Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutACSA200100001 Application 2001-07-09 APPLICATION TO AMEND THE .,ov A County of Albemarle 'A iI 1111 Department of Planning and Community Development SERVICE AUTHORITY • 8 ®?. 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville,VA 22902-4596 JURISDICTIONAL AREAS - ,.P 804 296-5823 APPLICANT Name: S OC C ef 0 f ani2citvn of C hcicio. e5,die- AIbe pie Signature: Phone: S 0 - g 7 5 - 025 Address: -370 &tt'ey,br:er Or. Sfe. g C hat (o+-1 e5 ;tte ) \/A 27 0101 CO-APPLICANT Name (or agent, if any): Signature: Phone: Address: JURISDICTIONAL AREA DESIGNATION REQUESTED: ❑ Water and Sewer 224/4er Only ❑ Water OnlyExisting to Structure(s) Limited Service (Describe in Justification below) - RJ 1 PROPERTY LOCATION (Address) 16 8 5 fu Io G f0`�n(II5 Cl 2 Z 6111 Tax Map(s)/Parcel Number(s): CURRENT SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION (If any): ❑ Water and Sewer ❑ Water Only ❑ Water Only to Existing Structures 0 Limited Service 4 , P,./ I r 'JUSTIFICATION FOR REQUEST: e 3:ye. I f I r,tf.,Je d -f t r c Use T11 e 5e?L:< /-di--ear 13 on -17 e .Pr.(, R -�'e, v '1,e f too Plc,,,,• Two''l d (e4 -v;rc �� p 19 4l,P sew®1 f 9901. We ore ie veil., 2 , -ew✓er any n e et 9.,', Sewer . i, i J a jvf 200 -t' -Fro y, 1-AP K.•/dt, d,(1 Wq v a e d Pow f{ .?v:1t t4 no?1"h(0/ 61 c ) osal. For Staff Use Only DATE SUBMITTED: 1-q - 6 f DATE$130 FEE PAID: Gc. -1 ®a4Q95 PROPERTY IS LOCATED (Check Appropriate): ❑ Inside or 0 Outside a Growth Area? 0 Adjacent to SAJA? ❑ Inside or ❑Outside a Water-Supply Watershed? 0 Adjacent to a Growth Area? [ Location and distance of water/sewer line proposed to provide service REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT ADOPTED: El Yes 0 No Date of Action Louisa Office: E-mail: tjswcd@avenue.org 39 Industrial Dr.,Ste 2 Web Page: avenue.org/tjswcd Louisa,VA 23093 Tel: 540-967-5940 THOMAS JEFFERSON ALBEMARLE SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT LOUISA 2134 Berkmar Drive,Charlottesville,VA 22901 NELSON FLUVANNA Tel: 804-975-0224, Fax: 804-975-1367 June 28, 2001 Mr. Wayne Cilimberg Director of Planning and Community Development, Albemarle County 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville VA 22901 Dear Mr. Cilimberg: The Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District partnered with Albemarle County in establishing and holding a Riparian Easement at the South Fork Soccer Park on Polo Grounds Road (Rt. 643). A plat of this property shows that a sanitary sewer line is located directly under the proposed Soccer Park, however the property is outside of the jurisdictional area for sewer connections. While we are aware of, and in support of, the policies that restrict connections to the sewer system to areas designated for growth, we believe that this project is deserving of an exception. A similar exception has already been granted to a church, located on the parcel from which the soccer park property was divided. When the Soccer Organization of Charlottesville Albemarle (SOCA) initially submitted an application for a Jurisdictional Area Extension in 1998, the property was under the control of Dr. William Hurt. SOCA, a non-profit community service organization, is now the sole owner of the property, with intentions to maintain the property as a recreational facility for the long term. SOCA has no interest in any profit-making uses of the property. As planned now, the Soccer Park will have a small septic system just above the flood plain area. The septic system will not support heavy usage from the general public, and will therefore need to be supplemented with portable toilets. Due to the site restrictions, the Albemarle County Health Department recommended that a connection to the sewer line be granted (as noted in a March 1, 2001 e-mail from Bill Craun to Margaret Doherty, County Planner). Neither the septic system nor the portable toilets, serve the interests of water quality protection or public health protection. of I T WCn that SOCA's _t Jurisdictional l Area Extension e �i is the recommendation the i JJYVI.iU :wvA'S retiUt�r,for a �ilrisull,tiUiiar Area .. granted. The County may wish to qualify the approval with a requirement that SOCA be responsible for disconnections from the sewer line if the use of the property changes. Thank you for your consideration of this request, and we look forward to hearing from you. (/ Of' //, Si �^ elyl RECEIVED Nick H. Evans Chairman JUL 1 1 7n0 j PLANNING AND Cc. Albemarle County Board of Supervisors COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT David Hirschman, Albemarle County Water Resources Manager David Benish, Albemarle County Planning Department "To exercise leadership in promoting soil and water conservation by providing technical expertise and education to policy-makers and the public" rery bApaper® . . 4 P•zti 4MAS \oef O N yy �,(, e NS,ERVATION DISTRICT ` SOIL and WATER CO ;tit 2134 gerkmar Drive Charlottesville VA 22901 ft!,• Mr. Wayne Cilimberg �N Director of Planning & I,e ii Community Development lyittlgt9 '` David Benish From: David Hirschman Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 10:01 AM To: Wayne Cilimberg; David Benish Subject: South Fork Soccer Center Sewage Wayne and David -- here is my commentary on sewage disposal at the South Fork Soccer Park. I can put this in memo form or any other format you may think is most appropriate. Thanks for looking at this issue with me. South Fork Soccer Park.Sewer d dhirsch@albemarle.org David J. Hirschman, Water Resources Manager Albemarle County Department of Engineering&Public Works 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville,VA 22902-4596 (804)296-5861 FAX(804)972-4035 1 South Fork Soccer Park—Sewer Options David Hirschman, Water Resources Manager Wayne &David: I have met briefly with Wayne on this subject and also discussed it with Alyson Sappington from the Thomas Jefferson Soil & Water Conservation District and Bill Craun with the Thomas Jefferson Health District. I understand the long-standing policy for not allowing hook up to public sewer outside of the jurisdictional area, except in cases supported by the Comprehensive Plan. In general, the policy is a firm statement linking public utilities with land use, and is philosophically sound. However, in certain cases, the policy prevents the best technical solution, and the best option from a water quality perspective, even in cases where future land use is of little concern. The South Fork Soccer Center is the latest and perhaps most dramatic example I have observed. I understand that the property in question is not within a Development Area. However, it is sandwiched between two such areas, divided only by the Rivanna River and its flood plain. If the intention is to provide a green swath along the River and between the Development Areas, then the soccer park seems consistent with that intention. The ownership of the property is by a non-profit organization, and even if the ownership were to change in the future, restrictions on flood plain development would restrict other more intensive uses. Given that the Board of Supervisors has approved the use for that particular site, I believe it would be prudent from both a land use and environmental perspective to allow for the best technical, environmentally-sound means of sewage disposal. In this case, hooking up to the sewer line is the clear,best alternative. The reasons for this are as follows: • Septic fields are an alternative to sewer hook-up. However, the site is quite limited for septic drainfield disposal due to the extensive flood plain, and limited area outside of the flood plain suitable for such a system. Bill Craun from VDH has expressed his preference for the site connecting to the sewer because of technical limitations with finding an adequate drainfield and reserve drainfield. According the Bill, the solution they have found meets only the minimum requirements, and may not be able to meet peak needs during events. The soil in flood plains tends to be more alluvial and porous than other soils in the area. They are not suitable for accepting septic waste because of the increased chance for waste to leach through them and because of periodic inundation. Even drainfields just above the flood plain level(as in this case)present more risk for septic leaching than drainfields further removed from flood plains and streams. Also, the drainfield area must be graded to install the system, instead of leaving the hillside undisturbed. Furthermore, this septic system will require a private pump station for the waste to get to the drainfield. These types of pump stations can best be described as "accidents waiting to happen." We have personally observed these types of pumps backing up directly into streams in our community. The issue is that they require constant maintenance, and the consequences of failure are very bad for downstream waters. There is no way to guarantee that periodic maintenance is taking place, so monitoring and oversight is difficult or non-existent. The best motto for private pump stations is to prevent them if at all possible, especially when other alternatives are readily and economically available. Finally, septic systems always provide some level of risk for sites that must also use wells for potable water. This site will require several wells. While Health Department standards impose certain minimum setback requirements between drainfields and wells, this is far from absolute protection, especially when drainfield conditions are not optimum. From a risk reduction perspective, eliminating the need for a drainfield is the best option. • Other types of non-conventional systems, such as composting toilets,may be an option. However,we have never clarified County policy on the use of such systems, and they probably would be incapable of handling the event-type loads that will be generated at the soccer park. In some cases, they have proven an excellent solution at remote sites with intermittent and small sewage flows. I don't know all the technical particulars of these systems,but my suspicion is that they would be very expensive to handle flows at the soccer park, and may not do an adequate job. In my mind, the use of such a system would be hard to justify when there is a sewer line running through the site, and we know that the waste will be adequately treated at the Moores Creek Treatment Plant. • Presently, SOCA is proposing to use port-a-johns to fill the gap between what the septic field can provide and expected demand. The environmental aspects of a row of port-a-johns may not be an issue, unless one considers their inherent drawbacks for odor, aesthetics, and sanitary conditions, especially when in use by a herd of sweating youths. The main issue with port-a-johns is that if the County approves of the use of the site as a soccer facility,by all means allow them a sewage disposal option that does not require the need for a row of permanent port-a-johns. From a regulatory standpoint, I also wonder whether permanent port-a-johns is tantamount to permanent pump and haul. • In this case,hooking up the sewer line is environmentally sound. The sewer line is already there and is not going away. It seems most prudent to hook onto an existing system rather than to create a redundant sewage disposal system on the site, especially one of dubious effectiveness. Hooking up to the sewer line will necessitate less site grading and will afford more enduring protection for the site's drinking water wells. Also, there is no doubt that the line can handle even the largest event-type flows that the site will generate. In general, if future land use is not a serious concern, I feel that we should seek the best technical, environmentally sound option for sewage disposal. I know that we cannot always know what all future land uses may be, or what potential there is for undesirable or more intensive uses that otherwise wouldn't be feasible without sewer hook-up. However, I am advocating for some balance—that on sites where our best judgement tells us that future land use is not an overriding issue, that we allow for sewer hook ups when it can be demonstrated to be the best technical and environmental alternative. I would be glad to discuss this issue further with you and your staff and help find an agreeable solution.