 seats Washington, Dulles - one jet, three turbo prop, 299 seats Delta Connection: Atlanta - five flights, all jets, 250 seats Cincinnati - four flights, all jets, 200 seats Non-stop service to eight major hubs Following the events of September 1, 2001, airline seats available for Roanoke passengers decreased by 25% While total departures and landings for military and commercial air carriers have remained fairly constant, general aviation operations continue to decrease Despite a significant decrease in airline seats, the Airport's average load factor for all flights has not increased dramatically After three straight years of declining passengers following September 1, 2001, in 2004 passenger numbers started to rebound Airlines would like an 80-85% load factor of passengers, but this creates a very crowded and uncomfortable situation for passengers Currently, the load factor is about 56%, which is not bad for a small community There was a three year slide after 2001, but there has been a six per cent increase in 2004, and it is hoped that this trend will continue Since inception, the Airport Commission has conducted passenger surveys 230 Roanoke City and Roanoke County residents, business travelers and guests comprise over 50% of the Airport's passengers While business passengers make up approximately 57% of Roanoke's passengers, five companies frequently are identified as the employer or destination: Virginia Tech (15 passengers per day); General Electric (ten passengers per day); Norfolk Southern (eight passengers per day); Mead Westvaco (four passengers per day); Advance Auto (three passengers per day) During a 12 month period from July 2003 through June 2004, approximately 32% of the passengers in Roanoke's primary service area flew out of other airports It has been found that some people go to other airports because of price, kind and size of aircraft, and seat availability The airline industry lost billions of dollars in 2004 and does not see a much brighter picture for 2005 Only three air carriers have made money, Southwest Airlines made the most at $313,000,000, which was about half of what they thought they would make Airline industry profit loss is due primarily to fuel prices, recent news suggests that fuel prices will get worse, and Iow airfare rates have also been a contributing factor Although United is in bankruptcy and Delta is in danger of the same, a huge question for the Roanoke Airport is, "What if US Airways liquidates?" In 2004, US Airways Express provided 42% of all seats US Airways carried 249,500 total passengers, or 40% of all Roanoke passengers Using a reasonable load factor of 70%, other carriers had a total of 89,500 available seats in 2004 That leaves a deficit of 160,000 seats if US Airways liquidates and no new service is added per year (or unaccommodated passengers) 231 Additional service by Delta and United would help tremendously An analysis of US Airways' passenger destinations and compatible route structures offered by other air carriers has been performed United and Delta have been identified as two primary carriers that could provide replacement service, they have been requested to consider providing replacement service as they prepare their contingency plans, and Roanoke has a very small passenger base but does support the airline industry Three additional flights to Atlanta on Delta Connection and four to Dulles on United Express would be beneficial What are our chances? US Airways' share of domestic enplanements: airports served in Virginia, West Virginia, North and South Carolina US Airways' share of domestic enplanements by airport - all airports served by US In order to increase Roanoke's attractiveness to incumbent and new carriers, the Commission has been working to reduce airport and airport-related costs In July 2005, Roanoke's landing fee is expected to drop by 18 cents per thousand pounds of landed weight, which will reduce the cost that is passed along to the airlines, creating some savings for the carrier In 2002, the Commission adopted an airline incentive program for new or improved air service - waiving land fees, waiving rents, modest marketing money Looking at hiring in-house employees who would create an "Airline Station" to help save the airline money Various types of airline service is being targeted The Commission continues to seek Iow fare service; (initial target was AirTran which is not going into small market areas; Independence is doing badly financially) 232 Encourage additional service by legacy carriers such as Continental or American which currently operate out of the airport Work with incumbent carriers such as United and Delta to increase and improve air service Other Issues: Commission is anticipating improvements to the 16 year old "New" terminal facility Would like to expand security check points to two lanes; place TSA behind the baggage domes if possible and improve bathrooms Possibility of work with the City and retailers to realign the entrance into the Airport and set up a better traffic flow at Towne Square Boulevard and Aviation Drive, which would be a win/win situation for everyone Have purchased property across from the cemetery on Airport Road for a future remote parking lot or rental car lot Currently working with the City for purchase of Fire Station No. 10, City could build a new station somewhat closer to most of the residents Five years ago, Roanoke was successful with return of the 24- hour tower; now the FAA, who is being told their funding is being cut, wants to target Roanoke's Airport, as well as 26 other towers, to reduce operations after midnight, which would interfere with development of the area where the old tower stands Issues regarding interference by shadowing of mountains and distraction by traffic with current radar equipment and site; a study has revealed that the site behind the Kroger Store at Towne Square which is owned by the Airport Commission, affords a better location for radar coverage; funding may be available for navigational aids and systems being proposed for next year or 2007 Two programs are currently underway: Aviation Easement Acquisition Program, and Purchase Assurance Program for properties that are impacted at a certain noise level 233 Program Dates - November 2003 through May 2006 175 eligible homeowners: 169 Roanoke City; six Roanoke County Participation in either program is voluntary Participation deadlines have been set: April 8, 2005 - Purchase Assurance Program February 3, 2006 - Easement Acquisition Program Airport Commission has completed or has underway 70% of the projects specified in the 1998 Master Plan Update; therefore, work on the Newest Master Plan Update will begin this year Chairman Turner stated that the name of the Roanoke's Airport should be changed from Roanoke Regional Airport to Roanoke International Airport because Roanoke has some international flights. Council Member Dowe inquired about the criteria that the Federal Aviation Administration used in selecting the radar site, given the fact that the mountains were there before the site was selected, and, if there are distractions with regard to traffic on 1-581, the same situation would exist if the radar site was located closer to the shopping district. He requested a comparison of Norfolk Southern, Virginia Tech and General Electric, etc., business flights per day, using today's statistics compared to 20 years ago, and compared to future flights in five to ten years, including an age demographic study for the period. He advised that there has been an increased interest and synergy with regard to rail service and inquired as to how rail service would play into the transportation issue. Chairman Turner advised that the Airport Commission would respond to Council Member Dowe's questions at a later time. Council Member Cutler called attention to Council's discussions regarding storm water management. He advised that there is a considerable amount of land at the Airport, and inquired if the Airport Commission is governed by Federal or State guidelines relating to storm water. The Executive Director responded that the Airport Commission is subject to State law, the primary concern relates to keeping de-icing fluid out of storm water, various actions have been taken to evaporate the fluid, levels of testing are under study and it is anticipated that there will be more requirements for testing in the future. She noted that de-icing salt is no longer used because it is too corrosive for aircraft, and called attention to the use of water separators to address routine problems. 234 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick referred to constantly changing rules and regulations regarding airport operations; therefore, it is important that there be continuing dialogue between Roanoke City, Roanoke County and the Airport Commission in order to keep the Council and the Board of Supervisors informed as to what each governing body can do to help Roanoke's Airport continue to progress. He spoke in support of changing the name of Roanoke's airport from a regional to an international airport. He commended the Airport Commission/Administration on the use of regional jets which represent an improvement over the past, and encouraged the Airport Commission to call on Council and the Board of Supervisors whenever they may be of assistance. Council Member McDaniel inquired as to how the Council and the Board of Supervisors could be of assistance with regard to encouraging the FAA to operate the radar tower on a 24 hour basis. The Executive Director suggested that the two localities adopt a resolution to be forwarded to legislators representing both localities, to Congressman Goodlatte, and to the FAA Administrator in support of operating the radar tower on a 24 hour basis. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick asked that the City Attorney prepare the proper measure for consideration by Council at a future meeting. Supervisor McNamara inquired about the status of US Airways; whereupon, the Executive Director advised that she was surprised that US Airways made it through January because the airline has taken huge financial hits; and General Electric, who leases the aircraft, continues to bail them out. She stated that another six 737 aircraft may go out of service due to the need for full overhauls; and at this point, if US Airways does not survive, the affect on Roanoke's Airport is not known, however, a number of employees who live in the area would lose their jobs. Council Member Wishneff commended the Airport Commission upon positioning itself for the next carrier by reducing fees, not passing capital costs on to the airlines, and creating the potential for an air station, etc. He stated that it appears that only a few airlines are making money, and inquired if there have been discussions at the Federal level to relieve some of the burden. Ms. Shuck advised that the Federal Government stepped forward following the September ! 1 event by bringing down loans, and has now taken the attitude that the free market will determine the fate of air carriers. She stated that she was not aware of any potential action by the Federal Government to help the airline industry, nor was she aware of any Federal committee hearings to address the issue. 235 Council Member Wishneff inquired about boarding assistance for disabled persons from the airport curb to the location where they board the airplane. The Executive Director replied that a shuttle bus operates from the parking lot which is equipped with a wheelchair lift, skycaps who are contract employees offer assistance, and in some instances airline employees assist disabled persons from the curb into the airport terminal. Chairman Turner noted that community volunteers assist at the Airport on weekends and on special occasions. As a result of various comments by persons in the community, Council Member Wishneff requested that the Airport Commission give further consideration toward ways to assist disabled persons. In light of the continuous financial battle of US Airways, Chairman Altizer inquired as to how long it would take another carrier to replace or improve the service level; and the number of passengers per day that would be required to attract a Iow fare air carrier. The Executive Director responded that the issue relates primarily to identifying a Iow fare carrier that serves this part of the country and offers the right size aircraft, because if the airline flies aircraft with 175 seats and requires 6-8 flights a day, the Roanoke Valley does not have a population base to support the requirement. She called attention to the need to match the same routes of full fare carriers with those of Iow fare carriers, both of which serve many of the same cities; AirTran provided service to Atlanta and then on to Florida, which are huge markets for the Roanoke area; Delta was asked for three flights a day on regional jets, and United Airlines was asked for four flights which would not have been difficult, but the problem was that Charlotte would loose ninety percent of its business, and Charlotte is a much bigger area for new air service than Roanoke. She stated that other airports are making the same requests as Roanoke. If US Airlines goes bankrupt, Chairman Altizer inquired as to when the Airport Commission would be notified; whereupon, the Executive Director advised that the Commission would be notified immediately. She stated that an analysis of the Roanoke Valley's needs have been provided to Delta and United and both airlines are preparing contingency plans, however, United has much less flexibility than Delta since it is not expected to get out of bankruptcy until sometime this fall. If US Airways goes out of business, Chairman Altizer inquired about the impact to the Roanoke Valley if another carrier does not step up to the plate; whereupon, the Executive Director advised that it is believed that an airline, or airlines, will step in and the Commission has encouraged Continental to serve the area in order to offer another airline option. 236 Commissioner Milliron left the meeting. Council Member Wishneff inquired if there would be a Plan B, C or D to encourage a charter airline into the area; whereupon, the Executive Director advised that a charter airline would likely be Plan C and Plan B would involve United and Delta Airlines; however, the problem with a charter airline is that service would involve taking passengers to a single city. She stated that the entire east coast would experience the same problems as the Roanoke area. Supervisor Flora made the observation that Roanoke provides a fairly profitable market for air carriers, which means that the area might be more likely to attract a replacement air carrier, therefore, what has not been working to the Roanoke Valley's benefit in the past could become the Valley's salvation in the future; however, that does not mean that the Airport Commission should not continue to look for potential Iow cost carriers. He stated that in all probability, if US Airways does not recover on its own, it will eventually be replaced by another airline. The City Manager advised that it would be appropriate to focus on changing the name of the Roanoke Regional Airport to an international airport. Mayor Harris expressed appreciation to members of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and to the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission for their attendance. He requested that the City Attorney prepare the proper measure in support of a 24 hour radar tower operation, and encouraged the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to take similar action. At 1:55 p.m., Chairman Altizer declared the meeting of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors adjourned. At 1:55 p.m., Chairman Turner declared the meeting of the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission adjourned. At 1:55 p.m., the Mayor declared the City Council meeting in recess to be reconvened at 2:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building. At 2:00 p.m., on Monday, March 7, 2005, the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. PRESENT: Council Members Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ................................................................................. 7. ABSENT: None ..................................................................................... O. 237 The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Ann H. Shawver, Deputy Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Mayor C. Nelson Harris. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led by Mayor Harris. PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-DECEASED PERSONS: Cutler offered the following resolution: Council Member (#36987-030705) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Edward R. Dudley, a native Virginian and former Roanoke resident, civil rights advocate and retired judge. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 69, Page 306.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36987- 030705. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDanieland adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0. The Mayor called for a moment of silence in memory of Mr. Dudley. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The Mayor advised that Shining Star Awards are presented to persons who go above and beyond the call of duty to be of service to their community. On behalf of the Members of Council, he stated that he was pleased to recognize Ms. Delphia Lewis and Mr. Greg A. Taylor. The Mayor advised that Ms. Lewis is to be commended for her ability to recognize a potential criminal activity and her willingness to take quick action; and as a direct result of her actions, a multi-state crime spree was abated, a potentially stolen U-Haul truck was located and thousands of dollars worth of stolen property was recovered. 238 The Mayor further advised that Mr. Taylor is to be commended for coming to the aid of an individual whose vehicle struck a tree and landed in a nearby creek; and after calling police, he pulled the individual from the car and assisted her up the embankment to safety. CONSENT AGENDA The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting of Council held on Tuesday, January 18, 2005, were before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... REGULAR AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: NONE. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: CITY MANAGER: BRIEFINGS: See pages 245-246. ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION: NONE. CITY ATTORNEY: Y.M.C.A.: The City Attorney submitted a communication advising that Subparagraph A of Paragraph No. 12 of the Agreement dated December 24, 2002, between the City of Roanoke (City) and YMCA of Roanoke Valley, Inc. (YMCA), requires the YMCA to transfer a portion of the property on which the old YMCA facility is located to the City by March 1, 2005; however, the Agreement requires the YMCA to remove asbestos from the old YMCA facility before the YMCA transfers the structure to the City; because of complications 239 related to removal of asbestos from the facility, the YMCA has not completed the removal and has not transferred the property to the City; accordingly, the YMCA has requested that the City agree to extend the deadline to April 30, 2005, by which time the YMCA must transfer the property to the City, but because April 30 is a Saturday, an amendment has been prepared extending the deadline to April 29, 2005. The City Attorney recommended the Council adopt an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute the appropriate amendment to the Agreement with the YMCA. Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance: (36988-030705) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement dated December 24, 2002, between the City of Roanoke and the YMCA of Roanoke Valley, Inc. ("YMCA"), to extend the date by which the YMCA must transfer to the City of Roanoke a portion of the property on which the former YMCA facility is located to April 29, 2005; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 308.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36988- 030705. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris .......................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ........................................................................................ 0. BLUE RIDGE BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE: The City Attorney submitted a communication advising that Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare is the local Community Services Board (CSB) formed pursuant to Section 37.1-194, et. seq., Code of Virginia (1950), as amended; the Citiesof Roanoke and Salem and the Counties of Roanoke, Botetourt and Craig each comprise and participate in the CSB; Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare has amended its bylaws to bring the document into conformity with current provisions of the State Code; and State Code requires approval of each of the governing bodies of the political subdivisions that participate in the CSB of bylaw changes. It was further advised that Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., Attorney, representing the CSB, has forwarded to the City Attorney's Office a draft of Amended and Restated Bylaws of Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare; the City Attorney's Office and the Department of Social Services have reviewed the Amended Bylaws and have no objections; and other participating political subdivisions have reviewed the Bylaws and have stated no objections to the draft amendments. 240 It was explained that amendments and additions to the by-laws include the following: (1) distinguishing between the Board of Directors of the CSB that is appointed by the participating localities and the organization that provides services to consumers; (2) clarification of the compositional requirements of the CSB; (3) establishment of new procedures for the appointment of CSB Board members; (4) clarification of the extent to which the delegated duties of the CSB require approval of the participating political subdivisions; and (S) incorporation of language to clarify that the CSB has no authority to bind the participating political subdivisions or to extend their credit. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (36989-030705) A RESOLUTION ratifying the amendments to the bylaws of Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 309.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36989- 030705. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris .......................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... O. CITY CODE-SIGNS/BILLBOARDS/AWNINGS: The City Attorney submitted a communication advising that the City routinely receives applications from merchants desiring to install signs that advertise their businesses; sometimes the signs encroach into the public right-of-way, which requires approval by Council before permits may be issued for installation of such signs; however, the Code of Virginia does not require localities to have approval of the local governing body before certain appendages from buildings that encroach into the public right-of-way and other public property, including signs, may be authorized. It was further advised that ~n an effort to streamline the application process for merchants desiring to install such signs, City staff has proposed an amendment to the City Code to grant the City Manager the administrative authority to approve signs and other appendages from buildings that encroach into the public right-of-way and other public property, in those circumstances in which Council is not required to do so. 241 The City Attorney transmitted an ordinance amending Chapter 27.1-2 of the City Code granting the City Manager the authority to approve permits for signs and other appendages from buildings that encroach into the public right- of-way and other public property; and the Code amendment also provides for certain revisions that include identifying additional appendages from buildings which require a permit, and increasing the amount of liability insurance required for issuance of such permits. Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance: (36990-030705) AN ORDINANCE amending the title of Chapter 27.1, Siqns, awninqs, marquees, canopies, clocks and thermometers: amending and reordaining §27.1-1, Requirements, and subsections (1)(a), (1)(c) (1)(d), (4), (5) and (6), of §27.1-2, Proiections over sidewalks, streets, alleys or other public property, deleting subsection (1)(b) and adding subsection (7) and of §27.1-2, Proiections over sidewalks, streets, alleys or other public property, and amending and reordaining §27.1-6, Siqns on public property, of Article I, In General, of Chapter 27.1, Signs, awnings, marquees, canopies, clocks and thermometers, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by identifying additional projections which can be authorized by permit, providing for authorization by the City Manager; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 310.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36990- 030705. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. Council Member Cutler inquired as to the extent of the City's review of design and appearance of signs, awnings, marquees, etc. The City Attorney responded that regulation occurs primarily in the downtown and H-l, Historic District. He stated that a permanent sign must receive a Certificate of Appropriateness by the Architectural Review Board as to architectural compatibility within the historic district. He explained that the proposed ordinance is primarily geared toward temporary signs, such as the A-frame signs on sidewalks in the downtown area and pertain mainly to restaurants and some retail businesses, which technically are not required to seek approval by the Architectural Review Board, although staff reviews the signs, awnings, etc., to ensure consistency with the historic character of downtown. There being no further discussion, Ordinance No. 36990-030705 was adopted by the following vote: 242 AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris .......................................................................................... 7. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0. DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Deputy Director of Finance submitted the Financial Report for the month of January 2005. (For full text, see financial report on file in the City Clerk's Office.) There being no discussion and without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the Financial Report for the month of January would be received and filed. REPORTS OF COMMI]-YEES: NONE. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. INTRODUCTION RESOLUTIONS: AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMI~-I-EES-INDUSTRIES: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution appointing Stuart H. Revercomb as a Director of the Industrial Development Authority of the City of Roanoke to fill the unexpired term of William Bova, resigned, ending October 20, 2005: (#36991-030705) A RESOLUTION appointing a Director of the Industrial Development Authority of the City of Roanoke, to fill the remaining portion of a four (4) year term on its Board of Directors. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 69, Page 315.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36991- 030705. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0. 243 MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: STREETS AND ALLEYS: Council Member Wishneff requested that the City Manager respond to the temporary closure of Crystal Spring Avenue, which was discussed by Council at its 9 a.m. work session. (See pages 209-211.) The City Manager called attention to a request of Carillon Health System to close that portion of Crystal Spring Avenue between McClanahan Street and Evans Mill Road, S. W., in order to facilitate the storage of materials and equipment to be used in connection with construction of an addition to Roanoke Memorial Hospital; and Carillon has requested that the temporary closure remain in effect until approximately October 2007. At the request of Council, she advised that City staff will meet with Neighbors in South Roanoke on Wednesday, March 9, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., in the Crystal Spring Elementary School Gymnasium, to present details of the temporary closure. CITY EMPLOYEES-SNOW REMOVAL: Council Member McDaniel commended City staff on their efforts to remove snow from the City's streets following the recent snow event on Monday, February 28, 2005. BUDGET: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick suggested that a communication from Posey Oyler, President, Roanoke-Salem Baseball Hall of Fame, requesting that the City of Roanoke consider funding for the Hall of Fame building, be referred to the City Manager and to fiscal year 2005-2006 budget study: REFUSE COLLECTION-REGIONAL COOPERATION: Council Member Cutler called attention to another venture of regional cooperation between Roanoke City and Roanoke County which commenced on February 28, 2005, with a City/County program to assist with the collection of automated trash containers on a six month trial period in select portions of the two communities. POLICE DEPARTMENT-ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL: The Mayor advised that it was the consensus of Council to replace the Shining Star Award program with the Public Safety Medallion inasmuch as a majority of Shining Star Awards have been presented to persons who performed a public service in the category of public safety. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. 244 MISCELLANEOUS-BUSES: Mr. Tony Hairston, 1263 Tayloe Avenue, S. E., expressed concerns with regard to abortion and homosexuality. He stated that he is a pro life advocate, because America was founded on Christian principles and family values, and homosexuality and abortion take away from family life. He expressed further concern that some individuals believe that it is acceptable to teach homosexuality as a curriculum in the schools, however, the issue should be reevaluated with the goal of going back to the basics of life. ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia, spoke with regard to the renovation and promotion of Victory Stadium as a memorial to veterans of the Roanoke Valley and for use by Roanoke's two high schools for athletic events. He encouraged the City to honor the agreement with Norfolk and Western Railway which provides that Victory Stadium was created on the sole condition that the land would be used for a stadium and that the City of Roanoke would maintain the property. TRAFFIC: Ms. Helen E., Davis, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., advised that at a previous Council meeting she incorrectly stated the age of Oliver White Hill as 90, when, in fact, he will celebrate his 99'h birthday in May, and it is hoped that the appropriate celebration will be held in his honor. She further stated that the late Edward R. Dudley will be remembered for his accomplishments and for his positive impact on people throughout the nation. Ms. Davis referred to the closing of fire stations in the predominantly northwest section of the City, and advised that in the year 2000, citizens were told of plans to close Fire Station No. 12; in August, 2002, by a 4 - 3 vote of the Council, Fire Station No. 12 was closed, firefighters were transferred to other units, six firefighters were assigned to the Roanoke County Clearbrook Station; and regional cooperation is admirable, but should not come at the expense of Roanoke's citizens. She advised that No. 1 Station in downtown will be preserved, No. 3 and No. 6 stations will be combined to form a new fire station; it appears that northwest Roanoke will lose three fire stations; northwest residents were advised in 2000, 2002 and 2004 of plans for a site on which to construct a new fire station because No. 9 station on 24'h Street was crowded and fire apparatus could not maneuver in and out of the station and that the City was looking for an appropriate site, however, to date the community has received no information on a proposed site. She added that northwest Roanoke is heavily populated; i.e.: Melrose Towers, United Methodist Home, Thornhill Place, McCray Court, churches, day care centers, William Fleming High School, William Ruffner Middle School, Roanoke Academy for Mathematics and Science, residential homes and businesses, therefore, after more than four years, citizens deserve to know what is going on in their neighborhood. She called attention to property adjacent to the Goodwill Industries at 3361 Melrose Avenue, N. W., that would provide an ideal site for a fire station in northwest Roanoke. 245 The Mayor advised that the remarks of Ms. Davis would be referred to the City Manager for response. DRUGS/SUBSTANCE ABUSE-CITY JAIL-CITY COUNCIL-SCHOOLS: Ms. Evelyn D. Bethel, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., spoke with regard to the regional jail, and inquired as to how the City of Roanoke can involve itself, uninvited, in connection with a site for a regional jail in Roanoke County when the City has shown no indication that it can move a methadone clinic from the Hershberger Road area of the City where homes, businesses, and schools have been established for many years. She pointed out that for months the Northwest Concerned Citizens Organization has requested that the methadone clinic be moved out of the Hershberger Road location to another site and suggested that the methadone clinic be located at or near the Roanoke City Jail in downtown Roanoke. HARRISON MUSEUM: Mr. Shaheed Omar, 1219 Loudon Avenue, N W., inquired as to why the City of Roanoke does not fund the Harrison Museum of African American Culture so that the organization may operate five to six days a week with a fully paid staff. The Mayor advised that Mr. Omar's inquiry would be referred to the City Manager for response. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: CITY CODE-ZONING-CITY JAIL-CITY COUNCIL-SCHOOLS: The City Manager responded to the remarks of Ms. Evelyn Bethel regarding the location of the methadone clinic on Hershberger Road. She advised that under the City's current Zoning Ordinance, only certain districts can accommodate a methadone clinic with a special use permit approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals; under current State Code provisions, a methadone clinic cannot be located within one- half mile of a public school or day care center; and moving the methadone clinic to the City Jail in downtown Roanoke would not meet City Code or State Code requirements. She further advised that the City of Roanoke would have preferred that the methadone clinic not locate at its present site at Hershberger and Cove Roads; however, the City is not in a position to relocate the facility to any site other than a location that meets City Code and State Code requirements, and the City of Roanoke continues to investigate other potential locations for the methadone clinic. At 3:05 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for one briefing, to be followed by a Closed Session which was approved earlier in the meeting. 246 At 3:10 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the Council's Conference Room, with all Members of the Council in attendance. ZONING: R. Brian Townsend, Agent, City Planning Commission, advised that staff has completed the text portion of the new zoning ordinance, the mapping portion is almost complete, and Council will be requested to schedule a public hearing to receive the views of citizens on the proposed new zoning ordinance. He called attention to a recent Supreme Court decision in two Virginia localities, Spotsovania County and Loudon County, that invalidated in whole, or in part, two comprehensive rezoning cases based upon the method of notification and the method in which the public hearing process was undertaken; therefore, the City of Roanoke will proceed cautiously since the City's new zoning ordinance falls within the same category. He stated that a notice will be mailed to each property owner in the City of Roanoke, or approximately 46,000 parcels of land, setting forth the new zoning classification, along with a descriptive summary of the change in zoning; a notice of public hearing will be published in The Roanoke Times describing the rezoning on two consecutive weeks; and preparation of 46,000 letters and a newspaper advertisement that could consist of two full pages will involve considerable staff time. Mr. Townsend requested guidance from the Council with regard scheduling the public hearing and inquired if it would be the preference of Council that the City Planning Commission conduct a public hearing, submit its recommendation to Council, to be followed by the Council's public hearing and action, which is the process that is typically followed in basic requests for rezoning; or would the Council prefer to engage in a joint public hearing with the City Planning Commission. The City Manager advised that a joint public hearing by Council and the City Planning Commission is recommended, however, conducting a joint public hearing would not obligate the parties to act on the same evening, and if Council concurs, the public hearing could be held on a day or evening other than a regular Council meeting day. In view of other pressing business to come before the Council during the months of March and April such as 2005-2006 fiscal year budget study sessions/budget adoption and a report of the Stadium Study Committee with regard to Victory Stadium, the Mayor suggested that action on the zoning ordinance be held in abeyance until those issues have been addressed. There was discussion with regard to the pros and cons of a joint public hearing by Council and the City Planning Commission in which it was pointed out that one of the most compelling reasons to hold a joint public hearing is the requirement for advertisement of one notice of public hearing on two consecutive weeks, as opposed to advertisement of two notices of public hearing on two consecutive weeks. In either case, it was explained that only one mailing to the 46,000 property owners would be required. 247 Following discussion, it was the consensus of Council to proceed with the typical process for the rezoning of property; i.e.: the proposed new zoning ordinance will be considered by the City Planning Commission at a public hearing, the City Planning Commission will submit a recommendation to Council, and the Council will conduct a separate public hearing prior to acting on the zoning ordinance. Mr. Townsend advised that the Council would be provided with a time line regarding the City Planning Commission's public hearing. At 3:40 p.m., the Council convened in Closed Session in the Council's Conference Room. At 4:25 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, with all Members of the Council in attendance, Mayor Harris presiding. COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0. OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT COMMI~-rEE: The Mayor advised that there are two vacancies on the Human Services Advisory Board created by expiration of the terms of office of Gall Burress and Clarence Hall, and called for nominations to fill the vacancies. Council Member Lea placed in nomination the names of Gall Burress and Clarence Hall. There being no further nominations, Ms. Burress and Mr. Hall were reappointed as members of the Human Services Advisory Board, for terms ending November 30, 2008, by the following vote: 248 FOR MS. BURRESS AND MR. HALL: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ............................................ 7. There being no further business, the Mayor declared the Council meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m. APPROVED ATTEST: Mary F. Parker City Clerk Mayor 249 REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION----ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL March 21,2005 2:00 p.m. The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday, March 21, 2005, at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the Roanoke City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C: Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., 10residing, (Mayor Harris arrived late), pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Reqular Meetinqs, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 36762-070604 adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 6, 2004. PRESENT: Council Members Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J, Wishneff (arrived late), M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. (arrived late), and Mayor C. Nelson Harris (arrived late) ..................... 7. ABSENT: None ..................................................................................... O. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Halt, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Council Member Sherman P. Lea. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. The Vice-Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: MISCELLANEOUS-MUNICIPAL BUILDING: Gareth McAIlister, Facilities Manager, introduced John T. Fenzel, Caleb P. Hancock, Benjamin A. Knouff and Philip M. Knouff, local students who participated in a "Ecybermission Project" study on the use of copper silver ionization versus chemical biocides in cooling towers, and the City of Roanoke Municipal Building was used as one of the test sites. Philip Knouff advised that they are a group of home-educated students participating in a web-based science, math and technology competition sponsored by the U. S. Army referred to as Ecybermission; the study was created to encourage students to learn more about the field of engineering and to identify ways to help their communities; and the team chose to study an alternative method of controlling microbiological growth in cooling towers since 250 most large buildings use external cooling towers as part of their air conditioning systems. Mr. Knouff referred to the American Legion Conference held in Philadelphia in 1976, where several people contracted an unknown disease called Legionnaires Disease that killed 34 people and caused 221 illnesses, and the disease was traced to a bacteria that grew in cooling towers. He indicated that algae, bacteria and fungus can flourish in open recalculating water systems such as cooling towers, the use of chemicals is a common way to control growth and the chemicals are expensive and dangerous to the environment. He advised that chemicals, which can cost as much as $1,500.00 per 30 gallon barrel and dangers associated with chemical biocides can cause irritation to the skin, eyes and lungs, nausea and vomiting if inhaled or swallowed; if chemicals are spilled, Hazmat teams may need to be called, which creates problems with regard to transportation and handling; and chemical biocides are dangerous to the environment because cooling towers use the principal of evaporation to remove heat from water, resulting in the remaining water becoming more and more concentrated with minerals called "Total Dissolved Solids" or "TDS" that need to be removed by draining or bleeding water from the cooling tower. He explained that the chemicals are not only dangerous to humans, but toxic to several types of fish; through their research, the teams learned that there is a safer, less expensive way to control microbiological growth; and bacteria cannot survive in the presence of copper or silver at a ph of 8.3 or less; and by using a specially modified Iow voltage electronic current to ionize small amounts of copper and silver into cooling tower water, microbiological growth can be controlled safely and economically. Mr. Knouff stated that cooling tower water from four different locations in the Roanoke Valley was sampled and tested for microbiological growth; two of the sites used chemical biocides to treat the water, and the remaining two sites used the copper silver ionization method; and the team found that copper silver ionization did an equal, if not better job of killing growth with less damage to the environment and less expense to the user. He presented graphs identifying the relationship between colony forming units (CFU's) that were discovered in the cooling towers from the four buildings that were analyzed. Building D uses chemical biocides and its highest reading was 35,000 CFU's per milliliter because the chemicals were fed through an automatic pump that needed to be reset to supply more chemicals; Building A, the Roanoke City Municipal Building cooling tower, is controlled by chemical biocides and the maximum number of CFU's per milliliter was 35 because the automatic pump continued to pump chemicals into the tower even though it was not running at full capacity during the months of January and February; 251 Buildings B and C used copper silver ionization for controlling the CFU's per milliliter indicating that the system is working effectively without the use of chemicals. Mr. Knouff advised that the highest reading obtained for Building B was 140 CFU's per milliliter, the highest for Building C was 96, and both of the levels are far below the acceptable maximum of 11,000. He noted that Site B, prior to installing the copper silver ionization system three years ago, spent approximately $19,000.00 a year on chemicals, with an initial cost of $5,000.00 and $41 7.00 for new copper silver bars which must be replaced annually, resulting in a savings of approximately $18,000.00 per year. Based on the team's findings, Mr. Knouff advised that there appears to be a better way to control microbiological growth in cooling towers that is less expensive and safer to the environment; and the City of Roanoke could save money, better protect the environment, and become a role model for other communities by switching to a copper silver ionization system. The City Manager expressed appreciation to the City's Facilities Manager and Building Maintenance Division staff and advised that based upon recommendations and conclusions of the students, immediate improvements will be made to the Municipal Building and to other City buildings as the opportunity presents itself. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick expressed appreciation to the students for sharing the results of the Ecybermission project with the City which could change the way the City manages its facilities, and based upon conclusions, as set in the report, the City could potentially save money when the cooling towers are replaced through routine maintenance over the next several years. He encouraged these students who participated in the study to return to the Roanoke Valley upon graduation from college so that the City will benefit from their knowledge. (Council Member Dowe entered the meeting.) CONSENT AGENDA The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was desired, that item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. He called specific attention to three requests for Closed Session. 252 COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, and to interview two applicants for appointment to the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the request of the Mayor to convene in a Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ..................................................................................................... 5. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff and Mayor Harris were not present when the vote was recorded.) COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager to convene in a Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ..................................................................................................... 5. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff and Mayor Harris were not present when the vote was recorded.) COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss acquisition of real property for public purposes, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the City, pursuant to Section 2.2- 3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager to convene in a Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: 253 AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ..................................................................................................... 5. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff and Mayor Harris were not present when the vote was recorded.) OATHS OF OFFICE-ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD-DISABLED PERSONS- PARKS AND RECREATION-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-COMMITTEES: A report of qualification of the following persons, was before Council: Lora J. Katz as a member of the Architectural Review Board, to fill the unexpired term of Robert B. Manetta, resigned, ending October 1,2006; Mark S. Lawrence as a member of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, for a term ending March 31,2007; and Carol D. Tuning as a member of the Fifth Planning District Disability Services Board, for a term ending January 31,2008. Council Member Dowe moved that the report of qualification be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ..................................................................................................... 5. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff and Mayor Harris were not present when the vote was recorded.) REGULAR AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: NONE. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: CITY MANAGER: BRIEFINGS: NONE. 254 ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION: TRAFFIC-CITY PROPERTY-PARKING FACILITIES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Council adopted Resolution No. 35794-040102 on April 1, 2002, to provide residents within the Downtown Service District with free parking in certain City-owned or City-controlled parking garages for three years, and 15 downtown residents currently utilize the program; and inasmuch as adequate parking in the downtown area remains critical to the success of Roanoke's goal of encouraging downtown housing, the program should be reestablished for three years, commencing April 1, 2005, and ending March 31,2008. It was further advised that one new provision has been added to the proposed program, which would allow the residents of downtown housing units that are physically connected to a City-owned or City-controlled parking garage to park in spaces reserved for their use; and such physical connections must be approved by the City. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution approving and reestablishing the above referenced program, as amended, to provide residents within the Downtown Service District with free parking in certain City-owned or City-controlled parking garages, effective April 1, 2005 through March 31, 2008, unless modified or terminated by the Council; and further authorize the City Manager to take such actions as deemed necessary to implement and administer the program. Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#36992-032105) A RESOLUTION continuing a program providing for free parking for certain downtown residents in certain City owned or controlled parking garages, as recommended by the City Manager. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 316.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36992-032105. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ..................................................................................................... 5. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff and Mayor Harris were not present when the vote was recorded.) 255 POLICE DEPARTMENT-BUDGET: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Office for Domestic Preparedness, under the U. S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), has awarded the City of Roanoke $65,000.00 from the Local Interoperable Communication Grant; DHS offers funds to successful applicants for activities which improve interoperable radio communications in Virginia; the City of Roanoke has been awarded grant funds in order to equip the Roanoke Police Department Mobile Command Center with an interoperable radio infrastructure and eight radios; upon installation, the radios will be used to communicate over any radio frequency currently used by any public safety agency throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia; and the infrastructure and radio units may be used by analog or digital radio technology. The City Manager recommended that Council accept the DHS Local Interoperability Communications Grant; authorize the City Manager to execute the grant agreements and any related documents, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney; and appropriate funds totaling $65,000.00 and corresponding revenue estimates in accounts to be established by the Director of Finance. Council Member McDaniel offered the following budget ordinance: (#36993-032105) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Interoperability Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004- 2005 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 316.) Council Member McDaniel moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36993-032105. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ..................................................................................................... 5. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff and Mayor Harris were not present when the vote was recorded.) Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution: 256 (#36994-032105) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of the U. S. Department of Homeland Security Local Interoperability Communications Grant made to the City of Roanoke by the Office for Domestic Preparedness and authorizing the execution and filing by the City Manager of the conditions of the grant. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 317.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36994-032105. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ..................................................................................................... 5. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff and Mayor Harris were not present when the vote was recorded.) (Mayor Harris and Council Member Wishneff entered the meeting.) ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke coordinated several annual Household Hazardous Waste Collection Days in the Roanoke Valley from 2000 to 2003 at the Roanoke Civic Center; during each event, a private contractor accepted household hazardous waste from citizens and properly disposed of the waste, preventing waste items from being placed in the Smith Gap Landfill or being disposed of improperly; the Counties of Roanoke and Botetourt, the Town of Vinton and the City of Salem have participated in previous events; in response to citizen feedback, participating staff from the City and neighboring governments have decided to alter the operation of the 2005 collection event from one annual event servicing 1,000 - 1,200 participants to three events per year servicing approximately 300 participants per event; and each participant would be required to pre-register, with the actual event being held on a Sunday. It was further advised that due to the reduced number of participants per event, it was decided that smaller collection events could be held at the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Transfer Station which is located on Hollins Road instead of at the Roanoke Civic Center; in order to use Resource Authority property, the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members Use Agreement must be amended to specifically allow the Authority to sponsor, or to issue a permit to an entity to sponsor, a Household Hazardous Waste Collection Day at the Hollins Road facility, which would allow household hazardous waste to be accepted, but not stored or disposed of on the site by a contractor, and would 257 further allow residents of the City of Salem, Botetourt County, and other jurisdictions to participate; and since the above referenced localities and other localities are not members of the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority, special permission from Charter Members is required to accept waste at the site. It was explained that Roanoke County and the Town of Vinton have approved the proposed amendment and it is anticipated that the Resource Authority will agree to the amendment; the City's Planning Department has determined that the City's operating criteria for the Transfer Station will allow for acceptance of the waste and Sunday hours of operation; and amendment to the Members Use Agreement will have no fiscal impact since the City of Roanoke has budgeted for household hazardous waste collection events within the VPDES Storm Water Quality Account No. 008-530-9736. The City Manager recommended that Council approve a fourth amendment to the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members Use Agreement, authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment, and to execute additional documents as may be deemed necessary to implement and administer the Amendment, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney. Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#36995-032105) A RESOLUTION authorizing a Fourth Amendment to the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members Use Agreement. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 318.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36995-032105. The motion was seconded by Council MemberDowe. .Dr. Cutler inquired if a date has been established for the event; whereupon, the City Manager advised that although no date has been set, the event is typically held during the month of April. In response to Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick's question as to whether the event will be held on a quarterly basis, the City Manager responded that the intent is to provide multiple opportunities in early spring, summer and fall. Council Member McDaniel questioned if each participant would be required to pre-register and why the event is being held on a Sunday as opposed to a Saturday; whereupon, the Assistant City Manager for Operations advised that regular collection at the Hollins Road transfer station occurs on Saturdays from 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., therefore, setup time for the event in the recycling area of the transfer station is not adequate; and pre-registration will help the process to move more efficiently. 258 The City Manager added that the event will become a regional activity; the City of Roanoke started Hazardous Household Waste Collection Day several years ago in response to and as a part of the settlement in the hazardous material claim relative to the Public Works Service Center; it was recognized that not only did Roanoke City residents participate in the event, but residents from surrounding jurisdictions as well; staff has addressed the issues of additional participation and financial resources from other jurisdictions; it is believed that the event is geared more toward a Resource Authority activity than strictly a City of Roanoke activity; if it is found that three events per year with 300 participants as a limit is not sufficient, additional opportunities for registration will be considered; and since the City is moving toward holding the event three times a year and at a different location, it will be necessary to evaluate the event prior to committing to a regional activity, as opposed to a City of Roanoke activity. There being no further discussion, Resolution No. 36995-032105 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, and Mayor Harris ................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ........................................................................................ 0. At this point, the Vice-Mayor relinquished the Chair to the Mayor. CITY ATTORNEY: NONE. DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: NONE. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: NONE. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. INTRODUCTION RESOLUTIONS: AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND AIRPORT: Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution expressing the Council's opposition to a proposal by the FAA to close the Air Traffic Control Tower located at the Roanoke Regional Airport between the hours of midnight and 5:00 a.m.: (#36996-032105) A RESOLUTION expressing the Council's opposition to a proposal by the FAA to close the Air Traffic Control Tower located at Roanoke Regional Airport between the hours of midnight and 5:00 a.m. IFor full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 319.) 259 Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36996-032105. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. Council Member McDaniel emphasized the importance of maintaining 24- I~our coverage of the Airport Control Tower. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick suggested that a communication be forwarded to surrounding counties, cities and towns served by the Roanoke Regional Airport to encourage adoption of a similar measure. Council Member Cutler called attention to outdated technology in the Roanoke FAA Control Tower, and advised that the City should focus not only on the hours of operation, but on the level of technology as well. There being no further discussion/comments by the Council, Resolution No. 36996-032105 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0. MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES: Council Member Cutler advised that he represented the City of .Roanoke at the Mid-Winter Meeting of the National League of Cities which was held on March 11 - 15, 2005, in Washington, D. C. He advised that he also represented the City on the National League of Cities Environment, Energy and Natural Resources Policy and Advocacy Steering Committee; and he visited with Federal and State officials at which time he delivered a communication that was prepared by the City administration addressing National League of Cities Priority Federal concerns using City of Roanoke examples. He stated that the 2006 Federal budget is tight due to the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan, Homeland Security, interest on debt, tax reductions, Medicare/Medicaid, and Social Security, all of which have been given priority preference over Discretionary Domestic programs, including grants to cities. He added that the Virginia De'legation is supportive of the City's position on the various issues. SIDEWALK/CURB AND GUTTER-STREETS AND ALLEYS: Council Member [:)owe requested information on the paving schedule for Densmore Drive, N. W., and the status of installation of sidewalk on 20'h Street and Mercer Avenue, N. W. 260 CITY COUNCIL-SPECIAL EVENTS: The Mayor called attention to the St. Patrick's Day Parade and Celtic Festival which was held on Saturday, March 18, 2005, in downtown Roanoke, and expressed appreciation to the Members of Council for their participation. He commended EventZone and others who were responsible for coordinating the festivities. ARTS MUSEUM OF WESTERN VIRGINIA: The Mayor called attention to the public unveiling of plans for the new Art Museum of Western Virginia in downtown Roanoke on March 21, 2005, at 1:30 p.m., which will be an outstanding cultural initiative for the City of Roanoke. He expressed appreciation to the Board of Directors and to the Executive Director of the Art Museum for their leadership. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia, spoke in support of the renovation of Victory Stadium. He called attention to photographs of Victory Stadium before and after flooding occurred, and stated that maintenance of Victory Stadium should be under the purview of the City's Parks and Recreation Department instead of the Civic Center. He expressed concern that the contract entered into between the City of Roanoke and N & W Railway has not been honored, terms of the agreement require the City to maintain the Stadium, the land on which the Stadium was built can only be used for a stadium, pursuant to Resolution No. 6889 adopted in 1941, and if the City does not comply with the agreement, the property will revert to the Railroad. He stated that the citizens of Roanoke should have a voice in the decisions that affect the City, and Victory Stadium should be renovated as a memorial to local veterans who fought for their country. SOLICITATION: Mr. Tony Hairston, 1263 Tayloe Avenue, S. E., spoke with regard to homosexuality. He called attention to an Internet document denouncing the right of gay couples to adopt children, and stated that to allow a child to be adopted by persons living in a homosexual union would not be a healthy environment. He expressed concern that America has become a nation with a concentration on money instead of family values; any law that gives a man or a woman the right to marry another man or woman is an unjustified law, and if America allows this behavior to continue, it then becomes a passive society. He asked if America is a nation of homosexuals and abortionists, or is America the land of the free man? 261 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: CITY COUNCIL-ARTS MUSEUM OF WESTERN VIRGINIA: The City Manager spoke with regard to the public unveiling of plans for the new Art Museum in downtown Roanoke earlier in the day, and commended the Mayor on the manner in which he represented the City of Roanoke. At 2:50 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for a Closed Meeting. At 5:00 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, with all Members of the Council in attendance, Mayor Harris presiding. COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Council Member Dowe moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris .................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0. COMMI~-FEES-SCHOOLS: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council hold a public hearing at a future Council meeting to receive the views of citizens on the appointment of David B. Carson and William H. Lindsey as Trustees to the Roanoke City School Board, for terms of office commencing July 1, 2005 and ending June 30, 2008. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and unanimously adopted. At 5:05 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be reconvened at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber. At 7:00 p.m., on Monday, March 21, 2005, the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. PRESENT: Council Members Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., and Mayor C. Nelson Harris .................................................................................. 7. ABSENT: None ..................................................................................... O. 262 OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney, Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Council Member Alfred T. Dowe. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was ted by Mayor Harris. PUBLIC HEARINGS: ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, March 21, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of Westwin of Roanoke, LLC, that a tract of land located at the southwesterly corner of Jefferson Street and Yellow Mountain Road, S. E., designated as Official Tax No. 4060601, be rezoned from Conditional C-1, Office District, to INPUD, Institutional Planned Unit Development District, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, March 4, 2005 and Friday, March 11,2005. The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that the petitioner proposes to rezone Official Tax No. 4060601 to develop a 42- unit condominium development with two levels of parking; current uses of the property include an off-site surface parking lot for Carillon Health Systems and an unoccupied dwelling; and a Second Amended Petition was filed on March 1, 2005, to reflect changes to the development plan as presented at the Planning Commission meeting on February 17, 2005. It was further advised that the proposed development is consistent with the following actions and statements of Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan: · Higher density residential development should be concentrated within and immediately adjacent to village centers~ Building location and design should be considered as important elements of the streetscape and should be used to define the street corridor as a public place. Building height and location should create a feeling of enclosure along a street. Residential and commercial buildings should be located close to streets with Iow vehicle speeds. 263 · Visual clutter and excessive lighting should be discouraged. Signs should be consolidated and attractively designed. It was noted that the housing section of the South Roanoke Neighborhood Plan which was completed in 1988, contains the following statements: "Residents indicated that single-family houses are needed in the neighborhood and the existing homes should be preserved as single-family structures.., to encourage home-ownership for new families. Housing for elderly residents is also needed to provide for those wishing to remain or retire in South Roanoke. Apartments and condominiums were identified as important in fulfilling this need. The design of new residential construction was identified as a concern. New construction should be compatible with the existing residences and complement neighborhood character." It was stated that the proposed development provides the following: Multifamily and condominium opportunities without converting existing single-family structures; The design is compatible with existing residences and will complement neighborhood character; The neighborhood plan further notes that parking was an issue with expansion of medical-related facilities in residential areas; All of the new residential units will have structured on-site parking; and Even though the development will occupy what is now a commercial parking lot, it will not displace existing parking supply. The City Planning Commission recommended approval of the request for rezoning, and noted that the petition satisfies application requirements for the district, promotes design principles of Vision 2001-2020, and is consistent with the South Roanoke Neighborhood Plan. Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance: 264 (#36997-032105) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 406, Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, to rezone certain property within the City, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 321.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36997-032105. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. David C. Helscher, Attorney, representing the petitioner, appeared before Council in support of the request of his client. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the request for rezoning. Dr. Harry Yates, 2208 South Jefferson Street, advised that his residence is located across the street from the proposed condominiums, and although he is not opposed to construction of the condominiums, he requested that further consideration be given to the massive traffic rerouting that will be required. He called attention to at least 100 additional vehicle spaces to be accommodated in a parking garage under the proposed condominiums which will empty onto Jefferson Street, from the east side, and suggested further investigation of the traffic impact on vehicles traveling from North Jefferson Street, right on McClanahan Street, left on Crystal Spring Avenue to 22"d Street and Richlieu Avenue, and another left to get back on Jefferson Street. He added that on Jefferson Street, the motorist must cross traffic lanes from north to south in order to come around the median bar in the middle of the street to enter the parking lot. He noted that a traffic count was requested at the City Planning Commission hearing, but was not honored due to Iow traffic volume, and information with regard to maintenance, insurance and safety issues regarding the parking garage has not been disclosed. Mr. Helscher responded that the issues raised by Mr. Yates were thoroughly studied, and the petitioner appeared before the City Planning Commission on two occasions because some of the issues required additional study. He explained that the parking lot on the site is currently used by Carillon employees, and his client intends to accommodate parking for those employees who will be displaced by providing a level of parking in the parking garage that will be owned by Carillon. He advised that traffic issues were studied, the City's Traffic Engineer suggested a right turn in and right turn out and the Planning Department determined that the traffic volume would not be a strain on existing facilities. He pointed out that the petitioner has the support of the South Roanoke Neighborhood Association which is of the opinion that the proposed development will be an asset to the neighborhood. 265 Council Member Wishneff requested that staff address traffic and parking issues; whereupon, R. Brian Townsend, Director, Planning, Community and Code Enforcement, advised that the parking lot is accessible off Yellow Mountain Road, and parking will be provided in a parking garage, with the £arilion entrance on Jefferson Street. He further advised that a review by the Planning Department and the City's Traffic Engineer did not indicate an adverse impact on having the same number of cars accessing the site from the other side of the block. In addition, he stated that net new traffic to be generated by the site did not justify the need for the developer to prepare a traffic study. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick inquired if assurances were made that there would be no change in the plan in terms of height; whereupon, Mr. Townsend advised that the requested zoning is INPUD, Institutional Planned Unit Development District, that binds the developer to the plan as submitted in the Second Amended Petition for rezoning, which includes both the layout and the relative height to the site, topography changes from the Jefferson Street side up to Yellow Mountain Road, and there is a height limitation of 45 feet in the INPUD District. Mr. Townsend advised that in order to address the issue of access during the morning peak traffic timeframe, the parking garage will be card-controlled. Because of a concern with regard to left turns from north bound Jefferson Street into the parking garage, he stated that the City's Traffic Engineer has suggested a right in/right out strategy. There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed. There being no further questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 36997-032105 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, and Mayor Harris ................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... O. ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, March 21, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of the City of Roanoke that a.tract of land located at 3379 Colonial Avenue, S. W., consisting of 23.742 acres, more or less, identified as Official Tax No. 1570101, be rezoned from RS-2, Residential Single Family District, to RPUD, Residential Planned Unit Development District, subject to certain conditions proffered by the petitioner, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, March 4, 2005 and Friday, March 11,2005. 266 The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that on December 20, 2004, Council adopted a resolution authorizing the City Manager to file a petition to rezone 23.742 acres, more or less, of City-owned property located on Colonial Avenue, S. W., from RS-2, Single Family Residential District, to RPUD, Residential Planned Unit Development District, subject to the fellowing proffered condition: That development of the RPUD District will be governed by the Development Pattern Book, Colonial Green, dated November. 1,2004. It was noted that a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on January 20, 2005, at which time the matter was continued until February 17, 2005; and at the Planning Commission's Work Session on February 3, 2005, alternative design concepts addressing comments from the January 20, 2005 public hearing were reviewed and discussed relative to the following: · The design and layout of the commercial/live-work area along the Colonial Avenue frontage. The design and layout of proposed crescent homes and a multifamily structure on the western edge of the site adjacent to the City-County boundary line. · The provision of pathways and connections of the development to its surroundings. · The preservation of existing significant vegetation and the overall resulting tree canopy on the development at build-out. It was further advised that Colonial Green is a mixed use development comprised of approximately 230 dwelling units, with the potential of 14,000 square feet of commercial space; the proposed housing mix includes approximately 28 single-family detached dwellings, 60 townhouse units, and 130 multifamily units; and commercial space would be .limited to the commercial/residential building located in proximity to the Colonial Avenue frontage. it was noted that the proposed development is consistent with policies and actions of Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan; and the Franklin Road/Colonial Avenue Area Plan that was adopted by Council on June 21,2004 states the following as it relates to the petition for rezoning: This property (Colonial Green) is suited for mixed-density residential development as well as limited commercial development. · The Future Land Use Plan designation is mixed residential. 267 It was further noted that the proposed development satisfies general standards and development requirements of Section 36.1-293; as a Residential Planned Unit Development, the site must be developed in substantial conformity to the development plan; significant improvements have been made to parking associated with the proposed mixed use buildings along Colonial Avenue which will result in commercial/live-work buildings taking a prominent position in relation to the streets and on-site parking being located to the side and rear of the building; and while a storm water management facility prohibits locating the mixed use buildings immediately abutting the Colonial Avenue right-of-way line similar to the adjacent medical clinic building, reorientation of the buildings and elimination of front parking spaces will create a more consistent streetscape. The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the amended petition for rezoning which includes the following: · Proffer of a revised Colonial Green Development Pattern Book dated February 17, 2005, · Revised RPUD.Development Plan dated February 17, 2005, and · An additional proffer stating: A minimum tree canopy ratio of 15% of the total RPUD district will be provided at completion of the project to be comprised of existing tree canopy preserved on the site and new tree plantings (based on canopy at 20 year maturity). Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance: (#36998-032105) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 157, Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, to rezone certain property within the City, subject to certain conditions proffered by the applicant; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 323.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36998- 032105. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the request for rezoning. Joyce Graham, Co-partner, Colonial Partners, spoke in support of the request for rezoning. She called upon David Hill, Project Manager, Hill Studios, to respond to questions with regard to the project. 268 Mr. Hill advised that representatives of Colonial Green have held several meetings with the City Planning Commission and residents of the area; whereupon, he highlighted certain issues that were addressed; i.e.: A concern that the multi-use property be changed from a more suburban to a more neighborhood commercial format. It presently consists of a cluster of buildings that will serve both neighborhoods and act as a neighborhood commercial area. Better formatting of condominium buildings relative to both shape of the building and location. Colonial Green has worked with residents of the area, the Planning Commission and City staff to get the optimal location for the buildings on the west boundary. The proximity of houses to the north boundary of the property along Sedgefield Road in Roanoke County. Colonial Green has changed the format of the plan so that no single house is closer than 135 feet from the property line on the north boundary. Concern with regard to the loss of tree canopy from the top of the hill. Colonial Green has created about a two-acre space at the top of the hill to preserve mature oak trees that help to buffer Sedgefield Road. Concern about trails and connectivity. Colonial Green has proposed trails that will extend throughout the community that will connect to the local and regional greenway network. Ms. Ruth Willson, 2651 Creston Avenue, S. W., expressed appreciation to Colonial Green representatives and to City staff for addressing various concerns that were raised by the neighborhood. She asked that as many trees as possible remain in place to decrease the visibility of the Western Virginia Water Authority water tanks. She expressed concern with regard to the working relationship with any successors to the Colonial Green project and inquired if a contractual agreement identifying terms and conditions related to the property would be executed inasmuch as the rezoning involves a three-phase project. Mr. Reggie Wood, 3331 Colonial Avenue, S. W., advised that the size of Colonial Avenue has not changed over several years, but the entire fabric of the community has been destroyed due to "cookie cutter" type developments along Route 221. He suggested that a comprehensive study with regard to the future of Colonial Avenue be prepared before the City approves the construction of Colonial Green. 269 Mr. Bill Modica, 331 King George Avenue, S. W., expressed concern that more developers are not willing to make an effort to satisfy the interests and desires of residents, whereupon, he expressed appreciation to the Colonial Green development team and the City's Planning staff for the manner in which they worked with the neighborhood. He also commended the walking trails, I~reserved woodlands, scenic grounds, and well designed housing units that will be a part of the project which will provide housing choices that will attract new residents to the area from regions that do not offer the same advanced and friendly culture as Roanoke. He encouraged Council to approve the request for rezoning. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that the development represents a most unusual opportunity for the City of Roanoke, and the developer has spent an extraordinary amount of time meeting with residents of the City and the County to address their concerns. Council Member Lea stated that he was pleased with the amount of citizen involvement in the Colonial Green project, and requested a response by City staff with regard to Ms. Willson's concern as to a contractual obligation with any successors to the Colonial Green project. Mr. Townsend advised that circumstances surrounding the request for rezoning are unique since the City is both the property owner and the petitioner. He called attention to a development agreement between the City and Colonial Green which will be modified since the plan referenced in the original agreement has been modified; and since the rezoning is intended for residential planned unit development, approval of the rezoning will run with the land, therefore, any future owner(s) of any phase of the project will be obligated to follow the same plan. There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed. There being no further questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 36998-032105 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris .............................................................. ~ ................... 7. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0. CITY PROPERTY-LEASES: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, March 21, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the proposal of the City of Roanoke to extend the lease of a City-owned structure known as the ^lexander-Gish House located in Highland Park, with the outbuilding and. parking lot to Old Southwest, Inc., for a period of five years, the matter was before the body. 270 Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, March 4, 2005. The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the original lease of the Alexander-Gish House located at 641 Walnut Avenue, S. W., by the Old Southwest Neighborhood Alliance was authorized by Ordinance No. 24929 on December 10, 1979; on May 11, 1981, the City Manager executed a lease assignment transferring the lease to Old Southwest Neighborhood Foundation, Inc.; Old Southwest, inc., has leased the location since December 10, 1979; and the current lease agreement expired on December 31,2004. It was further advised that Old Southwest, Inc., has requested an extension of the current lease agreement with similar terms and conditions; the previous lease contained a five year term, at an annual lease rate of $1.00; the proposed extension agreement is for an additional five year period, beginning January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2009, at an annual lease rate of $1.00; and the extension agreement may be further extended for an additional five- year term on the same terms, upon mutual agreement of both parties. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a lease extension agreement with Old Southwest, Inc., for the Alexander-Gish House, 641 Walnut Avenue, S. W., for a period of five years, commencing January 1, 2005 and ending December 31, 2009, with an option for an additional five-year term if agreed to by both parties. Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance: (#36999-032105) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the proper City officials to extend the lease agreement between the City and Old Southwest, Inc., for a period of five years, with an option to extend the lease for an additional five year term upon mutual agreement of both parties, for the use of a certain City- owned structure known as the Alexander-Gish House, located in Highland Park, together with the outbuilding and parking lot, upon certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 324.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36999- 032105. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the matter. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance 36999-032105 was adopted by the following vote: 271 AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, and Mayor Harris ................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0. CITY CODE-ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, March 21, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the proposed amendment' of Section 36.1-690, General authority and procedure, Division 5, Amendments, of Chapter 36.1, Zoning, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by deleting subsections (g) and (h) relating to minimum acreage requirements, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, March 4, 2005, and Friday, March 11,2005. The City Planning Commission submitted a communication advising that Section 36.1-690 of the City of Roanoke Zoning Ordinance includes two subsections that establish a minimum area that can be rezoned to certain commercial and industrial districts: (g) Except for extension of existing district boundaries, no change in zoning classification to a C-1, C-2, C-3, LM or HM district shall be considered which involves an area of less than two (2) acres, and no separate C-1, C-2, C-3, LM or HM district of less than two (2) acres shall be created by any amendment to this chapter.. (h) Subsection (g) notwithstanding, an area of less than two (2) acres, which abuts a C-2, CN, or an industrial district, may be rezoned to C~1. The proposed amendment to delete subsections (g) and (h) was initiated by motion of the Planning Commission at its January 20, 2005, meeting. The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the requested amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to delete subsections (g) and (h) of Section 36.1-690. The Planning Commission advised that rezoning decisions should be based on context and merits of the change, as well as the extent to which the change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: 272 (#37000-032105) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining §36.1-690, General authority and procedure, of Chapter 36.1, Zoninq, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by deleting subsections (g) and (h) of §36.1-690, General authority and procedure, to provide for greater flexibility in considering certain rezonings in which a minimum area can be rezoned to certain commercial and industrial districts, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 325.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37000- 032105. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the proposed amendment. Donald Wetherington, Attorney, 5 South Roanoke Street, Fincastle, Virginia, advised that the two-acre minimum requirement may have made sense when there were cow pastures within the boundaries of the City of Roanoke, but with the current density of the urban area and a mixture of compatible uses, not necessarily within the same zoning classifications, the two-acre requirement has become a relic. He stated that the City of Roanoke has a well- qualified and responsive City Planning staff with good land use tools at their disposal and encouraged the Members of Council to remove the two acre requirement and rely solely on the expertise of Planning staff. There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed. There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37000-032105 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris .................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. SCHOOLS: The following persons spoke with regard to the Blue Ridge Technical Academy: 273 Ms. Karen W. Meiss, 1019 Welton Avenue, S. W., advised that Blue Ridge Technical Academy is a unique program that offers training in technology and medical fields, allowing students to receive dual enrollment, credits, certifications, and internships that would not be available in a public high school, and BRTA is the first Charter School in the Commonwealth of Virginia that has exceeded its goal by educating students in various fields of their choice. She stated that operating costs for BRTA are not included in the fiscal year 2005-2006 School budget, and the School Board plans to close the Academy and return students to their home schools. She' encouraged the Council and the School Board to include funds in the 2005-2006 school budget to continue the program. Ms. Phyllis Brennan, 4156 Hershberger Road, N. W., called attention to increasing enrollment at Blue Ridge Technical Academy where students are given an opportunity to succeed with the support of the City and the School system. Ms. Sharon Yanosky, 316 Howard Road, Salem, Virginia, expressed appreciation to Council for listening to parents of students who attend Blue Ridge Technical Academy, and requested that the program remain intact. She referred to an article in The Roanoke Times in which the incoming Roanoke City School Superintendent, Marvin Thompson, stated his vision for the future of Roanoke City Schools which was~ a description of courses offered at Blue Ridge :1'echnical Academy. She stated that Blue Ridge Technical Academy provides a refuge where students can focus on two career paths -- Information Technology and Medical Science -- in a safe environment with dedicated staff, and urged the Members of Council to support continuation of the Academy. Mr. Jerome Nance, 4224 Tennessee Avenue., N. W., advised that he was previously in the 11th grade at William Fleming High School where class sizes consisted of as many as 30 students .per room, but due to the smaller class size at Blue Ridge Technical Academy, students learn in an environment where teachers and students have become a family. He asked that the programs offered by BRTA be continued. Ms. Shannon Allen, 2625 Broad Street, N. W., a freshman at Blue .Ridge Technical Academy, advised that the program has provided inspiration to her life. She asked that funds be included in next year's budget to continue operation of BRTA. Ms. Monica McWarren, 1652 Garstland Drive, N. W., advised that her siblings both attended Blue Ridge Technical Academy in their sophomore years where they received an outstanding educational experience. She called attention to a smaller teacher/student ratio 274 than in the traditional school f:lassroom where students are provided with a greater opportunity to learn. On behalf of students, faculty and parents, she urged that Council work with the Roanoke City School Board to find the necessary funds to continue operation of BRTA. Ms. Patricia Chambers, 3425 Pittsfield Avenue, N. W., a freshman at Blue Ridge Technical Academy, advised that BRTA is a model school and an asset to the community. She asked that funds be included in the School Board's budget to continue operation of the Academy. Ms. Alita D. Ashe, 5784 Littleton Road, Roanoke County, advised that many students who attended William Fleming and Patrick Henry High Schools have succeeded in the traditional classroom setting, but those students who attend Blue Ridge Technical Academy have been given the extra level of attention that they need to be successful. She added that a representative of the Thomas Jefferson Institute toured the facility and was impressed with the level of student-teacher engagement and the conduct of students. Courtney A. Penn, Member, Roanoke City School Board, expressed appreciation to those students from BRTA who articulated their positions and sentiments with regard to the Academy. He advised that the School Board considers the issue to be a top priority and will continue to assess various opportunities and/or options. Council Member Wishneff advised that the location of the Blue Ridge Technical Academy is significant and encouraged citizens to attend School Board meetings to express their concerns. The Mayor advised that the School Board is in the process of determining the direction for Blue Ridge Technical Academy and will discuss the matter with the new Superintendent of Schools and other interested individuals. Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that all remarks would be received and filed. ANIMALS/INSECTS-FIREARMS: Mr. Joe Schupp, 2323 South Jefferson Street, former member of the Wildlife Taskforce, spoke with regard to the City's ongoing deer culling operation that will conclude at the end of March. He advised that $80,000.00 is a large sum of taxpayer's money to be given to White Buffalo Inc., to remove deer; and total deer removal for 2003-2004 from July 1, 2003 to March 27, 2004 was 819, with 561 deer removed by sharp shooters, 213 removed by bow hunters (landowners with deer kill permits and the Urban Archery Program combined), and 63 removed through deer kill permits using shot guns. He stated that if the deer culling operation is deemed too costly and/or ineffective, he would urge Council to implement the sharp 275 shooting and Urban Archery Program, which must be approved by the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries by May 1, 2005 for implementation during the 2005-2006 season. He offered his services to oversee operation and implementation of Roanoke's Urban Archery Program. COMPLAINTS-DRUGS/SUBSTANCE ABUSE: Ms. Oglivier Quarles, 2205 Montauk Road N. W., a member of the Northwest Concerned Citizens Organization, expressed concern with regard to the methadone clinic located at 3208 Hershberger Road, N. W. She stated that Federal guidelines require that the methadone clinic hold open meetings in the community, but instead representatives of the facility elected to meet with a small group of persons who may, or may not, be residents of the immediate area; the neighborhood group has been portrayed as being unkind and uncaring in its attitude toward drug addicts, which is not an accurate portrayal of residents; and since the, methadone clinic opened, police officers have responded to approximately eight calls, and emergency medical services was contacted on at least three occasions. She emphasized that the neighborhood organization is motivated by a desire to make a difference in the community, to work toward a safe environment for children and senior citizens, and to identify alternative activities to drug and alcohol use. CITY EMPLOYEES-ART MUSEUM OF WESTERN VIRGINIA-COMPLAINTS-PAY PLAN-TAXES: Mr. Robert Gravely, 727 29'h Street, N. W., expressed concern with regard to the City's participation in a regional jail, additional funds for the Art Museum in downtown Roanoke, the use of taxpayers' money to advertise the City's new branding logo, and the City's workforce is undermanned, with inadequate training and an inadequate pay scale. ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia, spoke in support of the renovation of Victory Stadium, which can be used for such activities as the annual Easter Egg Hunt, and the American Cancer Society Relay for Life, etc. He called attention to overwhelming support by 7,000 persons who signed a petition in favor of the renovation of Victory Stadium in which they called for a referendum so that citizens could vote on the fate of the Stadium. He stated that funds that were previously identified for Victory Stadium have been used for other purposes and the proposed floodwall has not been constructed. There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. APPROVED ATTEST: City Clerk C. Nelson Harris Mayor 276 ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL April 4, 2005 9:00 a.m. The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday, April 4, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., in the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room i59, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant to ChaPter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-i5, Rules of Procedure, Rule i, Regular Meetings, Code of the City of Roanoke (i979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 36762-070604 adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 6, 2004. PRESENT: Council Members Sherman P. Lea (arrived late), Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. (arrived late), BeverlyT. Fitzpatrick, Jr., (arrived late) and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ............ 7. ABSENT: None ................................................... 0. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. AIRPORT-COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council; and to interview one applicant for appointment to the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (:1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member Cutler moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, and Mayor Harris .............................................................. 4. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Members Dowe and Lea were not present when the vote was recorded.) 277 CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss acquisition of real property for a public purpose, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the City, pursuant to §2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member Cutler moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, and Mayor Harris .....4. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Members Dowe and Lea were not present when the vote was recorded.) (Council Member Lea entered the meeting.) At 9:05 a.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for one Closed Session to be held in the Council's Conference Room, Room 451, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, to interview one applicant for a vacancy on the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, and to consider vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe entered the meeting during the Closed Session.) At 9:40 a.m., the Council meeting reconvened in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, with Mayor Harris presiding and all Members of the Council in attendance. ITEMS LISTED ON THE 2:00 P.M., COUNCIL DOCKET REQUIRING DISCUSSION/CLARIFICATION, AND ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO 2:00 P.M., AGENDA: None. TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: None. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION AT THE JOINT MEETING OF COUNCIL AND THE SCHOOL BOARD ON MONDAY, MAY 2, 2005: None. 278 BRIEFINGS: CITY EMPLOYEES: Employee Survey: The City Manager called upon Susan E. Short, representing The VirginiaTech Center for Survey Research, for results of the 2004 City of Roanoke Employee Survey. Ms. Short advised that: 1,116 surveys were completed, representing a 65 per cent response rate, margin of error was +/-1.7 per cent, and data was tabulated with confidentiality. Demographic characteristics: 68.2 per cent reported their race as "White", 63.4 per cent reported an annual salary of $40,000.00, 57.2 per cent reported that they had worked for the City six or more years, 55.6 per cent reported gender as male and 49.8 per cent reported their age at 40 years or older. Highlights of the level of employee agreement with selected statements: I feel that the work I do is important. I have a clear idea of my job responsibilities. The work done by City employees makes Roanoke a better place for citizens. The City of Roanoke is a good employer. Service to citizens is a high priority for City employees. am proud to work for the City of Roanoke. understand that employee Core Values is ~mportant to providing service. My co-workers are committed to providing a high level of service to citizens. I feel l have job security. Providing high quality services to citizens is a priority with the City of Roanoke. My job makes good use of my skills and abilities. I have been given opportunities to learn and take on new responsibilities in my job. Overall, lam satisfied with my job. I feel that I am respected as a person in my workplace. 94.0 per cent 91.1 percent 89.1 percent 8.8 percent 84.8 per cent 84.6 per cent 83.8 percent 80.8 per cent 80.1 per cent 78.9 percent 78.9 percent 78.8 per cent 76.4 percent 75.9 per cent 279 The following charts were reviewed regarding employee morale and motivation, employee satisfaction with benefits, employee opinions on selected benefits such as Tuition Assistance, Occupational Health Clinic, Employee Self Service, communicating with employees, employee compensation, and perceptions of employee treatment. 280 282 283 284 Employee opinions on communication methods: 285 The methods used to communicate with City employees are effective. (60.6 per cent) Preferred methods of communication: E-mail Direct conversation with supervisor City Corner Newsletter Around the Corner Newsletter Other: Memos, meetings, Tattler, Star City Beat, P. D. Newsletter · Areas for improvement in 2003 and 2004: City policies for employees are fair. If I do a good job, I have a better chance of getting ahead. Employees are treated with respect. I feel I am free to express my opinions in my job without worrying about negative results. The City of Roanoke is well managed. City policies for employees are carried out in a consistent manner. Job promotions with the City are fair. 36.3 per cent 35.9 per cent 14.2 per cent 2.1 per cent 7.4 per cent 2003 2004 56.3% 54.6% 50.1% 49.5% 46.4% 46.4% 46.6% 44.7% 39.2% 41.4% 42.2% 38.3% 32.6% 34.1% Information about City policies and procedures is readily available. (79.1 per cent) 286 · Workplace experiences: Since the last survey, have you witnessed or experienced Yes Harassment at work? 18.5% Discrimination at work? 29.7% Intimidation at work? 31.5% No 76.3% 64.7% 62.8% Employee agreement with statements regarding supervision: 2003 2004 My supervisor treats me fairly. 82.8% 80.5% My supervisor provides useful recommendations on how I can improve. 74.0% 73.4% Someone meets with me about my job progress at least every six months. 77.8% 69.2% I understand how my job performance is evaluated. 73.8% 68.5% My performance reviews are based on how well I understand/deliver services. 69.2% 63.3% My department head is an effective manager, department is well managed. 55.2% 58.1% Employee agreement with new items regarding supervision - 2004: My supervisor treats me with respect. 83.0% I feel free to make comments and suggestions to my Supervisor. 78.8% I feel that my work is appreciated by my supervisor. 77.7% My supervisor accepts my comments/suggestions in a constructive manner. 75.6% My supervisor is an effective manager. 74.1% My professional growth is important to my supervisor. 68.4% 287 · Employee perceptions regarding training initiatives: 76 per cent agree that the training and development opportunities offered by the City are worthwhile. 74 per cent agree that they receive as much training as they need. · Employee wellness and safety: The City protects employee wellness. 74.8% The City takes proper precautions to ensure a safe workplace. 72.3% Employee health and safety are priorities for the City. 71.3% The City Manager requested that Ms. Short comment on the frequency of conducting an employee survey; whereupon, she advised that it is not necessary for the City to conduct a survey on an annual basis since it has been demonstrated that there is a solid base line, but the survey should be conducted on a consistent basis, or cycle of every two to three years, so that employees will know that the organization is continuing to seek their input and to take the necessary action(s). Discussion: Council Member Cutler inquired about the differences in percentages of satisfaction from department to department and whether it is related to the nature of the work of the department or to the success of the department manager. Ms. Short responded that when looking at the departments that had the lower percentages; i.e.: public safety, it could be indicative of the types of work performed and the types of individuals with whom employees interact when performing their jobs; some of the rankings may be related to individual work within the City, but overall when looking at public safety, it is a different group which is difficult to compare with other City departments. Council Member Lea stated that 68.2 per cent of employees surveyed were Caucasian and inquired as to how the number compares versus the minority percentage. 288 Ms. Short responded that overall, demographics of the survey reflect the percentages in the City's workforce, and parallels what the City's work force looks like which is somewhat better this year than last year because there were more non white respondents, but overall results are congruent with Roanoke's population. The City Manager advised that the current breakdown of the City's workforce is approximately a 75 - 25 split between Caucasian and African American; last year the City had a higher percentage of Caucasians responding to the survey than African-Americans and she was pleased to report that more of the smaller percentage of the City's workforce chose to participate in the survey this year. Mr. Lea requested a clarification on the percentage breakdown of employees who responded to the question: "1 am treated with respect as an employee." Ms. Short advised that the, "1 am treated with respect as an employee" ranked high this year and last year, with similar results; the question "Employees overall are treated with respect" was one of the lower ranking questions which is an interesting difference in that employees believe that employees overall are not treated with respect, while they themselves do feel treated with respect. She stated that the response could have something to do with the fact that employees, when looking at their individual jobs are positive, but overall they are slightly more negative, which is typically the case with most surveys. She added that it could be attributed to familiarity with their own job, therefore, it is easier to form a more negative view of the unknown or a lack of understanding of the job of another employee. Council Member McDaniel inquired if managers will receive a breakdown of departmental results; whereupon, the City Manager advised that some departments were aggregated for the purpose of maintaining survey confidentiality; Council was provided with the first briefing on results of the survey and a meeting will be held with department managers to review results and to ask that managers conduct presentations within their respective departments to receive feedback from employees; and the management team will address areas in need of improvement. She stated that evident from the survey is the importance of the immediate supervisor to the employee, the need to ensure that first line supervisors are well equipped with information, and that employees believe that they are participants in decision making. She added that communication within the City organization is better this year than last year which is a direct result of staff's efforts to address the issue. 289 There being no further questions or comments, the Mayor expressed appreciation to Ms. Short for briefing the Members of Council on results of the employee survey. REFUSE COLLECTION: Downtown Solid Waste: Robert K. Bengtson, Director of Public Works, advised that: City staff has periodically updated Council on efforts to upgrade the Downtown trash collection process, such as the Trash Compactor Program in July 2004 which involved five automated trash compactors in lieu of curb side collection. The goal of City staff is to have less trash on downtown sidewalks thus creating a more positive influence on the pedestrian experience, to avoid traffic impact from refuse collection trucks in the downtown area, to encourage recycling, and to provide a level of added convenience to downtown customers. In July 2004, a wide range of responses for services was received, some of which were feasible and some not feasible; therefore, it was necessary to reassess future solid waste collection efforts. An advisory committee, representing a cross section of downtown businesses, office structures, etc., was appointed to provide input to City staff. VarioiJs programs and options enacted by other cities were evaluated prior to developing proposals for the City of Roanoke that will continue to modify and enhance Roanoke's downtown solid waste collection system. The advisory committee emphasized continuation of free collection once per week, curbside collection for 150 customers, and 110 customers paying in the range of $60.00 - $100.00 per month for trash collection. 290 Currently, solid waste collection begins at approximately 5:15 p.m., followed by recycling collection, with the final trash collection at about 9:30 p.m. It is proposed to change the 5:15 - 5:30 p.m. collection to 3:30 p.m, which will allow trash to be removed from the sidewalks in front of restaurants at an earlier hour in order to enhance the outdoor dining experience. It is proposed to expand paper recycling efforts by targeting large generators of paper in the downtown area, such as large office buildings, and to schedule evening hours for recycling from 5:30 to 9:00 p.m. · Final trash collection will remain at approximately 9:30 p.m. One automated trash compactor will be located along Kirk Avenue between Market Street and Williamson Road, free of charge to downtown customers, which will be activated by a swipe card system. The following results of a survey of downtown merchants were presented indicating a positive reaction to the proposal: 291 Implementation will occur over a period of several months; by the month of June, new collection times will be in effect, and the public will be educated with regard to the new collection schedule, and compactor implementation could take until October due to procurement code issues and Architectural Review Board actions. Three enclosed dumpsters which are currently located at the Art Museum site will be removed upon commencement of construction of the new Art Museum building, but availability of the automated trash compactor and the downtown collection system will help to address any inconvenience resulting from removal of the three dumpsters. There will be an upfront cost of approximately $38,000.00 for the automated trash compactor which will be funded from the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program (CMERP). Discussion: Council Member Cutler inquired about the advisability of retaining the advisory committee as a kind of sounding board for other market- related issues; whereupon, Mr. Bengtson advised that as the program unfolds it would be worthwhile to check in with the advisory committee from time to time. Dr. Cutler also inquired as to how leakage and odor wilt be addressed relative to the automated trash compactor; whereupon, Mr. Bengtson responded that the compactor will be designed in such a manner that no odor or leakage will be emitted from the unit. Dr. Cutler inquired as to how the City plans to address recalcitrant businesses in the downtown area; whereupon, Mr. Bengtson advised that the Solid Waste Management Code Enforcement Officer will continue to work with customers. In concluding the briefing, unless otherwise advised by the Council, the City Manager stated that there appears to be a consensus by the Council to support implementation of the above referenced changes to solid waste collection in downtown Roanoke and staff will proceed accordingly. 292 HOUSING/AUTHORITY: Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area Plan (NRSA): The purpose of the NRSA plan is: The development of a Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area (NRSA) plan for the Gainsboro community provides a unique opportunity to promote the long-term strength and stability of an older neighborhood of Roanoke, with residential, commercial, industrial and historical uses. The plan identifies strategies to revitalize Gainsboro which include increasing the homeownership rate through rehabilitation and new construction, rehabilitating owner- occupied housing, enhancing neighborhood business opportunities and promoting employment opportunities. In coordination with the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA) and Blue Ridge Housing Development Corporation (BRHDC), the City of Roanoke continues to forge a partnership with businesses, community groups, and residents to address community revitalization through a comprehensive strategy. The framework for the NRSA approach was established by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in the regulations entitled, "Consolidated Submissions for Community Planning and Development Program". This approach is intended to enable communities to tailor strategies to meet local needs through a flexible holistic process linking economic, human, social, physical, environmental and design concerns to build viable neighborhoods of opportunity. Under the regulations, cities are permitted to prepare and submit neighborhood revitalization plans as part of the local Consolidated Plan. The issuance of HUD Notice CPD-96-01 entitled, Community Development Block Grant Neighborhood Revitalization Strategies on January 16, 1996, provided further guidance addressing the approval regulatory framework and incentives to develop a NRSA. 293 The elements of the plan are consistent with the format presented in HUD Notice CPD-96-O1 and include: Boundaries - The boundaries of the designated area. Demographic Criteria - The demographic characteristics of the area (Statistics about the residents of the community). Consultation - the consultative approach to the community stakeholders (Input from the residents, business owners, non profit organizations, community groups and churches located in the designated area). Assessment - an assessment of the economic conditions of the area and the opportunities for economic development. Economic Empowerment - The plan to create meaningful jobs for Iow and moderate income persons of the area. Performance Measurements - The plan to identify progress that is readily measurable. Although the strategies presented in the plan will ultimately generate a number of important benefits for the community, the NRSA plan will enable the City of Roanoke to implement a mixed-income development strategy for the community, while providing certain flexibility in the use of CDBG funded business development assistance. Community Development Block Grant funds for affordable housing development have traditionally benefited only Iow- income families. The NRSA plan will allow the City of Roanoke to construct or rehabilitate and market housing in the Gainsboro neighborhood to individuals and families of a diverse range of income levels, thereby creating a broader income base in the community. Upon adoption by the Roanoke City Council and approval by HUD, the plan will become part of the City of Roanoke's 2005- 2010 Consolidated Plans. 294 While NRSA-related activities in Gainsboro are expected to extend through 2006, and possibly 2007, the City reserves the right, subject to funds availability, to extend the Gainsboro NRSA activities for the entire period of the 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan. The NRSA Plan will be evaluated periodically during this period against the benchmarks established therein, and to determine whether activities will require a continuation under the next Consolidated Plan. The City Manager introduced Frank E. Baratta, Budget Team Leader, to review the NRSA plan: Mr. Baratta advised that: The NRSA I~lan is a supplement to the City's five-year Consolidated (HUD) Plan; it offers added flexibility for CDBG- funded activities undertaken in the revitalization area; it promotes focused efforts in areas needing revitalization and requires HUD approval. NRSA benefits are: nearly half of the housing assisted with CDBG can be market-rate units (does not apply to HOME funds); job creation requirements are eased, including simplifying and reducing paperwork for businesses, and additional flexibility is provided for human service activities conducted by Community Based Development Organizations. NRSA must contain boundaries of the revitalization area; the area must be residential, consultation with stakeholders, assessment of area economic conditions, strategies for jobs and physical development and performance measurements. Current conditions in Gainsboro: A strength includes an active resident interest, location, religious, business, senior and education organizations; opportunities with Dumas, Cherry Avenue and Henry Street development. Weaknesses include rental/housing decline; Iow homeowner rate; perceptions of crime; well below medians in income and housing values. 295 Performance commitments to date include: residential - zoning changes, design district and historic designation; 12 new homes to be constructed; 15 major rehabs; 40 limited rehabs. Economic - zoning to support Henry Street development; assistance to Dumas; market incentives to business; providing fa~;ade grants to Gainsboro businesses. Infrastructure - Lick Run Greenway; curb, gutter and sidewalk, engage residents in urban forest projects. Public Safety - establish and train for Neighborhood Watch; conduct code enforcement sweep; conduct Crime Prevention through Environmental Design assessment. Commitments being developed with CulinaryArts scholarships for Gainsboro residents and "Officer Next Door" housing in Gainsboro. Public participation has included an extensive public process used to develop the Gainsboro Neighborhood Plan; presentation to the Gainsboro Steering Committee on January 20; presentation to the Gainsboro Neighborhood Alliance, including invitations to neighborhood businesses on February 7, discussion at the Gainsboro Steering Committee monthly meeting on March 17; and information was provided at the HUD public hearing on March 31. Discussion: Council Member Dowe referred to the potential of a public/private partnership with W & G Investment Group, LLC, which has expressed an interest in the Gainsboro area, and inquired as to what extent the City has worked with the group. Mr. Barattaadvised that the group has been apprised of the NRSA Plan; they applied for funding, but were not selected since much of their initial focus will be on rental property; and while rental is needed, the Iow home ownership rate in Gainsboro compared to the City at large was one of the drawbacks. He stated that there will be opportunities to work with the investment group because the public/private partnership is important and the City would like to encourage them to move to the home ownership side. 296 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick inquired as to the total number of housing units in the redevelopment area; whereupon, Mr. Baratta responded that there are approximately 534 units. Council Member Wishneff inquired if the NRSA plan is restricted to home ownership; whereupon, Mr. Baratta advised that rental rehabilitation, tenant occupied property, owner occupied, and new home ownership is permitted, although rental rehabilitation is sometimes difficult to put in place. He stated that the City could require home ownership only, but new houses cannot be constructed with CDBG funds, therefore, it would be necessary to overlay HOME funds with new home ownership, especially where there is infill construction on a vacant lot. He added that it is difficult to use CDBG funds entirely for new home ownership, so there is a large amount of owner occupied property; also, with new home ownership, if the surrounding owner occupied property is not taken into consideration, it can be difficult to sell new homes because potential buyers are concerned about their investment, so the City would end up with a mix of new home ownership and existing owner occupied property. He explained that HOME funds can only be used for Iow and moderate income housing. The City Manager advised that the NRSA plan allows the City to spend up to 49 per cent of funding that no longer will be attributed to Iow/moderate income on market rate housing; and all of the development that occurs in the Gainsboro neighborhood should not be publicly driven. She stressed the importance of "jump starting" involvement by the private sector and that the City should not always be in the business of trying to identify City dollars or Federal dollars for certain purposes. She stated that the purpose of the NRSA plan, over time, is to bring a different mix of housing into the area because the Gainsboro area has a lot of potential and should not be a Iow income area, but a mixed income area of the City. Council Member Lea inquired about citizen participation and understanding of the NRSA plan; whereupon, Mr. Baratta advised that the NRSA plan used the Neighborhood Plan as a foundation which included an extensive process over a long period of time, and the NRSA plan is similar inasmuch as it was built on neighborhood involvement. He added that the NRSA plan was presented to the Gainsboro community on January 20, City staff went into the neighborhood as early as possible with information about the Plan, interchange of information led to 297 formation of an executive committee; the Gainsboro Neighborhood Alliance held a special meeting at the Roanoke Higher Education Center; and City staff continues to provide information to the neighborhood. Council Member Cutler inquired if any of the building designs from the Cradle to Cradle Housing Design competition could be used in the Gainsboro area; whereupon, Mr. Baratta advised that the Blue Ridge Housing Development Corporation is looking at some of the designs that are compatible with the neighborhood and Blue Ridge has committed to build at least one of the compatible Cradle to Cradle designs. Dr. Cutler also inquired as to what was learned from the Southeast by Design project that could be used in the Gainsboro area; whereupon, Mr. Baratta advised that as a result of appointment of a Southeast by Design Steering Committee, a Gainsboro Steering Committee was appointed to promote and provide information, to identify issues that might not be on target, and to provide citizen oversight in order to keep the project moving forward. Council Member McDaniel inquired about a time frame for completion of the NRSA plan; whereupon, Mr. Baratta advised that completion of the plan will involve a 12-18 month process. There being no further discussion, the Mayor expressed appreciation to City staff for an informative briefing. At 11:08 a.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess, for a meeting of the Audit Committee to be held in the Council's Conference Room, Room 451, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building. At 12:15 p.m., the Council convened in Closed Session in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building. At 12:50 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, with Mayor Harris presiding and all Members of the Council in attendance. 298 COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Session just concluded, Council Member McDaniel moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of information Act; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... O. AIRPORT-OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMI'I-rEES: The Mayor advised that the four year term of office of J. Granger Macfarlane as a member of the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission expired on March 9, 2005; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of J. Granger Macfarlane. There being no further nominations, Mr. Macfarlane was reappointed as member of the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, foraterm ending March 9, 2009, by the following vote: FOR MR. MACFARLANE: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harris ...................................... 7. WATER RESOURCES: The Mayor called attention to the resignation of George W. Logan as a Director of the Western Virginia Water Authority, effective at the close of the May 19, 2005 meeting of the Western Virginia Water Authority; whereupon, on behalf of the Council, he requested that the City Attorney prepare the proper measure, to be considered at a future Council meeting, appointing John B. Williamson, III, to fill the unexpired term of office ending March 1, 2008. VIRGINIA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE-COMMITTEES: The Mayor advised of the following City of Roanoke nominations to Virginia Municipal League Policy Committees: 299 Environmental Quality - Council Member M. Rupert Cutler General Laws - William M. Hackworth, City Attorney Human Development and Education - Council Member Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. Transportation - Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr. Finance -Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance ROANOKE ARTS COMMISSION: Public Arts Plan: The Mayor advised that the first Public Arts Forum was held on March 7, 2005 at The Jefferson Center and was well attended by a diverse group of individuals. He called upon Mark C. McConnell, Chair, Roanoke Arts Commission, for an update on the Public Arts Plan. Mr. McConnel advised that the City of Roanoke and the Roanoke Arts Commission are collaborating to produce a new plan that will help organize the community's efforts in public art; in 2002, Roanoke adopted a Percent-For-Art program that designates one per cent of each capital improvement budget to purchase art for placement in public spaces; the Roanoke Arts Commission has been assigned the responsibility to administer the Percent-For-Art program; and the City and the Arts Commission, along with other community and cultural groups, wish to take a proactive approach to public art, the goal of which is to create a Comprehensive Public Art Plan that can become an essential ingredient adding to the vitalization of Roanoke. He stated that Roanoke's new Public Art Plan will decide what types of art should be purchased, identify where artworks should be installed, and which themes are most appropriate to capture Roanoke's "heart and soul"; and Roanoke's new public art program requires a cohesive plan, policies and procedures to ensure that the community will enjoy the full benefits of high-quality public art. He advised that the planning process is underway, with a preliminary draft of the Public Art Plan scheduled for review by May 2005; extensive public involvement has contributed to the planning and interested citizens are invited to participate in the final public workshop to be held on Monday May 2, 2005, at 5:30 p.m., at The Jefferson Center. Mr. McConnel introduced Kathleen Lunsford, Member of the Arts Commission; and Bettina Finley, representing TurnKey Meetings, Eloise Damorsch, representing Regional Arts in Portland, Oregon, and Clark Worth, representing Barney & Wirth, Inc., the principle team charged with the responsibility of developing a Public Arts Plan for the City or Roanoke. 3O0 Mr. McConnel advised that: Two years ago, when Council funded the Percent for Arts Program, the Roanoke Arts Commission was instructed to develop a Public Arts Plan. Plans from 20 different cities were studied, public arts professionals were interviewed and it became apparent that the task was larger than a volunteer committee could undertake; therefore, a public arts planning consultant was engaged to prepare a public input based study. A public arts forum was held on March 7, 2005 at The Jefferson Center which was attended by over 130 people from a diverse background of varying ages, and interviews were conducted with over 60 community leaders to solicit their vision for public art in Roanoke. An art survey was available on the Internet which has generated 70 responses to date. Meetings have been held with business groups and neighborhood organizations to solicit input and to distribute a survey in order to generate as much information as possible about how Roanokers view public art. Meetings were held with representatives of the Purchasing Department, Risk Management, and the Finance Department in order to understand how the Public Arts Plan and procedures will dovetail with existing City procedures and operations. Issues to be addressed include the existing process, collection, selection and placement of art, the purchase process, art issuance liability, and ways to leverage the City's investment and economic development in public art. Results of the study will be presented to Council in 60 days and will include a past history, goals and objectives of the public arts process, a listing of art selections to date, guidelines for future art acquisition, funding strategies, a master strategy and peer cities analysis. 301 The second public input forum will be held on April 4, 2005 at 5:30 p.m., at The Jefferson Center, at which time participants will vote electronically on questions that will be posed to the audience. Mr. Wirth advised that the study will include a process of community participation, the first Public Art Forum was well attended, the Public Forum scheduled for April 4 will be the second of three public workshops that have been scheduled, the theme for tonight's workshop is "Roll Up Your Sleeves" and is intended to provide an opportunity for participants to see the components of a Public Art Plan. He stated that tonight's meeting will also include a recap of the first work session, various images will be flashed on a screen and participants will be asked to vote their preferences on a scale of one to seven, and results of the voting will be used to help shape the Public Arts Plan; questions will be projected on the screen and participants will be asked to vote via electronic polling, and, in addition, participants will be permitted to frame their own questions. He advised that at the last pubic forum there was an outstanding response to the workshop session which included a round table discussion led bya facilitator and a recorder who took notes; the workshop theme will be repeated at tonight's work session and central discussion will focus on "What Does It Take to Make Excellent Art for Roanoke"; in approximately one month, a preliminary plan will be presented to and reviewed by the community and based on community input, Roanoke's Public Arts Plan will be produced. The City Manager advised that the proof of public art is in not only the local government's financial investment, but what becomes the attitude or philosophy of the greater community. She stated that it would be hoped that the consultant's report will address how to get ownership in public art, beyond the local government percentage, to the private sector/broader community which is a critical base. She advised that more construction is taking place in the community by the private sector than by the public sector; and the notion that public art is valued and appreciated should be instilled in the private sector and should be incorporated into their building designs. Dr. Cutler advised that two peripheries are closely tied to public art, i.e.: architecture and landscaping. He encouraged good landscaping and good architecture in the City's Public Arts Plan. 302 When the Public Arts Plan study is completed, Dr. Cutler inquired as to what community infrastructure will be put in place to tie in the neighborhoods, the arts plan process, and the Roanoke Arts Commission, in order to make the plan successful. Mr. McConnel advised that the Roanoke Arts Commission is a dedicated body of 15 persons with no real authority other than the assignment to purchase and install art. He stated that as criteria are formulated for a particular piece of art, community representatives will be included in the process to solicit and coordinate the desires of the specific neighborhood and the Roanoke community at large. There being no further questions or comments by Council Members, the Mayor expressed appreciation to Mr. McConnel for the presentation. At 1:20 p.m., the Mayor left the meeting and the Vice-Mayor presided over the final briefing of the Council's work session. POLICE DEPARTMENT: Vice-Organized Crime Unit: The City Manager advised of changes, improvements and enhancements in law enforcement during the past eight to twelve months; therefore, it would be appropriate for the Chief of Police to provide Council with an update on several activities and programs, with the goal of highlighting certain areas that have been emphasized during the past year. Chief Joe Gaskins advised that: The Geographic Policing Program has been successful, the community is pleased with the program, the number of complaints from various communities are down, police officers strive to attend each community meeting and have attended approximately 500 meetings during the past year which gives the community an opportunity to know police officers and an opportunity for police officers to know the community that they serve. 303 Geographic policing decentralized School Resource Officers (SRO) and the SRO now reports to the Lieutenant in the zone in which the school is located. o The primary goal of geographic policing is to reduce .the number of calls for service throughout the community, allowing police officers to have more time tO spend with people in the community and more time to solve problems. Due to a number of home invasions (drug dealers breaking into each other's homes and taking money and personal items); and narcotics related murders, a Violent Crimes Task Force was established, the purpose of which !s to address long term investigations and to concentrate on large criminal enterprise, to identify those persons who meet the definition of "king pin", and to identify all of the people who surround these people through a link analysis, The following is a breakdown of statistics on arrest and seizures for 2003, 2004 and January and February 2005 which demonstrates the success of the Organized Cdme component to the Vice Unit: 304 No drug-related murders have occurred since 2003. Three domestic homicides have occurred in 2005; if a victim contacted the City's Domestic Violence Specialist, they were counseled and encouraged to place charges against the perpetrator; staff developed a profile with Roanoke specific data showing the risk factors which determine when and where victims have been injured; a numerical system of rating risk factors was compiled and when the number reaches a certain level~ an arrest is made; and victims who have reached a certain level are advised that at this point, people in their particular situations have been murdered, therefore, it is time to address the issue. A Criminal Intelligence and Technology Unit was created through grant funding, equipped with three dimensional crime scene mapping software that allows police officers to create a crime scene in three dimension which is especially helpful in court situations; Express Video Enhancement Software has been purchased that allows film on cameras used in retail establishments to be made either lighter or darker; GPS Iocators, which are microphones that allow contact with police officers at all times have been purchased; the work of the Records Division is current and police officers now enter data directly into a computer from the police vehicle thereby eliminating the need for duplication of data entry and temporary employees, and police officers may now concentrate on quality of work rather than quantity of work. A new system is under investigation that will allow police officers to pass photographs across the network system. The City of Roanoke has been fortunate to receive the following grant funds for police operations: records software - a $130,000.00 grant through Homeland Defense Funds; $320,000.00 for a mobile police station which, in an emergency situation, can serve as a local command station; a tactical response vehicle; additional tactical equipment such as vests, helmets, etc., surveillance equipment, computer equipment, and interoperability type radios; a $35,000.00 V-STOP grant which was used to hire a Domestic Violence Specialist; a $5:~,000.00 grant for bike patrols; a $28,000.00 Division of Motor Vehicles Grant for DUI enforcement and speed detection equipment; and $30,000.00 for bicycle patrol helmets and $ :~6,000.00 for vests. 305 During the latter part of 2004, the complement of police officers was short by 39, however, to date the City of Roanoke is three officers short, 21 police officers have been hired since January, 19 recruits are presently enrolled in the Police Academy, ten officers are enrolled in field training, and the City can now be more selective by accepting better qualified applicants. Roanoke received funding for the Cadet Program in 2004, and four cadets are currently on the streets performing non- enforcement types of activities. Various community service outreach programs are administered by the Police Department; i.e.: Operation Blue Santa which raised $28,000.00 and a truckload of toys; the False Alarm Program saved the City 1,019 man hours, Guns and Hoses Hockey Game raised $2,500.00 for the Muscular Dystrophy Association, Crime Scene technicians met with persons in the community to explain the department's capabilities as resources to forensics; and the Police Academy graduated approximately 300 persons, with 33 graduates from the Advanced Academy and the Senior Academy. Morale has been an issue of discussion from time to time; however, morale should be evaluated in a different way; i.e.: sick leave usage is down by 23 per cent, production is up, and staff involvement in department operations has increased; the Police Academy received first place award in the nation; Roanoke won first place in the State for the 2000 IACP Vehicle Theft Award; the "Chief's Challenger" which is a traffic safety, education and training award received first place in the State and third place in the nation; and Roanoke ranked first place in the Special Olympics Photograph Contest. The National Accreditation effort will begin on April 17 - 21, 2005. The Eighth Annual Golf Tournament will be held on May 21, 2005, which has the potential to raise between $15,000.00 - $25,000.00 for Special Olympics. 306 Staff is excited about the second phase of the police building which will be a major accomplishment when all police operations will be housed under the same roof. Discussion: Council Member Dowe advised that it has been brought to his attention that there should be more concern about personal safety at City Council meetings. Council Member Lea inquired if there are additional measures that could be taken to address domestic violence. Chief Gaskins responded that any time there is an assault, or any time an officer responds to a call of domestic violence and there are visible signs that violence took place, the officer has no other recourse but to make an arrest; the problem usually occurs after the arrest when the individuals who took out the warrant have worked out their differences and the incident is not pursued through the court system. Council Member Lea inquired if medicine given out at the methadone clinic on Hershberger Road is dispensed on site. Chief Gaskins responded that he recently toured the facility, methadone is dispensed in liquid form to the client in a cup and the client is required to talk with the nurse prior to leaving the premises to prove that the substance was swallowed. He stated that if there is methadone on the streets of Roanoke, he did not believe that it came from the methadone clinic on Hershberger Road. Council Member Cutler inquired if there are gangs in Roanoke. Chief Gaskins advised that Roanoke has had one group that fits the definition of "gang", with ages ranging from minors to adults committing crimes. He stated that if the question is, are there "gangs" in Roanoke, the answer would be yes, there are groups that are striving to be gangs. He added that he did not believe that Roanoke has the "gangs" that one would typically worry about but nonetheless, several years ago a task force was 307 appointed including representatives of the Commonwealth's Attorney's Office, Sheriff's Department and Police Department which collected data on those persons who would loosely fit the description - who they are, where they are, where the signs are, and what kind of activities they are involved in, etc. He stated that if the situation reaches the point where it is believed that they are of "gang" status, the City of Roanoke will be ahead of the game. Council Member Dowe advised that information disseminated by the Virginia Municipal League has been provided to the Police Department. He stated that he was recently appointed by the Governor to serve on the Criminal Justice Board at the State level; therefore, Roanoke will be ahead of the curve in receiving information as viewed by the State. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick expressed appreciation to Chief Gaskins for briefing the Council on the status of police operations. He commended the success of the Geographic Policing Program in Roanoke's communities. He asked that Chief Gaskins apprise his department of the Council's appreciation for the work they do on a daily basis to protect the citizens of Roanoke. At 1:55 p.m., the Council meeting was declared in recess to be reconvened at 2:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber. At 2:00 p.m., on Monday, April 4, 2005, the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. PRESENT: Council Members Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ................................................ 7. ABSENT: None .................................................. 0. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. 308 The invocation was delivered by Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led by Mayor Harris. PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-LEGISLATION: Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution expressing appreciation to Senator John S. Edwards, Delegate Onzlee Ware and Delegate William H. Fralin, Jr., for their leadership and support during the 2005 Session of the Virginia General Assembly: (#37001-040405) A RESOLUTION expressing appreciation to The Honorable John S. Edwards, Member, Senate of Virginia, the Honorable Onzlee Ware and the Honorable William H. Fralin, Jr., Members, House of Delegates, for their leadership and support during the 2005 session of the General Assembly. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 327.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37001-040405. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. Delegate Fralin advised that it has been a pleasure to represent the City of Roanoke in the General Assembly and expressed appreciation for Council's acknowledgement of his service. Senator Edwards advised that the 2005 Session marked his tenth General Assembly Session and it has been a rewarding experience to represent the City of Roanoke. He stated that $3.13 million was allocated to cultural agencies by the General Assembly this year, with the promise of more funds to come. He also expressed appreciation to the Council for acknowledgement of his service. 309 The Mayor advised that due to another commitment, Delegate Onzlee Ware could not attend the Council meeting and the resolution would be forwarded to him by the Clerk. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-DECEASED PERSONS: Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution memorializing the late Emma Ruth Brooks, mother of Assistant City Manager Rolanda Russell: (#37002-040405) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Emma Ruth Brooks, mother of Assistant City Manager Rolanda Russell. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 328.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37002-04040S. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor Harris .................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. The Mayor presented a ceremonial copy of the above referenced measure to Ms. Russell and called for a moment of silence in memory of Ms. Brooks. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-DECEASED PERSONS: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution memorializing the late Roy Nelson Stroop, former President of the Wildwood Civic League: (#37004-040405) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Roy Nelson Stroop. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 330.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37004- 040405. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor Harris .................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. 310 The Mayor presented a ceremonial copy of the above referenced measure to Mrs. Stroop and called for a moment of silence in memory of Mr. Stroop. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT-SCHOOLS: The Vice-Mayor offered the following resolution congratulating the Roanoke Catholic High School boy's basketball team for winning the Fifth Virginia Independent Schools Division II State title game: (#37005-040405) A RESOLUTION congratulating the Roanoke Catholic Celtics Basketball team for its winning the Virginia Independent State, Division II, Basketball Tournament. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 331.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37005-040405. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor Harris .................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. The Mayor welcomed members of the basketball team and presented a ceremonial copy of the above referenced measure to Coach Joe Gaither, with the congratulations of the City of Roanoke. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-DECEASED PERSONS: On behalf of her son, James N. Kincanon,Jr., who is currently serving in the United States Army stationed in Afghanistan, Mrs. James N. Kincanon, Sr., wife of former Roanoke City Attorney, James N. Kincanon, Sr., presented a United States Flag that was flown at Camp Cherry-Beasley Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan on January 31,2005, in memory of Mr. Kincanon, husband, father and City Attorney. On behalf of the City of Roanoke, the Mayor expressed appreciation to the Kincanon family. 311 PROCLAMATIONS-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The Mayor presented a proclamation to Nancy F. Canova, Chair, Fair Housing Board, declaring the month of April 2005 as Fair Housing Month. PROCLAMATIONS-COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT: The Mayor presented a proclamation to Roy Mentkow, Acting Director of the Department of Technology, declaring the week of April 10-16, 2005 as National Public Safety Telecommunicator's Week. PROCLAMATIONS-POLICE DEPARTMENT: The Mayor presented a proclamation to Laird R. Manlove, Chair, Roanoke Valley Crime Line, declaring the month of April 2005 as Roanoke Valley Crime Line Month. CONSENT AGENDA The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meetings of Council held on Monday, February 7, 2005, recessed until Friday, February 18, 2005; and the regular meeting held on Tuesday, February 22, 2005, were before the body. (For full text, see Minutes on file in the City Clerk's Office.) Council Member Cutler moved that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. TAXES: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council schedule a public hearing for Monday, April 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a request of the Scott Robertson Memorial Fund, a non-profit organization, for tax exemption of certain real property in the City of Roanoke, located at the easternmost 250 feet of Densmore Road, N. W., was before the body. 312 Council Member Cutler moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................... O. OATHS OF OFFICE-PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMll-I-EES-PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT-INDUSTRIES: The following report of qualification was before Council: Robert C. Jones and Sharon L. Stinnette as members of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, for terms ending March 31, 2008; Stuart H. Revercomb as a Director of the Industrial Development Authority, to fill the unexpired term of William L. Bova, resigned, ending October 20, 2005; and Stephen S. Willis as a member of the Personnel and Employment Practices Commission, for aterm ending June 30, 2007. Council Member Cutler moved that the report of qualification be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None ..................................................... 0. REGULAR AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: 313 AIRPORT-BUDGET: Jacqueline L. Shuck, Executive Director, Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, advised that in accordance with requirements of the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission Contract dated January 28, 1987, as amended, the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission submits its fiscal year 2005-2006 Operating Budget for approval. She stated that the budget was adopted by the Airport Commission at a meeting on March 16, 2005, and includes a separate listing of Capital Expenditures which are expected to exceed $100,000.00 in cost and are intended to benefit five or more future periods. It was further advised that no deficit is anticipated in either the Operating Budget or for the listed Capital Expenditures; therefore, no additional appropriations are requested or anticipated from the City of Roanoke or the County of Roanoke; and formal approval of the Operating Budget and the Capital Expenditure List by resolution of each of the participating political subdivisions is requested. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#37003-040405) A RESOLUTION approving the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission's 2005-2006 proposed operating and capital budget, upon certain terms and conditions. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 329.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37003-040405. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. Council Member Cutler inquired as to the reason for the decline in airfield revenues of $150,000.00; whereupon, Ms Shuck advised that Roanoke decreased the landing fee to commercial air carriers by approximately 17 cents per one thousand pounds. There being no further questions or comments, Resolution No. 37003- 040405 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. 314 REPORTS OF OFFICERS: CITY MANAGER: BRIEFINGS: CITY EMPLOYEES-AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that realities of the 21s~ century require organizations to take full advantage of all resources in order to be successful; embracing improved technology, partnering with other organizations and investing in new infrastructure are but a few of the areas that successful organizations are concentrating on; related to the "people" side of the equation, successful organizations are embracing workplace diversity as an improvement area where a competitive advantage can be achieved; and in Roanoke, diversity efforts are focused in two areas: increasing the diversity of the workforce and developing the skills needed to work in a diverse environment. It was further advised that efforts at increasing workforce diversity are based on a broad and focused recruitment program; the City continues to develop relationships and partnerships between City staff, EEO/civil rights organizations, colleges/universities, sororities, fraternities and other groups interested in diversity, and progress has been made in this area; during 2004, minorities were hired in two key positions, the Director of Management and Budget and the Manager of Purchasing; and the City was also successful in recruiting and employing a person of color as Civil Engineer I. It was explained that in the area of developing "diversity capacity", the firm ofJ. O. Rogers & Associates (JOR) was hired to conduct an assessment of the City's current diversity efforts, with the intent of recommending "next steps" for consideration; while the study is not yet complete, certain initial observations were made by the consultant: the City of Roanoke has already shown commitment to diversity, with visible signs of diversity existing at senior levels within the organization and ongoing training exists for all employees that introduces the core diversity concepts and opens the door for conversations about diversity; JOR has also observed that while diversity training and employing a more diverse workforce are important, City staff needs to increase its focus on modeling appropriate diversity behavior; by improving the ability of employees to recognize and model diversity sensitive behavior in every situation, whether it is with a citizen or a fellow employee, the result will be improved service; and the City looks forward to the completion of JOR's report and subsequent recommendations. 315 It was noted that the Employee Development Program (EDP), which was implemented in 2001, continues to offer the most promise to help existing employees improve their skills and to advance within the organization; the program incorporates skill assessment, education planning and career counseling; supporting events have included informational presentations made by Averett University and Ferrum College to increase awareness of accelerated adult degree programs for nontraditional students; individualized support continues to be offered to EDP participants and candidates; during 2004, the EDP increased participation from 93 to 109; of the 109 participants, 55 per cent were female and 41 per cent were people of color, compared to 58 per cent and 42 per cent, respectively, last year; and currently, 18 participants are enrolled in formal education programs, two participants have received undergraduate degrees, and 11 participants have obtained new positions within the organization. The City Manager advised that the next step is: In order to improve the City's ability to recruit more women and people of color, particularly in public safety positions, the City must continue to refine its efforts through innovative recruitment as well as tapping different venues. In conclusion, the City Manager stated that the City's diversity strategy is sound and headed in the right direction toward increasing diversity capacity; the City's efforts in hiring more people of color has not been as successful as hoped, yet this is a long term commitment that requires constant attention; and the City will continue to provide the necessary attention to make Roanoke a truly high quality diverse employer. Mr. Daniel Hale, 4425 Oleva Street, N. W., advised that Council and the City Manager are to be commended for engaging the firm of J. O. Rogers and Associates to assess the City's current Affirmative Action efforts, which demonstrates good leadership on the part of the City and awillingnessto continue innovative affirmative action and the hiring of a diverse workforce. He called attention to the City's efforts to recruit qualified minorities and commended the City's Human Resources Department which initiated a change in the recruitment process; and the local branch of the NAACP is proud to work in partnership with the City on the Fifth Annual Recruitment Day, which will be held on Thursday, May 12, 2005, from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. He called attention to continuing concerns regarding the number of minorities in public safety departments; i.e.: Police, Fire and Sheriff's Department and he has the assurance of the Chief of Police that his department is working on a way to increase the number of minorities in the Police Department, he plans to meet with the Fire Chief later in the year, and he commended recruitment efforts by the Sheriff. He stated that he was encouraged by the hiring of minorities in the positions of Director of Management and Budget and the Manager of Purchasing which represents 316 significant appointments of minorities to key upper level management positions. He expressed appreciation to Council and to the City Manager for their leadership. ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION: BUDGET-GRANTS-YOUTH-JUVENILE CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Department of Criminal Justice Services notified the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County of an allocation of funds under the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant Program (JABG); an allocation of $40,581.00 in Federal funds was awarded jointly to the two jurisdictions; and a joint local match of $4,509.00 is required, for a total program budget of $45,090.00. It was further advised that the allocation formula provides $28,339.00 Federal, a $3,149.00 match for Roanoke, and a $12,242.00 Federal and $1,360.00 match for Roanoke County; staff from the jurisdictions have developed program proposals for use of funds; Roanoke County will provide a substance abuse intervention education program through the schools; the City of Roanoke, in collaboration with the Boys and Girls Club and Total Action Against Poverty (TAP), will provide services to students suspended or otherwise absent from school during the day; and TAP-Project Recovery will help adjudicated youth avoid the negative risks and unproductive lifestyles that often correlate with dropping out of school. It was explained that funding for the City's match of $3,149.00 is included in Account No. 001-630-1270-2010, Human Services Support; and the City of Roanoke will serve as fiscal agent for the funds. The City Manager recommended that Council take the following actions: Authorize the City Manager to accept the $40,581.00 JABG grant allocated to Roanoke for $28,339.00 and Roanoke County for $12,242.00 and to execute the agreement from the Department of Criminal Justice Services for such funds; and Appropriate $45,090.00 and increase the corresponding revenue estimates of $40,581.00 in Federal funds and $1,360.00 in County match funds in accounts to be established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund and transfer $3,149.00 from Human Services Support, Account No. 001-630-1270-2010, to the Grant Fund account. 317 Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37006-040405) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant Program and local match for juvenile education programs, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 General and Grant Funds Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 332.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37006-040405. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... O. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#37007-040405) A RESOLUTION authorizing acceptance of a Juvenile Accountability Block Grant from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services on behalf of the City, authorizing execution of any and all necessary documents to comply with the terms and conditions of the grant and applicable laws, regulations, and requirements pertaining thereto. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 333.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37007- 040405. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. 318 BUDGET-CITY PROPERTY-FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that a local emergency was declared in the City of Roanoke on September 28, 2004, as a result of flooding; an evaluation of damages to City property was completed by Risk Management and other operating departments; an assessment of damages was also completed as required for the purposes of flood insurance recoveries; insurance proceeds have been received both in the form of advances and settlements; the final insurance settlement is pending completion and subsequent insurance proceeds will need to be appropriated at a later date. It was further advised that funding in the amount of $192,071.00 has been received and needs to be appropriated to cover incurred expenses. The City Manager recommended that Council establish a revenue estimate of $67,271.00 in the Capital Projects Fund; and appropriate $67,271.00 to the following expenditure account: Department Account DollarAmount Facilities Management (BCAP) 008-440-9854-9003 $ 67,271.00 Establish a revenue estimate of $82,800.00 in the General Fund and $42,000.00 in the Civic Facilities Fund; and appropriate $124,800.00 to the following expenditure accounts: Department Account Facilities Management 001-440-4330-2300 Parks 001-620-4340-2300 Transportation - Street Maint. 001-530-4110-2300 Civic Facilities 005-550-7410-2300 DollarAmount $ 44,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 8,800.00 $ 42,000.00 Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37008-040405) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate flood insurance proceeds to various departments, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004- 2005 General, Civic Facilities and Capital Projects Funds Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 333.) 319 Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37008- 040405. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... O. STATE HIGHWAYS-STREETS AND ALLEYS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Section 33.1 - 41.1, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, establishes eligibility criteria of localities for receiving funds from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) for street maintenance; the Code section specifies two functional classifications of roadways (Principal/Minor Arterials and Collector/Locals) and establishes a base payment rate per lane mile for each classification of roadway; and rates are adjusted annually by VDOT based upon a statewide maintenance index of unit costs for labor, equipment and materials used by VDOT on roads and bridges. It was further advised that the City submits alist of streets, either added to or deleted from the City system, to VDOT once ayear; upon approval of the list, VDOT adjusts the annual reimbursement received by the City for street maintenance activities; and eligible expenditures include costs for maintenance of streets, sidewalks, curb and gutter, traffic signals, bridges, signs and pavement markings. It was explained that to streamline this recurring process, a single resolution may be used to authorize the City Manager to make submissions as required for all future years; the resolution would be attached to the appropriate forms at the time of each submission; and a Council update will be provided at each submission to VDOT. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to submit required forms to VDOT through which streets are added to or deleted from the City's street system used to determine State Maintenance Payment eligibility. 320 Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#37009-040405) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to submit on an annual basis a street inventory for State maintenance payment eligibility to the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), upon forms prescribed by VDOT, for approval by the Commonwealth Transportation Board, in order to ensure the city's eligibility for State maintenance funds. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 334.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution 37009-040405. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Southern Hills Neighborhood Plan identifies storm drain and street improvements needed along Southern Hills Drive; and design of the project is now sufficiently complete to identify property rights that will be needed for construction of the project. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to acquire the necessary property rights, following a satisfactory environmental site inspection by negotiation or eminent domain, which may include fee simple, permanent easements, temporary construction easements, rights-of-way, licenses or permits, etc. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#37010-040405) AN ORDINANCE providing for the acquisition of property rights needed by the City for certain street and drainage improvements in connection with the Southern Hills Drive-Street and Drainage Improvements Project; authorizing the City Manger to fix a certain limit on the consideration to be offered by the City; providing for the City's acquisition of such property rights by condemnation, under certain circumstances; authorizing the city to make motion for the award of a right of entry on any of the parcels for the purpose of commencing the project; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 335.) 321 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37010-040405. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. LEASES-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke currently leases 3,444.50 rentable square feet of space at 111 Franklin Road, Suite 200, for the Economic Development Department; the original lease was for a five year period beginning May 25, 2000 through May 31, 2005, at a rental rate of $16.75 per square foot, with a three per cent annual increase; and Resolution No. 34717-032000 approved the lease dated March 20, 2000. It was further advised that an extension of the current lease agreement for an additional five-year period has been requested, beginning June 1, 2005 through May 31, 2010; extension of the lease will be substantially similar to the original agreement; the proposed agreement establishes a rate of $16.00 per rentable square foot of space, with an increase of 1.55 per cent each year thereafter; and annual rental, which will be paid in monthly installments, is as follows: June 1,2005-May31,2006 $55,112.00 $4,592.66 per month June 1,2006-May31,2007 $55,973.12 $4,664.42 per month June 1,2007-May31,2008 $56,834.25 $4,736.18 per month June 1, 2008 - May 31, 2009 $57,695.37 $4,807.94 per month June 1,2009-May31,2010 $58,556.50 $4,879.70 per month The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the first amendment to the lease agreement with Crown Roanoke, LLC, a Virginia Limited Liability Company, for 111 Franklin Road, Suite 200, for a period of five years, beginning June 1, 2005 and expiring May 31, 2010, subject to approval of all documents as to form by the City Attorney. 322 Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance: "AN ORDINANCE authorizing the proper City officials to extend the lease agreement between the City and Crown Roanoke, LLC, for lease of office space within the Franklin Plaza Building, located at 111 Franklin Road, for the Department of Economic Development, for a period of five years, upon certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance." Council Member Dowe moved adoption of the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. Council Member Wishneff advised that the Economic Development Department should be housed at a location in proximity to the Municipal Building. He stated that the new Director of Economic Development, who may or may not be familiar with the Roanoke area, will be at a disadvantage if his or her office is not located near other City offices; and the Director of Economic Development should be a part of the City Manager's Office due to the level of importance of the position and the need to coordinate activities with the Planning Department, Finance Department and the City Attorney's Office. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick spoke to the benefits of locating all economic development organizations in the Roanoke Valley in one place, and the preferred location would be close in proximity to the Roanoke Valley Regional Partnership. He stated that economic development is not tied in with Planning Department activities as closely as in past years, therefore, he was comfortable with the present arrangement; however, the issue should be monitored over the next five years of the proposed lease and adjustments can be made if necessary. Council Member Wishneff moved that the above referenced ordinance be amended to provide for a three year lease extension in lieu of five years. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. Upon question, the City Manager advised that if the amendment to the ordinance passes, it will be necessary to renegotiate the lease with Crown Roanoke, LLC, inasmuch as rental rates were predicated on a five year lease; whereupon, she suggested that Council table the ordinance to allow time for renegotiation. 323 In clarification of the present location of the Office of Economic Development, the City Manager advised that approximately five years ago, a decision was made to move the Department of Economic Development out of the Municipal Building because the physical condition of office space did not present a positive image; the current site was selected because of its immediate proximity to the Roanoke Regional Economic Development Partnership and has served the City well over the past five years. She stated that she has encouraged her counterparts in other jurisdictions to also locate a portion, if not all, of their economic development offices in the same building due to the benefits of working together. She added that if Roanoke were a City or a downtown that was scattered for some distance, she would be more concerned about the location, but given the walkability of the downtown area, and the fact that the distance is relatively short between the Municipal Building and the Franklin Road location and with the use of e-mail and telephone communication there is a great deal of interaction between Economic Development staff and other City staff. She stated that at the time of relocation of the Economic Development Department five years ago, if there had been space immediately adjacent to the Municipal Building, the office would have been located at that site; however, it is more critical that the City present a positive image of economic development than where the office is physically located; City staff continues to be concerned about identifying space within the Municipal Building complex as soon as possible for administrative activities such as the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority which is currently located even farther away from the downtown area; and there is a higher value for those kinds of activities to locate in the Municipal Building before the Economic Development Department would be brought in. Following further discussion, the amendment to the ordinance to provide for a three year lease in lieu of a five year lease was adopted, Council Members McDaniel, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick voted no. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the ordinance be tabled pending renegotiation of a three year lease by the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and unanimously adopted. BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that during Council presentations on January 3, 2005 and February 7, 2005, the Fire-EMS administration requested minimum additional resources of $489,740.00 for the proposed Fire Station/Fire Administration Building to be located at 704 Franklin Road, S. W.; prior to the request, approximately $865,000.00 of cuts were made to the design in an effort to bring the project within budget; additional funding is necessary due to unanticipated site issues, site impacts to the proposed building design and for Council requested upgrades to the design; and additional funds will bring available funds in line with the consultants' estimated base bid costs. 324 The City Manager recommended that Council proceed with the Fire Station/Fire Administration Building project as currently designed; and the Citywill be able to meet the increased funding requirements of $489,740.00 by borrowing from the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project account and repaying from excess EMS Fee Revenues over three years. She further recommended transfer of $489,740.00 to Account No. 008-530-9678-9003, Fire/EMS Facility Improvement Program, said funds to be reimbursed to the Roanoke River Flood Reduction account. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: (#37011-040405) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Fire/EMS Facility Improvement Program, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 337.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37011- 040405. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. EASEMENTS-CITY PROPERTY-HIGHER EDUCATION CENTER: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Roanoke Higher Education Authority has requested a temporary construction easement on City-owned property identified as Official Tax No. 20:~3001 to support construction of the Culinary Institute, said easement to expire no later than June 30, 2006; and the Roanoke Higher Education Authority shall require its contractors to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any liability in connection with the easement, and provide proof of insurance acceptable to the City's Risk Manager. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute appropriate documents granting the easement as above described to the Roanoke Higher Education Authority, to be approved as to form by the City Attorney; and since the easement is granted to a governmental agency, a public hearing is not required. 325 Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance: (#37012-040405) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the execution of a deed of easement granting to the Roanoke Higher Education Authority a temporary construction easement across City property to be used as a construction staging and storage area and for the placement of an office trailer; upon certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 338.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37012-040405. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harris .............................................................. 6. NAYS: None .................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff abstained from voting and read the following statement for the record.) "STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST I, Brian J. Wishneff, state that I have a personal interest in the Roanoke Higher Education Center's Culinary Arts School Project. Therefore, pursuant to Virginia Code Section 2.2-3112(A)(2), I must refrain from participation in this matter. I ask that the City Clerk accept this statement and ask that it be made a part of the minutes of this meeting, and be retained for five years, as required by Section 2.2-3115, Code of Virginia. Witness the following signature made this 4th day ofApri12005. (Seal) S/Brian J. Wishneff" 326 SCHOOLS: The Mayor advised that on June 30, 2005, the three year terms of office of William H. Lindsey and Robert J. Sparrow as Trustees of the Roanoke City School Board will expire; and on Monday, March 21, 2005, Council unanimously voted to interview William H. Lindsey and David B. Carson for the position. He stated that Council will hold a public hearing on Monday, April 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard in the City Council Chamber, to receive the views of citizens. The Mayor called upon Mr. Lindsey for remarks. Mr. Lindseyexpressed appreciation for the three years that he has served as a Trustee of the Roanoke City School Board, which has been a learning experience. He stated that the School Board has achieved many things, but still has a lot of work to do; and he applied for reappointment because he would like to be a part of the School Board's work for the next three years as the Board works with a new Superintendent of Schools and the challenges that lie ahead. Council Member Wishneff expressed appreciation to Mr. Lindsey for his previous service and asked the following question: What are your ideas with regard to returning Patrick Henry High School to the Blue Ridge District which would help to return a degree of rivalry between William Fleming and Patrick Henry High Schools? Mr. Lindsey responded that he attended a recent presentation by the Virginia High School League, which is the governing body that determines school districts, and although it would be nice to have intra valley rivalry among the two high schools, certain Roanoke County schools and the City of Salem, the size of the school determines the distinct in which they are placed; and the Virginia High School League takes the position that it does the best it can insofar as organizing schools according to size and travel distance to games. In order to achieve the level of sports competition referred to by Mr. Wishneff, he stated that it would be necessary to change the size of Roanoke's high schools. Mr. Wishneff inquired if consideration has been given to changing the size of Roanoke's high schools. 327 Mr. Lindsey replied that Patrick Henry High School has approximately 1700 students and William Fleming has approximately 1300 students; in the course of reaching a decision to build a new Patrick Henry High School and a new William Fleming High School, the School Board considered smaller high schools, as well as more high schools of a smaller size; and the decision was not made solely on the basis of athletics, but upon tradition and academic considerations. He added that the issue continues to be considered, and numerous athletic issues need to be addressed, some of which have been mandated by the State. Council Member Cutler expressed appreciation to Mr. Lindsey for his prior service on the School Board and asked the following question: What would you do differently if elected to a second term on the School Board? Mr. Lindsey responded that he would like to see the completion of Patrick Henry High School and the beginning of the building process for William Fleming which will enable William Fleming High School to serve as a model school, both in physical plant and energy usage. He stated that he would like to be involved with continuing to build relationships with civic and business organizations; the School Board is beginning to reach out and to rely on the business community more than it has in the past for help with fund raising, an adjunct faculty, and opportunities for students to intern and get a job; and relationships have been established with the Boys and Girls Club and Total Action Against Poverty and he would like to be a part of those continuing and valuable relationships. In response to the question of what he would do differently if reappointed to another term on the School Board, he advised that he would like to spend more time visiting Roanoke's schools during the school day to converse with principals, students, and teachers. Council Member Lea expressed appreciation to Mr. Lindsey for his prior service and asked the following question: How would you work with other School Board members to ensure that the 13 schools that have not met the Standards of Learning will do so by 2007? 328 Mr. Lindsey advised that the School Board is depending on the new Superintendent to provide leadership to principals and teachers to help the remaining schools become accredited. He stated that the School Board works together as a team with more strength than at times in the past; a number of efforts have been made by the School administration which is currently in a period of transition; efforts will be focused on those schools that need to be accredited; there is a need to focus on and place greater resources in preschool initiatives so that by the time a child reaches the third grade, he or she can read, do math and pass third grade Standards of Learning, and, in all likelihood, if the child can pass the third grade SOL, he or she can pass fifth grade Standards Of Learning. He further stated that the number of preschool students was doubled this year by using Virginia Heights Baptist Church as a location for classes; and the City participates in a program in conjunction with TAP to bring school dropouts back into the school system, which is a segment of the student population that skews the numbers insofar as achievement, graduation rates and SOL achievements are concerned. In summary, he advised that by working with all components of the school population it will be possible to get the remaining schools accredited. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick expressed appreciation to Mr. Lindsey for his service and asked the following questions: Many times it appears that the school system is teaching to the Standards of Learning, rather than teaching the children. He quoted the following sentence from Mr. Lindsey's application: "We have to incorporate standardized measurements of achievement, butwe must reach beyond those benchmarks to provide real educational enrichment challenges to our students and for our teachers." Please elaborate on how you would achieve your goal? Mr. Lindsey advised that along with more funds, the teaching element is critical. Due to lack of funds, he stated that the School Board has not been in a position to offer a variety of enrichment opportunities for teachers beyond in- service training, such as attending conferences, specialized teaching opportunities, and sabbaticals, etc. He advised that Roanoke City Schools has historically been a good place for capable students who want an academic challenge, but it is necessary to work harder to address the needs of the other element of students; and the School system currently offers numerous services to students, i.e.: the provision of transportation to and from school, provision of breakfast and lunch, and various after school programs. He called attention to many opportunities that he would like for the school system to take advantage of, but whenever classroom performance is discussed, it comes down to the quality of teachers because only with top quality teachers will the classroom be successful; and it is anticipated that the new Superintendent will bring initiatives and leadership in programs that will be designed to help teachers teach and perform their responsibilities. 329 Council Member Dowe expressed appreciation to Mr. Lindsey for his service on the School Board and asked the following question: What are your thoughts with regard to school uniforms and will school uniforms add to the learning environment? Mr. Lindseyadvised that the following question must be answered: What do we want the classroom to look like? He called attention to the need to be cautious insofar as what the school system is striving to accomplish with school uniforms; school uniforms have been successful at Noel C. Taylor Academy, however, one of the motivations for students to comply is the observance of casual Friday each week. If the goal is to have a disciplined and orderly classroom environment, he stated that it will be necessary to focus on what students wear; if the goal is to provide an equalized environment for students, the Assistant City Attorney has provided information from other school districts; there are certain school environments where it might be helpful to enforce a uniform code on a trial basis; and it may be possible to focus on one school where parents, teachers and the Parent Teacher Association are willing to buy in on an experimental basis. Council Member Cutler asked the following additional question: It is my impression that the approach of Roanoke City Schools to career and technical education and advanced science education is unnecessarily fragmented, with each high school offering a kind of career and technical track that seems to greatly separate those students from the rest of the student body that is on more of an academic track. Do you see awayto give higher status to career and technical education faculty and students? Mr. Lindsey responded that currently a student can complete the vocational technical education program and graduate from high school with a certified diploma and the ability to go on to college if they choose to do so, so as not to discriminate against the student with a specialized diploma. By the same token, he stated that students are required to complete acertain core curriculum in order to pass the Standards of Learning, or to receive a certified diploma based upon objective standards. In this day and time, he explained that employers want young people who are ready to go to work, a number of young people upon graduation make the decision to go directly into the work place after having taken common classes and participating in the VoTech program byworking part of the day, just as Governor's School students attend the Governor's School for a part of the day. He added that when the new high schools are constructed, perceptions will most likely change. 330 Mayor Harris called attention to previous discussions with the Superintendent of Schools and the Chair of the School Board with regard to merging certain City/School administrative functions for greater efficiencies, and following the arrival of the new Superintendent of Schools, it is anticipated that a report will be presented to the Council and the School Board within :12 - :18 months. In closing, Mr. Lindsey expressed appreciation to the City Manager for her support of Roanoke's School system. The Mayor called upon David B. Carson, the second and last applicant to be interviewed, for remarks. Mr. Carson advised that after hearing the questions asked of Mr. Lindsey and his responses, he is aware of how much he needs to learn if appointed to the School Board. He stated that he has no particular expertise in education; by way of background, he attended public schools in the State of California where his parents felt strongly that it was important to not only become educated, but to attend neighborhood schools, and he has three children currently enrolled in the Roanoke City Public School system. He further stated that he is a firm believer that public service is an obligation and service on the School Board would enable him to give something back to the community in which he has chosen to live and raise his family. If appointed to the School Board, he advised that he would come with no established agenda, but with a keen interest in not only the educational component, but the athletic component, as well as other extra curricular activities. He added that his philosophy of education is: "Education is the art of either learning how to learn, or learning how to think," and the education system should teach students how to gather and analyze information in order to reach a solution or direction. Council Member Cutler expressed appreciation to Mr. Carson for offering his service to the City and asked the following question: How would you define or describe the relationship between the School Board and the Superintendent of Schools, and the relationship between the School Board and City Council? 331 Mr. Carson advised that from his research, there appears to be an excellent relationship between the Council and the School Board; there is a certain amount of financing that any city or township, etc., is required to contribute toward a local school system, for many years, the City of Roanoke has exceeded that amount, and the Council should be commended for its action which is an investment in Roanoke's future. He stated that although the School Board is appointed by the Council, the Board is independent of the Council and should remain so, but the lines of communication between the Council and the School Board should be open and respectful of each other. With regard to the relationship between the School Board and the Superintendent of Schools, he added that a School Board member should provide support and guidance in every way and should be held accountable for the job they were appointed to do, and if a School Board member and/or the Superintendent of Schools does not do their respective jobs they should be replaced. Council Member Dowe expressed appreciation to Mr. Carson for offering his service to the City and asked the following question: What expertise would you bring to the position of School Trustee? Mr. Carson advised that he is an attorney by profession; his law firm has defended School Boards in the past, as well as the Roanoke City School Board, and he has been advised that it would not be a Conflict of Interest for him to serve on Roanoke's School Board. In addition to his legal background, he stated that he would bring a passion for learning and a desire to pass on to Roanoke's children the kind of learning experiences that he enjoyed as a student in a public school system in another state. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick expressed appreciation to Mr. Carson for offering his service to the City and asked the following question: What are your thoughts with regard to motivating young people? Mr. Carson advised that everyone has a passion for something, whether it be athletics, or art, or entertainment, etc., which requires a certain amount of guidance, either in or out of the classroom, and the necessary resources for the student to build on their individual passion(s), and he would bring that level of understanding to the School Board. 332 Council Member Lea expressed appreciation to Mr. Carson for offering his service as a member of the School Board and asked the following question: What are your thoughts or ideas with regard to improving middle school athletics in the Roanoke City Schools? Mr. Carson advised that he was not familiar with middle school athletics in Roanoke, but having participated in athletic programs throughout his school career, he would be willing to ask questions and pursue ideas, and middle school athletics would provide another opportunity for students to develop their individual passion(s). Ms. McDaniel expressed appreciation to Mr. Carson for offering his service to the School Board and asked the following question: What can be done to generate more parental involvement in the Schools? Mr. Carson advised that parents need to be educated on the importance of their involvement in their child's education and they must understand that parental involvement is more than just getting their child up in the morning and. off to school, but involves attending school conferences, helping with homework assignments, etc. Council Member Wishneff expressed appreciation to Mr. Carson for offering his service as a member of the School Board and asked the following question: Would you be willing to consider the re-establishment of neighborhood schools? Mr. Carson answered in the affirmative and spoke to the advantages of attending school with children from the same neighborhood, which is just as true today as it was when he attended school in another state. On behalf of the Council, the Mayor expressed appreciation to Mr. Lindsey and Mr. Carson for their interest in the City of Roanoke and its school system. 333 CITY A'I-rORNEY: HOUSING/AUTHORITY-VALLEY VIEW MALL: The City Attorney submitted a written report advising that the City of Roanoke will sponsor a Fair Housing Expo at Valley View Mall on April 16, 2005; the new owners of Valley View Mall, CBL & Associates Management, Inc., require that the City execute an agreement in which the City will indemnify and hold harmless CBL, and defend CBL, in the event of injury or damage during the City's use of the premises; and onlyCouncil can waive the City's sovereign immunity and agree to such provision. Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#37013-040405) A RESOLUTION authorizing the waiver of the City's sovereign immunity in connection with the City's use of Valley View Mall for a Fair Housing Expo, and authorizing execution of an agreement with Valley View Mall, LLC, through its agent, CBL Associates Management, Inc., in connection with such use of Valley View Mall. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 339.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37013-040405. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harris ......................... T ........................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Director of Finance submitted the Financial Report for the City of Roanoke for the month of February 2005. (For full text, see financial report on file in the City Clerk's Office.) There being no questions or comments, without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the Financial Report for the month of February would be received and filed. 334 REPORTS OF COMMI-I-rEES: NONE. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: NONE. MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL: Council Member Dowe congratulated the .Delta Sigma Theta Sorority on the successful Jabberwock production which was held on Saturday, April 2, 2005, at The Jefferson Center. STATE HIGHWAYS-CITY COUNCIL: Council Member Cutler advised that the Virginia Department of Transportation has tentatively allocated $85,000.00 toward restoration of the fire damaged Virginian Passenger Railway Station, which amount is in addition to $250,000.00 in Federal funds that Congressman Bob Goodlatte was instrumental in acquir, ing for the project. STATE HIGHWAYS-CITY COUNCIL-GREENWAY SYSTEM: Council Member Cutler advised that the greenway program has been awarded $294,000.00 from TEA-21 funds from the Virginia Department of Transportation to continue funding for regional greenway trails. CITY COUNCIL-REFUSE COLLECTION: Council Member McDaniel referred to trash and debris that is placed in front of private property for periods longer than 24 hours prior to collection and inquired as to what penalties, if any, are imposed by the City for violations. The City Manager advised that rental property owners are given 24 hours in which to dispose of debris; if they fail to do so within the required period of time, the City collects the litter and bills the landlord for the service. Ms. McDaniel inquired if the penalty should be increased as a deterrent to those landlords who take advantage of the service; whereupon, the City Manager advised that according to State Code, the City can only charge for the actual cost for the pickup, as opposed to what a private hauler would charge; therefore, some landlords take advantage of the City because the City's rates are less expensive. She advised that the Department of Solid Waste Management, working in conjunction with the Police Department, will issue summons for improper placement of garbage and the City will begin to site those persons who do not return their totters to the side or rear of their home after the allotted time on the day of solid waste collection. 335 ARMORY/STADIUM-CITY COUNCIL: Upon question by Council Member Wishneff, the City Manager advised that copy of the report prepared by Sutton- Kennerly and Associates, Inc., Consulting Engineers, with regard to Victory Stadium is available for review by the public in the Mayor's Office, the main library and two branch libraries and copies may be purchased at cost. Council Member Wishneff advised that after having read the complete report of the consultant, it is somewhat different from the way it was portrayed by the news media. He stated that the study was divided into two parts; i.e.: (1) brick masonry work in which it was noted that over the years the ties that hold the brick have deteriorated and need to be replaced, at an estimated $! million, and the consultant has determined that the existing structure could safely support any anticipated additional load applied for future renovation; and (2) concrete holding the seats need to be replaced, at an estimated cost of $2.1 million; and the consultant found no subsurface settling, but stated that since some of the soils are not as compact as they should be, another $300,000.00 - $400,000.00 could be spent; therefore, for an estimated $4.6 million, Roanoke would have a completely functional Stadium without structural issues. He noted that for whatever reason, that concept was misconstrued and misunderstood by some members of the news media and other persons inthe community; and he could not find any statement in the consultant's report that "the building had lost its useful life" as was reported through the news media. He stated that his remarks were intended to clarify the facts and urged that citizens review the report of the consultant at the above referenced locations. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MA'I-rERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. CITY MARKET-COMPLAINTS: The following persons addressed Council with regard to management of the City Market Building: Easter P. Moses, Attorney, 120 Church Avenue, S. W., representing the owner of Gone CoCo Boutique, which is located in the City Market Building, advised that the Market Building is the center and the hub of downtown Roanoke; it is also a flagship building in the downtown area; the Market Building is comprised of 15 commercial tenants; and 336 for the past three to four years there have been disputes, discontent and dissention between tenants and the management leasing company, Advantis, a Norfolk based management company. He stated that several tenants were present to present their concerns, and suggested appointment of a Market Building Committee composed of several tenants, several City Council Members and several City representatives to study operation and management of the Market Building. He asked that the following primary issues be addressed: (1) Preparation of a cost benefit analysis regarding management of the building by the City of Roanoke, or management of the building by a real estate company. The Market building has 15 commercial tenants; the City of Roanoke managed the.building during the transition between F& W Management COmpany and Advantis; if the building is managed by the City of Roanoke, the City would most likely see substantial positive revenue; if the building continues to be managed by a rental company, the City will continue to suffer an operating loss and a study will reveal basic elementary facts that undermine those suppositions. (2) If a committee determines that a leasing company, or real estate company would be appropriate'to manage the building, is there a compelling reason for the building to continue to be managed byAdvantis, which is based in Norfolk, rather than a local real estate company; and several local real estate companies have expressed an interest in management of the building. (3) After three years, Advantis has not developed a uniform lease for Market building tenants. In summary, Mr. Moses advised that peace and closure is needed to the above referenced issues and the onlywayto do so is to determine if a rental company is needed, or can the City of Roanoke manage the building; and if it is determined that a rental company is needed, the question then becomes, do we need a local company, or do we need the expertise of a company outside the area. 337 Kelly Crovo, 1952 Grandin Road, S. W., a tenant in the City Market Building, advised that for the past five years, the number of businesses in downtown Roanoke has decreased, and no economic development plan with regard to revitalizing downtown Roanoke is available. He stated that Market Building tenants met with representatives of Advantis and others to review the terms of a uniform lease, an agreement was reached with Advantis, however, when the lease was sent to Market Building tenants, it contained different provisions than those which were agreed to at the meeting, which has led to a lack of trust, aggravation and animosity between building tenants and the management company. He advised that Advantis is slowly squeezing out Market Building tenants by stalling and by not honoring leases that were previously agreed to. David Estrada, 328 Griffin Lane, Floyd, Virginia, a tenant in the City Market Building, advised that Chico's Pizza has operated out of the Market building for the past 15 years, and expressed concern with regard to the manner in which the Market Building is operated by Advantis. He referred to unanswered telephone calls to representatives of Advantis, and Market Building tenants have been threatened and subjected to obscene language and unprofessional behavior by representatives of Advantis. Therefore, he spoke in support of hiring a local management company who would be more willing to listen and respond to the concerns of Market Building tenants. Georgia Crump, 1012 Stevens Road, Troutville, Virginia, a tenant in the City Market Building, expressed concern with regard to the unprofessional manner in which she was treated by a representative of Advantis after reminding him of the exclusivity clause in her current lease. She stated that she was harassed, provoked, and embarrassed by an Advantis employee in the presence of witnesses, a police report was filed and she is presently considering legal action; and over the past 20 years, she has paid the City of Roanoke over $275,000.00 in rent and taxes, therefore, she expects to be treated with dignity and respect by those persons who are charged with the responsibility of managing the City Market building. She stated that she was under the impression that the issue of the non-compete clause was settled in November, 2004; and other businesses have expressed an interest in locating in the City Market Building, but have been turned down even though they would not be competing with current businesses. She advised that she is prepared to take legal action with regard to issues involving her current lease, but would prefer that the matter be resolved by the City. 338 Robert Craig, 701 12'h Street, S. W., advised that Council has an opportunity to terminate the agreement with Advantis based upon unprofessional actions by employees which can be confirmed with witnesses to the incidents, and also due to the fact that acceptable leases have not been negotiated during the approximately 12 - 18 months that Advantis has managed in the City Market building. Anita Wilson, 32 Market Square, a tenant in the City Market Building, encouraged the City to engage the services of a local firm to manage the Building. She expressed concern and embarrassment with regard to the unprofessional behavior of Advantis employees to Market building tenants in the presence of other Market tenants and customers. Louis Wilson, 32 Market Square, S. W., a City Market Building tenant, advised that he was a witness to unprofessional behavior by an Advantis employee and would be willing to share his testimony with the appropriate City officials; and of primary concern is the lack of. trust by Market building tenants in the management company. He stated that even though there is a non-compete clause in certain leases, it has come to the attention of Market building tenants that Advantis has negotiated with a Mexican restaurant and a pastry shop, and Market building tenants stand ready to work with the City to resolve their concerns. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick suggested that management of the City Market Building be included in the report ora consultant engaged by the City to study the City Market area. He requested that the City Manager conduct an immediate investigation of the alleged incident(s) between Market Building tenants and Advantis employees, with a report to Council. ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia, spoke in support of the renovation and promotion of Victory Stadium. He referred to an Agreement with Norfolk and Western Railway which states that the Stadium was constructed at its current location on the express condition that the land would be used to erect and maintain a stadium. He stated that Victory Stadium should be managed and operated by the Department of Parks and Recreation instead of the Civic Center; and for $5 - 10 million, Victory Stadium could be renovated and used for high school football games and other outdoor events. 339 COMPLAINTS: Mr. Robert Gravely, 727 29'h Street, N. W., expressed concern with regard to the condition of the City's infrastructure and the insufficient number of employees to maintain the City's infrastructure. He referred to a citizen forum to be held on Thursday, April 7, 2005, that will be instrumental in bringing new programs and new leadership to the City of Roanoke. WATER RESOURCES: Ms. Suzanne Osborne, 1702 Blair Road, S. W., advised that according to a recent communication she received from the City of Roanoke, approximately 71 City residents with private irrigation systems in their yards will be subject to backflowtesting, at a cost of up to $250.00, in addition to a $35.00 City permit fee. Inasmuch as only 7! residents are affected, she requested that they be exempt from paying the fee since she could find no reference to private residences in the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and there is no rationale to ask a private property owner to spend $250.00 annually for an irrigation system that will be used for six months out of the year. She stated that the information that was furnished to the 7! property owners is erroneous and requested that the City either readdress the issue, or that the 71 homeowners be grandfathered. The Mayor requested that the City Manager provide Council with information on the issue referenced by Ms. Osborne. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: NONE. At 5:30 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be reconvened on Tuesday, April 12, 2005, at 12:00 p.m., at The Brambleton Center, 3738 Brambleton Avenue, S. W., Room No. 1, for a joint meeting of Roanoke City Council and the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and their respective library boards. The City Council meeting reconvened on Tuesday, April 12, 2005, at 12:~.0 p.m., in Room #1, The Brambleton Center, 3738 Brambleton Avenue, S. W., for a joint meeting of the Roanoke City Council and the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, with Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., and Chair Michael W. Altizer presiding. ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel and Mayor C. Nelson Harris (arrived late) ........................................................ 5. 340 ABSENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler and Brian J. Wishneff ..... 2. The Vice-Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PRESENT: Joseph B. Church, Richard C. Flora, Joseph P. McNamara, Michael A. Wray, and Chair Michael W. Altizer ............................................................ 5. ABSENT: None ................................................ 0. STAFF PRESENT: Representing the City of Roanoke: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; Rolanda B. Russell, Assistant City Manager for Community Development; R. Brian Townsend, Director of Planning, Building and Development; Sheila Umberger, Acting Director of Libraries; and Sheila N. Hartman, Assistant City Clerk. Representing Roanoke County: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator for Human Services; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Diane D. Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer; Diana L Rosapepe, Director of Library Services; and Diane S. Childers, Clerk. The invocation was delivered by John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator. (Mayor Harris arrived at 12:20 p.m.) LIBRARIES: Chairman Altizer introduced Bill Hidell, representing Bill Hidell and Associates, consultants for the Roanoke Comprehensive Public Library Study. Working from an outline prepared by Hidel, Katz and McConnel, Mr. Hidell presented the following progress report on the long range study: Findings of the Facilities Plan Process Conclusion Roanoke City Libraries are underutilized Roanoke County Libraries are maxed out in capacity and will decline in use if they do not develop/expand 341 How do we support this conclusion? Existing facility surveys 14 Focus group sessions Six Town Hall meetings Ten Key stakeholders interviews Telephone survey (City residents only) Peer Library comparison Tour of contemporary libraries Analysis of library annual reports Issues City collections are not meeting customer expectations Libraries are beyond maximum collection capacity Customer seating is not adequate Computer access is limited Parking is not adequate 25% of City residents use other library sites exclusively Performance indicators are stagnant or declining Mr. Hidell stated that members of the study group toured contemporary libraries, such as those in the Phoenix, Arizona area, as well as a variety of other contemporary libraries constructed within the last five years which have developed outstanding programs. He explained that the study group used an analysis of city and county peer library comparisons, which were compiled through a nationwide reporting system, in developing number comparisons throughout the study process. Mark McConnel, a Roanoke architect and member of the study group, gave a slide presentation regarding local library facilities and out-of-state contemporary library facilities, during which he mentioned that Carillon Health Systems is interested in working with the City of Roanoke to include a medical library within the library system. He stated that Roanoke City and Roanoke County share a tremendously long border between the localities and library systems, and called attention to the following issues facing the Roanoke County libraries: · Overcrowded and maxed out · Need better compartmentalization of books · Children's areas are somewhat cramped 342 He advised that a well functioning system, with adequate spacing and protection, will keep children interested in utilizing the facilities; and library staff, with access to proper technology, will have more opportunity to move from behind the counters in order to work with library clientele by rendering assistance similar to the experience of visiting a local bookstore. He further advised that various suggestions are under consideration for making improvements to the libraries by using donations that have been received for improvements. Mr. Hidell stated that typically, from a library planning perspective, one would plan for the maximum capacity of a three-foot section of shelving to be 80 per cent full; and any time capacity exceeds 80 per cent, circulation goes down because it is more difficult to locate items. He further stated that bookstores use a retail display model for distribution and service, and this concept could be incorporated into Roanoke's public library system. Mr. McConnel continued his presentation and noted that the 80 per cent rule is being followed and facilities should be well lit and well organized, with a system that allows books to be easily located. He stated that to a large degree, clientele interact with one another at the library circulation counter; the use of computers tends to isolate people, and technology should be provided in appropriate places. He explained that issues to consider in the planning stages of renovation are: parking, safety and visibilitY, handicap accessibility, restrooms, building functionality and utilization, lighting and overcrowding of bookshelves. He added that the Hollins Branch building renovation resulted in an increased circulation by 60 per cent within two years. He stated that the Melrose Branch has the largest available site of any that was reviewed; and both the Raleigh Court and Williamson Road Branch libraries are in a good location and widely used. As a consultant, he added that one of the issues to be considered was knowing where to go with a library system and how to develop the system. He reviewed slides which were taken during the study group's tour of libraries, and commented upon their locations which are just off main highways, with welcoming exteriors, a pedestrian and car friendly atmosphere, display of public art, skillful use of natural light and open design, ease of navigation throughout the building, overall user friendliness, retail display of books, designated areas for reading and computer usage, high and open ceilings, bookshelves are arranged similar to retail bookstores, clear and concise signage, open areas for staff and public interaction, children's amphitheatre and reading areas, and a young adults area using dramatic and bright colors, decorations, casual furniture and seating arrangements that provide a sense of their own defensible space. 343 Mr. Hidell noted that teenagers are the fastest growing segment of America's population, making up 28 per cent of the total population, and they have been the least served of any population by the public library system. He added that there are numerous contemporary library systems on waiting lists for development of programs specifically for the teen segment of the population. Mr. McConnel noted that the most successful library systems included staff who were available on the floor to assist patrons, or for developing programs rather than standing behind counters checking out books or placing books back on bookshelves; provided automatic book checkout and return areas using barcodes, which also printed out receipts; utilized well lit open spaces, natural lighting and scenery; provided public seating areas outside the buildings; utilized public donations and contributions from community members who took pride in and ownership of their library system; and every aspect of the facility was dedicated toward public service. Council Member Dowe inquired as to how the youth community could be persuaded to use Roanoke City libraries, as well as libraries at the public schools; whereupon, Mr. McConnel advised that the study revealed that the key is to make '.the library facility more inviting and a place where young people want to visit by providing their own defensible space. He stated that Roanoke's most successful recreation program is the climbing gym which is not an overly supervised site. Board Member Wray inquired about how to deal with the acoustics of high ceilings; whereupon, Mr. McConnel advised that acoustics would be addressed architecturally, using acoustical materials such as carpeting and ceiling decks that Will kill "space" sounds. Board Member Flora stated that using all of the elements in combination would make the library system more of a destination place; once students leave the school setting, they do not return until the next day, therefore, the public library could serve as a viable alternative, especially if the environment offers a coffee shop atmosphere, with pleasant green spaces affording visions of greenery rather than stacks of books which could make a dramatic difference in the attitude of young people. Mr. McConnel stated that in today's world, planners of successful libraries acknowledge the fact that people generally do not walk to the library; libraries are situated near major traffic intersections, are more visible and visitor' friendly, become landmarks in the community, contain adequate parking, and offer public drop-off areas for use during inclement weather. He noted that the City of Roanoke is blessed with small neighborhoods, some of which are compact enough to allow people to walk to their library, however, the majority of libraries toured by the study group were vehicular based, and most teenagers tend to drive to their destinations. 344 Mr. Hidell commented on the following examples of ocal library issues; i.e.: current collections do not meet the needs of the community (includes space and budget), libraries are beyond their maximum seating capacity, computer access is limited, parking is inadequate, and 25 per cent of Roanoke City re. sidents are now using other.library facilities. He reviewed the following information: What customers like: Friendly staff; Virginia Room; locations; adult book variety What customers do not like: No parking; bu Idings are not inviting; long wait for computers; insufficient seating; poor lighting; not enough meeting space Peer Library Comparisons: FY 2004 Library Statistical Report Data Librazy Circulation Visits Reference Turnover Public Total Materials Start Cost of per capita ~er capita Questions Rate Computer Expense Expended (FTL:) Transaction per capita ~er capita per 1000 per )er capita per · capita capita pop City I 3.17 3.47 0.40 0.86 !.~.! $35.02 $2.99 0.42 $!!.04 County 2 !.1..13 7.97 0.66 2.46 1.02 $27.!! $4.6! 0.48 $2.44 100-250 10.70 6.89 !.41 2.68 2.67 $40.24 $7.07 0.74 $3.05 K 4 Population 3 Peer Libraries Upper 16.50 10.92 2.93 3.86 2.98 $68.94 $9.79 0.95 S3.05 quartile 4 Peer Libraries 3 345 Note: 1. 2. 3. 4. Roanoke City Public Library 2004 Virginia Public Library Survey Roanoke County Public Library 2004 Virginia Public Library Survey 2004 Public Library Data Service Statistical Report Upper Quartile Hennen's American Public Library Ratings Mr. McConnel noted that the Steering Committee instructed the study group to compare the current library system with the library system they most wanted to emulate; therefore, the group looked at the upper quartile of libraries in the country, rather than the lower quartile. Mr. Hidell stated that to assist the public, kiosks could be located in shopping centers containing various types of information about the locality; other services could include computer access for faxes and e-mail, reference questions, local, state and federal revenue information, references to the Chamber of Commerce, and other public information. Mr. McConnel explained the following terms that were used within the various charts: "Store front library" is a very limited service library, or a one stop shop. "Super branch library" offers a good reference selection, good circulation and access, adequate parking, meeting rooms, 50 - 60 computers, a destination oriented branch. "Central library," or a resource reference library, which would include a medical library and a law library, typical super brand functions, administration, book handling and processing; and a central library for Roanoke would include a "Virginia Room". He noted that the "catch all" would be how to incorporate all of the special interest libraries into one branch, as well as administrative services. He added that it is a"quick leap" from discussing issues with regard to libraries and the ability to create the library of the future; one of the most inexpensive ways to apply a solution is to create an environment where people want to go; and there are two components of a library system: the physical side (books and computers) and the customer service and programs or staff side. 346 Mr. McConnel stated that the entire notion of creating an administrative and technological service center is important to the overall program because library space is expensive, but the building, administrative services, book handling, circulation and distribution does not have to cost $150.00 per square foot; and there is a much more efficient way to handle services and to keep a particular branch from becoming the "main" library. He noted that the study group visited successful library systems across the country that do not have a"main" library, but offer nice branches with one branch not receiving more attention than the other, and all branches are equal because the administrative services were removed. He further stated that for the average user, whether using a Roanoke County or a Roanoke City library branch, it does not make a great deal of difference because many of the services are currently cooperatively addressed, which is key to the study. Mr. Hidell continued with an overview of the following slide information: Scenario l(a) City of Roanoke Phase i Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 ; Phase 5 Building Cost Neighborhood Library Kiosk SO,O00 SO,O00 50,000 Renovation 150,000 100,000 150,000 100,00 Storefront i 250,000 250,000 Super Branch Library 2 5,040,000 3,800,000 5,450,000 Central Library 14,282,500 (72,500 sfl City of Roanoke S,240,OOO 4,200,000 14,732,OO0 5,450,000 100,O00 Annual Cost Roanoke City Building Cost $29,722,500 3 4 347 Note: 1 2 3 4 Storefront lease space Assumes addition to existing branch library Parking cost for central library are not included Land cost are not included Scenario l(b) Roanoke County Phase i Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Building Cost Neighborhood Library Kiosk 50,000 50,000 25,000 Renovation 150,000 100,000 100,000 Storefront i 250,000 250,000 Super Branch Library 5,200,000 3,850,000 5,675,000 2 Central Library 10,500,000 (60,500 sfl Roanoke County 10,700,000 5,575,000 3,950,000 300,000 5,675,000 Annual Cost Roanoke County Building Cost $26~200,000 3 Scenario 1 a and b Total Cost $55,922,500 348 Note: 1 2 3 Storefront lease space Assumes addition to existing branch library Land cost are not included Scenario 2 City and County (coordinate administration, technical services and planning) city and County Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Building Cost Neighborhood Library Kiosk 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Renovation 275,000 ].50,000 200,000 200,000 Storefront 1 250,000 250,000 250,000 Super Branch Library 5,040,000 3,800,000 5,350,000 3,950,O00 5,675,000 2 2 Resource Reference ].0,168,000 12,5].0,000 Admin. & Tech Service Center 1,8OO,OO0 Scenario 2 Annual Cost 5,7].5,000 6,050,000 ].5,768,000 ].6,710,0OO 5,925,O00 Scenario I a and b $50,168,OOO Total Cost 4 5 Note: ! 2 4 5 Storefront lease space Assumes addition to existing branch library Assumes renovation of existing building Parking cost for central library is not included Land cost is not included in construction estimates 349 Recommendations for successful elements for public library design: Join Forces - Coordinate planning, administration and technical services (City and County) - Currently, the customer views the system as being integrated, but operationally it is not, however, there is some economy; some staff functions could be consolidated, i.e.: taking staff from the backroom service area and relocating them to more visible programs and assistance. Facilities Plan - Address space and program needs with a full service delivery plan - a need to consider how services are distributed throughout the community, either in branch facilities or the main resource library, and also look at current electronic kiosk opportunities. Technology - Invest in a more robust operating system, material system, public computers and multi media technology-there is a need to look at the handling opportunities that exist, both from the customer side and the public side, making the operation of staff and customer flow easier. Staffing - Increase staff apPropriately to provide a high level Of service - Staff levels are Iow, combining the staff count of the two library systems and dividing by the population revealed that the average staff levels are currently .45 staff members per 1,000 people; the upper quartile average staff levels are currently .95 staff members per 1,000 people, and a range of between .70 and .75 is an appropriate ratio across the country; and there is a need to utilize available technology. Collections - Increase funding for all formats of collection development to be more aware of what the customer wants-the collection rate has sky rocketed. Retail Model - Develop a retail service/customer service culture for services and programming. It is important to follow the retail model in every aspect through placement, layout and marketing of the building, along with consideration of staff placement, affording opportunities for staff to circulate among users and provide more services. 350 Board Chair Altizer inquired if site specific locations were studied; whereupon, Mr. Hidell advised that site specific locations were not considered because the consultant was instructed to define the overall delivery of services; however, it should be addressed in the future. He referred to the concept of a super branch library and its positive effect on circulation in the community because users tend to gravitate toward programs and services provided by those types of libraries. With regard to location, Mr. McConnel explained that the two library systems share a long border, and much of the population is grouped in Roanoke City and Roanoke County around locations on the border; the number of super branches went from six to five because of the opportunity to coordinate all locations; it is known that super branches and library services are primarily vehicular driven, which does not mean that there may not be alibraryon Grandin Road, or in one of the village centers, and there is an opportunity to look at those types of population centers to determine if it makes sense to developa super branch library that would appeal to those communities. Council Member Lea inquired if the concept had been tested in any other community in Virginia; whereupon, Mr. McConnel advised that the proposal is not a revolutionary concept, and numerous library systems do not have a main library; many library systems locate technology groups off site to save money; and the study group toured the Phoenix library system because Phoenix is a progressive community, officials are committed to their library system and have taken action to improve their system by building and/or renovating, and library systems are in close geographic proximity to one another. The City Manager called attention to regional coordinated library systems in Williamsburg and Norfolk, and there are as many as 19 regional existing library systems in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Mr. McConnel stated that to this point it appears that an integrated coordinated effort for the Roanoke area makes the most sense, thus far, there does not appear to be a massive need or cost savings for combining the two library systems into one, but there is a need to work together to make the most of available dollars; and an integrated and coordinated library system appears to be the preferred option, considering recent successes in connection with merging and consolidating library systems. 351 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick expressed appreciation for the work of the study groups, and advised that it is hoped that this will provide another opportunity for the City and the County to work together, whether by merger or coordination of systems. He encouraged both localities to pursue the issue because it will provide an opportunity to do something positive for the future of the Roanoke Valley and for western Virginia. Mr. McConnel referred to renovation of the Hollins Branch Library and noted that improving the facility had increased circulation by 60 per cent over two years, which is solid evidence that expending money and effort pays off. Mr. Hidell added that suggestions and input by teenagers and adults with regard to improvements for use and services provided by libraries has proven to be successful and beneficial in other localities. Mr. McConnel noted that the task of the study group was to look at the overall library system and determine what changes need to be made, and could be made; the issue of regional cooperation was discussed and it is hoped that Roanoke City and Roanoke County will say that "x", "y" or "z" is the direction to go, or the localities may want to look at a cooperative or integrated venture. Whatever the decision, he stated that both library systems must do something, and a review of the numbers indicates that it makes more sense to act cooperatively; therefore, the study group encourages the governmental bodies to work together toward a strategic direction. Mayor Harris expressed appreciation to the study groups. Without objection by Council, he suggested that the report of the consultant be accepted and referred to both the County Administrator and the City Manager for review with their respective Library Directors and staffs, and report back to the Council and the Board of Supervisors with recommendations regarding the scenarios and options that were presented by the consultants. He added that the matter could also be discussed at future meetings of the Mayor/Chair and City Manager/County Administrator. Board Chair Altizer concurred in the suggestion to refer the matter to the County Administrator and the City Manager for discussion with their respective Library staffs, to review issues of joint cooperation, and to submit recommendations with regard to future action(s). On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, he expressed appreciation to all persons who participated in the study. 352 At 1:50 p.m., Chair Altizer declared the meeting of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors in recess until 3:00 p.m., in the Roanoke County Administration Building, 5204 Bernard Drive, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia. At 1:50 p.m., Mayor Harris declared the meeting of Roanoke City Council adjourned. APPROVED ATTEST: Mary F. Parker City Clerk C. Nelson Harris Mayor 353 REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION----ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL April 18, 2005 2:00 p.m. The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday, April 18, 2005, at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the Roanoke City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S.W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-I 5, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Regular Meetinqs, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 36762-070604 adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 6, 2004. PRESENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, BrianJ. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr. Sherman P. Lea, and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ........................................................................................ 7. ABSENT: None ........................................................................................... 0. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Council Member Sherman P. Lea. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Americawas led by Mayor Harris. PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-DECEASED PERSONS: Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution memorializing the late Arthur E. Smith: (#37014-041805) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Arthur Edward Smith, a long-time Roanoke resident and former attorney. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 339.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37014- 041805. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: 354 AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. The Mayor called for a moment of silence in memory of Mr. Smith. PROCLAMATIONS: The Mayor advised that Beth Poff, Executive Director, Mill Mountain Zoo, will leave the City of Roanoke on May 3, 2005 to assume the position of Executive Director of the Zoo in Jackson, Mississippi. In recognition of her services, he presented a proclamation declaring April 18, 2005, as Beth Poff Day in the City of Roanoke. He also presented Ms. Poff with the key to the City. CONSENT AGENDA The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was desired, that item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. He called specific attention to one request for Closed Session. COMMI~-rEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (! 950), as amended, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the Mayor to convene in a Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-COMMITtEES: A communication from Jane R. Conlin, Director of Human/Social Services, advising of the resignation of H. Clarke Curtis as a member of the Human Services Advisory Board, effective immediately, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council accept the resignation and that the communication be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: 355 AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. OATHS OF OFFICE-PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES: A report of qualification of Christene A. Montgomery as a member of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, for a term ending March 31, 2008, was before Council. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the report of qualification be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. REGULAR AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: BUDGET-CABLE TELEVISION: A communication from Council Member Sherman P. Lea, City of Roanoke representative to the Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee, advising that the City of Roanoke, the County of Roanoke, and the Town of Vinton jointly operate Roanoke Valley Television (RVTV); initial equipment and facilities for the television station were funded through a $480,000.00 capital grant from Cox Communications; and the station employs five full-time staff members who produce videos and shows for local governments and school systems for cable casting, along with government meetings, on Cox Communications' Channel 3. It was further advised that on June 8, 1992, Council approved the Roanoke Regional Cable Television Agreement, which requires that the RVTV Operating Budget be approved by the governing bodies of the city, county, and town, with funding to be shared by the three governments, based on the annual proportion of Cox subscribers located in each jurisdiction. It was explained that the Roanoke Regional Cable Television Committee approved the RVTV Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2005-06 at its March meeting, in the amount of $304,713.00, which is a 3.7 per cent increase from the current year's budget of $293,865.00; Cable Television staff is included on Roanoke County's payroll and benefit system and will receive the same salary increase and insurance costs as other County employees; RVTV's current rent is $2,770.83 per month; beginning March 1, 2006, rent will increase to $2,853.96 per month; the proposed budget includes funding for closed captioning services for meetings of both the City Council and Board of Supervisors; 356 Cox Communications paid a five per cent Franchise Fee to the local governments in 2004, which totaled $1,841,543.00; local governments have informally agreed to allocate up to 20 per cent of the Franchise Fees collected to the RVTV Operating Budget; for the coming year, the amount would be $368,309.00; RVTV's requested budget of $304,713.00 is less than that amount; and Cox calculates the percentage of subscribers (December 31,2004) in each locality as follows: Locality Subscribers Percentaqe Roanoke 31,008 54% Roanoke County 23,593 41% Vinton 2,634 5% Based on the above referenced figures, it was noted that each Iocality's contribution to the RVTV Operating Budget of $304,713.00 is as follows: Locality Roanoke Roanoke County Vinton Contribution for FY05 -06 $164,545.00 $124,932.00 $15,236.00 Total $304,713.00 Council Member Lea recommended that Council approve the proposed RVTV budget for Fiscal Year 2005-06, in the amount of $304,713.00, with the City's contribution totaling $164,545.00. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#37015-041805) A RESOLUTION approving the recommendation of the Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee to approve the annual operating budget for Fiscal Year 2005-2006 for the operation of the regional government and educational access station, Roanoke Valley Television (RVTV, Channel 3), and for the City to provide partial funding. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 69, Page 342.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37015- 041805. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. Elaine Simpson, Station Manager, RVTV, advised that for the City of Roanoke for 2004-2005, RVTV produced 12 Inside Roanoke shows, 12 Spotlight on City Schools shows, 24 City Council meetings, and 22 original video productions for the City of Roanoke (13 for the City of Roanoke, five for City Schools, and four joint City-County productions). There being no further discussion, Resolution No. 37015-O41805 was adopted by the following vote: 357 AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. BUDGET-ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY: A communication from Bittle W. Porterfield, III, Chair, Roanoke Valley Resource Authority, advising that on March 30, 2005, the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority approved its 2005 - 2006 annual budget, totaling $8,606,670.00 which represents a slight decrease of-0.3% from the current 2004 - 2005 budget; and tipping fee rate for Charter Members and commercial users will remain the same. It was further advised that in accordance with the Member Use Agreement, the Resource Authority's 2005 - 2006 Annual Budget is submitted for approval by Council. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#37016-041805) A RESOLUTION approving the annual budget of the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority for Fiscal Year 2005-2006, upon certain terms and conditions. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 69, Page 343.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37016- 041805. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. Council Member Cutler inquired if gas is still being flared on Rutrough Road; whereupon, Mr. Barger responded in the affirmative. There being no further discussion/questions, Resolution No. 37016-041805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: CITY MANAGER: BRIEFINGS: BUDGET: The City Manager introduced Sherman M. Stovall, Director, Office of Management and Budget, to present highlights of the City of Roanoke Recommended Budget for Fiscal Year 2005-2006: 358 The recommended budget is balanced and totals $223,799,000.00, an increase of $12,023,000.00, or 5.68 per cent. A recommended increase of one per cent in the meals tax - portion of the incremental revenue dedicated to fund the City of Roanoke's share of the William Fleming High School renovation project. Recommended adjustments to several user fees. · General Fund Revenue Summary: Revenue Increase $12,023,000.00 Local Revenue 9,536,000.00 + 5.80% State 2,487,000.00 Revenue + 5.26% Local Revenues Total Local Revenues Real Estate Tax Personal Property Tax Sales Tax Prepared Food All Other Local Taxes and Revenues FY 2005-06 FY 2004-05 $ Change % Chanqe $9,536,000.00 5.80% $ 5,239,000.00 8.90% $ 495,000.00 2.15% $ 246,000.00 1.30% $2,558,000.00 33.04% $ 998,000.00 1.78% State Revenues Total Intergovernmental Revenues Human/Social Services Shared Expenses (Constitutional Officers) Non-Categorical and Other (Recordation, ABC/Wine, Rolling Stock, and rental Car Tax) Categorical (Jail Per Diems, HB 599, Street Maint., Library, VJCCCA) FY 2005-06 $ Chanqe $2,487,000.00 $ 605,000.00 $ 594,000.00 $ (166,000.00) $1,454,000.00 FY 2004-05 % Chanqe 5.26% 2.79% 7.64% (10.60%) 8.90% 359 User Friendly Adjustments Fee EImwood Park Amphitheatre Mobile Stage (Non-profit not charging admission) Mobile Stage (Events charging admission) Outdoor Pool Entrance Monthly Fitness Center Daily Fitness Center Library Copy Fees Proposed Current $ 250.00 $ 150.00 per day per day $ 900.00 $ 600.00 per day per day $ 1,200.00 $ 900.00 $2.00 (Youth) $1.00 (Youth) $3.00 (Adults) $2.00 (Adults) $ 18.00 (R) $15.00 (R) $ 25.00 (NR) $22.00 (NR) $ S.00 (R) $4.00 (R) $ 6.00 (NR) $5.00 (NR) $ 0.15 $ 0.10 Fee Adjustments Fee Rental Inspection Fee Initial and Periodic Rental Inspection Fee Follow-Up Asbestos Removal Manufactured Homes and Modular Buildings Tent and Membrane Structures over 900 square feet Temporary Certificate of Occupancy Proposed Current $25.00 $75.00 $50.00 $35.00 $45.00 $ 75.00 Single Wide $100.00 Double Wide $125.00 Triple Wide $50.00 $ 75.00 First Renewal --- $125.00 Subsequent Based on valuation Based on valuation Based on valuation General Fund Expenditure Summary Revenue Increase Schools Employee Compensation, Benefits and Programs Debt Service, Equipment Replacement and Capital Maintenance Program and Other Budget Adjustments Budget Reductions $12,023,000.00 $ 2,462,373.00 $ 5,208,997.00 $ 2,980,000.00 $ 1,896,549.00 $ (524,919.00) 360 Commitment to Education: Increase of $2,462,373.00 Based on 36.42 per cent of adjusted local taxes Total transfer of $54,352,299.00, increase of 4.7 per cent Debt service of $3,781,963.00 Support of Patrick Henry and William Fleming High Schools renovation projects Employee Compensation and Benefits: Employee Compensation - $3,212,149.00 Average raise of 3.0 per cent of base pay - $3,091,889.00 Fire-EMS Career Enhancement - $120,260.00 Benefits and Programs - $1,996,848.00 Debt Service and Cash Funded Capital, Equipment Replacement and Maintenance Additional Debt Capacity - $2,301,000.00 Support of planned capital projects Capital and Equipment Replacement - $679,000.00 Equipment Replacement - $184,000.00 Capital Building Maintenance - $130,000.00 Paving - $200,000.00 Technology - $165,000.00 Proposed Use of One Time funding Repayment of Roanoke River Flood Reduction projects from funds borrowed for the Fire-EMS Facilities project-S21 7,184.00 Concept Design Courthouse Expansion - $250,000.00 Streetscapes and Traffic Calming - $250,000.00 Jail HVAC Design - $150,000.00 Funding to Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority for market rate rental unit - $235,000.00 Prioritized Projects - CMERP- $1,403,018.00 Carvins Cove Management Plan - $90,000.00 Equipment Replacement - $450,000.00 Technology Projects - $450,000.00 General Contingency- $110,000.00 Healthy Local Economy: Promotion of Brand Identity Enhance the profile of Roanoke outside of the region to attract new businesses, visitors and residents Market Roanoke as a technology savvy city with the continued promotion of the WiFi Zone downtown 361 RCIT Landscape Maintenance Enhance landscape maintenance to market the property for economic development Strong Neighborhoods Building Inspector Position Support rental inspection program and code compliance activities Construction Inspector Support site development inspections Stormdrain maintenance Enhance maintenance of storm drains Traffic Signal Equipment Replacement Ensure safer streets and intersections Support of GRTC/Valley Metro Additional financial support, with no reduction in service level Strong Neighborhoods Curb, Gutter, and Sidewalk Continue improvement program Zoning Ordinance Adopt the updated zoning ordinance Neighborhood Plans Complete the development of the final neighborhood plan and the implementation of all plans Targeted Application of CDBG funds Focus on neighborhood development and improvement Parks, Recreation and Leisure Parks and Recreation Support greenway maintenance, therapeutic recreation program and other program activities Library Restore Sunday operating hours at the Main Library Completion of the library comprehensive study Greenways Support future development of greenways Vibrant Downtown: Market Building Financial support for the operation of the Market Building Downtown Market-Area Study 362 Civic Center Additional funding to support operations Expansion and renovation to provide additional exhibit hall space Support for EventZone Consistent oversight of downtown events · Quality Services: Health Department Facilitate move to the Civic Mall Community Agency Funding Support of human service, community and cultural agencies Youth Services Continue supporting youth services and programs that advocate for youth. · Other Adjustments: Motor Fuels Additional funding based on rising costs State Mandated Public Safety Overtime Workforce Staffing Reduction of nine unfunded positions Expenditure Reductions Across all departments and divisions Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the City Manager be instructed to adjust the proposed 2005-2006 fiscal year budget to include Fire/EMS and Sheriff employees in the new pay scale that was approved for Police Officers which took effect on January 1,2005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and unanimously adopted. Council Member Cutler advised that he looks forward to the time when Council officially designates Carvins Cove Natural Reserve as a City park and donates a conservation easement on the land to the Virginia Outdoors Foundation and the Western Virginia Land Trust which will save the undeveloped water shed in perpetuity for water conservation and recreational values. He added that he looks forward to the preparation ora management plan that can be used as the basis for conservation easements, and expressed support for funds that are included in the proposed budget for the greenway system and community arts and cultural agencies. Council Member Dowe commended the City Manager and the budget team on their intuitive and creative thinking and proactive decision making. 363 Council Member Lea also commended the budget team and asked that consideration be given to allocating funds for preservation of the Oliver White Hill house which will send a strong message not only to the Roanoke community, but statewide. Council Member McDaniel advised that she was pleased that the proposed budget includes funds for reinstatement of Sunday hours at the Main Library. She inquired as to how the Library Study will be addressed. The City Manager advised that the consultant's written document has not been received; following receipt, the document will be forwarded to the Library Steering Committees and the Library Boards for the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County for review and recommendation to be followed by discussions by City Council and the Board of Supervisors as to whether there is an interest to proceed on a regional basis. She stated that a sizeable contingency has been left in the City's Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement account in anticipation that Council may wish to take some action over the next several months to further the Library study, whether it be on a regional basis or as a single jurisdiction. Council MemberWishneffadvised that the increase in the prepared food tax from four per cent to five percent in the proposed 2005-2006 budget is recommended in order to provide the ability to fund the debt service for William Fleming High School improvements and certain other key City projects. Sherman M. Stovall, Director, Office of Management and Budget, advised that at the time Council made the decision to support improvements to the second high school, no funding strategy was in place to fund the debt to be issued for the William Fleming project; when bonds are issued for the William Fleming project in 2008, the City will need approximately an additional $1 million to service the debt, therefore, the increase in the meals tax provides the capability to service the debt on the bonds. Council Member Wishneff reiterated his support for cultural agencies and advised that during upcoming budget study sessions, he will ask Council to consider appropriating in the range of $250,000.00 or more over the amount that is currently recommended in the City's fiscal year 2005-2006 budget. The City Manager advised that in May 2000, when receiving the plan from the school system to replace or significantly renovate the two high schools, the then sitting Council directed City staff to set aside $570,000.00 a year on an annual basis to fund the Patrick Henry High School renovation or a new building; the then sitting Council acknowledged that no funding was in place for the second high school, but desired to go on record that the Council intended to treat both high schools the same; it was identified as early as the year 2000 that the City would need an additional funding source in order to pay the debt service on the William Fleming improvements; and for the past three years, City staff, as a part of strategic planning sessions with the Council, has indicated that staff's recommendation would be an increase in the meals tax. She stated that the meals tax as a revenue stream was selected because (1) the meals tax is a discretionary 364 tax in that individuals have achoice as to whether or not they choose dine out, (2) the City of Roanoke, as the center to the region, provides aservice to many people who do not reside in the City of Roanoke and do not pay the City's traditional taxes, but do benefit from the services that citizens enjoy within the City of Roanoke, and (3) the largest meals tax payer in the City of Roanoke is The Hotel Roanoke which primarily caters to visitors within the community; therefore, for those reasons, as well as the need to put in place an appropriate revenue source to fund William Fleming High School improvements, a one per cent meals tax was recommended. She noted that when comparing the City of Roanoke to other urban cities throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia, the City's meals tax will be in line with that charged in other urban communities. Council Member Cutler called attention to storm water drainage which is a major capital construction need, and noted that Council has been briefed on approximately $60 million or more of backlog storm drainage projects; whereupon, he called upon the City Manager for suggestions on how to address the issue. The City Manager responded that City staff has suggested implementation of a storm water management fee; and the Council, being cognizant of the physical location of the City and the fact that much of the water runoff is a result of development from neighboring jurisdictions, has suggested that the appropriate way to approach storm water management is through a regional approach for specific projects that go beyond the City's traditional jurisdictional boundaries. Whether there is a regional approach or a single jurisdictional approach, she stated that the best way to handle storm water drainage is through implementation of a storm water fee, which is assessed based upon the amount of impervious surface of each individual property owner and represents a fair share of the property owner's contribution to storm water run off. The Mayor advised that Council will hold a public hearing on the City's proposed fiscal year 2005-2006 budget, the HUD Consolidated Plan and real property tax rate on Thursday, April 28, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, and Council will convene in budget study sessions on May 4, 2005 at 8:30 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, and on May 5, 2005 at 8:30 a.m., if necessary. ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION: BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program is designed as an opportunity for the United States Congress to work with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to enhance basic fire service delivery across the United States; in fiscal year 2004, Congress appropriated a total of $745,125,000.00 to carry out activities of the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program, which included a mandate that no less than five per cent of the appropriated funds would support fire prevention activities; and as such, $27,500,000.00 of the total appropriation has been reserved for Fire Prevention and Safety grants. 365 It was further advised that the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the United States Fire Administration recently announced that the Roanoke Fire- EMS Department has been awarded a $23,766.00 grant from the 2004 Assistance to Firefighters - Fire Prevention and Safety Program; and the total award package requires a local match of 30%, totaling $7,129.00, which is budgeted in Account No. 001-520-3521-3698. It was explained that the award will be used by the department for support in Fire Prevention and Education; specifically, funds will be used to enhance and maintain a comprehensive Fire and Life Safety Prevention program. The City Manager recommended that Council authorize acceptance of the grant award of $23,766.00 and that the City Manager be authorized to execute the required grant agreement and any other related documents to be approved as to form by the City Attorney; establish appropriate revenue and expenditure estimates in the Grant Fund in accounts to be established by the Director of Finance; and approve a transfer of the City match in the amount of $7,129.00 from Account No. 001-520-3521-3698 to Transfers to Grant Fund account. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: (#37017-041805) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funds for the Assistance to Firefighters Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 General and Grant Funds Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 344.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37017-041805. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted bythe following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#37018-041805) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of an Assistance to Firefighters Grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and authorizing execution of any required documentation on behalf of the City. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 345.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37018-041805. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: 366 AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. CARILLON BIOMEDICAL INSTITUTE: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that on September 1,1998, the City of Roanoke entered into a Parking Agreement with Carillon Health System based upon the agreement of Carillon to create or relocate between 310 to 440 additional full time job positions in the City's Enterprise Zone, One; creation of the positions required that parking permits be made available for persons selected to fill the positions; and by Amendment 1 dated November 19, 2001, the Parking Agreement was amended to allow Carillon to purchase up to 60 additional permits to meet the needs of its growing downtown workforce. It was further advised that the original term of the Parking Agreement was from September 1,1998 through August 31,2003, and upon mutual agreement of the parties, the agreement could be renewed for up to two additional five year periods; Carillon has requested the first five year renewal period; the rates for the renewal period (which were set out in the original Parking Agreement) are set forth in Renewal No.1 and are subject to an increase under conditions set forth therein; and Carillon also requested an increase in the number of additional supplemental permits from 60 to 120, effective April 18, 2005 as provided for in Amendment 1, to further support its expanded workforce in Enterprise Zone One. The City Manager recommended that she be advised to execute Renewal No. 1 to the Parking Agreement, which includes Amendment 1 between City of Roanoke and Carillon Health System for a period of five years, retroactive to September 1, 2003 through August 31, 2008, the form of such Renewal to be approved by the City Attorney; and that the City Manager be authorized to take such further action and to execute additional documents as may be necessary to implement and administer Renewal Number 1 and the Parking Agreement, including any future renewal of such Parking Agreement. The City Manager submitted an additional communication advising that an explanation is in order regarding the length of time that the matter has taken to come before Council. it was explained that the Carillon Agreement provides parking in several city decks, including the Tower Parking Garage; at the same time that the City was negotiating the matter with Carillon, ownership of the Wachovia Tower required interpretation of the lease (dating back to 1991) and whether such discontinued parking could be extended to their tenants; discussions were protracted and evolved over a number of months; and in the final analysis, the City extends the listed discontinued rates contained in the report to the first 440 Carillon parkers all of which are parking in the Church Avenue Parking Garage and, as such, the Wachovia Tower ownership is not eligible for the pricing structure. 367 Council Member McDaniel offered the following ordinance: (#37019-041805) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to execute Renewal No. 1 to the September 1, 1998, Parking Agreement between the City of Roanoke and Carillon Health System; authorizing the City Manager to take such further action and execute additional documents to implement and administer such Parking Agreement; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 345.) Council Member McDaniel moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37019-041805. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. CITY A~-FORNEY: NONE. DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: NONE. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board requesting that Council approve the following appropriations, was before the body. $10,000.00 for the GED Testing Fast Track program to provide supplies, tuition, and instructors to increase participation in the GED examinations, said new program to be 100 per cent reimbursed by State funds. $180,000.00 for the William Fleming Community Learning Center; the Centerwill be open year round and serve 150 students and 100 adults annually; and the Center will provide educational services to increase student performance on the Standards of Learning, said new program to be 100 per cent reimbursed by Federal funds. $25,290.00 for the Governor's Project Graduation Academy Grant to provide remedial instruction for seniors who have not earned verified credits in English, Reading and Writing, said new program to be 100 per cent reimbursed by State funds. 368 $2,340.00 for the Advanced Placement Fee Program to reimburse part or all of the cost of fees for the 2005 AP test for Iow-income students who take the test, said grant program to be 100 per cent reimbursed by Federal funds. · $613,294.00 from the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Fund to purchase food service equipment. A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in the request of the School Board, was also before the body. Council Member McDaniel offered the following budget ordinance: (#37020-041805) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for food service equipment and School instructional site-based requests from the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program (CMERP) and the School Food Service Fund fund balance, and to appropriate funding for the GED Testing Fast Track program, the William Fleming Community Learning Center, the Governor's Project Graduation Academy Grant, and the Advanced Placement Fee Program, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 General, School and School Food Service Funds Appropriations and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book 69, Page 347.) Council Member McDaniel moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37020- 041805. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: WATER RESOURCES: Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#37021-041805) A RESOLUTION ratifying and confirming the appointment of John B. Williamson, III, as a Director of the Western Virginia Water Authority, which appointment was made on March 17, 2005, by the Board of Directors of the Authority. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 69, Page 349.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 369 Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37021-041805. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniei, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: SCHOOLS: Council Member Cutler called attention to an article in The Roanoke Times on April 14, 2005, "Art Gets Canned" with regard to decorating trash cans to resemble classic art at Addison Middle School, the purpose of which was to acquaint children with great art and to improve the overall appearance of the school. REFUSE COLLECTION-ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY: Council Member Cutler called attention to Regional Household Hazardous Waste Collection Days, the first of which will be held on May 15 from 12:00 - 3:00 p.m., at the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority - Tinker Creek Transfer Station, 1020 Hollins Road, N. E., with other collection dates scheduled for August 7 and November 6, 2005 from 12:00 - 3:00 p.m. REFUSE COLLECTION-ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY: Council Member Cutler inquired about how the City handles e-trash (discarded surplus or obsolete electronic items); whereupon, the City Manager advised that the City has implemented a program and the Council would receive a briefing at its next meeting on Monday, May 2, 2005. HIGHER EDUCATION CENTER: The Mayor called attention to the ground breaking ceremony for the Culinary School at the Roanoke Higher Education Center on Tuesday, April 19, 2005, at 11:00 a.m. SCHOOLS-ARMORY/STADIUM: The Mayor called attention to discussions with the City Manager, the Chair of the School Board and the Acting Superintendent of Schools with regard to the fall schedule for William Fleming/Patrick Henry High Schools football games and the dilemma of identifying alternative locations, or options. He stated that the City Manager advises that the field at Victory Stadium could be made available for high school football this fall by installing temporary bleachers, and providing temporary arrangements for restroom facilities and concessions, etc. After conferring with the Acting Superintendent of Schools and some Members of the Council, the Mayor stated that there appears to be a broad consensus to move in that direction. 370 As suggested by the Mayor, Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the City Manager be instructed to make the field at Victory Stadium available for high school football games and that Council be provided with a report, including cost estimates, with regard to temporary measures proposed to be taken. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler. Council Member Lea expressed appreciation to the Mayor for his involvement in the issue. In addition to high school football, he called attention to the Western Virginia Education Classic which is a college football game that has made a significant impact on the school drop out rate in the City of Roanoke which averages from 4,000 - 8,000 fans each year. Therefore, he asked that the City Manager be requested to broaden her study to determine if some of the stands at Victory Stadium could be used in order to accommodate the Western Virginia Education Classic. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Cutler concurred in the request of Council Member Lea to include the Western Virginia Education Classic in the referral to the City Manager; whereupon, the motion, as expanded upon by Mr. Lea was unanimously adopted. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MA-I-~ERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. ARMORY/STADIUM: The following persons addressed Council with regard to Victory Stadium: Mark McConnel, 110 Kirk Avenue, S. W., addressed Council as a citizen, an architect, and as Vice-President of the Virginia Society of the American Institute of Architects. He advised that during the past several years, the City of Roanoke has solicited and received advice from consultants with varying professional expertise that have received the feasibility and cost of renovating Victory Stadium, and he applauded the most recent analysis by Sutton Kennerly and Associates. He stated that the most recent engineering study indicates that the structure of Victory Stadium is solid and can be renovated, however, a deficiency in the brick veneer was noted that could pose athreat to public use. He added that Sutton Kennerly and Associates correctly reported that new stadium construction would cost between $3,000.00 and $4,000.00 per seat; to rebuild a 15,000 seat stadium on the same site would cost a minimum of $45 million; and previous consultant's reports identified the maximum cost of renovating Victory Stadium at less than $20 million. He questioned the rationale of spending $45 million fora 15,000 seat stadium when the City could spend $20 million to renovate 20,000 seats in Victory Stadium; therefore, the most fiscally prudent action would be to renovate Victory Stadium. 371 Mark Clarke, 6734 Shingle Ridge Road, Roanoke County, a historic preservation specialist having worked on such projects as the National Cathedral, Washington's Tomb, Gunston Hall, the restoration of the City of Roanoke's Fire Station No. 1, the City's Municipal North building, and consulting services with regard to the City's Mountain View, and Buena Vista Recreation Centers, and the Commonwealth Building, advised that he has followed the saga of Victory Stadium with interest. He stated that after having read the Sutton Kennerly and Associates report, the data contained therein provides the best overall evidence and support to date for the restoration of Victory Stadium; the report addresses five specific areas of concern and makes recommendations for repair; the report does not state that Victory Stadium is not repairable, the brick fa(;ade is deteriorated and is in need of repair, two repair methods are suggested which are both reasonable and appropriate given the age of the structure, and the structural capacity of Victory Stadium is sufficient for future needs. He quoted from the Sutton Kennerly report that the existing structure could safety support the anticipated loads applied by future renovations, the overall concrete is in fair to good condition, however, a relatively simple method of repair was identified in the consultant's report; no building constructed in the 1940's is ADA compliant which must be addressed; and a small area of subsurface conditions and fill dirt may not be sufficient for loads at the present time, however a repair method was suggested by the consultant. He called attention to an appendix in the Sutton Kennerly report which provides a cost estimate for repairs; and the report consistently recommends repair and restoration, therefore, why would Sutton Kennerly and Associates even consider demolition when they provide cost estimates for renovation of the stadium. He stated that the information provided by the consultant would suggest that Victory Stadium is in better overall condition than most of the buildings that he has worked on as a historic preservation specialist, and, if one takes the data, observations and recommendations contained in the report at face value, the conclusion is that the Sutton Kennerly report provides the most compelling argument to date for restoration of Victory Stadium. Greg Lewis, 18 Kirk Avenue, S. W., Smith Lewis Architecture, advised that it is important to note not only for the Victory Stadium project, but any future capital project to be undertaken by the City that there is significant environmental impact of disposing of hundreds of tons of concrete and the actual landfilling of the materials. Therefore, he asked that the City take into consideration that there is no credible evaluation of that component of the project. He stated that it is also important to note and to resolve the issue of redevelopment or usability of the facility as it relates to the floodplain question and there are a number of ways to address the issue. 372 Stuart A. Barbour, 727 Riverland Road, S. E., spoke with regard to the renovation of Victory Stadium. He stated that it was not necessary for the City to hire aconsultant to advise that the concrete has crumbled because the City has failed to maintain the stadium during the past 60 years. He suggested several alternatives to address liability issues with regard to deteriorating concrete under the seats and repair of the steps. Norbert Weckstein, 2602 Wilshire Avenue, S. W., advised that the decision to renovate or construct a new stadium should be made based on the facts and a cost benefit analysis and not on emotions. He referred to instances in which temporary bleachers have collapsed; therefore, temporary bleaches are not as safe as Victory Stadium is in its present condition. He referred to other stadiums in the United States that are older than Victory Stadium, but continue to be used such as the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum and the Rose Bowl, both of which were opened in 1923. He stated that the chance of injury of persons attending a football game will be much greater if they are seated in temporary bleachers, as opposed to being seated in the stands at Victory Stadium; therefore, a second opinion would be in order from another engineering firm as to which would be the safer alternative; and other questions yet to be answered pertain to temporary toilet facilities, locker rooms and vendor facilities. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia, advised that the City has not properly maintained Victory Stadium. He encouraged the City to maintain the stadium as a memorial to veterans who defended their country in the line of duty and as a memorial to all persons who serve in public safety positions. He referred to an agreement with Norfolk and Western Railway in which the City agreed to use the Reserve Avenue site for a stadium. John Graybill, 2443 Tillett Road, S W., spoke in support of renovating Victory Stadium. He stated that to tear down the Stadium and construct a new facility would be a waste of taxpayers money when the City has a perfectly good stadium that could be renovated for much less money. POLICE DEPARTMENT-COMPLAINTS: Mr. Shaheed Omar, 1219 Loudon Avenue, N W., spoke with regard to allegations of police brutality which can be defined as any practice that degrades the status of a citizen, restricts freedom, annoys or harasses, and uses unnecessary and unwarranted physical force; and his motivation to address the issue stems from personal experience. He stated that the philosophy of the Police Department to provide honest, efficient and effective law enforcement services and to protect the life, property and civil liberties for all people in a fair and equitable manner is not practiced by all members of Roanoke's Police Department. He noted that his remarks were not intended to condemn the entire police department, but a few police officers whose attitude and behavior is that of "carte blanche", and brings police officers into the area 373 with the attitude that they are "at war" which stems from a belief that the general citizenry does not know their constitutional rights, or the general citizenry is afraid of the police in general, or police officers believe that no one has the ability or courage among the general population to challenge their authority. He stated that this component within the Roanoke City Police Department will be exposed and dealt with in both civil and federal courts. CITY MARKET: Ms. Anita Wilson, 32 Market Square, a tenant in the City Market Building, expressed appreciation to City Officials for working with City Market building tenants with regard to their concerns about management issues and Advantis, the Atlanta-based management company. She stated that Market Building tenants would like to work with the City as it reviews new management of the facility and leases for Market Building tenants. She also called attention to the need for renovations to the City Market building. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: CITY MANAGER-SPECIAL EVENTS: The City Manager called attention to events that were held in the City of Roanoke during the past weekend; i.e.: Blue Ridge - Southwest Virginia Film Festival on April 15 - 17, and the Giant Indoor Yard Sale on Saturday, April 16, at the Roanoke Civic Center, sponsored bythe City of Roanoke's Recycling Committee to benefit recycling education efforts. At 4:00 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for one Closed Session in the Council's Conference Room. At 4:35 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, with all Members of the Council in attendance, Mayor Harris presiding. COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Council Member Cutler moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Dowe was not present when the vote was recorded.) 374 At 4:37 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess until 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber. At 7:00 p.m., on Monday, April 18, 2005, the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. PRESENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, BrianJ. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea and Mayor C. Nelson Harris .................................................................................................. 7. ABSENT: None ........................................................................................... O. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney, Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Mayor C. Nelson Harris. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Americawas led by Mayor Harris. PUBLIC HEARINGS: SCHOOLS: Pursuant to the instructions of Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, regarding appointment of two Trustees to the Roanoke City School Board for three year terms of office, commencing July 1, 2005 and ending June 30, 2008, the matter was before the body. Applications were submitted by David B. Carson and William H. Lindsey. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, April 1,2005. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be heard in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of GAPCO Management, LLC, that all proffered conditions established by Ordinance No. 28666-061587 on property located at 3839 Shenandoah Avenue, N. W., identified as Official Tax No. 2732201, be repealed and replaced with new proffered conditions, the matter was before the body. 375 Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, April 1,2005 and Friday, April 8, 2005. The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that GAPCO Management, LLC, filed a petition on December 1, 2004, to amend proffered conditions on the subject property; a first amended petition to amend proffers was filed on March 23, 2005; and the property was rezoned on June 15, 1987, from RS-2, Residential Single-family District, to C-2, General Commercial District, subject to certain proffered conditions. It was further advised that following the 1987 rezoning, the property was developed and used for a grocery store and an adjacent retail shop; the grocery store and retail uses ceased and, in 2004, a church began using the former retail space; use of the property for achurch violates proffered conditions placed on the property when it was rezoned in 1987; upon discovery of the church operation, staff initiated enforcement efforts to which the petitioner responded by filing a request for amendment of proffers; the grocery store portion of the building is currently vacant and boarded; and proposed amended conditions as set forth in the first amended petition dated March 23, 2005, are as follows: (a) The property will be used only for the following permitted uses in a C-2, General Commercial District: Food stores with an unlimited gross floor area General retail establishments primarily engaged in the retail sale or rental of merchandise, goods, or products except automobiles, trucks, or construction equipment; and including the incidental repair and assembly of the merchandise goods or products to be sold on the premises. Churches, synagogues and other places of worship not including accessory columbariums. (b) The row of existing large pine trees along Old Stevens Road and the eastern portion of the north boundary line of the property will remain undisturbed, except those from the proposed entrance/exit on Old Stevens Road to Shenandoah Avenue. (c) Petitioner will erect and maintain a six-foot-high chain link fence along the entire north boundary line of the property and will, in addition, plant and maintain a staggered row of evergreen trees on ten-foot centers within the ten-foot buffer area along the north boundary line. 376 It was explained that the proposed amended conditions would bring the use as a church into conformity and would expand permitted uses to include general retail; in addition, the amended conditions would remove condition (b), which is an invalid reversion condition and would carry forward conditions (c) and (d) relating to retention of vegetation and establishment of screening buffers. The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the petition to amend proffered conditions which is consistent with the City's Vision 2001-2020 and will promote reuse of a commercial site. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#37022-041805) AN ORDINANCE to amend §§36.1-3 and 36.1-4, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 273, Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in order to amend certain conditions presently binding upon certain property previously conditionally zoned C-2, General Commercial District; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 350.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37022-041805. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. Edward A. Natt, Attorney, appeared before Council in support of the request of his client. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be heard in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. Council Member McDaniel inquired about proffers with regard to a tree buffer; whereupon, the Mr. Natt advised that a tree buffer as been proffered and trees will be planted. Council Member Cutler inquired about measures to protect water quality and water pollution run off from the proposed site; whereupon, Mr. Natt advised that no changes are proposed to the structures. In response to a question with regard to whether the Urban Forestry Plan will be taken into consideration, Mr. Townsend advised that the purpose of the rezoning is to allow for a wider range of use on the site; the City Planning Commission cannot require, nor did the Panning Commission bind or require any additional change to the site plan as a condition of approving the uses; and the Urban Forestry Plan does not come into play because the request does not apply to new construction and new site development. He stated that the area of the landscape buffer referenced by Council Member McDaniel is currently a pervious surface and involves replanting trees that were not previously planted and there is no change in any of the physical attributes of development of the site. 377 There being no further discussion or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37022-041805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of Mark A. Lucas and Lucas Physical Therapy, Inc., that property located at 739 Townside Road, S. W., identified as Official Tax No. 5490307, be rezoned from LM, Light Manufacturing District, Conditional, to C-2, General Commercial District, subject to certain conditions preferred by the petitioner, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, April 1,2005 and Friday, April 8, 2005. The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that a petition was filed on February 3, 2005; an amended petition was filed on February 18, 2005; a second amended petition was filed on March 25, 2005; the second amended petition proposes to rezone Official Tax No. 5490307, consisting of 3.998 acres, from LM, Light Manufacturing District, Conditional, to C-2, General Commercial District; and the amended petition requests that existing conditions be repealed and replaced with the following proffered conditions: 1. The property will be used only for medical office or medical clinics, general and professional offices, including financial institutions, personal service establishments and business service establishments. 2. The property will be developed according to the site plan prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., under date of January 31, 2005 and March 3, 2005, to add the Tree Retention Area (Exhibit 3), subject to such changes as may be required by City staff during the comprehensive development plan review process. 3. No sign, included one painted on the side of the building, shall be visible from the adjacent expressway. 4. The following proffers relate to lighting: a. Any outdoor light fixture shall be a full cutoff fixture or a decorative fixture with full cutoff optics. A "full cutoff fixture" shall mean an outdoor light fixture shielded in such a manner that all light emitted by the fixture, either directly from the lamp or indirectly from the fixture, 378 is projected below the horizontal plan. A "decorative fixture with full cutoff optics" shall mean an outdoor light fixture with manufacturer-provided or manufacturer-installed full cutoff optics. b. The spillover of lighting from any parking area on the subject property onto public rights-of-way or abutting property in residentially zoned districts shall not exceed one-al (0.5) foot candle at the property line. c. Any outdoor lighting in parking areas shall not exceed 1 2 feet in height. The maximum height shall apply to the height of the poles or other standards to which the fixtures are attached or the top most point of the fixture itself, whichever is higher. d. Outdoor lighting information for the subject property shall be submitted during comprehensive development plan review. Such information shall include the following: (1) Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures, including the manufacturer's specification of the area to be lighted with such fixtures; (2) Plans indicating the location on the property, and the type of illuminating devices, fixtures, lamps supports, reflectors and other devices; (3) Description of the illuminating devices, fixtures, lamps, supports, reflectors and other devices; (4) Photometric data, such as that furnished by the manufacturers, showing the angle of cut off of light emissions; and (5) Other information as may be deemed necessary by the Zoning Administrator to determine compliance with lighting proffers. 5. Petitioners shall plant a minimum of fifteen, two-inch caliper deciduous trees within the interior of the parking lot and maintain the same. 6. The primary exterior facade of the new structures will not contain cinderblock or metal siding. The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the Second Amended Petition to rezone to C-2, General Commercial District, with conditions. 379 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#37023-041805) AN ORDINANCE to amend §§36.1-3 and 36.1-4, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 549, Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in order to rezone certain property within the City, subject to certain conditions proffered by the applicant; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 351.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37023-041805. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. Edward A. Natt, Attorney, appeared before Council in support of the request of his client. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no discussion or questions by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37023-041805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. STREETS AND ALLEYS: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of Trustees of Edgewood Holiness Church that a portion of a ten foot alley beginning in a southerly direction for approximately 124 feet, be permanently vacated, discontinued and closed, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, April 1,2005 and Friday, April 8, 2005. The City Planning Commission submitted awritten report advising that the petitioner currently has a building permit for a community hall on Official Tax No. 6090712 and has paid the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) to install a sewer lateral; after meeting with City staff and staff from the WVWA, the latter advised that the petitioner's property could not achieve a gravity connection from the main sewer line on Springfield Avenue; since the WVWA allows a lateral to serve only a single property, the petitioner was advised to either install a pump station or combine the two parcels to use the existing lateral serving Official Tax No. 6090411; the petitioner is not amenable to installing a pump station and the WVWA advised that such was not the best long-term solution; 380 therefore, the petitioner requests closure of a portion of an unimproved alley running north to south and, in turn, agrees to dedicate a like portion to the City which runs east to west. The City Planning Commission recommended vacation of the right-of-way at no charge to the petitioner; and the portion of the alley to be vacated is equivalent to the alley to be dedicated. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#37024-041805) AN ORDINANCE permanentlyvacating, discontinuing and closing a certain public right-of-way in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as more particularly described hereinafter; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 353.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37024-041805. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler. Ernest R. Wood, Trustee, Edgewood Holiness Church, appeared before Council in support of the request. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no discussion or questions by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37024-041805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of Crawford Development Co., LLC, to amend proffered conditions on property located at 3806 Thirlane Road, N. W., identified as Official Tax No. 6520105, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, April 1,2005 and Friday, April 8, 2005. The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that Crawford Development, LLC, filed a petition on February 3, 2005, to amend proffered conditions on the subject property; the property was rezoned on October 2, 2000, from RA, Residential Agricultural District, to LM, Light 381 Manufacturing District, subject to certain proffered conditions; Condition No. 3 specifies that, "Either two, three or four buildings shall be constructed on the subject property and they shall provide at least 40,000 square feet of usable, interior commercial or light manufacturing space. Permanent certificates of occupancy shall be issued for at least two of the buildings within five (5) years of the acceptance of these proffers by City Council"; and the proposed amendment will modify Condition No. 3 to extend the time period by two years. The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the petition to amend proffered conditions to extend the time period to seven years from October 2, 2000. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#37025-041805) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3 and 36.1-4, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 652, Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, in order to amend certain conditions presently binding upon certain property previously conditionally zoned LM, Light Manufacturing District; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 355.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37025-041805. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. C. Cooper Youell IV, Attorney, appeared before Council in support of the request of his client. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37025-041805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. TAXES: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of The Scott Robertson Memorial Fund for tax exempt status of certain property located at the easternmost 250 feet of Densmore Road, N. W., the matter was before the body. 382 Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Monday, April 11,2005. The City Manager submitted a communication advising that The Scott Robertson Memorial Fund owns property described as Official Tax No. 2670906, located at 3707 Densmore Road, N. W.; the primary purpose of The Scott Robertson Memorial Fund is to operate a chapter of The First Tee of Roanoke Valley, a national not-for-profit youth development program; designed for youth ages 8 to 18, The First Tee is dedicated to providing young people of all backgrounds with an opportunity to develop, through golf and character education, life-enhancing values such as honesty, integrity and sportsmanship; and annual taxes due for fiscal year 2004-2005 on the above referenced parcel is $885.72 on an assessed value of $73,200.00. It was further advised that on May 19, 2003, Council approved a revised policy and procedure in connection with requests from non-profit organizations for tax exemption of certain real property in the City, pursuant to Resolution No. 36331-051903, adopting the revised Process for Determination of Property Tax Exemption dated May 19, 2003, with an effective date of January 1,2003; and The Scott Robertson Memorial Fund has provided the necessary information as a result of adjustments made to the City's revised local policy prior to the deadline of April 15, 2005, for exemptions that would take effect on July 1,2005. It was explained that according to the Commissioner of the Revenue's Office, the loss of revenue to the City will be $708.58 after a 20 per cent service charge of $177.14 is levied by the City in lieu of real estate taxes; the Commissioner of the Revenue has determined that the organization is currently not exempt from paying real estate taxes on property described as Official Tax No. 2670906 by classification or designation under the Code of Virginia; and the IRS recognizes the organization as a 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt organization. The City Manager recommended that Council authorize The Scott Robertson Memorial Fund exemption from real estate property taxation, pursuant to Article X, Section 6 (a) (6) of the Constitution of Virginia, effective July 1, 2005, for property described as Official Tax No. 2670906, located at 3707 Densmore Road, N. W., if the organization agrees to pay the subject service charge by that date. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#37026-041805) AN ORDINANCE exempting from real estate taxation certain property located in the City of Roanoke of The Scott Robertson Memorial Fund, an organization devoted exclusively to charitable or benevolent purposes on a non-profit basis; providing for an effective date; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 357.) 383 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37026-041805. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler. Jennifer Blackwood, Interim Executive Director, The Scott Robertson Memorial Fund, appeared before Council in support of the request. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37026-041805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-CITY PROPERTY-INDUSTRIES: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the proposed conveyance of a 0.460 acre portion of City-owned property, located in the Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology, Official Tax No. 7230101, in exchange for the release and vacation of a 50-foot perpetual road right-of-way across property owned by Edwin and June Wilson, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Monday, April 11,2005. The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City owns property located in the Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology (RCIT) identified by Official Tax No. 7230101 which is adjacent to property owned by Edwin and June Wilson; the Wilsons hold a 50' perpetual road right-of-way easement across City property that the City desires to extinguish; and negotiations with the Wilsons have resulted in an agreement to extinguish the right-of-way in exchange for a portion of an adjacent City-owned parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.460 acres. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the appropriate documents to convey a 0.460 acre portion of property identified as Official Tax No. 7230101 to Edwin and June Wilson, in exchange for relinquishing their easement across City property, such documents to be approved as to form by the City Attorney. Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance: 384 (#37027-041805) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the exchange of certain City- owned property containing approximately 0.460 acre, located in the Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology, bearing Official Tax Map No. 7230101, to Edwin and June Wilson in exchange for the vacation and abandonment of a 50' perpetual road right-of-way easement across City property owned by Edwin and June Wilson, authorizing the City Manager to sign the necessary documents to effect this exchange, upon certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 358.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37027-041805. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37027-041805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-CITY PROPERTY-WATER RESOURCES: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, with regard to the proposed conveyance of a 0.37 acre portion of City- owned property, located on Plantation Road in Roanoke County, Official Tax No. 027.11-02-05.01-0000, to the Western Virginia Water Authority, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Monday, April 11,2005. The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City owns property located on Plantation Road that houses a water metering station; the parcel is located in Roanoke County and contains approximately 0.37 acre; and the City desires to convey the parcel of land to the Western Virginia Water Authority for nominal consideration. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the appropriate documents to convey the property to the Western Virginia Water Authority, such documents to be approved as to form by the City Attorney. Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance: 385 (#37028-041805) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to execute the necessary documents to convey City-owned property housing awater metering station, located on Plantation Road in Roanoke County, containing 0.37 acre and identified as Roanoke County Tax No. 027.11-02-05.01-0000, to the Western Virginia Water Authority, upon certain terms and conditions, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 359.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37028-041805. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. The Mayor inquired iftherewere persons presentwhowould like to speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. Council Member Lea inquired as to plans for use of the property by the Western Virginia Water Authority; whereupon, the City Manager advised that the property should have been identified in the massive transfer of property to the Water Authority, effective July 1, 2004. She explained that all of the City's facilities were not exclusively located within the boundaries of the City of Roanoke and this particular parcel of land was inadvertently left off of the massive transfer of property because it was located in Roanoke County. There being no further questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37028-041805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia, spoke in support of the renovation of Victory Stadium. He called attention to alleged equipment that is stored under the stands at Victory Stadium that has not been returned to the owner nor repaired using funds received by the City from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). He inquired as to how FEMA funds were spent. He stated that the citizens of Roanoke let their voices be heard through a petition signed by approximately 7,000 persons in support of renovating Victory Stadium; therefore, he asked that taxpayers' money be used to renovate Victory Stadium rather than construct a new stadium. 386 CITY EMPLOYEES-AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: Ms. Angela Norman, 1731 Michael Street, N. W., President of the Committee for Community Preservation and President of the Municipal Employees Association, spoke with regard to the City Manager's Affirmative Action and Diversity report which was presented to Council on Monday, April 4, 2005. She stated that it is appreciated that the report indicates that there was a slight increase in the hiring and promotion of people of color; however, the Council briefing on September 2, 2003, with regard to an employee survey conducted by Virginia Tech Center for Survey Research reflected that 51.4 per cent of City employees believe that discrimination exists in the City's work place, and the report also revealed that 67.4 per cent believe that job promotions are not fair; the second survey conducted in November 2004, revealed that 59.4 per cent of employees continue to feel that promotional opportunities are not fair; the City hired the firm ofJ. O. Rogers and Associates to conduct an assessment of the City's diversity efforts; the report states that the City staff needs to increase its focus on modeling appropriate diversity behavior; the City's Personnel Operating Procedures state that the Manager makes the final hiring and promotional decisions; and endorsement of the Affirmative Action report by an organization that has "no gums and no teeth" does not speak for the people of color in the Roanoke community. She advised that she has appeared before Council on various occasions since 1997 to address discrimination related to City employment for people of color; currently the Committee for Community Preservation serves as a watchdog and as a liaison for accountability by City government; and the Committee is concerned as to whether an open application process was utilized to fill the positions of Director of Finance and City Treasurer and whether the issue of diversity was a consideration. She expressed appreciation to the City Manager for certain improved efforts; however, a higher percentage of increase in the 2006 diversity report is expected. PAY PLAN-TAXES-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-CITY EMPLOYEES: Mr. Robert Gravely, 727 29th Street, N. W., spoke with regard to the City's declining population base, real estate tax assessments, lack of affordable housing, a pay scale that is not conducive to home ownership, unfair City hiring practices, and insufficient wages for the City's work force. At 7:45 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess until Thursday, April 28, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., for the purpose of holding public hearings on the proposed fiscal year 2006 budget, HUD Consolidated Plan, and real estate tax rate. A meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke reconvened on Thursday, April 28, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. 387 PRESENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, BrianJ. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. (arrived late), Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea and Mayor C. Nelson Harris .................................................................................. 7. ABSENT: None ...................................................................................... 0. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Stephanie M. Moon, Deputy City Clerk. The meeting was opened with a prayer by Mayor Harris. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Americawas led by Mayor Harris. BUDGET-GRANTS-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The Mayor advised that the purpose of the reconvened meeting was to conduct public hearings on the recommended 2005-2006 HUD Funding Budget and the City of Roanoke Fiscal Year 2005-2006 Operating Budget. The Mayor advised that the first public hearing was in reference to the recommended 2005-2006 HUD Funding Budget. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Wednesday, April 13, 2005. A summary of the recommended fiscal year 2005-2006 HUD Funding Budget is as follows: REVENUES ESTIMATES: CDBG 2005-2006 Entitlement Grant CDBG 2005-2006 Program Income CDBG Prior Year Carry-over and Excess Program Income Home 2004-2005 Entitlement Grant Home 2005-2006 Program Income Home Prior Year Carry-over and Excess Program Income ESG 2005-2006 Entitlement Grant TOTAL HUD REVENUE $2,104,805.00 458,051.00 706,249.00 723,526.00 25,000.00 5,265.00 80,722.00 $4,103,618.00 388 RECOMMENDED EXPENDITURES: Housing Development Neighborhood, Community and Economic Development Human Services (including Homeless Assistance) TOTAL RECOMMENDED EXPENDITURES $2,823,521.00 870,463.00 409,634.00 $4,103,618.00 The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be heard in connection with the public hearing. The Reverend William Lee, Pastor, Loudon Avenue Christian Church, 4139 Appleton Avenue, N. W., representing Kuumba Community Health and Wellness Centerl requested consideration of the Kuumba project for Community Development Block Grant funding, in the amount of $500,000.00, to assist in acquiring and renovating a larger building to replace the current facility. He advised that the goal of the Kuumba Center is to provide healthcare for all persons in need; 62 per cent of persons served last year were uninsured; 52 per cent of the Center's income is derived from a Federal grant, 30-40 per cent is derived from insurance claims and other smaller grants. He explained that the requested funds will be used to purchase land and to double the size of the present facility to meet the healthcare needs of residents of the community. He stated that the Center wishes to provide additional services because it is recognized that clients have an array of medical issues that require further medical diagnosis; and a larger building and expanded staffwould not only better serve the citizens of the City of Roanoke, but the entire Roanoke Valley. There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed. BUDGET: The Mayor advised that the second public hearing was to receive comments from citizens with regard to the City of Roanoke's Recommended Fiscal Year 2005-2006 Budget. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Tuesday, April 19, 2005. The total General Fund Budget for fiscal year 2005-2006 is $223,799,000.00; Enterprise Funds: Civic Facilities Fund - $5,799,374.00, Parking Fund - $2,720,000.00, Market Building Fund - $311,855.00; Internal Service Funds: Fleet Management Fund - $5,595,415.00, Risk Management Fund- $12,721,500.00, Technology Fund $6,371,472.00; and School Fund $127,317,575.00. 389 The Mayor inquired iftherewere persons present who would like to speak in connection with the public hearing; whereupon, the following persons addressed Council: Ms. Alita Ashe, 5784 Littleton Road, spoke in support of funding for the Blue Ridge Technical Academy. She stated that funds for the Academy were not included in the 2005-2006 fiscal year budget of the Roanoke City Schools on March 8, 2005; and the School Board appointed a committee composed of parents, teachers, and School Board members to study alternatives and/or options with regard to the fate of the Technical Academy. She urged Council to work with the School Board to identify funds for continued operation of BRTA. David Diaz, Executive Director, Downtown Roanoke, Inc., expressed appreciation to the City for its support of downtown Roanoke. He noted that the number of persons who have chosen to live in downtown Roanoke continues to grow and DRI continues to meet with developers to encourage a conversion of office space and other places into downtown living units. He stated that the YMCA and The Jefferson Center have sowed the seeds to create an uptown district; the City Market area study will be beneficial in creating more possibilities for downtown living, and an improved Farmer's Market and Market building. He called attention to the signs of a struggling retail market in downtown Roanoke due to a smaller employment base, limited parking spaces for residents and tourists, and costs associated with parking. Since parking is inextricably tied to the future of the City's downtown and its economic growth, he suggested a business recruitment strategy including parking incentives and consideration with regard to decreasing the City's monthly rates in City-owned parking garages. He also suggested that signage be erected to direct persons to available parking and to relieve any feeling of anxiety when entering a parking garage. Mr. Clarence R. Martin, 155 Huntington Boulevard, N. E., asked that Council support a pay increase for all City retirees and a medical supplement to help defray the cost of health insurance for City retirees 65 years of age and older. Mr. Ken Rattenbury, 2226 Hunters Road, S. W., a downtown business owner, spoke in support of increasing the parking spaces in the downtown area, in part, due to the relocation of the Art Museum. He expressed concern that relocation of the Art Museum to the viaduct parking lot would create a negative impact on limited parking in the downtown area. Ms. Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., urged Council to amend the proposed fiscal year budget in order to include approximately $75,000.00 for the Oliver White Hill Foundation inasmuch as CDBG funds were not included as recommended by the Gainsboro Steering 390 Committee. She advised that funds would be used as a start up base to honor Oliver White Hill, a prominent and well known attorney who resided on GilmerAvenue, N.W.,who is known throughout the world for his accomplishments, yet his hometown has taken little, if any, steps to honor him. She stated that the Oliver White Hill Foundation plans to purchase the home and establish a museum as a fitting and living tribute to one of the City of Roanoke's most recognized black attorneys. There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed. TAXES: The Mayor advised that the third public hearing was in reference to a proposal that the current meals tax of 4% be increased to 5%, effective July 1, 2005. The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the public hearing; whereupon, the following persons addressed Council: Mr. Bill McClure, 542 Walnut Avenue, S. W., expressed concern with regard to the increase in the meals tax because it is unfair to single out restaurants for a tax increase that was originally created as a hospitality tourism tax. He added that the meals tax unfairly impacts restaurant businesses in comparison with neighboring cities and counties that have a lower tax rate which may encourage some consumers to "border hop" to avoid a higher tax. He stated that the proposed tax increase could lead to a loss of sales which could reduce revenue generated to the City; and the City of Roanoke has lost two restaurants to Roanoke County and many downtown restaurants are closing which is causing a negative impact on an already fragile business environment. He noted that even though the meals tax has been advertised as a one cent increase, the actual tax increase is 20 per cent, and questioned the use of the meals tax increase to fund renovations to William Fleming High School, which were to be funded through a bond issue. Mr. Duane Howard, 1135 Wasena Avenue, $. W., concurred in the remarks of Mr. McClure. He stated that for many senior citizens and people with disabilities dining out is not always a discretionary decision, but a necessity to get through the day. He added that the increase in the meals tax will not only hurt restaurant owners, but employees who hold Iow end service jobs. He advised that the City could replace the need for a meals tax increase by saving the $20 - $30 million that would have been spent on the construction ora new stadium. 391 There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed. At 7:30 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess. The Council of the City of Roanoke reconvened on Thursday, April 28, 2005, at 7:30 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. PRESENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, BrianJ. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., BeverlyT. Fitzpatrick,Jr., Sherman P. Lea and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ...................................................................................................... 7. ABSENT: None ............................................................................................ O. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Stephanie M. Moon, Deputy City Clerk. BUDGET-TAXES: The Mayor advised that the purpose of the public hearing is to receive citizen comments with regard to the City's real property tax rate for fiscal year 2005-2006. He advised that the City Manager's proposed budget includes a real property tax rate of $1.21 per $100.00 of assessed value for fiscal year 2005-2006, which is the current tax rate for fiscal year 2004-2005. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Tuesday, April 19, 2005. The Mayor advised that the following persons have registered to speak in connection with the City's real property tax rate for fiscal year 2005-2006: Mr. Dick Kepley, 550 Kepplewood Road, S. E., read the following quote: "the power to tax is the power to destroy". He stated that the power to raise taxes is the power to cause citizens to relocate to another locality; and the City's real estate assessments have increased annually. Mr. Bill McClure, 542 Walnut Avenue, S. W., expressed concern with regard to real estate property assessments, and advised that last year's increase in valuation of real estate contributed $3,268,218.00 to the City's budget, an automatic one and one half per cent of the budget, when compared to the total budget amount of $224 million. He noted that in 1999, he paid $81.63 on $100,000.00 real estate valuation assessment, and six years later, he paid $119.99 on $119,000.00 in valuation for a residence that has a market value of $80,000.00 - $85,000.00. He referred to a statement made by Mayor Harris that residents pay eight per cent of the assessment value; however, at the present rate of eight per cent, in six years, his 392 monthly payment will be approximately $166.66, or double the 1999 rate. He added that for the next 12 years, payment on his City real estate taxes will be approximately $229.70, or triple the 1999 payment. He expressed concern with regard to annual increases in the average assessment from three per cent to four per cent, and inquired if citizens are to accept an eight to nine per cent increase in property taxes, a 20 per cent increase in the meals tax in addition to other fees imposed by the City. He advised that the City's real estate tax rate is 1.21 per $100.00 of assed value, compared to Roanoke County at $1.12, the City of Salem at $1.18, Chesterfield County at $1.07 and Henrico County at 0.94; and other localities in the Commonwealth have limited real estate assessments or decreased their real estate tax rates. He also pointed out the decreasing in funding for the Westend Center, Boys Club and other non-profit organizations that provide prudent and needed services to the citizens of the City. Mr. John Kepley, 2909 Morrison Street, S. E., expressed concern with regard to the increase in real estate tax assessments. He stated that Council has made poor decisions concerning fiscal responsibility, such as the construction/renovations to Patrick Henry and William Fleming High Schools. He called attention to the establishment of a citizens group to be known as "Citizens for a Sensible Tax Increase" because citizens are no longer willing to tolerate increases in their property assessments. Therefore, he urged that Council consider changing the method in which real estate is assessed in the City of Roanoke. Mr. Bill Tanger, 257 Dancing Tree Lane, Botetourt County, advised that real estate taxes in the City of Roanoke are high because the City's expenses are high and one of the City's major expenses will be Victory Stadium, regardless of whether the facility is renovated or a new stadium is constructed. He added that City Council has the ethical responsibility to take a major expense such as Victory Stadium that affects taxpayers' money, both long term and short term, to a voter referendum. Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia, advised that if the City had made the right decisions with regard to the expenditure of large sums of taxpayers' money, an increase in real estate assessments would not be necessary to generate funds. There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed. 393 The Mayor advised that Council will engage in fiscal year 2005-2006 budget study sessions on Wednesday, May 4, 2004, at 8:30 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., and on Thursday, May 5, 2005, at 8:30 a.m., if necessary. He further advised that the City's fiscal year 2005-2006 budget will be adopted at a reconvened meeting of the Council to be held on Thursday, May 10, 2005, at 2:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber. There being no further business, at 7:45 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting adjourned. APPROVED Mary F. Parker City Clerk C. Nelson Harris Mayor 394 ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL May 2, 2005 9:00 a.m. The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday, May 2, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., in the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Regular Meetings, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 36762-070604 adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 6, 2004. PRESENT: Council Members Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe,Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, and Mayor C. Nelson Harris .................................................................................................. 7. ABSENT: ................................................................................................... O. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. SCHOOL TRUSTEES PRESENT: William H. Lindsey, Gloria P. Manns, Alvin L Nash, Robert J. Sparrow, David B. Trinkle, and Kathy G. Stockburger, Chair ...... 6. SCHOOL TRUSTEES ABSENT: Courmey A. Penn ....................................... 1. OFFICERS PRESENT: Representing the City of Roanoke: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; Mary F. Parker, City Clerk; George C. Snead,Jr., Assistant City Manager for Operations; and Rolanda B. Russell, Assistant City Manager for Development. Representing the Roanoke City School Board: Marvin T. Thompson, Superintendent (effective July 1, 2005); Doris N. Ennis, Acting Superintendent; Cindy H. Lee, Clerk to the School Board; Timothy R. Spencer, Assistant City Attorney and Legal Counsel to the School Board; Dr. Lou Talbutt, Executive Director for Student Support Services; and Crystal Y. Cregger, Executive Director for Support Services. The Mayor extended a welcome to the School Board, the new Superintendent of Schools Marvin T. Thompson, and administrative staff. 395 COUNCIL-SCHOOLS: On behalf of the School Board, Chair Stockburger expressed appreciation for the opportunity to meet with Council. She officially introduced Marvin T. Thompson, Superintendent of Schools, effective July l, 2005. Mr. Thompson expressed appreciation for awarm welcome to the Roanoke Valley. He stated that he was impressed with the School Board and its vision and goals for Roanoke City Public Schools. He advised that when looking at the big picture, it is about the future for Roanoke's school system; therefore, certain systems and processes will be critical to shaping the future of tomorrow. The Mayor expressed appreciation to Acting Superintendent Doris Ennis for her service to the Roanoke City School system. He stated that Ms. Ennis has brought great leadership during a year of transition and the City appreciates her many years of service to the School system as a teacher, principal and Acting Superintendent. 2005 High School Football Venue: Chair Stockburger advised that the School Board supports the recommendation of the Superintendent and executive staffthat efforts be made to secure Victory Stadium for all high school home football games in the fall of 2005. She submitted the following list of needs and specifications to closely emulate playing conditions that have existed in the past at Victory Stadium: Provide locker room facilities for both teams in the National Guard Armory. Erect a press box- a. Three locations to provide space for announcing, filming the games, coaching (announcer and scorekeeper; home coaches' box and filming area; visitor coaches' box and filming area) b. Press box needs to accommodate a minimum of 20 people (40' x 6') c. PA system for use during games 3. Working scoreboard and 25 second play clocks. 4. Wireless headsets for both teams (set up on two separate channels) 5. Bleacher seating for 3,000 patrons 6. Sideline benches for both teams (enough to seat 40 on each side) 7. Upgrade lighting for field 8. Provide modular port-a-john units for patrons 396 9. Adequate fencing surrounding brick structure to ensure safety for all patrons 10. Fence around playing field to separate players and patrons (there is a concern about having fans so close to the playing field) 11. Yard line markers every ten yards and at goal line 12. Access to water on sidelines 13. Approval for high schools to run their own concessions on game nights The Mayor advised that at its meeting on Monday, April 18, 2005, Council directed the City Manager to begin making preparations for fall high school football season to be played on the field at Victory Stadium; and the City Manager has been in the process of making the necessary plans and has conferred with the Acting Superintendent of Schools. He stated that the School Board has submitted certain items for consideration in preparation for the opening of the Victory Stadium field for high school football this fall; certain minor details remain to be worked out and cost options will be presented by the City Manager later in the day for the Council's consideration. He commended both the City and the School administrations for working out many of the details. Chair Stockburger advised that she has informed her colleagues on the School Board of some of the nuances of needs expressed by athletic directors and coaches so that certain needs can be met at the most reasonable cost while not anticipating any permanent type actions. She stated that it is not believed that there will be any surprises financially or otherwise that should be of concern to Council or to the School Board. The City Manager advised that the above referenced immediate list of 13 needs and specifications went beyond what might be considered the norm to get ready for temporary football play at Victory Stadium and the Council will be asked to consider options later in the day that will range from $80,000.00 to $300,000.00+. She stated that football games will be played at Victory Stadium, the arrangement may be slightly different than in past years, but players will have the opportunity to play football on a good field. Council Member Lea inquired about item 13: approval for high schools to run their own concession on game nights. The City Manager advised that the issue is a decision that will be made by the Council as it explores the various options; and, in the past, the City operated the concessions which provided a small revenue source to offset the cost of playing football at Victory Stadium, given the small amount of rent that is charged to the school system in comparison to expenses incurred. She stated that whatever option is selected by the Council for the temporary use of Victory 397 Stadium, it will be necessary to contract with vendors to operate small portable carts, regardless ofwhetherconcessions are managed by the City or by the School system. She added that expenses involved in getting Victory Stadium ready for football use should be considered by the Council before making a decision with regard to concessions. Chair Stockburger advised that she had previously inquired if it would be possible for the high school Boosters Clubs to operate Iowtech concession stands and furnish their own tables, prepackaged foods, etc., which would involve little or no overhead cost. She stated that another option could involve the Boosters Clubs contracting with concession vendors and the Booster's Clubs could share in a small percentage of the profits. Roanoke Academy for Mathematics and Science School -Prowess Report: The Chair advised that the School Board has actively monitored the progress of the new Roanoke Academy for Mathematics and Science Elementary School and expects the general contractor to perform its duties under the terms of the contract. She stated that in an effort to assist the general contractor in the completion of its duties, Roanoke City Schools secured the construction management services ofJ. M. Turner& Co., Inc., to assist with project completion; the cost of the project will not exceed contract price; a moving date for staff and students will be announced once a certificate of occupancy is obtained; and students wilt not move into the facility before SOL testing is completed on May 19, 2005, to ensure that the focus remains on instruction. It was noted that Roanoke Academy will be a state-of-the-art school; each classroom, including the media center and cafetorium, is equipped with a 27" television to broadcast educational programs; students will utilize mobile computer labs that will provide for wireless Internet access, in addition to computer workstations in each classroom; teachers will have the ability to make PowerPoint presentations in the classrooms; the math lab, science lab and computer lab are equipped with interactive whiteboards which allow video and computer images to be projected; students can interact with the whiteboard using a stylus or their finger as a mouse; screen images can be captured and saved for review or future learning opportunities; and teachers can develop electronic lesson plans in advance to be used by substitute teaching staff should the need arise. Question was raised if a Clerk of the Works will be considered for major construction projects in the future; whereupon, Ms. Cregger advised that a similar type position is under consideration for the William Fleming High School Project; and the School system has successfully applied the approach of the architectural firm serving as the Clerk of the Works over 16 completed projects ranging from substantial renovations to various upgrades. She stated that with the size of the William Fleming High School project and the problems encountered with the RAMS construction, the concept will be considered since it has been successful in connection with the Patrick Henry High School construction. 398 Safety/Discipline/School Uniforms: The Chair advised that recommendations from the School Safety/Discipline Task Force (May 21,2004) include five (5) action arenas: 2. 3. 4. 5. Human Resources Development Leadership Policy and Operations Student Programs Staffing Communication and Collaboration Throughout the Roanoke Community. She stated that the Roanoke school district has accomplished numerous recommendations in the five arenas proposed by the Task Force; and major actions are summarized under each specific arena. Arena I: Human Resource Development Human resources that affect schools have been expanded and developed. Staff training on the reporting and recording of discipline data continues to be conducted on a regular basis. For example, the Student Code of Conduct (Standards and Expectations for Student Behavior K-I2) has been revised and disseminated to provide clear and consistent rules and policies. For example, discipline codes for infractions were illustrated in the publication to provide consistency in reporting and recording discipline. De-escalation Training was conducted and completed by March 1, 2005 for staffs in all schools. Schools are reporting positive results. Youth Court has been established in both high schools resulting in over 53 students receiving disciplinary consequences other than out- of-school suspensions; thus, reducing out-of-school suspensions. Arena Ih Leadership Policy and Operations The policies and procedures are clear for student behavior and all administrators have set higher expectations for students. The School Board will take action on a dress code policy at the May Board meeting, which, if passed, will require all school handbooks to follow a consistent dress code with the requirements set forth in the Student Code of Conduct. Additionally, the Board is considering policies and regulations specifically addressing school uniforms 399 pending approval at the May Board meeting. Policies will be in place that will allow individual schools to request permission from the School Board for uniform programs to begin as early as the fall semester of 2006. In order to receive Board approval, schools must meet all regulations including the support of 70% of their families. The DARE and SRO programs continue to be effective. The most recent program intervention by DARE is the gang prevention curriculum that is now in place at all elementary schools. The program also has a component dealing with bullying. Surveillance cameras have been added at William Fleming with upgrades for Addison and Ruffner now completed. Cameras for some elementary schools are still pending. Arena 111: Student Proqrams Various support programs for students have been implemented during the 2004-2005 school year. Conflict mediation programs have been implemented at all middle schools in the Roanoke City school system. These programs are being evaluated in terms of numbers of students participating and results from teachers and principals. Peer mediators will also be trained in all fourth and fifth grades in 2005-2006. The New Start program has been added to include special services for elementary students with serious behavioral problems not currently addressed in the regular classroom. Two classes were established in 2004-2005. Adolescent Uplift, Beyond Anger Management counseling, and New Beginnings continue to provide additional services for specific groups of students. Character Education and good citizenship programs continue in all schools through various programs and activities. Arena IV: Staffinq Staffing has been added to focus on safety, security, and prevention. Four additional guidance counselors have been added at the middle school level so each middle school will have two guidance counselors for 2005-2006 paid by the local budget. A Discipline Coordinator for Transportation has been added to serve as a liaison with parents, school staff and students regarding transportation issues. 4OO All security officers in Roanoke City Schools will be trained and will receive certification as school security officers prior to the 2005-2006 school year. Roanoke City school staff and the Police Department continue to conduct drug dog searches at each middle and high school twice a year (minimum). When schools suspect drug activity, additional searches are requested. Arena ¥: Communication and Collaboration Throuqhout the Community Added staff has allowed Roanoke City Schools to focus on safety, security and prevention. Both high schools have increased supervision in hallways, cafeterias, common areas and locker rooms because of the seven-period day now in place. Parents, school resource officers and administrators serve on the Discipline Data Review Team to better understand and assist in reporting discipline data for the school district. The School Board Safety Advisory Committee continues to promote the involvement of parents, school and community leaders regarding discipline and safety issues. The School Board Safety Advisory Committee appointed a sub- committee that developed the dress code policies and procedures presented to the School Board at the April Board meeting. Evaluations of the various programs continue with both hard and soft data presented to the School Board in quarterly reports. For example, logs are maintained on the numbers of students participating in Conflict Mediation and Beyond Anger Management, with teachers and staff reaction. It was noted that Roanoke City Schools is spending approximately $1,555,023.00 for 2004-2005 on the various programs and activities above described; and the third quarterly discipline report in 2004-2005 compared to the third quarterly report in 2003-2004 showed a decrease of 34 per cent in the number of discipline incidents. Dr. Trinkle advised that a committee was formed to study the issue of school uniforms, to benchmark actions of other localities, and to review the City's policy; the City has no standardized school dress code, and every school has a different dress code; staff reviewed all dress codes and prepared a consistent dress code for each level of education which provides the opportunity for each individual school to add to or to change its dress code. He stated that it is believed that providing the option for a school uniform is warranted, although it is not the desire of the School Board to require a system-wide policy; and at an upcoming 401 meeting, the School Board will consider the second reading on an action that will allow individual schools to opt for a school uniform policy within certain parameters that the school must identify as a reason for initiating the policy, and 70 per cent of the school's parents must vote for and approve implementation of the uniforms. Dr. Talbutt advised that a requirement of the school uniform policy is that each school will provide an opportunity for funding of uniforms for those families who cannot afford to purchase the clothing; participating schools will be required to submit their request in April of the prior school year, and once enacted, a school uniform program must be in place for at least three years in order to provide an opportunity to study the impact of uniforms on student discipline and achievement. She explained that alternative schools are exempt from the requirement because the Noel C. Taylor Learning Academy currently has a uniform policy. Council Member Lea referred to the Lynchburg School system where uniforms are required at certain middle and elementary schools and the School system is considering initiation of the program in all middle schools next year. He inquired if the City of Lynchburg was consulted as a part of Roanoke's study; whereupon, Dr. Trinkle advised that the committee looked at the Lynchburg school system, but primarily focused on the City of Norfolk and two other school divisions. Mr. Thompson advised that Roanoke City Public Schools has the largest magnet program of any school system in the state; when looking at the various communities they are indicatively singular to themselves, therefore, the approach that has been taken by the School Board to set standards and guidelines for each community to identify whether or not they wish to go in the direction of school uniforms. He stated that if the community is educated about what uniforms have done in other localities, they can make an informed and not a reactionary decision when they see the same research that the committee based its decisions on. He added that the concept involves collective thinking, Roanoke's schools are about a group of people with a collective agenda, and the process outlined by the School Board is solid. He recommended that the school system help to guide the process in such awaythat the uniform policy is standardized for each community; and he would propose to further explore the issue in order to minimize any constraints that might be placed on the community as it moves forward. The Mayor expressed appreciation to the School Board for creating the option for a school uniform policy. He advised that it is hoped that some schools will take advantage of the option to participate because the community is interested in seeing if, over the three year period, a school uniform policy does, in fact, enhance discipline, test scores, and the learning environment, etc. 402 Meetinq the Needs of Blue Ridqe Technical Academy (BRTA) Students: The Chair advised that a study group consisting of students, parents, School Board members, the Superintendent of Schools and a representative from the business community will meet to determine if there are feasible ways to maintain the program and provide a recommendation to the School Board by May 19, 2005. She noted that in the interim, a transition plan has been developed for students, parents, and staff that will meet the needs of students during the upcoming school year. In response to a question by Council Member Wishneff, the Acting Superintendent of Schools advised that the School Board will seek input from committee members to determine if the program can be left intact or moved to another location. She stated that although the program has not failed, there are certain issues in terms of accountability that are of concern to the Superintendent and executive staff. Mr. Thompson advised that the BRTA is in its second year of warning; the school has not met accreditation standards, overall reading level for students is below grade level, other data in terms of curriculum offerings cause concern, and the alignment of certain internal programs within the system have raised questions, both personally and professionally. He explained that when looking at the population of students, staffing issues can be expensive and radical in terms of providing adequate staff. Council Member Wishneffadvised that those students who have not done well in the traditional school setting have improved their performance at Blue Ridge Technical Academy. He expressed disappointment that the program may be terminated without any kind of transition and that parents were allowed to read about proposed changes in the newspaper. Chair Stockburger advised that the matter has become an emotional issue and the School Board is striving to look at the issue quantitatively; those students who appear to the parents to be performing well at Blue Ridge are those students who are happy at school, but may not be high performers, and when considering the current amount of dollars expended on the program, students should be passing at 100 per cent. School Accreditation: The Chair advised that the Virginia Department of Education's implementation of the Standards of Quality has been supportive and ongoing through the use of visiting Academic Review Teams that provide technical assistance to help schools develop Three-Year School Improvement Plans designed to achieve full accreditation; Roanoke City Public Schools now has 15 schools warned in one or more areas and have received assistance in developing School Improvement Plans; 403 eight of the 15 schools receive Title 1 funds and must also meet the additional requirements of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) under the Federal No Child Left Behind Act; six of the 15 schools are rated as Tier 3 which means that they made AYP and/or were within 14 points of passing; and these schools revised their current plans and will not require a follow-up visit by the Academic Review Team. She explained that seven of the other nine schools received a full Academic Review, which requires a Three-Year Improvement Plan and a follow-up visit from the Academic Review Team; two of the nine Tier 1schools are participating in the Governor's Turnaround Academy; and principals of these schools are being trained to become Turnaround Specialists, they are working with their staffs and they are not required to work with an Academic Review Team. Chair Stockburger reported that the Standards of Quality regulations state that in the year 2005-2006 and beyond, a school will be Accredited with Warning in a specific area or areas for no more than three consecutive years if the school had previously been fully accredited in that area or areas; the school would have three years to implement a State approved improvement plan; and the Roanoke City School System will not know until after the May 2005 SOL tests are completed how many of its schools may qualify for this rating. She added that based on a school's performance ending in 2006 and beyond, a school shall be rated Accreditation Denied if it fails to meet the SOL test benchmarks for Full Accreditation -except for schools rated in Warning as previously noted; the Standards of Quality require that if one-third or more of the schools are denied accreditation, the local school board shall evaluate the superintendent and a copy of the evaluation will be sent to the State Board of Education; and schools that have never been fully accredited by the end of 2006 may apply to the State to be rated Near Accreditation/A School in Improvement if the following criteria apply: 1. Meet the required 75 per cent pass rate in English for Grades 3 and 5. 2. Sixty per cent of all students tested must pass the other three core areas. 3. In each area not fully accredited, the pass rate must have increased by at least 25 per cent when compared to the 1999 test scores. The Chair explained that a school rated under these conditions must show improvement each year and be fully accredited by 2009; although all of the schools have improved by more that 25 per cent in mathematics, science, and history, it is unlikely that any of the City's schools not yet accredited would meet the other two criteria by June 2006; and when schools are denied accreditation, the Superintendent may take any number of actions that may include, but are not limited to: 404 1. Appoint a new principal 2. Replace or reassign teachers 3. Modify the curriculum or introduce a new program 4. Request further technical assistance from the state 5. Honor requests for student transfers (required under NCLB for Title 1 Schools) 6. Provide supplemental tutorial services (required under NCLB for Title 1 Schools) 7. Expand after-school instructional programs 8. Provide professional development opportunities. The Acting Superintendent advised that accreditation teams from the State have been instrumental in coming to Roanoke and working with the school system in a non-threatening way in order to offer constructive criticism. Mr. Thompson advised that the State utilizes standard procedures and Standards of Quality which include eight areas and the City of Roanoke implements those areas in every school. He stated that the first step is to begin to set up systems where schools become aware of the eight areas and begin to implement them in a consistent manner through community input and individual leadership. He stated that leadership will be required and the capacity of individuals to do those things will be weighted and measured for accountability; and in order to provide a sound foundation, additional staff may be required. Chair Stockburger presented a brochure entitled, Roanoke City Public Schools, Discovering the Wealth in Every Student. Lessons Learned from the Roanoke Academy (RAMS) Project: The Chair advised that the School Board has established an approach to construction by utilizing the project architectural firm for contract administration and a Roanoke City Public School construction supervisor to monitor progress at the job site; this approach has allowed the School Board to successfully complete 16 school renovation projects since 1989; this approach was also utilized for building the new Roanoke Academy for Mathematics and Science; many project delays associated with Roanoke Academy resulted from staff changes within the general contractor's organization and were beyond the control of the School Board; every legal protocol has been followed to move the project toward completion; and the City's Building Commissioner and staff, the Assistant City Attorney, central administration staff, the Superintendent and the School Board have worked together to resolve project issues and to ensure that the facility is safe and inviting for students. 405 She added that contract delays with regard to Roanoke Academy and the success of the construction management approach which has been used to construct the new Patrick Henry High School are justifications to consider formal "Clerk of the Works" arrangements for new construction projects and extensive renovation projects; and utilization of this approach will be considered as planning for the new William Fleming High School begins. Proqress report on Combininq City/School Administrative Functions: The purchasing, accounts payable and technology departments of both the City and the School Board are working together to implement a new financial software package; for the first time, the School Board and the City will utilize the same purchasing software and share a consolidated vendor database; the project has been ongoing since July 2004 and the system will go live on July 5, 2005; meetings have been held with the School's Maintenance Department and the City's Parks and Recreation Department to address playground safety and discuss playground maintenance; additionally, quarterly meetings are held with staff from both organizations to coordinate shared facilities under the Joint Use Agreement; meetings are productive in identifying ways to assist each other and use resources wisely; the District recently published a Request for Proposal (RFP) to establish a district-wide copier contract, which the City can utilize once the contract is awarded; the district-wide office supply contract is under negotiation for renewal; and areas identified for future consolidation/partnering include employee uniforms, cell phones, vehicles, towing services, janitorial supplies and printing paper. Ms. Cregger advised that for the budget year commencing July 1, the School Board approved a survey of the pay scale for classified employees and will work with the City to review salaries of all classified employees to ensure that job descriptions are competitive with other school districts. She stated that the study will also include the City and the Schools pay system in order to address the issue of employees moving back and forth between the City and the School system. On July 5, she advised that the City and the Schools will implement a joint financial system; for the first time, the schools will share a data base of vendors under the procurement system with the City; any time the School system advertises for vehicles, it consults with the City's Fleet Management Department to determine if the City has equipment needs in order to take advantage of combined buying power; other areas of joint cooperation include grant writing/grant opportunities; and the Human Resources Department is currently reviewing the City's postings, tracking and online job applications in an effort to streamline school procedures. 406 Council Member Wishneff inquired as to the feasibility of appointing a committee consisting of two Members of Council, two Members of the School Board and City and School administrative staffs to review consolidation of services; whereupon, the Mayor advised that the matter could be discussed at future monthly meetings of the Mayor, School Board Chair, City Manager and Superintendent of Schools. He referred to a list of other City/Schools functions that have previously been suggested for review following arrival of the new Superintendent of Schools. Now that the new Superintendent has been appointed, he suggested that the issues be revisited and that a report be submitted to the Council and to the School Board with regard to a proposed plan of action. Council Member Wishneff suggested that the question of Schools administrative office space be added to the list for consideration. The Mayor encouraged the Members of Council and the School Board to submit additional ideas for consolidation of City and School programs. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that both respective bodies should move in the direction of leaders in their own right, and leadership requires that the Council and the School Board work together and select those issues that should be addressed. He stated that the City Manager and the Superintendent of Schools could begin to work on manyofthe issues and provide leadership on howto move forward. The City Manager advised that it is important for the Council and the School Board to create policy direction for their respective administrative staffs in order to move in the various directions. She stated that it has been clear over the past 1 2 months that there is support for the two administrative staffs to work together to improve efficiencies and effectiveness within the two systems which ultimately may free up dollars that could be allocated to education and to other City services. She called attention to employees within the City and the School system who move back and forth between the two systems because both systems have the same retirement plan, therefore, she encouraged the School Board at an early point to weigh in on the issue because that, in addition to a salary comparison, could have a bearing on employees who move back and forth between the two organizations. Chair Stockburger advised that it would be helpful when reviewing overlapping or redundancy of classified positions to have a quantitative figure of those persons moving from the City to the School system and vice versa. She asked if either system has conducted a task analysis of what employees are actually doing that would provide hard data on where there is redundancy in the two systems. The Mayor advised that the topic could be addressed in the monthly meetings of the Mayor/Chair and City Manager/Superintendent. Clarification on the Meals Tax: 407 The Mayor advised that the City's recommended 2005-2006 Fiscal Year Budget contains a recommendation to increase the meals tax by one per cent as a way to prepare for meeting the debt service on a number of City projects, the largest of which at this point is the William Fleming High School renovations. Council/School Board Retreat: Chair Stockburger advised that the School Board requests a four to six hour productive retreat with the Members of Council. The Mayor suggested that the matter be discussed as a part of the future monthly meetings of the Mayor/Chair and City Manager/Superintendent and over the next 30 to 60 days, he asked that Council and the School Board give consideration to specific agenda items for discussion; and the new Superintendent of Schools could provide a State of the Schools report outlining proposed future accomplishments. Council Member Wishneff suggested a joint discussion on neighborhood schools, housing and economic development. Council Member Cutler suggested that representatives from various components of the community such as the Central Council Parent Teacher Association and the Roanoke Valley Chamber of Commerce be included in the retreat to provide input on various issues. Chair Stockburger spoke to the advantage of engaging the services of an experienced facilitator for the retreat. Council Member Dowe suggested that the Council/School Board "buddy system" be reviewed. Fiscal year 2005-2006 School Budget: The Mayor advised that Council was previously briefed on the recommended 2005-2006 School budget. The Acting Superintendent advised that the School administration will submit recommendations to the School Board for the expenditure of approximately $600,000.00 in additional funds that were allocated to the school system. On behalf of the School Board, she expressed appreciation for the additional funds. The City Manager advised that it would be appropriate over the next 12 months to review the School/City funding formula and how the funding formula should be developed in the future. 408 Additional Comments by Council/School Board: Inasmuch as the four year term of office of Robert J. Sparrow will expire on June 30, 2005, the Mayor expressed appreciation to Mr. Sparrow for his service on the School Board. Council Member Dowe advised that as long as there is a critical mass of people who have a passion for children, team work will continue to be maintained and increased. He stated that he is excited about the transition to the new Superintendent of Schools who will bring a skill set to the City and to the School system that will be expedient and timely and he looks forward to a fruitful working relationship between Council and the School Board. Chair Stockburger expressed appreciation for the positive working relationship that exists between the Council and the School Board which is not taken for granted by the School Board. At 10:45 a.m., Chair Stockburger declared the meeting of the School Board adjourned. ITEMS LISTED ON THE 2:00 P.M., COUNCIL DOCKET REQUIRING DISCUSSION/CLARIFICATION, AND ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE 2:00 P.M. AGENDA: NONE. TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: The Mayor called attention to the unveiling of the new information kiosk on the second floor of the Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building on Tuesday, May 3, 2005, at 1:30 p.m., and advised that a press conference will be held at the same time to announce formation and membership of the new Multi-Cultural Commission. COMMI~-rEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the Mayor to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: 409 AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss acquisition of real property for public purposes, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss acquisition of real property for public purposes, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. At 10:55 a.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be reconvened immediately following a meeting of the Audit Committee at 11:00 a.m. The Council convened in Closed Session at 12:00 noon in the Council's Conference Room, Room 451, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, with all Members of the Council in attendance. The Council meeting reconvened at 1:30 p.m., in the Council's Conference Room, Room 451, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, with all Members of the Council in attendance, Mayor Harris presiding. 410 COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Session just concluded, Council Member Cutler moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or her knowledge that: (1)only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. COMMI~-~EES-YOUTH: The Mayor advised that the three year terms of office of Abbi Fitzpatrick, Sherman P. Lea, Jr., and James H. Smith, as members of the Youth Services Citizen Board will expire on May 31,2005, and there is a vacancy on the Board created by the resignation of Lylburn D. Moore, Jr.; whereupon, he called for nominations to fill the vacancies. Council Member Dowe placed in nomination the names of Abbi Fitzpatrick, Sherman P. Lea, Jr., James H. Smith and Antwan Lawton. There being no further nominations, Ms. Fitzpatrick, Mr. Lea and Mr. Smith were reappointed and Mr. Lawton was appointed as members of the Youth Services Citizen Board for terms ending May 31,2008, by the following vote: FOR MS. FITZPATRICK AND MESSRS LEA, SMITH AND LAWTON: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor ........... 7. COMMI~-~EES-COMMUNITY PLANNING: The Mayor advised that the three year term of office of M. Rupert Cutler as a member of the Roanoke Valley/Allegheny Regional Commission will expire June 30, 2005, and there is a vacancy on the Commission created by the resignation of Jennifer L. Pfister term ending June 30, 2006; whereupon, he called for nominations to fill the vacancies. Council Member Dowe placed in nomination the names of M. Rupert Cutler and Robert H. Logan, III. There being no further nominations, Mr. Cutler was reappointed for aterm ending June 30, 2008, and Mr. Logan was appointed to fill the unexpired term of Jennifer L. Pfister, resigned, ending June 30, 2006, as members of the Roanoke Valley/Allegheny Regional Commission, by the following vote: 411 FOR MESSRS CUTLER AND LOGAN: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ......................................................... 7. COMMITTEES-FIFTH PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION: The Mayor advised that the three year terms of office of M. Rupert Cutler and Sherman A. Holland as members of the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization will expire on June 30, 2005, and called for nominations to fill the vacancies. Council Member Dowe placed in nomination the names of M. Rupert Cutler and Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr. There being no further nominations, Messrs. Cutler and Holland were reappointed as members of the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization for terms ending June 30, 2008, by the following vote: FOR MESSRS CUTLER AND HOLLAND: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ............................................... 7. NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Robert A. Clement, Jr., Neighborhood Coordinator presented a briefing on neighborhood activities which are planned for the month of May, 2005. He presented a pamphlet describing the various neighborhood activities, and, on behalf of the neighborhood organizations, he extended an invitation to the Mayor and Members of Council to attend neighborhood events which range from a block party in Greater Raleigh Court, toa 24 block yard sale in Airlee Court, to a workshop at the City's Main Library on restoration of historic homes. At 1:40 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess until 2:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia. The regular meeting of the Roanoke City Council reconvened at 2:00 p.m., on Monday, May 2, 2005, in the Roanoke City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. PRESENT: Council Members Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., (arrived late), Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ................................................................. 7. ABSENT: None ........................................................................................... O. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. 412 The invocation was delivered by Council Member Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Americawas led by Mayor Harris. PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT-DECEASED PERSONS: Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution expressing sympathy upon the passing of Julian F. Hirst, a former City Manager of Roanoke, on Sunday, February 27, 2005: (#37029~050205) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Julian F. Hirst of Norfolk, Virginia, a former City Manager of Roanoke. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 360.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37029- 050205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted bythe following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0 J (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) The Mayor presented a ceremonial copy of the above referenced measure to Ms. Jane Hirst Green, daughter of Mr. Hirst. The Mayor called for a moment of silence in memory of Mr. Hirst. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT: Council Member Lea offered the following resolution paying tribute to Dr. Belinda Childress Anderson, the first female president of Virginia Union University: (#37030-050205) A RESOLUTION paying tribute to Dr. Belinda Childress Anderson, the first female president of Virginia Union University, one of the nation's oldest historically black colleges. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 361.) Council Member Lea moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37030-050205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: 413 AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) The Mayor advised that a ceremonial copy of the above referenced resolution will be forwarded to Dr. Anderson. PROCLAMATIONS: The Mayor presented a proclamation to Erin Hofberg, Program Manager, Ride Solutions, declaring Friday, May 6, 2005, as Clean Commute Day. PROCLAMATIONS-TOURISM: The Mayor presented a proclamation to David Kjolhede, Executive Director, Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitor!s Bureau, declaring the week of May 7 -15, 2005, as National Tourism Week. ARMORY/STADIUM: The Mayor advised that at 4:00 p.m., the Council would receive a report of the Stadium Study Committee transmitting the Committee's recommendations with regard to Victory Stadium. CONSENT AGENDA The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and ifdiscussionwas desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meetings of Council held on Monday, March 7, 2005, and Monday, March 21,2005, were before the body. (For full text, see Minutes on file in the City Clerk's Office.) Council Member Cutler moved that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) 414 AUDIT COMMI'I-~EE: Minutes of a meeting of the Audit Committee which was held on Monday, April 4, 2005, were before the body. The following internal audits were discussed: Clerk of the Circuit Court, Commissioner of the Revenue, and Police Department Cash Funds. Council Member Cutler moved that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that the Minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMI3-fEES-ROANOKE REGIONAL AIRPORT COMMISSION: A report of qualification of J. Granger Macfarlane as a member of the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, for a term ending March 9, 2009, was before Council. Council Member Cutler moved that the report of qualification be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) REGULAR AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: NONE. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: CITY MANAGER: BRIEFINGS: NONE. 415 ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION: BUDGET-GRANTS-COMMUNITY PLANNING: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that in order to receive Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) funding, the City of Roanoke must submit a five-year Consolidated Plan and Annual Updates to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and substantial amendments to the plan must undergo a 30-day public review and must be approved by City Council. It was further advised that under the current plan, $700,000.00 in CDBCand HOME funds are designated for the Northwest Neighborhood Environmental Organization (NNEO) "Fifth Street Gateway Project" and $200,000.00 for "Independent Housing for Special Needs;" NNEO has requested that the City's multi-year $2.35 million commitment, which includes the $700,000.00, be redesignated for the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA), which will manage the project; such action entails asubstantial amendment to the plan; and authorization for a contract with the Housing Authority to implement the redesignated use will be submitted to Council under a separate report. It was explained that the $200,000.00 for special needs housing was established in the 2003-2004 Annual Update to the present plan to assist with development of a group home facility; a specific project to implement the funds has not been identified through two consecutive budget cycles and its continued undesignated status adversely affects expenditure timeliness compliance; and redesignating funds for other uses also constitutes a substantial amendment. With respect to NNEO funding, it was advised that there is mutual agreement among NNEO, the Housing Authority and the City regarding the need to redesignate the funds; and the City has supported the Housing Authority's application for tax credits to assist with financing of the project, which is now to be known as "Park Street Square." With regard to special needs housing funding the City Manager further advised while the redesignation will assist in managing compliance, funds will be used for housing activities in the 2005-2006 period, including those serving special needs; the City remains committed to its support of such housing; included in the new plan are objectives to assist approximately 115 units of special needs housing, with as much as $1.3 million in CDBG and HOME funds to be devoted to such purposes over the coming five years; and group home facilities or other approaches can be considered. It was explained that the required 30-day public review period for the amendments was advertised on April 2, 2005, with comments due by the close of business on May 2, 2005; notice of amendments was also provided to members of the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates; and no objections to the amendments have been received to date. 416 The City Manager recommended that Council approve the above described amendments to the Consolidated Plan, such amendments to take effect upon, and provided that no compelling objections have been received by conclusion of the public review period; and that Council transfer $700,000.00 in CDBG and HOME funds from NNEO Fifth Street Gateway accounts to accounts for the RRHA Park Street Square Project, as follows: $200,000.00 from NNEO 035-G04-0420-5309 to RRHA 035-G04-0420-5428 $2S0,000.00 from NNEO 035-G05-0537-5309 to RRHA 035-G05-0520-5428 $241,388.00 from NNEO 035-090-5312-5309 to RRHA 035-090-5312-5428 $ 8,612.00 from NNEO 035-090-5325-5309 to RRHA 035-090-5325-5428 Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37031-050205) AN ORDINANCE to transferCDBG and HOME funds from the Fifth Street Gateway project to the Park Street Square project, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 363.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37031- 050205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#37032-050205) A RESOLUTION authorizing the appropriate City officials to execute an amendment to the Consolidated Plan for FY 2000-2005, providing for the redesignation of Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnerships funds to the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, upon certain terms and conditions. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 363.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37032- 050205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: 417 AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) GRANTS-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-COMMUNITY PLANNING: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that on February 17, 2005, the City received notice from the Northwest Neighborhood Environmental Organization (NNEO) that due to various circumstances it could not continue or complete the "Fifth Street Gateway" project; NNEO's notice also requested that $2.35 million in CDBG and HOME funds committed by the City to the project over several fiscal years be reassigned to the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA) on February 23, 2005, the City received a letter from the RRHA stating that NNEO had requested that the RRHA assume the position of General Partner and Developer for the project; the RRHA indicated awillingness to take on the role and advised that the Housing Authority anticipated filing a tax credit application for the project, which would continue under the name of "Park Street Square," and requested reallocation of CDBG and HOME funds; and the Housing Authority has since filed the application and is waiting for results of the selection process. It was further advised that of the $2.35 million in CDBG and HOME funds committed to the project, $700,000.00 has been appropriated and is the limit of funds to be made available until the next installment, on or about July 1,2006; however, of the $700,000.00, the City has stipulated that no more than $125,000.00 may be accessed by the Housing Authority prior to award of tax credits; a contract authorized by Council to be entered into between the City and the RRHAis required to provide access to the $125,000.00 and, upon award of tax credits, the balance of the $700,000.00; and as part of the tax credit financial structuring, the RRHA is expected to receive the funds in the form of minimally- interest-bearing loans, which the Housing Authority will use through its nonprofit arm, the Roanoke Valley Housing Corporation. It was noted that the Agreement contains a mutual indemnification clause in which both parties agree to indemnity the other for damages and expenses incurred as a result of the other party's conduct; and the effect of the clause is that the City would be waiving its defense of sovereign immunity in certain circumstances. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the 2004-2005 CDBG/HOME Agreement with the RRHA, to be approved as to form by the City Attorney. Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: 418 (#37033-050205) A RESOLUTION authorizing the appropriate City officials to execute the 2004-2005 Community Development Block Grant and Home Investment Partnership Program Agreement with the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority to provide access by the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority to funds for the "Park Street Square" project, upon certain terms and conditions. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 364.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37033- 050205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. A communication from Carl D. Cooper, Chair, Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates (RNA), advising that on April 18, 2005, the RNA adopted the position that no development project should commence in the Gilmer neighborhood until a neighborhood plan is created that would be in the same format as other City neighborhood plans adopted by Council, was before the body. It was noted that it is believed that the present Gilmer Neighborhood Plan, written by Hill Studios for the Northwest Neighborhood Environmental Organization, does not represent interests of residents; therefore, it is recommended that the Gilmer Neighborhood Plan be rewritten by City staff just as other neighborhood plans have been drafted by City staff; and it would be premature for any project to be approved without neighborhood involvement in the approval process. In response to Mr. Cooper's letter, Council Member Lea inquired if all of the proper procedures have been followed by the City. The City Manager advised that Mr. Cooper's letter would suggest that the Gilmer Neighborhood Plan that was prepared by Hill Studio and adopted by Council approximately two years ago, at the request of the Northwest Neighborhood Environmental Organization, was not a typical neighborhood plan as developed by City staff; however, it is the City's collective opinion that had the Gilmer neighborhood had concerns regarding the plan, it would have been appropriate to signal those concerns two years ago prior to adoption of the Plan by Council. She stated that the Board of Directors of NNEO has officially requested that the Redevelopment and Housing Authority assume responsibility for the project; while some small elements of the project have changed, the bulk of the plan remains the same as originally prepared and adopted by NNEO; and the proposed contract makes available a total of $700,000.00 contingent upon the RRHA receiving tax credits to initiate the originally approved NNEO Plan and provides $125,000.00 in up front funds to prepare the tax credit application. The City Manager advised that the City has followed the required procedures. There being no further discussion; Resolution No. 37033-050205 was adopted by the following vote: 419 AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) BUDGET-FDETC-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke is the grant recipient for Workforce Investment Act (WlA) funding, thus, City Council must appropriate funding for all grants and other monies received in order for the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board to administer WlA programs; and the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board administers the Federally funded Workforce Investment Act (WlA) for Area 3, which encompasses the Counties ofAIleghany, Botetourt, Craig, Franklin and Roanoke, and the Cities of Covington, Roanoke, and Salem. It was further advised WlA funding is intended to be used for four primary client populations: Dislocated workers who have been laid off from employment through no fault of their own; · Economically disadvantaged individuals as determined by household income guidelines defined by the U. S. Depart men t of Labor; · Youth who are economically disadvantaged, or have other barriers to becoming successfully employed adults; and · Businesses in need of employment and job training services. It was further advised that the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board has received a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) from the Virginia Employment Commission allocating $2,500.00 for institutionalization of the Governor's Career Readiness Certificate. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the required Memorandum of Understanding between the Virginia Employment Commission, the City of Roanoke, and the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board to accept funds; that she be further authorized to accept Western Virginia Workforce Development Board Workforce Investment Act funding of $2,500.00 for Institutionalization of the Governor's Career Readiness Certificate; and establish a revenue and expenditure budget in accounts to be established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund. Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: 420 (#37034-050205) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the Workforce Investment Act Grant for the Governor's Career Readiness Certificate, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 365.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37034- 050205. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution: (#37035-050205) A RESOLUTION accepting the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board Workforce Investment Act funding of $2,500.00 in connection with the implementation of the Governor's Career Readiness Certification Program and authorizing the City Manager to execute the Memorandum of Understanding among the Virginia Employment Commission, City of Roanoke and Western Virginia Workforce Development Board required accepting the funding. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 365.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37035- 050205. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) BUDGET-GRANTS-FDETC: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke is the grant recipient for Workforce Investment Act (WlA) funding, thus, City Council must appropriate funding for all grants and other monies received in order for the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board to administer WlA programs; the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board administers the Federally funded Workforce Investment Act (WIA) for Area 3, which encompasses the Counties of Alleghany, Botetourt, Craig, Franklin and Roanoke, and the Cities of Covington, Roanoke, and Salem; and WlA funding is intended to be used for four primary client populations: 421 Dislocated workers who have been laid off from employment through no fault of their own; · Economically disadvantaged individuals as determined by household income guidelines defined by the U. S. Department of Labor; · Youth who are economically disadvantaged, or have other barriers to becoming successfully employed adults; and · Businesses in need of employment and job training services. It was further advised that the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board requested that the Virginia Employment Commission transfer allocation of $100,000.00of Program Year 2003 Dislocated Worker Funds to Program Year 2003 Adult Program Funds due to surplus funding in the Dislocated Worker Program, and the higher-than-anticipated level of need in the Adult Program; and the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board has received a Notice of Obligation (NOO) from the Virginia Employment Commission transferring $100,000.00from the Dislocated Worker Program to the Adult Program for Program Year 2003 (July 1,2003 -June 30, 2005). The City Manager recommended that Council accept the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board Workforce Investment Act funding transfer of $100,000.00 for Program Year 2003; and adopt a budget ordinance transferring funds from Dislocated Worker Program, Account No. 035-633-2305-8057, to Adult Program, Account No. 035-633-2302-8057. Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37036-050205) AN ORDINANCE to transfer Workforce Investment Act Grant funding from the Dislocated Worker Program to the Adult Program, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 366.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37036- 050205. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) 422 PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that with the adoption of the City's Comprehensive Plan in 2001, certain strategic initiatives were identified to broaden the range of housing choices within the City of Roanoke, and to facilitate the development of new housing clusters through assemblage and redevelopment of underutilized or vacant land in strategic locations; one such location, the approximately 140 acre Countryside Golf Course, was included in a feasibility analysis initiated in mid-2002 to evaluate development potential; the study concluded that there was significant development potential for the property with a variety of development plans, housing alternatives, and a mix of possible land uses; and upon completion of the feasibility study, and beginning in early 2003, investigation of terms for acquisition of the property was initiated with The Fairways Group, LP, owners of the property. It was further advised that an option agreement has been drafted providing the framework for the City's ultimate acquisition of the property, according to the following general terms: A non-refundable option fee of $125,000.00 which will provide the City with a time period until October 28, 2005, to undertake related due diligence activities including environmental inspections, related site surveyings and other property evaluation activities; should the City proceed to acquire the property, the option amount will be credited to the purchase price; it is anticipated that approximately $10,000.00-$15,000.00 .would be sufficient to undertake the necessary due diligence activities during the option period; and · A purchase price of $4.1 million for the property, with closing of the sale to occur no later than November 30, 2005. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the option agreement with The Fairways Group, LP, on behalf of the City of Roanoke, and that Council transfer $125,000.00, for the option agreement and $15,000.00 for related expenses from Capital ProJects Fund Interest Earnings to an account to be established by the Director of Finance in the Capital Projects Fund. Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance: (#37037-050205) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for an option to acquire Countryside Golf Course, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 367.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37037- 050205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: 423 AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance: (#37038-050205) AN ORDINANCE authorizing execution of an Option Agreement by which the City of Roanoke is granted an option by Fairways Group, LP, formerly U. S. Golf Properties, LP, to purchase certain property known as Tax Parcels Nos. 6471801 through and including 6471806, 6431501, 6431502, 6431613, 6431614, and 6472302, known as Countryside Golf Course; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 367.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37038- 050205. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Director of Finance submitted the Financial Report for the month of March 2005. There being no questions or comments, without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the Financial Report for the month of March 2005 would be received and filed. REPORTS OF COMMIq-fEES: NONE. UNFINISHED BUS1 NESS: LEASES-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: Council at its meeting on Monday, April 18, 2005, having tabled a resolution approving a five-year lease for 3,444.50 square feet of office space at 111 Franklin Road, S. W., Suite 200, to be used bythe City's Office of Economic Development, the matter was before the body. The City Manager was instructed to negotiate for a three-year lease of the property. 424 Council Member Dowe moved that the matter be removed from the table. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted. The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the original lease was for a five year period beginning May 25, 2000 through May 31,2005, at a rental rate of $16.75 per square foot, with a three per cent annual increase; Resolution No. 34717-032000 approved the lease dated March 20, 2000; a five year term at $16.00 per rentable square foot, with a 1.55 per cent escalator was originally proposed; and funding for the lease is included in the Economic Development Department budget. It was further advised that a three-year period, beginning June 1, 2005 through May 31,2008 agreement includes a rate of $16.75 per rentable square foot, with an increase of 1.55 per cent each year thereafter; and annual rental, to be paid in monthly installments, shall be as follows: June 1~ 2005 - May 31~ 2006 June 1,2006 - May 31,2007 June 1,2007 May31~2008 $57,695.38 $58~556.50 $59~417.63 54,807.95 per month $4,879.71 per month $4,951.47 per month It was noted that the amendment contains a provision whereby the City acknowledges that Copty & Company acted as the broker for the agreement, and the City agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Crown Roanoke,/LC, from claims by any other broker or agent. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a first amendment to the lease agreement with Crown Roanoke, LLC, a Virginia Limited Liability Company, for 111 Franklin Road, S.W., Suite 200, for a period of three years, at the above rental amounts, beginning on June 1,2005 and ending on May 31,2008, with all documents to be upon form approved by the City Attorney. Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance: (#37039-050205) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the proper City officials to extend the lease agreement between the City and Crown Roanoke, LLC, for lease of office space within the Franklin Plaza Building, located at 111 Franklin Road, for the Department of Economic Development, for a period of three years, upon certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 368.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37039- 050205. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: 425 AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: SCHOOLS: Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution appointing William H. Lindsey as a Trustee to the Roanoke City School Board: (#37040-050205) A RESOLUTION appointing William H. Lindsey as School Board Trustee on the Roanoke City School Board for a term commencing July 1, 2005, and ending June 30, 2008. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 369.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37040- 050205. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) SCHOOLS: Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution appointing David B. Carson as a Trustee to the Roanoke City School Board: (#37041-050205) A RESOLUTION appointing David B. Carson as a School Board Trustee on the Roanoke City School Board for a term commencing July 1, 2005, and ending June 30, 2008. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 370.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37041- 050205. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick was not present when the vote was recorded.) 426 MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-LANDMARKS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION- HOUSING/AUTHORITY: Council Member Cutler advised that the livery stable located adjacent to Roanoke City Mills off South Jefferson Street, which is believed to be more than 100 years old and has been used for storage by Virginia Scrap Iron and Metal, is now in liquidation; the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority has initiated the process to acquire the building, and it is hoped that a new use can be found for the livery stable in lieu of razing the structure. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT-DECEASED PERSONS: Council Member Dowe advised of the death of long time educator, Ms. Nina Medley, and asked that the Medley family be remembered in prayer. He extended greetings to all mothers for a Happy Mother's Day on Sunday, May 7, 2005, and asked that all hearts be filled with kindness at this special time of the year. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. POLICE DEPARTMENT-TRAFFIC-FIRE DEPARTMENT-STREETS AND ALLEYS: Mr. William J. Bryant, Jr., 124 Fleming Avenue, N. E., spoke with regard to: · The condition of Williamson Road, i.e.: potholes and metal covers in the middle of the road that could pose a safety hazard; · A safety hazard with regard to traffic islands/left turn lanes on Williamson Road where longer vehicles protrude into the left lane of oncoming traffic; and · The need for repaying portions of Franklin Road, S. W. He commended employees of the City's Fire/EMS and Police Departments and asked that they receive hazardous duty pay in addition to their regular wages. CENSUS-CITY EMPLOYEES-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-POLICE DEPARTMENT- TAXES: Mr. Robert Gravely, 727 29th Street, N. W., spoke with regard to the need for affordable housing in the City of Roanoke; a concern that the wages of the average City employee are not sufficient to purchase a house; loss of the City's population; a large deficit in the City's budget; use of taxpayers' money as incentives to attract large businesses to the City; loss of City revenue; and the need for more accountability to the citizens of Roanoke with regard to how tax dollars are spent. 427 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: POLICE DEPARTMENT-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager called attention to a recent article in The Roanoke 77mes regarding the friendship that developed between a Roanoke City Public Safety employee and two fellow soldiers serving in Iraq which led to their relocation to the Roanoke Valley and their graduation in the near future from Roanoke's Police Academy. She advised that 31 City employees serve as active reservists, 13 of which are currently stationed abroad, and two employees have returned to the Roanoke Valley; and as a result of efforts by the City's Human Resources Department to prepare these men and women to leave and return to the City's employ, the City of Roanoke was awarded one of seven Five-Star Certificates from the Employers Support of the Guard and Reserve Program. The City Manager expressed appreciation to the community and to City employees for their participation in Citizens Appreciation Day which was held on Saturday, April 30, 2005, at Valley View Mall. At 3:05 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess. The Council reconvened at 3:10 p.m., in the Council's Conference Room, Room 451, with Mayor Harris presiding and all Members of the Council in attendance, except Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. ARMORY/STADIUM: The City Manager advised that Council at its meeting on Monday, April 18, 2005, requested that staff develop options regarding the limited use of Victory Stadium for high school football for the 2005 season. She called attention to three options that were prepared for the Council's consideration, which include cost estimates for various seating capacities. She stated that as the various options were considered, it was taken into consideration that Sutton Kennerly and Associates, Structural Engineer, has advised that both the east and west stands of Victory Stadium are in poor condition and will require attention to address several safety issues before the stands can be open to the public for limited use; the consultant has indicated that the existing stands can be used provided repairs are made to the concrete steps and risers to eliminate tripping and falling hazards; the consultant further advises that it would be necessary to either remove the brick masonry wall or provide fencing to prevent public access to the walls and the potential fall zones; and the consultant recommends that the press box not be used until certain brick masonry is removed and replaced with newly and properly reinforced brick. She stated that the options which will be presented to the Council have been prepared taking into consideration appropriate Building Code issues, as well as safety issues related to public assembly and public convenience such as sanitary facilities. She noted that as discussed with the School Board earlier in the day, temporary accommodations for high school football would not involve the creation of concession areas, but would most likely involve providing a temporary structure by vendors to the location. She called upon Charles Anderson, Architect II, representing the City Engineer's Office, to review the following options: 428 Victory Stadium Football 2005 Option A Temporary Bleachers Seating Capacity Bleacher Rental Portable Toilets Scoreboard and Sound System Fencing Press Box Filming Platforms 3000 4200 5400 Net Seats Net Seats Net Seats $ 57,000.00 $ 79,800.00 $ 11,700.00 $ 15,600.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $128,700.00 $155,400.OO $102,600.00 $ 23,400.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $186,000.00 Option B Seating Capacity (9 Rows of Seats) Existing Stands - No portal Access Access from Field Side Only 2160 4300 Net Seats Net Seats Portable Toilets $ 11,700.00 $15,600.00 Scoreboard and Sound System $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000.00 Fencing $ 30,000.00 $ 30,000.00 Press Box $ 15,000.00 $15,000.00 Filming Platforms $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 Repair Concrete Steps $ 15,000.00 $ 20,000.00 Additional Egress Gates from field side $ 8,000.00 Option C All spectators on one side Seating Capacity (Aluminum seats only) Locker Room Basic Repairs Restroom Basic Functional Repairs Fencing Press Box Remove Brick Repair Concrete Steps Filming Platforms Scoreboard and Sound System $86,700.00 $103,600.00 Existing West Side Stands - Remove Brick $ 12,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 37,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $200,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 12,000.00 6800 Excludes disposal of brick $ 329,0OO.O0 429 The Mayor advised that the briefing would continue following presentation of recommendations by the Stadium Study Committee at 4:00 p.m. At 3:55 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess. At 4:00 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council ' Chamber, with Mayor Harris presiding and all Members of the Council in attendance, except Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. STADIUM: At its meeting on Monday, August 2, 2004, Council appointed a Stadium Study Committee composed of George C. Miller, Charles A. Price, Gwendolyn W. Mason, Gregory W. Feldmann, L. Thompson Hanes, Chad A. Van Hyning, Marsha Combs, David B. Trinkle, Kermit E. Hale, Sherley E. Stuart, Jan P. Wilkins, John H. Parrot, Jr., Patricia Cronise and Richard H. Kepley. The Committee's charge was to assess the athletic facility needs of the City; to review the feasibility of renovating Victory Stadium for use as an athletic facility and venue for events that need to accommodate larger crowds; and to review other possible athletic facility venues, including an outdoor track and locations as the Committee deems appropriate. The Committee, with the assistance of City staff, was authorized to recommend consultants that would be needed in order to perform its duties and to supervise the work of the consultant; and the Committee was requested to report its recommendation(s) regarding the renovation of Victory Stadium and/or other athletic facilities to Council within nine months of the Committee's appointment. In reporting the Committee's recommendations to the Council the Mayor advised that the proceedings would occur in the following order: Presentation of formal report by John H. Parrott, Jr., Chair, Stadium Study Committee; Introduction of members of the Stadium Study Committee and the Consultants by the Chair; Comments by the consultant Questions/comments by the Members of Council; Upon conclusion of presentation of the report, a brief recess will be declared; Citizen comments Consideration by Council of a "Plan of Action". On behalf of the Members of Council, Mayor Harris expressed appreciation for the work of the Stadium Study Committee, for devoting both their personal and professional time and expertise, and for their individual contributions to complete their assignment. He also expressed appreciation for the support provided byJoyce Johnson, Administrative Assistant to the Mayor, who served as Recording Secretary for the Stadium Study Committee, and was responsible for coordinating information, taking minutes of the meetings and responding to requests for information throughout the study process. He advised that it is recognized that some persons are passionate about the subject of Victory 430 Stadium; however, while in the Council Chamber, the discourse would be civil, and if comments were made that were believed to be personal either toward the Council, the City Administration, the Stadium Study Committee or another individual, that person would be ruled out of order and requested to conclude their remarks. John H. Parrott, Chair, Stadium Study Committee, introduced the following Committee members: Sherley E. Stewart, Co-Chair, Marsha Combs, Patricia Cronise, Gregory W. Feldmann, Kermit E. Hale, L. Thompson Hanes, Richard H. Kepley, Gwendolyn W. Mason, George C. Miller (not present), Charles A. Price, David B. Trinkle, Chad A. Van Hyning and Jan D. Wilkins. He expressed appreciation for the Committee's devotion to its assignment, toJoyceJohnson for her support as Recording Secretary, and to Charles A. Anderson, representing the City Engineer's Office, who responded to numerous requests for information. Mr. Parrott presented the following report of the Stadium Study Committee: "Stadium Study Committee Recommendations May 2, 2005 Background The Citizens Stadium Study Committee was formed in August 2004 by City Council to make recommendations regarding "... assessing the athletic facility needs of the city" and "the feasibility of renovating Victory Stadium." Our recommendations are: A. Victory Stadium i. Demolish Victory Stadium (10-4 vote April 6, 2005). Utilize a professional firm to assist with planning and construction of a new, multipurpose stadium with adequate traffic access and parking. The new stadium would be situated in the most topographically and economically sound spot on land bounded by Franklin Road on the West, Reserve Avenue on the North, Jefferson Street on the East and the Roanoke River on the South (unanimous vote, March 9). Construct a new multipurpose stadium with at least 15,000 seats (8-5 vote March 9). 431 Maximize green space, gardening, and beautification opportunities as the stadium is designed and plans are made for the area. (Agreed at April 6, 2005 meeting). There are many opportunities to partner with garden clubs, greenways, river protection advocates and the city arborist to design a beautiful landscape. o Include the following design elements in the new stadium: A flexible seating, stage area for events, preferably in the Reserve Avenue end zone area, with access to dressing rooms and a load-in, load-out dock; Elevated locker rooms, bathrooms and concessions to minimize the risk of flooding. Design the rest of the stadium with possible flooding in mind; c. Adequate, permanent concessions facilities; Four locker rooms, two on each side with one of these two being dedicated in design to William Fleming and Patrick Henry to boost school pride and morale. The other one would be a "visitors" locker room on each side. Extra locker rooms would provide impetus for regional athletic events throughout the Rivers Edge complex and the City; Flags that can be changed to school banners as appropriate; Adequate space for a vendor area for special events and booster clubs, ticketing and security; Berm the end near the river for hill seating if the stands do not fully enclose the field; h. Use old elements that can be preserved from Victory Stadium, e.g. bricks, for legacy purposes. (May consider engraving these bricks and ~ citizens to purchase to increase positive citizen participation in the project.) These could be used in the pedestrian/vendor area, but also consider giving away 'limited' numbers of free bricks that can be taken away); 432 i. Use the same turf recommendations from the previous Orange Avenue project teams, unless it ~ not durable enough to withstand events and ~ flooding; Maintain the name Victory Stadium and McLelland Field· Incorporate into the design a wall or pedestrian area on the river end zone, to honor veterans. In addition, an area honoring the City's sports stars should be included; Consider additional design elements to maximize citizen use of the upcoming greenways project, river access, and other athletic fields; Provide certain areas needed by Parks and Recreation as they consider their move and consolidation. Recreation and Athletics in Roanoke Construct day stadiums on William Fleming and Patrick Henry high school campuses (e.g., 500-1000 seats). The field size should be suitable for multiple sports. Usage will aid in meeting a variety of the City's athletic needs (e.g., amateur sports, regional events). Construct all-weather tracks with at least 8 lanes (Olympic) at each high school, as previously agreed between the School Board and City Council. o Develop new management practices and policies, including: Providing sufficient funds for maintenance on a permanent basis to include the school facilities and the Stadium; Negotiating a fair, lowest possible new Stadium rent for the school system; Allowing non-profits to use the new Stadium at reduced rates. Particular sensitivity should be given in the policies to allow non-profit organizations access to the new Stadium, including concession rights, but not at the risk of pre-empting major, revenue generating events; 433 Allowing high school booster clubs to run concessions as well as sell items in the vendor area to raise money; A full time position on the Civic Center staff should be given to management and promotion of the stadium, with the same in the Parks and Recreation Department for upkeep, maintenance and turf control. If designed correctly, the Committee feels the stadium can be well of the year. The City of Roanoke should review the Parks and Recreation Department's Master Plan of 2000 to meet the current needs of the Roanoke community, anticipate future needs, and properly maintain these facilities on an on-going basis. Specifically, the Director of Roanoke City Parks and Recreation Department stated to our committee that the City had "two major outdoor deficits": 1 ) 15-20 additional soccer fields, and 2) approximately 25 softball fields. (See Stadium Committee minutes dated September 29, 2004). The Committee recommends that the area surrounding the new stadium be planned to address these needs. These additional park assets could be used for such events as The Commonwealth Games, football tournaments, softball/baseball tournaments and soccer and lacrosse events. The Committee strongly encourages Council to continue to work with the School Board to make Victory Stadium usable for high school football games until such time as the new stadium can be constructed." Mayor Harris called upon the Members of Council for questions and comments. Council Member Cutler expressed appreciation to the Stadium Study Committee and asked the following questions: What rationale did the Committee use to arrive at the 15,000 seat recommendation? 434 Mr. Parrott stated that the Committee's information suggested that the minimum seating requirement for championship football games is increasing; in a few years the number may be a minimum of 10,000 seats for a league game, therefore, 15,000 seats was recommended in anticipation of the City's future needs in 15-20 years. Would it be more cost effective to purchase bleachers as opposed to renting them for high school football at Victory Stadium with the understanding that the bleachers could be moved to the two high schools and used at the proposed day stadiums? Mr. Parrott advised that it would be more cost effective to purchase bleachers inasmuch as rental costs are high. Council Member Wishneff inquired about the rationale for not recommending any type of lighting at the two high school stadiums; whereupon, the reasons cited by Mr. Parrott pertained to the costs involved and neighborhood opposition, although they were not the prime reasons. He added that the main reason for recommending day stadia was due to the fact that if Council approves the primary recommendation of the Committee, lighted stadiums at each of the two high schools would not be needed. With regard to hosting a Virginia High School League championship game, Council Member Lea inquired if the City would need a stadium that would seat at least 10,000 persons; whereupon, Mr. Parrott replied that it was not an immediate need, but eventually the City may wish to move in that direction. Council Member McDaniel expressed appreciation to the Committee and inquired as to whether input was provided by the school system? Mr. Parrott responded that the School Board was not in favor of any type of facility that required a maintenance responsibility; however, coaches and students preferred to have their own stadium. Council Member Dowe expressed appreciation to the Committee and asked the following questions: Can athletes from surrounding jurisdictions be accommodated as opposed to City athletes only; whereupon, Mr. Parrott advised that valley wide participation could be developed as a part of the program. The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers has advised that water flows from different directions in the area, and is not relegated to the Roanoke River; therefore, he requested that Mr. Parrott elaborate on the thought process of the Committee in selecting the Reserve Avenue site. Mr. Parrott responded that the primary factor was that the City currently owns the land, and another determinant was the fact that on only one occasion since Victory Stadium was constructed was a football game cancelled due to 435 water issues; the Committee was of the opinion that installing the proper type of turf with adequate drainage would offset the need to remove the playing surface from the flood plain; other preventative measures would be required regardless of Federal mandates; the Committee did not recommend the expense of flood proofing the playing surface of either the existing stadium or a new stadium; and if the existing stadium is maintained, it would be worth the expenditure to install an under-drainage system in order to provide for an all weather playing surface. Was the fact that the City owns the land the primary determining factor in recommending renovation of the existing facility? Mr. Parrott responded in the affirmative and added that the space offers adequate parking, soccer fields and a track, along with other amenities aside from a stadium. Although the Reserve Avenue site provides a good location, Council Member Dowe referred to other concerns such as the storm water runoff potential from additional parking areas, the logic behind constructing other structures in the area, exceeding the cost of what was already projected, the recommendation for rental of Victory Stadium by the school system and other non-profit organizations, the lack of maintenance of the existing stadium, and failure of the Stadium to generate its own revenue. He inquired if the Committee gave consideration to providing an affordable and practical rental rate to schools, nonprofit organizations and promoters of other types of entertainment. Mr. Parrott responded that the Committee did not consider issues with regard to rental of the facility since the Committee was charged with the responsibility of submitting recommendations on the City's athletic facility needs and the feasibility of renovating Victory Stadium. Council Member Wishneff advised that during the consultant's presentation, it was stated that the building had lost its "useful life"; whereupon, he inquired if the $4.6 million which was recommended in the consultant's report is invested in the facility, how long would such improvements extend the useful life of Victory Stadium. Mr. Parrot advised that the expenditure of $4.6 million for improvements would most likely extend the life of the structure for a long period of time, but legally, the facility could not be used unless it is brought up to various building code standards, including handicap access; and because of the sizeable investment that would be required to bring Victory Stadium into compliance with building code standards, it was not determined to be a feasible recommendation. Why did the Committee fail to seek cost estimates in order to bring Victory Stadium up to building code standards? Mr. Parrott advised that in order to derive an accurate cost estimate, it could take as long as a year in order to select a architect and engineer, to develop specifications and a plan of action, therefore, the Committee made the decision that it would not pursue cost estimates. 436 In response to a question with regard to why the Committee did not request an extension of time for submittal of its recommendation(s), Mr. Parrott responded that the Committee was not of a mind to ask for what could have been at least a years extension of time in order to obtain cost estimates for renovation of Victory Stadium. Council Member Wish neff advised that the engineering firm via e-mail stated that minimal repairs to Victory Stadium in the range of $4.6 million would add over 40 years to the life of the facility; and some citizens were confused in their thinking that Victory Stadium is beyond repair, therefore, the public should know and understand that Victory Stadium can be used and a feasible option is renovation of the facility. Council Member Cutler asked the following questions: Flooding has been of great concern as well as water management. Insofar as rebuilding the stadium, what are the legal requirements with respect to elevation of the field and other features regarding the 100 year flood? Mr. Parrott responded that there were no requirements to elevate the field; athletic fields are considered to be a prime use of floodplains because they do not restrict the flow of water and can be constructed to drain properly; and there would be no concern with regard to obtaining insurance, however, any facilities that are constructed at the site would be required to be constructed out of the floodplain. Was the Committee's recommendation to rebuild the Stadium on Reserve Avenue versus another location due to the fact that it would cost less to build a new flood resistant stadium at the current site as opposed to purchasing a new site at another location. Mr. Parrot replied that the Committee did not review the cost of new site(s); two individuals offered to sell property to the City, but later withdraw their offers; the Committee was of the opinion that if the City utilized the condemnation procedure, it could pay more for acquisition of land; and the City's ownership of the Reserve Avenue property was a plus. Council Member Lea inquired if the Committee engaged in unofficial discussions with regard to costs before the decision was made to recommend construction of a new 15,000 seat stadium; whereupon, Mr. Parrot replied that certain per seat prices were known, i.e.: the per seat price for the Orange Avenue facility was less than $2,000.00; a 15,000 seat stadium would cost approximately $30 million; and using a unit price formula estimate can be dangerous because such estimates are historically inaccurate and mean different things to different people. 437 Mayor Harris advised that when the Committee began its work, there were a number of options that had been considered over the past several years: i.e., small stadiums at each of the high schools and the Orange Avenue site. He inquired if the Committee reviewed a variety of options prior to submitting its recommendations. Mr. Parrot replied in the affirmative and advised that the City Engineer's Office and the Director of Real Estate Valuation provided maps/plats of every unused piece of property in the City consisting of over 12 acres and the Committee visited all of the sites and discussed the pros and cons. Mr. Parrott introduced Conrad B. Ehrhardt, P.E., President of Sutton- Kennerly & Associates, Inc., and Project Manager for the Victory Stadium Condition Assessment Study, Robert G. Kennerly, Sr., P.E., who participated primarily in the study regarding masonry of the facility, and Michael L. Parker, P.E., a partner from the Charlotte office of Sutton - Kennerly & Associates. Mr. Ehrhardt presented a summary of the consultants report and advised that the services of Walter, Robbs, Callahan and Pierce, an architectural firm from Winston-Salem, North Carolina, was retained to assist in completion of the ADA assessment. Mr. Ehrhardt reviewed the following outline: American Disability Code (ADASAD) Concourse Level Expansion Exterior Brick Masonry Concrete (Risers/Treads) Subsurface Conditions Additional Items Engineer's Estimate of Probable Cost of Repairs/Remediation American Disability Code: Sutton-Kennerly retained the services of Walter, Robbs, Callahan, Pierce, Architects, PA, to determine the level of compliance with the current Americans with Disabilities Act Standards for Accessible Design (ADASAD) and Virginia State Building Code accessibility requirements. · Major Deficiencies: Existing vomitory ramps are not handicap accessible; No handicap accessible restroom facilities; No handicap accessible route to assembly seating area and press box; Handicap parking spaces and the accessible route to the stadium are gravel surfaces, not considered a "stable, firm and slip- resistant" surface and not ADA compliant; 438 Based on seating capacity of 24,000 fixed seats, 124 wheelchair spaces in the seating area are required · Concourse Level Expansion: Sutton-Kennerly conducted an analysis of the structural components of the facility to determine the feasibility of future renovations based on a conceptual design by Heery International in 1996. Based on the information provided, Sutton-Kennerly has determined that the existing structural system will support the concourse being relocated to the second level Council Member Wishneff inquired if it be possible to make Victory Stadium accessible; whereupon, Mr. Ehrhardt replied that anything is possible with enough money and time. Mr. Ehrhardt continued his presentations as follows: The consultant completed a structural analysis of the major structural components of Victory Stadium relative to the concourse level, which is currently on a slab on grade, and moving amenities such as restrooms and concession stands to an elevated concourse level. The existing stadium, when originally designed in the 1940's, allowed for expansion to an elevated concourse level, and an analysis confirmed the opinion that those activities could be elevated or moved to an elevated concourse level. A study was conducted in the mid-1990's relative to certain drawings that were completed by Heery International, which indicates an elevated concourse level. He further stated that ADA compliance and structural capacity at the existing concourse level were the two main issues. Council Member Wishneff inquired as to the consultant's conclusion on the structure; whereupon, Mr. Ehrhardt stated that the structure could support a concourse level and their findings concluded that Victory Stadium is in good general structural condition. Mr. Kennerly talked about stadium structures in general which are similar to bridge structures and parking deck structures because they are exposed to the elements of nature; like most building materials, when exposed to the weather, they tend to age and deteriorate over time; and building structures, are contained in a dry environment, with temperature control, no moisture, and may last for more than 100 years, while structures like the Victory Stadium, unless they are designed for durability, may have a 40 - 60 year life. 439 Major deficiencies in the Victory Stadium structure are the exterior masonry walls; · Walls at the rear of the stadium function as masonry guardrail walls; Walls are required to take the wind load and the load as the result of persons leaning against the wall, which could be as much as 50 pounds per linear foot of pressure; · Current walls of the structure are canter levered above ceiling risers; Reinforcing bars in the middle of the masonry walls hold the walls in place; Reinforcing bars are severely corroded, act as tinsel reinforcing steel for the masonry, and anchor guardrail walls to the structure itself; A photograph was shown depicting a bar that had lost about 75 per cent or more of its cross section area and walls currently have minimal reinforcing powers; Brick masonry is not a waterproof material, when water seeps into the brick, it ponds around the bar and creates erosion; Severe displacements have occurred in movement of the walls, some of which are out of plumb by as much as three and one-half inches due to the fact that when brick and concrete are tied together, they move differently and brick directly from the kiln is at its smallest point, but from that point on the brick expands from moisture and temperature; The day after concrete is cast it begins to loose moisture and shrinks and cracking then occurs; When two materials like brick and concrete are used together, one is pushing out, one is pulling in, and unless joints are installed to accommodate the movement, it is similar to bricks that are caught in a huge vice; Masonry walls are severely bowed, bowed brick walls above masonry walls cannot be straightened by pushing them back in place, and end wall brick has expanded from moisture and pushed the end wall out by about two inches. Council Member Wishneff inquired if the brick was cosmetic in nature; whereupon, Mr. Kennerly advised that the brick was a structural element and acts like a guardrailwall around the stadium, it is required by code to prevent pushing or leaning up against the wall, and must be durable enough to withstand wind load. He further stated that concrete coping stones, located on top of the 440 masonry guardrail walls, had a rebar that extended into the coping stone that has almost disappeared from corrosion; coping stones are now resting, with basically weight and friction holding them on at the top; they can be taken off because there is no caulking between the joints; the three expansion joints in the brick walls are closed, bricks are in contact as a result of growth of the brick both from temperature and moisture; therefore, inasmuch as the joints closed, it is similar to brick being caught in a vice and these forces cause the brick to bow and push out. Mr. Kennerly listed the following critical items: · Vertical expansion joints are completely closed Numerous bond failures with the separation of the brick masonry assemblage · There are no vertical expansion joints of the brick, where the brick is pushed out · Weather erosion of mortar in the head and bed joints, which is natural for a structure of this age · Failure of sealant joints at all concrete coping · Cracking and distress is wide spread · Bond failure and separation where brick bears down on concrete, and bond separation where brick has pushed up and caused separation from the concrete (concrete frame and columns get shorter with time and brick expands) · Flashing material which is a plastic material looses plasticizers and becomes hard, brittle and ineffective over time · Wire reinforcement is sometimes used to bond some wythes of masonry; older construction at the time that Victory Stadium was built required turning brick headers one way and bonding the two wythes, which caused a difference in the movement on the inside and the outside wythes of the brick and created a sheer force that caused the brick headers to fail, which has happened throughout the stadium structure; and if an eight inch wall is tied together, it is many times stronger than two individual four inch walls that are not tied together. Council Member Cutler requested a clarification of the term "wythe"; whereupon, Mr. Kennerly explained that the wythe of the brick is a unit of masonry; i.e.: four-inch wythes of brick are defined as a brick that is four inches wide. By using slides, Mr. Kennerly reviewed the following: The parapet masonry is bowed, the inside wythe of brick is bearing on top of the concrete seat riser, a rebar extends into what is called the collar joint between the brick, at it is at this point that water has gone through the brick wall and corroded the rebar 441 Major deficiencies in the exterior masonry fa(;ade on the east and west sides of the structure indicate that the brick is self- supporting from the ground up, which means that all gravity loads are supporting at the foundation system The brick must resist wind loads of in and out pressures, to resist the wind load, the load on the brick wall is transferred to the concrete frame, and the transfer mechanism is through anchors or ties; anchors or ties in the stadium are severely corroded, therefore, brick walls on the front and on the east and west sides of the stadium are not adequately anchored to the structure; and for structures like the Victory Stadium that have been exposed to the weather for over 60 years, this type corrosion is normal The masonry fa(;ade has sustained lateral displacement, with separation between the exterior wythe of brick and concrete spandel beams due to compression of the concrete column shortening and the brick expanding There is distress cracking and separation of the masonry directly below the underside of the concrete spandel beams. Less critical deficiencies in the exterior masonry fa(;ade include: Localized cracking and distress Flashing material failure Separation between the brick assemblage and the exterior facing of all concrete masonry block; and because many of the walls have brick on the outside and block, on the inside, there is a separation between the brick and block and whatever material that bonds the two together has either cracked or failed Cracked masonry headers Vertical cracking in the brick due mostly to high compression loads Weather and erosion on the mortar joints Failure of the ceiling joints Moderate corrosion of the steel little beams, although they are in fairly good condition · Corrosion of the anchors for the precast concrete belt. 442 He advised that his presentation was intended to be an overview of information contained in the full report of the consultant. In summary, he stated that masonry walls that are severely bowed out of plumb cannot be straightened up and must be replaced; retrofit anchors and tuckpointing will not solve the problem, and the cost of installing retrofit anchors and tuckpointing typically runs about 70 - 80 per cent of the cost of constructing a new wall, with the most expensive component being the installation of anchors and flashing systems; and it would be more feasible to remove and replace the walls than to repair them. He added that measures to provide temporary use were considered; an option would be to install a temporary line of bracing system at the guardrail and end wall, which would be a structural system to be anchored to the structure that would be bolted to the masonry walls to hold them in place; however, joints would still need to be constructed to accommodate some of the movement, or masonry end walls could be removed and a temporary guardrail wall installed around the outside; the masonry fac;ade on the front and rear sections could be removed leaving the concrete flame exposed; temporary retrofitting ties could be installed in the masonry fa~;ade to tie back and secure the front fa~;ade on a temporary basis; and it is estimated that temporary measures for masonry work on the above referenced options would cost in the range of $400,000.00 - $500,000.00. Mr. Parker advised that his contribution to the study was to look at the structural framing portion of the concrete by conducting tests and evaluations on concrete risers, treads, and some of the reinforcement. He presented the following summary of his evaluation: · Concrete frames and supporting members are in good condition · Vomitory walls are in fair to good condition · Stands generally are in poor condition, part of which is due to the fact that they are primarily horizontal, have been subjected to a considerable amount of water, and were designed at a time when not a lot of protection that could provided · Expansion joints have failed · There has been virtually no maintenance on building materials · Slabs on grade are in poor condition, cracked and settled with flood damage He further stated that when looking at these types of structures, engineers look at the embedded steel reinforcement which is a major structural component in aging structures; corrosion and the effects of corrosion was reviewed which required some excavation to look at major reinforcements, all of which appear to be in generally good condition; anchorage of seat brackets can be problematic, and it was discovered that bolts in the embed were in poor condition and highly corroded, but the brackets themselves were in good condition; water-soluble chlorides, which are found on the exterior of a structure whether it be bridges, parking decks or stadiums, revealed salt concentrations in the upper zones of the concrete that could cause corrosion; cores were taken from the concrete and examined under a microscope, which revealed the degree of deterioration of stadium concrete; ponding and leakage of surface water runoffincrease the rate of 443 carbonation in concrete, resulting in accelerated surface scaling and a higher risk of corrosion of embedded steel reinforcement; once chloride comes into contact with steel, it can cause an electro chemical ionic reaction and the steel begins to rust; when looking at the condition of the risers and treads, it is necessary to address problems associated with the concrete, therefore, as a mediation effort, removing unsound concrete surfaces on the treads and applying a migrating corrosion inhibiter to minimize the risk of corrosion of embedded steel was discussed; and replacing stand tread surfaces with a durable bonded concrete topping, installing a preformed flexible joint filler in expansion joints to manage water runoff, and applying silanes and silicates to riser and wall surfaces to improve the freeze/thaw durability of the concrete was also discussed. Council Member Wishneff inquired if the various repair scenarios could be done on a temporary basis; whereupon, Mr. Parker stated that work could be done by removing seats, cutting off bolts and installing new anchors and seats; it would not be wise to use lot of impact equipment for concrete repairs because the pressure would break through the concrete, therefore, a technique known as hydro-demolition using high pressured water is recommended which would remove concrete to a controlled depth, taking offabout one and one-half inches of the surface, installing new toppings and applying silanes and silicates to enhance the surface of the risers. Mr. Ehrhardt stated that there are adverse settlements on the slab on grade structures and in the concession stand and toilet areas, therefore, the services of Froehling and Robertson, Inc., a Roanoke firm, was retained to assist in conducting a subsurface investigation and evaluation; and the investigation revealed some loose silty sands up to 1 2 - 14 feet in the area. He stated that the original concrete frame was erected on deep foundations, but concession stands, restrooms and locker rooms were constructed on higher and more shallow foundations, and if left in their present location, there is the potential to either resupport, transfer the loads to firmer soil, or anticipate repeated additional repair. He stated that isolated concrete small repairs in beams and columns need to be addressed; expansion joints need to be replaced; perimeter sealants and slab on grade replacements needs to be addressed; where there has been setting too many offsets exist that can create tripping hazards; handrail replacements; durability treatments to reduce service maintenance, particularly in those areas that need concrete frames; stadium lights and flagpole needs to be removed and sandblasted, repaired, treated, repainted and reinstalled; masonry repair is needed at concession and restroom areas, as well as replacing certain door frames and press box repairs. He concluded the presentation with the following estimate of costs to complete repairs, which would not address upgrades that would be required as of code, ADA improvements, flood proofing, or any other improvements that would be necessary or desired from the owner's standpoint, but would address only those items that were found to be deficient relative to the structural and condition assessment: 444 · Repair Riser and Tread Stand · Surfaces Subtotal · Replacement of Brick/Block Masonry · Fa(;ade Subtotal · Additional Repair Items Subtotal · Ten per cent Contingency $ 2,095,000.00 $ 843,000.00 $ 1,232,000.00 $ 417,000.00 Total Estimate of Probable Cost for Repairs: $ 4,587,000.00 Information discussed in the presentation is contained in the following Executive Summary: "SUTTON-KENNERLY & ASSOCIATES, INC. · CONSULTING ENGINEERS REPORT PHASE II CONDITION ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION VICTORY STADIUM ROANOKE, VIRGINIA SKAJob No. 040677.0 March 23, 2005 SECTION 1 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Sutton Kennerly and Associates, Inc. (SKA) has completed the condition assessment and evaluation of Victory Stadium in Roanoke, Virginia. During Phase I of this project, SKA developed a scope of services required to complete a thorough evaluation of the present condition of Victory Stadium. SKA has now completed the investigation with the agreed upon scope of services, identified as Phase II. Victory Stadium is a concrete-framed structure with a brick masonry fa~;ade. Victory Stadium was built in 1942 and has a permanent seating capacity of approximately 24,000 seats. This facility has served as the home for high school sporting events, musical concerts, and holiday celebrations since its construction. The goal of this condition assessment and evaluation was to determine the overall service condition of the major elements of Victory Stadium. At the completion of Phase I of this project, SKA determined that there were (5) five major elements that should be the focus of the Phase II investigation. The (5) five focal points of Phase II were as follows: 445 The condition of the brick masonry fa(;ade. The structural capacity of the stadium as it related to potential renovations. The condition of the concrete framed structure, specifically the seating area surface of the stadium. The compliance of the stadium with current ADA requirements. The subsurface conditions of the soils below the concession/ restroom CMU masonry walls. In general, the comments made about each of these of these topics shall be applied to both the east and west stadium structures. Brick Masonry Facade SKA investigated the present condition of the brick masonry facade and, based on this investigation, SKA has major concerns about the structural stability of the brick fa(;ade. SKA separated the investigation of the brick masonry facade into three areas. The first area of the fa(;ade that was investigated was the rear guardrail walls. The rear guardrail walls are a major life safety issue in their present condition. Due to the severe corrosion of the reinforcing bars that is present and the omission of reinforcing bars in this area of the walls, the rear guardrail walls are no longer capable of safely resisting the minimum requirements of the Building Code. The reinforcing bars have deteriorated to a range of approximately 0 to 40% of their original size. The end walls of the brick fa(;ade are also an area that is a major concern to SKA. The end wall guardrails, including the tall sections at the top of the seating risers, are virtually unreinforced. The tall sections of the end walls are very unstable and unsafe at this time. Another major deficiency of the end walls is the bond separation that has occurred between the concrete risers and the first course of brick above the concrete risers. Since there was no reinforcing found in these end walls during our investigation and bond separation has occurred between the facade and the supporting members, the self weight of the brick walls and friction between the brick wall and the top of the concrete treads are the only elements holding this wall in place at this time. These end walls are no longer capable of safely resisting the minimum requirements of the Building Code. The rear brick masonry fa~;ade at the rear of the seating sections was compromised at the time of this report. The masonry ties and anchorage of the rear fa(;ade are severely corroded. There are also locations in the rear fac;ade where it appears that the masonry ties 446 were omitted at the time of construction. Another deficiency of the rear fa(;ade is the bowing of the walls that has occurred. The vertical displacement of the rear walls was determined to be approximately 1.5". SKA recommends that the masonry assemblages that are bowed, out- of-plane, displaced and deformed be removed and replaced, as these walls can no longer be repaired. Walls that are plumb and straight can be repaired with retrofit anchors and tuckpointed at the unbonded mortar joints. However, the cost associated with this type of repair is approximately 70-80% of the cost of replacing the brick fa(;ade. Therefore, it may be more feasible to remove and replace these brick walls as well. The estimated probable cost of removing and replacing the brick facades of this structure is approximately $1.0 million. SKA recommends the following items that could provide temporary use of the stadium structure. The rear and end guardrail walls could be temporarily braced throughout the structure or these walls could be removed and replaced with temporary guardrails. Retrofit anchors would be installed into the remainder of the brick fa(;ade to temporarily secure it to the structure for both of these two options. Another option that would provide temporary use of the stadium would be to remove the entire brick masonry fa(;ade and leave the concrete frame exposed. New temporary guardrails would have to be installed as part of this measure as well. The estimated probable cost of these recommendations is in the range of $400,000.00 to $500,000.00, depending on which option was selected. Structural Analysis of the Concrete Structure SKA has completed structural analysis of the existing concrete structure to determine if the stadium could safely support the additional loads that would be applied to the structure by new renovations. The conceptual renovation that was considered for this analysis was the 1996 Heery International conceptual renovation provided by the City of Roanoke in the Request For Proposal for this project. This Heery international renovation relocated the main concourse of the stadium to the 2nd level of the structure. Based on the existing structural drawings, the information provided for this conceptual renovation, and the present condition of the concrete structure, SKA has determined that the existing structure could safely support the anticipated additional loads applied by a future renovation. 447 SKA has not determined any potential costs associated with this conceptual renovation or any other "capital improvements" that could be made to the stadium. Estimating the costs of any "capital improvements" would require a program for the complete renovation of the stadium to be developed. At the time of this report no program has been developed as to the ultimate needs of the City of Roanoke and the potential use of this facility. Concrete Surface of the Seatinq Area The overall concrete structure was found to be in fair condition, particularly for a stadium that has been exposed to weather, flooding, and thermal cycles for over 60 years. The concrete columns and beams show signs of isolated spalling but in general are in good condition. The slabs-on-grade, particularly on the east side of the stadium, are only in poor to fair condition. The slabs-on-grade have been exposed to settlement that is likely associated with the flooding of the stadium that has occurred over the years. However, the major concern that SKA has of the concrete structure is the top surface of the seating area. The top surface of the seating area appears to be in very poor condition. There are signs of severe cracking, spalling, and scaling distress throughout the areas of the treads and risers of the concrete structure. This distress is primarily due to the concrete not containing an air void system to aid the durability of the concrete surface to resist cyclic freeze-thaw stresses. SKA recommends that the entire top surface of the seating area be repaired. This repair would require that the top 1½" of the existing concrete be removed by hydro-demolition. A Iow-shrink concrete topping slab would be installed to replace the 1½" of concrete that was removed. The estimated probable cost associated with repairing the top surface of the seating area is approximately $2.1 million. ADA Compliance of the Stadium SKA retained Walter, Robbs, Callahan, and Pierce Architects, PA (WRCP) to complete a study of the stadium to determine the level of compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act Standards for Accessible Design (ADASAD). After WRCP completed their study, it was determined that the stadium had several major deficiencies with regards to the ADASAD. The major deficiencies of the stadium were as follows: 448 2. 3. 4. The vomitory ramps are not handicap accessible. There is no handicap accessible route to the press box. There are no handicap accessible restroom facilities. The parking lot is not located on a stable, firm, and slip resistant surface. There are only 4 wheelchair seating areas at this time. Based on the seating capacity of 24,000 people, the ADASAD requires that a minimum of 124 wheelchair spaces be provided. Determining estimated costs for ADASAD improvements was not included in our current scope of services and therefore SKA has not determined any potential costs associated with making such improvements so that the stadium will be in compliance with the current minimum requirements of the ADASAD. Subsurface Condition of the Concession/Restroom CMU Wails SKA retained Froehling and Robertson, Inc. (F&R) to complete a subsurface analysis of the soils supporting the stadium. Based on the geotechnical report that has been provided by F&R, it was determined that the structural fill used during construction consisted of loose silty sands. These silty sands were still loose at the time of this investigation and have not completely compacted over the life span of this structure, as may be expected. Therefore, additional settlement could occur at the concession/restroom CMU walls. F&R recommends that additional foundation measures should be taken to stabilize these walls to minimize this additional settlement and potential detrimental effects upon the structure. Based on the information provided by F&R, SKA recommends that an additional foundation support system, such as helical piers spaced at approximately 6' to 8' on center, be installed at all of the concession/ restroom walls to minimize the risk of further settlement. The probable estimated cost associated with stabilizing and repairing/replacing the concession/restroom walls is approximately $350,000.00. Additional Reoair Items In addition to the main deficiencies indicated above, there are a number of less critical deficiencies that should be addressed if the stadium is to be repaired and utilized. The total estimate of the probable cost for all the repairs that we have identified is approximately $4.6 million. This estimated probable repair cost does not include any 'capital improvements' such as a new press box, concourse levels, ADA enhancements, and/or flood proofing, etc." 449 Mayor Harris expressed appreciation for the presentation and recognized the following Council Members for questions. Council Member McDaniel inquired if most of the damage to the stadium occurred as a result of flooding or due to the age of the structure; whereupon, Mr. Ehrhardt replied that primarily damage occurred because the structure is exposed to outside weather elements. In view of the silty sand that was discovered, she further inquired as to the advisability of demolishing Victory Stadium and constructing another facility on the same site; whereupon, Mr. Ehrhardt replied that a new stadium could be accommodated in terms of design; and methods are currently available that will accommodate construction with soils or materials that appear to be unacceptable, but can be rendered acceptable as a result of various techniques. Council Member Wishneff inquired about other projects that Sutton- Kennerly & Associates had been associated with; whereupon, Mr. Ehrhardt replied that he worked on the Carter-Finley Stadium at North Carolina State University; some of the issues that have been discussed in regard to Victory Stadium have been done in studies for rehabs at Appalachian State University where severe ettringite formation was discovered in the concrete (an internal chemical reaction that caused the concrete to break apart), which required a considerable amount of replacement; his firm designed an upper deck for the stadium at East Carolina University; the firm was involved in studies at Chapel Hill and Keenan Stadium, Whitmire Stadium/Waters Field at Western Carolina University; and participated in a number of projects on facilities similar to the Greensboro North Carolina Coliseum. Council Member Wishneff inquired if any of the facilities were torn down and replaced by new structures; whereupon, Mr. Kennerly replied that the lower seats at Appalachian State University were torn down due to chemical reactions of the precast concrete. Council Member Lea referred to previous statements regarding Victory Stadium's age and lack of maintenance and inquired if the structure is considered to be in good condition overall; whereupon, Mr. Kennerly replied that the concrete frame structure is in good condition. Council Member Cutler compared Victory Stadium to enclosed structures such as Jefferson High School and the old Passenger Train Station, etc., and inquired about the effects of weathering on an enclosed building in comparison to aweather beaten structure like Victory Stadium. He asked if the cost of bringing Victory Stadium up to code, after other expectations are added to the estimate to cover the cost of structural repairs, would be at least equivalent to a new stadium. Mr. Ehrhardt replied that without a program, etc., it would be inappropriate to comment with regard to costs since certain unique situations would need to be addressed. 45O Council Member Dowe inquired if the statement "exposed to the elements" is relegated exclusively to those elements that fall from the sky, as opposed to the location of Victory Stadium with respect to impending or existing water tables; whereupon, Mr. Ehrhardt stated that the actual water table is lower than what was believed to be the case, test borings revealed that the water level is quite Iow, or down in the range of 12 - 14 feet or more; and natural fluctuations are expected throughout the seasons, but the condition of Victory Stadium primarily involves exposure of the concrete to elements such as rain, snow, and various food items. Mayor Harris requested clarification on a statement in which the consultant "guestimated" that a new stadium would cost about $3,000.00 to $4,000.00 per seat, and if those figures are applied to 15,000 seats, the cost of a new stadium would be in the range of $45 to $60 million. Mr. Ehrhardt stated that the figures were based on a higher mid-range stadium; many national football stadiums could go as high as $6,000.00 per seat, and high school venues could go as Iow as $300.00 to $400.00 per seat, so there is a wide range depending upon the amenities that go into the cost; and later additions to the north side of Lane Stadium at Virginia Tech cost approximately $3,000.00 per seat. There being no further questions or comments for the Stadium Study Committee or the consultant, Mayor Harris advised that 20 persons had signed up to speak on the issue, therefore, each person would be allotted three minutes. W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., 1956 Hope Road, S. W., a former member of City Council and City Sheriff, stated that in the 1970's or 1980's, some persons were in favor of tearing down the Old Post Office Building, but under the leadership of the late Council Member James O. Trout, the Mayor and Members of City Council, allocated funds to renovate the building, which is now known as the Commonwealth Building and is occupied by State employees. He stated that the Commonwealth Building was in poor condition prior to the City's involvement as was the former Jefferson High School, The Hotel Roanoke, and the old Norfolk Southern Building which now houses the Roanoke Higher Education Center; therefore, he asked that Council have the same vision for Victory Stadium and renovate the facility. Abney S. Boxley, 301 Willow Oak Drive, S. W., asked that Council consider the primary purpose of Victory Stadium, the price that the City is willing to pay, the desired outcome when the course of action is selected, and that Council clearly articulate a vision for the facility. He commended the Stadium Study Committee on the quality of its work; however, the debate was miscast as one of a team either repairing Victory Stadium or building a new stadium; and the lack ora clear vision has led to acrimony among competing factions being trapped between two poor choices. He stated that the primary purpose of Victory Stadium was for high school football and other turf sports such as soccer and lacrosse, and asked that Council articulate a vision that creates a world class home for high school sports and provides home field advantage for athletes and fans alike. He advised that previous Councils have stated that they were willing to pay up to $18 million for a multi-purpose facility; therefore, he suggested that Council commit to spend up to $10 million to meet the primary purpose which is high school athletics and 451 use the remainder of the funds to construct a regional entertainment venue which should be planned in concert with other local governments. He noted that a 3,500 seat facility could be constructed at Patrick Henry High School and a larger 6,000 plus seat facility could be constructed at William Fleming High School within budget; the first stadium at William Fleming could be constructed by the fall of 2006 and the second stadium at Patrick Henry High School could be completed by the following year; and Victory Stadium could be saved for whatever purpose is deemed appropriate and on a time line of the City's choosing. William J. Bryant, Jr., 124 Fleming Avenue, N. E., spoke in support of renovating Victory Stadium for historical purposes. He concurred in the remarks of a previous speaker with regard to the City's role in renovating other local structures such as the Commonwealth Building, The Hotel Roanoke and the former Norfolk Southern Building. He advised that it does not make sense to build a new stadium at $45 million when Victory Stadium could be renovated for approximately $15 million. Margaret Keyser, 2701 Guilford Avenue, S. W., spoke with regard to constructing stadia at the two high schools. She expressed concern that the matter was not discussed with persons who live in the 1700, 1800, 1900and 2100 blocks of Brandon Avenue, Guilford Avenue and residential streets adjoining Patrick Henry High School. She advised that streets in the area were intended to be residential, with only Grandin Road and Brandon Avenue serving as thru ways, and parking will be an issue if no additional parking facilities are made provided at Patrick Henry High School. On behalf of residents of the area, she requested an in-depth briefing. Pat S. Lawson, 1618 Riverside Terrace, S. E., commended those persons who were willing to support the renovation of Victory Stadium. Robert Gravely, 727 29th Street, N. W., advised that a stadium designed to seat 15,000 people would cost an estimated $30 million; renovation of the current Victory Stadium with a seating capacity of 24,000 is estimated to cost between $5 million and $15 million, therefore, renovation would be more cost efficient. He stated that Victory Stadium must be promoted in order to generate revenue for the City, and urged that Council explore ways to create revenue from events held at the stadium and create job opportunities for Roanoke's citizens, while cutting costs and saving taxpayers' dollars. Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., expressed appreciation to the Mayor for proposing that Council seek additional information upon which to base a decision on Victory Stadium. Winfred Noell, 2743 Northview Drive, S. W., advised that the consultant provided a positive and reassuring report in favor of renovating Victory Stadium; sand and loose soil would not be an issue since nothing would be constructed on the soil if the stadium is renovated; and the investment $4.6 million would correct issues regarding corrosion, cracked brick, and out-of-plum walls. He expressed 452 concern that the Stadium Study Committee did not explore costs associated with its recommendations; therefore, he encouraged Council to obtain cost estimates for both renovation of Victory Stadium and construction of a new stadium so that Council's decision will be based on actual dollar amounts. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia, expressed appreciation to Council for its willingness to consider other stadia and other options. He stated that according to the agreement with N & W Railway, Victory Stadium belongs to the taxpayers of Roanoke; therefore, the City should maintain the facility as a memorial to those persons who served their country in World War II. He asked for a second opinion on the cost of constructing a new stadium and advised that since the Reserve Avenue property was given to the City of Roanoke by N & W Railway, representatives of the railroad should be contacted to provide input on any future development. If livery stables that are 100 years old can be preserved, he inquired as to why Victory Stadium which is only 60 years old cannot be renovated; and Victory Stadium could become another Lane Stadium on a smaller scale with a seating capacity for 25,000 persons. Evelyn D. Bethel, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., spoke in support of a thorough and independent cost estimate for the basic renovation of Victory Stadium based upon a design that would meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Tax Credit purposes. She pointed out that historic preservation of Victory Stadium has not been investigated to its fullest extent. She concurred in the remarks of a previous speaker with regard to renovating Victory Stadium in a manner similar to the City's involvement with the Jefferson Center, the Commonwealth Building and the Roanoke Higher Education Center. She asked that Council obtain realistic cost estimates for all options regarding Victory Stadium so that the decision of Council will be based on solid information and not on personal feelings. Patricia M. Pruett, 4902 Grandin Road, S. W., expressed concern that students attending Roanoke's high schools do not know where their football games will be played during the upcoming fall football season, and that their memories of high school football games will be diminished; therefore, the City owes them the opportunity to play football at Victory Stadium. She spoke in support of a cost analysis for renovation of Victory Stadium and that the current stadium remain a part of Roanoke's history for future generations. She expressed appreciation to the Members of Council for their devotion to the City and asked that Council do everything within its power to renovate and to maintain Victory Stadium. John C. Graybill, 2443 Tillet Road, S. W., expressed appreciation to the Stadium Study Committee and advised that if he was convinced that Victory Stadium should be demolished, he would endorse the Committee's recommendation 100 per cent; however, he spoke against construction ora small football stadium at Patrick Henry High School because of the detrimental affects on surrounding residential streets. He stated that as a taxpayer, he pended upon City Council to make fiscally responsible decisions; $1 O0 million has already been spent for two new high schools, even though Roanoke has a declining student 453 population; funds that are proposed for construction of a track at each high school totals approximately $1.3 million per school which could be used toward renovating Victory Stadium; and the City could save additional taxpayers' dollars if the school system was instructed to save present gymnasiums and field houses, which were constructed because there were inadequate dressing facilities at Victory Stadium. He inquired if a track could be installed at Victory Stadium if the field were raised to prevent flooding, .in addition to renovation of restroom and dressing facilities. He urged that Council obtain cost estimates on renovating Victory Stadium versus construction of a new stadium, that the community be given the opportunity to provide input into the study, and that citizens be allowed to vote on the fate of Victory Stadium through a referendum. Frieda G. Tate, 4556 Vanwinkle Road, S. W., expressed appreciation to Council Members for their service to the community. She spoke in support of preservation of local landmarks such as Victory Stadium and Jefferson High School, and advised that the citizens of Roanoke have overwhelmingly stated their preference for renovation of Victory Stadium. E. Duane Howard, 1135 Wasena Avenue, S. W., advised that the decisions of the Stadium Study Committee can be summarized as a rush to judgment; and it should be taken into consideration that the most crucial fact of the entire debate over Victory Stadium for the last 5 - 15 years has been the issue of structural integrity of the facility; therefore, the Committee should be starting its study now with the benefit of information contained in the consultant's report. He added that in the final analysis, the consultant advises that the stadium can be renovated for $4.5 million which is not a lot of money when considering today's figures as opposed to constructing a new facility. He added that the City needs Victory Stadium to host future events such as the X-games and gravity sports and encouraged the Members of Council to support the wishes -of the majority of Roanoke's citizens by renovating Victory Stadium. Peter White, 2615 Rosalind Avenue, S. W., asked that Council obtain cost estimates to renovate Victory Stadium and, in the interim, that Council give consideration to a location where high school football can be played in the fall. He asked that the City explore the cost of constructing a small stadium at each of the two high schools and advised that Council has a fiduciary responsibility to obtain cost estimates on all available options. Bill Tanger, 257 Dancing Tree Lane, Botetourt County, commended the work of the Stadium Study Committee. He stated that it was a wise recommendation to not recommend construction of a stadium at the.Orange Avenue, site; therefore, he supported the concept of a new and large stadium to be constructed on Reserve Avenue. He advised that the Stadium Study Committee recommends a new 15,000 seat stadium; the engineer indicated that it would cost $45 to $60 million; Victory Stadium could be renovated at a cost of $4.6 million for structural repairs, although the cost of full renovations is not known at this time, therefore, the next step would be to determine whether the Citywants to spend $45 to $60 454 million on a new stadium or to renovate Victory Stadium. He stated that an even larger issue is a voter referendum; Council has the ethical responsibility to empower the City to hold referenda, therefore, the time has come for Council to provide a mechanism that allows taxpayers to vote on major issues; virtually every major city in Virginia provides this authority and the City of Roanoke needs to take similar action. Terry Moomaw, 3426 West Ridge Circle, S. W., spoke on behalf of Gary Leah, Principal, Patrick Henry High School; Randy West, Athletic Director; a majority of the staff at Patrick Henry High School and a majority of the Patrick Henry High School PTA Board of Directors. He endorsed construction of an athletic facility at the two high schools. Chris Craft, ] 501 East Gate Avenue, N. E., spoke in opposition to the demolition of Victory Stadium. He referred to that portion of the consultant's report that concession stands and restrooms could be raised to the same level as the stands for seating, thus removing any concerns with regard to the foundation underneath current seating stands. He spoke in support of renovation of the stadium and construction of concession stands and a press box. Richard Kepley, 550 Kepplewood Road, S. E., a member of the Stadium Study Committee advised that Chairman Parrot presented the "maJority' report, and he would present the "minority" report. He pointed out that the Committee's report indicates that the Stadium should be jointly-controlled by the Roanoke Civic Center and the Department of Parks and Recreation; the Civic Center was responsible for the stadium for the past four years; prior to that time, the Parks and Recreation Department was responsible for the facility, the Parks and Recreation Department engaged in a yearly program of replacing wooden seats with metal benches, and have been replaced during the past four years while Victory Stadium was under control of the Civic Center. He added that during the past ten years, three major brick works projects have been completed on the stadium; viz: both sides, both ends on the Jefferson Street side and under the press box, and space under the press box can still be used; he was advised informed that 90 per cent of the metal bleachers are in good condition, the other ten per cent could be repaired, and the area under the press box could be roped off. He stated that no brick work has been done in the last four years since the Civic Center was assigned responsibility for the facility; therefore, he asked that a specific City department be charged with the responsibility of managing and promoting use of the stadium in order to generate revenue. He spoke to issues regarding flood control and seating capacity and noted that some persons have said that the stadium is too large; however, it should be recognized that 260,000 people live within 20 minutes of downtown Roanoke, over 20,000 people have attended the Fourth of July celebration at Victory Stadium, and the Dave Matthews Concert drew over 30,000 people. 455 He pointed out that the consultant advises that Victory Stadium is basically sound, all seats could be replaced with metal seats, brick work could be repaired, new risers and steps could be constructed, and ADA issues could be addressed in addition to restroom facilities and concession stands. He encouraged Council to obtain cost estimates on the renovation of Victory Stadium, compared to the cost of a new stadium and that there be an assessment of current metal bleachers before the City invests in the cost of temporary bleachers for high school football. Mr. Kepley called attention to past efforts by the City to restore Jefferson High School and The Hotel Roanoke and advised that the same should be done for Victory Stadium. Frank Roupas, 841 Warrington Road, S. W., spoke in support of renovating Victory Stadium. (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick entered the meeting.) The Mayor presented a communication transmittinq the following "Plan of Action for Stadium Decision" which was intended to facilitate conclusion of the matter. He explained that the Plan consists of requests for information, i.e.: cost estimates for certain stadium options, as well as referral of certain recommendations from the Stadium Study Committee to the City and School administrations; the Plan is responsive to the work of the Stadium Study Committee and to additional requests by the Members of Council. Plan of Action for Stadium Decision: Council direct the City administration to take the necessary steps that result in City Council receiving thorough, independent cost estimates from professionals with significant experience in designing and/or constructing new and renovated stadium projects for: A basic renovation of the existing Victory Stadium incorporating elements enumerated in Section A.5, Items B (if it meets historic standards), C through F, two turf options (one artificial, one natural), compliance with ADA standards, a renovated press box, upgraded lighting and sound systems, and with a minimum retention of 20,000 seats. Further, one renovation estimate should be based on adesign to meet the Secretary of Interior Standards for historic tax credit purposes and the second estimate to not include said standards. A new stadium incorporating elements enumerated in Section A.5, Items B through L, with estimates reflecting seating capacities at 5,000, 10,000 and 15,000 benchmarks. 456 All options take into account the impact of the flood reduction project along the Roanoke River and make the appropriate adjustments to the construction estimates. Council affirm the Stadium Study Committee's recommendation that a stadium facility remain sited in the area outlined by Recommendation A.2. Council direct the City administration to provide a cost estimate for Item A. 1. Council forward Recommendations B.1 and B~2 to the Roanoke City School Board for review and response. Council refer items contained in Recommendation B.3 to the City Manager for review and report back to City Council. Council refer Recommendation B.4 to the City Manager for review and report back to City Council. Recommendation B.5 is currently being addressed. The Mayor advised that the Members of Council provided input to the above referenced Plan of Action and previously indicated their concurrence, with the exception of Council Member Dowe who asked to reserve comment until today's meeting. Council Member Wishneff moved that Council approve the "Plan of Action for Stadium Decision" under date of April 27, 2005 as submitted by the Mayor. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick expressed appreciation to the Mayor for his leadership in resolving the issue. He advised that after having received additional information that the schools would prefer to have stadiums constructed at the two high schools, Council would be remiss if it did not obtain cost estimates; whereupon, in addition to instructing the City Manager to obtain cost estimates with regard to renovating Victory Stadium and constructing a new stadium, he offered an amendment to the motion that the City Manager be instructed to obtain cost estimates for construction of stadia at William Fleming and Patrick Henry High Schools and that Council receive public comment prior to taking any action on the matter. The amendment to the motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. Council Member Dowe expressed appreciation to the Mayor for his leadership. He advised that the job of Council is to be stewards of taxpayers' money and to take those actions that will put Roanoke in the best possible position. He concurred in the remarks of a previous speaker that there is no guarantee that a stadium at the Orange Avenue site would work, there is no 457 guarantee that a refurbished Victory Stadium would work, there is no guarantee that a newly constructed stadium would work, but there must be at last one scenario that will provide the best likelihood of success. He called attention to certain challenges within the Mayor's proposed "Plan of Action," and he was willing to support the Plan; however, it would hoped that the Council would have the courage to include the original site on Orange Avenue. He stated that he was encouraged by the remarks of citizens who spoke in support of preserving The Jefferson Center which was accomplished as a result of public/private partnerships. Council Member Cutler stated that his vote would be based on his respect for the work of the Stadium Study Committee which was composed of a group of intelligent individuals who spent nine months on their assignment. He advised that if the Council expects citizens to volunteer for similar tasks in the future, Council must respect their recommendations; and the Stadium Study Committee voted unanimously in support of a new stadium to be bounded by Franklin Road, Jefferson Street, Reserve Avenue and the Roanoke River. Council Member McDaniel advised that she respects the recommendations of the Stadium Study Committee; however, she could not support any specific recommendation(s) without precise cost estimates. While cost estimates are prepared, she stated that costs for constructing a small stadium at each of the two high schools be explored. Council Member Lea spoke against the Vice-Mayor's amendment to the motion. He stated that the citizens of Roanoke have spoken, the Stadium Study Committee has submitted its recommendations and the Council should make a decision to either renovate Victory Stadium or to construct a new stadium. He asked that Council seek cost estimates prior to making a decision to either construct a new stadium or to renovate the present stadium, but to ask for cost estimates on stadia to be constructed at the two high schools would be a step backwards and send the wrong message; therefore, he would not support the amendment to the motion. Council Member Wishneff advised that no citizen wants a stadium in their neighborhood and it would not be wise to send a message to citizens that the City is considering a stadium at either Patrick Henry or William Fleming High Schools. Mayor Harris respectfully disagreed with the Vice-Mayor's amendment to the motion on the grounds that Council should narrow the options so as to focus on a decision; members of the Stadium Study Committee invested nine months of time on the study and most of their major decisions were not unanimous, but the one decision that was unanimous was to site the athletic facility along the Reserve Avenue corridor; and the Committee looked at constructing a stadium at each of the two high schools and unanimously reached the conclusion that it was not an option worth pursuing. 458 There being no further discussion, the amendment to the motion; was defeated by the following vote: AYES: Council Member McDaniel and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ...................... 2. NAYS: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Lea and Mayor Harris ....... 5. The original motion was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. Mayor Harris expressed appreciation to the Stadium Study Committee, representatives of Sutton-Kennerly & Associates, the Members of Council and citizens who participated in the meeting. At 7:15 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess. The Council meeting reconvened at 7:25 p.m., in the Council's Conference Room, Room 451, with Mayor Harris presiding and all Members of the Council in attendance. ARMORY/STADIUM: As previously indicated, City staffcontinued the briefing on 2005 high school football at Victory Stadium. Mr. Anderson advised that following Council's earlier discussion on the three options that were presented by staff for 2005 football at Victory Stadium, City staff looked at cutting new egress points into the front wall of the stadium on both sides that would provide approximately 4200- 4300 seats across the front, into the end zone, with temporary portable bleacher seating of approximately 16 rows in order to gain another approximately 1300 seats, which would increase seating capacity to about 5600 seats, at a cost of approximately $1 36,000.00 (Option B Hybrid). Option B Seating Capacity Existing Stands - No portal Access 5580 Access from Field Side Only Net Seats Bleacher Rental Portable Toilets Scoreboard and Sound System Fencing Press Box Filming Platforms Repair Concrete Steps Additional Egress Gates from field side $ 26,100.00 $ 21,900.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 8,000.00 $ 136,000.00 459 Following discussion, it was the consensus of Council to approve the above referenced Option 8 Hybrid. After further discussion, by consensus of the Council, the following was approved: · For liability purposes, Victory Stadium will not be available for any activity other than high school football and the Western Virginia Education Classic. · Concessions will be operated by High School Boosters Clubs. The school system will pay the same rental rate as in past years for use of Victory Stadium. · Athletic teams will be requested to dress for football games at their home schools and the School system will provide a location for dressing by visiting athletic teams. · The Victory Stadium Capital Account will be used to fund temporary improvements to Victory Stadium. At 8:00 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess until Wednesday, May 4, 2005, at 8:30 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., at which time the Council would engage in Fiscal year 2005-2006 Budget Study. The meeting of Roanoke City Council reconvened on Wednesday, May 4, 2005, at 8:30 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, for fiscal year 2005-2006 Budget Study, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. PRESENT: Council Members Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel and Mayor C. Nelson Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. ABSENT: Council Member Alfred T. Dowe,Jr.- ............................................. 1. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager, William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Stephanie M. Moon, Deputy City Clerk. OTHERS PRESENT: Rolanda B. Russell, Assistant City Manager for Community Development; George M. McMillan, Sheriff; Evelyn W. Powers, Treasurer; Sherman M. Stovall, Director, Office of Management and Budget; and Amelia Merchant, Budget Management Analyst, Office of Management and Budget. COUNCIL: The Mayor announced that no public hearings were scheduled to be heard by the Council on Monday, May 16, 2005, whereupon, he suggested that the 7:00 p.m., Council meeting be cancelled. 460 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#37042-050405) A RESOLUTION canceling the portion of the regular meeting of City Council used for the conduct of public hearings which is scheduled to be held at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, May 16, 2005, and amending Resolution No. 36762-070704, which established the meeting schedule for the Fiscal Year commencing July 1,2004, and terminating June 30, 2005. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 370.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37045- 050405. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted bythe following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Dowe was absent.) BUDGET: The City Manager advised that at the Council's Financial Planning Session, which was held on February 18, 2005, it was reported that the financial and budget situation was better this fiscal year than in the past two years. She further advised that as stated during the April 18, 2005 Council meeting, the City has experienced good revenue growth, both in local taxes, and primarily in real estate taxes, which are the City's main sources of revenue, along with some improvements in State revenue which have not been available to the City in previous years. She noted that the City has a number of needs to be addressed as the cost of doing business increases; and the proposed budget includes several efforts that the Council previously outlined, such as debt service to accomplish construction of the two high schools, and to maintain progress with regard to equipment replacement, building maintenance, technology and street paving. The City Manager pointed out that seven positions were reinstated that had been unfunded in previous years, i.e.: four positions in Street Maintenance and Social Services Departments, an additional law clerk for the judges which is funded in partnership with Roanoke County and the City of Salem, and two positions in the Planning, Building and Development Department. She added that recommendations to improve landscaping at the Roanoke Centre for industry and Technology and promotion of the City's brand identity are considered to be key activities to improve economic development opportunities for the City of Roanoke. She referred to an editorial in The Roanoke Times with regard to Council's strategic decision to purchase the Countryside Golf Course, which is important to the City's efforts, not only to increase additional housing opportunities, but to provide opportunities for additional business development. She also called attention to the Colonial Green Project which is another project that is designed to make Roanoke more attractive to persons visiting the Roanoke Valley. 461 The City Manager noted that additional funding was included in the proposed budget for parks and recreation activities, greenways, outdoor events support, the Discovery Center and program activities, and recommendations for improvements to storm drainage maintenance and traffic signal equipment replacement. She emphasized that consideration was given to various issues that were discussed by the community at large and by the Members of Council, and she was pleased to present a balanced 2005-2006 fiscal year budget. She called attention to certain proposed constitutional modifications to the real property tax as proposed by the two gubernatorial candidates, and expressed concern with regard to the potential of lower property tax revenue for the City leading to reduced public services and/or higher real property tax rates. Council Member Cutler stated that the landscaping environment at the Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology should be more natural in appearance, and suggested the creation of hiking trails and appropriate locations for outdoor dining for employees who work in the industrial park. He requested information with regard to a utility fee for storm water management. The Director of Finance called attention to an additional allocation of $12 million in funds within the proposed 2005-2006 Fiscal Year Budget. ITEMS REFERRED TO BUDGET STUDY Additional Operatinq Funds for Mill Mountain Theatre Mr. Stovall called attention to discussions by the Mayor, the Vice-Mayor and City staff with representatives of Mill Mountain Theatre regarding the financial status of Mill Mountain Theatre and assistance by the City of Roanoke; whereupon, the following options were presented: Marketinq initiative - $137,200.00 · Enhancing general ticket sales through a sustained television advertising campaign and permanent signage, such as a marquee and the use of print media. Development Initiative - $27,764.00 · Enhancing individual contributions, corporate sponsorships, and secure government and foundation grants. Additional technology support, such as computers and clerical support positions. Capital Improvements - $750,000.00 · Provide $200,000.00 for capital improvements over fouryears. Allocate funding as a part of the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program. 462 Mr. Stovall stated that it is recommended that $209,000.00 be provided for capital improvements over four years to be allocated as a part of the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program, which is consistent with the provision of capital funding provided to the Grandin Theatre and The Dumas Center. He added that the Mountain Theatre is receptive to the City's recommendation, but requested the following considerations: · $125,000.00 in the first year and $25,000.00 each year for three years; and · Provision for funds in July 2005 to facilitate improvements during the off-season. The City Manager advised that the City will provide non-cash assistance to Mill Mountain Theatre, as follows: technology expertise from the Department of Technology and clerical support through a program administered by the Department of Social Services. There being no further questions/comments, Council Member Cutler moved that Council concur in the following recommendation: $209,000.00 be provided for capital improvements over four years to be allocated as a part of the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program; $125,000.00 in the first year and $25,000.00 each year for three years; Provision for funds in July 2005 to facilitate improvements during the off-season; and Provide non-cash assistance to Mill Mountain Theatre, as follows: technology expertise from the Department of Technology and clerical support through a program administered by the Department of Social Services. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted. Public Safety Pay Mr. Stovall advised that: In an effort to address the recruitment and retention of Police Officers, an enhanced level of compensation was provided, effective January 1,2005. · A request to provide the same level of enhanced compensation to Deputy Sheriffs was suggested by Sheriff George McMillian. 463 Council subsequently provided instructions to adjust the recommended fiscal year 2005-2006 budget to provide Deputy Sheriffs and Fire-EMS employees the same level of enhanced compensation that was provided to Police Officers. Annual implementation cost will $1,050,000.00, effective July 1,2005. be approximately Implementation of the enhanced level of compensation for Deputy Sheriffs and Fire-EMS employees, effective July 1,2005, would require a reduction in pay increases granted to all City employees from three per cent to two per cent. Mr. Stovall reviewed the following options: · Delay provision of enhanced compensation to Deputy Sheriffs and Fire-EMS employees until January 1,2006. · Reallocate $120,000.00 recommended for Fire-EMS Career Enhancement Program to base pay. Delay provision of enhanced compensation for all City employees until January 1, 2006, and increase the pay raise from three per cent to four per cent as an incentive to employees for the delay in implementation. Cost: · Total annual cost of approximately $4 million. · Fiscal year 2005-2006 cost of approximately $2 million for one- half year. · Fiscal year 2006-2007 cost of additional $1.3 million as the full cost of enhanced compensation is incurred. Mr. Stovall reviewed the following staff recommendations: Provide Sheriff and Fire-EMS employees the same level of enhanced compensation that was approved for Police Officers, effective January 1, 2006, which will result in an increase of four per cent and a potential classification modification for public safety employees who complete the probationary period. · Increase the recommended pay raise for all City employees from three per cent to four per cent, effective January 1,2006. 464 Discussion: Council Member Cutler inquired about the average percentage pay increase for City employees; whereupon, Mr. Stovall advised that over the past several years, the average pay increase has been between two and one-half to three per cent. The City Manager pointed out that the budget message states that the City lags behind benchmark communities in terms of general compensation, not public safety compensation, and urged that Council consider the recommendation to delay the pay increases so that the City would not fall any further behind in competitiveness. Council Member Lea requested clarification with regard to delaying the pay increases until January 1,2006, in order to provide an eight per cent increase for Sheriff and Fire/EMS employees. Mr. Stovall responded that the eight per cent pay increase would provide the Sheriff and Fire/EMS employees with the same level of enhanced compensation that was provided to Police Officers in January 2005. Council Member Lea expressed concern with regard to the majority of City employees at certain grade levels who may be in need of additional financial assistance today, as opposed to January 1,2006, and inquired as to the number of employees who would be affected by the delay. The City Manager responded that over 40 per cent of the City's work force is in public safety, which will cost approximately $1 million to address recruitment/retention issues, in termsofthe remaining 60 per cent of City employees, she stated that the majority falls in the category of approximately $30,000.00 annually, and the City provides a certain amount of funds each year toward employee health coverage. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick made the observation that there will be a better long term gain to the employee as a result of implementing the raise on January 1, 2006, which will be to the benefit of the employee at retirement. Council Member Cutler inquired if there is a problem with competitive salaries in other City departments such as Planning, Engineering, Parks and Recreation, etc., or has the City created two classes, i.e.: public safety employees and other employees. The City Manager responded that the City surveys all classifications annually to determine competitiveness with certain benchmark communities and adjustments are made accordingly. 465 Council Member Wishneff inquired about the amount of percentage received from the State Compensation Board for the Sheriff's Department; whereupon, the City Manager advised that the State establishes salaries and classifications for all Constitutional officers and their employees. She added that several years ago, Council voted to place employees of Constitutional officers under the City's Pay and Classification Plan; and almost without exception, the City's Pay Plan pays more than the amount approved by the State Compensation Board for employees within certain classifications. She further advised that an increase approved by the General Assembly provides a greater reimbursement to the locality for the cost of salaries, but the reimbursement does not equal the amount that is paid by the City. Council Member McDaniel asked about the impact of phasing in pay increases, i.e.: a one per cent pay increase on July 1,2005, and the remaining three per cent on January ], 2006. The City Manager responded that if Council approves any type of pay increase, a two per cent increase, effective July 1, 2005, would be suggested as opposed to piecemeal so that the increase can be seen by the employee in its entirety. Mayor Harris advised that the City has a financial commitment to properly train public safety employees due to their work environment, and the personal risk they take in the line of duty, etc. He called attention to a bronze memorial that is dedicated to fallen police officers, and made the observation that no memorial is dedicated to the memory of employees who have lost their lives in the line of duty in other City departments. Council Wishneff inquired if a pay increase could be provided in December 2005 for all City employees, excluding public safety employees. Mr. Stovalt responded that if a pay increase is provided prior to January 1,2006, it would be necessary to reduce funding in storm drainage maintenance, enhanced bridge maintenance, fleet replacement, building maintenance, street paving and technology. The City Manager suggested that if Council wishes to grant a pay increase for City employees prior to January 1,2006, it is requested that staff be given the opportunity to revisit the proposed budget to make recommendations to Council regarding specific adjustments. There being no further questions/comments, Council Member Cutler moved that Council approve the recommendation of the City Manager to increase the proposed pay raise for all City employees from three per cent to four per cent, and eight per cent for Sheriff and Fire-EMS employees, effective January 1,2006. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted. 466 Retiree Benefits - Cost of Livinq Adiustment The Director of Finance reviewed the following: Factors considered in providing an adjustment: o Change in consumer price index o Increased cost to the pension plan o Level of raises provided by similar plans within the State o The level of increase provided by Social Security · Eligible members of the Pension Plan received a2.1 per cent cost-of-living adjustment on July 1,2004. · Association of Municipal Retirement Systems of Virginia Cost of Living Adjustments: Locality Proposed FY 06 Arlington 2.70% Charlottesville 2.00% Fairfax County - Education 3.00% Falls Church 1.30% Newport News 1.85% VRS 2.70% Social Security 2.70% The Director of Finance submitted the following recommendation: · Provide a 2.25 per cent increase to eligible members of the Pension Plan, effective July 1,2005; · Provides for an increase in the average annual retirement allowance of approximately $273.00 on an annual basis; · Cost of an additional $420,999.00 in benefits annually or $259,000.00 in annual contributions to the Pension Plan; and · Pro-rata share of annual contributions for the City of Roanoke - $225,000.00. Council Member Cutler inquired if employees of the Western Virginia Water Authority were included in the City's Pension Plan; whereupon, the Director of Finance stated that former City employees who transferred to the Water Authority would remain in the City's Pension Plan. 467 The Director of Finance recommended that Council consider a 2.50 per cent cost-of-Jiving increase for City retirees, effective January 1, 2006, as opposed to a 2.25 per cent increase, effective July 1,2005. Vice Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council approve a 2.50 per cent cost-of-living increase for City retirees, effective January 1,2006. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted. Retiree Benefits - Health Insurance Supplement: The Director of Finance advised that the City's Pension Plan currently provides a 75 per cent monthly supplement of the amount of health insurance supplement to active employees, or $221.25 to City retirees with at least 20 years of service until age 65, and the supplement is provided to complement a retiree's pension allowance until Medicare eligibility. He added that employees with 15 years or more of service are allowed to continue health care coverage in the Pension Plan until age 65 by paying a blended premium rate that takes into consideration the premium paid for active employees, rather than a true retiree rate. He noted that previous consideration was given to providing a health insurance supplement to retirees 65 years of age or older; however, due to the cost of maintaining the current level of benefits and providing a cost of living adjustment to retirees, it is not financially prudent at this time to provide the enhanced benefit. Council Member Wishneff inquired about the benefits of a joint City/School health insurance contract; whereupon, the City Manager called attention to discussions with staff of the Roanoke City School Board and suggested that Council provide the leadership to initiate a regional study regarding creation of a valley-wide health insurance consortium. The City Manager advised that the City of Roanoke has previously expressed a willingness to change the anniversary date for renewal of its health insurance contract from a fiscal year basis to a calendar year basis in order to be in line with other localities. Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the remarks would be received and filed. Roanoke-Salem Baseball Hall of Fame: Mr. Stovall reviewed the following: · A request has been submitted for a contribution for construction of the Roanoke-Salem Baseball Hall of Fame in the City of Salem; · Anticipated cost of the building is $350,000.00; · The City of Roanoke previous donated $10,000.00. 468 The City Manager recommended that Council: · Consider making a donation as a part of the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program process. · Prior to forwarding a donation, a specific amount will be recommended to the Council for approval. Additional Fundinq to Cultural Orqanizations: · The budget includes approximately $560,000.00 in funding to cultural agencies. $335,500.00 is allocated by the Roanoke Arts Commission · Funding is increased annually based on the growth in discretionary revenue. · The level of funding provided is more than the anticipated admissions tax revenue of $465,000.00. The City Manager advised that the City of Roanoke does not supplement operating programs, and emphasized that all capital needs should have a donor because the program or activity is not strictly a City activity. Council Member Wishneffsuggested that an Arts Cultural District be established, along with a financial incentive for businesses to be located in the district. He spoke in support of implementing the district within the next year. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick indicated that a Business District Plan was created in 1995 and suggested that the Plan be reviewed to determine if a cultural district was included. Council Member Cutler inquired about the status of funding for completion of the Public Art Plan; whereupon, the City Manager stated that Council authorized an appropriation of $50,000.00 from the One Percent for the Arts account and it is anticipated that the Plan would be completed within the next 30 - 60 days. She suggested that a Council work session be scheduled in June or July. OTHER BUSINESS: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick requested clarification as to the availability of funds for services performed by the City's Legislative Liaison to the Virginia General Assembly. 469 The City Attorney called attention to a decrease in the amount of funds allocated to professional services in the City Attorney's budget. He explained that the account covers expenses of the Legislative Liaison and various expenses incurred by the City with regard to litigation of cases, and the budget of the Legislative Liaison is based upon whether there is ashort session oralong session of the General Assembly. He stated that over expenditure occurs in the account because the costs associated with processing litigation claims must be estimated, and litigation costs and Legislative Liaison expenses are funded through the same account. Therefore, he requested the assurance of Council that funds will be approved in the event of a shortfall of funds in the City Attorney's professional services account. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick stated that due to the importance of services provided by the City's Legislative Liaison, Council would support requests for additional funds to be allocated to the City Attorney's budget. Domestic Violence Council MemberWishneffinquired if the City has the necessary resources to address domestic violence; whereupon, the City Manager responded that the biggest challenge to the City does not relate to resources, but to education. In an attempt to educate, she stated that information on domestic violence has been forwarded to local churches for distribution within the various communities. Council Member Wishneff inquired if there are legal solutions to domestic violence; whereupon, the City Manager advised that she would meet with the Chief of Police to determine if there are legislative solutions that would allow for a different level of intervention by police officers. The Assistant City Manager for Community Development advised that the Police Department will work with School Resource Officers at the two high schools to educate youth with regard to appropriate behavior and programs will be instituted at branch public libraries in the various neighborhoods. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick suggested that the Mayor, the City Manager, the Chair of the Roanoke City School Board and the Superintendent of Schools discuss a curriculum to change the cycle of domestic abuse beginning at the elementary school level. Downtown Parking: Council Member Wishneffexpressed concern with regard to the number of persons working in the downtown Roanoke area who do not have adequate parking, and advised that an aggressive effort should be made to bring monthly parkers downtown during business hours. He suggested that the City considera decrease in monthly parking rates in parking garages/parking lots owned by the City of Roanoke. 470 The City Manager advised that the City's parking garages charge a uniform parking rate of $65.00 per month for an unreserved space and $85.00 per month for a reserved space, and the rates have been in effect for several years. She added that the City of Roanoke's parking rates are lower than private sector rates, with the exception of surface parking lots located on Day Avenue, S. W. The City Manager further advised that the City provides discounts to large volume business users and offers discounts if the employer chooses to pay parking on atype of blanket basis. She noted that staff reviews parking, aswellas what can be done to accommodate a new business or prospective business that contacts the City, as to the availability of parking and whether or not the City can offer a discounted parking rate. Council Member Wishneff suggested an across the board parking rate discount to be used by Downtown Roanoke, Inc., as a recruiting tool to encourage more people to visit the downtown area. The City Manager advised that if the Council wishes to give consideration to an adjustment in parking rates, the issue needs more detailed discussion by Council including additional information to be provided by City staff inasmuch as the parking fund is a self-supporting fund and if rates are reduced on a city-wide or system-wide basis, the Parking Fund would have to be subsidized. She added that maintenance activities are built into the Parking Fund in order to keep the City-owned garages in good condition; and within approximately two years, two new garages will be constructed that will require activity to support the cost of debt service. Council Member Wishneff inquired if the City has an annual contract with Downtown Roanoke, inc.; whereupon, the City Manager advised that Downtown Roanoke is funded through a Downtown Service Fund that was created approximately nine years ago and the contract is scheduled for renewal in 2006. She further advised that the only funding provided by the City beyond the Service Fund is the traditional ten cents on the tax rate that the City collects and thereafter distributes to Downtown Roanoke on a quarterly basis; and the City provides Downtown Roanoke with $10,000.00 toward expenses incurred for the Dickens of a Christmas activities (primarily the parade) and Downtown Roanoke, Inc., manages the Farmer's Market and is responsible for collecting and retaining rental fees. Mayor Harris suggested that Council engage in a work session to discuss issues regarding downtown Roanoke, i.e.: what can the City do to attract people to downtown and development of a strategy to increase parking in downtown Roanoke. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick suggested that the briefing should also include the downtown study of the City Market area. 471 The City Manager advised that since the matter requires additional discussion, it is suggested that the work session be held after the appointment of a new Director of Economic Development, and following discussions by the Director of Economic Development and the Acting Executive Director of Downtown Roanoke, Inc., regarding issues pertaining to the downtown area. EventZone: Council Member Cutler inquired about the City's relationship with EventZone; whereupon, the City Manager advised that the City of Roanoke provides approximately $170,000.00 to EventZone, which was created as a result of Festival in the Park and the City's Special Olympics. Oliver White Hill Foundation: Council Member Lea inquired about the status of measures to preserve the Oliver White Hill house; whereupon, the City Manager advised that a specific request for funds from the Oliver White Hill Foundation was not received for the fiscal year 2006 budget development process. She further advised that during the 2005 budget cycle for Community Development Block Grant funds, the City received a request from the Oliver White Hill Foundation, in the amount of $150,000.00, for what was identified as Phase I of the project, which involved property acquisition, architectural design, exterior repairs, and handicap accessibility; and the initial plan of the Foundation was to convert the property, which is currently occupied by two families, into a multi-use structure with a civil rights center to be located in the basement and on the first floor, and two rental units on the second floor level. The City Manager stated that staff did not recommend CDBG funding in last year's budget cycle due to a concern that the project would not meet eligibility requirements for Community Development Block Grant funding and the City could not document either the creation of jobs or that the majority of patrons of the facility would be in the Iow-moderate income category. She further stated that in communicating the City's position to the Foundation, it was explained that the City would consider funding a portion of the project through the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program; however, to date, the Foundation has not demonstrated the ability to raise funds for a portion of acquisition costs or for rehabilitation of the property. The City Manager stated that she met with representatives of the Virginia Law Foundation who expressed an interest in contributing financially to the project; however, no response has been received from the Oliver White Hill Foundation. She advised that funding should be predicated on a matching funds program similar to the Dumas Center, the Grandin Theatre, and Mill Mountain Theatre. 472 Mayor Harris suggested that he and Council Member Lea meet with business leaders in the African American community in an informal setting to discuss issues surrounding the historic section of Gilmer Avenue which may prompt an existing organization to partner with the City of Roanoke to develop the project. Mayor Harris also suggested that he and Council Member Lea work with City staff on development of a business plan. Council Member Cutler referred to other historic landmarks within the northwest community, such as the Harrison Museum of African American Culture, the Martin Luther King,Jr. Bridge, and the Dumas Hotel and suggested that discussions be held with the community with regard to creating a larger district that could lead to increased financial support for the area. First Street Bridqe Council Member McDaniel inquired about the status of the First Street Bridge; whereupon, the City Manager advised that signs have been installed, and the Federal Government has awarded the City $500,000.00 which can be used for the bridge itself and other planned amenities. She stated that Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Mattern was the sole bidder responding to the City's Request for Proposal to develop bridge design; and it is anticipated that the Federal Government will approve design of the pedestrian bridge by early fall. She added that a detailed construction schedule would be included in the Council Update. Council Member Cutler suggested that a progress report also be forwarded to the First Street Bridge Committee. Contribution Toward Onqoinq Efforts at Smith Mountain Lake: The City Manager called attention to a communication from the Franklin County Administrator requesting that the Cities of Roanoke and Salem and Roanoke County contribute $10,000.00, each, to Franklin County to address ongo'ing efforts to clean-up Smith Mountain Lake; and in 2004, the City received a similar request from the Tri~County Group and the Western Virginia Water Authority made a contribution on behalf of the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County. The City Manager explained that as part of the consent decree agreement between the Water Authority and the Department of Environmental Quality, the Water Authority will continue to make contributions to the Tri-County Group, which is a citizen-based organization. She added that the Water Authority does not intend to make a contribution to Franklin County, which is responsible for a majority of the cost to clean-up Smith Mountain Lake; therefore, she recommended that $10,000.00 be approved by Council and forwarded to Franklin County to be used toward clean-up efforts at Smith Mountain Lake. 473 Roanoke River Update Council Member Cutler inquired about the appointment of a River Keeper for the Roanoke River; whereupon, the City Manager advised that an update will be presented at the Council's Work Session on June 6, 2005, regarding a plan of action for management of the Roanoke River. CLOSING COMMENTS: Pay for Performance Increase The City Manager advised that a communication would be forwarded to all City employees outlining the Council's decision with regard to the compensation issue and outlining the deliberation of Council as it struggled to make a difficult decision. Proposed Budget Stabilization Reserve Policy The Director of Finance called attention to previous discussion by Council at the Financial Planning Session on February 18, 2005, with regard to establishment of a Budget Stabilization Reserve Policy. He stated that enactment of the Policy will be beneficial in the City's continued commitment to long-term financial planning; and the Government Finance Officers Association and other organizations recommend that local governments develop and adopt financial management policies as components of their financial management systems. The Director of Finance advised that the proposed reserve policy is intended to demonstrate a commitment to long term financial planning; and reserve policies continue to receive a greater emphasis from bond credit rating agencies as financial stress increases for local governments. He further advised that the reserve policy would be used in conjunction with the City's other financial policies to help ensure financial stability and protection of the City of Roanoke's "double- A" bond rating credit quality; and guidelines will be established to maintain the Budget Stabilization Reserve Policy, which is referred to as a "rainy day fund". Mr. Hall indicated that the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program Policy is in conflict with the proposed Budget Stabilization Reserve Policy; therefore, it will necessary to amend the City Code inasmuch as the intent of the CMERP ordinance will no longer be needed. The Director of Finance advised of the need for an economic and community development reserve to provide a supplement to economic and community development funds that are included in the City's Capital Improvement Program. He explained that the City has historically funded certain capital improvement programs on a cash basis, and the Economic and Community Development Reserve would provide a source of funding which would create flexibility to cash 474 fund unforeseen opportunities that may arise in areas of economic development and community development. He stated that the proposed Economic and Community Development Reserve Policy is intended to demonstrate a commitment to financial planning for economic and community development projects which may provide future growth opportunities and expansion of Roanoke's tax base. In the interest of continuing and promoting sound financial decisions, the Director of Finance recommended that Council take the following actions at its meeting on Tuesday, May 10, 2005: Adopt a Budget Stabilization Reserve Policy; Modify the Debt Service Policy to reflect the impact of the proposed Budget Stabilization Reserve Policy; Repeal the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program which conflicts with the Budget Stabilization Reserve Policy; and Create an Economic and Community Development Reserve Policy Announcements Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick announced that the Flat Car located at the Railwalk will be used for the Chili Cook-offAnnual Festival on May 7, 2005. He stated that the Flat Car would ultimately become the main stage when construction commences on the new Art Museum. There being no further business, at 11:45 a.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess until Tuesday, May 10, 2005, for the purpose of adopting the 2005-2006 fiscal year budget for the City of Roanoke. The Council of the City of Roanoke reconvened on Tuesday, May 10, 2005, at 2:00 p.m., in the Roanoke City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S.W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. PRESENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe,Jr., BeverlyT. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel and Mayor C. Nelson Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. ABSENT: Council Member BrianJ. Wishneff- ................................................ 1. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. 475 The invocation was delivered by ViceIMayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Americawas led by Mayor Harris. BUDGET: The Mayor advised that the purpose of the meeting was to adopt measures enacting the City of Roanoke's 2005-2006 fiscal year budget. The Mayor announced that Council would consider a revised pay ordinance granting all City employees a three per cent pay increase, effective July 1, 2005 instead of January 1,2006; and an additional increase of four per cent would be allotted to public safety employees, commencing January 1,2006. He explained that in January 2005, Council authorized a four per cent increase for the Police Department to help with recruitment and retention initiatives, and when the action was taken, it was understood that the Council was temporarily breaking atype of pay parody or pay equalization among the City's public safety departments, i.e.: Police Department, Fire/EMS Department, and the Sheriff's Department. He called attention to discussions with a number of City employees who support a general pay increase of three per cent commencing on July 1,2005, as opposed to a four per cent increase effective January 1, 2006; therefore, after conferring with the Members of Council, the City Attorney was requested to prepare revised measures for the Council's consideration. The Mayor advised that Council would also consider authorizing a 2.25 per cent cost-of-living increase for City retirees, effective July 1, 2005, instead of a 2.50 per cent increase effective January 1,2006. The Mayor stated that Council values and appreciates the work of all City employees, it was not the intent of Council to pit or to promote one group of City employees over and above another group, and no Member of Council intended to imply that public safety employees are more committed or more dedicated to their jobs than other City employees. He advised that earlier in the day he met with Reed P. Cotton, Jr., the son of a former City employee, who lost his life in atragic accident in the line of duty to express appreciation for the 20+ years of service that his father gave to the Roanoke community as an employee in the Solid Waste Management Department. He explained that Council met in fiscal year 2005-2006 budget study on Wednesday, May 4, 2005, and diligently addressed numerous budget related issues over a period of four to five hours; and pointed out that information provided by the news media as it relates to Council meetings does not always accurately reflect the full discussion by Council on certain issues. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: BUDGET: A Certificate of funding submitted by the Director of Finance advising that funds required for the 2005-2006 General Fund, Civic Facilities Fund, Parking Fund, Market Building Fund, Department of Technology Fund, Fleet Management Fund, Risk Management Fund, School Fund, School Food Services Fund, and Grant Fund budgets will be available for appropriation, was before Council. 476 Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the Certificate of Funding would be received and filed BUDGET-PARKS AND RECREATION-FEE COMPENDIUM-LIBRARIES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that in developing the budget for fiscal year 2005-06, departments were asked to review their fee structures and, where feasible, propose fee schedule (compendium) changes that focus on recovering the cost of providing services. It was further advised that the recommended fiscal year 2005-2006 budget incorporates proposed fee structure changes for Elmwood Park Amphitheater rental, mobile stage rental, outdoor pool entrance, fitness centers, library copy fees, rental inspection fees, asbestos removal permit fees, manufactured homes and modular buildings permit fees, tent and membrane structure permit fees and temporary certificate of occupancy renewal fees. Elmwood Park Amphitheater Fee Currently, the charge for rental of the Elmwood Park Amphitheater is $150.00 per day assessed to any organization utilizing the facility. The proposed fee will increase the current charge to $250.00. Mobile Staqe Fee Parks and Recreation currently charges a fee in a two-tier structure: $600.00 per day for 501 (c) organizations not charging admission and $900.00 per day for events charging admission. The proposed fee will increase the charge as follows: $900.00 per day for 501(c) organizations not charging admission and $1,200.00 per day for events charging admission. Outdoor Pool Entrance Fee The entrance fee for outdoor pools has not been increased in more than 10 years. Currently, the entrance fee is $1.00 for youth and $2.00 for adults. The proposed increase will result in the following entrance fee structure: $2.00 for youth and $3.00 for adults. Fitness Center Fees Currently, Parks and Recreation administers a two-tier fee structure for both monthly and daily fitness center memberships. Residents are assessed a fee of $4.00 for daily membership and $15.00 for monthly memberships; and non-residents are assessed alee of $5.00 for daily membership and $22.00 for monthly memberships. The proposed fee adjustments will result in the following fee structure: Residents- $5.00 for daily membership and $18.00 for monthly membership; non-residents - $6.00 for daily membership and $25.00 for monthly membership. 477 Library Copy Fee: The Library currently charges $0.10 for each single copy made in the public library system. The proposed increase to $0.15 for each single copy will more appropriately align the fee with the actual cost assessed to the library for offering the service to library patrons. Rental Inspection Fee: Currently, Housing and Neighborhood Services charges a fee of $75.00 for the initial inspection as well as periodic inspections. Subsequent follow-up visits are charged at a rate of $35.00 each. A fee of $25.00 will be levied for the initial and periodic rental inspections. Follow-up compliance inspections will be levied at a rate of $50.00 each. Asbestos Removal Currently, the permit for the removal of asbestos is issued based on valuation of the project. The proposed fee adjustment will institute a flat fee of $45.00 per certificate. Manufactured Homes and Modular Buildings At present, the building permit is issued with the fee being determined based on valuation of the property. The proposed adjustment will result in a building permit being issued based on the structure: $75.00-single wide, $100.O0-double wide, and $125.00- triple wide. Tent and Membrane Structures At present, building permits are issued for the erection of tent and membrane structures over 900 square feet at a cost based on the value of the structure or the rental fee for the structure. The proposed adjustment will result in those permits being issued at a flat cost of $50.00 each. Temporary Certificate of Occupancy Renewal Currently, residents are issued renewal Temporary Certificates of Occupancy without a fee; a fee structure for renewal is recommended. The first renewal certificate will be issued for a fee of $75.00, and subsequent renewal certificates will be issued at a fee of $125.00 each. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution and amend the City's Fee Schedule (Compendium) to reflect changes in the above referenced fees, effective July 1,2005. Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution: 478 (#37043-051005) A RESOLUTION amending the City's Fee Compendium to provide for revised fees for use of City park facilities and services and for new and revised inspection fees in order to update current fees and promote uniformity with fees charged by the City and surrounding localities; and providing for an effective date. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 371 .) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37043-051005. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneffwas absent.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#37044-051005) A RESOLUTION amending the City's Fee Compendium to provide for revised fees for use of City park facilities and services and for new and revised inspection fees in order to update current fees and promote uniformity with fees charged by the City and surrounding localities; and providing for an effective date. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 373.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37044-051005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) BUDGET-CITY CODE-TAXES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that in March 2000, as part of the Financial Planning Work Session, Council began planning for future capital projects, including the renovation of Patrick Henry High School; as a part of the planning process, Council agreed to begin setting aside $570,000.00 in debt service funding on an annual basis to build debt capacity for future projects; and the strategy included building the necessary capacity to support the City of Roanoke's share of the Patrick Henry High School project. 479 It was further advised that at its next Financial Planning Work Session in March 2001, Council continued to plan for and to discuss capital projects, including the renovation of William Fleming High School, at a projected cost of $40 million; while there was support to provide the City of Roanoke's share of $20 million for the project, it was recognized that a new revenue source would be needed to support debt service; and as a result of subsequent planning efforts and discussion, an increase in the Prepared Food and Beverage Tax was identified as the potential funding source for the City of Roanoke's share of the William Fleming High School project. It was explained that an analysis of the amount of debt service funding required in fiscal year 2009, after issuance of bonds for the William Fleming High School project, indicates that additional funding of approximately $1.1 million will be needed to fully fund the City's share of the project; a proposed increase in the Prepared Food and Beverage Tax from four per cent to five per cent compares to an All Virginia Cities average of 4.9 per cent and a 5.9 per cent average for Virginia First Cities Coalition jurisdictions; and the comparison is based on tax rate information for 2004 provided by the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service. The City Manager advised that the proposed increase in the Prepared Food and Beverage Tax from four per cent to five per cent will result in additional revenue of approximately $2.1 million dollars; one half of the incremental revenue will be used for debt service funding that will be needed to support the William Fleming High School project, with the remaining portion to be used to address recurring operating expenses in the General Fund; and the Prepared Food and Beverage Tax is, in essence, a tax that is paid by those who choose to dine out and people outside of the City of Roanoke who elect to take advantage of the many restaurants in the City. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance amending Section 32-284 of the City Code to increase the Prepared Food and Beverage Tax to five per cent, effective July l, 2005. Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance: (#37045-051005) AN ORDINANCE amending §32-284, Levyoftax; amount, Article XlV, Tax on Prepared Food and Beveraqe, Chapter 32, Taxation, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by increasing the tax rate on prepared food and beverages from four percent (4%) to five percent (5%), providing for an effective date; and dispensing with the second reading by title paragraph of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 374.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37045- 051005. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: 480 AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... (Council Member Wishneffwas absent.) CITY MARKET-BUDGET-ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER-GRANTS-COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT-SCHOOLS-FLEET MAINTENANCE FUND-RISK MANAGEMENT FUND: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following revised budget ordinance: (#37046-051005) AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual General, Civic Facilities, Parking, Market Building, Department of Technology, Fleet Management, Risk Management, School, School Food Services and Grant Funds Appropriations of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2005, and ending June 30, 2006; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 375.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37046-051005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler. The City Manager was requested to clarify the revised ordinance; whereupon, she advised that in order to make the necessary adjustments to provide for a three per cent pay increase for City employees, effective July 1,2005 instead of January 1,2006, City staffwas instructed to identify additional sources of funds to make up the difference. She called attention to three accounts that were previously recommended for funding in the fiscal year 2005-2006 budget, but were subsequently reduced in order to provide the necessary funds for athree per cent pay increase for City employees effective July 1, 2005; i.e.: Storm Water Management, Bridge Maintenance and Traffic Signal Replacement, and advised that incremental improvements in Fleet Replacement, Building Maintenance, Technology, and Street Paving will be left intact. Ordinance No. 37046-051005, as revised, was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) POLICE DEPARTMENT-PAY PLAN-BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT-COMMI'I-I-EES- CITY SHERIFF-PENSIONS: Council Member Cutler offered the following revised ordinance: 481 (#37047-051005) AN ORDINANCE to adopt and establish a Pay Plan for officers and employees of the City, effective July 1, 2005; providing for certain salary adjustments and merit increases; authorizing annual salary increments for certain officers and employees for use of private motor vehicles; authorizing annual salary increments for sworn police officers assigned to the Criminal Investigation Division; authorizing annual salary increments for certain members of the Fire-Emergency Medical Services Department who are certified as Emergency Medical Technicians; authorizing annual salary increments for certain members of the Fire-Emergency Medical Services Department who are members of the Regional Hazardous Materials Response Team; providing for continuation of a police career enhancement program; providing for continuation of a Firefighter/Emergency Medical Technician merit pay program; providing for a Community Policing Specialist program; providing for payment of a monthly stipend to certain board and commission members; providing for an increase in base annual salary for any employee of the Sheriff who meets the qualifications for and has been appointed Master Deputy Sheriff; repealing, to the extent of any inconsistency, Ordinance No. 36693-051304, adopted May 13, 2004, as amended by Ordinance No. 36935- 010305, adopted on January 3, 2005, except for Paragraph 17 thereof, relative to the annual salaries of the Mayor, Vice-Mayor, and Council members; providing for the salaries of the City's Constitutional Officers; providing for an effective date; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 383.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37047- 051005. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. Joyce Conner, a City employee, read acommunication from Reed P. Cotton, Jr., 1408 Fresno Street, N. W., an employee of the Solid Waste Management Department. Mr. Cotton advised that he was concerned about the double raise that was proposed for public safety employees, and according to an article in The Roanoke Times, job peril was cited as justification for the raise. He stated that his father, Reed P. Cotton, Sr., was the last City employee to die in the line ofdutyand although he was not a public safety employee, he asked if his father's life as a Solid Waste Management employee for over 22 years was not as important as those public safety employees who have lost their lives in the line of duty. He requested that Council consider the impact that a selective double raise will have on the 60 per cent of City employees who are not public safety personnel, because not only is the proposed raise a public showing of favoritism, it will give six months of his hard earned salary increase to agroupofemployeeswho already earn more than the average Solid Waste Management employee. He asked that Council withdraw its support for the selective double raise for public safety employees, and advised that all City employees should receive a raise, as opposed to a select group of public safety employees. 482 Donald Maddox, 3540 Melcher Street, S. F., a City employee, expressed appreciation to Council for considering a revised measure that will allow a three per cent raise for all City employees, effective July 1,2005. He concurred in the need for a pay increase for employees in the Police Department and the Sheriff's Department, but expressed concern on behalf of the other 60 per cent of good and dedicated City employees, many of whom also work under dangerous conditions. Eddie Bobbitt, 1146 Ferrell Drive, Wirtz, Virginia, a City employee, also expressed appreciation to Council for considering a revised ordinance authorizing a three per cent pay increase for all City employees, effective July 1,2005. He stated which it is understood that the City's public safety employees work under stressful conditions, but his job as an equipment mechanic is just as stressful inasmuch as he is charged with the responsibility of maintaining the City's fleet of vehicular equipment which is used by public safety employees, public works employees, and solid waste management employees, etc. Robert Gravely, 729 29'h Street, N. W., advised that those City employees who earn the least amount of wages should receive the highest pay increase. He stated that the City's pay scale should be upgraded due to increases in insurance such as Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Delta Dental and Aflac. In addition to public safety employees, he called attention to unsafe working conditions for other City employees and asked that all City employees be treated equally and fairly. Brenda S. Hamilton, 4505 Biltmore Drive, N. W., Clerk of the Circuit Court, expressed appreciation to Council for considering a revised pay increase of three per cent for all City employees, effective July 1, 2005. She advised that the 22 members of her staff looked forward to a three per cent pay increase. She stressed the importance of looking at all City employees as a group and that public safety employees not be singled out as the elite few because all City employees strive to serve the needs of the citizens of the City of Roanoke. She asked that the City's pay scale be reviewed and upgraded. George M. McMillan, 5034 Oakley Avenue, S. W., City Sheriff, expressed appreciation to Council for awarding a three per cent increase to all City employees, effective July 1,2005 as opposed to January 1,2006. He stated that it is known that it was not the intent of Council to pit one employee group against another. Council Member Lea expressed appreciation to the Mayor for his leadership in resolving the City employee pay increase issue. He also expressed appreciation to Sherman L. Stovall, Director of Management and Budget, for responding to his questions in a timely manner and for helping him to better understand the City's budget process. 483 Council Member Dowe expressed appreciation to all City employees for their service to the City of Roanoke. He, too, expressed appreciation to the Mayor for his leadership in resolving the pay increase issue and also expressed appreciation to the City's budget team for its efforts to prepare a budget that will move the City of Roanoke forward within the confines of its resources. Ordinance No. 37047-051005, as revised, was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneffwas absent.) BUDGET-PENSIONS: The Director of Finance and the City Manager submitted a joint communication advising that retirees of the City of Roanoke Pension Plan (the Plan) are awarded cost-of-living adjustments (COLA) on an ad hoc basis by Council; the Plan does not include a provision for an automatic COLA due to the significant actuarial cost and related increase in contribution rates; thus, COLA's are not pre-funded in the Plan, but rather the increased cost is recognized when the increase has been awarded; factors considered as part of the recommendation for an annual adjustment include achange in the Consumer Price Index, increased cost to the Plan, the amount of raises provided by similar plans within the state, and the amount of increase provided by Social Security; eligible members of the City of Roanoke Pension Plan received a 2.1 per cent cost-of-living adjustment on July 1,2004, which was the ninth consecutive COLA provided to eligible retirees; and the Recommended Budget for fiscal year 2006 includes a four per cent raise for active employees, effective January 1,2006. It was further advised that the required contribution rate for the pension plan to fund the current level of benefits will increase for fiscal year 2006 from 9.56 per cent to 12.61 per cent of payroll; additional cost to the General Fund is approximately $1,600,000; a proposed 2.50 per cent increase to eligible members of the Plan, effective January 1,2006, will increase the average annual retirement allowance by approximately $303.00, costing the Plan an additional $467,671.00 in benefits annually; the actuarial cost of a 2.50 per cent COLA is estimated at $4.4 million to be funded over the next 20 years through the annual payroll contribution rate which results in an increase of approximately $287,700.00 in annual contributions to the Plan; all City operating funds, along with the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, School Board, Roanoke Valley Resource Authority, Roanoke Valley Detention Commission, Western Virginia Water Authority, and the Commonwealth of Virginia will assume their pro rata cost for funding the COLA; and the City's pro rata share of the increase is approximately $250,000.00. 484 It was explained that the recommended increase will apply to those retirees who retired on or before July 1,2004, i.e.: those retirees who have been retired for at least one year; approximately 1,541 of the 1,595 retirees, or 97 per cent of those receiving benefits as of March 31,2005, will be eligible for the increase; and the increase will also apply to a member's or surviving spouse's annual retirement allowance, excluding any incentive payments made under the Voluntary Retirement incentive Program established by Ordinance No. 30473-41591, adopted April 15, 1991, or to the retirement supplement paid according to Section 22.2-61 of the City Code. It was advised that a request was also referred to budget study to consider providing a supplemental allowance for health insurance for City retirees who are 65 years of age or older; the Plan currently provides a monthly supplement of 75 per cent of the amount of health insurance supplement provided to active employees, or $221.25 to retirees with at least 20 years of service until age 65; the supplement is provided to complement the pension allowance until Medicare eligibility; upon reaching Medicare eligibility, retirees are eligible to begin receiving both hospital and medical benefits; and a new drug benefit program beginning in January 2006, Medicare Part D, will assist with outpatient prescription drugs. The Director of Finance and the City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance granting a 2.50 per cent COLA for eligible retirees, effective January 1,2006 coincident with the recommendation of the effective date of salary increases for active employees; consideration was given to the request by the Retirement Association for a supplemental allowance for health insurance for retirees 65 and older; and due to the significant increase in contributions required to sustain the current level of benefits and to provide aCOLA, no benefit changes are recommended that would result in additional funding requirements for the pension plan. The Mayor having previously announced that the Council would consider a 2.25 per cent cost-of-living increase for City of Roanoke retirees, effective July 1, 2005, as opposed to a 2.50 per cent increase, effective January 1,2006, Council Member Cutler offered the following revised ordinance: (#37048-051005) AN ORDINANCE providing for certain supplemental benefits under the City of Roanoke Pension Plan to certain members of such Plan and certain of their surviving spouses; providing for an effective date; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 387.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37048-051005 as revised. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: 485 AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) BUDGET-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for fiscal years 2006-2010 is a plan recommended for approval by Council for capital expenditures to be incurred over the next five years in order to address priority long-term capital needs of the City of Roanoke; and the CIP reflects the current status of projects which have previously been approved and funded by Council and is a revision to the fiscal years 2005-2009 Capital Improvement Program approved by Council on May 13, 2004. It was further advised that on April 18, 2005, Council received the proposed Capital Improvement Program for fiscal years 2006-2010 as part of the Recommended Resource Allocation Plan; the Capital Improvement Program Summary Section of the document provides a summary of projects; and the Capital Improvement Program for fiscal years 2006-2010 is comprised of capital projects, with an estimated cost of project completion totaling $257,922,677.00. It was further advised that during the Financial Planning Work Session in February 2005, Council was briefed on the need for short-term financing in the amount of $2.6 million to support the Financial Application Integration project; the project includes replacement of the City's financial systems and replacement of the accounting, tax/treasury, budget preparation, and human resource/payroll system applications; the need for financing is based on the cash flow to support the planned staging of projects; sufficient funds are budgeted in the Technology Fund to support the required level of debt service; and authorization to hold a public hearing to issue bonds to support the project is requested. It was explained that on May 2, 2005, Council authorized execution of an option agreement for the purchase of the Countryside Golf Course at a cost of $4.1 million; funding for acquisition of the propertywillcome from the issuance of bonds; moving forward with the project may require the planned issuance of bonds for the planned Multipurpose Recreation Center to be shifted beyond fiscal year 2008; with the option fee of $125,000.00 credited to the purchase cost, net funding of $3,975,000.00 will be required; authorization to hold a public hearing to issue bonds to support the project is also requested; and bonds will be issued during fiscal year 2005-2006 for the following projects: 486 Previously Authorized · Riverside Center · Civic Facilities Expansion and Renovation · Patrick Henry High School · Fallon Park Elementary School · Westside Elementary School $ 5,500,000.00 $ 6,405,000.00 $21,750,000.00 $ 1,600,000.00 $ 3,850,000.00 To Be Authorized · Art Museum · Downtown West Parking Garage · Financial Application Integration · Countryside Golf Course $ 3,700,000.00 $ 2,600,000.00 $ 2,600,000.00 $ 3,975,000.00 The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution endorsing an update to the CIP;authorize a public hearing to be held on June20,2005, for issuance of General Obligation Bonds for the Art Museum ($3,700,000.00), Downtown West Parking Garage ($2,600,00.00), Financial Application Integration ($2,600,000.00), and Countryside Golf Course ($3,975,000.00); and appropriate $3,204,476.00 included in the fiscal year 2005-2006 Transfer to Capital Projects, Account No. 001-250-9310-9508, to the respective capital project accounts established by the Director of Finance for the following projects: $150,000.00 to Capital Project, Account No. 008-530-9552 for Bridge Maintenance $40,000.00 to Capital Project, Account No. 008-530-9823 for Police Academy Building $199,274.00 to Capital Project, Account No. 008-530-9736. for Stormwater Management $310,000.00 to Capital Project, Account No. 008-530-9575 for Transportation Projects $217,184.00 to Capital Project, Account No. 008-056-9620 for Roanoke River Flood Reduction $250,000.00 for Capital Project, Account No. 008-530-9845 for Concept Design Courthouse Expansion $250,000.00 for Capital Project, Account No. 008-530-9799 for Streetscapes and Traffic Calming $150,000.00 for Capital Project, Account No. 008-440-9860 for Jail HVAC Design $235,000.00 for Capital Project, Account No. 008-615-8114, for the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority $1,403,018.00 to Capital Project Contingency, Account No. 008- 530-9575, for prioritized projects; and 487 Appropriate $1,100,000.00 of residual equity from the close-out of Water and Sewer funds to: · Carvins Cove Management Plan, Account No. 008-620-9825 $90,000.00 · Equipment Replacement, Account No. 017-440-2642 $450,000.00 · Technology Projects, Account No. 013-430-1602 $450,000.00 · Capital Project Contingency, Account No. 008-530-9575 $110,000.00 Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37049-051005) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the General and Capital Projects Funds for various capital improvement projects, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Capital Projects, Department of Technology, and Fleet Management Funds Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 389.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37049- 051005.The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#37050-051005) A RESOLUTION endorsing the update to the Capital Improvement Program submitted by the City Manager by letter of May 10, 2005. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 390.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37050-051005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) 488 BUDGET-GRANTS-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that in order to receive Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) funding, the City of Roanoke must submit a five-year Consolidated Plan and Annual Updates to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and the current five-year Consolidated Plan for the City of Roanoke will expire on June 30, 2005. It was further advised that at the April 4, 2005 Council briefing, Council received a Summary of the Draft 2005-2010 HUD Consolidated Plan, which detailed priorities and objectives for the five-year period and the uses of funds recommended for fiscal year 2005-2006, the first year of the plan; Council also received a draft of the Gainsboro Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area (NRSA) plan, which is a supplement to the five-year Consolidated Plan; the Draft 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan was made available for public review and comment for a 30-day period, beginning April 4, 2005; as part of the review, the draft plan was provided to Roanoke County, Salem, Vinton, and Botetourt County for comments which might assist the City in preparing the plan; opportunities for citizen input were provided at four public hearings which were held on September 23 and November 4, 2004, March 31 and April 28, 2005; in addition, information regarding availability of the plan for public review was sent to each member of the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates (RNA); the five-year Consolidated Plan must be received by HUD on May 16, 2005, in order for the City's HUD fiscal year to begin on July 1,2005; and funding for fiscal year 2005-2006, the first year of the new plan, would be available from the following sources: New HUD Entitlements Estimated Program Income Estimated Carry-over Subtotal $2,909,053.00 483,051.00 711,514.00 $4,103,618.00 It was explained that it is estimated that the $4.1 million in HUD funds as above referenced will leverage or otherwise be combined with as much as an additional $5.4 million in other public and private funding; therefore, total estimated investment in activities included in the Annual Update is approximately $9.5 million; priorities and objectives of the new five-year plan incorporate adjustments in the distribution of CDBG funds under the City's HUD Funds Policy, on which Council was briefed in September 2004; during the five-year period, priorities and objectives are structured to distribute 57 per cent of the CDBG funds to housing, 22.5 per cent to economic development, ten per cent to human services, ten per cent to neighborhood development and 0.5 per cent to homeless services; and including HOME, which is entirely for affordable housing assistance, and ESG, which is entirely for homeless services, almost two-thirds of the resources will be directed toward housing development. 489 The City Manager recommended that Council approve the 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan and that she be authorized to submit the plan to HUD for final review and approval, including execution of all necessary documents pertaining thereto, such documents to be approved as to form by the City Attorney; and that Council adopt the revised HUD Funds Policy incorporating a CDBG funds distribution of 57 per cent for Housing, 22.5 per cent for Economic Development, ten per cent for Human Services, ten per cent for Neighborhood Development, and 0.5 per cent for Homeless Services, with uses for HOME and ESG funds to remain unchanged. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#37051-051005) A RESOLUTION approving the 2005 - 2010 Consolidated Plan and authorizing the City Manager, or the City Manager's designee to submit the approved Conso idated Plan to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for final review and approval, and authorizing the execution of all necessary documents pertaining to such Consolidated Plan. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 391.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37051-051005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) CITY CODE-BUDGET-CMERP-EQUIPMENT: The Director of Finance submitted a communication advising that a Budget Stabilization Reserve Policy is a component of sound financial management of a local government; development of financial management policies is recognized by municipal bond rating agencies and is a recommended best practice by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA); and the importance of a budget stabilization policy is to define a level of reserves desired by an organization in assuring liquidity to address unforeseen financial needs. It was further advised that while the City has several fund balance policies in place, including a reserve for self-insured liabilities, the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program (CMERP), and the reserve for debt service, the City does not currently have a General Fund budget stabilization policy; although the City maintains a reasonable reserve in the Debt Service Fund, there is no adopted policy identifying such as a budget stabilization or rainy day fund, which 490 was noted by all three bond rating agencies in the City's most recent credit review, with emphasis on the need for a reserve inasmuch as the City's bond indebtedness is anticipated to increase over the next few years; a policy was developed in coordination with the City's financial advisor and reviewed by analysts in municipal bond rating agencies; and the recommended policy was also reviewed by Council at the February 18, 2005 Annual Financial Planning Session. Key elements of the policy include: Reserve floor - The reserve will be maintained at a level to provide working capital and a margin of financial flexibility; the reserve will be a designated portion of the General Fund balance, and will be maintained at a minimum of five per cent, with a target of eight per cent of the adopted General Fund expenditure budget for the current year. Reserve drawdown - Use of the reserve will occur only upon authorization by Council to address unforeseen emergencies, or due to significant declines in revenues that cannot be covered by other sources. Reserve growth - The reserve will be maintained within the target range by retaining interest earnings and by designating a portion of the undesignated fund balance to the reserve when necessary. Reserve replenishment- If the reserve is used, it will be restored to the five per cent minimum level within three fiscal years, after which time, it will continue to be increased toward the eight per cent goal. It was explained that the primary fund balance policy currently in existence for the General Fund is the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program (CMERP); the CMERP ordinance was originally adopted to address a lack of adequate funding in the adopted budget for capital equipment and maintenance needs; the CMERP ordinance reserved the entire General Fund balance for capital needs; during recent years, funding included in the adopted budget has systematically been increased to address capital needs, working toward the goal of including adequate capital funding in the adopted budget; in conjunction with adoption of the Budget Stabilization Reserve policy, the CMERP ordinance will be repealed, since adoption of the new policy would conflict with the CMERP ordinance and as funding is included in the adopted budget to address capital equipment and maintenance, the intent of the CMERP ordinance is no longer needed; and as the Budget Stabilization Reserve is adopted and the CMERP ordinance is repealed, the amount that previously would have been designated as CMERP will be considered undesignated fund balance and the undesignated fund balance will be available for one-time funding needs and may be appropriated for use in the subsequent year by Council. 491 The Director of Finance advised that the City's budget stabilization reserve will be established in the General Fund by a transfer of $15.5 million from the Debt Service Fund; in conjunction with the transfer, the Debt Policy will be amended to reflect the impact of the new policy; while the residual Debt Service fund balance will continue to be reserved for future debt service and bond issuance costs, the goal of maintaining the balance at a level equal to one year of debt service expenditure will no longer be included; it is believed that the policy will be beneficial to the City's continued commitment to long-term financial planning; and the reserve policy will be used in conjunction with Roanoke's other financial policies to help assure financial stability and protection of Roanoke's "double-A" bond rating credit quality. The Director of Finance recommended that Council adopt resolutions establishing the Budget Stabilization Reserve Policy and amending the Debt Policy; adopt an ordinance to repeal the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement (CMERP) ordinance; and adopt a budget ordinance transferring funds totaling $15.5 million from the Debt Service Fund to the General Fund. Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance: (#37052-051005) AN ORDINANCE amending Chapter 2, Administration, Article VIII, Finance Generally, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by repealing §2-189, Reserve for capital improvements and capital maintenance and equipment; and dispensing with the second reading by title paragraph of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 392.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37052- 051005. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#37053-051005) A RESOLUTION approving and adopting a policy entitled "City of Roanoke Virginia Budget Stabilization Reserve Policy" for the City. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 393.) 492 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37053-051005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#37054-051005) A RESOLUTION approving and adopting a Debt Policy for the City of Roanoke. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 394.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37054- 051005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: (#37055-051005) AN ORDINANCE to transfer funding establishing the Budget Stabilization Reserve, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 General and Debt Service Funds Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 395.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37055-051005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) 493 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that interest earned from the Capital Projects Fund and occasional land sale proceeds have traditionally been used for economic development or community development initiatives; and currently, no dedicated funding source is available for economic development or community development initiatives. It was further advised that it would be beneficial to have a specified funding source when economic or community development opportunities arise; and adopting a policy which reserves Capital Projects Fund interest earnings and proceeds from the sale of general government property for economic development and community development initiatives would result in a dedicated funding source. It was explained that funding will be used for economic and community development initiatives that include, but are not to be limited to the following: 2. 3. 4. Purchase of property for the purpose of economic development. Economic development incentives. Greenway Development. Infrastructure improvements to support economic development and community development initiatives. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a policy designating Capital Projects Fund interest earnings and proceeds from the sale of general government property for economic development and community development initiatives. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#37056-051005) A RESOLUTION approving an Economic and Community Development Reserve Policy dedicating Capital Projects Fund interest earnings and proceeds from the sale of real property for economic and community development initiatives. (For full text of Resolution, see resolution Book No. 69, Page 396.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37056- 051005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) 494 BUDGET-CITY CODE-CITY MANAGER: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Section 2-121 of City Code authorizes the City Manager to make transfers up to $75,000.00 within or between departments and divisions as set forth by fund in the annual appropriation ordinance. It was further advised that as a part of year-end processing, there is a need to transfer funds for items such as salary lapse and internal service fund billings in excess of the $75,000.00 threshold; and such actions currently require that a Council report be processed to authorize the transfer. The City Manager recommended that Section 2-121 of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, be amended, to allow the City Manager to make transfers within or between departments and divisions in excess of $75,000.00 from April 1 through June 30 annually; and the Director of Finance shall report such transfers to Council as a part of the quarterly Summary of City Manager Transfers. Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance: (#37057-051005) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining §2-121, Authority to transfer funds, of Article V, City Manager, of Chapter 2, Administration, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, to provide for the authorization of the City Manager to transfer funds; and dispensing with the second reading by title paragraph of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 397.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37057-051005. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 2:50 p.m. APPROVED ATrEST: Mary F. Parker City Clerk C. Nelson Harris Mayor 495 REGULAR WEEKLY SESSiON----ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2005 2:00 p.m. The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday, May 16, 2005, at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the Roanoke City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S.W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Reqular Meetinqs, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 36762-070604 adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 6, 2004. PRESENT: Council Members Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. (arrived late), Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ....................................................................... 7. ABSENT: None ........................................................................................... 0. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Council Member Sherman P. Lea. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Americawas led by Mayor Harris. PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: PROCLAMATIONS-LANDMARKS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION: The Mayor presented a proclamation to Dr. John Kern, Director, Roanoke Regional Preservation Office, Virginia Department of Historic Preservation, declaring May 2005 as National Historic Preservation Month. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD: Robert N. Richert, Chair, Architectural Review Board, advised that the Board takes pride in recognizing those persons who go out of their way to make improvements to their property in the City of Roanoke's historic districts. On behalf of the Architectural Review Board, he recognized the following property owners: Herb Smith, represented by Mark Clark, in recognition of improvements to property located at 1215 Franklin Road, S. W. 496 · David McCray and John Lipscomb in recognition of improvements to property located at 310 Washington Avenue, S. W. Scott Winter, representing Winter Properties Partnership, LLP, and Peter Fields of Fields Construction, Inc., in recognition of Janette Avenue Condominiums at 6TM Street and Janette Avenue, S. W. · Jim and Ann Haynes in recognition of improvements to property at 526 Marshall Avenue, S. W. PROCLAMATIONS-POLICE DEPARTMENT: The Mayor presented a proclamation to Police Chief Joe Gaskins declaring May 15-21, 2005 as National Police Week. PROCLAMATIONS-EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES: The Mayor presented a proclamation to Fire/EMS Chief James Grigsby declaring May 15-21, 2005, as Emergency Medical Services Week. PROCLAMATIONS-PUBLIC WORKS: The Mayor presented a proclamation to Robert K. Bengtson, Director of Public Works, declaring May 15-21, 2005, as National Public Works Week. Also accepting the proclamation were Ed Hartman representing the Facilities Management Division, Lloyd Rawley representing the Transportation Division, and Coco Schrader representing Solid Waste Management. PROCLAMATIONS-BICYCLISTS: The Mayor presented a proclamation to Barbara N. Duerk, representing the Virginia Bicycle Federation, declaring May 2005, as Bike Month. CONSENT AGENDA The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and ifdiscussionwas desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. He called specific attention to three requests for Closed Session. MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting of Council held on Monday, April 4, 2005, and recessed until Tuesday, April 12, 2005, were before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. 497 COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the Mayor to convene in a Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategyofthe public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager to convene in a Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council schedule a public hearing for Monday, June 6, 2005, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in connection with appropriation of additional funds for the Department of Social Services, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. VIRGINIA ALCOHOL SAFETY ACTION PROGRAM: A communication from Jennifer Pfister tendering her resignation as a member of the Roanoke Valley- Alleghany Regional Commission, was before Council. 498 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council accept the resignation and that the communication be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss acquisition real property for a public purpose, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager to convene in a Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. REGULAR AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: EASEMENTS-WESTERN VIRGINIA LAND TRUST-WATER RESOURCES: Roger B. Holnback, Executive Director, Western Virginia Land Trust, discussed the potential of placement of a conservation easement on the Carvins Cove Natural Reserve. He displayed a photograph that was taken from the Appalachian Trail, which surrounds 14 miles of the ridge above Carvins Cove, and advised that not only is Carvins Cove a source of the City's water supply, is a national and internationally known resource for citizens and those persons who use the Appalachian Trail. Mack Cooper, member of the Board of Managers, Appalachian Trail Conference, which is composed of 33,000 members and four million annual users of the Appalachian Trail, spoke in support of continued management of the Carvins Cove area as a primitive, non-motorized, recreational natural area. He advised that the Appalachian Trail Conference is a 501(c)(3) private non-profit organization and is charged with Congressional designated responsibility for the Appalachian National Scenic Trail pursuant to the National Trail Systems Act. He stated that almost 21 miles of the Appalachian Trail surrounds the Carvins Cove area along the crest of Catawba Mountain and the Tinker Cliffs from Virginia 311 to U. S. Route 220; the area is one of the more highly visited areas along the Appalachian Trail, and McAfee's Knob is the second most photographed point 499 along the entire 2,1 72 mile long trail. He advised that the Appalachian Trail has fought to ensure adequate protection of this critical visual resource, including a 13 year fight to protect the area from a proposed 765 KV power line that would have bisected the area and severely impacted the resource; and development in surrounding areas threatens to erode the values that are sought by users of the Appalachian Trail and the Carvins Cove area. He stated that the Carvins Cove area should remain in a primitive state that will afford opportunities for continuation of non-motorized back country recreation; and, to this end, the Appalachian Trail Conference has, through its Virginia regional office, and with the City of Roanoke's Department of Parks and Recreation, offered assistance in developing a recreational plan, an inventory of trail sources, and most recently helped to organize and support the 2004 National Trails Day event to build a new multi-use trail in the area. He stated that as development occurs around the boundaries, maintaining the area as an intact, undeveloped, natural area will be crucial to providing visitors with a sense of refuge and remoteness as pressures from · development continues. He advised that the Carvins Cove area is an asset to the community in and around the City of Roanoke, as well as the countless users of the Appalachian Trail, and should be permanently protected from development; and affording permanent protection to this natural area will also ensure maintenance of the trail for Appalachian Trail hikers of today and for many future generations. He asked that the City of Roanoke give consideration to maintaining Carvins Cove in its current natural state and the Appalachian Trail Conference looks forward to continuing efforts with the City of Roanoke to protect the Carvins Cove Watershed. James M. Turner, Jr., President, Western Virginia Land Trust, read a resolution adopted by the Western Virginia Land Trust urging the City of Roanoke to utilize a conservation easement to protect the Carvins Cove Natural Reserve in perpetuity and offered the services of the Land Trust to work with the City on any plans for Carvins Cove. Bill Modica, representing the Board of Directors of the Upper Roanoke River Roundtable, a nonprofit citizens group devoted to protection of and stewardship for the Upper Roanoke River Watershed, advised that the Board of Directors adopted a motion to endorse and encourage the request of the Western Virginia Land Trust to create a conservation easement on the City-owned land surrounding the Carvins Cove Reservoir. He further advised that it is believed that implementing this level of protection will better ensure the water quality for Roanoke City residents and enable the recreational uses currently allowed for this valuable property. He stated that the Roundtable wishes to see the area protected from future economic pressure to over develop the reserve in the guise of budget considerations. Council Member Cutler advised that the City of Roanoke's fiscal year 2006 budget includes funds for preparation of a Master Plan for the Carvins Cove natural area; and later in the day, Council will consider adoption of an ordinance that officially makes the Carvins Cove natural area, which was previously under the administration of the City's Utility Department prior to creation of the Western Virginia Water Authority, an official unit of the City's park system. He stated that 5OO it is hoped that the City will continue to make progress on a Parks Master Plan which will provide the data base for drawing the boundaries for a conservation easement. Council Member Cutler moved that the resolution adopted by the Western Virginia Land Trust be referred to the City Manager for report to Council to include the process by which staff will work through the master planning process, consideration of a conservation easement and a proposed timetable for the process. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dowe. Council Member Lea inquired if there are issues of concern relative to establishing a conservation easement; whereupon, the City Manager advised that referring the request to City staff will provide an opportunity to develop information for Council's consideration on the pros and cons; discussions have taken place with regard to creating conservation easements, not only at Carvins Cove, but on portions of Mill Mountain; and the concept of a conservation easement at Carvins Cove is positive because it would preserve the lands in general and in perpetuity in their natural state. However, she .added that if an · interest develops in future use of the property, it would not be wise to place conservation easements on those portions of the property that might be developed in the future. She noted that the Council and the City administration demonstrated an interest in Carvins Cove when the Council voted to preserve a significant part of the area in its natural state. There being no further discussion, the motion was unanimously adopted. POLICE DEPARTMENT: John L. Brownlee, U. S. Attorney, advised that earlier in the day, on behalf of the President of the United States and Project Safe Neighborhoods, and in recognition of National Police Week, he presented a check in the amount of $100,O00.O0 to the Roanoke City Police Department to assist the Police Department in its efforts to reduce violent crime. He explained that President Bush established Project Safe Neighborhoods in 2001 as a way to aggressively enforce the nation's gun laws, to educate the public about the penalties for felons possessing firearms, and to provide funding for the community outreach and assistance program. He stated that with the $100,000.00 grant, it is hoped that the number of violent crimes in the City of Roanoke for the 2005 summer, as a part of Operation Safe Summer, can be reduced in order to make Roanoke an even safer place to live. He provided an update on certain cases that the Roanoke City Police Department has been involved with during the past six months; officers from Roanoke's Police Department worked with agents from the DEA to arrest, convict and sentence two of Roanoke's most notorious drug dealers; last month, Wendell Johnson, a four time convicted drug dealer from Roanoke pled guilty to conspiracy and possession with the intent to distribute cocaine; and Wendell Johnson, or "Little Wendell" as he was known on the street, had been a major drug dealer in the Roanoke area since the early 1990's, and smuggled cocaine into the area from Texas, North Carolina, Florida and New York. He added that law enforcement officials estimate that Wendell Johnson, since 2003, sold over 100 kilograms of 501 cocaine, with an estimated street value at over $10 million; and due to the work of Roanoke City Police Officers, Wendell Johnson will spend the next 22 years in a Federal prison. He advised that over a month ago, Joe Vaughn Manning from Roanoke, pled guilty to conspiracy and possession with the intent to distribute cocaine; Mr. Manning admitted to selling pounds of cocaine in Roanoke twice a week from 1999 to 2004 from his source of supply in North Carolina; law enforcement officials estimate that Mr. Manning sold over 200 kilograms of cocaine, with an estimated street value of over $20 million; and he will spend the next 18 years in a Federal prison without the possibility of parole. He stated that because of the outstanding efforts of the Roanoke Police Department, these two drug dealers who sold poison to Roanoke's children for years have been removed from the City's neighborhoods for approximately the next 20 years. In addition to apprehending and convicting the above referenced drug dealers, Mr. Brownlee advised that Roanoke Police Officers have aggressively enforced the gun statute; since 2001, the Office of Attorney General has increased the number of illegal firearm prosecutions by 135 per cent, and manyofthe cases were developed by the Roanoke Police Department. He commended Roanoke's police officers who have made the City a safer place to live and advised that Roanoke's Police Officers embody the proposition that real service is about giving more than one gets and when it comes to service and giving to the community, men and women from Roanoke's Police force and their families are true role models. Police Chief Joe Gaskins expressed appreciation to Mr. Brownlee for his support and assistance which has led to a reduction in violent crime and home invasions in the City of Roanoke. He stated that the $100,000.00 grant will be used to increase the number of hours of bike patrol in the City's neighborhoods, to replace mobile cameras in police vehicles, and programs for Roanoke's youth. On behalf of the Members of Council, the Mayor expressed appreciation to Mr. Brownlee for his presentation. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: CITY MANAGER: ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION: BUDGET-STATE COMPENSATION BOARD: The City Manager submitted a communication concurring in a communication from Brenda S. Hamilton, Clerk of Circuit Court, with regard to acceptance of Technology Trust funds. Acommunication from the Clerk of the Circuit Court advising that the Clerk is responsible, by statute, for the recordation of legal instruments which include: Land Records, Marriage Licenses, Financing Statements, Assumed Names, Wills and other Probate Records, and Law, Chancery and Criminal Orders, was before Council. 502 She advised that the Records must be maintained and made available to the public; the Compensation Board through the Technology Trust Fund has made funds available to be allocated toward contractual obligations for the offices that have indicated that funds are needed; the City's Circuit Court Clerk's Office has been allocated funding in the amount of $36,590.00 for equipment upgrades and maintenance fees; and acceptance of the funds is vital to meeting year-end budget obligation by the Clerk's Office. The Clerk of the Circuit Court recommended that Council accept funding from the Compensation Board Technology Trust Fund, in the amount of $36,590.00, appropriate $36,590.00 and establish a revenue estimate in the same amount in accounts to be established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: (#37058-051605) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funds for the Compensation Board Technology Trust Fund Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 398.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37058-051605. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#37059-051605) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of funding from the Compensation Board of the Commonwealth of Virginia through the Technology Trust Fund and authorizing the acceptance, execution and filing of appropriate documents to obtain such funds. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 398.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37059-051605. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 5O3 BUDGET-GRANTS-FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that a local emergency was declared in the City of Roanoke on September 28, 2004, as a result of flooding; an evaluation of damages to City property was completed by the Department of Risk Management and other operating departments; an assessment of damages was also completed as required for the purposes of flood insurance recoveries; insurance proceeds, in the amount of $192,071.00, were previously received both in the form of advances and settlements and subsequently appropriated on April 4, 2005; the final insurance settlement in the amount of $164,275.00 has been received and requires appropriation; and insurance proceeds will offset expenditures resulting from flood damage, clean-up and replacement of lost contents. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance increasing the revenue estimates for insurance proceeds by $29,037.00 in the General Fund and $135,238.00 in the Civic Facilities Fund, as follows: Department Parks Transportation -Street Maint. Civic Facilities Account 001-620-4340-2300 001-530-4110-2300 005-550-7410-2300 Dollar Amount $ 25,935.00 3,102.00 135,238.00 Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37060-051605) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate flood insurance proceeds to various departments, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004- 2005 General and Civic Facilities Funds Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 399.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37060-051605. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATION - HOUSING/AUTHORITY - COMMUNITY PLANNING: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Section 36-52.3, Code of Virginia, provides for local establishment of Rehabilitation Districts by Council resolution; establishment of Rehabilitation Districts permits the City to implement housing programs such as rehabilitation assistance incentives; in addition, Rehabilitation Districts enable the City to establish Neighborhood Design District regulations in the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to new construction and additions to existing structures; and programs are limited to core areas of the City, which Council has designated as Conservation Areas, Redevelopment Areas, or Rehabilitation Districts. 504 It was further advised that through the neighborhood planning process, staff identified three areas where Rehabilitation Districts should be designated: Washington Park, the southern portion of the Williamson Road area, and portions of Villa Heights; and each of the proposed rehabilitation districts are adjacent to areas embraced in the Harrison Conservation Area approved by Council pursuant to Resolution No. 25373, adopted on November 10, 1980. It was pointed out that the Washington Park Alliance for Neighborhoods and the Williamson Road Action Forum, in a letter dated February 25, 2005, have requested that the City of Roanoke establish Rehabilitation Districts in their respective neighborhoods. The City Manager explained that the Code of Virginia requires that a proposed Rehabilitation District must meet two criteria; i.e.: the area must be adjacent to an area embraced in a conservation plan which has been approved by Council pursuant to Section 36-49.1 of the Code of Virginia; the Melrose Rehabilitation District is adjacent to the Harrison Conservation Area; and the proposed Washington Park/Williamson Road Rehabilitation District is a new district which abuts the Harrison Conservation Area approved by Council pursuant to Resolution No. 25373 adopted on November 10, 1980. It was further explained that the second criterion is that the area is likely to deteriorate if not rehabilitated; four indicators were used to identify the potential for housing deterioration, inasmuch as experience has shown that these factors, if not addressed, are likely to lead to problems with housing maintenance and result in a loss of competitive market position of the neighborhood in relation to the City and the Region: Median value in relation to Roanoke's overall housing values · Owner occupancy rates · Age of structures · Resident income levels Washinqton Park · The neighborhood has an extremely Iow owner-occupancy rate of 27%. · The median house value is $48,400.00 (40% less than Roanoke's median of $80,300.00). · 79% of the structures are 50 years or older. · 59% of the residents are at or below poverty level and median household income is $12,948.00. (58% less than City median of $30,719.00) Williamson Road area: Owner occupancy rate is 48%, eight points below Roanoke's overall ownership rate of 56%. The median house value is $64,850.00 (19% less than Roanoke's median $80,300.00). 505 84% of the structures are 50 years or older. 23% of residents are at or below poverty level and median household income is $24,518.00 (20% less than City median of $30,719.00). Villa Heiqhts: · Owner occupancy rate is 71%, 15 points higher than the City's overall ownership rate. · The median house value is $57,400.00 (29% less than Roanoke's median of $80,300.00). · 89% of the structures are 50 years or older. · 23%of residents are at or below poverty level and median household income is $26,513.00 (14% less than City median of $30,719.00). It was noted that establishing these areas as Rehabilitation Districts is important to Roanoke's strategy to target rehabilitation activities into selected focus areas; all three neighborhoods are CDBG-eligible; however, without the designation, some resources such as the Rental Rehabilitation Program and extended Real Estate Tax Abatements will not be available; Planning staff reviewed the proposed expansion with the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority; and on April 11,2005, the RRHA Board of Commissioners adopted Resolution No. 3320 in support of the proposed Rehabilitation Districts. The City Manager recommended that Council approve a resolution designating the Washington Park/Williamson Road rehabilitation district and expanding the Melrose rehabilitation district, pursuant to provisions of Section 36- 52.3, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, finding that portions of the City of Roanoke as described in the resolution are deteriorating, and that if such portions of the City are not rehabilitated, such areas are likely to deteriorate to acondition similar to that which exists in the conservation area embraced by, and included in, the Harrison Conservation Plan. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#37061-051605) A RESOLUTION expanding the Melrose Rehabilitation District and establishing a new rehabilitation district, the Washington Park/~/illiamson Road Rehabilitation District. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 400.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37061-051605. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. 506 Council Member McDaniel requested a progress report on successes in other conservation areas of the City of Roanoke. BUDGET-WATER RESOURCES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that prior to existence of the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA), the Departments of Parks and Recreation and the Roanoke Utilities Department partnered in a joint arrangement that would allow a portion of fees obtained for recreational use at Carvin's Cove to divert back to Parks and Recreation; the funds were used as matching funds for the Virginia Recreational Trails Grant program and other related trail improvements; and were the only operational and/or capital funds that were available to the Department of Parks and Recreation for the routine and capital upkeep of the 30+ miles of trail within the "Reserve". It was further advised that when the WVWA was formed, $40,335.00 of funds which remained in the account for Carvin's Cove Trails was transferred to the Authority; the Water Authority has since returned the funds to the City to enable completion of the trail project; and the Department of Parks and Recreation is prepared to utilize the funds to rehabilitate trails within the "Reserve". The City Manager recommended that Council authorize the Director of Finance to establish a revenue estimate in the amount of $40,335.00 in Account No. 008-620-9825-9811 (Carvins Cove Planning and Development) and appropriate funding of the same amount in an expenditure account to be established in the Capital Projects Fund. Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37062-051605) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the Western Virginia Water Authority for the Carvins Cove Planning and Development Project, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 405.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37062-051605. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. Council Member Cutler pointed out that it is important for the public to understand that the entrance fee paid by the public to use Carvins Cove as a recreation area is, in fact, earmarked for improvements to Carvins Cove recreational facilities. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick suggested that a sign be erected advising users of the facility that the entrance fee will be used for continued improvements to Carvins Cove. Ordinance No. 37062-051605 was adopted by the following vote: 507 AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. CITY CODE-REFUSE COLLECTION-RECYCLING: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that for some time, the Department of Public Works and the Solid Waste Management (SWM) Division has examined trash collection operations in the downtown area, with the primary objectives of keeping trash off the streets, maintaining vehicular traffic flow, encouraging recycling, helping all legitimate businesses and activities to thrive, and enhancing the "Downtown Experience" generally; and a series of meetings with downtown interests since the summer of 2004 resulted in a plan for adjustments to trash collection services, on which Council was briefed on April 4, 2005. It was further advised that a key component of the plan is an adjustment to the times that Solid Waste Management personnel will collect trash and recyclable paper and cardboard from sidewalks in the Central Business District (CBD); specifically, the collection route currently starts at approximately 5:15 p.m., and will be moved to begin at approximately 3:15 p.m., in orderto collect trash from lunchtime traffic while avoiding rush hour vehicular traffic and not detract from outdoor dinner dining; flexible arrangements will be made with establishments that produce large amounts of recyclable paper and cardboard to collect the material at times that are convenient to the establishments, particularly between 6:30 and 9:00 p.m.; and in addition, Solid Waste Management may make unique arrangements for collections in special circumstances, such as the Market Building and special events or weekend events. It was explained that Section 14.1-19(d) of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, specifies that trash in the Central Business District must be placed out between 5:00 and 9:00 p.m., which is not conducive to the degree of flexibility that is needed to provide high quality waste and recyclable collection service to the diversity of establishments in downtown Roanoke; Section 14.1-6 of the City Code authorizes the City Manager generally to establish rules and regulations regarding waste collection; arrangements for collection of trash and recyclables in the Central Business District should be established by such rules and regulations and adjusted administratively as needed; and allowing arrangements to be made administratively will allow initial steps of the service enhancement plan to be implemented. The City Manager recommended that Council delete Section 14.1-19(d) of the Code of the City of Roanoke, to allow trash and recyclables collection times in the Central Business District to be established by rules and regulations to be promulgated by the City Manager as authorized by Section 14.1-6 of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: 508 (#37063-051605) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining §14.1-19, Collection in central business district, of Chapter 14.1, Solid Waste Management, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by deleting requirements pertaining to set-out time for trash and recyclables within the central business district; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 406.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37063-051605. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. Lisa Link, representing the Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce, commended City staff on the recommendation and on the process that led to the recommendation. She advised that approximately two years ago, the Chamber of Commerce was made aware of plans to change the trash collection procedures and schedules in downtown; the plan presented numerous challenges to downtown businesses and, as originally proposed, would have had a detrimental affect on certain businesses. However, she stated that City staff was willing to work with business owners by not only listening to their concerns, but to develop aplanthat would best meet the needs of the businesses and the City of Roanoke. She expressed appreciation for the collaborative process that was undertaken by numerous downtown businesses and the City of Roanoke. Ordinance No. 37063-051605 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. POLICE DEPARTMENT-BUDGET: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that in 1991, the Virginia General Assembly passed State legislation allowing local law enforcement to seize and have forfeited property connected with illegal narcotics distribution which also makes it possible for police departments to receive proceeds from forfeited properties; application for an equitable share of property seized by local law enforcement must be made to the Department of Criminal Justice Services, Forfeited Asset Sharing Program and certified by the Chief of Police; property, including funds shared with State and local agencies, may be used only for law enforcement purposes; program requirements mandate that the funds be placed in an interest bearing account and that interest earned be used in accordance with program guidelines; and revenue totaling $43,573.00 has been collected and is available for appropriation in the Grant Fund, Account Nos. 035-640-3302-3299 and 035-640-3302-3300. It was further advised that in 1986, Congress authorized the transfer of certain Federally forfeited property to state and local law enforcement agencies that participated in the investigation and seizure of the property; application for an equitable share of property seized by local law enforcement must be made to the U. S. Department of Justice and certified by the City Attorney; property, 509 including funds shared with state and local agencies, may be used only for the purpose stated in the application, i.e., narcotics investigations related to law enforcement; participation in Federally forfeited property enhances the effectiveness of narcotics investigations by providing the necessary investigations equipment, investigative funds, and offsets costs that would otherwise have to be borne by the City's taxpayers; the Police Department receives funds periodically from the Federal government's Asset Sharing Program; grant requirements mandate that the funds be placed in an interest bearing account and that interest earned be used in accordance with program guidelines; and revenue totaling $107,402.00 has been collected and is available for appropriation in the Grant Fund, Account Nos. 035-640-3304-3305 and 035-640-3304-3306. The City Manager recommended that Council increase the Grant Fund revenue estimate for Account No. 035-640-3302-3299 be increased by $2,197.00 and Account No. 035-640-3302-3300 by $41,376.00 and appropriate $43,573.00 to Grant Fund - Overtime Wages, Account No. 035-640-3302-1003; increase the Grant Fund revenue estimate forAccount No. 035-640-3304-3305 by $105,450.00 and Account No. 035-640-3304-3306 by $1,952.00 and appropriate $107,402.00 to the Grant Fund - Investigations and Rewards, Account No. 035-640-3304-2150. Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37064-051605) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for State Asset Sharing and Federal Forfeited Property Sharing, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 407.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37064-051605. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. TRAFFIC-STATE HIGHWAYS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the General Assembly approved several amendments to the 2004- 2006 biennium budget that continue to promote the VDOT-Iocality partnership; the amendments establish several initiatives to encourage localities to assume responsibility for all or parts of their construction programs; the Local Partnership Fund initiative designates $40 million to encourage local governments to assume responsibility for management and administration of certain transportation projects within the locality; to request funds from the Local Partnership Fund, the locality must identify a qualifying project or projects and agree to administer the selected projects; qualifying projects are those that are scheduled for advertisement between July 1, 2005 and June 30, 2006, based on the VDOT 510 advertisement schedule and Federally funded through the secondary or urban system allocation; Federal funds replaced by the State funds must then be used for another project which qualifies for Federal funding; and applications for Local Partnership Funds are due by June 1,2005. It was further advised that the only City project currently eligible for the funds is the Signal & ITS Improvement project listed in the current Six-Year Improvement Plan; the City has agreed to assume control over the project, which includes $800,800.00 in Federal funds that will be replaced with the same amount of State funds if the project is approved under the program; and the $800,800.00 in Federal funds will be transferred to the 13'h Street and Hollins Road - four lane project. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution supporting an application for allocation of $800,800.00 through the Virginia Department of Transportation Local Partnership Fund. Council Member McDaniel offered the following resolution: (#37065-051605) A RESOLUTION supporting the City of Roanoke's application for an allocation of $800,800.00 through the Virginia Department of Transportation Local Partnership Fund. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 408.) Council Member McDaniel moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37065-051605. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. CITY ATTORNEY: CITY CODE-PARKS AND RECREATION-GREENWAY SYSTEMS: The City Attorney submitted a written report advising that at the request of Council Member Cutler, an ordinance was prepared for consideration by Council which would amend the City Code to provide a definition for the term "park" as used therein, as well as a statement of purpose for City parks; and the ordinance has been reviewed by the Director of Parks and Recreation, and the Director of Planning, Building and Development. Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance: 511 (#37066-051605) AN ORDINANCE amending Article IV, Parks, Chapter 24, Public Buildinqs and Property Generally, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by adding a new §24-103, Definition; purpose; and dispensing with the second reading by title paragraph of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 409.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37066-051605. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. Council Member Cutler expressed appreciation to the City Attorney for drafting the proposed ordinance which, if adopted, will define the purposes and appropriate uses of City parks and add City owned land at Carvins Cove and adjoining the Roanoke River, Mill Mountain, Fishburn Parkway and the Blue Ridge Parkway to the City's park system. He advised that when the Western Virginia Water Authority was created in 2004, ownership of that portion of Carvins Cove Reservation containing the reservoir and the treatment plant was transferred from the City's Utility Department to the Regional Water Authority; the balance of the Carvins Cove area, consisting of over lO,000acres, was retained by the City and is currently managed by the Department of Parks and Recreation; and with the passage of the proposed ordinance, the area will officially become part of the City's park system and represent one of the crown jewels of the City's park system, along with Mill Mountain Park. He called attention to the importance of creating a great park system for residents of and visitors to Roanoke. Ordinance No. 37066-051605 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board requesting that Council approve the following appropriations, was before the body. $8,521.00 for the Title I D At-Risk Juvenile Detention Center Reading Teacher program to provide Federal funds to employ a part-time reading teacher at the Juvenile Detention Center, said new program to be 100 per cent reimbursed by Federal funds. $9,650.00 from Title I Assessment funds to purchase scientific and graphing calculators to be used by middle and high school students to implement statewide standards of learning assessment programs, said continuing program to be 1 O0 per cent reimbursed by Federal funds. 512 $8,250.00 for the 2005-06 Western Virginia Regional Science Fair which will be hosted by the City of Roanoke, participating school districts, corporations and individuals will contribute toward the cost of the fair, with a local match cost to Roanoke City Schools (this is a continuing grant). $41,278.00 for the Learn and Serve K-! 2 Virginia program which is a continuing program to provide hands-on education and career development for students at William Fleming High School and Taylor Learning Academy, said program to be 100 per cent reimbursed by Federal funds. The School Board further requested transfer of $1,900,000.00 from facilities funds and debt service reserve to provide funds for 23.6 full time employees and related instructional expenses, for staffing changes in administrative services, and for increased transportation costs for fuel and additional route miles. A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in the request of the School Board, was also before the body. Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37067-051605) AN ORDINANCE to transfer funding to cover staffing and administrative costs of additional school instructional personnel, funding of fuel costs and to appropriate funding for the Title I D At-Risk Juvenile Detention Center Reading Teacher program, the Calculator Grant, the Western Virginia Regional Science Fair, and the Learn and Serve K-12 Virginia program, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 School Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book 69, Page 410.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37067- 051605. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. HOUSING/AUTHORITY: Ben J. Fink, Chair, Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA), expressed appreciation to Mayor Harris and to Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick for their input into the development of the following Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Roanoke and the Housing Authority, the goal of which is to establish a closer working relationship between the City and the RRHA. 513 August6,2004 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE ROANOKE REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING AUTHORITY (RRHA) AND THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE (CITY) This memorandum of understanding defines the role of the RRHA and the City: A strong partnership between the City and RRHA is essential to the success of the overall mission of both. The unique powers and roles, when combined in aworking partnership, provide the greatest opportunity for addressing the challenging issues facing Roanoke today. II. As constituted by Title 36 of the Code of Virginia, the relationship between the City and RRHA is unique among all other organizations in the community. City Council created RRHA and appoints the Board of Commissioners for 4-year terms. For redevelopment and revitalization projects, the City sets policy and direction and RRHA implements the programs and projects of the City. For public housing and Section 8, RRHA is heavily regulated by HUD policies and guidelines in the fulfillment of its responsibilities. III. RRHA is charged with three primary responsibilities: a. Maintenance of 1,328 units of public housing in nine developments to serve economically disadvantaged citizens in the City of Roanoke. b. Administration of 1,321 Section 8 rental housing vouchers to assist economically disadvantaged citizens in the City of Roanoke. c. Utilization of redevelopment and rehabilitation powers to assist the City in major economic development and neighborhood revitalization initiatives. IV. RRHAand the City agree that all housing initiatives will bejointly developed. RRHA will explore opportunities to establish a presence in the Downtown Roanoke area in a separate facility in order to more closely facilitate interactions between the staffs of the City and RRHA. VI. RRHA and the City will explore and implement methods to partner on code enforcement within the City. 514 VII. RRHA and the City will negotiate a percentage of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding as an annual amount to be utilized by RRHAto address housing needs within the City. VIII. RRHA and the City will partner to leverage outside funding sources such as grants, HOPE VI programs, etc. IX. RRHA will explore ways to pursue regional opportunities for housing and redevelopment and participate with the City in discussions with surrounding jurisdictions about regional housing issues and solutions. Signed this day,. of ,2004 Chairman Mayor Board of Commissioners City of Roanoke, Virginia Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that it was pointed out some time ago that there was no written agreement in effect with regard to the City's ongoing relationship with the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority; therefore, it was suggested that the relationship be formalized. He called attention to discussions with regard to relocating the Housing Authority's administrative offices from the present location on Salem Turnpike to the Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, Municipal North, which will create better interaction between City staff and Housing Authority staff. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#37068-051605) A RESOLUTION authorizing the Mayor to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding dated August 6, 2004, between the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority and the City of Roanoke. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 69, Page 41 !.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37068- 051605. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler. There was discussion with regard to amending the following language in the Memorandum of Understanding: "The Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority will explore opportunities to establish a presence in the downtown Roanoke area in a separate facility, in order to more closely facilitate interaction with the staffs of the City and the RRHA." 515 Following discussion, it was the consensus of Council to delete the word "separate" from the above referenced sentence in the Memorandum of Understanding. The Mayor requested that Chairman Fink comment on the status of relocating the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority administrative offices to Municipal North; whereupon, Mr. Fink called attention to a communication addressed to the Mayor under date of May 9, 2005, advising that the RRHA will move its entire central office functions to the Municipal North building; while this includes staff that does not routinely work directly with City staff, from an organizational point of view it is not possible to split the RRHA central office staff to operate in more than one location; over the past several years, the Executive Director has worked hard to develop an integrated staff that works as teams, often across division lines, and to maintain this organizational efficiency which is critical to the success of the Housing Authority, all staff must be located in the same place. The City Manager advised that at the Council work session on June 6, 2005, City staff will present an outline of the various offices that are proposed to utilize facilities in Municipal North; and assignment of space in Municipal North was delayed pending a decision by the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority with regard to relocating central office staff. There being no further discussion, Resolution No. 37068-051605 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: NONE. MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: CITY CLERK-ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Council Member Lea recognized Stephanie M. Moon, CMC, Deputy City Clerk, who was recently appointed as Secretary to the Executive Committee of the Virginia Municipal Clerks Association and reappointed as Director of Region IV. 516 ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-SCHOOLS: Council Member Lea commended middle and high school students from the Roanoke City Public Schools who participated in the New York NAACP ACT-SO (Academic, Cultural, Technology, Scientific Olympics) competition in the categories of poetry, dance, essays, music, chemistry, filmmaking, playwriting, dramatics, oratory, musical vocals and entrepreneurship. TRAFFIC: Council Member McDaniel commended the City's efforts with regard to Phase I of traffic calming on Grandin Road, S.W., between Memorial and Westover Avenues. MILL MOUNTAIN THEATER: Council Member Wishneffcommended the Mill Mountain Theater on the recent production of MAHALIA. BRIDGES: Council Member Cutler read the following article from the Council Update with regard to the status of the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Bridge. "Development plans for the restoration of the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Bridge continue to move forward. Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern's bridge design work is 90 per cent complete. Project plans have been submitted to VDOT for environmental and historic review, a requirement for the process. A separate contract proposal to incorporate added features to honor Dr. Martin Luther King has been accepted by the City of Roanoke and is in the process of being executed. Norfolk Southern has removed their signals from the existing bridge and constructed a new signal tower separate from the bridge. The bridge project will be advertised for construction bids upon VDOT approval, which is expected by the end of the calendar year." ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-SCHOOLS: Council Member Dowe commended the achievements of the following educators in the Roanoke City Public School System: · Thomas (Tom) F. Fitzpatrick- Roanoke City Public Schools Teacher of the Year · Michelle M. Dahlquist - McGIothlin Award Winner · Cynthia D. Delp - Curry School Principal of the Year · Cameron Srpan - Outstanding High School Chemistry Teacher He also commended the outstanding contributions of all Roanoke City Public School teachers and administrative staff. 517 PARKS AND RECREATION-TREES: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick called attention to fallen trees along the banks of the Roanoke River in Wasena, Smith and River's Edge Parks. He requested that the matter be referred to the City Manager for report with regard to maintaining public and private property adjacent to the Roanoke River. The City Manager advised that at the Council's work session on Monday, June 6, 2005, City staffwill present a briefing on maintaining the Roanoke River and the appearance of property adjacent to the Roanoke River, which consists of both public and private ownership; and the Mayor has requested that staff initiate a clean up day for the Roanoke River. She stated that education is the key to enlighten property owners that they are responsible for their property which abuts the river; and Colonel Charles R. Alexander, Commander, Wilmington District, will also present a status report on the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project at the June 6~h work session. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. POLICE DEPARTMENTS-COMPLAINTS: Mr. Shaheed Omar, 1219 Loudon Avenue, N.W., spoke with regard to the citizen complaint process in the Roanoke City Police Department. He advised that six steps have been developed in the process that should be reviewed and revised in order to provide better access to the public in an impartial investigation and specific knowledge of the results of complaints. He proposed the following changes: The process currently provides that the complainant will secure a fact sheet at the Police Department for completion and execution. It is recommended that a fact sheet be made available at locations other than the Police Department, such as public housing rental offices, City libraries and other public facilities in the City. The process currently provides that the complainant must speak with the supervisor at the Police Department who, in turn, completes the form for the complainant's signature. It is not clear if both actions are to be taken; however it is recommended that neither action be required and that the City of Roanoke establish an Ombudsman's Office and/or an independent citizen review council to address the initial complaint levied by a citizen. The Ombudsman, or independent citizen review council, should be appointed by Council, and composed of citizens representing various ethnic groups and social/economic citizenry of Roanoke. 518 The Ombudsman should not be recommended by the Roanoke City Police Department and no police officers should be appointed to serve on the citizen review council; the review council should not be housed in or hold meetings in the Roanoke City Police Department, and the primary mandate of the citizen review council should be to ensure fair and equitable review of all citizen complaints from beginning to end. Currently a citizen files a complaint at the Police Department, or a police officer visits the citizen's home; most citizens from Iow income minority communities do not want to come to the Police Department to complete the form, or have a police officer visit their home because there is not a great deal of trust for any type of law enforcement in the Iow income minority community and the citizen feels intimidated by the process. Mr. Omar requested that Council give consideration to the above referenced recommendations in an effort to initiate a citizen complaint process that is as simple and non-threatening as possible for Roanoke's citizens. ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia, expressed appreciation for the City's willingness to perform a cost analysis with regard to renovating or constructing a new Victory Stadium. He spoke in support of maintaining Victory Stadium as a memorial to those veterans who defended their country in time of war. COMPLAINTS-LANDMARKS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION-ROANOKE VISION, COMPREHENSION DEVELOPMENT PLAN-SCHOOLS: Ms. Evelyn D. Bethel, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., advised that development in historic Gainsboro has been hampered by apparent City policies and City administration policies which have a goal of (1) preventing private investment in single home ownership, and (2) establishment of a small business outside the Henry Street district. She stated that the Gainsboro Comprehensive Plan which was approved several months ago may be in violation by the City administration. She stated that the Blue Ridge Technical Academy may be moved out of the Higher Education Center within the borders of Gainsboro, which is now being considered as a historic district She stated that there are potential problems that the Council should be aware of; i.e.: preventing a private investor to locate in a single family home and road blocks that have been put into place to prevent a person or a company from establishing a small business in the area. She stated that while Gainsboro residents are pleased with the potential development on Henry Street, they would support development of a historic nature in the neighborhood. 519 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: CITY MARKET-CITY MANAGER-REFUSE COLLECTION-LOCAL COLORS: The City Manager advised that she was unaware of the allegations made by Ms. Bethel; therefore, the Assistant City Manager for Community Development will meet with Ms. Bethel immediately following the Council meeting to obtain more information. The City Manager called attention to the successful Local Colors celebration which was held on May 14 and 15 on the City Market. She also called attention to Hazardous Waste Collection Day which was held at the Hollins Road Transfer Station on Sunday, May 15. Over 300 families pre- registered for the event and the average wait time for participants was between 15-18 minutes which was considerably less than in prior years. She stated that the next Hazardous Waste Collection Day will be held on Sunday, August 7, 2005. At 4:00 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for three Closed sessions. At 5:05 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, with all Members of the Council in attendance, Mayor Harris presiding. COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion bywhich any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMI~-rEES-YOUTH: The Mayor advised that the term of office of Sherman A. Holland as a member of the Youth Services Citizen Board, expired May 31,2005; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Aaron Ewert. There being no further nominations, Mr. Ewert was appointed as a member of the Youth Services Citizen Board, for a term ending May 31, 2008, by the following vote: 520 FOR MR. EWERT: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris ........................................................................ 7. The Mayor announced that pursuant to Resolution No. 37042-050405, adopted by Council on Wednesday, May 4, 2005, the 7:00 p.m. Council Meeting was cancelled. (No public hearings were advertised to be held.) There being no further business, at 5:10 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting adjourned APPROVED A'I-FEST: Mary F. ParF, er City Clerk C. Nelson Harris Mayor 521 ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL June 6,2005 9:00 a.m. The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday, June 6, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., in the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Regular Meetings, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 36762-070604 adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 6, 2004. PRESENT: Council Members Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., (arrived late), Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., (arrived late) and Mayor C, Nelson Harris .................................................................................. 6. ABSENT: Council Member Sherman P. Lea ................................................... 1. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. COMMI-I-rEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to §2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia(1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member Cutler moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris .......... 4. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Lea was absent and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were not present when the vote was recorded.) COMMI3-rEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Council Member Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss the annual performance of three Council-Appointed Officers, pursuant to Section 2.2- 3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. 522 Council Member McDaniel moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris .......... 4. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Lea was absent and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were not present when the vote was recorded.) CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to §2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member McDaniel moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris .......... 4. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Lea was absent and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were not present when the vote was recorded.) CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss the terms of a public contract where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to §2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member Cutler moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris .......... 4. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Lea was absent and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were not present when the vote was recorded.) 523 CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss acquisition of real property for a public purpose where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to §2.2- 3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member McDaniel moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris .......... 4. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Lea was absent and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were not present when the vote was recorded.) CiTY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in Closed Meeting to discuss acquisition of real property for a public purpose where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member McDaniel moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Session as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Mayor Harris .......... 4. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Lea was absent and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were not present when the vote was recorded.) At 9:05 a.m., Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe entered the meeting. ITEMS LISTED ON THE 2:00 P. M., COUNCIL DOCKET REQUIRING DISCUSSION/CLARIFICATION, AND ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE 2:00 P. M., AGENDA: NONE. TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: NONE. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION AT A JOINT MEETING OF COUNCIL AND THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ON TUESDAY, JULY 5, 2005, AT 12:OO P.M.: NONE. 524 BRIEFINGS: FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL: The City Manager introduced Colonel Charles R. Alexander, Jr., District Engineer, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, for a briefing on the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project. Colonel Alexander introduced Wayne Bissette, Chief, Engineering; Max Hromiak, Construction Engineer; and Jan Brodmerkel, Project Manager, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, who would answer questions in connection with the briefing. Colonel Alexander presented the following project summary: Project Cost Estimate: $65.3 million Federal - $45.8 million Non-Federal - $19.5 million Real estate and utility relocations - $10.8 million Cash - $8.7 million Major Project Components: Flood warning system (stream and rain gages) - 1991 FIoodproofing Sewage Treatment Plant - 1993 Floodproofing hospital (reimbursement) - 1993 Channel improvements (bench cuts and training walls) Recreation trail (completed Wasena Park portion) The following maps were reviewed depicting project limits, recreation trail and parking area, future construction of bench cuts and estimated stage reductions. 525 N ;~roject Limits 526 Fiscal year 2005 construction includes the following: Four bench cuts between the Waste Water Treatment Plant and 9'h Street: Industrial Development, APCO Yard (Roanoke Station), upstream of 13th Street and downstream of 13'h Street. Recreation trail - 900 feet between Franklin Road and the pedestrian bridge for Victory Stadium. Landscaping. Channel snagging and debris removal. Rip rap for bridges. Colonel Alexander reviewed the following fiscal year 2005 construction area and bench cut construction area. 527 Fiscal year 2005 contract status is as follows: May 25 - concluded negotiations June 1 - received SBA approval June 2 - issued Notice in Federal Business Opportunities June 20 - issue Invitation for Bid July 20 - open bids August 1 - award contract August 15 - issue Notice to Proceed 528 Issues include requested use of continuing contract clause and approval to carry over funds into fiscal year 2006. Fiscal year 2006 construction: Preparing for fiscal year 2006 construction in fiscal year 2005: Coordinate with City on contract elements Request approval for a continuing contract Preparing plans and specifications Complete field work for cultural resources site at APCO Service Center upstream of 9th Street City obtains additional disposal areas Proposed fiscal year 2006 contract elements Additional bench cuts upstream of 9'h Street Recreation trail-between Wastewater Treatment Plant and 9th Street Landscaping Channel snagging and debris removal Estimated Federal funding: Through fiscal year 2005 - $17.1 million Through fiscal year 2006 - $5 million Through fiscal year 2007 - $8.3 million Through fiscal year 2008 - $7 million Through fiscal year 2009 - $6.3 million Through fiscal year 2010 - $2.1 million Total project cost estimate: $65.3 million Federal: $45.8 million Non-Federah $19.5 million In conclusion, Colonel Alexander advised that there is a commitment to build both flood reduction and recreation features, the project will reduce flooding, a contract will be awarded in fiscal year 2005 (continuing contract and permission to carry over funds), preparation of plans and specifications for fiscal year 2006, and completion of cultural resource field work for fiscal year 2006 construction contract. He emphasized that no phase of the project will be left with barren earth and landscaping will take place in each component; the Corps of Engineers will work with the City on a more appropriate name for the training wall; training walls allow admittance to limited areas due to existing structure, and infrastructure allows for required flood reduction features without further excavation and acquisition and disposition of existing property; the elevation of bench cuts is above the current river channel; and it is not intended to alter the hydrologyofthe Roanoke River in any respect. 529 With regard to future development along the Roanoke River, Colonel Alexander emphasized the importance of keeping in mind that double handling of material and time distance in terms of hauling material increases costs; the Corps of Engineers is a learning organization and has used information from previous Roanoke flood events to fine tune plans and specifications for the Roanoke River Project. He assured Council of the personal and organizational commitment to complete the project; currently, the Corp's civil works budget is flat, this year the Wilmington District received approximately $20 million more than last year, and he remains optimistic that the flow of dollars through 2010 will continue, however, of paramount importance is the continuing strong relationship and support of Congressional representatives. The City Manager inquired as to any actions that the City could take to ensure that the project moves forward; whereupon, Colonel Alexander spoke to the importance of maintaining continuing communication with Congressman Bob Goodlatte. He stated that during his visit to Roanoke in September 2004, as the flood waters were cresting, he suggested that the City capture the event through photographs, and measure damage in order to keep the issue at the forefront with the City's Congressional delegation and with the Governor. He added that the projects that tend to fair the best are those where all parties speak with one voice so that the message is not watered down or filtered by the time it reaches _ ~ Congress. Discussion centered around future development of the Roanoke River; the Roanoke River is an environmental gem for the City of Roanoke; landscaping issues; a greenway trail from the City of Salem to Roanoke County through the City of Roanoke and Explore Park as soon as possible as the primary recreation trail in the region; and protection of the Roanoke log perch. On behalf of the Members of Council and the City administration, the Mayor expressed appreciation to Colonel Alexander for his presentation. CITY MARKET: The City Manager advised that inasmuch as Advantis Real Estate Services Company is no longer the management entity for the City Market Building, it is impractical for the City to enter into a short term management agreement with another management company; therefore, City staff, specifically the Department of Economic Development, will be responsible for managing the operation of the City Market Building on a temporary basis. She called upon R. Brian Townsend, Acting Director of Economic Development, for a status report. Mr. Townsend advised that: The transition from operating under Advantis Real Estate Services Company to the City's Department of Economic Development will involve the handling of lease renewals and the leasing of space by Economic Development staff for the foreseeable future. City Staff 530 will meet with City Market Building tenants to review current leases on a provision by provision basis to ensure that there is an understanding of obligations in terms of payment, fees, etc. City Staffwill work in conjunction with the Purchasing Department to ensure a smooth transition, to retain vendors and to maintain business relationships. With the coming of the new art museum on the viaduct parking lot, operational changes were necessary to remove the Market Building dumpster. The Market Building Tenants Association is working toward incorporation and prior to this time, tenants were paying $50.00 per month per tenant that went into a market building fund. Turnover in the Market Building has been Iow, with no newtenants since 2002; the oldest tenant has operated in the building for 19 years, the newest tenant has occupied the building for three years, and the average length of stay is approximately ten years. Delinquency of rental payments has been an issue ($47,000.00 - $48,000.00 in December 2004), with three to four tenants comprising the bulk of delinquencies. All tenants who were delinquent in their payments have now been placed on a payment plan and it is anticipated that all tenants will be in compliance by September, 2005. The majority of leases will expire on or about the same time; average square footage is 457 square feet at $35.00 per square foot; 12 leases will expire in the foreseeable future, five leases have currently expired, and staff will focus on the next critical issue of devising a standard lease document in a simplified format. Food court and non food court tenants pay a standard Common Area Maintenance (CAM) fee per month and it is important to establish the CAM fee at a rate that covers the reasonable cost of operating the Market Building. Currently, approximately 1900 square feet of vacant leaseable space is available that could accommodate four additional tenants. · The third floor will require structural improvements. 531 Anita Wilson, President, City Market Building Tenants Association, was requested to provide a status report on incorporation of the Tenants Association; whereupon, she advised that the Tenants Association anticipates receipt of the Articles of Incorporation this week and it is anticipated that all required transactions will be completed in approximately 45 days. Mr. Townsend was requested to give an update on the City Market study; whereupon, he advised that seven firms responded to the Request for Proposals, interviews were conducted and the preferred consultant was selected, the final detailed scope of work and study schedule has not been received from the consultant, and a July 1start date for the study is anticipated. The City Manager advised that because the contract has not been executed with the consultant, the name of the consulting firm cannot be revealed, however, the firm has considerable background and experience in the field, and following execution of the contract, all stakeholders will be given an opportunity to provide input. Council Member Wishneff suggested that representatives of the consulting firm be invited to attend the Council's 9:00 a.m., work session on Tuesday, July 5, 2005. There was discussion with regard to City Market Building lease renewals, which will require approval by Council; the exclusivity, clause; extended hours/Sunday hours of operation; revenues and expenses and the need for the City to subsidize City Market Building operations. The Director of Finance advised that the City's General Fund budget included a $35,000.00 subsidy for the City Market, and vendors and market operations generate $61,000.00 in direct taxes to the City; i.e.: meals tax, sales tax and business license tax. Question was raised as to whether the City will engage the services of a management firm to operate the City Market building, or will the building be operated by the City; whereupon, the City Manager advised that operating the City Market Building on a permanent basis is not an activity that the City should engage in. Mr. Townsend reviewed the following charts with regard to lease commencement by year, average tenancy of current tenants, delinquent rent from May 2004 to May 2005, lease expirations byyear from 2003 -2011, average square feet of current tenants (475 square feet), average base rent per square foot ($34.72), and the status of current leases. 532 533 534 · Expired Leases 535 536 He advised that a standard lease document will be prepared in a simplified format with provisions that address lease rate and term, exclusivity clause, Common Area Maintenance Fee, late fees, holdover terms and default of lease. Mr. Townsend reviewed a chart demonstrating revenues versus expenses from April 2004 to April 2005, showing average monthly revenue at $20,276.00 and average monthly expenses at $29,101.00. He advised that the Economic Development Department will work with the Purchasing Department to utilize established master contracts and place new vendors on City contracts; maintenance issues include the HVAC maintenance contract, reviewing maintenance needs and evaluating new approaches to day-to-day maintenance needs, and the Department of Economic Development will serve as liaison for operational issues. He noted that future investment requirements for the City Market Building include an upcoming roof replacement project and identification and prioritization of additional capital improvements which are subject to the upcoming Market area study. CENTRAL ROANOKE MOBILITY STUDY (I-5 81/220 CORRIDOR) OVERVIEW: TRAFFIC-STATE HIGHWAYS: Kenneth H. King, Jr., Transportation Division Manager; Paul Anderson, representing Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Mattern; and Michael Gray, representing the Virginia Department of Transportation, participated in the briefing. Mr. Anderson presented the following summary study scope: Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Mattern has contracted with VDOT to provide a transportation planning needs study within the 1-581/220 Corridor from north of the Orange Avenue Interchange to south of the Wonju Street Interchange, based on short-term, mid-term and long-term conditions, and to develop solutions that are compatible with local community goals, environmentally sound, economically feasible and with minimized adverse impacts upon the community. Engineering and Planning staff from the City of Roanoke will be heavily involved and will serve on the Study Steering Committee. The scope of work shall generally consist of the following: Examine existing (2004) multi-model transportation inventory and travel data for the delineated study, including collection of necessary data not provided. Update and expand the City of Roanoke Synchro Traffic Model to include current traffic volumes. Access travel deficiencies in the Corridor based on accident analysis and capacity analysis (i.e. Level of Service.) 537 Determine anticipated changes in land use for the mid-term (2015) and long-term (2025) phases; impacts upon the transportation network; multi-modal operational improvements needed (short-term only); capital-intensive roadway improvements needed; community, study network and environmental impacts; impacts upon other modes; and planning level cost.) Estimates and prioritization of needs (each by phase). Prepare study recommendation graphics. Include community input throughout the study process. Coordinate with DOT and City of Roanoke officials. Make presentations to stakeholders, City Council members and citizens. Publish a report and technical documents. Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Mattern will be teamed with Michael Baker, Jr., Inc., to provide travel modeling, forecasting and engineering support. John Lambert and Associates will assist with public and media relations and public involvement. One of the early study tasks will be contacting stakeholders to invite their participation throughout the study and to solicit their initial thoughts about the current facility and their suggestions for areas that the study should address. The total budget for the study is approximately $300,000.00. The studywill build on and draw from earlier studies, but will be focused on developing workable improvement concepts. It will not produce design documents, but should help in setting budgets and priorities for design projects that are a likely outgrowth of the study recommendations. The study kickoff meeting was held on April 19. The study is expected to be completed in late summer of 2006. Stakeholder interviews will begin in mid May. An initial briefing of Council has been tentatively scheduled for June 6 and the first stakeholder meeting will be held on June 8. A generalized project schedule is as follows: Hold kick-off meeting - April 2005 Obtain base mapping/photography- May, 2005 Collect supplemental traffic data - May/June 2005 Hold first stakeholder meeting -June 2005 Update Synchro traffic model -June/July 2005 Develop short term improvement options -July-October, 2005 Forecast future traffic using tp+travel demand model -July-Sept, 2005 Hold initial citizen involvement meeting - September 2005 538 Develop improvement options in September- November, 2005 Hold Council briefing - November 2005 Hold second stakeholder meeting - November 2005 Refine and screen improvement options - December 2005 -February 2006 Prepare budgetary construction cost estimate -January-March 2006 Prepare and distribute draft report -March -June 2006 Hold final citizen information meeting -June 2006 Prepare and distribute final report -July- August, 2006 Mr. Gray advised that VDOT has participated with the City from the beginning, the project will enhance ingress and egress to downtown Roanoke and the multi-faceted study will allow VDOT to program funds. Mr. King advised that the goal of the study is to develop interim, short term and long term improvements and to improve access to the Riverside Center, and Council will receive another briefing at mid point in the study process. Space assignment - Municipal North: MUNICIPAL BUILDING-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The City Manager advised that when assigning space in Municipal North, first priority was given to those City functions that are currently housed in leased locations off site from the Municipal Building. She state that in viewofa recent communication from BenJ. Fink, Chair, Reanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA), with regard to an interest by the Housing Authority to relocate its administrative offices to Municipal North, it is appropriate to brief the Members of Council on the proposed allocation of space in Municipal North. She added that the RRHA has agreed to engage the services of Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Mattern to prepare a space analysis report, and City staff recently met with John R. Baker, Executive Director, and Earl 6. Reynolds, Jr., Deputy Executive Director, RRHA, to review two options for space allocation in Municipal North. (See building diagrams on file in the City Clerk's Office.) As a part of the discussion, the City Manager advised that the Housing Authority has requested 15,000 square feet of office space, and construction costs would be borne by the City of Roanoke, with a goal of keeping costs at approximately $35.00 per square foot. Council Member Wishneff inquired if the project could be done as a Commonwealth of Virginia Historic lax Credit Project; what is the status of the study by the Commonwealth of Virginia that includes certain occupants of the Commonwealth Building and howwill the building be used in the future; when will the Carilion Biomedical Institute move from the downtown location; does the City have a theoretical commitment in connection with the RNDC building; and what is the status of discussions with the School Board regarding relocation of school administrative offices to downtown Roanoke. 539 The City Manager advised that the School Board has requested that a Council/School Board retreat be scheduled in early fall at a time following the School Board's retreat. Following discussion of the matter, the City Manager was requested to submit a recommendation whereupon, she requested the concurrence of Council to ask the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority to occupy space on the third floor of Municipal North to be shared with the Department of Housing and Neighborhood Services, with the balance of space to be located on the first floor of the building; and that the Campbell Avenue entrance will not be opened to the public initially, with the understanding that the option will be open for future discussion. Inasmuch as no objection was expressed by the Council, the City Manager advised that City staff would proceed as above referenced to allocate space in Municipal North to the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority and Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Mattern would continue to work on a space analysis study. FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL-COUNCIL: In the interest of time, the City Manager advised that the briefing on the Upkeep of the Roanoke River would be postponed until the regular meeting of Council on Monday, June 20, 2005. At 11:45 a.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be immediately reconvened in Closed Session in the Council's Conference Room, Room 451, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building. At 2:00 p.m., on Monday, June 6, 2005, the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. PRESENT: Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., and Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff (arrived late), M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., and Mayor C. Nelson Harris .................................................................. 6. ABSENT: Council Member Sherman P. Lea ................................................... 1. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk.' . The invocation was delivered by Mayor C. Nelson Harris. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Americawas led by Mayor Harris. 540 PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: On June 30, 2005, following more than 24 years of service to the City of Roanoke, George C. Snead, Jr., Assistant City Manager for Operations, will retire; whereupon, Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#37069-060605) A RESOLUTION paying tribute to George Carpenter "Chip" Snead, Assistant City Manager for Operations for the City of Roanoke, and expressing to him the appreciation of this City and its people for his exemplary public service. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 69, Page 413.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37069- 060605. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: (Council Member Lea was absent.) The Mayor and Members of Council commended Mr. Snead for his service to the citizens of the City of Roanoke and advised that a reception would be held in his honor at 4:00 p.m., on Monday, June 6, 2005, at the Jefferson Center. The Mayor presented a crystal star to Mrs. Snead. Mr. Snead advised that public service is a special calling; the City of Roanoke is a unique community, and he encouraged elected and administrative officials to build on Roanoke's strengths in order to maintain its uniqueness. He expressed appreciation for the opportunity to be a part of the City of Roanoke's service to its citizens. CONSENT AGENDA The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting of Council held on Monday, April 18, 2005, and recessed until Thursday, April 28, 2005, were before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: (Council Member Lea was absent.) 541 AIRPORT-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council schedule a public hearing for Monday, June 20, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, with regard to proposed conveyance of property rights to the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Lea was absent.) AUDIT COMMITTEE: Minutes of a meeting of the Audit Committee which was held on Monday, May 2, 2005, were before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the minutes be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Lea was absent.) LIBRARIES: A communication from Samuel C. Oakey, III, tendering his resignation as a member of the Roanoke Public Library Board, was before Council. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the resignation be accepted and that the communication be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Lea was absent.) COMMITTEES-COMMUNITY PLANNING-YOUTH-FIFTH PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION-WATER RESOURCES: A report of qualification of the following persons was before Council: 542 The Honorable M. Rupert Cutler as a member of the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization for a term ending June 30, 2008; and as a member of the Roanoke Valley Allegheny Regional Commission for a term ending June 30, 2008; Robert H. Logan, III, as a member of the Roanoke Valley Allegheny Regional Commission, to fill the unexpired term of Jennifer L. Pfister, resigned, ending June 30, 2006; Aaron Ewert, Sherman P. Lea, Jr., and Antwan Lawton as members of the Youth Services Citizen Board, for terms ending May31,2008; and John B. Williamson, III, as a member of the Board of Directors, Western Virginia Water Authority, to fill the unexpired term of George W. Logan, resigned, ending March 1,2008. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the report of qualification be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Ceuncil Member Lea was absent.) REGULAR AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS: BUDGET-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, June 6, 2005, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a proposal to adjust the Fiscal Year 2004-2005 General Fund budget, in connection with appropriation of funds for Social Service/Human Service programs, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, May 27, 2005. The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Department of Social Services experienced an increase in demand for the following services over the past year: Fuel Assistance, Auxiliary Grant, Refugee Resettlement, Foster Care, Adoption, Day Care and Food Stamp; certain of the programs are mandated by the State; additional Federal and State funding was allocated by the State with 543 only Fuel Assistance and Day Care requiring local funds; the agency also experienced an increase in operating expenditures, partly due to under-projecting costs relative to occupancy of a new facility; and additional funds for operating costs provided by the State also requires a local match. It was further advised that the Comprehensive Services Act (CSA), which was established in 1993, provides for out-of-home services to troubled and at-risk youth and their families through a collaborative system of State and local agencies, parents and private sector providers; services include mandated foster care, certain special education services and foster care prevention; and CSA also provides services to certain targeted non-mandated populations. it was explained that the City of Roanoke will receive additional funding for Fuel Assistance, Auxiliary Grant, Refugee Resettlement, Foster Care, Adoption, Day Care and Food Stamp programs for fiscal year 2005 in the amount of $1,927,010.00; Auxiliary Grant and Day Care programs totaled $810,000.00 which included a required match of $80,169.00; $10,000.00 of the required local funds will be provided from the Emergency Relief program which is 100 per cent local funds; additional funds for operating expenditures totaled $49,000.00; $24,771.00 will be reimbursed by the State with a $24,229.00 local match; and the number of citizens requiring assistance and the cost of providing services continues to increase. It was further explained that CSA expenditures are projected at $10,650,000.00 for fiscal year 2005; expenditures exceed the CSA fiscal year 2005 appropriation of $9,011,779.00 by $1,638,22 1.00 and require appropriation of additional local funds in the amount of $503,261.00; additional funds are intended to cover mandated services for at-risk youth; and CSA has experienced an increase in the number of youths requiring higher cost services. The City Manager recommended that Council increase General Fund revenue estimates by $1,871,612.00, transfer $104,398.00, appropriate $1,976,010.00 for Social Services, increase General Fund revenue estimates by $1,134,960.00, transfer $503,261.00, and appropriate $1,638,221.00 for the Comprehensive Services Act. Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance: (#37070-060605) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Department of Social Services and Comprehensive Services Act, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 General Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 414.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37070- 060605. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. 544 The Mayor inquired if there were persons in attendance who would like to speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37070-060605 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Lea was absent.) PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: NONE. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: CITY MANAGER: ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION: BUDGET-DISABILITY SERVICES BOARD: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Fifth Planning District Commission Disability Services Board (DSB) is responsible to local governments and serves as a critical resource for needs assessment, information sharing and service opportunities for citizens with disabilities, their families and the community; the following jurisdictions in the Fifth Planning District have enacted resolutions establishing participation in a regional effort and appointed a local official to serve: the Cities of Roanoke, Salem, and Covington; the Counties of Roanoke, Craig, Botetourt, and Alleghany and the Towns of Clifton Forge and Vinton; other members of the DSB include representatives from business and consumers; and the City of Roanoke serves as fiscal agent for the Fifth Planning District Disabilities Services Board. It was further advised that the State Department of Rehabilitative Services has allocated funds in the amount of $14,800.00 for a one-year period to continue local staff support for administration of the Fifth District DSB. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to enter into a contract with existing DSB staff support to continue the provision of local administrative support; and that $14,800.00 be appropriated to a Grant Fund account to be established by the Director of Finance and that a corresponding revenue estimate be established in the Grant Fund. Council Member McDaniel offered the following budget ordinance: 545 (#37071-060605) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funds for the Fifth District Disability Service Board Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 416.) Council Member McDaniel moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37071- 060605. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Lea was absent.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#37072-060605) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to enter into a contract with the Fifth Planning District Commission Disability Services Board ("DSB") staff to provide continuing local administrative staff support, upon certain terms and conditions. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 417.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37072- 060605. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Lea was absent.) BUDGET-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Human Services Advisory Board budget in the amount of $561,982.00 was established by Council with adoption of the General Fund budget for fiscal year 2005-06; requests from 40 agencies totaling $1,002,302.00 were received; Advisory Board members studied each application prior to allocation meetings which were held on March 23 and March 30, 2005; and agencies were notified of tentative allocations and advised that they could appeal the recommendations of the committee. 546 It was further advised that appeals of Advisory Board recommendations, as provided by policy, were received after notification to each agency of the tentative recommended allocation; appeals were filed and heard on April 13, 2005 from the following agencies: Roanoke Valley CASA, Brain Injury Services of Southwest Virginia, Adult Care Center, inner City Athletic Association, and Blue Ridge independent Living Center; after hearing the appeals, $5,000.00 was allocated to the inner City Athletic Association and the funds will be transferred from the City Manager's Contingency budget, for a total available budget of $566,982.00; no other adjustments were made to recommended allocations; and performance audits will be conducted by the Council of Community Services to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of all funded programs. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the required contracts; that Council transfer $5,000.00 from the City Manager's Contingency, Account No. 001-300-9410-2199, to the Human Services Advisory Board, Account No. 001-630-5220-3700; and that Council transfer $566,982.00 from the Human Services Advisory Board, Account No. 001-630-5220-3700, to new line items to be established in the Human Services Advisory Board budget by the Director of Finance. Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37073-060605) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding to the Human Services Committee, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 General Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 418.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37073- 060605. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Lea was absent.) Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution: 547 (#37074-060605) A RESOLUTION concurring in the recommendations of the Human Services Advisory Board ("Board") for allocation of City funds to various nonprofit agencies and performance audits for Fiscal Year 2005-2006; authorizing the City Manager or her designee to execute any required contracts with the qualified agencies for provision of services, and to execute a contract with the Council of Community Services to perform the necessary audits to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of all funded programs. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 420.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37074- 060605. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Lea was absent.) BUDGET-ROANOKE ARTS COMMISSION: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Roanoke Arts Commission Agency Funding Advisory Committee budget, in the amount of $335,512.00, was established by Council with adoption of the General Fund budget for fiscal year. 2005-06; the total represents an increase in funding of $6,580.00, or two per cent for the Committee as recommended to Council in February 2005; requests from 18 agencies, totaling $570,747.00 were received; committee members studied each application prior to the allocation meeting which was held on March 21, 2005; agencies were notified of tentative allocations and advised that they could appeal the recommendations; and one appeal was filed by the Virginia Museum of Transportation; however, no changes were recommended by the Committee. The City Manager recommended that Council transfer $335,5 ! 2.00 from the Roanoke Arts Commission Agency Funding Advisory Committee, Account No. 001 - 310-5221-3700, to new line items to be established by the Director of Finance within the Roanoke Arts Commission budget. Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37075-060605) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding to the Human Services Committee, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 General Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 421.) 548 Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37075- 060605. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. In the future, Council Member Wishneff suggested that recommendations of the Roanoke Arts Commission Agency Funding Committee be reviewed at the Council's budget study work sessions which will allow more opportunity for discussion and input by Council Members. Council Member Cutler advised that Council delegated the Roanoke Arts Commission with the responsibility of reviewing and submitting recommendations with regard to funding allocations for certain cultural service organizations. He stated that he was not enthusiastic about the prospect of Council involving itself in the annual list of funding allocations recommended by the Arts Commission and suggested that Mr. Wishneffengage in a personal discussion with the Chair of the Arts Commission, or attend a meeting of the Arts Commission. There being no further questions/discussion by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37075-060605 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (C®uncil Member Lea was absent.) BUDGET-ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Rosser International, inc., was selected to perform design services for the proposed expansion of the Civic Center facilities; Phase II expansion will provide for a new exhibit hall, truck marshalling area and other associated improvements to the existing facility; the original agreement with Rosser International, in the amount of $815,000.00, has been amended on six occasions, bringing the current total contract amount to $1,008,515.36; the initial agreement with Rosser International provided only design services and did not include bidding and construction phase services; and proposed Amendment No. 7 will provide for services required to support construction activities, provide for special inspections, reports required by the building code, and miscellaneous design services. It was further advised that City staff has negotiated an agreement with Rosser International to provide the services at a fee of $322,806.00; total consultant fees for the project are appropriate for the value of the construction contract; since the amount exceeds 25 per cent of the original contract amount, approval by Council is required; and funds are available in Civic Center Expansion/Renovation Phase II, Account No. 005-5 50-8616, for the contract amendment. 549 The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute Amendment No. 7, in the amount of $322,806.00, with Rosser International, Inc., for the above referenced additional work. Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution: (#37076-060605) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager's issuance and execution of Amendment No. 7 to the City's contract with Rosser International, Inc., for additional professional services during the construction phase of the Roanoke Civic Center Expansion and Renovation Project -Phase II Improvements. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 422.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37076- 060605. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. Council Member Dowe requested a briefing on the status ofthe Civic Center expansion project; whereupon, the City Manager advised that there have been no major changes in the project; however, aCouncil briefing would be scheduled at a future Council meeting. Council Member Wishneff advised that in hind sight, it would have been preferable to use the tax increase at the Civic Center to fund one year of debt service and to use remaining debt service to fund operations, which would build trust within the community. Secondly, in view of the large sum of money involved, he inquired if the work was rebid. The City Manager responded that this is the original contract with Rosser international, the full amount of the contract was not appropriated and appropriations occur at different stages in the contract. She stated that the request currently before the Council addresses architectural and engineering services which are not in any greater amount than were originally anticipated as the full amount for architectural and engineering services. There being no further questions/discussion by Council Members, Resolution No. 37076-060605 was adopted by the following vote: (Council Member Lea was absent.) BUDGET-COMMONWEALTH'S A~ORNEY-STATE COMPENSATION BOARD: The City Manager submitted a communication transmitting a request of the Commonwealth's Attorney for acceptance of reallocated funds from the Compensation Board. 550 The Commonwealth's Attorney advised that the Compensation Board has made funds available to be allocated toward contractual obligations for certain Commonwealth's Attorneys who have indicated that funds were needed; the Compensation Board approved a request for four desktop computers, eight laptop computers, ten printers, one shredder, one copier and one fax machine, and allocated funds, in the amount of $26,818.00, toward purchase of the equipment; a local match of $3,782.00 will be required, for a total of $30,600.00; the local match will be provided from the Forfeited Criminal Assets account; and acceptance of the funds makes sound financial sense for both the Office of the Commonwealth's Attorney and the City of Roanoke. The Commonwealth's Attorney recommended that Council accept funds from the Compensation Board, in the amount of $26,818.00, from funds re- appropriated by the Governor to be used for equipment for the Office of Commonwealth's Attorney; that Council adopt an ordinance to establish a revenue estimate in the amount of $26,818.00, transfer $3,732.00 from Forfeited Criminal Assets, Account No. 035-150-5 140-2030, and appropriate $30,600.00 to expenditure accounts to be established in the Grant Fund by the Director of Finance. The City Manager recommended that Council concur in the recommendation of the Commonwealth's Attorney and that Council accept funds from the Compensation Board Technology Trust Fund. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: (#37077-060605) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the Compensation Board for equipment replacement for the Commonwealth's Attorney, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 423.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37077-060605. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Lea was absent.) BUDGET-WATER RESOURCES-STREETS AND ALLEYS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that during creation of the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA), the City of Roanoke agreed to assist the WVWA with repair of utility cuts by including repair cuts as part of the City's annual paving contract; the WVWA agreed to reimburse the City for all costs associated with the 551 work; assistance provided the WVWA with additional time to properly plan, solicit, and contract for services; the WVWA now holds contracts for the work and will contract the repairs without the City's assistance in the future; the Water Authority will issue payment to the City in the amount of $273,380.35 for reimbursement of utility cut repair work performed under the City's recently completed paving program; and the adopted revenue estimate for the service was $87,000.00 which will result in revenue of $186,380.00 above the original estimate. It was further advised that the current revenue estimate for State funding of street maintenance is $9,726,000.00; however, State adjustments in street maintenance payments resulted in an increase of $109,000.00, bringing the revised estimate to $9,835,000.00. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance to increase the revenue estimates for street maintenance by $295,380.00 in response to a $186,380.00 increase in revenue from the Western Virginia Water Authority, and a $109,000.00 increase in revenue from the State for street maintenance; and appropriate said funds to Transportation Division Street Paving, Account No. 001 - 530-4120-2010. Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37078-060605) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for Street Paving, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 General Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 424.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37078- 060605. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. The City Manager was requested to explain the relationship between the City of Roanoke and the Western Virginia Water Authority relative to the above referenced recommendation; whereupon, she responded that the Western Virginia Water Authority previously contracted with the City to perform street improvements, therefore, City revenues will be increased in order to accept payment from the Water Authority; and in the future, the Water Authority plans to handle a great deal of the work. In summary, she stated that the Western Virginia Water Authority has contracted with both the City of Roanoke and the County of Roanoke for certain services, whether they be technology, or payroll, or financial services, and the item under consideration is another service or activity that the Water Authority contracted with the City as the entity prepared to take on its full responsibilities. There being no further questions/discussion by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37078-060605 was adopted by the following vote: 552 AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Lea was absent.) BUDGET-YOUTH: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke Outreach Detention/Electronic Monitoring Program provides court-ordered, pre-dispositional, intensive supervision of juveniles living within the community; program services are provided to juveniles who reside in the City of Roanoke and other jurisdictions such as Roanoke County, Botetourt, City of Salem, Craig County, and Alleghany County; each outside jurisdiction pays for services provided; the fiscal year 2004-2005 revenue estimate for Outreach Detention/Electronic Monitoring Services is $35,000.00; and it is anticipated that actual revenue will exceed the estimate in the amount of $16,000.00. It was further advised that in accordance with State mandates, all program revenue must be used for services that are specifically outlined in the Board approved VJCCCA plan; and excess revenue must be appropriated for program activities. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance to increase the General Fund revenue estimate by $16,000.00 in Account No. 001-110-1234- 1310 and appropriate $16,000.00 to the following accounts: 001-631-3330-1004 001-631-3330-2021 001-63 1-3330-2030 001-63 1-3330-2066 001-631-3330-2111 Temporary Wages $11,800.00 Cell Phone $ 2,135.00 Administrative Supplies $ 1,265.00 Program Activities $ 500.00 Drug Tests $ 300.00 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: (#37079-060605) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Outreach Detention/Electronic Monitoring Program, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 General Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 425.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37079-060605. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: 553 AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Lea was absent.) BUDGET-RAIL SERVICE: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Johnstown America Corporation previously announced establishment of operations in the former Norfolk Southern East End Shops to produce railroad freight cars; subsequent to the announcement, Freightcar Roanoke, Inc., was created to conduct the Roanoke operations; and Freightcar Roanoke, Inc., is an affiliate company of Johnstown America Corporation. It was further advised that as a condition of expansion, the City, on behalf of Johnstown America Corporation, requested a Governor's Opportunity Fund (GOF) grant of $200,000.00; the Commonwealth of Virginia has awarded the $200,000.00 GOF grant based on the City contributing an equal amount as match; the City's local match requirement will be an appropriation of $200,000.00 to the Industrial Development Authority of the City of Roanoke, Virginia (IDA); the IDA will grant to Freightcar Roanoke, Inc., the GOF monies and $135,000.00 of City match to assist with improvements and equipment, plus up to $65,000.00 of City match in job training grants, ($1,000.00 per City resident hired to work at a permanent, full-time position); Freightcar Roanoke, Inc., will create at least 400 jobs while investing at least $5,545,000.00 in improvements and equipment by April 30, 2008; conditions that have been agreed to are set out in a Performance Agreement; the Performance Agreement for Freightcar Roanoke, Inc., requires pay back of the GOF monies and part of the City's match if Freightcar does not complete its obligations; and funding for the $200,000.00 match from the City is available in the Economic and Community Development Reserve in the Capital Projects Fund. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to enter into a Performance Agreement with Freightcar Roanoke, Inc., and the Industrial Development Authority of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, the form of such Performance Agreement to be approved by the City Attorney; that the City Manager be further authorized to take such actions and to execute such documents as necessary to implement and administer the Performance Agreement, including a request for, and acceptance of GOF monies above referenced; that Council adopt a budget ordinance establishing a revenue estimate of $200,000.00 in the Capital Projects Fund for funding from the GOF, appropriate $200,000.00 in matching funds from the City's Economic and Community Development Reserve, and appropriate a total of $400,000.00 to an expenditure account to be established by the Director of Finance in the Capital Projects Fund entitled, "Freightcar Roanoke Development Project". Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: 554 (#37080-060605) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate Governor's Opportunity and local match funding for the Freightcar Roanoke Development Project, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 425.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37080-060605. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Lea was absent.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#37081-060605) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the proper City officials to execute a Performance Agreement among the City of Roanoke (City), the Industrial Development Authority of the City of Roanoke, Virginia (IDA), and Freightcar Roanoke, Inc. (FCR), that provides for certain undertakings by the parties in connection with certain investments and job creation by FCR and/or its affiliates to take place in the City of Roanoke at the former Norfolk Southern East End Shops; authorizing the proper City officials to obtain and accept a grant or donation from the Governor's Opportunity Fund (GOF) in an amount up to $200,000.00 to be used for an IDA grant to FCR; to provide for the appropriation of up to $200,000.00 by the City to the IDA for grants to FCR for the purposes of economic development, as further set forth below; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this Ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 426.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37081-060605. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Lea was absent.) 555 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Ordinance No. 36927-1-22004 adopted by Council on December 20, 2004, authorized execution of an Agreement between the City of Roanoke and Colonial Green, L.C., for development of Colonial Green, and the conveyance in phases of approximately 23 acres of City property on Colonial Avenue in exchange for development and creation of a mixed density traditional neighborhood design and layout consistent with the City's Vision 2001 o 2020 Comprehensive Plan, among other things, upon certain terms and conditions as set forth in the Agreement. It was further advised that subsequent to execution of the Agreement, and as an outcome of the rezoning process, minor changes were required to the phasing plan and development pattern book that was incorporated by reference as exhibits in the original development Agreement; with the changes, such items are now inconsistent with references contained in the original Agreement, therefore, the Agreement needs to be amended in order to be consistent with the outcomes of the rezoning process; also included in the amendment are clarifications to the phasing and subdivision process for implementation of the project; and the changes have no substantive impact on the overall intent and outcomes anticipated by the development Agreement. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute an amended development Agreement on behalf of the City of Roanoke, to be approved as to form by the City Attorney. Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance: (#37082-060605) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to execute an Amended Agreement for the Development of Colonial Green, to be entered into by the City and Colonial Green, L.C., the developer, which provides for conveyance, in phases, of approximately 23 acres of property on Colonial Avenue in exchange for certain proposed development activities, in order to conform an Agreement heretofore entered into on December 27, 2004, to certain changes made in the development plan during the conditional rezoning process; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 428.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37082- 060605. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Lea was absent.) 556 CITY A~-I'ORNEY: POLICE DEPARTMENT-NUISANCES-COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY-CITY CODE: The City Attorney submitted a written report advising that during the last Session, the General Assembly amended (effective July 1, 2005), §I 5.2-1812.2, Code of Virginia, which is the enabling legislation for §21-25 of the City Code, pertaining to willful damage to or defacement of public or private facilities (the City's graffiti ordinance); amendments to the State Code eliminate the previous requirement that damage to private property be less than $1,000.00 for the ordinance to apply, and imposes a mandatory minimum fine of $500.00 for certain types of graffiti; and the amendment also simplifies and reduces the time requirements for giving notice to private property owners before the City can undertake cleaning or covering graffiti. The City Attorney transmitted an ordinance to amend §21-25 of the City Code to conform with §15.2-1812.2 of the State Code. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance: (#37083-060605) AN ORDINANCE amending 521-25, Willful damaqe or defacement of public or private facilities, Article 1, In General, Chapter 21, Offenses - Miscellaneous, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by the amendment of §21-25 in order to conform it to §15.2-1812.2 of the State Co~le, by imposing a mandatory minimum fine for certain types of graffiti, and reducing certain time requirements for notices; providing for an effective date; and dispensing with the second reading by title paragraph of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 429.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37083-060605. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. The City Manager was requested to respond to the prevalence of graffiti in the City of Roanoke; whereupon, she advised that the extent of graffiti is not known because to this point, enforcement of the current ordinance has been on a complaint basis. She stated that provisions of the current ordinance allow for longer periods of time in which to respond, particularly on the part of the property owner, and the proposed ordinance will allow the City to proceed more expeditiously. She called attention to a small allocation of funds in the City's annual budget for removal of graffiti; and on a complaint basis, the City has aggressively pursued the issue during the past several years, although no actual numbers are available. She stated that graffiti is offensive on any facility and, if allowed to remain, encourages more instances; therefore, it is important to remove graffiti as quickly as possible. She asked that the general public take note that the City of Roanoke enforces the elimination of graffiti and asked that any complaints regarding violations be reported to the City for investigation. Ordinance No. 37083-060605 was adopted by the following vote: 557 AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Lea was absent.) CITY CODE: The City Attorney submitted awritten report advising that since 1982, Council has reenacted and recodified the City Code on an annual basis in order to properly incorporate in the Code amendments made by the General Assembly at the previous Session to State statutes that are incorporated by reference in the City Code; and the procedure ensures that the ordinances codified in Roanoke's Code incorporate the most recent amendments to State law. It was further advised that incorporation by reference is frequently utilized in local codes to preclude having to set out lengthy provisions of State statutes in their entirety; in addition, the technique ensures that local ordinances are always consistent with State law as is generally required; and the procedure whereby a local governing body incorporates State statutes by reference after action of the General Assembly has been approved by the Attorney General. The City Attorney recommended that Council adopt an ordinance to readopt and reenact the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979); if an ordinance is not adopted, City Code sections incorporating provisions of the State Code amended at the last Session of the General Assembly may not be deemed to include the recent amendments and may be impermissibly inconsistent which could result in the dismissal of criminal prosecutions under the City Code sections. Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance: (#37084-060605) AN ORDINANCE to readopt and reenact the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979),as amended; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 432.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37084- 060605. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Lea was absent.) 558 HOUSING/AUTHORITY-COMMUNITY PLANNING-GRANTS: The City Attorney submitted a written report advising that on May 2, 2005, Council approved certain amendments to the 2000-2005 Consolidated Plan; the resolution that was adopted did not fully conform with the City Manager's recommendations; specifically, the City Manager requested that Council redesignate $700,000.00 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership funds to the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, and $200,000.00 of CDBG funds for other designated housing activities in the 2005-2006 period; however, as adopted, Resolution No. 37032-050205, among other things, redesignated the entire $900,000.00 to the Housing Authority. It was further advised that in order to follow the recommendations of the City1 Manager, a new resolution has been prepared which repeals Resolution No. 37032-050205, and implements the City Manager's recommendations under date of May 2, 2005. Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution: (#37085-060605) A RESOLUTION authorizing the appropriate City officials to execute an amendment to the Consolidated Plan for FY 2000-2005, providing for the redesignation of certain Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnerships funds, upon certain terms and conditions; and repealing Resolution No. 37032-050205, adopted on May 2, 2005. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 433.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37085- 060605. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris ........................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Council Member Lea was absent.) DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Director of Finance submitted the Financial Report for the month of April 2005. (For full text, see Financial Report on file in the City Clerk's Office.) The Director of Finance advised that on a year to date basis, for the first ten months of the year, the City's revenues grew approximately seven per cent in the General Fund, real estate has increased by about eight per cent, growth has been experienced in the personal property tax for the first time in three years, the meals tax has trended with about a four per cent growth, the hotel/room tax is 559 flat compared to last year, the business license tax has experienced a three per cent growth, and the sales tax has flattened out with growth at less than one per cent for this year. He stated that overall, the budget is on track. There being no discussion and without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the Financial Report for the month of April would be received and filed. REPORTS OF COMMI~-fEES: NONE. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: NONE. MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Council Member Dowe congratulated organizers of Roanoke's Festival in the Park, 2005 Young Heroes, Women's Leadership Awards, and Roanoke Branch NAACP Citizen of the Year. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MA~-~ERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. CITY MARKET-LEASES: Kelly Crovo, City Market Building tenant, submitted the following inquiries: Will the City Market study include the entire downtown area? What are the City's plans with regard to attracting more businesses to downtown Roanoke? Why is the new art museum project in downtown Roanoke moving forward prior to completion of the City Market study? He raised questions with regard to the amount of time it has taken to draft a standard lease with a non-compete clause for City Market Building tenants. With regard to previous statements about extending operating hours/Sunday hours for the City Market Building, Mr. Crovo advised that the majority of persons who patronize downtown Roanoke after hours prefer to visit restaurants that serve alcoholic beverages in addition to food items, and it would be difficult to obtain an alcoholic beverage license for businesses located inside the City Market Building due to the fact that alcohol cannot be contained once it leaves a specific counter space; and no business owner would be in favor of extending operating hours if they cannot generate a profit. CITY MARKET-LEASES: Anita Wilson, President of the City Market Building Tenants Association, advised that the Tenants Association would like to work with the City toward reaching a uniform lease agreement that would be fair to those persons who have supported the City Market Building inthe past. She stated that 560 she has refused to sign the new lease for space in the City Market Building which was proposed by the former management company because the lease would require that she be charged twice the highest based rent, plus a certain percentage. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY EMPLOYEES: Marion Vaughn-Howard spoke as a City employee and as a citizen of the City of Roanoke, and expressed appreciation to Council for the City Employee Student Tuition Reimbursement Program. As a recent graduate of Mary Baldwin College, she presented a Certificate of Appreciation to the Mayor and Members of Council for the City's assistance through the Tuition Reimbursement Program. COMPLAINTS-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: Robert Gravely, 729 29th Street, N. W., spoke with regard to the need to provide more jobs and better paying jobs for the citizens of Roanoke, the need to reinvent downtown Roanoke in order to bring growth to the City, and the need for demolition of older buildings in downtown Roanoke to make room for new buildings which will enable the City of Roanoke to be marketed at state and national levels. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: NONE. At 3:10 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for one Closed Session in the Council's Conference Room. At 3:50 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, with all Members of the Council in attendance except Council Member Lea, Mayor Harris presiding. COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Council Member Cutler moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or her knowledge that: (1)only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: (Council Member Lea was absent. There being no further business, the Mayor declared the Council meeting adjourned at 3:52 p.m. APPROVED City Clerk C. Nelson Harris Mayor 561 REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION----ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL June 20,2005 2:00 p.m. The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday, June 20, 2005, at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the Roanoke City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Reqular Meetinqs, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 36762-070604 adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 6, 2004. PRESENT: Council Members Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., and Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick,Jr.- ..................................................................................................... 6. ABSENT: Mayor C. Nelson Harris ................................................................ 1. The Vice-Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Council Member Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Americawas led by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY SHERIFF-CITY COUNCIL: Ms. Lori Frantz, whose husband is a City employee and a member of the U. S. Reserves who served in active duty at Fort Eustis for 14 months and will be leaving at the end of the year for a tour of duty in Iraq, presented a "My Boss Is a Patriot" certificate to the Members of Council and to Sheriff George McMillan in recognition of their assistance to the families of City employees serving in the military. "The National Committee for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve recognizes Roanoke City Council and the Roanoke City Sheriff's Department as a patriotic employer for contributing to national security and protecting liberty and freedom by supporting participation in America's National Guard and Reserve Force." Also in attendance were ESGR, General White, and Mike Cavanaugh, United States Reserve Ambassador. 562 General White commended the City of Roanoke for initiating and adopting a supportive plan for City employees serving in the National Guard and Reserve programs who have been, or may be, called to active duty. He stated that the United States is in a perilous period; the military is striving to remove itself from a quagmire not of its own choosing; active support and encouragement of the City's military member employees is vital for the war effort; and the Defense Department recognizes those municipalities such as the City of Roanoke and other employers that support the military. Mike Cavanaugh, representing Lt. General James R. Helmley, Chief of the Army Reserve, advised that in his position as Ambassador, he represents the eyes and ears of Lt. General Helmleyin the community and one of his responsibilities is to communicate what Reserve soldiers, who are an integral part of the United States Army, are doing worldwide. He stated that Reserve soldiers serve in over 100 countries around the world, and parts of the United States are populated strictly by Reservists who bring to their jobs as soldiers the spirit of their communities and their families, therefore, it is extremely important to remember that they are leaving their families and their employers when they go forth to serve in active duty. He advised that the U. S. Army is appreciative of employers like the City of Roanoke who go the extra mile to ensure that the needs of the families of soldiers are met on the home front. On behalf of Lt. General Helmley, he presented the Vice-Mayor with a photograph of soldiers from the Roanoke area and a two star coin. Council Member Cutler advised that Roanoke makes up the difference between the military pay and the City of Roanoke pay in each instance for every Reservist and National Guard member employed by the City of Roanoke, which enables the employee to be kept whole with respect to his or her income while serving in active duty. General White commended the City of Roanoke for being recognized as the first municipality in the Commonwealth of Virginia to provide the differential in pay. The Vice-Mayor advised that there is no finer honor than to serve one's country, and the City of Roanoke values and supports the troops who are serving their country. He commended the Sheriff and the City Manager for their understanding of the dedication of Roanoke's employees who are members of the National Guard and the Reserve, and it is hoped that Roanoke's Sister Cities in the eastern part of the State will understand that the City of Roanoke made a positive and proper leadership decision and will follow suit. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-CITY EMPLOYEES: Earl Saunders, President; Carolyn Coles, Board Member; and Edward Murray, Executive Director, Rebuilding Together, Roanoke Program, advised that Rebuilding Together Roanoke is a volunteer organization that repairs the homes of elderly, disabled and Iow income persons in the Roanoke area. 563 Mr. Saunders stated that this year, as a result of the support of sponsors from a wide range of organizations, businesses, churches, etc., Rebuilding Together made significant major repairs to 27 homes, 25 of which are located in the City of Roanoke. He advised that the City of Roanoke has been a sponsor for many years and this year 26 City volunteers, under the leadership of W. Dan Webb and River Laker representing the City's Department of Housing and Neighborhood Services, volunteered over 162 hours to repair a City-sponsored house. On behalf of Rebuilding Together Roanoke, Mr. Murray presented the Vice- Mayor with a plaque in appreciation of the City of Roanoke's sponsorship of a house. "On behalf of Grateful Homeowners Across the Roanoke Valley, Rebuilding Together would like to thank the City of Roanoke - Rebuilding Day 2005 Housing Sponsor." W. Dan Webb, Acting Director, Department of Housing and Neighborhood Services, advised that a team of approximately 20 City employees representing nine departments volunteered a total of 162 hours. He stated that repairs consisted of construction of a front porch, joist replacement, decking, guard rails, columns, painting, repair of a hole in the back porch, replacement of a door, yard work, gardening and two dumpsters of debris and trash were removed from the site. He advised that the project was enjoyed by all City employees and other participants and the City looks forward to participating in the program next year. The Vice-Mayor requested that the City Manager express the gratitude and appreciation of Council to all City employees who participated in the program. He stated that whether the program is Rebuilding Together, or many other programs/projects that are initiated throughout the City, some of which are City sponsored, he is always amazed at the response and support of Roanoke's employees who take great pride in their desire to make the City of Roanoke a better community. CONSENT AGENDA The Vice-Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was desired, that item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. He called specific attention to three requests for Closed Session. MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting of Council held on Monday, May 2, 2005, recessed until Wednesday, May 4, 2005, and Tuesday, May 10, 2005, were before the body. Council Member Dowe moved that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: 564 AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick .................................................. ~ .............................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Mayor Harris was absent.) COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the request of the Vice- Mayor to convene in a Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Mayor Harris was absent.) CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Council Member Alfred T. Dowe,Jr., Chair, City Council's Personnel Committee, requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss the annual performance of two Council-Appointed Officers, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the request to convene in a Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Mayor Harris was absent.) CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss acquisition of real property for a public purpose, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the City, pursuant to Section 2.2- 3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. 565 Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager to convene in a Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Mayor Harris was absent.) REGULAR AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: TRAFFIC: W. Jackson Burrows, 325 Willow Oak Drive, S. W., appeared before Council and referred to a recent meeting with the Mayor and the Vice-Mayor in which he and his father, David Burrows, discussed the need for additional parking on Crystal Spring Avenue between 22"d Street and 23rd Street, S. W., due to an increase in business activity in the area. He advised that the Mayor and Vice-Mayor suggested development of a proposed plan, along with any improvements that property owners might be willing to fund; therefore, he enlisted the services of Rife and Wood Architects to develop a proposal. He referred to a proposal which would provide an additional 13 spaces of diagonal parking, replacement of 280 feet of linear curb, three landscape islands would be required, the curve at 23rd Street would be redesigned, overgrown and oversized trees would be removed and replaced with an appropriate urban variety, six sections of sidewalk in front of the Mid Atlantic Securities and Crawford Commercial Real Estate building would be replaced, and lighting would be optional. (See proposal on file in the City Clerk's Office.) Discussion by Council involved whether the proposed improvements could be considered as a part of the village center concept; a concern was expressed with regard to cutting down trees, although it was acknowledged that current trees have become over grown; parking issues; the feasibility of a partnership between the City of Roanoke and business interests in the area; and the condition of an alley at the rear of Lipes Pharmacy. In response to questions raised during the discussion, the City Manager advised that any project that would enhance the vitality of the community, while maintaining the residential character of the neighborhood would be in keeping with the village center concept as discussed in the City's Comprehensive Plan. With regard to funding of improvements through a partnership between the City of Roanoke and area businesses, she referred to the Grandin Road area that was 566 funded solely by the City of Roanoke, the neighborhood was involved in the planning process, adjustments were made in the plan for parking, and traffic calming measures were implemented. With regard to alley maintenance, she advised that the City maintains those public alleys from which it removes solid waste; and three to four years ago, when the City made the decision to discontinue the practice of collecting solid waste from certain alleys, it was with the Council's understanding that the City would no longer maintain alleys for private use. She stated that the alley in question at the rear of Lipes Pharmacy is open to public access and would be maintained by the City. Everett Ward, President, Tinnell's Finer Foods, 2205 Crystal Spring Avenue, S. W., called attention to proposed plans to expand the retail operation and to improve the physical site. He stated that it is hoped that the City of Roanoke values the contributions of businesses in the area and will play an active ro~e in connection with parking, streetscape, sidewalk, and landscaping improvements. He commended the City for recognizing Roanoke's village centers as a unique contribution to the economic life of the City and advised that village centers are not just an economic asset for retail services and the village concept they encourage, but they represent atrue asset for the branding strategy that the City could use in its economic development efforts. He noted that potential employers often consider good schools and great neighborhoods when looking at locations to relocate, the City of Roanoke is fortunate to have thriving village centers, and it is hoped that the City will consider a partnership with businesses to improve this area of the City of Roanoke. Ford Kemper, 2515 Avenham Avenue, S. W., spoke in support of the remarks of Mr. Ward. He stated that Tinnell's Finer Foods provides an anchor for a successful village center and it is important that existing village centers not be taken for granted as the City invests in other areas that could be vastly improved through modest improvements. He stated that with the surge of successful business activities, the Crystal Spring area could be vastly enhanced and improved as a result of certain modest improvements. There being no further discussion, and without objection by Council, the Vice-Mayor advised that the proposal presented by Mr. Burrows would be referred to the City Manager for review and recommendation to Council. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: CITY MANAGER: BRIEFINGS: See pages 588-599. ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION: 567 BUDGET-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that CDBG, HOME and ESG funds provide for a variety of activities ranging from housing and community development to homelessness prevention and economic development through the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); the City has received entitlement grant funds for over 20 years and must reapply annually; and on May 10, 2005, pursuant to Resolution No. 37051-051005, Council authorized the filing of three separate funding applications as part of its approval of submission of the 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan to HUD. It was further advised that the funding release process is underway, and HUD's letter of approval is forthcoming granting the City access to 2005-2006 CDBG, HOME and ESG entitlements; the 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan with Fiscal Year 2005-2006 Action Plan approved by Council included $4,103,618.00 in new entitlement funds, anticipated program income and funds unexpended from prior year accounts; and recommended actions also include appropriation of an additional $77,015.00 of HOME funds being appropriated to an unprogrammed account for use in future activities and will be incorporated into the Consolidated Plan at a later date through a revision or amendment. It was noted that acceptance of funds and appropriation or transfer to certain accounts are needed in order to permit 2005-2006 activities to proceed; and acceptance of the 2005-2006 HOME entitlement requires $85,191.OOin local match which will be satisfied by excess matching funds banked in previous years from such sources as below market rate loans from non-federal sources. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution accepting 2005-2006 CDBG, HOME and ESG entitlement funds, in the amount of $2,909,053.00, contingent upon receipt of an approval letter from HUD as follows: CDBG 2005-2006 Entitlement HOME 2005-06 Entitlement ESG 2005-2006 Entitlement TOTAL $2,104,805.00 723,526.00 80,722.00 $2,909,053.00 · Authorize the City Manager to execute the required Grant Agreements, Funding Approval, and other forms required by HUD in order to accept the funds, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney; · Appropriate $2,909,053.00 entitlement and $483,051.00 in anticipated program income to revenue and expenditure accounts in the Grant Fund to be established by the Director of Finance; · Transfer $356,457.00 in CDBG and HOME accounts from prior years to projects included in the 2005-2006 CDBG and HOME programs; 568 · Increase the revenue estimate in CDBG revenue accounts by a total of $401,1S2.00 and appropriate the funds into project expenditure accounts; and · Increase the revenue estimate in HOME revenue accounts by a total of $30,920.00 and appropriate the funds into project expenditure accounts. Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance: (#37086-062005) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Community Development Block Grant, HOME Investment Partnerships Program and Emergency Shelter Grant Program, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 434.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37086- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None (Mayor Harris was absent.) Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#37087-062005) A RESOLUTION accepting the Fiscal Year 2005-2006 funds for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, the HOME Investment Partnerships program (HOME) and the Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) program and authorizing the City Manager to execute the requisite Grant Agreements with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 437.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37087- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: 569 AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Mayor Harris was absent.) BUDGET-GRANTS-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Virginia Economic Development Partnership (VEDP) established the Virginia Opportunity Region Grant to assist governments in the State with marketing; the Department of Economic Development applied in March 2005 for a grant to purchase a marketing booth for trade shows; and in April, the Virginia Economic Development Partnership awarded the City of Roanoke a grant in the amount of $6,061.20, requiring 50 per cent in matching funds. It was further advised that matching funds for the grant of $3,030.60 is available in the Economic Development Department budget, Account No. 001-310- 8120-2015; and the contract to receive the grant was executed by the City Manager and returned to the State by June 17, 2005, in order for the funds to be received. It was explained that action by Council is needed for the City of Roanoke to formally accept and appropriate funds and to authorize the Director of Finance to establish a revenue account to receive the funds; and Council must certify its acceptance of the City Manager's execution of the Agreement for the Virginia Opportunity Region Grant. The City Manager recommended that Council accept the grant and appropriate State grant funds, in the amount of $6,061.20, in an account to be established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund; and approve and ratify the City Manager's execution of the above referred grant agreement and authorize the City Manager to execute any other required grant documents, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney. Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37088-062005) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Virginia Opportunity Region Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004- 2005 General and Grant Funds Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 438.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37088- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: 570 AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Mayor Harris was absent.) Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution: (#37089-062005) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of a Virginia Opportunity Region Grant from the Virginia Economic Development Partnership; ratifying the execution of grant documents; and authorizing execution of any other required documentation on behalf of the City. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 438.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37089- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted bythe following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Mayor Harris was absent.) FIRE DEPARTMENT-SALE/PURCHASE OF PROPERTY: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that construction of three new Fire/EMS stations was proposed under the Strategic Business Plan for the Fire/EMS Department; construction of the new stations will facilitate the consolidation of other fire stations; a site has been identified on Williamson Road that is suitable for one of the new stations; the owner has agreed to sell the property for $225,000.00 "net"; and appropriation of funds for purchase of the property is included in another report to be addressed at a later time during the Council meeting. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to acquire, in fee simple, a parcel of land identified as Official Tax No. 2170128, following satisfactory environmental site inspection and title examination. Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance: 571 (#37090-062005) AN ORDINANCE providing for the acquisition of certain property needed by the City for development of a jointly operated Fire - EMS station by the City and Roanoke County, located on Williamson Road, bearing Roanoke City Tax No. 2170128, and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 439.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37090- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Mayor Harris was absent.) BUDGET-INDUSTRIES-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that in 1997, Maple Leaf Bakery signed an original Performance Agreement with the City of Roanoke and the Industrial Development Authority of the City of Roanoke, Inc. (IDA), agreeing to make a $32 million investment in construction and equipment at the Roanoke Centre for Industry & Technology (RCIT), while hiring 200 employees; and part of the Agreement was a $200,000.00 grant from the Governor's Opportunity Fund. It was further advised that following the signing of the Agreement, Maple Leaf indicated the original investment would be less than $32 million, and the Company would hire less than 200 employees; the Virginia Economic Development Partnership (VEDP) was contacted regarding the GOF, and a letter was received by the City indicating that $110,000.00 of GOF monies would be available to Maple Leaf up front and the remaining $90,000.00 would be available once original requirements were met; and the City had already matched the original $200,000.00. It was explained that earlier this year, Maple Leaf indicated that it had met the terms of the original Agreement and supplied documentation; a letter was sent to the Virginia Economic Development Partnership requesting the remaining $90,000.00 which was received by the City on May 23, 2005; and funds received from the Governor's Opportunity Fund must be appropriated by Council before funds may be paid to Maple Leaf via the IDA. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance establishing a revenue estimate of $90,000.00 in the Capital Projects Fund, Account No. 008-3 ! 0-9635-9830, Maple Leaf Development, and appropriate funds in the same amount to an expenditure account to be established by the Director of Finance. 572 Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance: (#37091-062005) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding received from the Governor's Opportunity Fund for the Maple Leaf Development Project, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 440.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37091- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Mayor Harris was absent.) BUDGET-YMCA.-GREENWAY SYSTEM: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that beginning in fiscal year 2002, the City committed to a $2.0 million investment to be paid in $200,000.00 increments over a ten-year period to the Downtown Family YMCA; funds cover costs associated with design and construction of a new central branch YMCA complex; and City residents will receive a discounted membership rate, which will allow them to visit any YMCA facility, including the facility in the City of Salem. It was further advised that beginning in fiscal year 2002, the City committed to contributing $200,000.00 per year for ten years, for a total of $2.0 million to greenway development in the City of Roanoke; greenways have become a necessary commodity for communities across the United States since they are viewed as an essential amenity that encourages economic development; greenways connect people to various aspects of a community such as parks, shops, schools and neighborhoods; and Roanoke currently has several greenway projects underway in various stages of development, with a core design element to include connections to Roanoke's primary greenway artery, the Roanoke River Greenway. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance to appropriate $200,000.00 from the Economic and Community Development Reserve to the Downtown Family YMCA, Account No. 008-620-9757-9003; and appropriate $200,000.00 from the Economic and Community Development Reserve to Greenways Development, Account No. 008-620-9753-9003. Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance: 573 (#37092-062005) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the Economic and Community Development Reserve for the YMCA Aquatic Center and the Greenway Development Projects, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 441 .) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37092- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. Council Member Cutler expressed concern with regard to the financial status of the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission and staff that was established some time ago with the assistance of a State grant which will soon expire. He stated that funds will be needed from all participating governments to retain the position of Executive Director and to address other Greenway Commission expenses. The City Manager responded that the above referenced request pertains to capital funds and aten year commitment made by the City several years ago to set aside $200,000.00 per year for greenway construction, in order to complete the greenway system and the City's contribution to the new YMCA. She advised that while the ongoing operation and administration of the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission may be an issue in the future, it is not anticipated to impact the current year budget, or the upcoming fiscal year budget, and a request for funds will be addressed at such time as the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission submits an official request to all Roanoke Valley jurisdictions for additional operating funds. Council Member Wishneffadvised that when the Economic and Community Development Reserve Fund was established, his expectation was that the Fund would be used for economic development proposes/projects, and not general community commitments, or commitments that were made for a certain period of time. He further stated that he was not opposed to either the YMCA Aquatic Center or Greenway Development Projects, but funds are proposed to be taken from the wrong funding source, therefore, he could not support the recommendation of the City Manager. There being no further discussion, Ordinance No. 37092-062005 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick .................................................................................. ~ ........................ 5. NAYS: Council Member Wishneff ............................................................... 1. (Mayor Harris was absent.) 574 BUDGET-FLEET MANAGEMENT: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that it is anticipated that the cost of vehicle repairs for vehicles used by General Fund departments will exceed the budget by $250,000.00 due to cost of repairs for Fire/EMS, Solid Waste Management and Police vehicles and equipment; vehicles and equipment used by Fire/EMS and Solid Waste Management are specialized in function and are generally more costly to repair; and it is anticipated that expenses for the Occupational Health Clinic will exceed the budget by $51,000.00 due to expanding program services to include family members of employees. It was further advised that funding to address additional costs for vehicle repairs is available from incremental revenue generated by the Recordation Tax; it is anticipated that revenue from this source will exceed the revenue estimate by $386,000.00 as a result of an increase in the Recordation Tax approved during the 2004 Session of the Virginia General Assembly that became effective in September 2004; and funding to cover expenses of the Occupational Health Clinic is provided from the Health Insurance Reserve. The City Manager recommended that the Director of Finance be authorized to increase the Recordation Tax, Account No. 001-110-1234-0216 revenue estimate by $386,000.00; increase Occupational Health Services, Account No. 001 - 110-1234-0884 revenue estimate by $51,000.00; appropriate $250,000.00 for vehicle repairs; appropriate $51,000.00 to the Occupational Health Clinic budget, Account No. 001-340-1263; appropriate $136,000.00 to the City Manager Contingency, Account No. 001-300-9410-2199, as an additional contingency for unplanned expenditures and year-end close out; and use of the funding will be reported to Council in the City Manager Transfer section of the monthly financial report. Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37093-062005) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate additional funding for certain internal service and Occupational Health Clinic charges, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 General and Risk Management Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 442.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37093- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... (Mayor Harris was absent.) 575 ART MUSEUM OF WESTERN VIRGINIA: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke and the Art Museum of Western Virginia entered into an Agreement dated October 4, 2000, in connection with the City's providing certain funding in relation to the Art Museum's proposal to design, develop and construct a new building or complex to be located in the City of Roanoke to house an Art Museum, and possibly other entities to provide facilities and services to residents of the City of Roanoke and Southwestern Virginia; the Agreement required certain actions to be taken on or before acertain date or dates; the Agreement was amended on June 17, 2002, in order to extend the time of performance of certain actions to be taken pursuant to the Agreement; and the City of Roanoke and the Art Museum mutually desire that the time of performance of certain actions to be taken pursuant to the Agreement be extended for another one-year period. It was further advised that the City of Roanoke and the Western Virginia Foundation for the Arts and Sciences ("Foundation") entered into an Agreement dated April 16, 2002, pursuant to which the City agreed to convey certain property to the Foundation, subject to certain terms and conditions; and the Foundation desires to assign its rights and obligations pursuant to the Agreement to the Art Museum of Western Virginia "(Art Museum"). It was noted that the Art Museum agrees to be bound to the terms of the Agreement to the extent that the Foundation was so bound; the City of Roanoke accepts the Art Museum as assignee of the Foundation with all rights and responsibilities of the Foundation; an Assignment of Agreement is necessary to assign the rights and obligations pursuant to the Agreement to the Art Museum; Amendment No. 2 is necessary to extend the time of performance of certain actions to be taken pursuant to the Agreement; and Amendment No. 3 is necessary to amend certain provisions of the Agreement pursuant to the Assignment of Agreement and certain other developments. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the Assignment of Agreement for disposition of certain property to the Art Museum of Western Virginia, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney; to execute Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement between the City of Roanoke and the Art Museum of Western Virginia to extend the time of performance for commencement of construction for an additional one-year period ending June 30, 2006, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney; and to execute Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement between the City of Roanoke and the Art Museum of Western Virginia to amend certain provisions of the Agreement pursuant to the Assignment of Agreement and certain other developments, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney. Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution: 576 (#37094-062005) A RESOLUTION authorizing execution of an amendment to an Agreement with the Art Museum of Western Virginia ("Art Museum"), dated October 4, 2000, relating to the development of an art museum, and execution of an Assignment Agreement by which the Western Virginia Foundation for the Arts and Sciences ("Foundation") will assign to the Art Museum its rights and obligations pursuant to an agreement with the City dated April 16, 2002. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 444.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37094- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler. E. Duane Howard, 1135 WasenaAvenue, S. W., advised that he did not wish to take issue with design aspects of the proposed building; however, the new Art Museum should be located on a City block by itself, surrounded by green space, trees, fountains and park benches, in order to create a building that would be representative of the Roanoke Valley and the mountains that the building represents, instead of being situated between an ancient building and a freeway, all of which would be a disgrace not only to the Art Museum, but to the art elements that the building will house. He stated that his preference would be to replace an entire City block of old historic buildings in order to construct a new futuristic art museum building. Council Member Wishneff called attention to discussion in the next 30 to 60 days with regard to creating a Cultural District in the City of Roanoke. He stated that all across the country, there is a growing recognition that locating museums in the suburbs is not the way to go and there is now an interest in bringing museums back to the downtown central core, within walking distance of other cultural and retail establishments. Council Member Cutler advised that the proposed location will be accessible to and in the heart of the City of Roanoke where various improvements are currently taking place in the downtown area. He stated that architectural diversity will also be a plus. Council Member Dowe advised that because of limited available space, the City of Roanoke is faced with situations where it is necessary to be creative. He stated that he is excited to hear the comments of Mr. Howard concerning the new building, especially since Mr. Howard has articulated himself as a natural preservationist and a person who gravitates toward history. Resolution No. 37094-062005 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... (Mayor Harris was absent.) 577 CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU-TOURISM-VISITOR'S INFORMATION CENTER: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke annually has entered into an Agreement with the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau (RVCVB) to provide funding for marketing the Roanoke Valley as a convention and destination tourism site; as part of the annual budget adopted by Council on May 10, 2005, the Memberships and Affiliations budget includes funding of $541,440.00 specifically designated for the RVCVB; and an additional $306,000.00 is designated in the annual budget for marketing efforts and will go to the RVCVB, subject to an adjustment provision as set forth in the Agreement. It was further advised that the City of Roanoke has negotiated a one-year Agreement commencing July 1, 2005, with the RVCVB detailing the use of the funds; the Agreement provides for the same number of City of Roanoke representatives on the RVCVB Board of Directors as last year; the Agreement also contains a mutual indemnity clause, paragraph 9, which requires the approval of Council; the RVCVB submitted a detailed report listing accomplishments made through April 2005; and an annual budget and work plan for 2005-2006 will be submitted to the City Manager for review and approval, upon approval of the RVCVB Board of Directors. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute an Agreement, in the amount of $847,440.00, with the RVCVB, subject to approval by the City Attorney~ for the express purpose of marketing the Roanoke Valley as a regional destination for convention and destination tourism, Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution: (#37095-062005) A RESOLUTION authorizing an agreement with the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau for the purpose of increasing tourism in the Roanoke Valley. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 445.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37095- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. E. Duane Howard, 1135 Wasena Avenue, S. W., expressed concern with regard to the overall image of the City of Roanoke and the lack of maintenance of certain City facilities. He referred to a photograph in the 2005 City Calendar depicting downtown Roanoke and showing trash piled up on the street beside a fire hydrant. He called attention to trash that was allowed to accumulate around a fire hydrant on Luck Avenue, S. W., in the general vicinity of the Jefferson Center that was removed after numerous complaints were filed with various City departments. He advised that some time ago, the City spent over $220,000.00 on improvements to Wiley Drive and Smith Park, and called attention to broken/damaged cement flower boxes along Smith Park and Wiley Drive which serve as an example of improperly maintained City facilities. 578 Council Member Wishneff inquired as to the number of Roanoke Valley jurisdictions that are dues paying members of the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau; whereupon, the City Manager advised that the City of Roanoke provides approximately 75 per cent of all funding for the RVCVB; i.e.: in the range of $850,000.00 and several years ago, the City increased the transient lodging tax and dedicated the additional one per cent for the purposes of marketing Roanoke; and other participants in funding the Convention and Visitors Bureau are Roanoke County, the City of Salem, Botetourt County, Franklin County and Craig County. The City Manager advised that for a number of years she has advocated an increase in the contribution by other Roanoke Valley jurisdictions to the RVCVB; and recently the Convention and Visitors Bureau prepared a strategic plan, however, the plan lacks the ability to be delivered due to the lack of additional funding. She stated that a strategic plan will be prepared including various options through which the Convention and Visitors Bureau would pursue additional funding, both through the public sector and the private sector, and the RVCVB has been encouraged to look at potential membership and involvement by the business community. She added that the City has placed the Convention and Visitors Bureau on notice that the City of Roanoke would not consider increasing its level of participation until there is a serious effort on the part of other jurisdictions to pay their fair share which can be determined in a number of different ways. During further discussion, the City Manager advised that the Sports Committee of the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau is one of the most active committees of the RVCVB and is composed of persons who have a keen interest in athletics and sports. She stated that the Sports Committee actively solicits conferences, conventions and tournaments to the Roanoke Valley in an effort to expose Roanoke to those persons who might not otherwise visit the locality. Council Member Lea expressed concern with regard to sports marketing efforts by the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau. He spoke in support of the City of Roanoke hosting a Virginia high school league playoffgame in any sport, and stated that he would like for the City of Roanoke to become more involved in amateur sports, even at the NCAA level. He referred to sporting events that are held throughout the Roanoke Valley such as the City of Radford hosts the spring jubilee of all schools across the state for spring sports (tennis, golf, baseball, etc.); for a number of years the City of Lynchburg hosted the Virginia High School League State Basketball Tournament; Liberty University hosts a football tournament; and the CityofSalem hosts numerous sporting events. He stated that even though the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau represents the entire Roanoke Valley, he would like to ensure that the City of Roanoke is in the forefront. While he expressed appreciation for the work of the RVCVB, he stated that in the future, it is hoped that the RVCVB will be more focused on bringing sporting events to the City of Roanoke, especially in view of the fact that the City provides 75 per cent of RVCVB funding. 579 Council Member Dowe advised that those Roanoke Valleyjurisdictions that were once dependent upon the City of Roanoke for certain things are not as dependent today. He called attention to a recent news conference that announced six new tournaments that other jurisdictions in the Roanoke Valley do not have sufficient hotel space to accommodate and the primary reason that the City of Roanoke cannot be the lead locality is due to the fact that Roanoke does not have adequate playing facilities. He encouraged Roanoke Valley localities to submit regional packages for sporting events/tournaments. Council Member Lea responded that the issue is not so much whether or not the City of Roanoke has adequate playing facilities, but aquestion of making wise decisions in terms of priorities. Resolution No. 37095-062005 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Mayor Harris was absent.) HUMAN DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke Department of Social Services has a contract with Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) to manage Virginia Institute for Social Services Training Activities (VlSSTA) Piedmont Area Training Center; the contract is subject to renewal annually, and includes funding for all expenses that are necessary to operate the program; the Center located in downtown Roanoke, is one of five Centers in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and within the Piedmont region, and the City of Roanoke DSS is the largest agency served; training is provided to staff of local departments of social services in the region; and childcare providers in the area also receive training at VlSSTA. It was further advised that beginning this year, the VISSTA Area Training Center has expanded services to provide policy training formerly conducted directly by the Virginia Department of Social Services; there were approximately 3,962 people trained in Roanoke in fiscal year 2004, and it is anticipated that 5,000 persons will come to Roanoke for VlSSTA training by the end of fiscal year 2005; the number will increase for fiscal year 2006; and VCU is adding eight trainers and one training assistant to work out of the Roanoke office; therefore, additional office space and training facilities are needed. It was explained that approximately 4,450 square feet of office space is under lease at First Campbell Square, of which 2,250 square feet are leased under an agreement dated May 7, 1998, and 2,200 square feet are leased under an agreement dated June 21,2001; areas are located on the fourth floor and include a training room, two computer labs, four offices and a storage area; current leases for the area will expire on April 30, 2006; space will be remodeled to eliminate 58O offices and storage areas and add a multipurpose lunchroom/training area; leases need to be extended in order to expire at the same time as additional space to be rented; and the new lease rate for combined areas on the fourth floor shall be $63,412.50 annually ($14.25 per square foot), which will include the cost of renovations. It was noted that an additional area of approximately 3,300 square feet on the first floor needs to be leased for expanded space for storage, 14 offices, and a conference room; proposed rent for the space is $47,025.00 annually ($14.25 per square foot) which includes the cost of renovations; funds for the leases are 100 per cent reimbursable from VCU, and the VlSSTA budget for fiscal year 2006 from VCU will include the amount needed for the lease; should funding from VCU cease, the City may terminate the lease; and funds have been appropriated to the City's fiscal year 2005-2006 budget for VlSSTA and are included in the General Fund revenue estimate. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a Lease Agreement with First Campbell Square, LLC, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney, for 3,300 square feet of space located on the first floor of First Campbell Square and for a period of five years, beginning July !, 2005 and ending June 30, 2010; and to execute amendments to the May 7, 1998 lease and the May 1,2001 lease with First Campbell Square, LLC, subject to approval bythe City Attorney, to extend the term of such leases until June 30, 2010. Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance: (#37096-062005) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to enter into a lease agreement with First Campbell Square, LLC, for the lease of space at 210 First Street, and amendments to the May 7, 1998 lease and the May 1,2001 lease, for use by the City of Roanoke to operate the Virginia Institute for Social Service Training Activities ("VlSSTA") Piedmont Area Training Center, upon certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 446.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37096- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Mayor Harris was absent.) 581 LICENSES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke and KMC Telecom of Virginia, Inc., (KMC Virginia) entered into a Temporary Nonexclusive Revocable License Agreement dated January 7, 1997, (License Agreement) allowing KMC Virginia to install, operate, and maintain a telecommunications system or facilities in certain portions of the public ways within the City of Roanoke; the License Agreement provides that KMCwill provide four dark fiber to the City at no cost; and the License Agreement was extended by an Extension Agreement dated October 2, 1997, further amended by a First Amendment dated February 25, 1998, and a Second Amendment dated October 1, 1998, which extended the License Agreement on a month-to-month basis; and KMC Virginia has operated in the City of Roanoke since January 7, 1997, and has established a customer base within the City. It was further advised that in February 2005, KMC Virginia and TelCove, Inc., entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement under which TelCove, Inc., and/or TelCove of Virginia, LLC (TelCove Virginia) would acquire KMC's network transmission facilities (fiber, conduit, and other equipment) within the City of Roanoke; at the same time, the Asset Purchase Agreement provides that other KMC facilities in Virginia will also be transferred and assigned to TelCove, Inc., and/or TelCove Virginia; the transfer is intended to take place on July 1,2005, or as soon thereafter as the necessary governmental approvals can be obtained; and KMC Virginia and TelCove Virginia have filed a joint application with the Virginia State Corporation Commission to approve the asset transfer. It was explained that the License Agreement requires any transfer or assignment by KMC Virginia of such License Agreement to have the consent of Council; accordingly, KMC Virginia, TelCove, Inc., and TelCove Virginia have requested that Council consent to the transfer and assignment; and TelCove Virginia and/or TelCove, Inc., have agreed to fully comply with all terms, conditions and obligations of the License Agreement. The City Manager recommended that Council consent to the transfer and assignment of the Temporary Nonexclusive Revocable License Agreement between the City of Roanoke and KMC Virginia to TelCove, Inc., and/or TelCove of Virginia, LLC, upon such terms and conditions as the City Manager deems appropriate, with the form of the Assignment Agreement to be approved by the City Attorney; and that the City Manager be further authorized to take such actions and to execute such documents as may be necessary to accomplish the transfer and assignment and to administer and enforce the License Agreement. Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#37097-062005) A RESOLUTION consenting to the transfer and assignment of a Temporary Nonexclusive Revocable License Agreement dated January 7, 1997, between the City of Roanoke and KMCTelecom of Virginia, Inc., (KMCVirginia) to TelCove of Virginia, LLC and/or TelCove, Inc.; and authorizing the City Manager to 582 execute an Agreement to accomplish such transfer and assignment and to take such actions and execute such documents as may be necessary to administer and enforce the License Agreement. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 447.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37097- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Mayor Harris was absent.) SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS-BUDGET-STREETS AND ALLEYS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Southern Hills Neighborhood Plan identifies storm drain and street improvements needed along Southern Hills Drive; and plans have been completed to provide for an underground drainage system, improved water mains, sanitary sewer and a new curb and gutter, at an estimated total project cost of $1,740,000.00. The City Manager recommended that Council transfer $1,740,000.00 to Account No. 008-530-9835, Southern Hills Drive Drainage, from the following sources: Source Amount Account UnappropriatedCMERP $407,756.00 001-3323 Capital Improvement Reserve - Economic Development $576~006.00 008-530-9575-9178 Grow America Fund $225,000.00 008-310-9688-9003 Peters Creek Detention Basins $140,064.00 008-056-9656-9088 Johnson &Johnson Offsite Improvements $54,248.00 008-002-9700-9003 Johnson & Johnson Offsite Improvements $49,703.00 008-002-9700-9001 NPDES Phase II $65,800.00 008-530-9736-9003 Transportation - Street Paving (FY05-06Funds) $153~082.00 001-530-4120-2010 Curb~ Gutter, Sidewalk #3 $68~341.00 008-530-9806-9076 Total $1,740,000.00 583 Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance: (#37098-062005) AN ORDINANCE to transfer funding from various capital projects to the Southern Hills Drive Street and Drainage Improvements Project, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 General and Capital Projects Funds Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 448.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37098- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. Upon question, the City Manager advised that the project extends down the entire length of Southern Hills Drive to the intersection with Griffin Road; and the project involves not only the creation of an appropriate storm drainage system for the area, but increases the water main from atwo inch main to an eight inch main, realigns the sanitary sewer system and provides a new curb and gutter system. She stated that the project was first contemplated in 1999, when a proposal for development of certain property on Route 220 was submitted and the developer was given an incentive package that involved a commitment of approximately $800,000.00 for certain improvements that did not materialize. She explained that the same $800,000.00 that were set aside for the project are now included in the transfers that are shown as the Grow America Fund and the Capital Improvement Reserve; and funds were reallocated several years ago when the Southern Hills development project did not occur. The City Manager further advised that this is a project that is long overdue; therefore, the various transfers are recommended; the City will be reimbursed by the Western Virginia Water Authority for the water main upgrade which would be bid with the total project and the cost of sewer main improvements would not be reimbursable inasmuch as they are not considered to be an upgrade, but are required to be moved because the sewer main interferes with location of the storm drainage system. Question was raised with regard to ownership of sewer and water mains, etc., following construction; whereupon, the City Manager advised that water and sewer mains would become the ownership and responsibility for maintenance of the Western Virginia Water Authority, and the storm drainage system, curb and gutter, and paving of the street would become the responsibility of the City of Roanoke for future maintenance. There being no further discussion, Ordinance No. 37098-062005 was adopted by the following vote: 584 AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Mayor Harris was absent.) Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37099-062005) AN ORDINANCE to transfer funding from Transportation - Street Paving Project to the Southern Hills Drive Street and Drainage Improvements Project, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 General and Capital Projects Funds Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 449.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37099- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Mayor Harris was absent.) DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: BUDGET-SCHOOLS: The Director of Finance submitted a communication transmitting a request for appropriation of $300,000.00 for the Food Service Program, representing additional costs experienced by the Program through fiscal year 2005, said program to be 100 per cent reimbursed by Federal funds. The Director of Finance recommended that Council concur in the request of the School Board. Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37100-062005) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate Federal funding for School Food Services, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 School Food Services Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 450.) 585 Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37100- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Mayor Harris was absent.) REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: NONE. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: NONE. MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BYTHE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL: Council Member Dowe acknowledged recipients of the B'nai Brith Athletic Achievement Awards which were presented on May 23, 2005. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL: Council Member Dowe congratulated organizers of and participants in the American Cancer Society Relay for Life. He also commended organizers of and participants in the Miss Virginia Pageant which will be held in the City of Roanoke on June 20-25, 2005. He wished all fathers in the Roanoke Valley a belated and happy Father's Day. ANIMALS/INSECTS-PARKS AND RECREATION-CITY COUNCIL: Council Member Wishneff requested that the City Manager explore the feasibility of establishing a dog park in the City of Roanoke. The City Manager advised that a dog park is under consideration largely as a result of enforcement efforts by Animal Control Officers of the leash requirement in City parks, and Council will be provided with a progress report. DRUGS/SUBSTANCE ABUSE-CITY COUNCIL: Council Member Lea referred to the recent court ruling with regard to the methadone clinic on Hershberger and Cove Roads, N. W., and inquired as to future action(s), if any, that may be taken by the City. The City Attorney responded that the City of Roanoke is not a party to the lawsuit and, at some point, an evidentiary hearing will be held to allow both parties in the case to present evidence that will enable a judge to rule on the motion before the court. 586 CITY COUNCIL-SCHOOLS: Council Member Cutler advised that he represented the City of Roanoke at the Ribbon Cutting Ceremony for the new Roanoke Academy for Mathematics and Science on Sunday, June 12, 2005, and encouraged all citizens to visit the new facility. CITY COUNCIL-GREENWAY SYSTEM-WATER RESOURCES: Council Member Cutler called attention to volunteer efforts by approximately 130 persons, representing atotal of 1,738 hours of labor, to improve biking and hiking trails at the Carvins Cove Natural Reserve. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL-DOWNTOWN ROANOKE, INCORPORATED: Council Member Cutler congratulated Downtown Roanoke, Inc., for hosting "Movies in the Park" in Elmwood Park. DRUGS/SUBSTANCE ABUSE-CITY COUNCIL: Council Member Cutler referred to an article in the Sunday, June 19, 2005 edition of The Roanoke Times under the caption, "Working in the Shadows", with regard to day laborers in the City of Roanoke. He quoted a sentence from the article that referred to a"crack market" in the area of the Main Library in downtown Roanoke, and asked that the City Manager investigate the statement and report to Council. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MAI-rERS: The Vice-Mayor advised that council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. POLICE DEPARTMENT: Shaheed Omar, 1219 Loudon Avenue, N. W., advised that he addressed Council at its meeting on Monday, April 18, 2005, with regard to the issue 'of alleged police brutality and he again addressed the Council on Monday, May 2, 2005, and suggested proposed recommendations for changes to the City's police complaint process. He expressed concern that to date, he had not received a response from the City Manager. ARMORY/STADIUM-SCHOOLS: Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia, spoke in support of renovation of Victory Stadium and expressed concern that the 4th of July celebration will not be held at Victory Stadium in 2005. If the City plans to spend $136,000.00 on improvements to Victory Stadium to accommodate high school football in the fall, he suggested that another $150,000.00 be spent to repair seats and to renovate restrooms. He stated that renovating Victory Stadium would cost one-half the time and money compared to building a new structure. POLICE DEPARTMENT-PARKS AND RECREATION-REFUSE COLLECTION- HOUSING/AUTHORITY-WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM: Evelyn D. Bethel, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., advised that some time ago, pursuant to action taken by a previous City Council, the Gainsboro community was targeted for urban renewal; whereupon, she inquired if the Gainsboro area is still considered to be a redevelopment area. She referred to a previous statement by the City Manager that a dog park is currently under consideration by City staff, yet several years 587 ago, Gainsboro residents supported a play area for children which is included in the City's Comprehensive Plan as green space; however, the neighborhood was recently informed that the space may be used for construction of houses. She called attention to accumulation of trash in certain sections of the City where residents fill the large blue trash receptacles over capacity. She referred to weed and trash abatement violations and the appearance that some City inspectors earmark certain areas of the City to issue citations, while other areas of the City are ignored; therefore, she asked that there be consistency in enforcement activities by inspectors throughout the entire City of Roanoke. She called attention to the 1-581 area in the vicinity of the Roanoke Civic Center where litter has accumulated. She suggested that the City enact a"scoop the poop" program to help keep the City of Roanoke clean. PARKS AND RECREATION-RENTAL INSPECTION PROGRAM: E. Duane Howard, 1135 Wasena Avenue, S. W., advised that the Mill Mountain Star, which is one of the City's greatest tourist attractions, should be open to the general public 24 hours a day, seven days a week. He referred to proposed amendments to the City's Rental Inspection Program which is scheduled to be heard at the Council's 7:00 p.m. session and stated that the proposed ordinance will be ineffective in addressing Roanoke's rental properties. He advised that he was prepared to present further information to substantiate his statement at the Council's 7:00 p.m. public hearing. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: CITY MANAGER: On a personal note, the City Manager advised that she recently became a grandmother for the fifth time with the birth of a baby girl, CITY MANAGER-REFUSE COLLECTION: The City Manager advised that she serves on the Board of Directors of the Innovations Group and attended the recent Transforming Local Government Conference in Sarasota, Florida, at which time the City of Roanoke was the recipient of the J. Robert Howland Outstanding Achievement Local Government Innovation Award for the Solid Waste Management Roanoke Auxiliary Cab. Frank W. Decker, Ill, Division Manager, Solid Waste Management, advised that design of the Roanoke Auxiliary Cab was a team building effort by employees of Solid Waste Management and Fleet Management in partnership with Truck Enterprises of Roanoke. He explained that the project involved a separate auxiliary cab for the third crew member and a dedicated space for tools, safety equipment and personal items, and the Roanoke Auxiliary Cab meets the objective of enhanced worker safety, efficiency and customer service. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager advised that ateam of 72 City employees and their families and friends participated in the American Cancer Society's Relay for Life on June 17 - 18, 2005, at the Roanoke Civic Center and raised approximately $4,800.00. 588 HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The City Manager advised that the Colonial Green site will be cleared for construction of new houses and infrastructure during the week of June 20, 2005. PARKS AND RECREATION-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: In response to previous remarks made by Ms. Evelyn D. Bethel, the City Manager advised that the Gainsboro community continues to be a redevelopment area. She stated that the property referenced by Ms. Bethel for park purposes is owned by the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, correspondence with reference to the matter was sent to a number of persons in the Gainsboro community, and a copy will be forwarded to Ms. Bethel. Insofar as designating the land as a play area, she advised that the City's Department of Parks and Recreation has encouraged use of another site which is more conducive to a play area for children. She stated that the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority owns the property in question. At 4:10 p.m., the Vice-Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for two briefings, to be followed by three Closed Sessions which were approved earlier in the meeting. At 4:20 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the Council's Conference Room, Room 451, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, for the following briefings: ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER: The City Manager called upon Charles Anderson, Architect, representing the City Engineer's Office, for the following overview of the Roanoke Civic Center Phase II Expansion Project: Drawings taken from construction documents prepared by the architectural design consultant showed a large part of the site containing the Performing Arts Theatre, Coliseum Building and Phase I Office Buildings; Phase II Expansion consists of construction of approximately 75,000 total square feet, of which about 46,000 square feet includes the new Exhibit Hall as the centerpiece of expansion; A primary reason for constructing the new Exhibit Hall was to alleviate the current problem regarding the leasing of facilities for either exhibits or sporting events during the months of October through April; · A proposed 5,000 - 6,000 square foot kitchen will have its own loading dock and will be centrally located; Kitchen and concession staff will be able to serve all elements within the complex, with access to meeting rooms, banquet halls and the Performing Arts Theatre; 589 The north end of the new building will include a storage room that is designed to meet the needs of the Exhibit Hall; The south end of the new building will include a small concession area; Restrooms will be located and accessible to the Exhibit Hall, along the main corridor, and the lobby pre-function area; Access to the building will be primarily from the east side, located just to the west of the current entrance in the plaza area, with an entry point on the north end of the building offthe parking area; A main feature of Phase II of the project will be a new and improved loading dock; Parking space will be available within the truck loading area for three vehicles, security fencing, etc.; RV and camper parking spaces for supporting staff of individual events will be located on the west side of the facilities; The Exhibit Hall will have a clear height of 30 feet which will accommodate sizeable e.xhibits such as large masts on sailboats at the boat show; The exterior will consist of split-face concrete block matching the coloration of existing pre-cast concrete masonry, and glass on the west end which is referred to as the "jewel box" effect will allow motorists traveling on 1-581 to see into the Exhibit Hall; Utilities will be located within the floor, rather than across the floor, with conduit that will handle up to 480 volts of power, along with outlets for 220 volts at each location, and duplex-type electrical outlets for use by various vendors; Water access will be located throughout the facility; 237 8' x 10' booths or 281 8' x 8' booths can be accommodated within the Exhibit Hall (currently accommodates 200 8' x 8' booths); with a wireless communication system; Parking management for shows, with parking to be allowed along the fenced asphalt area which is considered an access road; · A new cooling tower will be screened with additional landscaping; 590 · The current storage building will be eventually removed and converted to parking space; and · Completion of construction is projected to be February, 2007. Council Member Cutler inquired about continuing dialogue with representatives of The Hotel Roanoke and Conference Center and the City as to how Civic Center and Hotel functions might work together; whereupon, Wilhemina W. Boyd, Director, Civic Facilities, advised she had been in contact with representatives of the Conference Center, the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau and Contract Enterprise regarding those events that are held in the Exhibit Hall and also use facilities at The Hotel Roanoke. The City Manager advised that along with the Mayor, she previously met with a representative of the Fulton Corporation's marketing group, who was excited about Exhibit Hall expansion and expressed a desire to meet with City staff in approximately one year following completion of improvements because there is an outstanding market from the Washington, D.C. and northern Virginia corridor for this size of Exhibit Hall space. She stated that other projects such as improvements to Lick Run and the lighting of the greenway between the rearofthe Civic Center and The Hotel Roanoke will increase opportunities for persons to travel to and from the facility with a certain level of comfort and ease. Council Member Cutler inquired if golf carts could be used to shuttle patrons through the area; whereupon, Mr. Anderson advised that consideration has been given to removing one of the sets of steps in order to reconfigure the area for access. Council Member Cutler further inquired about the timetable for completion of the greenway project; whereu, pon, the City Manager advised that the project will be completed some time in 2005. With respect to events such as the Kiwanis Pancake and Auction Day that has been held for a number of years in the old Exhibit Hall, he further inquired if it would be possible to rent a portion of the new Exhibit Hall; whereupon, Mr. Anderson responded in the affirmative inasmuch as the Exhibit Hall was designed with the structural ability to support a partition system to accommodate different size events. Council Member Dowe inquired about proposed plans for use of the existing Exhibit Hall; whereupon, Mr. Anderson stated that it is proposed to subdivide the 10,000 square feet Exhibit Hall by constructing a permanent wall around the outside corridor along existing columns, with a moveable wall-type partition system that would subdivide the space into combinations of meeting rooms, with access to an elevator in order to accommodate the movement of food to the Exhibit Hall. With regard to trade shows and in an effort to be more multi-dimensional, Council Member Dowe inquired about plans for temporary seating; whereupon, Mr. Anderson stated that the Exhibit Hall would be flexible and designed to accommodate banquets for up to several thousand people, using chairs and a platform at the end or along one side of the area. 591 Council Member Dowe inquired as to what amenities would set the City's facilities apart from surrounding localities; whereupon, Mr. Anderson advised that presently there is no public address system in the facility, however, a system is included on the contingency list and a determination will be made as to the level of quality that will be required. The City Manager explained that every project budget contains acontingency, and it is hoped that the contingencywould not be spent for unknowns, but for certain activities and upgrades; and as the project proceeds, completion of basic construction will disclose to the contractors whether there are problems in the design, or if something exists underground that was not anticipated. Council Member Dowe noted that it would be less expensive to assess costs up front rather than after construction; whereupon, Mr. Anderson replied that preliminaryworkwas completed with regard to the underground surface, there is the potential for recovering rock on the site, and there is some concern with regard to how the two buildings will come together; and once it is known how new construction will interface with the existing building, when footings are in place and columns are constructed within the next four to six months, it will be easier to identify certain needs. The City Manager called attention to a lengthy construction period for the project; and the importance of ensuring that the Coliseum and the Performing Arts Theatre may continue to be used for events that were previously scheduled and/or will be scheduled over the next 12-18 months, and during those times when events are held, much of the construction will not be .able to continue. She stated that the biggest unknowns occur during the earliest part of construction, and once the project proceeds past that point, decisions regarding enhancements, etc., can be made. Council Member Dowe inquired about parking management, and asked if raising the roof of the Coliseum was still an option; whereupon, the City Manager advised a Master Plan for the Coliseum consisted of multiple phases, and at some point in the future Council may wish to allow for expansion of seating capacity in the Coliseum, with boxes and other amenities; prior to assuming the position of City Manager, the Civic Center operated through a certain level of subsidy from the City and the former Director of Civic Facilities was instructed not to exceed the subsidy for any reason, which created a disadvantage since decreases were made in custodial and maintenance areas; the City made improvements to the Civic Center complex based upon the Civic Center's revenue with the cap on the subsidy; Council's decision regarding Victory Stadium took some of the revenue off the table relative to funding the project; however, the Council believed in the importance of Civic Center expansion and there was agreement that the General Fund would support the project; and if the present or future Council wish to accelerate multiple phases of Civic Center expansion, it could be accomplished with the understanding that more General Fund money would be required as opposed to the principles that were applied several years ago that indicated that it could be 10-15 years before the City would reach that phase. 592 Council Member Dowe noted that there is more of a market today to cover high school sports; therefore, it is important to offer digital capabilities in order to attract these types of events; television revenue is important and more consideration should be given to those types of issues. Council Member Wishneff inquired about the inside appearance of the new Exhibit Hall; whereupon, Mr. Anderson advised the floor would be constructed of sealed concrete, with walls of concrete block and drywall, the ceiling would have exposed construction si. milar to the Coliseum which would be painted, and there would be a ceiling constructed over the pedestrian walk area. Mr. Wishneff further stated that it appeared that the facility was being constructed primarily for exhibits and trade shows, and inquired if there was a convention component to the plan; whereupon, Mr. Anderson responded that the meeting hall area and current exhibit halls would be upgraded to include carpet and ceilings and the kinds of amenities that are routinely found in that type of accommodation. The Director of Civic Facilities explained that consideration has been given to those groups that need the Coliseum as well as exhibit areas and/or break-out spaces. She stated that one concept could include a gala session in the Coliseum or in the Performing Arts Theatre, and atrade show could be conducted in the Exhibit Hall, with break-out space at the Civic Center and The Hotel Roanoke. Mr. Wishneff stated that he had seen numerous sound system products during the last six months that would fit the budget and consist of the latest technology. In addition, he asked the City Manager to submit concepts for additional parking alternatives. ' Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick stated that over the long term, there could be an aggravated parking situation; whereupon, the City Manager advised that there is the possibilityofexpanding existing parking garages, and parking is not an issue with evening activities due to the availability of parking in all of the publicly owned parking garages. She stated that the challenge is in providing adequate parking for day time events inasmuch as the majority of the City's parking garages are primarily full. Council Member Wishneff inquired about disseminating information to the public at least six to twelve months before the new facilities are scheduled to open; whereupon, the City Manager advised that the City would be required to handle the majority of information dissemination, as opposed to the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau. Council Member McDaniel inquired about the number of parking spaces that would be displaced; whereupon, Mr. Anderson stated that approximately 250 parking spaces will be eliminated. She further inquired as to how out of town patrons will be informed about shuttle parking; whereupon, the City Manager advised that information will be provided when tickets are sold; and the Director of Civic Facilities stated that Civic Center staff also works with representatives of the Virginia Department of Transportation to place information on highway signage and on the 1-581 side marquee, indicating that the Civic Center parking lot is full and patrons should use the shuttle. Ms. McDanielinquired if shuttles are a deterrent when attracting events to the Civic Center; whereupon, the Director of 593 Civic Facilities replied that it was a plus because other cities do not provide parking. The City Manager responded that the more patrons become regular users of the facility, the more theywill choose to use the shuttles, which are more convenient; the City encountered more parking challenges before the project started with major back ups on 1-581 at other locations, recent parking management activities helped to eliminate problems, however, some persons continue to ignore the signs that indicate that the parking lot is full and vehicles must be redirected. With regard to Council Member Dowe's previous question, she stated that if the City decided to raise the roof of the Coliseum, another piece of the parking lot would be taken out of commission during construction. Council Member Lea inquired as to the availability of a shuttle for persons with disabilities; whereupon, the City Manager advised that shuttle buses are handicapped equipped and disabled persons could park in the designated handicapped spaces in the garages and the surface parking lots. The Director of Civic Facilities noted that one entire line was designated for handicapped individuals. Council Member McDaniel inquired if bookings have been confirmed for the new Exhibit Hall; whereupon, the Director of Civic Facilities stated that no bookings have been confirmed to date, marketing staff have attended trade conventions and participated in trade shows, and an interest has been expressed in the facilities when they are near completion; and larger events book as much as five years in advance or approximately 2009-2010. Council Member Lea inquired if there are plans for increased scheduling of events by local persons and organizations; whereupon, the Director of Civic Facilities advised that gospel plays, job fairs and trade shows have been booked for approximately 20 days out of the month, most of which are local. The City Manager advised that the Civic Center has not been maintained at its highest level over the past few years which has led to a lesser number of bookings; the City has now made an investment in quality maintenance in the facility, the facility is now turning the corner and the local groups have expressed an interest in booking events; food service has been improved by combining concessions and catering and serving dinner before broadway events; and past complaints regarding the condition of the facilities prevented the City from marketing the Civic Center; however, with the improvements, Civic Center staff is now in a better position to market the facilities. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick spoke to the effectiveness of four truck unloading bays. He suggested installation of professional-looking permanent signs for shuttles that can be easily dropped down that would contain either the Civic Center's logo and/or Roanoke's branding logo; and requested installation of a permanent sign stating "Shuttle Stop" at Williamson Road that would be readily visible to the public. 594 Council Member McDaniel suggested that the shuttle signs be coordinated with parking garage signs; whereupon, the City Manager advised that the Traffic Engineer is reviewing all directional signs in downtown Roanoke with regard to location and content in order to make the downtown area more user friendly. Council Member Wishneff inquired if the City had considered geothermal systems such as the system that is used at the Bristol facility; whereupon, Mr. Anderson advised that there was discussion regarding the installation of a system that would depend upon usage, relationship with the power company, and the type of rates that the City would get. Council Member Wishneff inquired if outside naming rights would be solicited; whereupon, the Director of Civic Facilities advised that naming rights would apply to the entire complex and not just to the Exhibit Hall and a study would be conducted to determine how many people pass Civic Center signage which would be an important consideration for any person who might wish to invest in naming rights. The City Manager advised that it would be preferable to discuss naming rights during the next phase of Civic Center improvements because once box seating and larger seating capacity can be offered, the dollar value would be more worthwhile. Council Member Cutler inquired if environmental leak certification in terms of storm water frequency and energy conservation had been considered in the design; whereupon, Mr. Anderson responded that he could not recall any discussion to that effect. Dr. Cutler also inquired if there was gray water re- circulation; whereupon, Mr. Anderson advised that staff is looking into the issue. Council Member Cutler inquired as to how Percent for the Arts is included in the project; whereupon, Mr. Anderson advised that the Chair of the Roanoke City Arts Commission was contacted with regard to art on the Civic Center plaza; a water proofing project will eliminate some of the leaks at the current Exhibit Hall regarding the drainage system that lies in front of both buildings and should be completed during the fall season; City staff looked at replacing all pavers to provide for a more manageable system in terms of maintenance, current pavers are seven feet by seven feet in size and weigh about 1,500 pounds each, making it difficult for staff to properly remove and maintain drainage areas, new pavers directly above the drains could only be reduced to half that size in order to accommodate the weight of Civic Center equipment that will be moved across pavers, and consideration is being given to recoating pavers with a mosaic design. The City Manager advised that a specific amount of money was established for the Percent for the Arts Program that would not necessarily tie in to a specific building; the Arts Commission prefers to go through the process of developing a master plan and then make decisions with regard to art location display; the Arts Commission may or may not recommend to Council that art be placed at a specific 595 .facility, nor would it recommend that art would be displayed at every City project, however, the capital budget is assessed one percent on certain projects to be used for art; and a mosaic for the Civic Center plaza was discussed by the Arts Commission approximately 12-18 months ago, but the Arts Commission was of the opinion to proceed in another direction. ROANOKE RIVER CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM: The City Manager referred to a previous City Council briefing on the Roanoke River Corridor Program and questions raised by Council Members with regard to obtaining easements or property adjacent to the Roanoke River. She stated that a suggestion was offered that City staff prepare a plan or plans that would place the City in a position to maintain the Roanoke River; whereupon, she called upon Gary Hegner, Parks Superintendent, for a briefing on a proposed program which is in draft format in order to receive input by Council to ensure that staff is proceeding according to the wishes of Council. Mr. Hegner advised that: The Roanoke River Corridor Improvement Program is designed to improve aesthetic character, improve water flow and improve water quality of the Roanoke River and its tributaries through increased maintenance, educational, and cooperative measures. · Proposed Proqram Mission To be the environmental stewards of the Roanoke River and its tributaries, improving aesthetic quality and health through education, cooperation, easement acquisition and land donation, and implementation of best management practices. · Examples of Successful River Manaqement Proqrams Modeled Delaware River River KeeperTM program (Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware) Red River River KeeperTM program (Fargo-Moorhead area, North Dakota) James River Association (Mechanicsville, Virginia) · Proqram Overview Pilot program with annual update to City Manager and City Council Oversee targeted areas within the Roanoke River, Tinker Creek and Lick Run A Collaborative Effort is required between City Staff and Departments: 596 · Parks and Recreation · Public Works (Transportation, Engineering) · Environmental and Emergency Management · Housing and Neighborhood Services (Code Enforcement) · Human Resources (Municipal Volunteer Program) · City Manager and City Council River improvement staff would also work with the following outside entities: · Upper Roanoke River Roundtable · Greenways Commission · Clean Valley Council · Other local municipalities (Salem, Roanoke Montgomery County) · Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) County, Benefits and Outcomes improved waterway aesthetics Increased community involvement Synergistic working relationships between City departments and local environmental groups Higher property values (The Proximate Principle) Increased recreational opportunities Program Goals-Short Term Develop excellent working relations between all involved City departments and outside entities Document public and privately owned parcels requiring debris removal in targeted areas: · Fallen and dead trees · Trash · Hazardous materials Promote waterfront property owner education: · Proper care of waterfront property · Consequences of improper waterfront care · Benefits of easement acquisition and land donation · Work with Code Enforcement staff to target improperly maintained properties. 597 Council Member Cutler inquired if the program implied regional cooperation; whereupon, Mr. Hegner responded that the study started as a City- wide project, but will ultimately incorporate other neighboring jurisdictions and agencies. Mr. Hegner explained that in recent Clean Valley Days, approximately 90 man hours of time were donated by volunteers and City staff which generated approximately $900.00 in dumping fees; and such endeavors helped to develop cooperation with other regional entities and provided educational opportunities to improve the quality of the Roanoke River and its tributaries. Mr. Hegner noted that none of the areas of the Roanoke River are looked at on a regular basis, and the proposed program will target certain properties; an effort has been made to remove invasive species such as paradise trees; in conjunction with Public Works staffthere discussions have taken place with regard to conducting an "extreme make-over work day" for targeted areas along the Roanoke River and tributaries, which would provide immediate results from the program, as well as implementation of the private property easement acquisition process. He called attention to marketing the program through webpage development, RVTV, local television and radio media coverage to improve overall knowledge and it is hoped that a short-term goal of erosion prevention will be established, along with the sharing of equipment and costs with other Roanoke Valley jurisdictions. He stated that certain components that would not be initially covered in the program are silt management issues, private property care where permission has been denied, and flood reduction. In addition, he noted that $40,000.00 in funds was identified through MPDS funding. The City Manager stated that the first step was to begin educating abutting private property owners regarding their responsibilities; it has been found that once property owners understand their responsibilities, they are quick to assume responsibility; there is a need to educate private property owners with regard to opportunities to provide easements to the City which would allow the City to assume certain responsibilities on their behalf; there will be a need to increase staff in order to assume any kind of maintenance program on a regular basis; two or three times a year, City forces and civic volunteers could be combined to conduct an "extreme make-over" that the City is not presently staffed or equipped to address; City staff could take the next nine months to begin laying out a detailed work plan and budget for fiscal year 2007 that would provide for regular and on-going maintenance; and there is a potential to install inexpensive netting as a fence across areas of the Roanoke River to prevent refuse from going into river. She asked for input by Council with regard to the proposed approach. Council Member Cutler expressed appreciation to the City Manager and City staff for responding to the Council's request for this kind of initiative along the Roanoke River and advised that this is the first time that the City has looked at the Roanoke River with a determination to do something. He referred to the Appalachian Trail Conference that has organized volunteer trail clubs and the Carvins Cove Trail Greenway Program that has attracted the attention of several hundred volunteers, which could also be done along Roanoke River; local 598 jurisdictions have done a good job for the "up land" by adopting greenways as linear parks, or official parks of the park system, and it is now time to address the waterways. He stated that one of the fallacies that the City has operated under for some time is that the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Flood Reduction Project will be a kind of panacea for the Roanoke River, however, issues of funding and the timetable are questionable, and the purpose is narrow in terms of installing bench cuts that will spread out the water and reduce flooding by a relatively small amount. He added that this is a great beginning and it is hoped that the City will continue to look at the River Keeper trade mark program; and he would support an organization or an individual who would be charged with the responsibility of receiving calls for public or private entities when there is a problem on the Roanoke River. Mr. Hegner called attention to opportunities for grant funding to assist with the program. Council Member Wishneff inquired if there was a role for the Sheriff's Department to play with regarding the Roanoke River cleanup project; whereupon, Mr. Hegner replied that the Sheriff has expressed a reluctance to send inmate crews along the banks or into the water of the Roanoke River. The City Manager noted that the City is hard pressed today to respond to some of the challenges regarding the Roanoke River, no equipment has been purchased for that purpose, therefore, the City must move into the program in a systematic way; and with Council's support, the City is prepared to move into the education component of the program to help property owners to understand their individual roles and responsibilities, and to provide enforcement under existing code regulations. She advised that the City could enforce what is occurring on the back side of private property just as much as on the front side, the City could work toward river "make-overs" two or three times a year, but to provide regular clean up of the entire length of the Roanoke River would require equipment and staff that could be brought to the Council for approval during a normal budget cycle. Council Member Wishneff concurred in and supported the efforts of City staff. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick encouraged each Member of Council to drive down Wiley Drive from the east end of Wasena Park through the area that includes Rivers Edge Sports Complex to witness a prime example of an area that the City has not properly maintained where weeds and paradise trees could be cut down tomorrow with City equipment; the area behind the old Marstellar building looks unsightly and although the City cannot address the issue at this time, someone should be held responsible for any dumping that has occurred to date. He inquired about potential options that might be available to the City at this time. 599 Steven C. Buschor, Director, Department of Parks and Recreation, expressed appreciation to other City departments for their assistance in preparing the draft program. He advised that numerous individuals and organizations are ready to volunteer, but the City needs to designate someone to lead the charge; entities such as "Life Net" have adopted a section of the Roanoke River; and credit should be given to those partners in and outside of the City for their efforts to reach this point. Mr. Hegner advised that the Kiwanis Club will sponsor an event to clean up the Roanoke River on July 2, 2005, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that bench cuts would allow the City to maintain parts of the Roanoke River easier than steep banks; opportunities exist to create a different kind of partnership, and he requested that the City Manager move post haste on the Roanoke River Management Program. At 5:50 p.m., the Council convened in Closed Session in the Council's Conference Room. At 6:55 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, with all Members of the Council in attendance except for Mayor Harris, Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick presiding. COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Council Member Cutler moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements undertheVirginia Freedom oflnformationAct; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ........................................................................................................... 4. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Mayor Harris was absent.) (Council Members Lea and Wishneff were not present when the vote was recorded.) At 7:00 p.m., on Monday, June 20, 2005, the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., presiding. 6OO PRESENT: Council Members Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. and Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr.- .................................................................................................... 6. ABSENT: Mayor C. Nelson Harris ................................................................ 1. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney, Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Americawas led by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. PUBLIC HEARINGS: STREETS AND ALLEYS: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, June 20, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of East Gate Church of the Nazarene to permanently vacate, discontinue and close a portion of 21" Street, N. E., the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, June 3, 2005 and Friday, June 10, 2005. The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that the petitioner currently has a site plan under review to construct a parking lot on Official Tax No. 3340306; the parking lot will serve the Church, which is at the southern end of the same block; the petitioner recently had a survey done of Official Tax No. 3340306, which revealed that the right-of-way is ten feet wider than was originally shown on both the previous survey and CityTax Maps; and, in addition, both private and City staff surveys revealed that a portion of the northwest corner of the petitioner's property is in the pavement of 2!"Street and Kessler Road. It was further advised that the petitioner has agreed to dedicate an approximately 598 square foot portion of Official Tax No. 3340306 to the City of Roanoke as a condition of the vacation; the dedicated land will become part of the right-of-way, moving the petitioner's property line off of the pavement, and potentially improving the line of sight at the intersection of 21" Street and Kessler Road, N. E.; vacation will allow the petitioner to build a slightly larger parking lot; development review staff has worked with the petitioner to address storm water management on the site; the property acquired in the vacation will not add a significant number of parking spaces for the petitioner, but may allow greater flexibility in design; and if the vacation is approved, the petitioner will be required to submit a revised site plan for the parking lot after a combination plat has been recorded. 601 The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the request for closure, subject to certain conditions as more fully set forth in the report. Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance: (#37101-062005) AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing a certain public right-of- way in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as more particularly described hereinafter; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 450.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37101- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. James W. Conner, Head Trustee, East Gate Church of the Nazarene, appeared before Council in support of the request. The Vice-Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the request to close a portion of the street. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37101-062005 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................ 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Mayor Harris was absent.) ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, June 20, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of Warehouse 315 LLC to rezone property located at 315 Albemarle Avenue, S. E., Official Tax Nos. 4022101 and 4022104, from HM, Heavy Manufacturing District, to C-3, Central Business District, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, June 3, 2005 and Friday, June 10, 2005. 602 The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that the property is commonly known as the former Heironimus warehouse; no specific use is proposed in the petition to rezone; City real estate records list the properties as having two structures totaling 59,147 square feet; the original building, listed as having been built in 1930, is brick with masonry detailing which is typical of Roanoke's historic industrial architecture; and several concrete block and wood frame structures have been added to the original building. The Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the request for rezoning, and advised that the proposed rezoning will permit adaptive reuse of an underused property, which is consistent with and promotes the policies of Vision 2007-2020 and the Redevelopment Plan for the South Jefferson Redevelopment Area. Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance: (#37102-062005) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 402 of the Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, to rezone certain property within the City; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 453.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37102- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler. Donald L. Wetherington, Attorney, representing the petitioner, appeared before Council in support of the request of his client. The Vice-Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the request for rezoning. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. Council Member Wishneff commended the petitioner for initiating the project and inquired if it would be beneficial for the City of Roanoke to consider some type of historic district which would then open up certain financial avenues for the area. Mr. Wethington advised that the National Register of Historic Places Evaluation Committee has recognized the property and the building qualifies for rehabilitation tax credits. The City Manager advised that the property in question, as well as the property owned by Norfolk Southern which will be used by FreightCar America, were included and approved in an amendment to the City's Enterprise Zone. Mr. Wetherington advised that if there are incentives and encouragements that the City could offer it would be welcomed not only for the benefit of the current project, but for any other projects that may occur in the area. 603 There being no further discussion, Ordinance No. 37102-062005 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Mayor Harris was absent.) COMMUNITY PLANNING-ROANOKE VISION, COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, June 20, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a proposal of the City of Roanoke to amend Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan, to include the Hollins/Wildwood Area Plan, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, June 3, 2005 and Friday, June 10, 2005. The City Planning Commission submitted awritten report advising that the area included in the Neighborhood Plan encompasses five neighborhoods in the northeast section of the City: East Gate, Hollins, Mecca Gardens, Monterey and Wildwood; and the Plan features the following priority recommendations: · Infrastructure: Create capital improvement projects for the following: Sewer connections: Coordinate with residents and the Western Virginia Water Authority to install service for properties that currently have septic systems. City funds should supplement or cover the residents' portion of the cost. This is the top priority of the Plan. Curb, gutter, and sidewalk installation: Address improvements based on the Infrastructure Improvements map with the following considerations: · Install curb, gutter and sidewalk on arterial streets and inflll of blocks with incomplete networks. New subdivisions - all new developments will have curb and gutter and sidewalk. In select residential areas, install curb and gutter depending on existing drainage conditions. · Focus improvements in areas that have been identified as having storm water problems. 604 Transportation: Address the Orange Avenue corridor and all adjoining arterial streets collectively, and base future improvements accordingly. Consider widening Orange Avenue to six lanes only as a last resort. · Code Enforcement: Increase canvassing in the area, particularly in the Hollins neighborhood. Residential Development: Encourage new development per the Future Land Use map and in select areas, consider rezoning for residential development rather than commercial or industrial. The City Planning Commission recommended approval of the Hollins/Wildwood Area Plan for adoption as a component of Vision 2001-2020. Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance: (#37103-062005) AN ORDINANCE approving the Hollins/Wildwood Neighborhood Plan, and amending Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan, to include the Hollins/Wildwood Neighborhood Plan; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 454.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37103- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. The Vice-Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the proposed Neighborhood Plan. Philip T. McDermott, President, Wildwood Civic League, appeared before Council in support of the Plan. There being no further speakers, the Vice-Mayor declared the public hearing closed. Council Member Cutler advised that the Neighborhood Plan referred to the role of the Western Virginia Water Authority in water and sewer connections, and identified sewer lines as the most important infrastructure need; the Plan also notes that the Water Authority is unlikely to be able to fully fund such projects as providing public sewer lines to the neighborhoods and suggests that capital improvement projects to extend sewer service would be a good investment by the City. He inquired as to how the statement fits in with the City's capital improvements budget. 605 The City Manager questioned whether the statement should be included in the Neighborhood Plan inasmuch as it could be precedent setting. She stated that pursuant to present City policy, any failed septic system is required to connect to a public sewer; the Western Virginia Water Authority accepted the City's policy to extend a public sewer line to a property when the septic system fails and to share in the cost of system upgrade with the property owner; and, in the future, if other property owners in the area that have an active sewer system wish to participate in the public sewer system, the cost could be prorated. She stated that to suggest, as the Neighborhood Plan indicates, that the City should be responsible for the resident's portion of the cost is unacceptable; more recent policies as adopted by City Council and subsequently adopted by the Western Virginia Water Authority are reasonable policies; and there is no requirement for those persons who are currently on septic systems to hook up to the public sewer system until their septic system has failed and the Health Department refuses to issue a permit. With regard to future development, she advised that a different policy could be reviewed that would be economic development related. Following discussion, the City Manager asked that staff be permitted to suggest appropriate language to amend the Neighborhood Plan to reflect that there are no plans by the City in the Capital Improvement Program to extend sewer lines inasmuch as extension of water and sewer lines is the responsibility of the Western Virginia Water Authority to be shared by the Water Authority, the developer and/or the property owner. Council Member Cutler inquired if there is any parallel between street and drainage improvements for the Southern Hills area; whereupon, the City Manager advised that using the City's previously adopted policies for water and sewer extensions would fall in line with what is proposed in the Southern Hills area. Upon question, the City Manager explained that if a neighborhood petitioned the Western Virginia Water Authority for a sewer extension before the sewer system failed, the neighborhood could participate on a cost sharing basis, with 50 per cent of the cost to be borne by the Water Authority and the other 50 per cent to be assessed on a prorated basis to individual lots along the sewer line extension. Council Member Cutler complimented staff on the Quality of Life section of the Plan, particularly with respect to Read Mountain by acknowledging the role of the Western Virginia Land Trust as a way to obtain conservation easements to protect the views and the undeveloped nature of Read Mountain; the City of Roanoke has avested interest in the view shed and environmental preservation of Read Mountain; the proposed Plan affirms the City's support of the goals of the Read Mountain Alliance and future funding should be considered to assist the Read Mountain Alliance and the Western Virginia Land Trust in obtaining 606 conservation easements on properties on and around Read Mountain. He pointed out that in most cases conservation easements are donated because of tax benefits that accrue to those individuals who donate easements; therefore, not a large amount of funding assistance would be required by the City, but certain educational programs should be offered to advise private landowners of the benefits of donating conservation easements. Mr. McDermott advised that when the Wildwood area was annexed to the City of Roanoke in 1976, property owners were promised water and sewer line extensions and installation of sidewalks; water lines have been installed, but extension of sewer lines and installation of sidewalks have not occurred, and approximately two houses that have questionable, if not failed septic systems, currently exist in the Hollins/Wildwood area. He stated that the majority of the membership of the Wildwood Civic League would be willing to pay their share of the cost for sewer line extension from the house to the street, but find it unacceptable to pay $6,000.00 - $8,000.00 which was previously proposed by the Western Virginia Water Authority. Following further discussion, by consensus, Council authorized the City Manager to revise the Hollins/Wildwood Area Plan with regard to extension of sewer lines to ensure continuity with existing City policy. There being no further discussion by Council, Ordinance No. 37103-062005 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Mayor Harris was absent.) The City Manager called attention to a number of neighborhoods that were annexed into the City of Roanoke in the 1970's that are in a similar situation with regard to private septic systems and the issue will be reviewed on a City-wide basis in order to reach a consistent approach. BONDS/BOND ISSUES-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, June 20, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a proposal of the City of Roanoke to adopt a resolution authorizing the City to contract a debt and to issue general obligation public improvement bonds to the City, in the principal amount of $12,875,000.00, for the purpose of providing funds to pay the cost of the following capital improvement projects: Art Museum Project - $3,700,000.00, Public Parking Facilities - $2,600,000.00, Financial Information System Project - $2,600,000.00 and Acquisition of Land for Redevelopment - $3,975,000.00, the matter was before the body. 607 Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Monday, June 6, 2005 and Monday, June 13, 2005. The Director of Finance submitted a written report advising that several projects included in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) require financing during Fiscal Year 2005-2006; on May 10, 2005, Council adopted a resolution endorsing an update to the CIP for Fiscal Years 2006-2010 that was included in the Recommended Resource Allocation Plan; and the update included the need for short term financing of $2.6 million for replacement of financial systems including accounting, tax/treasury, budget preparation, and human resource/payroll; and although funding sources have been identified to pay for the systems over approximately five years, short term financing will be required to provide adequate cash flow as major systems are purchased. It was further advised that on May 2, 2005, Council authorized execution of an option agreement for the purchase of Countryside Golf Course at acost of $4.1 million; an option fee of $125,000.00 was paid, thus the remainder of funding for acquisition of the property will come from the issuance of bonds; two other projects included in the CIP for which issuance of bonds has not previously been authorized are the City's contribution to the Art Museum of $3.7 million and a parking garage in the western part of downtown Roanoke that requires an additional $2.6 million financing; and total financing required for the projects are: Art Museum Downtown West Parking Garage Financial Application Integration Countryside Golf Course Total $ 3,700,000.00 $ 2,600,000.00 $ 2,600,000.00 $ 3,975,000.00 $12,875,000.00 The Director of Finance recommended that Council adopt a resolution authorizing issuance of $12,875,000.00 in General Obligation Bonds under the Virginia Public Finance Act. Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#37104-062005) A RESOLUTION authorizing the issuance of $12,875,000.00 principal amount of general obligations of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, in the form of General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds of such City, for the purpose of providing funds to pay the costs of the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, improvement, extension, enlargement and equipping of various capital improvement projects (including the acquisition of land therefor) and the acquisition and installation of various capital equipment projects of and for such city; fixing the form, denomination and certain other details of such bonds; providing for the sale of such bonds; authorizing the preparation of a preliminary official statement relating to such bonds and the distribution thereof and the execution of a certificate relating to such official statement; authorizing the execution and delivery of a continuing disclosure certificate relating to such 608 bonds; authorizing and providing for the issuance and sale of up to the principal amount of General Obligation Public Improvement Bond anticipation notes in anticipation of the issuance and sale of such bonds; delegating to the City Manager and the Director of Finance certain powers with respect to the sale and determination of the details of such bonds and notes; and otherwise providing with respect to the issuance, sale and delivery of such bonds and notes. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 456.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37104- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. The Vice-Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the public hearing. Ms. Sarah Higgins, 2267 Countryside Road, N. W., representing the Countryside Neighborhood Organization Steering Committee, advised that many residents of the area built their homes on the golf course out of a personal preference to live in an area with mountain views and green space and they believe that Countryside should continue to be used as a golf course. She spoke directly to three issues: the tourist value, the recreation value, and the fact that the location is directly in the path of air traffic. She stated that the City of Roanoke values its viewsheds and Countryside Golf Course provides outstanding views of the mountains, it is a kind of private park that is available to the public, and it is one of the few reasonably priced golf courses in the City and offers considerable tourist and recreation value. Because of the aesthetic condition of the golf course, she stated that it provides a pleasant introduction to the City of Roanoke from either 1-81 or 1-581; golf is becoming a popular recreation sport and it has been reported that if Countryside Golf Course closes many people will leave the area. She stated that to construct more houses irt the area in view of the present air traffic pattern to Roanoke Regional Airport would be a mistake; whereupon, she presented information from the Virginia Department of Aviation recommending that residential housing not be constructed in neighborhoods that are located in the path of airplanes. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that one of the reasons that the City of Roanoke chose to involve itself in the matter is due to the fact that portion of the lease for the golf course which is owned by the Roanoke Regional Airport will not be renewed, and at this time the City does not have specific plans regarding a proposed use of the land. Upon question, the City Manager called upon R. Brian Townsend, Director, Department of Housing and Code Enforcement, to provide a summary of the process that will be followed by the City. 609 Mr. Townsend advised that environmental assessment of the property started last week; a boundary survey will be initiated in the near future; since the announcement was made of the City's option on the property, the City has received numerous inquiries; it is proposed to follow a two step process, one of which will invite developers to provide qualifications and interest in the property; City staff will then short list those who have submitted the best qualifications; developers will be asked to submit a proposal similar to the process that was followed with the Colonial Green project in which the developer made a proposal to the City, and City staff reviewed the proposal and how it fits into the context of the site. He stated that even though the Airport Commission does not plan to renew the lease on the fly zone of the golf course, the space will have to remain open by necessity; venues will be provided to keep the neighborhood informed of activity; and a neighborhood briefing is tentatively scheduled for the month of July, 2005. The City Manager advised that it would be intended for the property to go through a rezoning process for a planned unit development of some description that would involve public hearings at both the City Planning Commission and the City Council levels; and while the City would look toward closing on the property before the end of the calendar year, it would be the recommendation of staff to make some arrangement for the ongoing operation of the golf course while planning efforts continue. She stated that much like the Colonial Green project, if the City reaches the point of transferring the property and certain leases are in effect, the new property owner would have to accept conditions under the leases so that owners of adjacent property would continue to know that the property will be well maintained and operated in such a way that the golfcoursewould continue until such time as development were to actually occur. Council Member Wishneff advised that the City's intent is to increase property values and inquired if Council Members as a group could visit the site in the July/August time frame to meet with residents in order to hear their concerns. Council Member Cutler advised that as a member of the Roanoke Valley Bird Club, it has been brought to his attention that Countryside Golf Course is an important habitat for an internationally protected species, the Bluebird, and called attention to the importance of protecting the integrityofthe Bluebird habitat. He stated that ecological and environmental concerns will be reflected in the ultimate plan which will help to make property values increase. Council Member Cutler stated that Roanoke's international reputation, originally based on its railroad heritage, will be enhanced and enlarged by construction of the proposed new Art Museum of Western Virginia much of the construct on costs of the Art Museum will be provided by private donors, private individuals, and private foundations; therefore, the facility will be a bargain for Roanoke's taxpayers. He stated that the new Art Museum will provide a major contribution to the economyofthe Roanoke Valley; therefore, he spoke in strong support of the City's participation in funding of construction of the new Art Museum of Western Virginia. 610 Council Member Lea advised that Council is committed to engaging the community in every step of the process relating to Countryside Golf Course. There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed. There being no further questions or comments by Council Members, Resolution No. 37104-062005 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ......................................................................................... (Mayor Harris was absent.) RENTAL INSPECTION PROGRAM: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, June 20, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a proposal of the City of Roanoke to amend the City Code to establish Rental Inspection Districts in order to comply with State Code regulations, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Monday, June 6, 200.5 and Monday, June 13, 2005. The City Manager submitted a communication advising that in 1994, enabling legislation was adopted which allowed localities to require residential rental units in Rehabilitation Area and Conservation Districts to be inspected before a change in occupancy, or after the sale of such unit; on September 2, 1997, following an intensive examination of the issues led by the Roanoke Regional Housing Network Rental Inspection Committee ("Rental Inspection Committee"), which consisted of neighborhood citizens, landlords, non-profits, realtors and others, Council adopted Ordinance No. 33552, which enacted the City's Rental inspection Program; and the Rental Inspection Program is intended to protect the public health, safety and welfare by ensuring proper building maintenance and compliance with building regulations applicable to residential rental dwelling units. It was further advised that in 2004, the Legislature amended enabling legislation to mandate changes to local ordinances for localities enforcing a Rental Inspection Program; an article written by Mark K. Flynn, Director of Legal Services, Virginia Municipal League, provides a good description of changes in enabling legislation, as well as a good overview of the history of rental inspection programs in the Commonwealth of Virginia; as a result of amendments to enabling legislation, the Rental Inspection Committee was reconvened to review and endorse an amended Rental Inspection Program ordinance that complies with changes in state law; and amendments to the Code of Virginia mandate a number of changes to the City Code, i.e.: 611 A rental inspection program may be conducted only in a rental inspection district for which City Council has made the following findings: there is a need to protect the public health, safety and welfare of the occupants of residential rental dwelling units within the designated rental inspection district; the residential rental dwelling units within the designated district are blighted or in the process of deteriorating, or the residential rental dwelling units are in need of inspection by the building department to prevent deterioration, taking into account the number, age and condition of the residential dwelling rental units inside the proposed rental inspection district; and the inspection of residential rental dwelling units inside the proposed rental inspection district is necessary to maintain safe, decent and sanitary living conditions for tenants and other residents living in the proposed rental inspection district. Upon inspection of a residential rental dwelling unit, if there are no violations of the building code that affect the safe, decent and sanitary conditions for the tenants of such rental unit, the rental unit is exempt from rental inspection for a minimum of four (4) years. Upon adoption of a rental inspection ordinance, the building department is required to make reasonable efforts to notify owners of residential rental dwelling units in the designated rental inspection district and provide information and an explanation of the rental inspection ordinance and the responsibilities of the owner under the ordinance. The City is authorized to require all owners of residential rental dwelling units in a rental inspection district to notify the building department if the dwelling unit is used for residential rental purposes, but no fee may be charged for such registration. It was explained that boundaries of rental inspection districts are based upon research data compiled by the U.'S. Census Bureau, the City of Roanoke GIS System, and the City of Roanoke Code Enforcement database; and Housing and Neighborhood Services remains committed to the Rental Inspection Program to reduce unsafe conditions in residential rental property and to encourage preventative maintenance to preserve good, quality rental housing. 612 The City Manager recommended that Council make the findings required by the Code of Virginia and approve amendments to the City of Roanoke Rental Inspection Program, effective July 1,2005. Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance: (#37105-062005) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining §7-34, Purpose and intent, by amending subsections (a) and (b), and adding subsections (c) and (d); §7-35, Definitions; §7-36, Applicability, by amending subsection (a), and adding subsection (b); §7-37, Inspection and certificate of compliance required; §7-38, Exemptions; §7-39, Certificate of exemption, by amending subsections (a), (b), (c), and (d), and adding subsections (e) and (f); §7-40, Issuance of certificate of compliance; §7-41, Temporary waiver of compliance; §7-42, Display of proof of compliance, by amending subsections (a) and (b); §7-43, Alteration of proof of compliance; §7-44, Fees; and §7-45, Appeals, by amending subsection (b); of Article III, Rental Certificate of Compliance, of Chapter 7, Buildinq Requlations, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, in order to comply with state code regulations; providing for an effective date; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 469.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37105- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea. The Vice-Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the matter. Paula Prince, 550 Mountain Avenue, S. W., a resident of Old Southwest, spoke in support of amendments to the Rental Inspection Program. She stated that Old Southwest has a significant number of rental properties, many of which house Iow or moderate income tenants; prior to adoption of the Rental inspection Program, it was exceedingly difficult to maintain minimum building code standards for many of the properties; problems with rental properties include tenants living in units without adequate plumbing, or electrical systems, with no kitchens or bathroom facilities, apartments with no smoke detectors, apartments with inadequate heating, and apartments with structural damage at a level that is potentially dangerous. She added that support for a Rental Inspection Program was fairly weak until there was an horrendous fire which caused the death of a grandmother and four children; the fire started because there was no fire wall separating the apartments; and at that point, discussions were initiated to create a Rental Inspection Program .and a considerable amount of work and compromise went into drafting the Rental Inspection Program that has been in existence for the past several years. She stated that the Rental Inspection Program currently 613 before the Council is adequate to maintain the level of improvement that has been experienced since the program was implemented; and in order to provide quality housing for renters at all income levels, it is imperative to enforce a Rental Inspection Program. She advised that quality rental properties improve the quality of life in all neighborhoods and encourage those who are interested in purchasing property to have faith that their investment will be safe. David Bidler, 1515 Brandon Avenue, S. W., a member of the Roanoke Regional Housing Network's Rental Inspection Committee, advised that the Housing Network has, over the past several years, reviewed various changes to the City's Rental Inspection Program; and proposed changes are mandated by the General Assembly and must be implemented by July 1,2005, so as not to lose the inspection program. He stated that the Rental Inspection Committee of the Regional Housing Network supports proposed amendments to the Rental Inspection Program which causes the program to be more efficient and preserves the ability of the building inspector to enter the property and inspect rental property that otherwise may not be inspected until a tenant files a complaint. E. Duane Howar~t, 1135 Wasena Avenue, S. W., advised that he has on several occasions encouraged the 'City to include issues regarding inspection of rental properties on the City's legislative agenda for consideration by the General Assembly. He stated that his primary concern with the City's Rental Inspection Program relates to enforcement issues by the City's Code Enforcement staff. He added that if renters complain when unsafe conditions or building code violations occur, they are evicted which happened to him after paying more than $50,000.00 in rent over a period of eight years because City Building Code Inspectors do not administer the program fairly among all landlords. He stated that the Rental Inspection Program should include all rental properties in the City; and he currently rents a property that is 70 years old, but the propertydoes not fall under the rental inspection district. He alluded to rental properties that are not fit for human habitation that do not fall under the Rental Inspection Program; and roofs that are allowed to remain in their present deteriorated condition by City Building Code Inspectors who take no action against certain wealthy landlords. Council Member Lea advised that Mr. Howard made certain strong statements about the City's Rental Inspection Program and inspection efforts; whereupon, he requested information on the role of the City's Building Code Inspectors, etc. The City Manager advised that Mr. Howard has not made the kind of statements to her as City Manager that were previously made before the Council and she would like the opportunity to meet with him to discuss his concerns. She stated that at his previous residence, Mr. Howard made complaints against his landlord, and he left certain information with the City Manager's Office which was forwarded to Code Enforcement staff for investigation. She advised that some of the changes that Mr. Howard has proposed in the Rental Inspection Program are beyond the ability of the City to change because they involve requirements enacted by State Code. She stated that an amendment to the State Code has limited the City in some respects relative to how and when the City may perform 614 rental inspections, if the City had the authority to perform rental inspections on a City-wide basis, she would make a recommendation to the Council to do so because the City has a significant number of rental properties and it would be to the City's best interest to ensure that all rental properties are maintained to a certain standard. She stated that the City has a dedicated code enforcement staff, they frequently respond strictly on a complaint basis because of the size of the community and the amount of property that is included in the rental category, and she would report back to the Council after she has met with Mr. Howard and investigated his concerns. There being no further questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37105-062005 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None .......................................................................... ~ .............. 0. (Mayor Harris was absent.) PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-AIRPORT-CITY PROPERTY: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, June 20, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a proposal to convey City-owned property located at 5268 Aviation Drive, N. W., to the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, June 10, 2005. The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City owns property located at 5268 Aviation Drive that houses Fire Station No. 10, containing approximately 2.67acres; the City desires to convey the property to the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission for the consideration of $771,663.00, upon certain terms and conditions, including the right of the Cityto continue to use the fire station for up to five years; and, in accordance with the City's Economic and Community Development Reserve Policy, proceeds from the sale of the land will be used for the purchase of land for fire stations. It was further advised that the City will retain use of Fire Station No. 10 for up to five years, pay 50 per cent of operating costs (including utilities, phone service, service contracts, building supplies, and other such costs), and continue to provide minor maintenance and cleaning services; the City will also pay 50 per cent of normal maintenance and repair costs that are less than $5,000.00 per item, and station personnel will maintain the grounds. 615 The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the following documents, subject to approval by the City Attorney: A deed conveying the property with special warranty of title to the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, subject to certain terms and conditions. A letter dated May 27, 2005, from Jacqueline L. Shuck, Executive Director, Roanoke Regional Airport, agreeing to certain terms and conditions for continued operation of the Station. An amendment to paragraphs five and 21 (b) of the 1987 contract with the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, in order to make the contract consistent with the terms of the Executive Director's letter dated May 27, 2005. Adoption of an ordinance to establish a revenue estimate for the sale of property in the amount of $771,663.00 in the Capital Projects Fund. The budget ordinance will appropriate funds to accounts to be established by the Director of Finance entitled, Fire/EMS Station 3 ($485,862.00) and Fire/EMS Station 5 ($285,801.00). Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance: (#37106-062005) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to execute the necessary documents to convey City-owned property, which houses Fire Station #10 located at 5268 Aviation Drive, bearing Tax No. 6560101, containing approximately 2.67 acres, to the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission; authorizing the City Manager to execute a letter dated May 27, 2005, agreeing to certain terms and conditions for the continued operation of the Station; and authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to the 1987 contract with the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, upon certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 485.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37106- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea. The Vice-Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the matter. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. Council Member Cutler requested the City Manager to review the City's plans to replace fire service in that portion of the City that is currently serviced by Fire Station No. 10;whereupon, the City Manager advised that Fire Station No. I0 is physically located on property immediately adjacent to the Roanoke Regional Airport and currently serves both the Airport and residents who reside in that section of the City; the Airport is interested in developing its own stand alone fire 616 station facility, and to that end has offered to purchase the land from the City of Roanoke; the City intends to use the proceeds from sale of the land to purchase an alternate location; earlier in the meeting, Council acted on a recommendation to purchase a parcel of land on Williamson Road, several blocks to the south of the Hershberger/Williamson Road intersection; the Airport Commission will allow the City to continue to occupy the present facility for up to five years by prorating the share of participation of the cost of maintaining and operating the facility; and it would be the City's intent over the next same five years to construct a new facility on Williamson Road which would be designed with funds also derived from the sale of the property in question. She stated that it is hoped to have a new fire station constructed in advance of the five year time frame; it was always a part of the Fire/EMS Master Plan to eventually relocate the fire station away from the Airport and decisions by the Airport Commission have accelerated the planning process. There being no further questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37106-062005 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ...................................... .- .................................................. 0. (Mayor Harris was absent.) Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance: (#37107-062005) AN ORDINANCE to establish a revenue estimate from the sale of property on Aviation Drive and to appropriate funding for the new construction of the Fire-EMS Stations #3 and #5, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2004-2005 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 487.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37107- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Mayor Harris was absent.) 617 PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-RED CROSS-CITY PROPERTY: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, June 20, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a proposal to convey certain City-owned property located on Luck Avenue, S. W., to the American National Red Cross, in exchange for certain property owned by the Red Cross, in connection with the Downtown Parking Garage Project, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, June 10, 2005. The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City owns property located on Luck Avenue, S. W., which is currently used for employee parking, and desires to convey a portion of the parcel of land to the American National Red Cross in exchange for three parcels of land located at the corner of Fifth Street and Luck Avenue, S. W., identified as Official Tax Nos. 1113512, 1113513 and 1113514 to be used for future development of a downtown parking garage; to facilitate conveyance of an approximately 0.2661 acre portion of Official Tax No. 1012407, the parcel of land has been subdivided into two parcels designated as Tract B-1 and Tract B-2 as shown on a plat prepared by Caldweil White Associates; and the City desires to convey Tract B-1 and a 24 foot access easement across Tract B-2 to serve Tract B-1 to the American National Red Cross. Following the public hearing, the City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a deed of exchange to convey the property designated as Tract B-l, in addition to a 24 foot access easement across Tract B-2, to the American National Red Cross, in exchange for three parcels of land identified as Official Tax Nos. 1113512, 1113 S 13 and 1113514, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney. Council Member McDaniel offered the following ordinance: (#37108-062005) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to execute the necessary documents providing for the conveyance of a 0.2661 acre parcel of City-owned property known as Tract B-l, bearing Official Tax No. 1012407, together with a 24 foot access easement across City-owned property known as Tract B-2, to the American National Red Cross, in exchange for three parcels bearing Official Tax Nos. 1113512, 1113513, and 1113514, located at the corner of Fifth Street and Luck Avenue, S. W., for future development of a downtown parking garage, upon certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 488.) Council Member McDaniel moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37108- 062005. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler. 618 The Vice-Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the matter. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37108-062005 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Mayor Harris was absent.) HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Vice-Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. ARMORY/STADIUM: Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia, spoke in support of the renovation of Victory Stadium. He advised that if the City of Roanoke plans to spend $136,000.00 on improvements to Victory Stadium to prepare the facility for high school football in the fall, the City could allocate several thousand dollars more to renovate restrooms and locker rooms. He stated that Victory Stadium could be made accessible for the physically disabled with the paving of one lane of the parking lot in order to accommodate wheel chairs; the second floor of the Stadium could be used for emergency medical services and a museum honoring sports figures; andjust as the City has begun construction of a flood wall at the Sewage Treatment Plant, some type of flood control measures could be taken at Victory Stadium. He advised that the 4th of July celebration should continue to be held at Victory Stadium and the Stadium should be renovated and promoted as a memorial to the Roanoke Valley's World War II veterans. AIRPORT-ZONING-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD- COMMUNITY PLANNING-INDUSTRIES: Council Member Cutler moved that Council amend its current policy to provide that the City Clerk will advertise for applications for vacancies on the City Planning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals, Architectural Review Board, Industrial Development Authority, Roanoke Regional Airport Commission and the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, unless otherwise directed by the Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: 619 AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... O. (Mayor Harris was absent.) COMMITTEES-ROANOKE ARTS COMMISSION: The Vice-Mayor advised that the three-year terms of office of Betty Branch, Frank J. Eastburn, Susan W. Jennings, Nelett H. Lor, and Anna Wentworth as members of the Roanoke Arts Commission will expire June 30, 2005; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancies. Council Member Cutler placed in nomination the names of FrankJ. Eastburn, Susan W. Jennings and Nelett H. Lor. There being no further nominations, Mr. Eastburn, Ms. Jennings and Ms. Lor were reappointed as members of the Roanoke Arts Commission, for terms ending June 30, 2008, by the following vote: FOR MR. EASTBURN, MS. JENNINGS AND MS. LOR: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ............................... 6. (Mayor Harris was absent.) COMMI-I-fEES-GREENWAY SYSTEM: The Vice-Mayor advised that the three- year term of office of Barry W. Baird as a member of the Roanoke Valley Greenways Commission will expire June 30, 2005; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy. Council Member Cutler placed in nomination the name of Barry W. Baird. There being no further nominations, Mr. Baird was reappointed as a member of the Roanoke Valley Greenways Commission, for a term ending June 30, 2008, by the following vote: FOR MR. BAIRD: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................... 6. (Mayor Harris was absent.) COMMI~-fEES-LIBRARIES: The Vice-Mayor advised that the three-year terms of office of Pamela S. White and Stanley G. Breakell as members of the Roanoke Public Library Board will expire on June 30, 2005; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancies. Council Member Cutler placed in nomination the names of Pamela S. White and Stanley G. Breakell. 620 There being no further nominations, Ms. White and Mr. Breakell were reappointed as members of the Roanoke Public Library Board, for terms ending June 30, 2008, by the following vote: FOR MS. WHITE AND MR. BREAKELL: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ............................................... 6. (Mayor Harris was absent.) COMMI~-rEES-COURT COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS BOARD: The Vice-Mayor advised that the three-year terms of office of Julian H. Raney, Jr., and John B. Ferguson as members of the Court Community Corrections Program Regional Community Criminal Justice Board will expire on June 30, 2005; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy. Council Member Cutler placed in nomination the names of Julian H. Raney, Jr., and John B. Ferguson. There being no further nominations, Mr. Raney and Mr. Ferguson were reappointed as members of the Court Community Corrections Program Regional Community Criminal Justice Board, for terms ending June 30, 2008, by the following vote: FOR MR. RANEY and MR. FERGUSON: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ............................................... 6. (Mayor Harris was absent.) COMMITTEES-PENSIONS: The Vice-Mayor advised that the four-year term of office of George F. Taylor as a member of the Board of Trustees, City of Roanoke Pension Plan will expire on June 30, 2005; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy. Council Member Cutler placed in nomination the name of George F. Taylor. There being no further nominations, Mr. Taylor was reappointed as a member of the Board of Trustees, City of Roanoke Pension Plan, for a term ending June 30, 2009, by the following vote: FOR MR. TAYLOR: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................... 6. (Mayor Harris was absent.) 621 COMMI~rEES-CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU: The Vice-Mayor advised that the one-year term of office of A. Morris Turner, Jr., as a member of the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau will expire on June 30, 2005; and pursuant to an Agreement between the City of Roanoke and the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau, the City is entitled to appoint an additional member; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations. Council Member Cutler placed in nomination the name of A. Morris Turner, Jr., and Barton W. Wilner. There being no further nominations, Mr. Turner was reappointed and Mr. Wilner was appointed as members of the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau, for terms ending June 30, 2006, by the following vote: FOR MR. TURNER AND MR. WlLNER: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ............................................... 6. (Mayor Harris was absent.) COMMI~-fEES-TOWING ADVISORY BOARD: The Vice-Mayor advised that the three-year terms of office of Christine Proffitt and Robert R. Young as members of the Towing Advisory Board will expire on June 30, 2005; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancies. Council Member Cutler placed in nomination the name of Robert R. Young. There being no further nominations, Mr. Young was reappointed as a member of the Towing Advisory Board, for a term ending June 30, 2008, by the following vote: FOR MR. YOUNG: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ................................................................................... 6. (Mayor Harris was absent.) PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMI~-rEES: The Vice-Mayor advised that the one-year terms of office of Richard Clark, Betty Field, Steven Higgs, Louise F. Kegley, Carl H. Kopitzke, Michael A. Loveman, E. C. Pace, III, and Eddie Wallace as members of the Mill Mountain Advisory Committee will expire June 30, 2005; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancies. Council Member Cutler placed in nomination the names of Richard Clark, Betty Field, Steven Higgs, Louise F. Kegley, Carl H. Kopitzke, Michael A. Loveman, E. C. Pace, III, and Eddie Wallace. 622 There being no further nominations, Mr. Clark, Ms. Field, Mr. Higgs, Ms. Kegley, Mr. Kopitzke, Mr. Loveman, Mr. Pace and Mr. Wallace were reappointed as members of the Mill Mountain Advisory Committee, for terms ending June 30, 2008, by the following vote: FOR MR. CLARK, MS. FIELD, MR. HIGGS, MS. KEGLEY, MR. KOPITZKE, MR. LOVEMAN, MR. PACE AND MR. WALLACE: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ............................................... 6. (Mayor Harris was absent.) (By consensus, Council changed the terms of office from one year to three year terms.) There being no further business, the Vice-Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m. APPROVED ATTEST: Mary F. Parker City Clerk Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr. Vice-Mayor 623 ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL July 5, 2005 9:00 a.m. The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Tuesday, July 5, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., in the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Regular Meetings, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 36762-070604 adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 6, 2004. PRESENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, BrianJ. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beyerly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea and Mayor C. Nelson Harris .................................................................................................. 7. ABSENT: None ............................................................................................ 0. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ................................................................................................ 0. COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Council Member Alfred '1". Dowe, Jr., Chair, City Council's Personnel Committee, requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss the annual performance of two Council-Appointed Officers, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. 624 Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ................................................................................................ O. COUNCIL-CITY PROPERTY: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the request to convene in Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 7. NAYS: None ................................................................................................ O. ITEMS LISTED ON THE 2:00 P. M., COUNCIL DOCKET REQUIRING DISCUSSION/CLARIFICATION, AND ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE 2:00 P. M., AGENDA: NONE. TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: COMMITTEES: Council Member McDaniel inquired if members of the Flood Plain Committee had been advised that Council would consider a resolution abolishing the Committee at its 2:00 p.m. session; whereupon, the City Clerk advised that no member had been notified by the City Clerk's Office. With the concurrence of the Council, the City Manager advised that staff would call each member of the Flood Plain Committee prior to the 2:00 p.m. Council meeting. COUNCIL COMMI~-~EE ASSIGNMENT REPORTS: The Mayor advised that the item was included on the agenda to provide an opportunity for the Members of Council to report on various committee assignments, liaison roles, or an update on various activities, including Virginia Municipal League Policy Committee assignments. Council Member McDaniel commended newly elected officers of the Friends of the Library. 625 Council Member Cutler advised that the Mill Mountain Advisory Committee, working in conjunction with the Department of Parks and Recreation and Virginia Tech have compiled a report consolidating information that was acquired over the period of a decade on Mill Mountain Park that will be used in the Master Plan; and considerable progress has been made on the Master Plan which will identify portions of Mill Mountain that have been developed, and more development will take place in the future regarding the zoo, star, radio/television towers, campgrounds, etc., and steep portions of the mountain and park that constitute Mill Mountain Park. He stated that pursuant to an ordinance that was adopted by Council approximately one month ago it is intended to combine City-owned lands around the Fishburn Parkway and the Blue Ridge Parkway, exclusive of those leased to the National Park Service on the Blue Ridge Parkway; and a draft of the Master Plan has been completed and submitted to the Mill Mountain Advisory Committee for review prior to submission to Council. He stated that the Master Plan would provide a launching pad for consideration of a conservation easement on that portion of Mill Mountain Park that does not lend itself to development and should be protected for watershed, aesthetics and recreation wildlife habitat purposes. Council Member Cutler reported that the Roanoke Arts Commission is in the I~rocess of acquiring a painting by local artist Eric Fitzpatrick entitled, "The Water Seekers" for the main office of the Western Virginia Water Authority. Coun'cil Member Cutler stated that he serves on the Environmental Quality Policy Steering Committee of the Virginia Municipal League and on behalf of the Western Virginia Water Authority, he has requested that the Committee consider an amendment to the State Code that would allow regional water authorities to hold conservation easements, and a number of private properties exist on the watershed or water supply reservoirs which could be protected by conservation easements held by the Water Authority. He stated he also serves on the Board of Directors of the Virginia Outdoors Foundation, and the Foundation has accepted two easements on properties on the watershed of the Falling Creek and Beaver Dam reservoirs. He advised of efforts bythe Mill Mountain Zoo Board of Directors to appoint a new Executive Director to fill the position vacated by Beth Poff. The City Manager advised that Council Member Cutler was recently selected as Chair of the Western Virginia Water Authority, effective July 1,2005. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick reported on the railwalk and the outstanding work of City staff to move the project forward. He advised that a flatcar donated by Norfolk Southern was recently installed with "trex" boards on top which would become the new stage for "First Fridays", inasmuch as the former venue on the City Market will not be available due to construction of the new Art Museum; acquisition of"trex" boards was awise expenditure of funds because the boards will not have to be replaced as often and the stage will save staff time by 626 eliminating the need to assemble/disassemble the portable stage; the National Railroad Historical Society has provided ideas for a plaque to be installed at the bottom of the bridge from The Hotel Roanoke; and consideration has been given to placing locomotives by class in the area near the shops to the east end to demonstrate the City of Roanoke's involvement with the railwalk. He added that approximately 21 pairs of locomotive drivers were found at Virginia Scrap Iron and Metal which are between 3 ½ to 4 feet tall, mounted with axles, that can accommodate installation of a 4' x 4' information board in the middle of the railwalk down to the east end shops. He stated that a representative of FreightCar America has offered to donate paint to replace the letters "Southern Car" with "Norfolk Southern" and the project should be substantially complete by early October. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick called attention to continuing efforts to move administrative offices of the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority to Municipal North and a progress report will be provided within the next 90 days. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick stated that he serves as Vice-Chair of the Transportation Policy Committee of the Virginia Municipal League, and Co-Chair of the Virginians for Better Transportation which is a state-wide private sector group, and in those capacities he will continue to seek coordination between the two bodies to focus on transportation issues facing the Commonwealth of Virginia. With regard to the Virginia First Cities Coalition, Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that both gubernatorial candidates offered certain onerous tax suggestions that could be harmful to cities and the suggestions will be closely monitored by First Cities. He also spoke to a request of the Mill Mountain Advisory Committee with regard to an incline, an inn and an observation tower for Mill Mountain. The City Manager commented on the location of the flatcar, and advised that those persons using the flatcar have found it to be an attractive venue, but when scheduling events and activities they have encountered some difficulty with the owners of the surface parking lot(s) in terms of liability insurance, which makes the venue not as attractive as it could be due to a cost that would not otherwise be incurred when using City-owned property. She encouraged the Members of Council to act as advocates when communicating with owners of surrounding surface parking lot(s) to reiterate the value of making their property available or charging a minimum fee to the public for use of the facilities. In his capacity as Chair of the Legislative Committee, the City Manager inquired of Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick if plans are underway for a presentation on imminent domain and certain tax issues at a future Council meeting; whereupon, he stated that it would be appropriate for the City's legislative liaison to brief the Council within the next 60 days at a 9:00 a.m. Council work session. 627 Council Member Lea reported on activities of the Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee. He advised that last year, RVTV produced 51 original television shows; i.e.: Inside Roanoke, Roanoke County Today, Spotlight on City Schools, Accent, Excellence in Roanoke County Business Partners; 58 Roanoke Valley government meetings were broadcast; a 15-year franchise agreement was executed with Cox Communications; a capital equipment grant of over $1 million was awarded to RVTV; and RVTV completed transition to a completely digital television station. Council Member Wishneffcailed attention to an issue regarding the Regional Industrial Park in Pulaski. He asked that the City Manager provide pertinent details to which the City Manager responded that she was not privy to the information. She stated that an important announcement was made last week to designate the Dublin Airport as a foreign trade tax zone, the City of Roanoke and other jurisdictions of the Roanoke Regional Partnership have financially supported the activity for the past several years in the hopes of receiving the designation which would provide access to Federal funds; and support of the designation should make the broader region more attractive to certain kinds of businesses as they engage in import/export activities. Council Member Wishneffadvised that at a recent meeting of the Harrison Museum, Members of the Board of Directors were encouraged to consider moving the Harrison Museum of African American Culture to Center in the Square. Council Member Cutler noted that the Harrison Board of Directors was not overly enthusiastic about the prospect of moving to Center in the Square, a certain amount of reluctance has been expressed on the part of the Harrison Museum Board of Directors to accept the invitation of Center in the Square because the Museum would lose some of its independence and uniqueness, but all Board members in attendance acknowledged that the Harrison School is not the appropriate location for a public museum; Board Members indicated that the Dumas Center had extended an offer to house the Harrison Museum, but there is not sufficient space in the Dumas to display the present collection of museum pieces; Senator John Edwards, Council Member Lea and others spoke in favor of the Harrison Museum taking advantage of an offer to move into space to be vacated by the Art Museum of Western Virginia at Center in the Square; the Harrison Museum continues to be in a tenuous financial situation and the main purpose of the meeting was to encourage City, State and national levels to provide more financial support for the Museum, and it has been acknowledged that more support is needed from the local community. In closing, Dr. Cutler advised that Council Members Lea and Wishneff attended the meeting on behalf of City Council, in addition to local State Senators and Delegates, .and minutes of the meeting would be available upon request. 628 As a Member of the Board of Directors of Center in the Square, Council Member Dowe advised that discussions have taken place regarding larger opportunities for the Harrison Museum that can be sustained would be preferable and after measures to gain momentum have been identified along with solicitation of more community support. The paradigms will be broken down in order to get on with the business of operating the Harrison Museum. Council Member Cutler responded that relocating the Harrison Museum to Center in the Square would contribute to breaking down the paradigm. Council Member Dowe advised that some time ago, the City of Roanoke created a Youth Commission, which was modeled after the City of Hampton's Youth Commission, to enable young people to have a level of "buy in" to the decisions made on their behalf and to act as an incentive for more young people to return to the City of Roanoke following completion of college because they would have a vested interest in what they perceive to be decision making for the future. He stated that he requested the City of Roanoke's Youth Commission to consider drafting a comprehensive plan for youth, which may be presented within the next year. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that he participated in the recent ribbon cutting for the Youth Center at Preston Park, the Center was designed with input by members of the City's Youth Commission, a good representation of young people from across the City's neighborhoods was in attendance, and establishment ofaYouth Center is another positive step in the right direction for Roanoke's youth. The City Manager advised that representatives of the Youth Commission would present a progress report at the August 1, 2005 Council work session, along with before and after photographs of the Preston Center; the Vice-Mayor attended the "soft opening" of the Preston Center and a formal ribbon cutting ceremony will be held in the near future. She stated that the Preston Center is an example of youth not only taking ownership of the building, but activities within the building. The City Manager advised that she has encouraged the Harrison Museum to allow the loaning of some of its art to the City in order to provide exposure to diversity in art and indicated that a special charge by Council to the Roanoke Arts Commission could be to nurture and improve the relationship with the Harrison Museum and the Museum's art collection in order to expose more people to another element of art. BRIEFINGS: CITY CODE-BUILDINGS/BUILDING DEPARTMENT: The City Manager introduced Karl S. Cooler, Building Commissioner, for a briefing on certain changes to the Building Code/enforcement, and an update on downtown buildings and certain renovation projects that have proven to be particularly challenging in an older city. 629 Mr. Cooler presented the following building inspections overview: · Adoption of the 2003 Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code. Adoption of the 2003 USBC is scheduled for December 1,2005. A revision of Chapter 7 of the City Code will be submitted to Council in September 2005, with proper references for adoption at the local level. The International Existing Building Code (IEBC)is a new code for the international series of codes and will be adopted by the Commonwealth Virginia in 2005. The Code is modeled after the New Jersey Rehab Code which was long held to be the standard to allow older buildings to be much more readily used for modern uses. The 2003 IEBC is an expansion of Chapter 34 of the International Building Code which deals with existing buildings. Its adoption will give developers, design professionals and building departments more tools to analyze existing buildings for alternative compliance to the building code. · Progress of Rehabilitation of Downtown Structures. Building shell and systems Individual upfits for owners and tenants Colonial Arms, 204 Jefferson Street City-state Building, 102 Campbell Avenue Construction Activity for 2005. Construction activity is strong for the first half of 2005. It was thought at the beginning of this year that the mild winter was partially responsible, but construction figures have consistently been above last year's numbers by approximately 10-1 2%. · Permit Structure - Multiple Versus Combination Permits. The City has been working with Accela Permits Plus software to make it more flexible and provide the ability to work more closely within the Building Department, with other departments and with outside customers to improve service. 630 The City has been working with contractors and with the Roanoke Regional Home Builders Association to move toward a combination permit system in lieu of the separate permits which are currently used. All responses to date have been extremely positive. A trial run of the system has been used on the Civic Center Phase II project and reaction by all persons involved has been good. Roanoke County has approved combination permits for residential permits and is expected to follow with commercial permits in the near future. In the near future, the City Manager will propose the necessary changes to fully implement combination permits. Revised square foot building costs will closely parallel the method used by the Director of Real Estate Valuation. No change will be requested in the current permit fee, and the goal is to make the change from multiple permits to combination permits with as little change as possible in the overall fee for a structure. Joint meetings with Building Officials from the City of Roanoke, Roanoke County and the City of Salem started in December 2004 and continue to be held. The following priority tasks were identified: Standardizing Permit Submission Requirements. Mutual Aid Agreement. Standardizing Code Interpretations. National Accreditation of the Building Departments. Work with Virginia Tech's Architecture Department to Develop Standard Plans. Cross Connection Testing and Certification. The City's Cross Connection Control Program was implemented on July 1, 2004, as a result of new requirements in the 2000 USBC. Virginia added a requirement to the 2000 International Property Maintenance Code that required annual testing of cross connection devices. The Western Virginia Water Authority is required by Virginia Health Department regulations to have a cross connection control program in place as acondition of supplying water to a property. 631 Both the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County have acceptable cross connection control programs in place; the Water Authority's program includes language that recognizes the programs from the two jurisdictions as a basis for compliance with their requirements; should either of the participating jurisdictions fail to maintain an acceptable program, the Water Authoritywould be required to implement aprogram of its own in its place. The Water Authority has stated that it will not supply water toa meter that is connected to a system that requires a cross connection device without an annual test and certification that the device is working properly. The City of Roanoke's program requires that a $35 permit be obtained and that the services of a third party certified tester be used for the device; and satisfactory test results are sent to the City upon completion of the annual test and/or repair of the device. Roanoke County charges a $30 fee and performs the test with its Utility Department inspectors; they are currently revisiting their requirements since formation of the Western Virginia Water Authority has resulted in elimination of the County's Utility Department. Mr. Cooler stated that the Colonial Arms Building located at 204Jefferson Street which is a 12 story building with a basement and is located within a flood zone has been of interest, certain things about the building as awhole make up its safety insofar as building construction, and other systems in the building that relate to safety include the fire suppression system and fire alarm system which must function as awhole in order for any individual to safely occupy the building; individual upfits, whether it be a tenant space or an owner occupied space then come into consideration; it is necessary to ensure that construction of the shell of the building is adequate to protect any occupant in the event that something happens on any floor, and that the building is protected with a fire alarm system or sprinkler system that will give occupants the time they need to exit the building in the event of an emergency. He stated that another issue pertaining to the building is in reference to the flood plain because it is obvious that the building cannot be flood proofed or raised out of the flood plain. In order to accomplish what is believed to be an adequate variance to the flood plain requirements, he advised that the building has been sealed based on calculations where it is believed that water will come in and a pump will be installed with a back up generator that will pump water out faster than it comes in; and this type of system would enable the electrical service and main distribution panels to the building to remain in service in the event of a flood. He advised that certain buildings in 632 Virginia are required to under go professional review design, the City engaged in the services of design professionals to analyze building construction and to identify any issues that do not meet building code requirements which would give the City an opportunity to key in on those issues, rather than to do a full analysis and walk through; and the City of Roanoke cannot make changes at the local level, but does have the authority to grant variances in order to make code requirements work at the local level. He explained that building shell and systems, i.e.: fireproofing and compartmentalization of each floor must be complete and the fire suppression system and fire alarm system must be fully operational before the first units can be occupied in the building, and the building should be operational and ready for occupancy in approximately December 2005. The City Manager stated that new code requirements will afford the City as opportunity to rehabilitate older buildings within the City of Roanoke, however, certain challenges still exist. Mr. Cooler advised that the permit process will be quite lengthy as the City moves from nine permits to one; an effort will be made to keep the permit process as simple as possible, with the least amount of monetary impact as possible; the new review system will pull all information together regarding the monetary value of the project under one heading and provide a truer picture of construction and the amount of application. Council Member Cutler inquired as to whether the City was taking any initiative with respect to "green building" techniques; whereupon, the City Manager responded that she was not aware of any building currently under design; the previous design of the stadium/amphitheatre contained an element that would use water runoff for landscaping; and the City has encouraged Carillon Health Systems to use "green building" techniques on the first building of the Riverside Centre. Mr. Cooler stated that the new Art Museum is considering a system that would use rainwater. Council Member Dowe advised that a majority of the buildings within the City of Roanoke are older structures, and inquired as to whether there is a way to separate the various buildings into construction percentages; whereupon, Mr. Cooler stated that it would be important to ensure that the City's records are accurate and the need to coordinate Building Department and Department of Economic Development reporting in order to reach an accurate figure which would involve reaching a balance between an educational department, a service department and an enforcement department. He called attention to efforts to encourage the building departments of the City of Roanoke, Roanoke County and the City of Salem to meet on a quarterly basis to standardize certain submission requirements and interpretations; national certification through ICC is under investigation which will complement police and fire department accreditation procedures, since the Building division is a part of the safety component; and discussions have been held with the Architectural Department at Virginia Tech to develop standardized foundation plans and small building plans to assist builders that do not have that level of expertise. 633 Mr. Cooler discussed cross connection and back flow prevention measures and advised that there are three avenues of cross connection control and enforcement inspection: building, plumbing and residential codes, which identify requirements of a system at the time of installation. He explained that the General Assembly modified the Property Maintenance Code, which provides that once a cross connection device is installed, the device must be inspected on an annual basis and shown to be operational; another method which is used by Roanoke County involves a cross connection control program that was adopted by ordinance; and Western Virginia Water Authority regulations, as promulgated by the Health Department, require jurisdictions to have a cross connection control program in effect which is incorporated as an integrated package program for submittal to the State; and, if it is deemed that any jurisdiction does not have an acceptable cross connection control program in effect, the locality will be required to implement a program to test and certify cross connection devices. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick stated that the City of Roanoke became the "national poster child" when it went through the Autumn Lane termite poisoning case that resulted from awater line break that allowed chemicals to flow into the water line; whereupon, Mr. Cooler stated that the Building Department will identify and review new technologies, make efforts to incorporate appropriate information into the City's process, and be as flexible as possible. Council Member Wishneff stated that more complaints were received from citizens regarding the residential fee than installation of the cross connection device. COMMUNITY PLANNING -CITY MAPPING PROGRAM: The City Manager called attention to efforts by City and School staff to implement a Financial Application and Integration System (FAIS), which will provide a useful service to individual neighborhoods and citizens. The Director of Finance advised that staff of the Finance Department were also involved with implementation of the system. Justin Eades,Junior Systems Analyst, Department of Technology, presented an overview of the Community Portal, which is a unique website designed to present various kinds of data at the neighborhood level; data behind the scenes is GIS or geographic based, made to look like a normal website, easy to use, simple to navigate, and not overwhelming for the average user; and the Community Portal was launched last Fall in conjunction with redesign of the City's Website. Tracey Leet, GIS Coordinator, Department of Technology, conducted a walk through of the website, starting at the home page Community Portal. He explained that there are three ways to activate the system: (1) type in a specific address, (2) select a neighborhood; or (3) select a common place in the City of Roanoke. The following was used as an example: 634 DISCOVER EXPLORE LEARN FIND The Roanoke Roanoke Community Driving Valley Neighborhoods Information Directions WELCOME TO ROANOKE'S COMMUNITY PORTAL WHERE YOU CAN FIND INFORMATION ABOUT ROANOKE'S NEIGHBORHOODS, COMMUNITIES, AND DISCOVER THE SURROUNDING REGION. Click on one of the photos above to select your starting point. Addresses: Community Portal Address: http://www, roanokeva.gov/cphome City's Website Address: http://www, roanokeva.gov City's Mobile Website Address: http://mobile.roanokeva.gov Mr. Leet explained that the site has two components: a reporting section and a mapping section containing different layers; examples include the education home page, libraries, recreation, parks and youth athletic regions, voting precincts and polling places, and related sites for neighborhood organizations; and the system has the capability of zooming in to provide more detail, including links directly to the real estate site. He added that the E-Government Group is constantly looking for ideas to improve the site and to add more layers of information; a layer of information regarding leaf collection will be added and removed as needed during the fall season; and a layer of information on trash collection and maps and directions to City parks which can be accessed and printed by keying in a starting position, similar to the way users access "Map Quest" on the Internet, will also be added. Council Member Dowe commended Department of Technology staff for their innovative and impressive work. At 10:30 a.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be immediately reconvened in Closed Session in the Council's Conference Room, Room 451, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, to be followed byajoint meeting of Council and the City Planning Commission at 12:00 p.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building. At 12:00 p.m., on July 5, 2005, the Council meeting reconvened in Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room 159, the Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., the City of Roanoke, for a joint meeting of Council and the City Planning Commission. PRESENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, and Mayor C. Nelson Harris--6. ABSENT: Council Member BrianJ. Wishneff ................................................ 1. 635 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Gilbert E. Butler, .Ir., D. Kent Chrisman, Robert B. Manetta, Paula L. Prince, Henry Scholz, Fredrick M. Williams and Chairman Richard A. Rife .......................................................... 7. ABSENT: None ..................................................................................... 0. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. OTHERS PRESENT: R. Brian Townsend, Director, Planning, Building and Development; and Martha P. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Commission; and Chris Chittum, Senior Planner. COUNCIL-COMMUNITY PLANNING: The Mayor welcomed Members of the City Planning Commission and Planning Department staff. COUNCIbCOMMUNITY PLANNING-NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS: Mr. Townsend presented an annual update on Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan, and advised that a second report would be shared with the Planning Commission regarding Neighborhood Plan Implementation. Mr. Chittum highlighted updates to the overall Comprehensive Plan. He stated that almost every action to the Plan has some type of activity geared toward implementation; one of the actions deals with the new Zoning Ordinance; and a number of places are identified in the Comprehensive Plan where changes to the Zoning Ordinance are necessary in order to meet the City's goals. He further stated that the Plan recommends that a Housing Plan be developed which is in the process of completion by the Planning Department, along with certain other activities, i.e.: Colonial Green, Countryside, and Day Avenue, etc. He indicated that every quadrant of the City will be covered by some type of neighborhood design, and reviewed the following in terms of neighborhood development for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) targeting: Housing and Neighborhood Construction Development; Neighborhood Assist Centers: Housing Neighborhood Services and City Libraries. Two libraries have been identified for the project; Economic Development Activities: Technology businesses in the City; Establishment of a Brand Identity. A lot of activity in economic development on a neighborhood level with facade grants, particularly businesses located in village centers; 636 Cultural resources: Greenway development, stormwater and air quality management; Three new historic districts created on-line within the last five years, with two pending - Gainsboro and Salem Avenue; Public Safety First year of geographic policing efforts. Regional cooperation. All neighborhood plans taken as a whole. Neighborhood plans identify districts on the Zoning Map. Observation: Implementation tends to be very high in the neighborhoods. Implementation in active neighborhood groups. Mr. Chittum stated that following adoption of neighborhood plans, implementation will take place in the second or third year; and one of the most important recommendations for the Comprehensive Plan is to develop neighborhood plans. Discussion: Council Member Dowe inquired about a time period with regard to updates to neighborhood plan implementation; whereupon, Mr. Chittum reiterated that the timeframe for implementation is two - three years following adoption of the Plan. Council Member Dowe requested more information on the role of the Department of Planning, Building and Development relative to the Youth Commission Comprehensive Plan. Council Member Cutler complimented staff on updates to the Neighborhood Plan Implementation Report and the Vision 2001-2020 Implementation Report July 2005; and called attention to the following items: · Affordable Housing - the Cradle to Cradle Program · Regional Park Authority · Expansion of park systems · Cellphone towers · Riverkeeper Program · Ore Branch Project 637 Upon completion of the Market Study, Council Member Cutler suggested that the City focus on the Greater Henry Street Area Study, water quality, a storm water management authority, i.e.: how to assist the Water Authority with infiltration and inflow, removal of storm water from the sewer system, and creation of a more residential friendly downtown area. Council Member McDaniel inquired as to whether the City is a part of the Riverkeeper Program; whereupon, Council Member Cutler advised that the program is a private entity and therefore the City cannot participate. He further advised that the entity has considered joining the national corporation to become the official trademark Riverkeeper 501 (2)(3) and a meeting is scheduled in the near future to discuss the matter. Mr. Townsend stated that each year, operational departments are contacted with regard to updates to the Comprehensive Plan which reinforces the Plan annually. He further stated that while the Zoning Ordinance is a major part of implementation of the Plan, two-thirds of the Plan is not administered by planners, but departments such as Public Works, Facilities Management, etc. He indicated that the Planning Department has built a stronger staff constituency for the Plan in terms of realization and the importance in urban activities to move the Plan forward. He pointed out that Planning staff will continue to involve other City departments that play a major role in the implementation process. The City Manager commented that the Plan and the implementation schedule in the annual report were intended to provide a greater sense of direction to City departments with regard to Council's priorities and expectations of individual departments. Mr. Townsend stated that any additional comments with regard to the documents should be forwarded to the Department of Planning, Building and Development, and the documents will be posted on the City's website for review by citizens. Mr. Townsend called attention to a public hearing which is scheduled to be held on Thursday, July 28, 2005, at 4:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, by the City Planning Commission with regard to the proposed new Zoning Ordinance. He noted that the first advertisement would be published in The Roanoke Times on Tuesday, July 12, 2005, and notices containing a general notification to the public hearing and a descriptive summary of the Zoning Ordinance and zoning districts were mailed to all property owners in the City of Roanoke. 638 Mr. Townsend stated that following the public hearing, the City Planning Commission will hold weekly work sessions during the month of August to formulate its recommendations to Council; and the Planning Commission anticipates submitting recommendations to Council no later than October 2005. Council Member Dowe inquired if there is a role that the Council could play in assisting City staff on educating the public with regard to the proposed new Zoning Ordinance; whereupon, Mr. Townsend stressed the importance of strong citizen participation in the process. (For full text, see Implementation Reports for Vision 2OO1-2020 Comprehensive Plan and Component Neighborhood Plan on file in the City Clerk's Office.) Mr. Williams distributed a marketing brochure which was prepared for the Williamson Road area. (See brochure on file in the City Clerk's Office.) On behalf of the Council, the Mayor expressed appreciation to Members of the City Planning Commission for their service to the City of Roanoke. There being no further business, at 12:55 p.m., Chairman Rife declared the meeting of the City Planning Commission adjourned. At 12:55 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess until 2:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber. (The Council reconvened in Closed Session in Room 159.) At 2:00 p.m., on Tuesday, July 5, 2005, the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding. PRESENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, and Mayor C. Nelson Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. ABSENT: Council Member BrianJ. Wishneff- ................................................ 1. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Mayor Harris. 639 The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Americawas led by Mayor Harris. ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING: CITY COUNCIL: Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution establishing a meeting schedule for City Council for the fiscal year commencing July 1,2005, and ending June 30, 2006: (#37109-070505) A RESOLUTION establishing a meeting schedule for City Council for the Fiscal Year commencing July 1, 2005, and terminating June 30, 2006, and changing the time of commencement of regular meetings to be held on the third Monday in August, 2005, and the third Monday in September, 2005. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 489.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37109- 070505. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ............................................................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneffwas absent.) PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: NONE. CONSENT AGENDA The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and ifdiscussionwas desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting of Council held on Monday, May 16~ 2005, were before the body. (For full text, see Minutes on file in the City Clerk's Office.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: 640 AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ................................................................................................ 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) COMMITTEES-WATER RESOURCES: A Resolution adopted by the Western Virginia Water Authority expressing appreciation to George W. Logan for his service as a Director of the Water Authority, was before Council. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the Resolution be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ................................................................................................ O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) CITY PROPERTY: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that pursuant to requirements of the Code of Virginia, the City of Roanoke is required to hold a public hearing on the proposed conveyance of property rights; whereupon, she requested that a public hearing be advertised for Monday, July 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the conveyance of City-owned property to Roanoke Sports Group, LLC. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ................................................................................................ 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) OATHS OF OFFICE-PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMI]-fEES: The following report of qualification was before Council: Sherley E. Stuart as a member of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, for a term ending March 31,2008. 641 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the report of qualification be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ................................................................................................ O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) REGULAR AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: NONE. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: CITY MANAGER: BRIEFINGS: NONE. ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION: PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that construction of three new Fire-EMS stations was proposed under the Strategic Business Plan for the Fire-EMS Department; construction of the new stations will facilitate consolidation of other stations; a site has been identified on Melrose Avenue that is suitable for one of the new stations and the owner has agreed to sell the property for $332,500.00; and funding to purchase the property was appropriated on June 20, 2005. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to acquire in fee simple a parcel of land identified by Official Tax No. 2322001, following satisfactory environmental site inspection and title examination. Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance: (#37110-070505) AN ORDINANCE providing for the acquisition of certain property needed by the City for the development of a new Fire - EMS station, located on Melrose Avenue, bearing Roanoke City Tax No. 2322001, and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 490.) 642 Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37110- 070505. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. Ms. Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., expressed concern that no public meetings were held by the City regarding the proposed fire station on Melrose Avenue. She stated that when the City Manager assumed her position in 2000, she met with agroup of citizens at First Baptist Church on Wells Avenue and Jefferson Street, at which time citizens expressed concerns with regard to how some black communities have been raped of land for industrial sites, roads, etc., and they were told by the City Manager that such practices would no longer be permitted, instead the Burrell Center has been closed, a methadone clinic has been opened, no play area has been provided for the community, and schools in the neighborhood have been closed. She also expressed concern that with the closing of fire stations, response times could be affected and alluded to the fact that certain decisions by the City could be racially motivated. She asked that Council review the issue of closing fire stations by using critical thinking and require accountability and truth by all persons. Fire Chief James Grigsby was requested to review the rationale for 14 fire stations; whereupon, he advised that currently the City has 13 fire stations on line; and until four years ago, the City had 14 fire stations until a new fire station at South Peters Creek Road was constructed and the station on Salem Turnpike was closed. He stated that the City of Roanoke consists of approximately 42 square miles and 13 fire stations would cover about 3.2 miles per square mile per station. He advised that under the Fire Department's Business Plan to build three additional new stations and to close aging stations, Roanoke will have a total of 11 stations which will cover 3.8 square miles on an average per station; therefore, the City of Roanoke will be well within the national benchmark as established by the Insurance Service Organization. He stated that Roanoke has stations that were constructed in 1906, 1912, 1926, and in approximately 1928 prior to Peters Creek Road, 1-581, Orange Avenue, Second Street Bridge, Fifth Street Bridge, Tenth Street Bridge, etc., aging infrastructure and fire equipment that cannot be navigated into some of the smaller existing fire stations. He added that citizens are naturally and rightly concerned about response times which is an element of five or six critically important elements in providing life saving services; the preferred response time is within four minutes, 90 per cent of the time which is a standard that is currently met by Roanoke's Fire Department; and a plan has been recommended that will provide response times of four minutes or less, 90 per cent of the time. Council Member Dowe referred to road improvements and other changes in fire service over the years. He inquired about the types of training enhancements/materials that are considered when constructing today's fire stations. 643 Chief Grigsby advised that higher quality homes are constructed today due to more stringent building code standards, training of fire suppression staff has improved, fire education programs are offered in the Roanoke City Schools and free smoke detectors are offered to City residents. He stated that fire inspectors in the downtown area, improved building codes, new materials and public education all lead to a more fire safe community which, is evidenced by the fact that during the past three years there have been less than 100working fires in the City of Roanoke. Chief Grigsby was requested to address the issue of response times relative to a future increase in the City's housing stock; whereupon, he advised that population density drives the number of calls and some peripheral areas will be underserved by the four minute response time; Old Mountain Road will be the most underserved area, because even with the new fire station, it will take four minutes to reach the bridge at Old Mountain Road; and areas that offer the most concern are Old Mountain Road and some of the southwest and southeastern peripheral areas where the four minute response time is not met. He stated that those areas represent the ten per cent that are allowed by national standards, which is not comforting to those individuals who live in the area; however, new homes are being constructed according to stronger building code standards and very few calls have been received from those areas. He advised that inner City areas where there is a high population density receive outstanding fire response coverage. Council Member Lea inquired if community meetings were held; whereupon, Chief Grigsby responded that approximately 36 meetings were held throughout the community. The City Manager expanded on Chief Grigsby's response by advising that several years ago, when the Master Plan for Fire/EMS was first proposed, City Staff conducted a series of meetings. She stated that there has been a general misunderstanding in the community because some individuals thought that the City intended to close fire stations before new fire stations were opened; whereupon, she clarified that it is not intended to close any station until such time as replacement fire station is operational. She advised that Council previously approved sale of the fire station at the Roanoke Regional Airport and the City has a five year period during which to construct the new fire station; the capital improvement budget does not provide for design or construction of the new facility for several years, but it is an important signal to the community that funds received from the sale of the Airport fire station will be used to purchase the property for both new stations on Williamson Road and the proposed station for the Melrose Avenue area. Question was raised with regard to the status of jobs within the Fire Department as a result of construction of the new fire stations; whereupon; the City Manager advised that it is planned to consolidate staff, there may be some adjustments in equipment depending on equipment availability over the next several years, and a reallocation of resources to 11 stations as opposed to the current 13 stations. 644 Question was raised with regard to the assessment of the property located at the corner of Franklin Road and Elm Avenue (704 Franklin Road, S. W.); whereupon, the City Manager advised that the City's assessment was approximately $65,000.00, and an independent appraisal assessed the property at approximately $315,000.00, which was reviewed and agreed to by the Director of Real Estate Valuation, as a reasonable price for the property. She stated that when this particular fire station is constructed, additional space will be provided for a Police satellite or substation on a permanent basis and a community meeting room; when the station on Salem Turnpike closed, it allowed the addition of an ambulance to the South Peters Creek station, which improved the response time for medical calls, and the balance of firefighters were assigned to the Clearbrook station in Roanoke County, in order to provide better service to that portion of the southwest section of the City and the Southern Hills area where response times were in the range of six to eight minutes. Chief Grigsby advised that the Clearbrook Agreement allowed the Southern Hills area and the southern tip of the Route 220 corridor to be served within the four minute response time, as opposed to the previous six to eight minute response time. There being no further discussion, Ordinance No. 37110-070505 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ................................................................................................ O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) TRAFFIC-STATE HIGHWAYS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Virginia Department of Transportation's (VDOT) Revenue Sharing Program has been available to Virginia counties for manyyears; funds are matching funds and may be used for transportation maintenance and construction activities; and as part of a new initiative, the Commonwealth of Virginia has made funds available to cities and towns that maintain their road systems and has increased the amount of available funds statewide. It was further advised that funds are matching funds that must be supplemented by local funds on a one to one basis; the City can receive a maximum of $1 million from the State which must be matched by $1 million of local funds; staff has identified three projects for which the funds may be used which include maintenance and rehabilitation of the Walnut Avenue Bridge, improvement of the intersection at Aviation Drive and Towne Square Boulevard, and maintenance of sidewalks, citywide; and the City has identified the following funding sources: (545 Walnut Avenue Bridge Improvements - $325,000.00 from Walnut Avenue Bridge Project, Account No. 008-530-9511. Aviation & Towne Square Intersection Improvements - $250,000.00 from Aviation & Towne Square Boulevard Improvements, Account No. 008-530-9830, and $200,000.00 from VDOT Highway Projects, Account No. 008-530-9803. · Sidewalk Maintenance - $225,000.00 from Sidewalk Maintenance, Account No. 008-530-9793. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution supporting the request to participate in the Virginia Department of Transportation Revenue Sharing Program. Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution: (#37111-070505) A RESOLUTION supporting the City of Roanoke's participation in the Virginia Department of Transportation's Revenue Sharing Program. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 491.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37111- 070505. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ................................................................................................ O. (Council Member Wishneffwas absent.) BUDGET-ROANOKE PASSENGER STATION RENOVATION PROJECT: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Western Virginia Foundation for the Arts and Sciences (WVFAS) received notification that it would receive additional Transportation Enhancement funds for the Roanoke Passenger Station Renovation Project, in the amount of $100,O00.00, which is in addition to the $1,098,000.00 in Enhancement funds approved in 2001, 2002 and 2004, bringing the total to $1,198,000.00; other State-provided funding of $ 500,000.00 has been committed to the project which currently totals almost $3.2 million, considering both State and local funding; the City of Roanoke must enter into separate supplemental agreements with the WVFAS and the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOI') which define the responsibilities of each party; authority for all VDOT agreements for the project was previously authorized by Council action on January22,2002 (Resolution No. 35734-012202); authority for alIWVFAS 646 agreements for the project was previously provided pursuant to Ordinance No. 36157-121602; the WVFAS would be responsible for the match requirement of $25,000.00; and it is requested that the $100,000.00 of Transportation Enhancement funds be appropriated (to be reimbursed by VDOT) to Project Account No. 008-530-9900-9007 for disbursement to the Western Virginia Foundation for the Arts and Sciences. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a budget ordinance to increase the revenue estimate in the amount of $100,000.00 for Transportation Enhancement funds to be provided byVDOT; authorize the Director of Finance to increase the revenue estimate in the amount of $100,000.00, and appropriate funding in the same amount to the Roanoke Passenger Station Renovation Project, Account No. 008-530-9900-9007, for disbursement to the WVFAS. Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37112-070505) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate TEA-21 Enhancement Grant funding to be provided by VDOT for the Roanoke Passenger Station Renovation Project, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 492.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37112- 070505. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted bythe following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ................................................................................................ 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) BUDGET-CITY INFORMATION SYSTEMS-SCHOOLS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that in support of Council's objective to improve application integration and efficiencies and the Financial Application Integration project, the City of Roanoke along with the School system, is seeking a replacement for the existing Budget Preparation application; in 2004, a team consisting of representatives from the School system and City departments began the process of identifying a cost-effective solution to meet the needs of both organizations; a Request for Proposal was released in January, 2004 and again in November, 2004; in both cases, following a review of submissions including site presentations, the team rejected all bids due to either functional limitations, or costs above the $500,000.00 budgeted for the project. 647 It was further advised that during the second RFP review, the Department of Technology (DOT), seeking a viable alternative that meets the functional requirements of the City and the Schools at a reasonable cost, identified a solution that was written "in house" by the IT department of the City of Virginia Beach; the system has previously been sold to other localities in Virginia for a nominal fee; it was viewed by the Budget Preparation System Committee as a viable alternative to the purchase of vendor software; DoT assisted the Budget Preparation System Committee in analyzing the functional capability of the Virginia Beach solution, reviewing an on-line demonstration of the system, determining technical staffing needs, and developing a five-year cost analysis comparison; and based on the findings, it was the recommendation of the Department of Technology and the review team to adopt the Virginia Beach solution. It was explained that DoT, in partnership with the Department of Management and Budget (DMB) and City School administrative offices, will customize the system to meet the specific budget and performance management needs of both agencies; the new system will greatly enhance the budgetary process by providing an innovative, cost-effective solution to support the growing complexity and diverse operational needs of the City and the Schools while continuing to meet the objective of Council for integration of technology systems; by adopting the Virginia Beach solution, the City and the Schools will avoid expenditure of approximately $400,000.00 during a five-year period as compared to purchasing a vendor-provided solution; and funds can be redirected to other priority technology projects. It was noted that the report seeks authorization to add a Programmer/Analyst I position to provide computer support to the School System and DoT; afull time support position is needed to further customize and maintain the new system which cannot be supported with existing staff; cost of the position was included in the five-year cost analysis; following the first year, the position will support the budget preparation system, as well as provide support to the e-gov team on various projects; and, in the first year, the position will be funded by the Financial Application Integration project, and in subsequent years, the DoT operating budget will fund the position. The City Manager recommended that Council authorize the addition of a Programmer/Analyst I position in the Department of Technology to provide on- going system support; and adopt a budget ordinance to transfer funds from Account No. 13-430-1602-3028 (Reserve Future Capital Outlay) to the following accounts: Regular Employee Salaries City Retirement ICMA Match FICA Life Insurance Account (I 3-430-1601-1002) (13-430-1601-1105) (13-430-1601-1116) (13-430-1601-1120) (I 3-430-1601-1130) Amount $ 37,859.00 4,774.00 650.00 2,896.00 432.00 Total $ 46,611.00 648 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: (#37113-070505) AN ORDINANCE to transfer funding and provide approval of an additional position for computer support for the new Budget Preparation System, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Department of Technology Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 493.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37113-070505. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler. Upon question, the City Manager explained that approximately $400,000.00 will be redirected to other aspects of the financial application system; and by purchasing this particular software and certain other minor adjustments and the City saved a considerable amount of funds by purchasing the Virginia Beach solution which was a mutual decision by both the City and the School system. There being no further discussion, Ordinance No. 37113-070505 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ................................................................................................ O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) BUDGET-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Federal Government's Child and Family Service Review (CFSR) project has conducted exhaustive studies of each State's implementation of child welfare programs; reviews assessed seven program outcomes and seven systemic factors in the delivery of child protective services, foster care, adoptions and family preservation services; each state is required to submit a Program Improvement Plan (PIP) to address areas where specific national performance standards were not met; each locality must, in turn, develop its own PIP; Virginia's PIP was approved in 2004, and the State legislature has approved funding for implementation of local plans; the amount allocated by the State to the City of Roanoke is $195,131.00, which includes the required 20% local match of $39,026.00 and is intended for the State's fiscal year 2006; PIP funds will be allocated in a separate State budget line for both fiscal year 2006 and fiscal year 2007; and in fiscal year 2008, funds will be included in the City's base allocation, provided that targets established in the local PIP are met. 649 It was further advised that the City of Roanoke Department of Social Services has submitted its PIP to the Virginia Department of Social Services (VDSS); the Plan requires much more intensive involvement by foster care staff in the delivery of services; increased collaboration with foster children, birth families and foster families is an essential part of the Plan; the CFSR conducted on a national level has shown that the relationship between social worker visits with these parties has a high correlation with increased well-being of foster children; the Child Welfare League of America and the American Public Human Service Association have documented the need to reduce child welfare caseloads; the recommended caseload size ranges from eight to 12 children; the City averages about 16 foster care cases per social worker when fully staffed at the present staff complement; due to high demands and stress related to the job, the City's foster care social work staff has turned over at an alarming rate during the past 12-18 months, and there have been vacancies on a nearly constant basis; the lack of stability in the City's workforce is contributing to its inability to fully meet the CFSR performance standards; social workers also need strong supervisory support and training in order to effectively meet standards and to advance in their job skills; and present supervisory units have about eight staff (including support staff), however, six staff per unit is the recommended size. It was explained that the local PIP allocation of $195,131.00 will fund salaries and benefits for four additional social workers and one social work supervisor; positions will not be filled before August 1, 2005, therefore, salary costs will only accrue for 11 months in fiscal year 2006 which will enable the PIP allocation to cover start up costs for equipment purchases; the hiring ofstaffwill reduce foster care caseloads to an average of about 13 children per social worker; and supervisors will have about seven staff in their units. The City Manager recommended that Council authorize the Department of Social Services to increase staff complement by four full-time social workers (grade 11) and one full time social work supervisor (grade 13), and adopt an ordinance establishing a revenue estimate in the General Fund in the amount of $156,105.00, transfer $39,026.00 from the City Manager Contingency, Account No. 001-300-9410-2199, and appropriate $195,131.00 for the Department of Social Services, as follows: 001-630-5314-1002 001-630-5314-1105 001-630-5314-1120 001-630-5314-1130 001-630-5314-2020 001-630-5314-2035 001-630-5314-2044 (Regular Employee Salaries) (City Retirement) (FICA) (Life Insurance) (Telephone) (Expendable Equipment) (Training and Development) 146,363.00 18,456.00 12,215.00 1,820.00 2,000.00 11,000.00 3,277.00 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: 650 (#37114-070505) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Department of Social Services and to provide approval of five additional positions for child welfare, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 General Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 494.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37114-070505. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ................................................................................................ O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Director of Finance submitted the Financial Report for the month of May 2005. (For full text, see report on file in the City Clerk's Office.) There being no questions or comments, without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the Financial Report for the month of May would be received and filed. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: NONE. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: COMMITTEES-FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL: Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution abolishing the Flood Plain Committee: (#37115-070505) A RESOLUTION discontinuing and abolishing the Flood Plain Committee which was first appointed by a former Mayor on April 30, 1973, and expressing this Council's appreciation to the members for their services to the City. (For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 495.) 651 Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37115- 070505. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ................................................................................................ 0. (Council Member Wishneffwas absent.) MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL-FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL: Council Member Cutler commended the work of the City's Flood Plain Committee. PARKS AND RECREATION-CITY COUNCIL-CITY EMPLOYEES-ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Council Member Cutler advised that the City of Roanoke has officially adopted the banks of the Roanoke River extending through the City of Roanoke as the maintenance responsibility of the City. He called attention to and commended an activity which occurred on Saturday, July 2, 2005, in which volunteers, primarily from the City's Parks and Recreation Department, assisted approximately 40 members of the Kiwanis Club of Roanoke in clean up efforts along the Roanoke River from Wasena Park to Carillon Roanoke Memorial Hospital. He noted that over six tons oftrashwere collected, and expressed appreciation to Steven Buschor, City Parks and Recreation Director, his Deputy for Park Maintenance, Gary Hegner, and other City employees who participated in the event. CITY COUNCIL-RAIL SERVICE: Council Member Cutler expressed appreciation to those persons responsible for the rail solutions initiative to encourage the Commonwealth of Virginia and the Federal Government to support the use of rail freight to supplement traffic on Interstate-81. PARKS AND RECREATION-ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick expressed appreciation to the Kiwanis Club of Roanoke for their volunteer efforts to clean up debris along the banks of the Roanoke River on Saturday, July 2, 2005. PARKS AND RECREATION-ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL-CITY EMPLOYEES: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick commended City staff for making aesthetic improvements along Wiley Drive through Smith Park and a small portion of the River's Edge Sports Complex, and asked that other areas of the City be addressed in the same manner. 652 ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL-CITY EMPLOYEES-FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick commended City staff for their assistance in connection with rescue efforts and clean up activities as a result of the heavy rainfall that occurred in the City of Roanoke during the week of June 26, 2005, specifically in the Brandon Avenue/Franklin Road area. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL-YOUTH: Council Member Lea recognized and commended the attendance of several young people who were observing the City Council proceedings. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. PARKS AND RECREATION-SWIMMING POOLS: Sarah Burns, 1925 Gayle Street, N. W., representing an organization called "Just Mills", requested reinstatement of the park that was previously located across from the Washington Park Swimming Pool. CITY EMPLOYEES: Angela Norman, 1731 Michael Street, N. W., appeared before Council as a citizen and as President of the Municipal Employees Association. She advised that it has been brought to the attention of the organization that recently a Caucasian employee with a high school diploma was promoted several times to reach the Director's level, earning in excess of over $80,000.00 a year, while an African-American employee with excellent evaluations, with over 25 years of job experience and the equivalent of two years of college was denied promotional opportunities on four occasions within same department. She stated that employees who may not have a college degree have dedicated many years of service to the City of Roanoke in order to qualify for promotional opportunities; while college degrees are a valuable asset, the City's Affirmative Action Policy clearly states that experience is a valid substitute for education; and qualified senior employees will never be promoted if this policy is not enforced. She advised that local government provides many excellent services for citizens due to the efforts of long term and experienced City employees; "the good ole girl, good ole boy" network is applicable inside municipal government and strongly applicable within the ranks of the City of Roanoke; as a result of deals and decisions that are made behind closed doors, injustice occurs and legal cases result in misjudgment, regardless of the facts; and multiple violations have been allowed in hiring and promotional practices by Roanoke City government. Therefore, she stated that she has contacted the Department of Labor, the Department of Justice, and the Equal Opportunity Commission to investigate continual cover-ups. She advised that she has been a catalyst in the hiring of many minorities in Roanoke City government; as a result, retaliation is a form of discrimination, but the level of retaliation has not been strong enough to prevent her from holding the City Manager and the City Administration accountable to the City's established polices and procedures. She stated that the citizens of the City of Roanoke entrust the people they hire to do the right thing, but unless someone speaks out against injustice, employees will continue to be victims. 653 HOUSING/AUTHORITY: Brenda Petty, 1925 Gayle Street, N. W., representing residents of Lincoln Villages, spoke in support of the installation of screen doors on the front of housing units. She called attention to the deteriorating condition of screen doors that were previously installed on back doors. ARMORY/STADIUM: Jim Fields, 1 7 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia, advised that a previous resolution adopted by the Council states that Victory Stadium was constructed on the condition that the land on which it was built would be used solely for a stadium, armory or for recreational purposes. He pointed out that if Victory Stadium is demolished, the railroad would reclaim the property and donate the land to another party; therefore, he asked that the City of Roanoke uphold the provisions of the agreement and renovate Victory Stadium for use by future generations of Roanokers. CITY EMPLOYEES-YOUTH: Evelyn D. Bethel, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., advised that the young people in the audience should be encouraged to become a part of the City's Youth Commission. She stated that Ms. Norman spoke on behalf of City employees who are members of the Roanoke City Municipal Employees Association and her concerns should be investigated and resolved. She called attention to other alleged instances of discrimination in hiring practices throughout the Roanoke Valley. COMPLAINTS-FIRE DEPARTMENT-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-CITY EMPLOYEES: Robert E. Gravely, 727 29th Street N. W., spoke with regard to inadequate response times by Fire/EMS personnel to older homes in the City of Roanoke, many of which have been allowed to deteriorate due to neglect by property owners; the need to update the City's antiquated pay scale; the need to take the necessary actions to prevent flooding throughout the City; the need to take appropriate actions to attract new businesses to the City; the need to increase the income level of the average citizen residing in the City of Roanoke with the ultimate goal of homeownership; and the need to correct discriminatory practices within the City's work force. COMPLAINTS-FIRE DEPARTMENT-CITY EMPLOYEES: Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., requested an organizational chart containing the names and telephone numbers of City department managers and directors. She expressed concern with regard to the closing of fire stations in the predominantly northwest section of the City of Roanoke, and asked that Council use critical thinking and require the truth relative to issues that relate to northwest Roanoke. DIRECTOR OF FINANCE-CITY MARKET-REAL ESTATE VALUATION: Robert E. Craig, 701 12th Street, S.W., expressed concern with regard to the criteria for the comprehensive study of the City Market area and inquired as to costs associated with the study. He stated that placing the Director of Real Estate Valuation under the supervision of the Director of Finance gives the appearance of a conflict of interest. 654 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: NONE. At 3:30 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess and Council convened in Closed Session in the Council's Conference Room, Room 451, NoeIC. Taylor Municipal Building. At 4:25 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, with all Members of the Council in attendance, except Council Member Wishneff, Mayor Harris presiding. COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Council Member Dowe moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................ ~ ................. 6. NAYS: None ................................................................................................ O. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMI-I-FEES-PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT: The Mayor advised that the terms of office of I. B. Heineman, Alma L. Lee, and Lylburn D. Moore as members of the Personnel and Employment Practices Commission, expired on June 30, 2005; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancies. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the names of Martha P. Franklin, Letitia A. Smith and Curtis E. Mills. There being no further nominations, Ms. Franklin, Ms. Smith and Mr. Mills were appointed as members of the Personnel and Employment Practices Commission, for terms of three years each ending June 30, 2008, by the following vote: FOR MS. FRANKLIN, MS. SMITH AND MR. MILLS: Council Members McDaniei, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris .................................................. 6. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) 655 OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMI-I-rEES-ROANOKE NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERSHIP: The Mayor advised that the terms of office of Robin Murphy-Kelso and Carl D. Cooper as members of the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates expired on June 30, 2005; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancies. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Robin Murphy- Kelso. There being no further nominations, Ms. Murphy-Kelso was reappointed as a member of the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates for a term ending June 30, 2008, by the following vote: FOR MS. MURPHY-KELSO: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ........................................................................ 6. (Council Member Wishneffwas absent.) OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMI~-rEES-HOUSING/AUTHORiTY: The Mayor advised that the term of office of Ben J. Fink as a Commissioner of the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authoritywill expire on August 31,2005; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Ben J. Fink. There being no further nominations, Mr, Fink was reappointed as a Commissioner of the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority for a term ending August 31,2009, by the following vote: FOR MR. FINK: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. 6. (Council Member Wishneffwas absent.) DIRECTOR OF FINANCE-CITY CLERK-CITY A~-rORNEY-CITY MANAGER-CITY EMPLOYEES-MUNICIPAL AUDITOR: Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance establishing compensation for the City Manager, CityAttorney, Director of Finance, Municipal Auditor, and City Clerk for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2005: . (#37116-070505) AN ORDINANCE establishing compensation for the City Manager, City Attorney, Director of Finance, Municipal Auditor, and City Clerk for the fiscal year beginning July 1,2005; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 495.) 656 Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37116- 070505. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, and Mayor Harris .................................................................................................................. 6. NAYS: None ................................................................................................ 0. (Council Member Wishneff was absent.) There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m. Mary F. Parker City Clerk APPROVED C. Nelson Harris Mayor 657 REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION .... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL July 18, 2005 2:00 p.m. The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday, July 18, 2005, at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the Roanoke City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S.W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Reqular Meetings, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 37109-070505 adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 5, 2005. PRESENT: Council Members Brian J. Wishneff (arrived late), M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L McDaniel and Mayor C. Nelson Harris ............................................. 7. ABSENT: None ................................................... 0. The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Council Member Sherman P. Lea. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led by Mayor Harris. PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-SCHOOLS: The Mayor recognized the following students who participated in the City's 2005 Summer Intern Program: Ron Miller - Rising Senior/Virginia Tech/Majoring in Business Information Technology Miranda Diggs - Rising Senior/Radford University/Majoring in Management and Marketing 658 Christina Sawyer- Rising Junior/Bridgewater College/Majoring in Business Administration Ashley Reynolds - Second Year-Law Student at William and Mary School of Law Blake Taylor-RisingJunior/Concord University/Majoring in Criminal Justice Rashad Hamidullah - Rising Senior/West Virginia University/Majoring in Political Science/Pre Law Brian Muelenaer - Rising Senior/Roanoke College/Majoring in Business Administration/Marketing Stephanie Berry - May 2005 Graduate/Point Loma Nazarene University, San Diego, California/Degree in Communications with a Minor in Psychology Erica Peterson - Graduate Student/Radford University/Industrial Organizational Psychology Master's Program Twyla Stephen December 2004 Graduate/Ferrum College/BS in Accounting/Business Financial Management Michelle Hamilton - May 2005 Graduate/Elon University/Degree in Exercise Sports Science ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-DISABLED PERSONS: The Mayor presented a proclamation to Tuan Reynolds, Community Action Specialist for Blue Ridge Independent Living Center, declaring the year 2005 as Virginians With Disabilities Act and Americans With Disabilities Act Year. CONSENT AGENDA The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was desired, that item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. He called specific attention to two requests for Closed Session. 659 MINUTES-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: Council Member Lea requested that the minutes of the regular meeting of Council held on Monday, June 6, 2005, be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Council Member Lea advised that at the Council's Work Session on June 6, 2005, Council was briefed on a proposal to relocate administrative offices of the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority from 2624 Salem Turnpike, N. W., to Municipal North; whereupon, he requested a status report by the City Manager. The City Manager advised that the previous briefing outlined two options; i.e.: the Housing Authority requested space on the second floor of Municipal North with a separate entrance to be provided on the Campbell Avenue side; however, since the RDHA requested 15,000 square feet of office space it was determined that sufficient space was not available on the second floor, therefore, it was necessary to locate the Housing Authority on at least two floors of Municipal North. She stated that reopening the Campbell Avenue entrance would cost in the range of $250,000.00 due to the need for significant repairs and the probability of installing railings that would be required to meet Architectural Review Board standards given the architectural significance of Municipal North. She advised that an alternate plan was reviewed that would place the majority of Housing Authority activities on the third floor which has the largest amount of square footage of any of the floors in Municipal North, and would allow for the Housing Authority and the City's Department of Housing and Neighborhood Services to be located in close proximity, and space on the first floor adjacent to the handicap accessible ramp would also be available for Housing Authority Section 8 certification customers and others. She noted that while the space allocation may not be exactly what the Housing Authority requested, the Executive Director advises that the Housing Authority is satisfied with the proposed arrangements; Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Mattern will prepare a space allocation study and has already begun a series of one on one interviews; and all of the space is not clearly defined pending results of the space allocation study. MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting of Council held on Monday, June 6, 2005, were before the body. (For full text, see Minutes on file in the City Clerk's Office.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: 660 AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. COMMI-I-rEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the Mayor to convene in a Closed Meeting as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. AUDIT COMMI'I-rEE: Minutes of a meeting of the Audit Committee which was held on Monday, June 20, 2005, were before the body. Topics of discussion included: Internal Audit Report, Police Property Room, Street Lighting, Municipal Auditing 2006 Annual Plan, KPMG External Audit-Fiscal Year 2005-Audit Committee Planning Meeting. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the minutes be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... O. CITY COUNCIL-LEASES-COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA BUILDING: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council schedule a public hearing for Monday, August 15, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, with regard to execution of a new lease with the United States General Services Administration for office space in the Commonwealth Building, was before the body. 661 It was advised that the United States of America General Services Administration (GSA) has leased space in the Commonwealth Building, 220 Church Avenue, S. W., since February 1986; and the City proposes to enter into a new lease with the GSA for 19,841 rentable square feet of office space in the Commonwealth Building for a ten-year period ending March 31, 2015, at an estimated revenue of $2,392.845.00. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager to schedule a public hearing. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None ................................................... 0. CiTY COUNCIL-CITY PROPERTY-INDUSTRIES-HOSPITALS-LEASES: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council schedule a public hearing for Monday, August 15, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in connection with execution of a new lease with Carillon Bio Medical Institute for office space at 111 - 117 Church Avenue, S. W., was before the body. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager to schedule a public hearing. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None ................................................... 0. CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council convene in Closed Meeting to discuss the disposition of publicly-owned property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the City, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body. 662 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager as above described. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... O. PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES-ROANOKE ARTS COMMISSION- COURT COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS BOARD-CONVENTION OF VISITORS BUREAU- GREENWAY SYSTEMS: A report of qualification of the following persons, was before Council: Barry W. Baird as a member of the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, for a term ending June 30, 2008; John B. Ferguson as a member of the Court Community Corrections Program Regional Community Criminal Justice Board, for a term ending June 30, 2008; Betty Field, Louise F. Kegley, Carl H. Koptizke, Michael A. Loveman and E. C. Pace, III, as members of the Mill Mountain Advisory Committee, for terms ending June 30, 2008; Cathy C. Greenberg as a member of the Roanoke Arts Commission, to fill the unexpired term of Courtney A. Penn, resigned, ending June 30, 2007; Thomas Pettigrew as a member of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, for a term ending March 31, 2008; and Barton J. Wi lner as a member of the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau, for a term ending June 30, 2006. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the reports of qualification be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. 663 REGULAR AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS-BUILDINGS/BUILDING DEPARTMENT: Ms. Suzanne Osborne, 1702 Blair Road, S. W., addressed Council with regard to the City's requirement for backflow testing on residential lawn sprinkling systems, which affects approximately 70 residents of the City of Roanoke. She stated that the City has not previously required annual backflow testing, however, pursuant to a communication from Roy McFarland,Jr., Building Inspections Department, dated March ].5, 2005, residents were given until April 30 to comply. She advised that attached to Mr. McFarland's letter was a list of ].2 - ].5 certified testers; however, there are no listings in the yellow pages of the telephone directory for certified backflow testers. She stated that sources referenced by Mr. McFarland, quoted a price ranging from $90.00 an hour to a flat fee of $250.00, plus a $35.00 permit fee; and $90.00 to $250.00 is a large spread, in addition to the $35.00 permit fee, for a system that may be used approximately six months out of the year. She added that according to the Technical Service Manager, Virginia Building Permit Department, backflow testing is not a State mandated requirement, but is optional by locality. She advised that if the City of Roanoke wishes to require that residential lawn irrigation systems be tested annually, it should be done at the City's expense and not at the expense of the property owner. Therefore, she requested that Council instruct the City Manager to give further consideration to the matter. Council Member Wishneffadvised that two questions should be addressed; i.e.: is the requirement for backflowtesting mandated by the State and what is the role of the Western Virginia Water Authority. The City Manager advised that prior to creation of the Western Virginia Water Authority, the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County adopted the requirement for backflow testing. Council Member Cutler advised that as Chair of the Western Virginia Water Authority, he would obtain information with regard to backflow testing. 664 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that in addition to the information requested by Council Member Wishneff, he would like to know if property owners were appropriately notified, the fairness of the policy, and a broad overview of backflow device testing. Following further discussion and without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the matter would be referred to the City Attorney for an opinion on whether testing of backflow prevention devices is mandatory for all jurisdiction in the Commonwealth of Virginia and to the City Manager for an overview of the City's policy regarding backflow testing. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: CITY MANAGER: BRIEFINGS: The City Manager introduced Nancy Snodgrass, Zoning Administrator, for a briefing on the proposed new Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Snodgrass advised that the City of Roanoke initiated a process to develop an entirely new Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map in June 2002 which would be consistent with and implement policies of Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan. She advised that: The City's current Zoning Ordinance was adopted in 1987; Vision 2001 which was adopted in August 2001, set a comprehensive new direction for the City in terms of development patterns, urban design, protection of residential neighborhoods, preservation of recreation lands and open spaces, tree canopy, impervious surfaces, off street parking, and signage. The new direction was driven by more than 2,000 residents and businesses who participated in development of the Comprehensive Plan. The process to comprehensively rewrite the City's Zoning Ordinance incorporated and has continued to incorporate significant citizen participation; a 20 member steering committee was appointed in the summer of 2002 that provided direction for development of the new 665 ordinance, reviewed and revised draft regulations, and provided ongoing feedback; the committee was comprised of representatives from focus groups that were convened during the initial phase of the process, as well as representatives from City Council, the City Planning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals, Architectural Review Board, and City staff. In February, 2004, 18 months into the process, the steering committee released the public discussion draft that was intended to generate discussion and further public input; at that same time staff released the public discussion draft of a proposed Zoning Map that applied the designations of the ordinance draft. Release of public discussion drafts, including posting on the City's website, initiated a four month public discussion phase that resulted in more than 1,100 comments via letters and e-mails, 11 structured focus group work sessions, six public open houses, and numerous staff meetings with or presentations to various neighborhoods and civic organizations, such as Downtown Roanoke, Inc., the Williamson Road Area Business Association, Roanoke Valley Chamber of Commerce, Neighbors in South Roanoke, Old Southwest, Inc., and the Gainsboro Steering Committee. Following the public discussion phase, staff organized all 1,100 comments into a lengthy spreadsheet, researched alternatives or revised regulations, and benchmarked draft sign and landscaping regulations with other jurisdictions. For six months, beginning in June of 2004, the steering committee met weekly to consider all 1,100 comments and to recommend changes to the draft documents. In December 2004, the steering committee presented the draft Zoning Ordinance to the City Planning Commission; the document represented a two and one half year effort by committee members that included in-depth discussions of regulatory concepts relative to Vision 2001-2020, and direct involvement in reviewing and revising draft regulations; meetings represent more than 1,500 person hours volunteered by committee members, not to mention significant individual time devoted to studying drafts, public comments, and benchmarking surveys. 666 The committee's draft was posted on the City's website in December 2004 in a strike/highlight format that utilized the February 2004 public discussion draft as its base, making changes from the draft readily identifiable. A 40 page spreadsheet of comments received and how the committee draft responded to the comments was also made available on the website and through the Planning Department. Since release in December, the committee's draft has been available for public review, and staff has continued to meet with various civic and neighborhood organizations such as Valley Beautiful, WRABA, Old Southwest, Inc. and the Gilmer neighborhood. The steering committee's draft ordinance became the public hearing document that will go before the City Planning Commission on July 28, 2005. With completion of the committee's draft ordinance, staff continued to work on the new Zoning Map, which delineates zoning districts created by the proposed Zoning Ordinance. Because the proposed ordinance establishes a new zoning classification system, the proposed Zoning Map represents a comprehensive rezoning of the City. Since release of the initial Zoning Map proposal in February 2004, staff has reviewed and considered each comment received on the proposed zoning map until release of the public hearing map in mid May. In preparation for the City Planning Commission's public hearings, staff has worked closely with the City Attorney's Office to determine logistics and content of public notification and it is believed that the City of Roanoke has done more than any other jurisdiction in the Commonwealth of Virginia to give legal notice and individual property owner notification. 667 An eight page legal ad supplement was, or will be, included in The Roano/~e Times on July 12 and July 19, 2005, which includes a descriptive summary of the proposed ordinance and zoning map, both base districts and overlay districts. Because the proposed zoning ordinance establishes certain new districts and changes specific definitions and regulations of certain districts, and because all properties in the City of Roanoke will be assigned a new zoning classification, more than 43,000 notices were mailed to owners of every tax parcel in the City of Roanoke on Thursday, July 14, including a letter outlining the City's intent to consider a new zoning ordinance and map, setting forth the time and place of the City Planning Commission's public hearing and explaining how to determine the proposed zoning of a specific property. While all notification packets included the same cover letter and a descriptive summary of the entire ordinance, each packet also contained a descriptive summary of the base district proposed for that specific property and a descriptive summary of any applicable overlay district; the mailing label identifies the tax parcel and the proposed zoning of the property, both base and any applicable overlay. Because regulations and language of the Zoning Ordinance are not easily understood, the Planning Department telephone number is included in the mailing, and citizens are encouraged to call staff to address questions regarding a specific property. It is important that citizens understand that all existing uses will be grandfathered as provided by law, and current uses of most parcels will not be affected by provisions of the proposed ordinance unless and until current use of the property is changed or redeveloped. The City Planning Commission will hold public hearings on the proposed Zoning Ordinance and map on Thursday, July 28, 2005, in the City Council Chamber at 4:00 p.m.; no recommendation will be made by the Planning Commission at that time; after public hearings are closed, staff will compile and organize all public hearing comments in a format that will allow the Planning Commission to consider all comments and the proposed ordinance and map in a systematic manner; the Planning Commission will meet in weekly evening work sessions until it is ready to make a recommendation on the Zoning Ordinance and map to Council. 668 A series of weekly work sessions have been scheduled throughout the month of August. When the Planning Commission is ready to forward its recommendation to City Council, two legal ad supplements that represent the Planning Commission's recommended versions of the ordinance and map will be published in The t~oano/~e Times prior to the Council's public hearing. Members of Council expressed appreciation to the Zoning Ordinance Steering Committee, the Zoning Administrator and the Department of Planning and Code Enforcement for their commitment to updating the City's Zoning Ordinance. ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION: BUDGET-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that notification was received from the Commonwealth of Virginia Commission for the Arts (Commission) that a $5,000.00 Local Government Challenge Grant was awarded to the City of Roanoke; and application for the grant was made at the request of the Arts Council of Roanoke Valley, Mill Mountain Theatre, Opera Roanoke, Roanoke Symphony Orchestra, Roanoke Ballet Theatre, Inc., and Young Audiences of Virginia. It was further advised that in order to receive the funds, the Commission for the Arts must obtain written confirmation that local tax revenue dollars will be used to match or exceed the amount of the grant; and for fiscal year 2005-2006, the above referenced organizations will receive local funding as recommended by the Roanoke Arts Commission and approved by Council on June 6, 2005, in the following amounts: Arts Council of Blue Ridge Mill Mountain Theatre Opera Roanoke Roanoke Symphony Orchestra Young Audiences of Virginia Roanoke Ballet Theatre, Inc. $14,880.00 13,830.00 9,300.00 29,500.00 4,665.00 6,380.00 It was noted that grant funds will be distributed to the above referenced sponsoring agencies in the amount of approximately $833.00 each. 669 The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the necessary documents for acceptance of the grant, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney; and that Council adopt a budget ordinance appropriating $5,000.00 in State grant funds and create a corresponding revenue estimate in accounts to be established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund entitled "Challenge Grant FY 06". Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37117-071805) AN ORDINANCE to establish the Local Government Challenge Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 497.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37117- 071805. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................. 0. Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution: (#37118-071805) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of Local Government Challenge Grant No. 06-0322 from the Virginia Commission for the Arts, upon certain terms and conditions. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 497.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37118- 071805. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None ................................................... 0. 670 POLICE DEPARTMENT-BUDGET-NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke was awarded grant funds, in the amount of $100,000.00, by the U. S. Department of Justice through the Project Safe Neighborhoods Grant Program which is administered through the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police (VACP). It was further advised that grant funds must be used by the Police Department to address gun trafficking and juvenile gang crime; and specific plans for funding include augmentation of neighborhood bicycle patrols, juvenile programs, and replacement of police bicycles and several in-car digital video cameras. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the grant agreement and any related documents, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney; and that Council accept the Project Safe Neighborhoods Grant of $100,000.00 from the U. S. Department of Justice; adopt an ordinance appropriating $100,000.00, as follows, to accounts to be established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund and establish a revenue estimate in the same amount in the Grant Fund. Overtime FICA Expendable Equipment Fees for Professional Services Administrative Supplies Total $46,445.00 3,555.00 33,000.00 16,000.00 1,000.00 $ 100,000.00 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: (#37119-071805) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Project Safe Neighborhoods Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Grant Funds Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 498.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37119- 071805. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. 671 Mr. Shaheed Omar, 1219 Loudon Avenue, N. W., advised that while it is important to apprehend drug dealers, it is also important to address the needs of those persons who are addicted to drugs. He stated that the City of Roanoke offers one detoxification facility where Iow income persons may receive treatment, however, the number of beds are limited and due to lack of space, drug users are turned away and left to deal with their addiction on their own. He advised that more treatment facilities and detox beds are needed in order to help drug addicts break the habit which will, in turn, reduce the City's crime rate. Upon question, the City Manager advised that the matter referenced by Mr. Omar has been identified as an issue, however, she was not prepared to respond at this time. She stated that staff will research the issue to identify available options and advise Council accordingly. She explained that the Project Safe Neighborhood Grant is not intended to be used for ongoing issues such as those referenced by Mr. Omar. Ordinance No. 37119-071805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................... 7. NAYS: None ................................................... 0. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution: (#37120-071805) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of a Project Safe Neighborhoods Grant from the U. S. Department of Justice, and authorizing execution of any required documentation on behalf of the City. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 499.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37120- 071805. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .................................................... 7. NAYS: None ................................................... 0. 672 BUDGET-GRANTS-ENTERPRISE ZONE-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke has two Enterprise Zones, One A and Two; only Enterprise Zone One A provides a facade grant incentive through the Industrial Development Authority of the City of Roanoke; those projects intended to refurbish the exterior of a building facing a street are eligible for one third of the cost of rehabilitation, up to a maximum of $25,000.00 per project; in fiscal year 2005, $103,240.21 was distributed in facade grants, resulting in almost $1 million in improvements; all funds in the account are expended on a yearly basis; and according to the Enterprise Zone application, facade grants require a yearly appropriation of $100,000.00. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance appropriating funds in the amount of $100,000.00 for facade grants from the Economic and Community Development Reserve to Account No. 08-310-9736- 9003, Facade Grants. Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance: (#37121-071805) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the Economic and Community Development Reserve for Facade Grants in the Enterprise Zone One A Project, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 500.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37121- 071805. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. Council Member Wishneff advised that Brian J. Wishneff and Associates serves as consultant for the Culinary School project, therefore, he would abstain from voting on the ordinance inasmuch as the project may be a candidate for fa~;ade grant funding. Ordinance No. 37121-071805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris .............................................................. 6. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff abstained from voting.) 673 HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke is grant recipient for Workforce Investment Act (WlA) funding, thus, City Council must appropriate funds for all grants and other monies received in order for the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board administers the Federally funded Work Force Investment Act (WlA) for Area 3, which encompasses the Counties of Alleghany, Botetourt, Craig, Franklin, and Roanoke, and the Cities of Covington, Roanoke, and Salem. It was further advised that WIA funding is intended for four primary client populations: Dislocated workers who have been laid off from employment through no fault of their own; Economically disadvantaged individuals as determined by household income guidelines defined by the U. S. Department of Labor; Youth who are economically disadvantaged, or have other barriers to becoming successfully employed adults; and Businesses in need of employment and job training services. It was further advised that the Virginia Employment Commission (VEC) has submitted a WlA agreement for the City of Roanoke to continue to serve as the grant recipient for WlA Area 3 to be operated by the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the required Grant Agreement with the Virginia Employment Commission for Program Year 2006. Council Member McDaniel offered the following resolution: "A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to execute the Grant Agreement with the Virginia Employment Commission for Program Year 2006 I order for the City to continue as the grant recipient of funding for the Workforce Investment Act for Area 3". Council Member McDaniel moved the adoption of the resolution. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. 674 Council Member Lea referred to an article in the Sunday, July 17, 2005 edition of The Roanoke Timeswhich indicated that the Workforce Board was hastily reorganized without sensitivity toward diversity. He stated that actions of the Workforce Board are of concern to him as one member of City Council and he would like the assurance that the Workforce Board will act in accordance with established guidelines and with integrity and a sensitivity toward diversity. Therefore, he requested that the City Attorney be instructed to address the issue of liability, if any, to the City of Roanoke in its capacity as grant recipient of funds and legal requirements for Workforce Board structure. Council Member Lea moved that a representative of Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) and TAP's This Valley Works Program be reinstated to the Workforce Board, and that the Workforce Board be directed to proceed immediately to create a diverse workforce. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. The Mayor advised that a resolution is currently on the floor and parliamentary procedure prevents introduction of another motion while an existing motion is on the floor. Following discussion of the matter in which Council Member Lea indicated that he would prefer a response by the City Attorney to his questions prior to voting on the resolution. The Mayor called on the City Manager for response as to whether adoption of the resolution is time sensitive; whereupon, the City Manager advised that prior to responding to the question, she would like to confer with appropriate officials of the Virginia Employment Commission. In response to Council Member Lea's questions, she advised that while the City of Roanoke is the fiscal agent and has been the fiscal agent for many years for the program under consideration and previous programs, the City of Roanoke is only one jurisdiction out of the region that is responsible for making policy decisions; and as the City of Roanoke's current designee to the Workforce Board she would make the Board aware of concerns expressed by Council Member Lea. The Director of Finance was requested to comment on the City's level of responsibility in its role as fiscal agent; whereupon, he advised that as fiscal agent, the City receives funds which are passed on to subgrantees and, in general, the City has the responsibility to assure that funds are spent according to program guidelines. 675 Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick spoke in favor of adopting the resolution which would enable funds to flow to the Virginia Employment Commission to address the needs of dislocated workers who have been layed off from employment. At the same time, he stated that the City Manager could address the questions/concerns expressed by Council Member Lea and any other pertinent information that may be necessary. Council Member Dowe expressed a reluctance to vote for the resolution until the questions raised by Council Member Lea have been addressed. He stated that he is concerned with not only the issue of diversity, but because certain people of color who brought expertise not only to the Workforce Investment Board, but to any organization on which they might serve, were removed from the Workforce Board. Prior to making a decision with regard to the City of Roanoke continuing to serve as fiscal agent, Council Member Wishneff suggested that the City study the feasibility of administering the program in house. Following further discussion, it was the consensus of Council that action on the resolution would be tabled until the end of the 2:00 p.m. Council session pending a response by staff to the questions/concerns expressed by Council Member Lea. PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-HEALTH DEPARTMENT-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Kuumba Community Health & Wellness Center, Inc., is a Federally qualified community health center, with a mission to increase access to affordable, high quality, comprehensive and preventive health care that is culturally sensitive for the citizens of the Roanoke Valley; Kuumba Community Health & Wellness Center, Inc., was established in 1999, and the first clients were served in December 2000; since that time, Kuumba has become known as one of a few safety net providers of primary health care in the area; Kuumba leases the site of the current facility located at 3716 Melrose Avenue, N. W., from the William A. Hunton Branch YMCA; and to allow for facility expansion and future staffing increases in order to serve more clients and to offer a broader array of health services, Kuumba applied for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to acquire the property at 3716 Melrose Avenue, N. W. 676 It was further advised that Kuumba will begin a capital campaign to raise funds to construct a new facility on the same site; on May 10, 2005, Council authorized Kuumba-New Facility, pursuant to Resolution No. 37051-051005, which approved the Five Year Consolidated Plan for 2005-2010, including the Fiscal Year 2005-2006 One Year Action Plan, for submission to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and $125,000.00 of 2005- 2006 CDBG funds was appropriated for Kuumba-New Facility on June 20, 2005, pursuant to Ordinance No. 37086-062005 and Resolution No. 37087-062005, pending receipt of a letter of approval from HUD. It was stated that in order for Kuumba to proceed with acquisition of the property located at 3716 Melrose Avenue, N. W., authorization by Council is needed to execute a subgrant agreement; CDBG funding is available in Account No. 35-G06-0637-5475 and will be provided to Kuumbatoassistwith acquisition of and costs associated with purchase of the property; and it is anticipated that Kuumba will increase the number of Iow-to-moderate income clients to be served once the new facility is constructed. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the 2005-2006 CDBG Subgrant Agreement with Kuumba Community Health & Wellness Center, Inc., subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney. Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution: (#37122-071805) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to execute a CDBG-funded Agreement, and any necessary amendments thereto, with Kuumba Community Health & Wellness Center, Inc., providing $125,000.00 of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to assist with the acquisition of, and costs associated with, the purchase of property located at 3716 Melrose Avenue, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 500.) Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37122- 071805. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. 677 FIRE DEPARTMENT-ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke has enrolled the site of the new Fire Station/Administration Building located at 704 Franklin Road, S. W., in the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's (VDEQ) Voluntary Remediation Program (VRP); and due to past use of a portion of the site as a dry cleaning operation, the City's decision to enter the site into the VRP provides the City of Roanoke with certain immunities under Virginia law with regard to waste management and air and water quality. It was further advised that a stipulation for participation in the VRPwas the City's agreement to a Declaration of Restrictive Covenants associated with the property that permits groundwater beneath the property to be used only for environmental monitoring and testing and that the property shall not be used for residential purposes or for a child daycare facility, schools or playground purposes; and the residential exclusion does not apply to the use of the property for a fully-staffed Fire Station/Administration Building. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a Declaration of Restrictive Covenants and any documentation required by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and such other documents as may be necessary to obtain VDEQ approval under the Volunteer Remediation Program. Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance: (#37123-071805) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to execute a Declaration of Restrictive Covenants and Certification of Satisfactory Completion of Remediation and any documentation required by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) and take such further action as may be needed to obtain the VDEQ approval for a Certification of Satisfactory Completion of Remediation for certain City owned property located at 704 Franklin Road, S. W., containing approximately 0.77 acre, and being Official Tax Map No. :~020310; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 501.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37:~23- 071805. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. 678 Council Member Wishneff advised that he would vote in favor of the ordinance because it is an important step to take regardless of how the site is used; however, he reiterated his opposition to the closing of Fire Station No. 1 in downtown Roanoke and the relocation of Fire Station No. i to the proposed site on Franklin Road which does not provide a good location for a fire station due to poor access to the site. He stated that caution should be exercised when taking prime real estate at intersections off the City's tax roles. At a future Council meeting, he requested a briefing on the status of the fire station project, a discussion with regard to the wisdom of closing Fire Station No. 1 in downtown Roanoke as a fire station and a poll by those persons/businesses served by Fire Station No. 1. Ordinance No. 37123-071805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... O. STATE HIGHWAYS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that as part of the effort to complete the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the 1-73 Location Study, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has developed a Programmatic Agreement that enumerates responsibilities of the signatories in implementing various stipulations of the Programmatic Agreement to resolve adverse effects to the Blue Ridge Parkway; and the City of Roanoke is one of several consulting parties involved in the process of evaluating potential impacts to the Blue Ridge Parkway. It was further advised that the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and VDOT intend to address potential adverse effects through implementation of a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) developed in consultation with consulting parties identified for the project by the FHWA; a draft MOA was issued in October 2004, followed by a revised draft MOA issued in April 2005; all comments from consulting parties were addressed and incorporated and at this time, the FHWA has determined that based on comments received on the revised draft MOA, no further substantive changes to the agreement document have been made; and the FHWA now requests signatures on the final Programmatic Agreement for the 1-73 Corridor Project. 679 With regard to the Blue Ridge Parkway (BRP) crossing design, it was explained that the Agreement stipulates, in part, that "The VDOT shall implement the Project so that the major features of the Interstate 73 crossing of the BRP include a divided median interstate with six traffic lanes that will be maintained within the existing 160-foot-wide dedicated right-of-way of Route 220; no direct connection between Interstate 73 and the BRP shall be constructed in the current location of the Route 220 and BRP interchange; as desired by the NPS-BRP, VDOT shall remove the existing access connection between Route 220 and the BRP upon initiation of construction of the section of the Project crossing the BRP; VDOTshall remit to the NPS-BRPat the time of said construction the amount of cost savings to the Project that result from the decision not to restore the existing access (savings equal to the amount design and construction of the access ramps would cost if access were restored); the NPS-BRP shall apply this money to the design and construction of an access connection to the BRP at another location in the Clearbrook area of Roanoke County between BRP mileposts 120 and 123; and the location will be determined by the NPS-BRP in consultation with Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke". The City Manager recommended that Council authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement, which is binding on the City for 20 years. Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#37].24-07].805) A RESOLUTION authorizing the Mayor to execute an 1-73 Programmatic Agreement with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Virginia State Historic Preservation Officer, the Virginia Department of Transportation, the National Park Service, and Roanoke County, regarding the Interstate 73 Corridor proposed to run through the City of Roanoke, such agreement containing provisions seeking to resolve any adverse effects this undertaking may have on the Blue Ridge Parkway or other historic properties. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 502.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37124- 071805. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. 680 BUDGET-MILL MOUNTAIN THEATER: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that during Fiscal Year 2005-2006 Budget Study, Council was briefed on a funding request of Mill Mountain Theater; and as a part of the briefing and subsequent discussion, staff provided Council with a recommendation which included the provision of $200,000.00 for capital improvements over four years as a part of the fiscal year 2005-2006 Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program (CMERP). it was further advised that Mill Mountain Theater requested consideration for allocation of $125,000.00 in the first year and $25,000.00 each year for three subsequent years; Mill Mountain Theater also requested that funding be made available in July in order to make the capital improvements during the off-season; and in order to facilitate provision of the funding in July, it will be necessary to front fund the allocation from the Capital Project Contingencywith reimbursement from the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program. The City Manager recommended that Council authorize transfer of $125,000.00 from Capital Project Contingency, Account No. 08-530-9575-9178, to an account to be established by the Director of Finance in the Capital Projects Fund. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance: (#37125-071805) AN ORDINANCE to transfer funding from Capital Improvement Reserve for the Mill Mountain Theater, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 504.) Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37125- 071805. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 7. NAYS: None .................................................... O. 681 REPORTS OF COMMI'I-FEES: NONE. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: NONE. MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY INFORMATION SYSTEMS: Council Member Cutler congratulated the City's Public Information Officer in connection with an article that was published in the V/rginia To~/nandOitymagazine entitled, "World Comes to Downtown Roanoke Via Wire-less Internet Technology". PARKS AND RECREATION-BICYCLISTS: Council Member Cutler referred to two events that were held during the past weekend; i.e.: competitive mountain biking events at Carvins Cove Natural Reserve and Mill Mountain Park and the Mill Mountain Hill Climb from Belleviewand Walnut Avenues to the Mill Mountain Star. He advised that the events demonstrate that the City of Roanoke is a bicycle friendly community. YOUTH: Council Member Lea advised that he represented the City of Roanoke at the closing ceremony of World Changers. He called attention to and commended the level of excitement that was exhibited by the young people who participated in the program. YOUTH: Council Member McDaniel spoke in support of implementation by area churches and other organizations of a home-based World Changers program in the Roanoke community. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT-VA AMATEUR SPORTS/COMMONWEALTH GAMES: On behalf of the City of Roanoke, Council Member Dowe advised that he accepted an award from Virginia Amateur Sports in recognition of the City of Roanoke's 2005 sponsorship of the Virginia Commonwealth Games which were held on July 15-17, 2005, in the Roanoke Valley. 682 REFUSE COLLECTION: Council Member Wishneff presented the City Manager with photographs of various types of trash receptacles that were taken by a citizen of Roanoke while vacationing in Europe. ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL: The Mayor advised that July 1, 2005, marked the beginning of his second year as Mayor; whereupon, he expressed appreciation to the Members of Council for their support by representing the City of Roanoke at various community events and activities, all of which is a testament to the commitment of Council Members to the citizens of Roanoke. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MA'I-rERS: The Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. POLICE DEPARTMENT-CITY MANAGER-CITY COUNCIL: Mr. Shaheed Omar, 1219 Loudon Avenue, N. W., advised that as a result of his recent appearance before Council with regard to alleged police brutality and the City's police complaint process, he received a communication from the City Manager responding to certain suggestions. He stated that it is hoped that this will mark the beginning of dialogue regarding the police complaint process and urged that Council review the City Manager's letter and provide input with regard to proposed suggestions. ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia, spoke with regard to renovating Victory Stadium and an agreement which was entered into between Norfolk Southern Railway and the City of Roanoke with regard to maintaining Victory Stadium and the National Guard Armory. He stated that the City plans to spend $136,000.00 to prepare Victory Stadium for high school football in the fall and suggested that instead of spending funds on temporary restroom facilities, the money could be better used toward renovation of current restrooms. COMPLAINTS-FIRE DEPARTMENT: Ms. Josephine Hutchison, 1111 Loudon Avenue, N. W., expressed concern with regard to closing the fire station at 12th Street and Loudon Avenue, N.W. She questioned whether or not adequate notice was given to residents of the area with regard to the proposed closure and also questioned whether closing the fire station at 12'h Street is a racial act. 683 COMPLAINTS-FIRE DEPARTMENT: Ms. Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., spoke in opposition to closing City fire stations. She advised that petitions signed by citizens in opposition to the proposed closure have been ignored by City officials. She suggested that the City utilize the services of the Virginia Department of Fire Programs to conduct an evaluation of the Roanoke Fire Department, which is a service that has been provided to many fire departments in the Commonwealth of Virginia at no cost other than the cost of lodging, food and travel. She explained that results of the evaluation would be provided to the City Manager and the Fire Chief and would provide the Fire Chief with the necessary information to support or to modify the proposed reorganization of fire service. SEGREGATION/INTEGRATION-COMPLAINTS: Mr. Tony Hairston, :1263 Tayloe Avenue, S. E., expressed concern with regard to race relations in the City of Roanoke. He also expressed concern with the way he was treated as a resident at the Total Action Against Poverty Transitional Living Center, and the loss of his job at a local restaurant due to racial remarks. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: NONE. At 4:15 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for two Closed Sessions. At 5:10 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, with all Members of the Council in attendance, Mayor Harris presiding. COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Council Member McDaniel moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ............................................................... 6. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. (Council Member Wishneff was not present when the vote was recorded.) 684 OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-WAR MEMORIAL: The Mayor advised that the terms of office of Sloan H. Hoopes, Harold H. Worrell, Sr., Robert O. Gray, Alfred C. Moore, and Philip C. Schirmer as members of the War Memorial Committee expired on June 30, 2005; Mr. Moore has declined to serve another term; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancies. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the names of Sloan H. Hoopes, Harold H. Worrell, Sr., Robert O. Gray and Philip C. Schirmer. There being no further nominations, Mr. Hoopes was reappointed for a term ending June 30, 2008, Messrs. Worrelland Graywere reappointed forterms ending June, 30, 2007, and Mr. Schirmer was reappointed for a term ending June 30, 2006, as members of the War Memorial Committee by the following vote: FOR MESSRS. HOOPES, WORRELL, GRAY AND SCHIRMER: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ................... 6. (Council Member Wishneffwas not present when the vote was recorded.) (Council, by consensus, agreed to stagger the terms of office.) OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-LIBRARIES: The Mayor advised that there are vacancies on the Roanoke Public Library Board created by the resignation of Samuel G. Oakey, III, for a term ending June 30, 2006; expiration of the term of office of Roland H. Macher on June 30, 2005; Mr. Macher is ineligible to serve another term, whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancies. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the names of Anne E. Caldwell and Susan Koch. There being no further nominations, Ms. Caldwell was appointed for a term ending June 30, 2006, and Ms. Koch was appointed for a term ending June 30, 2008, as members of the Roanoke Public Library Board, by the following vote: FOR MS. CALDWELL AND MS. KOCH: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ............................... 6. (Council Member Wishneff was not present when the vote was recorded.) 685 OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMI-I-fEES-TOWING ADVISORY BOARD: The Mayor advised that there is a vacancy on the Towing Advisory Board created by the resignation of Patrick Shumate for a term ending June 30, 2006; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Thomas W. Ruff. There being no further nominations, Mr. Ruffwas appointed as a member of the Towing Advisory Board to fill the unexpired term of Patrick Shumate, ending June 30, 2006, by the following vote: FOR MR. RUFF: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor Harris ..................................................... 6. (Council Member Wishneffwas not present when the vote was recorded.) HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-GRANTS: Council having tabled a resolution authorizing execution of the Workforce Investment Act Grant Agreement with the Virginia Employment Commission for Program Year 2006 until conclusion of the Council's 2:00 p.m. session, Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the matter be tabled until the 7:00 p.m. session of the Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and unanimously adopted. At 5:15 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be reconvened at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber. At 7:00 p.m., on Monday, July 18, 2005, the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., presiding. PRESENT: Council Members BrianJ. Wishneff (arrived late), M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe,Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel and Vice-Mayor BeverlyT. Fitzpatrick, Jr. - ...................................................... 6. ABSENT: Mayor C. Nelson Harris .................................... 1. The Vice-Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. 686 OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth, City Attorney, Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. The invocation was delivered by Council Member Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick. PUBLIC HEARINGS: WATER RESOURCES: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, July 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the amendment and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Western Virginia Water Authority, changing the terms of office of members of the Board of Directors to begin on July 1, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, June 17, 2005. The City Attorney submitted a written report advising that the Board of the Western Virginia Water Authority has requested that its Articles of Incorporation be amended to provide that after the terms of the present members end, the terms of their successors will commence on July 1 of the year of their appointment, rather than on March i as is currently the case; the stated purpose of the request is to permit members to serve through the Authority's annual budget process and not have their terms end or begin in the midst of the process; the procedure that must be followed to amend the Water Authority's Articles of Incorporation is the same as that which was followed when they were adopted in 2004; and Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke must advertise, at least 30 days in advance, a public hearing, after which the governing bodies of the localities may adopt concurrent resolutions authorizing amended Articles of Incorporation to be filed with the State Corporation Commission. Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: (#37126-071805) A RESOLUTION amending and restating the Articles of Incorporation for the Western Virginia Water Authority (the "Authority"). (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 505.) 687 Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37126- 071805. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. The Vice-Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the proposed amendment. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Resolution No. 37126-071805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ........................................................... 5. NAYS: None .................................................. O. (Mayor Harris was absent and Council MemberWishneffwas not present when the vote was recorded.) PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-CITY PROPERTY-WATER RESOURCES: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, July 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the proposed conveyance of a ]..2508 acre portion of City-owned property located on Carroll Avenue, N. W., to the Western Virginia Water Authority, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Monday, July 11, 2005. The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke owns property located on Carroll Avenue, N. W., that was previously held by the Water Department which contains a two-million gallon water storage tank; and the parcel of land was inadvertently omitted from the initial transfer of property to the Western Virginia Water Authority, therefore, the City wishes to convey the land to the Water Authority. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the necessary documents to convey the property to the Western Virginia Water Authority for a nominal consideration, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney. 688 Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance: (#37127-071805) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to execute the necessary documents to convey City-owned property housing a water storage tank, located on Carroll Avenue, consisting of 1.2508 acre and identified as Official Tax No. 2340106, to the Western Virginia Water Authority, upon certain terms and conditions, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 509.) Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37127- 071805. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel. The Vice-Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the matter. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37127-071805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ........................................................... 5. NAYS: None .................................................... 0. (Mayor Harris was absent and Council Member Wishneff was not present when the vote was recorded.) CITY PROPERTY-ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER-LEASES: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, July 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the proposed lease of a portion of City-owned property located at the Roanoke Civic Center to Roanoke Sports Group, LLC, for use as office space as part of the terms of a License Agreement for operation of a hockey team, the matter was before the body. Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on Friday, July 8, 2005. 689 The City Manager submitted a communication advising that on February 25, 2005, the United Hockey League (UHL) announced that the League's Board of Governors had granted approval to Ken and Kristen Dixon to bring their hockey team to Roanoke; a Limited Liability Corporation, Roanoke Sports Group, doing business as the Roanoke Valley Vipers was formed; 15 teams participate in the League which is in its 15'h season; and the team will play 38 home games. It was further advised that the initial term of the License Agreement is for three years, with an additional two-year term upon mutual agreement between Roanoke Sports Group, LLC, and the City of Roanoke; the new team will replace the now defunct Roanoke Express (formerly Valley Rampage, Valley Rebels, and Virginia Lancers) of the East Coast Hockey League that occupied the Roanoke Civic Center Coliseum from 1988 until 2004; owners of the team have the financial resources to bring hockey back to Roanoke, with experience in the sport and as business owners; and the owners anticipate generating revenue in excess of $200,000.00 by creating special incentives to increase attendance. It was explained that after thorough research and careful consideration, it has been determined that the League's reputation, the owner's financial status and sports experience, along with the owner's business backgrounds would be an asset to the Roanoke Valley; a license agreement to benefit both parties was collaborated; entering into the proposed Agreement with Roanoke Sports Group, LLC, would further enable the City to achieve its goals of promoting quality events that can be enjoyed by the entire family and all age groups and increasing revenue for the City of Roanoke and the Roanoke Civic Center; the Agreement would be for a period of three years, with a two-year option to extend; the season would run from October to April; specific dates for the 2005-2006 hockey season were finalized at the end of June; and the City will convey 736 square feet of office space to the Roanoke Sports Group, LLC, as part of the terms and duration of the license agreement. The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a License Agreement between the City of Roanoke and Roanoke Sports Group, LLC; subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney; and to execute any other documents as may be necessary to implement and administer the Agreement, including exercising an option to extend the Agreement. 690 Council Member McDaniel offered the following ordinance: (#37128-071805) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to enter into a License Agreement between the City of Roanoke and Roanoke Sports Group, LLC, for an initial term of three years, with an additional two year term upon mutual agreement of the parties, which will provide for use of the Civic Center Coliseum and certain related facilities by Roanoke Sports Group, LLC, to provide a certain number of United Hockey League ("UHL") games in the coliseum and to provide certain office space and other space to Roanoke Sports Group, LLC for use during the term of the License Agreement; authorizing the City Manager to take such further action and execute such documents as may be reasonably necessary to provide for the implementation and administration of the License Agreement upon certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title. (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 69, Page 510.) Council Member McDaniel moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37128- 071805. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. The Vice-Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in connection with the matter. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed. There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No. 37128-071805 was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Lea, McDaniel and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick ........................................................... 5. NAYS: None ..................................................... O. (Mayor Harris was absent and Council Member Wishneff was not present when the vote was recorded.) Council Member Wishneff entered the meeting. HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-GRANTS: Council at its 2:00 p.m. session having tabled action on a resolution regarding the Workforce Investment Act Agreement with the Virginia Employment Commission for Program Year 2006, pending a response by the City Attorney and the City Manager in connection with questions/concerns raised by Council Member Lea, the matter was before the body. 691 The City Attorney referred to a Charter that was adopted in 2003 by all participating localities in the Western Virginia Workforce Board, pursuant to the Workforce Investment Act, which created a chief local elected officials organization or consortium; Council authorized the Mayor to execute the Charter in July 2003, and the Charter has not been amended and continues to be in effect. He stated that the Charter was entered into by and between the jurisdictions of the City of Covington, City of Roanoke, City of Salem, Alleghany County, Botetourt County, Craig County, Franklin County and Roanoke County and charges the chief elected officials of each of the above referenced localities, being either the Chairperson of the Board of Supervisors or the Mayor of the Cities, to constitute themselves as the chief local elected officials consortium; and the consortium was given the authority to appoint the local Workforce Investment Board. He noted that the Charter also provides that these actions can either be taken by the chief elected official or his or her designee; and all jurisdictions appointed designees to the consortium to act in their place; pursuant to the agreement, the consortium designated the City of Roanoke to serve as grant recipient, and the Workforce Development Board, which is appointed by the consortium, acts as fiscal agent for all Title I funds that are funneled through the entity. The City Attorney stated that Council Member Lea inquired as to what, if any, liability the City of Roanoke might incur by participating in the consortium; whereupon, he advised that the agreement states that any financial or legal liability of the consortium shall be shared on a pro rata basis by population of member jurisdictions based on the latest census, therefore, any liabilitywould be shared on a per capita basis. The City Manager advised that some time ago, a decision was made collectively by Chief Elected Officials to appoint their Chief Appointed Official to the consortium; the City Manager and County Administrator of each of the jurisdictions above named by the City Attorney became the CLEO, which appoints the Workforce Development Board; and the Board previously consisted of a group of 40 persons which has now been pared down to 15, and represents persons who previously served on the larger board. She advised that the agreement also refers to specific roles of the CLEO; i.e.: appointment of all members to the Workforce Development Board, development of by-laws through designation of a grant recipient, a fiscal agent to receive funds, account for funds, ensure appropriate auditing, approve the source budget, develop a five year plan, negotiate performance standards, appoint the youth council, designate or certify local one stop operators, and conduct oversight. 692 The City Manager suggested that she, as the City of Roanoke's representative to the Chief Local Elected Official (CLEO) group, be directed by the Council to take Council Member Lea's concerns to the full CLEO Board at its next meeting. As the new Chair of CLEO, she advised that one of the first orders of business will be an understanding of the process for appointing boards in the future. Council Member Lea made the observation that TAP plans to appeal the decision to remove its representative from the Workforce Development Board; whereupon, he inquired as to the appropriate entity to hear the appeal. The City Attorney responded that after reviewing the Charter, it would appear that the appeals process would be addressed by the CLEO group. The Director of Finance advised that because the City of Roanoke serves as grantee, even though the City has a fiscal agency relationship with the Workforce Development Board, the City is fully responsible for the funds to the State; and as such, the City is required to have the funds audited by external auditors according to Federal audit guidelines and included in the City's annual financial report. The Vice-Mayor requested a clarification of the City Manager's recommendation; whereupon, she advised that funds for Workforce Development activities come to the City of Roanoke through the State office of the Virginia Employment Commission; in order for the City to receive the funds on behalf of the region, the City of Roanoke must agree on an annual basis to serve as grant recipient, which is the item under consideration by the Council; assuming that the Council acknowledges to the State that the City will continue to serve as grant recipient, an ordinance will be submitted for consideration by Council at its next meeting which will enable the State to forward funds to the City for distribution. If such action is not approved by the Council, Workforce Investment funds will not come to the region; therefore, the City Manager recommended that Council take affirmative action. Following further discussion with regard to the City's status as grant recipient and composition of the Workforce Development Board, Council Member Cutler moved that the resolution be removed from the table. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe. 693 Council Member Lea inquired as to the status of his motion, seconded by Council Member Dowe, that a Total Action Against Poverty representative be reinstated to the Workforce Development Board and that a diverse Board be appointed. Upon a roll call vote, the motion was lost by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Dowe and Lea ...................... 3. NAYS: Council Members Cutler, McDaniel and Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick .... 3. Council Member Wishneff inquired if the City of Roanoke could withdraw from the regional board and receive its proportionate share of funds directly from the State; whereupon, the City Attorney advised that he would review Federal guidelines relating to receipt of funds. Following further discussion, it was the consensus of Council that the Mayor would draft a communication to the Workforce Development Board stating concerns expressed by Council regarding Board membership diversity. Council Member McDaniel reoffered the following resolution: (#37129-071805) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to execute the Grant Agreement with the Virginia Employment Commission for Program Year 2006 in order for the City to continue as the grant recipient of funding for the Workforce Investment Act for Area 3. (For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 69, Page 511.) Council Member McDaniel moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37129- 071805. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, McDaniel and Vice- Mayor Fitzpatrick ..................................................... 5. NAYS: Council Member Lea ........................................ 1. (Mayor Harris was absent.) 694 HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Vice-Mayor advised that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, recommendation or report to Council. COMPLAINTS-TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY: Mr. Robert E. Gravely, 727 29th Street, N.W., advised that a communication should be forwarded to the Work Force Development Board instructing the Board to reinstate a Total Action Against Poverty representative. He spoke with regard to the need to attract more persons to the Roanoke area by creating additional avenues of opportunity, better and more affordable entertainment venues, and living conditions that are more conducive to the income level of the average citizen. There being no further business, the Vice-Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. APPROVED A-I-rEST: Mary F. Parker City Clerk C. Nelson Harris Mayor