HomeMy WebLinkAboutOCTOBER 15, 1991 MINUTES
Cit,y ot Virgi1ìia BeElcn
"WORLD'S LARGEST RESORT CITY"
CITY COUNCIL
MAYOR MEYERA E OBERNDORF, At-La'ge
VICE MAYOR ROBERT E. FENTRESS, Vi'ginia Beach &mugh
JOHN A. BAUM, Blackwat", &ough
JAMES W. BRAZIER, JR., Lynnhaven &mugh
ROBERT W. CLYBURN, Kemproille &mugh
HAROLD HEISCHOBER, At-La'ge
LOUIS R. JONES, Bayside &,ough
PAUL]. LANTEIGNE, Pungo &mugh
REBA S. McCLANAN, Prince" Anne &mugh
NANCY K. PARKER, At-La,ge
WILLIAM D. SESSOMS, JR., At-La,g,
AUBREY V. WATTS, JR., City Manage>'
LESLIE L. LILLEY, c.ty Attomey
RUTH HODGES SMITH, CMC/AAE, City CI",k
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
281 C1TY HALL BUILDING
MUN1CIPAL CENTER
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRG1N1A 23456-9005
18041427-4303
OCTOBER 15, 1991
ITEM I.
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFING
- Council Chamber -
10:00 AM
A.
TIDEWATER REGIONAL TRANSIT EXPRESS BUS SERVICE
Mr. James C. Echols, Executive Director
I TEM II.
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
- Council Chamber -
10:30 AM
A.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
FY 1991-1992 1995-1996
ITEM III.
INFORMAL SESSION
- Council Chamber-
12: NOON
A.
CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf
B.
ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL
C.
RECESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION
ITEM IV.
FORMAL SESSION
- Council Chamber -
2:00 PM
A.
CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf
B.
I NVOCATI ON:
Reverend Andrew W. Ballentine, Jr.
Emmanuel Lutheran Church
C.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
D.
ELECTRONIC ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL
E.
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION
F.
MINUTES
1 .
INFORMAL & FORMAL SESSION - August 26, 1991
2.
CIP PUBLIC HEARING
- September 26, 1991
G.
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES UTILITY REPORT (Stormwater Management)
1 .
CITY MANAGER'S PRESENTATION
E. Dean Block, Assistant City Manager for Economic Management
a.
b.
Accept Report and schedule Public Hearing
H.
RESOLUTION
1 .
Resolution authorizing and directing the City Manager to execute
the second Supplemental Agreement with the City of Suffolk re
purchase of water.
I .
CONSENT AGENDA
A II matters listed under the Consent Agenda are cons I dered i n the
ordinary course of business by City Council and will be enacted by
one motion in the form listed. If an item Is removed from the Consent
Agenda, it wi II be discussed and voted upon separately.
1 .
Resolution endorsing continuation of Virginia Beach Clean Community
Program with grant funding of $18,095 to be furnished by Department
of Waste Management, Commonwealth of Virginia.
2.
Ordinance to AMEND and REORDAIN Sections 21-17, 21-130, 21-194,
21-251, 21-273, 21-274, 21-275, 21-276, 21-277, 21-278, 21-279,
21-280, 21-314, 21-456 and 21-465 of the Code of the City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia, re motor vehicle and traffic code.
3.
Ordinance, upon FIRST READING, to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE a $40,000
Federa I Grant to the Department of Menta I Hea I th, Menta I
Retardation, and Substance Abuse Operating Budget re expansion of
mental health services.
4.
Ordinance to TRANSFER $40,000 in Community Development grant funds
to Gracetown Street and Drainage project re funding of right-of-way
acquisition.
5.
Ordinance to TRANSFER $14,946 from the Sheriff Department's FY
1991-1992 Operati ng Budget to faci I i tate the transfer of a CI erk
III position to the Circuit Court re administering the Jury system.
6.
LOW BID with advance notice to proceed:
SERVICE ELECTRIC CORP-
ORATION OF VIRGINIA
Municipal Center Ductbank
$252,000
7. LOW BID:
H. HAMNER GAY & CO., Bay Colony Sewer Improvements $765,185
INC. Contract I
SHORELINE CONTRACTORS, Bay Colony (E. Bay Shore Drive) $101 ,000
INC. Sewer Pump Station
Contract V
8. Ordinance authorizing tax refunds in the amount of $7,884.10.
10/10/91 gs
J. APPO I NTMENT
HAMPTON ROADS PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION
K.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
L.
NEW BUSINESS
M.
ADJOURNMENT
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
OCTOBER 22, 1991
OCTOBER 29, 1991
CITY COUNCIL SESSIONS
RESCHEDULED
Formal Session 6:00 PM
(CIP Workshop #3/Reconci liation)
Formal Session 2:00 PM
NOVEMBER 5, 1991 Formal Session 2:00 PM
NOVEMBER 12, 1991 Formal Session 2:00 PM
(CIP Public Hearing & First Reading)
. NOVEMBER 26, 1991 Formal Session 6:00 PM
(CIP Second Reading)
DECEMBER 3, 1991
DECEMBER 10, 1991
DECEMBER 17, 1991
Formal Session
Formal Session
Formal Session
2:00 PM
2:00 PM
2:00 PM
MINUTES
VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
Virginia Beach, VirginIa
October 15, 1991
Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf called the VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL to order for
the CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFING relative TIDEWATER REGIONAL TRANSIT EXPRESS BUS
SERVICE in the Council Chamber, City Hall Building, on Tuesday, October 15,
1991, at 10:00 A¡M.
Council Members Present:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Louis R.
Jones and Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf
Council Members Absent:
John A. Baum
(OUT OF THE CITY)
(ENTERED: 10:05 AM)
(ENTERED: 10:20 AM)
(ENTERED: 12 NOON)
(ENTERED: 10:05 AM)
(ENTERED: 10:28 AM)
(ENTERED: 10:05 AM)
Vice Mayor Robert E. Fentress
Harold Heischober
Paul J. Lanteigne
Reba S. McClanan
Nancy K. Parker
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
- 3-
CITY MANAGER'S
B R I E FIN G
TIDEWATER REGIONAL TRANSIT EXPRESS BUS SERVICE
ITEM # 34953 (Continued)
Councilman Jones advised the City has plans for Site 4 and this site would
generate tremendous traffic problems.
Mr. Echols advised two sites would be proposed for development: one north and
one south (on each side of the Corridor).
Mr. Dunn advised if property procurement is necessary, this would be derived
from Route 44 Toll Funds. A figure has been quoted of approximately $6.5-
MILLION. However, if it is possible to utilize a site already in public
ownership and procurement would not the necessary, the actual construction of
the lot would be in the vicinity of $3,000 per space. It would cost
approximately $750,000 to construct Site 1.
Jane Whitney, Director of Pro jec t Management - Tidewater Regional Transi t,
distributed a map depicting the HOV Transit Service Element. The "darker line"
depicts express bus service to the Naval Base and downtown Norfolk. There are
four express routes planned:
Pembroke to the Naval Base
(every 15 minutes)
Holland Road to the Naval Base
(every 30 minutes)
Holland Road to Norfolk Downtown area (every 30 minutes)
Hilltop Area to Pembroke and on to
Norfolk Downtown area or Naval Base
The "larger dash line" indicates limited which means it serves as a local or
feeder service for part of the way and expresses on to the Naval Base and/or
the downtown Norfolk area. One route is being proposed to serve the Holland
Road "Park and Ride" lot during peak hours and then the Pembroke and Holland
Road during off peak hours. The "smaller dash line" indicates feeder routes.
Smaller buses (30-foot) will be utilized.
An extensive marketing program will be conducted over the next two years. An
advertising campaign will be conducted relative the utilization of the HOV
lanes within the next two weeks. This is being funded as part of the five-year
program to change attitudes. Approximately one-third of the citizens who had
objected to the HOV believe the new scheme is feasible.
The "Executive Summary of Rail Systems Analysis and Fixed Guideway Service
Plan" was distributed to City Council. Vice Mayor Fentress advised a portion of
this Summary reflects the steps necessary to ultimately develop a complete mass
transit system.
Councilman Jones referenced a large parcel of property below Site 3, which
would probably create less of a traffic problem.
Mayor Oberndorf referenced a "Park and Ride" near Laskin Road by the SPSA
Transfer Station which is not utilized. Mr. Echols advised this was a residual
parcel from 1-44 construction owned by VDOT. There were two ventures of fringe
parking lots in this area: this particular location and the other on Greenwood
Drive. These two facilities were not convenient to the citizens and did not
succeed.
Mr. Dunn advised 1-44 was bond indentures issued in 1965 for $34-MILLION. At
that time, this was a 40-year bond which meant it would payout in 2005. Due to
the rapid growth of traffic on 1-44, the bonds have been paid off in advance,
the road has been widened twice and is now in the process of being widened for
the third time. Almost every interchange from Witchduck Road all the way to
Birdneck Road has been rebuilt. Route 44 has a net revenue of approximately
$7-MILLION. Therefore, if the cost for the fringe parking lot acquisition and
construction is $6.5-MILLION, it would involve eleven (11) months of tolls to
compensate for these funds.
October 15, 1991
- 4 -
C I T Y MAN AGE R ' S
BRIEFING
TIDEWATER REGIONAL TRANSIT EXPRESS BUS SERVICE
ITEM # 34953 (Continued)
Mr. Dunn referenced the proposed establishment of a Park-and-Ride facility as
part of VDOT's Traffic Management building site at Indian River Road and Reon
Drive to be implemented in 1993.
Mr. Dunn advised, in 1980, VDOT pursued construction funds for 1-64/264 as part
of the agreement with the Federal Highway Administration. They approved it with
a contingent that HOV funds would also be included on Route 44. A study,
entitled Virginia Beach/Norfolk Corridor Study, recommended a "Busway" on
Routes 44, 264 and 64 be established. This study was utilized in presentation
to the Federal Government for the funding of the HOV lanes.
Mayor Oberndorf advised Secretary of Transportation John G. Milliken, during
the VML Conference, explained his recommendation to the Governor in all
transportation areas where the normal procedure had been 95% State share, 5%
locality, he will be recommending at least 20% locality share up from the 5% as
the usual funding will not be available from the State.
Mr. Echols anticipated the Operating Cost would be $110,000 in additional cost
to Virginia Beach with a smaller cost to Norfolk.
Bruce Pollock, President - Central Business District Association, advised
support of light rail and the Park-and-Ride program, but the CBD has concerns
relative proposed Sites 1 and 2, which front on Columbus Loop. There is an in-
house program to establish Site 1 as an interim park. The CBD has been informed
in the past that eventually Site 1 might be the Light Rail Station. There are,
already in the CBD core area surrounded by Columbus Loop, approximately 2000
parking spaces which are not utilized on any given day. The CBD would prefer to
see the Commuter Lot Sites located on Euclid or Bonney Road.
The specific staff recommendations and the documents and resolutions will be
brought forward to City Council with a PUBLIC HEARING scheduled relative the
TRT Commuter Lot Sites.
October 15, 1991
- 2 -
C I T Y
MANAGER'S
B R I E FIN G
TIDEWATER REGIONAL TRANSIT EXPRESS BUS SERVICE
10:00 A.M.
ITEM # 34953
Robert J. Scott, Director of Planning, advised representatives of the Virginia
Department of Transportation and Tidewater Transportation District Commission
would present proposals relative Commuter Parking Lots oriented toward the
utilization of the HOV Lanes. These representatives have assembled a series of
possible sites.
Mr. James C. Echols, Executive Director, Tidewater Regional Transit, advised
the best way to improve transportation services to the Naval Base would be to
take advantage of the HOV lanes being developed and scheduled to be opened
November 1992. There will be a transit service to the Navy Base utilizing the
HOV Lanes. To help commuters aggregate to the lanes, fringe parking lots are
being proposed. During discussions of these various elements, the Secretary of
Transportation has been most supportive and encouraging.
Frank Dunn, Virginia Department of Transportation, advised the fringe parking
lots will be funded through the Route 44 Improvement Program. Mr. Dunn
presented seven (7) possible commuter lot sites and discussed their advantages
and disadvantages:
Site 1:
Site 2
Site 3
Site 4
Site 5
Site 6
Site 7
Located off Columbus Street, comprised of 2.6 acres and
currently owned by the City of Virignia Beach. This site
has good access and would contain 220 ~ Parking Spaces.
Located off Beasley Drive, comprised of approximately 7
acres. This site is a large parcel of privately owned
land. This site has good access, good bus and parking
circulation and would contain 300 ~ Parking Spaces. This
site is in private ownership. Its economics, in terms of
cost, are probably greater than could actually be
afforded.
Bounded by Holland Road to the Northeast, Independence
Boulevard to the West and Shoreline Drive to the South,
this site has good circulation and would contain 220 +
Parking Spaces. This site is also in private ownership.-
Located off Baxter Road, this is a parcel of property
owned by the City of Virginia Beach, initially acquired
wi th the Baxter Flyover. This parcel is comprised of
10.5 acres. This site has good access and would contain
250 ~ Parking Spaces.
Located off Independence Boulevard and Wicklow Place,
this site is pri vately owned. This site presents a
tremendous operational problem as traffic from the
Baxter Road Flyover has almost no access to the site.
This site would contain 350 + Parking Spaces.
Located off Independence Boulevard, comprised of 7.3
acres. This parcel was acquired in advance for the
Constitution Drive Flyover and currently belongs to the
Virginia Department of Transportation. This parcel was
designed with the consideration of the Constitution
Drive Flyover being constructed. This site has good
circulation; however, has problems with the only
entrance being on Independence Boulevard. This site
would contain 350 + Parking Spaces.
Located off Holland Road. This parcel is owned by the
Virginia Department of Transportation and was acquired
during the construction of Route 44. However,
preliminary investigations determine this site is
probably jurisdictional wetlands. This site would
contain 650 ~ Parking Spaces.
October 15, 1991
- 5 -
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
CAP I TAL
IMP R 0 V E MEN T
PRO G RAM
FY 1991-1992
1995-1996
10:55 A.M.
ITEM # 34954
E. Dean Block, Ass I stant City Manager for Econom i c Management, adv i sed the
tota I Cap i ta I I mprovement Program FY 1991-1992 - 1995-1996 is sign i f i cant I y
smaller than last year by about 6% or approximately $73-MILLION. The total for
Roadways is approximately 12% smaller than last year. The effect upon the
program is relatively minor. There are some delays and some minor deletions of
certain kinds of projects; however, most are not significantly delayed.
With the uti I ization of a map, Mr. Block advised the "florescent green"
projects are completed projects. The "red" projects are currently under
construction or nearing completion with the "yellow" projects being under
design. Independence Boulevard Phase IV has been divided Into two phases. There
are some delays in State projects. The State program is based upon the existing
formula, the matching of State funds.
Mayor Oberndorf referenced Secretary of Transportation John G. Mi Iliken, during
the VML Conference, explained his recommendation to the Governor In all
transportat i on areas where the norma I procedure had been 95% state share, 5%
locality, he wi II be recommending at least 20% local ity share up from the 5% as
the funds wi II not be avai lable from the State. Later during the VML
Conference, there was a briefing by the leading economist from Virginia Power,
who basically believes the Recession wi II not be "short lived". The two areas
of the State, which wi II be most severely hit wi II be Northern Virginia and the
Tidewater area.
Mr. Block advised the CIP proposal was bui It upon the debt policies, which are
based upon certain forecasts of revenue.
Concern was expressed relative the
advised the request of the Schools
the past year and th i s has been a
was over $80-MILLION over a 5-year
this amount.
priorities of Schools and Roads. Mr. Block
has increased each year significantly over
pattern since 1986. This year, the request
period and the City is not able to absorb
Mr. Block advised Ocean Lakes at one time was a part of a 1992 Referendum and
there was decision made by the School Board not to seek this Referendum. The
City has responded to 95% of the School's first year request, which equates to
an increase of approximatley $6-MILLION over last year. Funds to move forward
on Ocean Lakes can easi Iy be provided from what has been allocated but then the
construction funds would have to come in 1993 through an anticipated Referendum
at that time.
Mayor Oberndorf requested information be provided relative the impact on level
of service involved in the citizens travel ing to and from work, shopping, etc.
and businesses transporting their products, if all other projects for the City
were put "on hold" in order to free up the funds to be used exclusively for the
school system. Operating effects wi II also be provided.
Mr. Block advised the City was below the average State per pupil cost. If the
City were to take all the cost upon itself and raise the total amount of funds
expended on schools to the average state per pupi I cost, sixty cents (60tþ
would have to be added to the present tax rate to generate the funds.
Concern was expressed that funds uti I ized for true economic development
continue to be included. Anything that will bring revenue to the City must be
maintained.
Specifics regarding the expenditure of the School's $870,000 was requested.
Mr. Block advised because of limitations on the City's capacity, the
recommendation on page 1B of the School Section of the CIP is simply a
financial recommendation. The additional step has been taken of sharing with
the City Counci I all of the School's requests.
October 15, 1991
- 6 -
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
CAPITAL
IMP R 0 V E MEN T
PRO G RAM
FY 1991-1992
1995-1996
ITEM # 34954 (Continued)
Mayor Oberndorf summarized the concerns of Civic Leagues: (1) Citizens
appreciate road projects which actually connect one with another resulting in a
good traffic flow; (2) Concerns expressed relative capacity, comfort and
rezoning of schools (3) How would these two areas be balanced in attempting to
drive the City forward in a healthy fashion so neither suffers, but sti II not
jeopardize the AA Bond Rating.
City Counci I requested information relative how much of the School Board's
requests re I ate to past due projects and then how many re I ate to future
projections. A delineation of past, present and future is needed.
Mr. Block advised the School's CIP is based not only on a backlog, but also
predicated upon continuing increases in enrollment based upon approximately
1800 pupils per year over a five-year period and also the School Board's views
on improvements in level of service. These levels of service focus on reducing
class size and significantly reducing the number of portables in the system.
Mr. Block advised the Economic Development Fund has been included under
Roadways for a number of years and the balance available will be provided to
City Counci I.
Mr. Block advised the Off Road Bikeways were recommended for deletion from the
CIP and their funds were shifted to Schools. Mayor Oberndorf advised receipt of
a request from the Bellamy Woods development to investigate the possibi lity of
a bikeway for their area.
Counci I woman McClanan has requested the City Attorney DRAFT a resolution
relative bikeways. Easements and rights-of-way could be available for bikeways
and jogging trails. The developers should be encouraged to incorporate
bikeways within their developments.
Mr. Block advised the Resort Area is a self contained program based upon the
City Counci I 's policies and the specific dedicated fees and taxes adopted. The
essential ingredients of the program of revital ization, which the City Counci I
APPROVED, would be continued within the forecasted revenues anticipated.
As per request of Counc i I woman Parker, the ba lance in the separate park i ng
enterprise fund wi II be provided.
October 15, 1991
- 7 -
ITEM # 34955
The INFORMAL SESSION of the VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL was called to order by
Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf In the Counci I Chambers, City Hall Building, on
Tuesday, October 15, 1991, at 12:00 NOON.
Counci I Members Present:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Heischober, Louis R. Jones,
Reba S. McClanan, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf, Nancy K.
Parker and Wi Illam D. Sessoms, Jr.
Counci I Members Absent:
John A. Baum and Paul J. Lanteigne
October 15, 1991
- 8 -
ITEM # 34956
Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf entertained a motion to permit City Counci I
conduct its EXECUTI VE SESS ION, pursuant to Sect i on 2.1-344, Code
Virginia, as amended, for the following purposes:
to
of
1 .
PERSONNEL MATTERS: Discussion or consideration of or interviews of
prospective candidates for employment, assignment, appointment, promotion,
performance, demotion, salaries, discipl ining, or resignation of specific
public officers, appointees, or employees pursuant to Section 2.1-344 (A)
(1).
To-Wit: Appointments:
Community Development Advisory Commission
Hampton Roads Planning District Commission
Citizens Advisory Commission
Consideration: Prospective Candidates - City Manager's Position
Upon mot i on by Counc i I man Braz I er, seconded by Counc i I man He i schober, City
Counci I voted to proceed into EXECUTIVE SESSION.
Voting:
9-0
Counci I Members Voting Aye:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Helschober, Louis R. Jones,
Reba S. McC I anan , Nancy K. Parker, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf and Wi Iii am D. Sessoms, Jr.
Counci I Members Voting Nay:
None
Counci I Members Absent:
John A. Baum and Paul J. Lanteigne
Counci Iman Lanteigne entered the EXECUTIVE SESSION at 12 NOON.
October 15, 1991
-----,------ -
- 9 -
FOR MAL S E S S ION
VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
October 15, 1991
2:00 P.M.
Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf' called to order the FORMAL SESSION of the VIRGINIA
BEACH CITY COUNCIL in the Counci I Chambers, City Hall Bui Iding, on Tuesday,
October 15, 1991, at 2:00 P.M.
Counci I Members Present:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Heischober, Louis R. Jones,
Pau I J. Lante i gne, Reba S. McC I anan, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker and Wi Iliam D. Sessoms, Jr.
Counci I Members Absent:
John A. Baum
(OUT OF THE CITY)
INVOCATION:
Reverend Andrew W. Ballentine, Jr.
Emmanuel Lutheran Church
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
October 15, 1991
- 10 -
I tem I V-Eo 1.
CERTIF ICATION OF
EXECUTIVE SESSION
ITEM # 34957
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Fentress, .,seconded by Councilman Clyburn, City
Counci I CERTIFIED THE EXECUTIVE SESSIONiTO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MOTION TO
RECESS. :
Only publ ic business matters lawfully exempted from
Open Meeting requirements by Virginia law were
discussed in Executive Session to which this
certification resolution applies;
AND,
Only such pub I ic business matters as were
identified in the motion convening the Executive
Session were heard, discussed or considered by
Virginia Beach City Council.
Voting:
10-0
Counci I Members Voting Aye:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Heischober, Louis R. Jones,
Pau I J. Lante i gne, Reba S. McC I anan, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker and William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Counci I Members Voting Nay:
None
Counci I Members Absent:
John A. Baum
October 15, 1991
Itønlutintt
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION
VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
WHEREAS: The Virginia Beach City Council convened into EXECUTIVE
SESSION, pursuant to the affirmative vote recorded in ITEM # 34956,
Page No.8 and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia
Freedom of Information Act; and,
WHEREAS: Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a
certification by the governing body that such Executive Session was
conducted in conformity with Virginia law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Virginia Beach City
Council hereby certifies that, to the best of each member's knowledge,
(a) only public business matters lawfully exempted from Open Meeting
requirements by Virginia law were discussed in Executive Session to
which this certification resolution applies; and, (b) only such public
business matters as were identified in the motion convening this
Executi ve Session were heard, discussed or considered by Virginia
Beach City Council.
~~~
R th Hodges Smith, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
October 15, 1991
- 11 -
Item IV-F.1.
MINUTES
ITEM # 34958
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Fentress, seconded by Counci Iman Sessoms, City
Counci I APPROVED the Minutes of the INFORMAL AND FORMAL SESSIONS of September
24, 1991.
Voting:
10-0
Counci I Members Voting Aye:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Heischober, Louis R. Jones,
Pau I J. Lante i gne, Reba S. McC I anan, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker and William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Counci I Members Voting Nay:
None
Counci I Members Absent:
John A. Baum
October 15, 1991
- 12 -
Item IV-F.2.
MINUTES
ITEM # 34959
Upon motion by Counci Iman Clyburn, seconded by Vice Mayor Fentress, City
Council APPROVED the Minutes of the CIP PUBLIC HEARING on September 26, 1991.
Voting:
9-0
Counci I Members Voting Aye:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne,
Reba S. McClanan, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf, Nancy K.
Parker and Wi Iliam D. Sessoms, Jr.
Counci I Members Voting Nay:
None
Counci I Members Abstaining:
Harold Heischober
Counci I Members Absent:
John A. Baum
Counci Iman Helschober ABSTAINED as he was acting as KING NEPTUNE and not in
attendance during the CIP PUBLIC HEARING
October 15, 1991
- 13 -
Item IV-G.l.a.
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES UTILITY REPORT (STORM WATER MANAGEMENT)
ITEM # 34960
E. Dean Block, Assistant City Manager for Economic Management, advised Federal
and State Env i ronmenta I regu I at ions have been passed wh i ch requ ire the Ci ty
address quantity and qual ity issues by constructing water control structures as
needed by Individual local ities, as well as system maintenance, water qual ity
testing, enforcement of program standards, publ ic education, et cetera. The
City is confronted with an unacceptable backlog of flooding problems developed
over many years in various areas of the City. These are addressed specifically
in the Capital Improvement Program FY 1991-1992 - 1995-1996. The City's task
was to develop the best way to finance these needs and mandates. It is proposed
that an environmental service utility be implemented to fund the comprehensive
storm water management plan.
A video providing an introduction to storm water issues was presented to City
Counci I. National and State Regulatory agencies, such as the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), have acted as "watchdogs" to prevent major industries
from polluting waterways. EPA now requires local governments to develop
comprehens i ve programs to contro I storm water po I I ut i on generated by sma I I er
industries, businesses and individuals as well. Two types of pollution have
been identified: point source and non-point source. Point source occurs where
the source of pollution can be identified. Non-point source reflects where the
source cannot be specifically identified. Individuals are the major
contributors to this type of pollution which results from over ferti I izing
farmland and lawns, disposing of motor oi I in si nks or storm drains, improper
disposing of pet waste, bui Iders who fai I to use proper erosion, sediment
controls during construction, etc. The Hampton Roads communities are charged
with developing a storm water management program in which the requirements and
goals of the various Federal, State and local storm water management programs
are co-ordinated, administered and implemented. The passage of new Federal
storm water regulations requires local governments to obtain a permit from the
Federal government to discharge storm water runoff from the local drainage
system into nearby waterways. Cities and Counties wi II be required to reduce
pollutants in their storm water discharges to the maximum extent practicable.
Funding for the storm water management program and compliance with the new law
is the responsibi lity of each City and County.
Stephen R. Sedgwick, Project Director - Camp, Dresser & McKee, advised the
three critical elements of addressing the storm water management needs of
Virginia Beach are: technical, financial and organizational.
The City is in the process of submitting a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Part 1 permit application. After the Part 2 permit
application Is returned to EPA, then the City is permitted to allow their Storm
Water Management Program to move ahead. The Environmental Services Utility
concept was deve loped to provi de a ded i cated source of revenue for fund i ng
storm water management programs on a Citywide basis.
The base unit used to estimate the relative impact to the City's storm water
quantity (flooding) and quality (pollution) management problems is the ERU
(Equivalent Residential Unit). An ERU is defined as the average Impervious area
of a residence in Virginia Beach. A residence refers to all residential
categories (single fami Iy, mobile home, townhouse, apartment, condominium,
etc.). It Is calculated by dividing the total impervious area for four
residential classifications by the total number of dwell ing units. Based on the
analysis of all 102,500 residential parcels in Virginia Beach, the area of an
ERU was ca I cu I ated to be 1,926 square feet of i mpervi ous area. Uti Iity fees
for non-residential property are calculated by dividing the total impervious
area by the square footage of an ERU (1,926 sq ft.).
Under the ERU pol icy, residential properties would be charged one ERU for each
dwelling unit present. The environmental services fee for a parcel containing a
duplex would be 2-ERUsj and, an apartment complex with 8 units would pay the
equivalent of 8-ERUS.
October 15, 1991
1-
- 14 -
Item IV-G.l.a.
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES UTILITY REPORT (STORM WATER MANAGEMENT)
ITEM # 34961
Mr. Sedgwick displayed a chart depicting the summary of findings for the
proposed Storm Water Program depicting total expenditures from FY 92-93
($9,365,316) to FY 94-95 ($9,767,013). Copies of the Environmental Services
Utility Implementation ProJect were distributed to City Counci I and are hereby
made a part of the record.
Camp, Dresser and McKee, recommends the Bond Leveraging option to financing the
existing and expanded storm water quality and quantity program for the
Environmental Services Uti I ity. This method wi II allow the City to introduce
and implement a storm water management program at the lowest ERU rate per month
($3. 17/ERU/month) and wi II provide monies to begin funding the identified
capital improvements.
There are five general steps Involved in Implementing an Environmental Services
Utility in the City of Virginia Beach. These steps are:
Public Education/Public Workshops
Adoption of Environmental Services Utility Ordinance
Adoption of Environmental Services Uti lity rate
Estab I ish i ng po I i c i es, procedures and ru I es needed
implement an Environmental Services Utility Program.
to
Implementation of the Environmental ServIces Utility bi II ing
system.
June 1992 has been determined to be the projected date for starting the bi II ing
of a storm water management utility.
Mr. Block advised the appropriate Ordinances will be SCHEDULED for the City
Council Session of November 12, 1991.
October 15, 1991
- 15 -
Item IV-G.l.b.
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES UTILITY REPORT (STORM WATER MANAGEMENT)
ITEM # 34962
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Fentress, seconded by Councilman Sessoms, City
Council:
RECE I VED: ENV IRONMENT AL SERV I CES UTI L ITY REPORT
(Storm water Management);
AND,
SCHEDULED a PUBLIC
OCTOBER 29, 1991.
HEARING
for
2
P.M.,
Voting:
10-0
Counci I Members Voting Aye:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Heischober, Louis R. Jones,
Pau I J. Lante i gne, Reba S. McC I anan, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker and Wi Iliam D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
John A. Baum
October 15, 1991
- 16 -
Item IV-H.l.
RESOLUTION
ITEM # 34963
Upon motion by Councilman Heischober,
Council ADOPTED:
seconded
by Councilman Jones,
City
Resolution authorizing and directing the City
Manager to execute the second Supplemental
Agreement with the City of Suffolk re purchase of
water.
Voting:
10-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Heischober, Louis R. Jones,
Paul J. Lanteigne, Reba S. McClanan, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker and William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
John A. Baum
October 15, 1991
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
1
2
3
4
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE SECOND
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF
SUFFOLK FOR THE PURCHASE OF WATER
5
WHEREAS, on February 18,1981, the City of Virginia Beach
6
and the City of Suffolk entered into an agreement pursuant to which
7
Virginia Beach was permitted to construct two wells in Suffolk for
8
the purpose of providing Virginia Beach with water in times of
9
emergency; and
WHEREAS, the aforesaid agreement was modified on October
14, 1981, to provide, among other things, that Virginia Beach's
right to use the aforesaid wells would expire ten years from the
date of such agreement; and
WHEREAS, the aforesaid agreement is due to expire on
October 14, 1991; and
WHEREAS,
it is in the best interests of the City of
Virginia Beach to enter into a new supplemental agreement allowing
the city to access emergency water supplies for an additional eight
years, or until the Lake Gaston Pipeline becomes operational;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That the City Manager be, and hereby is, authorized and
directed to execute, on behalf of the City of Virginia Beach, the
contract entitled "Second Supplemental Agreement by the City of
Suffolk to Provide Water", the said contract having been presented
to the City Council concurrently with this Resolution.
Adopted by the City Council
on the
day of
October
15
CA-91-4061
\ordin\noncode\suff.res
R-3
.- .. . .
..~ fI- . ~~-
SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT BY THE
CITY OF SUFFOLK TO PROVIDE WATER
This Second Supplemental Agreement made as of the - day of -' 1991,
between the City of Suffolk, a Municipal Corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia
("Suffolk"), and the City of Virginia Beach, a Municipal Corporation of the Commonwealth
of Virginia ("Virginia Beach"), provides:
Recitals
a) On February 18, 1981, Suffolk and Virginia Beach entered into an
agreement (the "Agreement") to allow Virginia Beach to construct two new wells ("new
wells") that would provide emergency capacity to Virginia Beach in the intended amount of
approximately 8 million gallons per day.
b)
On October 14, 1981, Suffolk and Virginia Beach signed a First
Supplemental Agreement modifying several of the terms of the Agreement in accordance
with the terms of the First Supplemental Agreement.
c) Suffolk and the City of Norfolk ("Norfolk") have entered into a contract
(the "Suffolk-Norfolk contract") whereby Norfolk has agreed to supply certain water to
Suffolk. That contract has been attached to this Second Supplemental Agreement and is
incorporated herein by reference.
-1-
d) Suffolk and Virginia Beach desire to extend the expiration date of the
Agreement and the First Supplemental Agreement either for a period of eight years from
the date of this Second Supplemental Agreement or until the day that the Lake Gaston Raw
Water Supply Project ("Gaston") becomes operational whichever first occurs and further
wish to memorialize the interaction of the Suffolk-Norfolk contract with this Second
Supplemental Agreement and the contract between Norfolk and Virginia Beach relating to
water supply (the "Norfolk-Virginia Beach Contract"), all as more particularly set forth
below.
Agreement
Now therefore, in consideration of the promises and of the mutual covenants,
conditions and undertakings set forth below, Suffolk and Virginia Beach agree as follows:
1. Any terms of the Agreement and the First Supplemental Agreement that are not
expressly altered by this Second Supplemental Agreement shall be conclusively presumed
to continue in full force and effect.
2.
Suffolk and Virginia Beach desire to allow Virginia Beach to extend the time
period allowing Virginia Beach access to the two new wells. Virginia Beach shall be
permitted access to the two new wells until one of the following two dates occurs, whichever
is first:
a) Eight years from the date of this Second Supplemental Agreement; or
-2-
b)
The date on which Gaston becomes operational.
Gaston shall be
conclusively presumed to be operational on the day that, excluding preliminary tests, the
Lake Gaston Pipeline is able to supply sixty million gallons per day (MGD) to Virginia
Beach.
If Suffolk should decide to discontinue Virginia Beach's access to the Reid's Ferry
well as set forth in paragraph 6 of this Second Supplemental Agreement, Virginia Beach
shall still be permitted access to the second well on Waters Drive for the time period set
forth in this paragraph. Suffolk shall not have the right to discontinue Virginia Beach's
access to both new wells.
3.
The permitted capacity of Gaston is sixty (60) MGD. Isle of Wight County
and the City of Franklin may participate in Gaston and receive one (1) MGD each upon
execution of a contract with Virginia Beach setting forth participation terms. Virginia Beach
does not currently have contracts with Isle of Wight or Franklin setting forth terms by which
Isle of Wight or Franklin will participate in Gaston.
If both Isle of Wight and Franklin elect not to participate in Gaston, then
Suffolk may, upon execution of a contract with Virginia Beach setting forth reasonable
participation terms, receive up to two (2) MGD from Gaston. If either Isle of Wight or
Franklin elect not to participate in Gaston, then Suffolk may, upon execution of a contract
with Virginia Beach setting forth reasonable participation terms, receive up to one (1) MGD
from Gaston. It is understood by both parties that one of Suffolk's participation terms shall
be that Suffolk must agree to pay a prorata share of the cost of Gaston, which shall be
-3-
either 1/60 or 2/60 of the cost, depending on whether Suffolk receives one or two MGD
from Gaston.
4.
The Applicable Contribution Rate, as defined in paragraph 2 of the First
Supplemental Agreement shall be increased from seventeen and one half cents per thousand
gallons to twenty cents per thousand gallons. This rate shall remain in effect for the time
period that Virginia Beach is permitted to access one or both of the new wells. Virginia
Beach shall be obligated to pay by the 25th day of the next month after water is pumped
the Applicable Contribution Rate to Suffolk whenever one or both of the new wells, any of
the old wells, the Isle of Wight new wells or the Southampton new well are pumped to
supply water to Virginia Beach. Virginia Beach shall be required to submit to Suffolk a
monthly record of water pumped from the old wells, the new wells, the Isle of Wight new
wells or the Southampton new well, by the 15th day of the next month after water is
pumped. Virginia Beach shall not be required to pay for any water pumped from any of
these wells for Suffolk's, Isle of Wight's or Southampton's use.
5.
Should Virginia Beach, at any time during this Second Supplemental
Agreement, pay either to Isle of Wight or Southampton, or both, a contribution rate in
excess of twenty cents per one thousand gallons of water pumped to supply Virginia Beach,
then Suffolk will be entitled to receive compensation under this Second Supplemental
Agreement at that higher contribution rate. Suffolk shall not be entitled to receive
compensation equal to the sum of the rates paid by Virginia Beach to both Isle of Wight
and Southampton.
-4-
.- -' <-,_..
6. Suffolk reserves the right to discontinue Virginia Beach's use of one of the new
wells, which is located on Suffolk Tax Assessor's Parcel 17, Lot 12, and is known as the
Reid's Ferry well. This discontinuation of the Reid's Ferry well shall only be effective upon
a duly-enacted resolution of the Suffolk City Council, which provides for Virginia Beach to
receive thirty days prior written notice of Suffolk's action. This written notice shall be sent
to the Virginia Beach City Manager, and shall state that Suffolk intends to discontinue
Virginia Beach's use of the Reid's Ferry Well. This written notice shall be effective upon
receipt by Virginia Beach. Thirty days after Virginia Beach has received Suffolk's written
notice, Virginia Beach shall no longer have the right to use the Reid's Ferry well. This well
shall then be the exclusive property of Suffolk, free and clear of any interest Virginia Beach
previously had in the well.
7. Virginia Beach agrees to pay to Suffolk an annual fee of twenty-five thousand
dollars per new well in Suffolk for the right to pump the new wells in Suffolk. There are
two new wells in Suffolk, so the total current annual fee from Virginia Beach to Suffolk is
fifty thousand dollars. This fee shall be paid on or before January 15 of each year that this
Second Supplemental Agreement is effective, and shall be prorated for any portion of a year
that this Second Supplemental Agreement may be in effect. If Suffolk should discontinue
Virginia Beach's use of the Reid's Ferry well at any time during a year in which this fee has
been paid, Virginia Beach shall be entitled to receive a prorated refund of the twenty five
thousand dollar fee assessed for the Reid's Ferry well for that part of the year that it is
denied access to the Reid's Ferry well.
-5-
8. Pursuant to Section 19(a) of the Norfolk-Virginia Beach Contract dated October
14, 1981, Virginia Beach expressly agrees to allow Suffolk to purchase water from Norfolk
in accordance with the provisions of the Suffolk-Norfolk Contract attached as Exhibit 1.
Virginia Beach further agrees, when Gaston has become operational as defined in paragraph
2(b) of this Second Supplemental Agreement, that it shall not object to Norfolk selling to
Suffolk a total of up to 10 million gallons per day of raw water.
9(a). Once the old wells (as defined in the First Supplemental Agreement) of the
Norfolk Water System begin to pump water, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the First Supplemental
Agreement require Virginia Beach to make certain payments to Suffolk under the terms of
the First Supplemental Agreement. Under ~rrent operating practices, Norfolk does not
begin to pump the old wells until the levels of the Norfolk reservoirs drop to a pre-
determined level.
9(b). During months in which Suffolk acquires water from Norfolk pursuant to the
Suffolk-Norfolk contract, the Norfolk reservoir levels will be depleted more rapidly than
they would have been depleted had Suffolk not acquired water from Norfolk pursuant to
the Suffolk-Norfolk Contract. This more rapid depletion will result in Norfolk's being
required to pump the old wells sooner than would have been required without Suffolk's
withdrawals. Virginia Beach and Suffolk do not desire for Virginia Beach to pay Suffolk
for water that was withdrawn from the old wells, in part, to replenish water Suffolk acquired
from Norfolk pursuant to the Suffolk-Norfolk contract.
-6-
9( c). Pursuant to this Second Supplemental Agreement, the amount of water upon
which Virginia Beach calculates its contribution to Suffolk, when computed in accordance
with paragraph 2 of the First Supplemental Agreement, for the first month in which the old
wells are activated, shall be reduced by the total amount of water withdrawn by Suffolk
from the Norfolk water system and not replaced in accordance with the Suffolk-Norfolk
contract prior to the first activation of the old wells. For each succeeding month, the
amount of water upon which Virginia Beach calculates its contribution to Suffolk shall be
reduced by all water withdrawn by Suffolk from the Norfolk water system and not replaced
in accordance with the Suffolk-Norfolk contract during that month. Virginia Beach shall
receive a monetary credit from Suffolk as a set off representing that portion of the water
pumped from the old wells that was used to replenish the water Suffolk withdrew from the
Norfolk system, which shall be shown in the invoice received by Virginia Beach in the
manner set forth in paragraph 9( d) below.
9( d). Any bill or invoice sent from Suffolk to Virginia Beach requesting payment
for pumpage of the old wells shall reflect: (1) the amount of money Virginia Beach would
have owed to Suffolk as calculated under paragraph 2 of the First Supplemental Agreement;
(2) the amount of water supplied by Norfolk to Suffolk, if any, pursuant to the Suffolk-
Norfolk contract; (3) a calculation showing the amount of monetary credit Virginia Beach
is entitled to receive due to Suffolk's obtaining water from Norfolk through the Suffolk-
Norfolk contract as computed in paragraph 9(c) above; and (4) the remaining payment due
from Virginia Beach to Suffolk, if any.
-7-
10.
The Mitigation Program as set forth in Paragraph 9 and Exhibit B of the
Agreement shall continue to remain in force and effect.
However the costs of the
Mitigation Program shall be borne by Virginia Beach and Suffolk in proportion to the
amount of water produced from one or both of the two new wells for the benefit of each
city, respectively. If one or both of the two new wells are pumped exclusively for the benefit
of Suffolk, Suffolk agrees to bear 100 percent of the cost of all the terms of the Mitigation
Program. If one or both of the two new wells are pumped exclusively for the benefit of
Virginia Beach, then Virginia Beach shall bear 100 percent of the cost of all the terms of
the Mitigation Program. If one or both of the new wells are pumped for the joint benefit
of Suffolk and Virginia Beach, the cost of the Mitigation Program shall be borne by each
city proportionally, based solely on the amount of water each city has had pumped from one
or both of the two new wells.
11. Notwithstanding any language in either the Agreement, the First Supplemental
Agreement or the Suffolk-Norfolk contract, the provisions of paragraph 5 of the Agreement
which require Suffolk to discontinue use of the new wells upon the occurrence of certain
conditions shall continue to remain in force and effect. The amount of water that Suffolk
may use as set forth in paragraph 5 of the Agreement is hereby increased from ten percent
to twenty percent of the production of both new wells. Suffolk shall have no right to use
the water from the new wells upon the declaration of an emergency by the Virginia Beach
City Council, the institution of mandatory conservation measures with penalties by Virginia
Beach, and notice to Suffolk from Virginia Beach to discontinue use of the new wells
-8.
(except for the 20% emergency usage previously referenced). Should Suffolk discontinue
the use of the Reid's Ferry well, then Suffolk shall not be entitled to withdraw twenty
percent of the water from the other new well in Suffolk.
12.
Pursuant to § 15.1-875, Code of Virginia as amended, Suffolk has granted local
consent for Gaston to Virginia Beach in accordance with the terms and conditions permitted
by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. The resolution of the Suffolk City Council granting
local consent is attached to this Agreement as Exhibit 2 and incorporated herein by
reference. It is mutually agreed that this consent by Suffolk does not relieve Virginia Beach
from the requirement of applying for and obtaining a conditional use permit from Suffolk
for any Virginia Beach water facilities in Suffolk.
13.
All prior payments made by Virginia Beach to Suffolk, pursuant to the First
Supplemental Agreement are hereby expressly approved and confirmed.
14.
If any portion of this Second Supplemental Agreement is found to be invalid
or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, that shall not render the remaining
portions of this Second Supplemental Agreement invalid or unenforceable.
In witness whereof Suffolk and Virginia Beach have each caused this Second
Supplemental Agreement to be signed on its behalf and its seal to be affIXed and attested
by officials thereunto duly authorized, pursuant to authority given by resolutions adopted by
their respective City Councils. Said resolutions are attached hereto and incorporated herein
by reference and made a part hereof.
-9-
CITY OF SUFFOLK
~ /W
By: r(ti6
CIty Manager
Attest:~C'-yyL.. A "'~
City Clerk
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
By:
City Manager
Attest:
City Clerk
'.AP... ~R' A T
~1". 0
:~ ,
~ SIGNATURE
f1.~ðiNÏA BEACH FUBL C UTILITIES
~. DEPARTMENT-
i~~PPROVED AS TO FCC :\1
~l¥;--; .
ìr.' . SIGNATURE
,: CIIT ATTORNEY
By:
Virginia Beach City Attorney
-10-
STATE OF VIRGINIA,
CITY OF SUFFOLK, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this r¡ ~ day of
Oc+obeV, 1991 by R ~c.~l('c9.l. He cDr-ic. L, City Manager.
-k~ (b . Gs ^ö.tO u
Notary Pub c \-
My Commission Expires: 3"L,\(")e 301 \~g Y
STATE OF VIRGINIA,
CITY OF SUFFOLK, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this <¡? jj,
day of
~, 1991 by H~nR.lI L. I )ufdt?í'l
{
, City Clerk.
& Ltlœt- 1/ t11~ J--
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: ¿JcJo ope 3/, JQQ-5"
-11-
~.
STATE OF VIRGINIA,
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
day of
, 1991 by
, City Manager.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
STATE OF VIRGINIA,
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this - day of
, 1991 by
, City Clerk.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
~\MSM\VB\VBSUFFWA
-12-
14
87ô
c' ~:. c ~~:, .-:: c s
EXHIBIT 1
RAW WATER AGREEMENT
THIS
AGREEMENT ,
made
this
gï~
day of rY1~'i
1988, by and between the CITY OF NORFOLK, VIRGINIA, a
municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia
(hereinafter referred to as "Norfolk"), party of the first
part,
and
the
CITY
OF
SUFFOLK,
VIRGINIA,
a
municipal
corporation
of the
Commonwealth
of Virginia
(hereinafter
referred to as "Suffolk"), party of the second part.
WHEREAS, Norfolk and Suffolk own and operate water
supply treatment and distribution systems; and
WHEREAS, Suffolk is expected to experience raw water
deficits
in the future and is in need of additional raw
water; and
WHEREAS,
Suffolk
owns
two
large
municipal
wells
adjacent to Western Branch Reservoir, which, at present, are
not connected to the Suffolk water system; and
WHEREAS,
these
Suffolk wells
could
be
pumped
to
discharge to the Norfolk reservoir,
from which the water
could
be
transported
through
Norfolk's
raw
water
transmission system under terms and conditions agreeable to
both Norfolk and Suffolk; and
WHEREAS,
Norfolk is expected to have
available a
limited quantity of surplus raw water for a period of time,
and, subject to the provisions of the Norfolk-virginia Beach
--- -.---- --- --.-.
---
. -_. -- - - .__._--n .-------
..--- ----------._----
.--.---.-
_.. _____n_- ----
c;~. '::.J.':;D3
water
contract,
is
willing to provide Suffolk a
Norfolk
portion of said surplus raw water under terms and conditions
agreeable to both Norfolk and Suffolk; and
WHEREAS, Suffolk wishes to acquire a portion of the
surplus raw water which may be available from time to time
and to arrange for transmission of the Suffolk groundwater
through the Norfolk system, if or when the surplus raw water
is not available;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and
mutual
covenants
and
herein
agreements
contained,
the
parties hereto agree as follows:
1.
Well Water Supply Transmission.
As of the date
of
this
to
Norfolk
Agreement,
to
available
make
agrees
Suffolk raw water from its reservoir system in an amount not
to
exceed
the
metered
well
water
discharged
amount
by
Suffolk to the Norfolk reservoir system.
The maximum amount
of such well pumpage shall be 4 million gallons per day
(MGD) .
This raw water shall be made available to Suffolk
from the
raw water transmission system owned by Norfolk
which originates at the Western Branch Pump Station and Lake
Prince
Station
Pump
and travels eastward to the Norfolk
water treatment system.
2.
Connections.
Norfolk shall be responsiblè for
making the connection to its
raw
water
main at a point to
-2-
G::CI'::L:.rJ
be designated by Norfolk.
Suffolk shall be responsible for
the cost of any pipeline necessary to convey the raw water
from Norfolk's transmission main connection to the Suffolk
treatment system.
Plans and specifications for the pipeline
shall be developed by Suffolk.
To protect the hydraulic
integrity of the Norfolk transmission system, these plans
and specifications must be approved by Norfolk prior to any
construction.
Norfolk shall also provide, install, own and
maintain the installed metering equipment.
All subsequent
repairs shall adhere to the same conditions.
3. Payment for Water.
Suffolk shall pay Norfolk for
all raw water delivered at the rate currently charged by
Norfolk for its raw water.
The raw bulk water rate in
effect as of the date of this Agreement is $0.335 per 1,000
gallons.
It is understood that this rate may be changed
from time to time by Norfolk.
In the first three years of
this contract, the raw water bulk rate charged to Suffolk
shall not increase any more (any higher percentage) that the
concurrent increase in retail water rates within the City of
Norfolk.
During this period, a contract amendment will be
developed
to
set
forth
the
acceptable
basis
for
any
subsequent adjustments in the raw water bulk rate.
Nothing
herein shall preclude the City of Norfolk from cancelling
the contract within the provisions of Paragraph 6.
Norfolk
-3-
c~;, ':: .I,~: .= ].
shall inform Suffolk in writing at least ninety (90) days in
advance of the effective date of any rate increase.
Suffolk
shall remit payment for all raw water within twenty
(20)
days of receipt of bills.
4.
Additional Cost of Well Water.
It is understood
and agreed by both parties that the introduction of well
water into the Norfolk reservoir system will impose an
additional treatment cost to Norfolk. In order to
compensate Norfolk for this additional cost, Suffolk agrees
that a surcharge in addition to the published raw bulk water
rate, not to exceed $0.05 per 1,000 gallons will be imposed
on Suffolk for raw water withdrawn as. a result of well/l
Ré.Y/~tVl!() <J,.
pumpage. Such surcharge shall be rgg,Ü '.oad on an annual
basis, and Norfolk shall inform Suffolk in writing at least
ninety
(90 )
days in advance of the effective date of any
surcharge
increase.
Any additional
or unusual
treatment
cost
required by law or regulation as
a result of well
pumping may increase the surcharge, subject to a ninety (90)
day
notice.
The
surcharge
exists
°!lly
to
recover
the
related additional treatment costs, and can be adjusted only
if
treatment
costs
are
shown
to have
increased,
due
to
mandated federal or state standards or identified well water
quality problems.
5.
utilization of Surplus Raw Water.
It is also
agreed by both parties that, at times when reservoirs are at
-4-
C ~: :,' "::.'..~ :':~. :;;
seventy percent (70%) or more of capacity, Suffolk may, with
Norfolk's prior approval, take surplus raw water from the
Nofolk system without having to replace it with equal amount
of groundwater.
This withdrawal may not exceed 2.0 million
gallons per day and may require certain approvals which
Suffolk shall obtain prior to commencement.
6.
Term.
This
Agreement
shall
take
effect
immediately upon execution and shall continue indefinitely
or until canceled by either party upon one (1) year's formal
written notice to the other party.
7.
Providing
and Receivinq Water.
Suffolk
may
terminate the receiving of raw water at any time, provided
such act is accomplished in a manner consistent with sound
engineering
and
technical
practices,
after
reasonable
advance notice to Norfolk.
Except in the case of a bona
fide emergency, Norfolk will not unilaterally terminate the
pumping of surplus raw water to Suffolk without given ten
(10) days' formal written notice to Suffolk of its intent to
do so.
within such ten (10) day period, or at some time
thereafter, Suffolk may notify Norfolk of its intent to pump
well water as contemplated by Paragraph 1 of this Agreement.
Such well water may then be supplied and Suffolk may
continue to receive raw water to the ~~~~ permitted bY..(/.
Paragraph 1.
-5-
"'.,"',~: "1 .-..,,",....,
t~'~,;-":u,:.;\".j
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Norfolk has caused
this
Agreement
to
be
signed
on
its behalf by James
B.
Oliver, Jr., City Manager, and its corporate seal attached
hereto by Louis S. Hudgins, City Clerk.
The City of Suffolk has caused this Agreement to be
signed on its behalf by John L. Rowe, Jr., City Manager, and
its corporate seal attached hereto by Henry C. Murden, City
Clerk.
CITY OF NORFOLK
By
~~
I ames B. Oliver Jr.
City Manager
~J
LOuis S. ~~ .....
City Clerk
CITY OF SUFFOLK
By
q.n- A.~
John L. Rowe, Jr.
city Manager
ATTEST:
~L ~C~
Henry C. urden
City Clerk
Approved as to Form
and Corr cInes¡
nd Correctness:
t at this is a true copy of an Agreement between
, Virginia and the City of Suffolk, Virginia.
ç¡~J. (k~
No ry
My Commission Expires: 1-8-91
EXHIBIT 2
A RESOLUTION REAFFIRMING AND RATIFYING THE TERMS AND
CONDITIONS OF THE FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SUFFOLK AND THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH,
DATED OCTOBER 14, 1981
WHEREAS, the city of Suffolk and the City of Virginia
Beach entered into the First Supplemental Agreement dated
October 14, 1981, to a Water Agreement between the same
parties dated February 18, 1981; and
WHEREAS, the City of Suffolk takes the position that it
has previouslý ratified by Resolution Nos. 86-81, 20-81, 145-
80 and 22-81, the terms of the First Supplemental Agreement
dated October 14, 1981, including, but not limited to,
Paragraph 8 (b) of the First Supplemental Agreement, which
requires the City of Suffolk to consent to "the construction
and operation by Virginia Beach within Suffolk of the
Transmission Facilities defined in paragraph 7 under Section
15.1-875 of the Virginia Code"; and
WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach takes the position
that the City of Suffolk has not previously ratified the terms
of the First Supplemental Agreement dated October 14, 1981;
and
WHEREAS, as a result of this position, the City of
Virginia Beach ceased paying the City of Suffolk the
contribution required by Paragraph 2 of the First Supplement
Agreement in May, 1990; and
WHEREAS, the City of Suffolk desires the City of Virginia
Beach to pay immediately the $91,478.91 the City of Virginia
Beach owes the City of Suffolk, pursuant to Paragraph 2 of the
First Supplemental Agreement; and
WHEREAS, should the City of Virginia Beach fail to make
payment of the $91,478.91 owed the City of Suffolk pursuant to
the terms of paragraph 2 of the First Supplemental Agreement,
the city of Suffolk shall terminate the February 18, 1981,
agreement as supplemented by the First Supplemental Agreement
dated October 14, 1981, in 30 days after giving Virginia Beach
written notice of default in payment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City
of Suffolk, that:
1.
To clarify its position in regards to the First
Supplemental Agreement, it hereby reaffirms and
ratifies the terms of the First Supplemental
Agreement dated October 14, 1981; including, but not
limited to, Paragraph 8(b) of the First Suppremental
-1-
- - - .
, ,. ,
". 'f', :r, :~,
, to,',:
"',: '
Agreement, which requires the Suffolk city council
to consent to "the construction and operation by
Virginia Beach within Suffolk of the Transmission
Facilities defined in Paragraph 7 under Section
15.1-875 of the Virginia Code".
2 .
That the Suffolk city Manager and City Attorney are
hereby, authorized to notify the City of Virginia
. )~eachj\ pursuant to Paragraph 13 of the First
. Supplemental Agreement, that the city of Virginia
Beach '. 1's in default in payment of amounts owed to
the City of Suffolk pursuant to Paragraph 2 of the
First Supplemental Agreement, and should Virginia
:Þ . . .
Beach fa~l to pay the amount owed w~th~n 30 days
after such notice, the city of Suffolk shall
terminate the First Supplemental Agreement and take
ownership of the Virginia Beach wells.
~.'..
3.
That the reaffirmation and ratification of this
First Supplemental Agreement dated October 14,
1981, by the City of Suffolk does not affect in any
way the consideration by Suffolk of any Conditional
Use Permit required by the Suffolk Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance for Virginia Beach Transmission
Facilities or other Virginia Beach water supply
facilities located in the City of Suffolk.
4.
That, notwithstanding any of the foregoing sections
of this Resolution, the City of Suffolk shall take
ownership of the Virginia Beach wells no later than
October 14, 1991.
READ AND ADOPTED:
June 19, 1991
A TRUE COPY, TESTE: :J.1" -----, C'J~~
O;i¡ty Clerk
-2-
- 17-
Item IV-I.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 34964
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Fentress, seconded by Councilman Clyburn, City
Council APPROVED in ONE MOTION Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the CONSENT
AGENDA.
Voting:
10-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Heischober, Louis R. Jones,
Paul J. Lanteigne, Reba S. McClanan,* Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker~~* and William D. Sessoms,
Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
John A. Baum
*Councilwoman McClanan DISCLOSED she is a member of the Clean Community
Commission and declared that she is able to participate in the transaction
fairly, objectively, and in the public interest.
~~*Councilwoman Parker DISCLOSED she is a member of the Clean Community
Commission and declared that she is able to participate in the transaction
fairly, objectively, and in the public interest.
October 15, 1991
- 18 -
Item IV-I.l.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 34965
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Fentress,
Council ADOPTED:
seconded by Councilman Clyburn,
City
Resolution endorsing continuation of Virginia Beach
Clean Community Program with grant funding of
$18,095 to be furnished by Department of Waste
Management, Commonwealth of Virginia.
Voting:
10-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Heischober, Louis R. Jones,
Paul J. Lanteigne, Reba S. McClanan,* Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker** and William D. Sessoms,
Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
John A. Baum
.
1~Councilwoman McClanan DISCLOSED she is a member of the Clean Community
Commission and declared that she is able to participate in the transaction
fairly, objectively, and in the public interest.
**Councilwoman Parker DISCLOSED she is a member of the Clean Community
Commission and declared that she is able to participate in the transaction
fairly, objectively, and in the public interest.
October 15, 1991
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS ,
the Council of
the City of Virginia Beach
recognizes the existence of a litter problem within the City; and
WHEREAS ,
the
Virginia
Litter
Control
Act
of
1976
provides, through the Department of Waste Management, for grants
for the purpose of enhancing local litter control programs; and
WHEREAS, the Virginia Beach Clean Community Program is
in its thirteenth year of funding under this program; and
WHEREAS ,
in
order
for
the
fourteenth
year
funding
application to be forwarded to the Department of Waste Management,
said application must be endorsed by Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the
City of Virginia Beach endorses and supports the continuation of
the Virginia Beach Clean Community Program with grant funding of
$18,095 to be furnished by the Department of Waste Management of
the State of Virginia.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Department of Waste
Management is hereby requested to consider and approve said grant
application and program, said program being in accord with the
regulations governing the use and expenditure of these funds.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach on
~ day of
October
, 1991.
- 19 -
Item IV-I.2.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 34966
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Fentress,
Counci I ADOPTED:
seconded by Counci Iman Clyburn,
City
Ordinance to AMEND and REORDAIN Sections 21-17,
21-130, 21-194, 21-251, 21-273, 21-274, 21-275,
21-276, 21-277, 21-278, 21-279, 21-280, 21-314,
21-456 and 21-465 of the Code of the City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia, re motor vehicle and
traffic code.
Voting:
10-0
Counci I Members Voting Aye:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Heischober, Louis R. Jones,
Paul J. Lanteigne, Reba S. McClanan, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker and William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Counci I Members Voting Nay:
None
Counci I Members Absent:
John A. Baum
October 15, 1991
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
~
;:.;. "'.
-- '- " ~, ",
c, (¿. ...,-'(11-"...- /!.¡/ ---,-,,~~-....J.!.!;.""iþ,J.
:¡:::; :,~, ¡~':,..:
f'o'-<.!£
[:._;~;::--:",=;.;-r
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND
REORDAIN SECTIONS 21-17, 21-
130, 21-194, 21-251, 21-273"
21-274, 21-275, 21-276, 21-277,
21-278, 21-279, 21-280, 21-314,
21-456 AND 21-465 OF THE CODE OF
THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH,
VIRGINIA, PERTAINING TO MOTOR
VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC CODE.
AFr:~c:v:=:¡ /\:.. TO ;,f:GAl
Y /\1'<) FORM
~
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That sections 21-17,
21-251,
21-273"
21-
21-130,
21-194,
274, 21-275, 21-276, 21-277, 21-278, 21-279, 21-280, 21-314, 21-
456
and
City
virginia
Beach,
of
the
Code
of
the
of
21-465
Virginia, is hereby amended and reordained to read as follows:
section 21-17.
Minimum age of drivers of school buses and public
passenger carriers.
It chall be unlawful:
(1)
For any percon, whether licensed or not, who is under the age
of (18)
yearc to drh'e a motor vehicle while in uca ac a
school
trancportation
or
from
of pupils
buc
for the
to
cchool; provided, however, cuch cchool bus may be operated by
a percon between tha agac of cixteen (16) and eighteen (18)
yearc, with the approval of the school board carved by such
00s-.-
(2)
For any person, whether licensed or not, who is under the aga
of twenty-ono (21) years, to drive a motor vehicle whila in
uce as a public passenger-carrying vehicle.
It shall be unlawful for any person, whether licensed or not.
who is under the aqe of (18) years to drive a motor vehicle while
in use as a school bus for the transportation of pupils to or from
school. or to drive a motor vehicle while in use as a passenqer
carryinq vehicle.
section 21-130.
Alteration of suspension system.
fa+
operate upon any highway any motor
No person
shall
vehicle registered in Virginia as a passenger motor vehicle if it
has been modified by alteration of its altitude from the ground to
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
the extent that its bumpers, measured to any point on the lower
edge of the main horizontal bumper bar, exclusive of any bumper
guards,
are not wi thin the range of
fourteen
(14)
inches to
twenty-two
(22)
inches above the ground.
No vehicle shall be
modified to cause the vehicle body or chassis to come in contact
with the ground, expose the fuel tank to damage from collision, or
cause the wheels to come in contact with the body under normal
operation.
No part of the original suspension system shall be
disconnected
defeat
the
safe
operation
suspension
of
the
to
system.
However, nothing contained in this section shall prevent
the
installation
duty
equipment,
including
shock
of
heavy
absorbers and overload springs.
Nothing contained in this section
shall prohibit the operation on a public highway of a motor
vehicle with normal wear to the suspension system if such normal
wear does not adversely affect the control of the vehicle.
+1*
shall
operate upon any highway any motor
No person
vehicle registered in Virginia as a truck if it has been modified
by alteration of its altitude from
the ground to the extent that
on the lower edge of the main
any bumper guards, do not fall
its bumpers, measured to any point
horizontal bumper bar, exclusive of
within the limits specified herein for its gross vehicle weight
rating category.
The front bumper height of trucks whose gross
vehicle weight ratings are 4,500 pounds or less shall be no less
than fourteen
(14)
inches and no more than twenty-eight
(28)
inches and their rear bumper height shall be no less than fourteen
(14) inches and no more than twenty-eight (28) inches.
The front
bumper height of trucks whose gross vehicle weight ratings are
4,501 pounds to 7,500 pounds shall be no less than fourteen (14)
inches and no more than twenty-nine (29)
inches and their rear
bumper height shall be no less than fourteen (14)
inches and no
more than thirty (30) inches.
The front bumper height of trucks
whose
vehicle
weight
ratings
pounds
:t.eB
gross
are
7,501
to
thoucand
(10,000)
fifteen thousand
(15,000)
pounds shall be no
less than fourteen (14) inches and no more than thirty (30) inches
and their rear bumper height shall no less than fourteen
(14)
2
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
inches and no more than thirty-one (31) inches.
The provisions of
this subsection shall not apply to trucks with a gross vehicle
weight rating in excess of 10,000 pounds.
For the purpose of this
section, the term "truck" shall include pickup and panel trucks
and "gross vehicle weight ratings" shall mean manufacturer's gross
vehicle weight ratings established for that vehicle.
-fG1-
and in cases where bumper
In the absence of bumpers,
heights have been lowered or modified, height measurements undor
£ub~oction (a) or (b) mentioned above shall be made to the bottom
of the frame rail.
-fG1-
This section shall not apply to specially designed or
modified motor vehicles when operated off the public highways in
races and similar events.
Such motor vehicles may be lawfully
towed on the highways.
No motor vehicle whose front-end suspension has been modified
bv the use of lift blocks shall be driven on anv hiqhwav in the
commonwealth.
-fe+
Any person who violates any provision of this section
shall be guilty of a traffic infraction and shall, upon conviction
thereof, be subject to a fine of not more than one hundred dollars
($100.00) .
section 21-194.
Maximum length--Generally.
( a)
otherwise
no motor
specifically provided,
Except
as
vehicle exceeding a length of forty (40) feet shall be operated on
any highway of the city.
The actual length of any combination of
vehicles coupled together, including any load thereon, shall not
exceed
fifty-fivo
no
sixty
total
of
(55)
(60)
feet,
and
a
tolerance
inches;
shall
be
allowed
that
exceeds
twelve
(12)
provided that, the city manager, when good cause is shown, may
issue a special permit for combinations in excess of fifty-five
(55) feet, including any load thereon, where the object or objects
to be carried cannot be moved otherwise.
(b)
Vehicles
the
designed
exclusively
and
used
for
transportation of motor vehicles may have an additional
load
overhang not to exceed five (5) feet.
3
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
( c)
as defined
in
section
21-202,
the
In
an
emergency,
towing of disabled vehicles which cannot be separated for safety,
physical or mechanical reasons and which exceed fifty-five (55)
sixty (60) feet in length shall be permissible for the purpose of
towing any such vehicle to the nearest facility which can make the
necessary repairs, but not more than fifty (50) miles from the
point such vehicle was disabled.
( d)
buses
exceed
forty
( 40)
foot
Passenger
may
the
limitation when such excess length is caused by the projection of
a front safety bumper or rear safety bumper or both.
Such safety
bumper shall not cause the length of the bus to exceed the maximum
legal limit by more than one foot in the front and one foot in the
rear.
"Safety bumper," as used herein, means any device which may
be fitted on an existing bumper or which replaces the bumper and
is so constructed, treated or manufactured as to absorb energy
upon impact.
section 21-251.
Following fire apparatus or rescue squad vehicle.
It shall be unlawful for the driver of any vehicle, other
than one on official business, to follow any fire apparatus or
rescue squad vehicle travelling in response to a fire alarm or
emergency call at any distance closer than five hundred (500) feet
to
such apparatus
or rescue squad vehicle.......
or to park such
vehicle within five hundred (500) feet of where fire apparatus has
stopped in answer to a fire alarm.
section 21-273.
Driving while license, permit or privilege to
drive suspended or revoked.
+a+
Except as otherwise provided in sections 46.2-304 and
46.2-357
of
of
Virginia,
resident
or
the
Code
person,
no
nonresident, whose operator's or chauffour'c driver's license~ ~
in£truction learner's permit or privilege to drive a motor vehicle
has been suspended or revoked or who has been directed not to
drive by any court or by the commissioner or by operation of law
pursuant to the provisions of Title 46.2 of the Code of Virginia
or this chapter, or who has been forbidden, as prescribed by law,
by the G,Çommissioner,
the sß.tate G,Çorporation G,Çommission,
the
4
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
Commonwealth
Transportation
Commissioner,
àtlighway
the
s§.tate
G~ommissioner, any court or the s§.uperintendent of s§.tate ~£olice,
to operate a motor vehicle in this £:tate Commonwealth,
shall
thereafter drive any motor vehicle or any self-propelled machinery
or equipment on any highway in this city, unless and until the
period of such suspension or revocation shall have terminated.
-fb1-
first
violating
this
section
shall
A
offense
of
constitute a Class 2 misdemeanor.
A second or subsequent offense
shall constitute a Class 1 misdemeanor.
~
In addition to the provi£:ion£ of £ub£:oction (b)
above
above provided penalties, the court shall suspend or revoke such
person's license, permit or privilege to drive for the same period
for which it had been previously suspended or revoked when such
person violated this
section.
such person has
In the event
violated this section by driving during a period of suspension or
revocation which was not for a definite period of time, the court
shall suspend or revoke such person's license, permit or privilege
to drive for an additional period not to exceed ninety (90) days.
Any additional suspension ordered under the provisions of this
section
the
expiration
previous
of
the
shall
commence
upon
suspension
revocation,
such previous
suspension
or
unless
or
revocation has expired prior to the ordering of an additional
suspension or revocation.
Any ~erson who operates a motor vehicle in violation of the
conditions set forth in a restricted license or in violation of
any
other
restrictions
of
Virginia
imposed
to
Code
pursuant
section 18.2-271.1 shall be in violation of this section.
section 21-274.
Driving while restoration of license is
contingent upon furnishing proof of financial
responsibility.
( a)
No person, resident or nonresident, whose operator'£: or
chauffour'£: driver's license or in£truction learner's permit has
been suspended or revoked by any court or by the commissioner or
by operation of law pursuant to the provisions of Title 46.2 or
section 18.2-271 of the Code of Virginia or this chapter, or who
has been disqualified pursuant to the provisions of the Virqinia
5
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
Commercial Driver's Licence Act, Code of Virqinia section 46.2-
341.1 et. seq., or who has been forbidden, as prescribed by law,
by the G.Qommissioner,
the ,s§.tate G.Qorporation G.Qommission,
the
e;tata highway Commonwealth Transportation G.Qommissioner or the
s~uperintendent of s~tate p£olice, to operate a motor vehicle in
this ctate Commonwealth,
shall drive any motor vehicle in this
city during any period wherein the restoration of the license or
privilege is contingent upon the furnishing of proof of financial
responsibility,
he
has
given
of
financial
proof
unless
responsibility in the manner provided in Code of virginia, section
46.2-435 et. seq.
Any person who drives a motor vehicle on the
roads
of
the
city
furnished
of
financial
and
has
proof
responsibility but who has failed to pay a reinstatement fee shall
be tried under the provisions of section 21-272.
(b)
first
violation
this
section
shall
A
offense
of
constitute
misdemeanor.
second
subsequent
A
or
Class
2
a
violation of this section shall constitute a Class 1 misdemeanor.
section 21-275.
suspension of license for certain
while transporting explosives, etc.
violations
When the driver of any motor vehicle
is
convicted of a
violation of any of the provisions of sections 21-239, 21-240,21-
242,
21-250,
21-311 or 21-312 or any of the applicable speed
limits prescribed in this chapter and such violation was committed
while
operating
vehicle,
truck,
trailer
or
tractor
a
motor
semitrailer transporting explosives or any
inflammable gas or
liquid, in addition to any other penalty imposed, the court may
suspend the oporator'£ or chauffour'£ driver's license of such
person so convicted for a period of ninety (90) days from the date
of conviction.
section 21-276.
Disposition of surrendered
revocation or suspension.
license
upon
(a)
In any case in which the accused is convicted of an
offense, upon the conviction of which the law requires or permits
revocation or suspension of the oporator'c or chauffaur'£ driver's
license of the person so convicted,
the court shall order the
6
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
surrender of such license, which shall remain in the custody of
the court during the period of such revocation or suspension, if
such period does not exceed thirty (30) days, or:
(1)
If
such period exceeds thirty
until
the time
( 30)
days,
allowed by law for appeal has elapsed,
when it shall be
forwarded to the GQommissioner¡ or
(2)
until an appeal is effected and proper bond posted, at which
time it shall be returned to the accused.
(b)
The provisions of this section have no application to
the suspension of a license by the court pending payment of fine,
as permitted by section 46.2-395 of the Code of Virginia.
(c)
Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a) of this
section, when the time of suspension or revocation coincides, or
approximately
coincides,
with
time,
the
court may
the
appeal
retain the license and return the same to the accused upon the
expiration of suspension or revocation.
section 21-277.
Chauffeurs as operators and ~ice ~ersa-
Any perEon licenced ac a chauffeur under Code of Virginia
Title 46.2 £hall not bo required to procure an operator'£ licenEe,
but no perEon chall drive any motor vehicle aE a chauffeur unless
licenced ac a chauffeur.
Nob?ithEtanding any other proviEion of
thiE chapter, no pore on Ehall be required to obtain a chauffeur's
licenEe for the purpoce of driving a Echool bus.
section 21-278.
Possession and exhibition of license.
fa+
The
operator
chauffeur
of
motor
vehicle,
or
a
any
trailer
semitrailer,
~lhile
cuch motor vehicle,
trailer
or
or
Eemitrailer iE beinq operated upon the highways of the city, shall
have
in
possession
chauffeur's
the
hie
operator'E
his
or
reqistration card issued by the Department or the state or country
in which the vehicle is reqistered, and his driver's license~ ~
temporary
inctruction
driver'E
permit
permit
or
learner's
or
temporary driver's permit.
-fÐt
The operator or chauffeur of any motor vehicle, trailer
or semitrailer shall stop, upon the signal of any peace or police
7
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
law enforcement officer who shall be in uniform or who shall show
his badge or other sign of authority,
ad shall,
upon request,
exhibit his oporator'~ or chauffeur'~ reqistration card. driver's
license.
learner's permit. or temporary inctruction or driver's
permit and shall write his name in the presence of such officer,
if so required for the purpose of establishing his identity.
~
Every person licensed by the divi~ion Department as an
operator and ovary percon licen~od by tho divi~ion a~ a chauffour
a driver or issued a temporary inctruction learner's or driver's
permit, who fails to carry his license or permit shall be guilty
of a traffic infraction and, upon conviction, punished by a fine
of ten dollars ($10.00); provided, however,
if any person, when
summoned to appear before a court
for failure to display his
license or permit,
upon such demand being made of him,
shall
present to the officer making such demand, or a magistrate of the
city, before the return date of the summons, a proper license or
permit duly issued to him prior to the time of such demand, or
shall appear pursuant to such summons and produce before the court
a proper licence or permit duly issued to him prior to the time ~
cuch demand the summons was issued, he shall be deemed to have
complied with the provisions of this section.
Section 21-279.
violations of restrictions on licenses.
Any person issued an operator' ~ or chauffeur' ~ a driver's
license on which there are printed or stamped restrictions,
as
provided by Code of Virginia, section 46.2-329, or a rectrictod
driving permit provided by a court purcuant to Code of virginia,
coction 18.2-271.1
(E), who operate~ drives a motor vehicle in
violation
restrictions
be guilty
of
Class
2
shall
such
of
a
misdemeanor.
section 21-280.
Miscellaneous offenses relating to licenses.
It shall be unlawful for any person to commit any of the
following acts:
(1)
To display or cause or permit to be displayed or to have in
his possession any operator'c or chauffour'£ driver's license
8
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
(2)
(3)
(4)
knowing the same to be fictitious or to have been cancelled,
revoked,
suspended
altered,
photographed
for
the
or
or
purposes of evading the intent of this article or the state
law.
To
lend to,
or knowingly permit the use of by one not
entitled thereto,
oporator'(:
chauffour'(:
driver's
or
any
license issued to the person so lending or permitting the use
thereof.
To
display
represent
his
oporator'(:
or
or
as
own
any
chauffour'(:
driver's
license
issued
the
person
to
not
displaying the same.
To reproduce, by photograph or otherwise, any oporator'£ or
chauffour'£
driver's
license
temporary
permit
or
or
inctruction
learner's
permit
issued
the
di ~..i£ion
by
department without obtaining prior written consent of the
divicion department.
(5)
To fail or refuse to surrender, upon demand, any oporator'£
or chauffour'£ driver's license issued in thi£ £tato the
commonwealth or any other state to any court in this city in
which he has been tried and convicted for the violation of
any law of thi£ £tate the Commonwealth or ordinance of this
city
regulating
affecting
operation
a
motor
of
the
or
vehicle.
signals by lights
devices--Legend.
traffic-control
section 21-295.
or
other
signals by lights or other traffic-control devices shall be
as follows:
(1)
Red indicates that traffic then moving shall stop and remain
stopped as long as the red signal is shown, except in the
direction
indicated
lighted
provided,
by
a
green
arrow;
however, that except where a sign is placed prohibiting turns
on red, vehicular traffic facing a steady red signal, may
after
coming
full
cautiously
the
to
a
stop,
enter
intersection to make a right turn, or to make a left turn if
such left turn
is made
from a highway which allows
for
9
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
traffic
in but one direction
into another highway which
allows for traffic in but one direction after making such
left
turn
the
turning
traffic
will
going
in
that
be
direction.
Such turning traffic shall yield the right-of-
way to pedestrians lawfully within an adjacent crosswalk and
to other traffic using the intersection.
(2)
Green indicates that traffic shall then move in the direction
of the signal and remain in motion as long as the green
signal is given,
except that such traffic shall yield to
other
vehicles
pedestrians
within
the
and
lawfully
intersection.
(3)
Amber indicates that a change is about to be made in the
direction of the moving of traffic.
When the amber signal is
shown,
traffic
which
already
entered
the
has
not
intersection, including the crosswalks, shall stop if it is
not reasonably safe to continue, but that which has already
entered the intersection shall continue to move until the
intersection has been entirely cleared.
The amber signal is
a warning that the red signal is imminent.
(4)
Tho u~o of a Elashing red indicates that traffic shall stop
before entering an intersection and the use of a flashing
amber
indicates
traffic
through
the
that
may
proceed
intersection or past such signal with reasonable care under
the circumstances.
(5)
Flashing amber indicates that traffic may proceed through the
intersection or past such signal with reasonable care under
the circumstances.
section 21-298.
Unauthorized signs, signals, etc.
1.&
No unauthorized person shall erect or maintain upon any
highway any warning or direction sign, marker, signal or light in
imitation of any official sign, marker, signal or light erected
under the provisions of this chapter, and no person shall erect or
maintain upon any highway any traffic or highway sign or signal
bearing thereon any commercial
advertising.
Nothing
in this
section shall be construed to prohibit the erection or maintenance
10
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
of
signs,
or signals bearing thereon the name of an
markers
organization which has been authorized to erect the same by the
sß.tate aHighway and :t.Transportation B~ommission or by the city
manager;
nor shall this section be construed to prohibit the
erection by contractors or public utility companies of temporary
signs
by
the
sß.tate
aHighway
:t.Transportation
and
approved
B~ommissionsate G12epartment warning motorists that work is
in
progress upon the highway or adjacent thereto.
l.Ql
Any violation of this section shall constitute a Class
4 misdemeanor.
section 21-314.
Same--penalty for reckless driving under sections
21-311, 21-312 or 21-313.
(a)
convicted
driving
under
Every
person
of
reckless
sections 21-311, 21-312 or 21-313 shall be quilty of a Class 1
misdemeanor.
for the fin::t violation be punÜ:hed by a fine not
exceeding one thou~and dollar~ ($1,000.00), or by confinement in
jail not oxceeding twelve (12) month~, or both, in the di~cretion
of the jury or of the court trying the case without a jury.
For
each second or sub~equent conviction for the offense of rockles8
driving under any
~uch ~ection£
committed within tv:ol vo
(12)
months before or after the date or another act of reckle~~ driving
for which he has been convictod, £uch per~on £hall be puni~hed by
a fine of not le£~ than one hundred dollars ($100.00)
nor more
than one thou~and dollar£ ($1,000.00), or by impri£onment in jail
for not les£ than ten (10) day~ nor more than twelve (12) months,
or by both ~uch fine and impri~onment.
(b)
In addition to the penalties prescribed in subsection
(a),
if any person is convicted of reckless driving under any
section referred to therein, the court may suspend any license
issued to such convicted person under chapter 3
(section 46.2-
300, et seq.) of Title 46.2 of the Code of Virginia, for a period
of not less than ten (10) days nor more than six (6) months and
such court shall require the convicted person to surrender his
license so suspended to the court where it shall be disposed of in
accordance with section 21-276.
If a person so convicted has not
11
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
obtained
license
required
chapter,
is
a
such
by
or
the
nonresident, the court may direct in the judgment of conviction
that such person shall not, for a period of not less than ten (10)
days or more than six
months as may be prescribed in the
(6)
judgment,
drive
motor
vehicle
in
this
ctate
operate
any
or
Commonwealth.
The court or the clerk of court shall transmit the
license
G.Qommissioner
with
of
the
to
the
along
the
report
conviction required to be sent to the divi£ion Department of Motor
Vehicles.
( c)
When any person shall be convicted of reckless driving
as provided for in cubcection (10) ~ section 21-312~ in addition
to any other penalties provided by law, except in those cacoc for
which revocation of licence£: ic provided in Code of virginia,
coction 46.2-3g9, the operator'c or chauffour'c driver's license
of such person may be suspended by the court or judge for a period
of not less than sixty (60) days nor more than six (6) months.
In
case of conviction the court or judge shall order the surrender of
the
license
court
where
it
disposed
in
shall
be
of
to
the
accordance with the provisions of section 21-276.
Where the
conviction is a second conviction which would require revocation
under the provisions of section 46.2-389 of the Code of Virginia,
the court shall suspend the oporator'c or chauffour'c driver's
license of such person and thereupon transmit the same to the
divicion Department of Motor Vehicles as provided by law.
If such
person so convicted has not obtained a license required by Code of
Virginia, chapter 3 (section 46.2-300 et seq.) of tTitle 46.2, or
is a nonresident,
such court shall direct in the judgment of
conviction that such person shall not drive or operate any motor
vehicle in this ctate Commonwealth for a period of not less than
sixty (60) days nor more than six (6) months.
section 21-456.
Duty to obey traffic signs and signals and orders
of police officers.
Pedestrians shall obey signs and signals erected on highways
or streets for the direction and control of travel and traffic and
they shall obey the orders of police officers engaged in directing
12
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
travel and traffic on the highways and streets.
violations of
this section shall be punished by a fine not exceeding H¥e
dollar£ ($5.00) one hundred dollars ($100.00) for each offense.
section 21-465.
Penalty for violating sections 21-457 - 21-464.
Any person convicted of violating any of the provisions of
sections
21-457
through 21-464
shall be
fined not more than
for
t~:onty-fi YO dollar£
($25.00)
one hundred dollars
each offense.
Adopted by
Virginia on the
the
15
council
City
of
of
the
October
day of
CA-4421
\ordin\proposed\21-017et.pro
R-2
13
($100.00)
Virginia
Beach,
, 1991.
- 20 -
Item IV-I.3.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 34967
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Fentress,
Counci I APPROVED, upon FIRST READING:
seconded by Counci Iman Clyburn,
City
Ordinance, to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE a $40,000
Federa I Grant to the Department of Menta I Hea I th,
Mental Retardation, and Substance Abuse Operating
Budget re expansion of mental health services.
Voting:
10-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Heischober, Louis R. Jones,
Paul J. Lanteigne, Reba S. McClanan, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker and William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Counci I Members Voting Nay:
None
Counci I Members Absent:
John A. Baum
October 15, 1991
1
2
3
4
5
AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE
A FEDERAL GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,000
TO THE DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH, MENTAL
RETARDATION, AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE OPERATING BUDGET
TO EXPAND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES FOR THE HOMELESS
6
WHEREAS, the Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Substance
7
Abuse coordinates mental health services for the homeless;
8
WHEREAS, a new federal grant program, Projects for Assistance in Transition
9
from Homelessness (PATH), has been awarded to the City of Virginia Beach
10
Community Services Board, which replaces and significantly expands the former
11
Mental Health Services for the Homeless Block Grant Program (MHSH);
12
WHEREAS, the grant will increase the departmental position total by 1 FTE;
13
WHEREAS, no city funding match is required and an in-kind match is
14
available through the existing Community Services Board budget;
15
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
16
BEACH,
VIRGINIA that a grant
in the amount of $40,000 be accepted and
17
appropriated and 1 FTE be established for the duration of the grant in the
18
Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Substance Abuse Operating
19
Budget to expand mental health services for the homeless.
20
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that appropriations be offset by a $40,000 increase
21
in estimated revenue.
22
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, this
23
day of
, 1991.
24
This ordinance shall be effective from the date of its adoption.
p"
"~~~
WACC.K R JR -
OFFJce OF BUDGET AND EVALUATION
- ¡'
b..-'--"'-'~'-- c.',LÇ_"i'i===""~"'-'-"~ .-.-
FIRST READING:
SECOND READING:
October 15, 1991
- 21 -
Item IV-I. 4.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 34968
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Fentress,
Council ADOPTED:
seconded by Councilman Clyburn,
City
Ordinance to TRANSFER $40,000 in Community
Development grant funds to Gracetown Street and
Drainage project re funding of right-of-way
acquisition.
Voting:
10-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Heischober, Louis R. Jones,
Paul J. Lanteigne, Reba S. McClanan, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker and William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
John A. Baum
October 15, 1991
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
ORDINANCE TO TRANSFER $40.000 IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT FUNDS TO THE GRACETOWN STREET AND DRAINAGE PROJECT TO
FUND THE COST OF RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION
1
WHEREAS. Council
has establi shed the Gracetown Street and
2
3
Drainage project in the Capital Improvement Program. and
WHEREAS.
the
the
costs
of
project
exceeds
the
amount
4
5
previously appropriated. and
WHEREAS. the budget of the Department of Housing contains
6
7
contingency funds set aside for cost overruns
in established
projects.
8
9
NOW. THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH
that $40.000 be transferred from the Department of
Housing and Neighborhood Preservation's contingency account to the
Gracetown project in order to fund the cost of acquisition of right
of way.
Adopted by the Counci 1 of the Ci ty of Vi rgi ni a Beach on the
15 October
--------- day of -------------. 1991
Approved as to Content:
Mã~~¡¡Ç4r~
Dept. 0 Housing and
Neighborhood Preservation
,----
- 22-
Item IV-I.5.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 34969
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Fentress,
Council ADOPTED:
seconded by Councilman Clyburn,
City
Ordinance to TRANSFER $14,946 from the Sheriff
Department's FY 1991-1992 Operating Budget to
facilitate the transfer of a Clerk III position to
the Circuit Court re administering the jury system.
Voting:
10-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Heischober, Louis R. Jones,
Paul J. Lanteigne, Reba S. McClanan, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker and William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
John A. Baum
October 15, 1991
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
1
2
3
4
AN ORDINANCE TO TRANSFER $14,946 IN ASSOCIATED COSTS FROM THE
SHERIFF DEPARTMENT'S FY 1991-1992 OPERATING BUDGET TO FACILITATE
THE TRANSFER OF A CLERK III TO THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE PURPOSE
OF ADMINISTERING THE JURY SYSTEM OF THE COURT.
5
WHEREAS, the Judicial Council of Virginia has concluded that the
6
responsibility for the administration of the jury system should be under the
7
supervision of the Court;
8
WHEREAS, currently in Virginia Beach, this administrative function
9
is handled by a City paid position, a Clerk III, under the supervision of the
Virginia Beach Sheriff's Office;
WHEREAS, the Sheriff's Department is in agreement with the transfer
of this individual to the Circuit Court to meet the Judicial Council of
Virginia's determination; and
WHEREAS, the requested transfer will require no additional funds and
no change in status of the position.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA that the City funded position of Clerk III,
the
responsibility for providing jury system administration, and the $14,946 in cost
associated with the Clerk
position be
transferred
from the
III
Sheriff
Department's FY 1991-92 Operating Budget to the Circuit Court's FY 1991-92
Operating Budget, and that this transfer be effective on October 15, 1991.
Adopted on this day
October 15
, 1991.
r'
APPROVED ;
~~
WAl TERC. K JR
OFFICE OF BUDGET AND EVALUATION
"H-.-._- ._-
II
Ii -' ..,
l!~-I
Ii
.==,.,."""""""""""'~~-.,'="~
- 23 -
Item I V-I.6.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 34970
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Fentress,
Counci I APPROVED:
seconded by Counci Iman Clyburn, City
LOW BID with advance notice to proceed:
SERVICE ELECTRIC CORP.
OF VIRGINIA
Municipal Center Ductbank
Voti ng:
10-0
Counci I Members Voting Aye:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Helschober, Louis R. Jones,
Pau I J. Lante i gne, Reba S. McC I anan, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker and Wi Iliam D. Sessoms, Jr.
Councl I Members Voting Nay:
None
Counci I Members Absent:
John A. Baum
$252,000
October 15, 1991
I tem I V-I. 7.
CONSENT AGENDA
- 24 -
ITEM # 34971
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Fentress,
Counci I APPROVED:
seconded by Counci Iman Clyburn,
City
LOW BIDS:
H. HAMNER GAY & CO.,
INC.
SHORELINE CONTRACTORS,
INC.
Voting:
10-0
Counci I Members Voting Aye:
Bay Colony Sewer Improvements
Contract I
Bay Colony (E. Bay Shore Drive)
Sewer Pump Station
Contract V
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Heischober, Louis R. Jones,
Pau I J. Lante i gne, Reba S. McC I anan, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker and Wi Iliam D. Sessoms, Jr.
Counci I Members Voting Nay:
None
Counci I Members Absent:
John A. Baum
$765,185
$101,000
October 15, 1991
- 25 -
I tem I V-I. 8.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 34972
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Fentress,
Counci I ADOPTED:
seconded by Counci Iman Clyburn,
City
Ordinance authorizing tax refunds in the amount of
$7,884.10 upon appl ication of certain persons and
upon certification of the City Treasurer for
payment.
Voting:
10-0
Counci I Members Voting Aye:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Heischober, Louis R. Jones,
Paul J. Lanteigne, Reba S. McClanan, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker and Wi II iam D. Sessoms, Jr.
Counci I Members Voting Nay:
None
Counci I Members Absent:
John A. Baum
October 15, 1991
ORM NO. C.A. 7
~/10/91
H~C
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING TAX REFUNDS
UPON APPLICATION OF CERTAIN PERSONS
AND UPON CERTIFICATION OF THE TREASURER
FOR PAYMENT
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That the following applications for tax refunds upon certification of the Treasurer are hereby approved:
NAME Tax Type Ticket Exonera- Date , Penalty I nt. Total
Year of Tax Number tion No. Paid
Donald L Moore 91 RE(1/2) 78118-5 12/5/90 378.96
Donald L Moore 91 RE(2/2) 78118-5 6/5/91 378.9ó
Robert M Stein etal ~1 RE(I/2) 1096n8-5 12/5/90 484.70
Robert M Stein etal 91 ~E(2/2) 109608-5 6/5/91 969.38
Louise K Chaffin 91 RE(1/2) 19579-1 11/7 /90 92.88
Mary Leclair 91 RE(2/2) 65858-6 8/21/91 38.20
Banc One Mortgage Corp 91 RE(2/2) 56242-0 6/5/91 91. 72
Gilbert K & Dolores McGarvey 89 RE(1/2) 71314-6 11/29/88 16.80
Gilbert K & Dolores McGarvey 8~ RE(2/2) 71314-6 5/9/89 16.80
Gilbert K & Dolores Mc~arvey 90 RE(I/2) 72479- 2 11/7/89 17.94
Gilbert K & Dolores McGarvey 90 R.E (2/2) 72479-2 5/8/90 17.()4
Gilbert K & Dolores McGarvey 91 RE(I/2) 73703-7 11/20/90 18.94
Gilbert K & Dolores r1cf'.,arvey 91 RE(2/2) 73703-7 5/24/91 18.94
Independence West Assoc 90 RE(2/2) 54223-9 6/1/90 957.56
Harvey Lindsay & Co 91 RE(1/2) 55085-2 11/26/90 581. 59
Harvey Lindsay & Co 91 RE(2/2) 55085-2 5/29/91 581. 59
Life Savings Bank 88 RE(1/2) 68362-4 12/5/87 249.49
Life Savings Bank 88 RE(2/2) 68362-4 6/5/88 249.49
Life Savings Bank 89 RE(I/2) 7'1723-3 12/5/88 269.50
Life Savings Bank 89 RE(2/2) 70723-3 6/5/89 269.50
Life Savings Bank 90 RE(1/2) 71914-7 12/5/89 302.46
Life Savin9s ~ank 90 RE(2/2) 71914-7 6/5/90 302.46
Life Savings B~nk 91 RE(1/2) 73122-0 12/5/90 319.49
Life Savings Rank 91 RE(2/?') 73122-n 6/5/91 319.49
Edgar L Beach 90 RE(2/2) 128012-6 5/30/90 182.08
Frank Guzman Jr 87 pp 71159-5 8/23/91 259.31
Tota 1
7,386.17
This ordinance shall be effective from date of adoption.
The above abatement(s) totaling
$7,386. 17 were approved by
the Counci I of the City of Virginia
Beach on the~~day of October,. 1991
Approved as to form:
Ruth Hodges Smith
City Clerk
FORM NO. C.A. 7
9/23/91
EMC
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING TAX REFUNDS
UPON APPLICATION OF CERTAIN PERSONS
AND UPON CERTIFICATION OF THE TREASURER
FOR PAYMENT
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That the following applications for tax refunds upon certification of the Treasurer are hereby approved:
NAME Tax Type Ticket Exonera- Date Penalty I nt. Total
Year of Tax Number tion No. Paid
Kevin Brunick 91 RE(2/2) 66368-7 6/5/91 10.83
J I Kislak 91 RE(1/2) 66368-7 11/26/90 10.83
Carteret Savings Bank 91 RE(1/2) 112988-9 12/5/90 295.83
Atlantic Residential Mortgage 91 RE(1/2) 49881-1 12/4/90 46.35
Atlantic Residential Mortgage 91 RE(2/2) 49881-1 6/4/91 46.35
Atlantic Residential Mortgage 90 RE(1/2) 49047-3 12/5/89 43.87
Atlantic Residential Mortgage 90 PE(2/2) 49047-3 6/5/90 43.87
Total
497.93
This ordinance shall be effective from date of adoption.
The above abatement(s) totaling
$497.93 were approved by
the Council of the City of Virginia
Beach on the~- day of October, .1991
Approved as to form:
Ruth Hodges Smith
City Clerk
- 26 -
Item IV-J.1.
APPOINTMENTS
ITEM # 34973
Upon NOMINATION by Vice Mayor Fentress, City Counci I APPOINTED:
HAMPTON ROADS PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION
C. Oral Lambert, Jr.,
Interim City Manager
(Unexpired term of Aubrey V. Watts, Jr. thru 6/30/93)
Voting:
10-0
Counci I Members Voting Aye:
James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W. Clyburn, Vice Mayor
Robert E. Fentress, Harold Heischober, Louis R. Jones,
Pau I J. Lante i gne, Reba S. McC I anan, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker and Wi Iliam D. Sessoms, Jr.
Counci I Members Voting Nay:
None
Counci I Members Absent:
John A. Baum
October 15, 1991
- 27 -
Item IV-M.l.
ADJOURNMENT
ITEM # 34974
BY CONSENSUS, City Counci I ADJOURNED the Meeting at 3:45 P.M.
ð 7/h£)
Beverl O. Hooks, CMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk
~~~~
th Hodge Smith, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
City of Virginia Beach
Virginia
October 15, 1991