HomeMy WebLinkAbout20090303actionsACTIONS
Joint Meeting of the Four Boards, March 3, 2009
March 5, 2009
AGENDA ITEM/ACTION
ASSIGNMENT
1. Call to Order.
• Meeting was called to order at 2:00 p.m. by the
Chairman, Mr. Slutzky. All BOS members
were present except Mr. Slutzky. Also present
were Bob Tucker, and Larry Davis.
2. Presentation of South Fork Rivanna Reservoir
Stewardship Task Force final report – Ms. Sally
Thomas.
• RECEIVED.
4. Action by vote of each Board on Task Force
Recommendations.
• MOVED, by a vote of 6:0, that the Albemarle
County Board of Supervisors approve the first
five recommendations on the “Bullet Summary
of Task Force Recommendations” with the first
bullet item being amended to add that the
Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority will seek
additional legal advice with respect to the
potential legal implications of modifications to
the existing permitted water supply plan.
(Attachment 1)
7. Adjourn to March 4, 2009, 9:00 p.m.
• The meeting was adjourned at 4:29 p.m.
/mrh
Attachment 1 – Bullet Summary of Task Force Recommendations
ATTACHMENT 1
BULLET SUMMARY OF TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS
Qualification of Task Force Recommendations: “. . .consistent with the Task Force mandate which places
the fundamentals of the Water Supply Plan beyond the Task Force purview. .”
Task Force Recommendations:
o Investigate if inflowing sediment will likely create new wetlands and if so, seek legal counsel and
engineering advice toward understanding if these wetlands can be removed by permit under
federal and state law at some future date when water storage beyond the storage currently
permitted at Ragged Mountain is needed.
o Investigate technical feasibility (including effectiveness and probable cost) through a consultant,
and the permitability through discussions with federal and state agencies, of constructing a
sediment forebay for the reservoir.
o Maintain a dialogue with the University of Virginia and “recreational users” of the South Fork
Reservoir on conditions that inhibit future rowing and “recreational pursuits”, and discuss
maintenance programs that may correct such conditions to the extent the financial investment
required for maintenance is considered “important”.
o Continue “Community” efforts to reduce sediment and pollutants entering the Reservoir, to
include “strengthening and enforcing” water protection ordinances and programs “such as those
of the Thomas Jefferson Soil & Water Conservation District.”
o Continue to monitor growth of hydrilla and study effective management options.
o Investigate “selective dredging” when “decision makers” conclude that benefits may be “worth the
cost” by:
o Developing a map identifying priority areas and cleared depths for recreational uses;
o Identify areas for selective dredging to prevent wetland creation from sedimentation;
o Identify physical obstacles (e.g., tree stumps) to selective dredging of reservoir;
o Undertake bathymetric surveys “in the critical areas for [selective] dredging”;
o Take and analyze sediment core samples “in the critical areas for [selective] dredging”;
o Identify access, staging, and dewatering areas for selective dredging;
o Explore “opportunistic dredging” based on attractiveness of “market conditions”;
o Estimate impact and duration of selective dredging on residents and aquatic habitat, and
assess prevention, preparedness and response measures for water quality and treatment
impacts.
o Determine in relation to other infrastructure financial priorities if the public interest is served by
issuing a Request for Proposals for “removal of sediment”.