Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-09-01 adjAugust 18, 1982 September 1, 1982 (Adjourned from August 11, 1982) ,:144 A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, scheduled for August 18, 1982, was cancelled by vote of the Board taken on August 11, 1982. September 1, 1982 (Adjourned from August 11, 1982) An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on September 1, 1982, at 2:00 P.M. in Meeting Room 5, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia; said meeting being adjourned from August 11, 1982. Present: Mr. James R. Butler (arrived at 2:05 P.M.), Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke, Mr. Gerald E. Fisher, Mr. C. Timothy Lindstrom and Miss Ellen V. Nash (Arrived at 2:18 P.M.). Absent: Mr. ~J. T. Henley, Jr. Officers Present: Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive, and Mr. George R. St. John, County Attorney. ~ Also present were members of the Albemarle County Service Authority Board of Directors, L. A. Lacy, Elizabeth Tewksbury and Robert Humphris, along with James Bowling, Attorney, and John Brent, Executive Director. The meeting was called to order at 2:08 P.M. This meeting was called in order to discuss the fire hydrant program with members of the Service Authority Board. Mr. Agnor began by presenting a brief history. In 1977, the County's Engineering Department was assigned the task of determining how many fire hydrants in the County were not operational and how many densely populated areas in the County had no fire hydrants. This came .about as the result of two major fires in Scottsville. A report was made to the Board and the recommendations contained in that report were incorporated into the County's first Capital Improvements Program. Included in the Capital Improvements Program were funds for a four-year program to install ninety or more hydrants in subdivisions where existing waterlines were sufficient in terms of general sizes and where no hydrants were located at that time. At about that same time, County ordinances were amended to require that fire hydrants be installed as waterlines were put.into the ground. Priorities for hydrants were set based on there being no waterline extensions required and where the hydrants would protect the largest amount of population. This is the fourth year of the program, and the hydrants which have not been placed would require fairly substantial extensions of waterlines. When this hydrant program was first approved it was decided that the County would pay for the hydrants (parts and materials) from the County's General Fund and the Albemarle County Service Authority would actually install the hydrants with its labor and equipment. The question of who would pay for any necessary waterline extensions has never been resolved. The Albemarle County Service Authorit~ has now initiated a study of its system preparatory to drafting a master plan, and is in the process of developing its own capital improvement program. Mr. Fisher asked if there would be potential customers to hook to the lines if same were extended. Mr. Agnor said the extensions would mainly be for fire flow. Mr. Fisher asked the cost of extending the lines being discussed. Mr. Lacy said for the sixteen hydrants which still need to be installed, the cost would be over $140,000. (Note: Miss Nash arrived at 2:18 P.M.) Mr. Brent said the Service Authority has been investigating areas that are not pPesently served and thus far the cost is above $1 million. Mr. Fisher asked if there is any advantage to the property owner to have fire suppression capabilities. Mr. Brent said it may create a reduction in insurance rates. Mr. Lindstrom asked if it is possible to pass the cost of fire suppression to the people who benefit from the fire flow. Mr. St. John said that State statute allows the Service Authority to charge a differential rate as long as the rate covers different types of service, but for the same class of service, the rates must be uniform. Mr. Fisher asked about the possibility of making assessments on real property. Mr. St. John said the Board of Supervisors would have to set up fire districts, and then apply a separate tax rate for fire suppression. Mr. Agnor said his knowledge of fire districts and tax rates for those districts is principally for the fire suppression equipment and fire departments which mans same - the utility systems have a fire related rate which they charge to the user. Mr. Lindstrom asked if an assessment were placed on the water bill specifically for fire suppressi¢ and charged only to those who receive that service, could such an assessment be used to pay for these new water lines. Mr. Brent said that would change the whole rate structure of the Service Authority. Mr. Fisher felt to charge such an assessment would in actuality be charging consumers twice (i.e. property owners who currently have service have already paid for that installation and would now be assessed additionally to finance costs of future fire suppression waterline extensions). Mr. Lacy said the funding of the $140,000 does not bother the Service Authority too much if done in the uniform rate structure. Mr. Lacy said he saw nothing wrong with having present customers finance the whole system, which not only includes laying new lines but also replacing old lines. Mr. Lindstrom said property owners could be asked to purchase the line and install the hydrant at their own cost or not receive the service. Mr. Fisher felt this would lead to areas of the County not ever receiving fire suppression service. Mr. Lindstrom said citizens all over the County are charged uniform rates for services they do not receive such as education. Mr. Lindstrom then referred to the County's Smoke Detector Ordinance, which requires owners of rental property to install smoke detectors; and asked if a similar ordinance could be enacted requiring fire suppression systems. Mr. St. John felt special enabling legislation would have to be adopted by the General Assembly before any such ordinance could be enacted. Mr. Fisher said he felt the Phase IV extensions should be looked at as to the overall cost on the consumer rate. If it is only a miniscule amount, then he feels that the Service Authority should add that amount to the rate. Mr. Brent said the Service Authority is presently examining the rate structure, and that is one of things that is being investigated. 345 September 1, 1982 (Adjourned from August 11, 1982) Mr. Lacy said that some time ago the Board appropriated $39,000 to make improvements in Crozet so as to increase the fire flow to Western Albemarle High School. For some reason, the Service Authority was never notified about the appropriation. In the meantime, the require- ments for fire flow have increased so much that improvements would cost in excess of $200,000 since a twelve-inch waterline would have to be run all the way from Crozet to the High School. Mr. Fisher asked when the Service Authority's Master Plan will be completed. Mr. Brent said the Service Authority had stopped the consultant from working waiting for the Board of Supervisors to act on amendments to the COunty's Comprehensive Plan. Possibly work can be completed by March, 1983. Mr. Fisher said he thought the Service Authority should continue· planning and this matter be discussed again next spring. Mr. Fisher reported that Messrs. Thomas Michie, James Murray, Mitchell Van Yahres, George Williams, himself, and a group of citizens from Crozet had attended a meeting of the State Water Control Board in Richmond yesterday. Although the Crozet Interceptor is number two on the priority list for 1983, the staff of the Water Control Board said that the project had problems because drawings would not be finished and approved by October 1. This is the first time that anyone from the Rivanna Authority knew this would be a requirement. Mr. Agnor said the Rivanna Board got a call from Richmond last Friday during which it was stated that the staff of the Water Control Board was going to recommend for funding, only projects that were one hundred percent ready to go and the Crozet Interceptor is only eighty percent ready. Mr. Williams did not know that the project had to be one hundred percent ready since the actual money will not be available until October, 1983. Mr. Agnor said that the City Manager has heard from a person who attended the hearing yesterday that the State Water Control Board may settle the question by funding one-half of an approved project in Fiscal Year 83 and the other one-half in Fiscal Year 84. Mr. Fisher said there is no way of knowing what Congress will do in the following year. Mr. Fisher then thanked the members of the Service Authority Board for attending this meeting. With no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 3:15 P.M.