Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-09-27 Adjourned Vanass¢ Hang~n Brustlin, Inc. Revised Draft ~lay 16, 2001 Appendices Appendix A: Supply Analysis Executive Summary Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. (VI-IB) has been authorized by the Rivarma Water & Sewer Authority (RWSA} to prepare a raw water supply study to evaluate the future water needs of the RWSA's Urban Service Area which includes the City of Charlottesville and surrounding areas. O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc. serves as a subcontractor to VHB on various aspects of the raw water supply study. Among the initial efforts as part of this study are tasks to: (1) estimate the current and future safe yield of the existing raw water supply system and, (2) project future water demand through the year 2050. A comparison of safe yield and demand projections will enable the RWSA to better understand whether and when it may face a water deficit, and the magnitude of any such deficit. Subsequent studies will include an analysis of alternatives to address any water deficit. Alternatives to be evaluated will include, but will not necessarily be limited to, new sources of supply, water conservation programs, demand control measures, and options to restore or increase the safe yield of existing sources. This report summarizes the results, of a raw water safe yield review of the existing RWSA Urban Service Area system as it has historically operated. This system includes the (1) Rivanna Reservoir, (2) Sugar Hollow/Ragged Mountain Reservoir system, and (3) North Fork Rivanna River Intake. For purposes of this analys, is, "safe yield" is defined as the maximum raw water yield that can be supplied consistently over the long term. It is estimated by examining hydrologic data for as long a time period as possible and then calculating the probable maximum yield of the raw water, supply resource during the most severe drought, also referred to as the "critical period". Previous safe yield estimates conducted for the same water supplies used differing techniques and drought periods to estimate safe yield. For example, the recent Urban Area Raw Water Management Plan (Black & Veatch, 1995) used synthesized flow records simulating the period 1942 - 1991, and particularly the drought of 1954 to estimate the yield of the Rivarma Reservoir. The Report on Water Works System Charlottesville, Virginia (Polglaze & Basenberg, 195~ used the 1930 drought to predict the safe yield for the Rivanna Reservoir. The Safe Yield of Municipal Surface Water Supply Systems in Virginia Planning Bulletin #335 (Virginia State Water Control Board, March 1985) used the Appendices 36 ~Vawil[~proj~OSO2%WP~RIrPORTSLR~commend~iJ Alternative~ 4.doc ~ Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. Revised Draft zFlay 16, 2001 1953-54 critical period to estimate safe yield of the Sugar Hollow/Ragged Mountain system. Methods employed for this analysis included a review of United States Geological Survey (USGS) stream gage data for numerous gauging stations in the region. This data was used to select representative hydrologic data and to identify the critical periods for all three water supply sources noted above. System-wide safe yield evaluations were performed for the RWSA Urban Service Area system based on the 1930 drought, which was form. d to be the critical period for each of the water supply systems (the Rivanna Reservoix, Sugar HOllow/Ragged Mountain Reservoir system, and the North Fork Rivanna River). The system-wide safe yield was estimated by adding the safe yield estimates for each component of the system. As no data exist ~o directly evaluate the effect of the' 1930 drought on the Sugar Hollow/Ragged Mountain reservoir system, estimates of safe yield based on two surrogate watersheds were used. The estimated safe yield of the water supply system is currently 11.9 to 12.6 rngd. This range in safe yield results from uncertainty regarding the 1930 safe yield of the Sugar Hollow/Ragged Mountain system. As siltation reduces storage volume in the reservoirs, this safe yield will decrease over time. Safe yield for the system in Year 2050 is estimated to be 4.5 mgd to 4.8 mgd. Current and future safe yield 'estimates for the ex~Lsting raw water supply system and for each component of the system are summarized below. RWSA Current And Future System-Wide Safe Yield Estimates Source Current Safe Year 2050 Safe Yield Yield Rivanna Reservoir Sugar Hollow/Ragged Mtn. North Rivanna River Intake Total System 7.2 mgd 0 mgd 4.1 to 4.8 mgd ¢~) 3.9 to 4.2 mgd (~) 0.6 mgd 0.6 mgd 11.9 to 12.5 mgd 4.5 to 4.8 mgd (1) Range corresponds to uncertainty regarding the 1930 drought event. Appendices ~\VawiIl~roJeCt-~OS02~WP~REPORTS'O~:ommend~d Altcmaaves 4. Joe 37 ~ Vanass~ Hangen Bmstlin. Inc. Revised Draft May 16, 2001 Appendix B: Demand Analysis Executive Summary Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. (VI-IB) was retained by the R.[varma Water and Sewer Authority to assist with evaluating their need for future additional raw water supply sources in order to satisfy the needs of its customers. As part of this process, VHB is assisting the AuthOrity with evaluating their existing water supplies, projecting future water demand, evaluating alternative approaches to address any shortages identified, and if required, permitting the construction of any new water sources found to be required-. This Water Demand study is the first step in assisting the Authority to better understand its long term demand as it carries out its mission of providing adequate, safe and dependable water supply to its customers. As the permitting process moves forward, this report will become an important component of the documentation that will be required to support the Authority in its efforts to secure adequate raw water supply for its customers. As such, this report will 'be subject to detailed review by individuals, state and federal agencies, and other concerned parties. As this process mo,zes forward, this study may be revised to respond to comments and concerns that are raised. This report presents a comprehensive review of long term water demand in the region, and is based on the best available data. A design year for the study has been established ~ts the year 2050. This study presents four separate approaches to projecting raw water demand. The first approach looks at .historic trends in raw water volumes and projects these trends into the future. The other three approaches break down total demand into a series of distinct components, and project demand for each component into the future. Total demand is the sum of the individual components of demand. One of these techniques is based on population trends and per capita water consumption, the second is based on build out under .the comprehensive plans for each of the jurisdictions, and the third is based on historic trends in each of the components of demand. The details of ali four approaches are presented in the study report. This study concludes, using all four approaches and the best available data, that demand can be expected to continue to rise from its current level to the design year 2050. In addition, it was found that each of the approaches results in total demand estimates that correlate well with the other approaches used. Total demand estimates fall within a range of approximately 20 percent. While these demand estimates result in a range of values, the study does not conclude that any one approach results in a better projection than any other approach. As a result, the study comes to the overall conclusion that total watert demand in the year 2050 will range between 18MGD and 21MGD. Appendices - ~.~.Vawflr,.ptojeetst.3OSO'Z\~PORTS'~'c. orarm:nded Alc~rna~v,ts &doc 38 V~m~ss¢ Hangcn B~s~lin, [nc. RevisedDraft ~$Iay 16, 2001 Appendix C: Analysis of Alternatives Executive Summary II In our efforts to recommend to RWSA a strategy to meet the long-term water supply needs of its customers, the study team performed a thorough analysis o'f alternatives. Th~s process involved first identifying all potential reasonable measures to bring supply' and demand into balance through 2050. We then evaluated each of those alternatives against the criteria of effectiveness, practicability/cost, and environmental impact. The purpose was to identify the least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative capable of meeting proiected demartd. The alternatives evaluated included improvements to existing supply sources as weU as development of wholly new sources. Since sedknentation in the SFRR is the primary factor in diminishing water supplies; efforts to stem siltation were investigated. Also, conservation and drought management policies were reviewed for their potential to manage demand. Other efforts to prolong the useful life of SFRR, such as adding crest controls, were also investigated. Although the SFRR currently provides th6 bulk of the raw water for the region, other existing impoUrxdments at Chris Greene Lake and Beaver Creek were analyzed for their water supply potential. Finally, new sources such as tap. ping groundwater and constructing new water impoundments were investigated based on the same criteria. The result of this analysis was a balanced comparison of possible improvements, summarized in the matrLx on the following pages. This format allows easy review of key proiects benefits and impacts. The results of the evaluation process, supplemented by follow-up investigations based on consultation with r%o-ulatory agencies and input from the public, formed the basis for the recommendations included herein. To summarize that recommendation, we recommend temporary use of the .revised release, imptementation and monitoring of sedh'aent control, drought management, and~- voluntary conservation, along with pursuance of 4' crest controls with an 8 mgd constax~t release. These measures represent a package of viable alternatives that appear best to satisfy applicable considerations. This combination would meet the needs of the Urban Service Area th. rough approximately 2030, allowing adequate t-Lme to mordtor and select fubare, longer-term measures. Furthermore, the combination is cost-effective, tv. curs minimal environmental impacts, benefits flow i~ the Fdvarma below the dam, and prolongs the useful l.de of SFP,.R. Appendices 39 THE 'WITNESS ,REPORT FREE Charlottesville, Virginia Premier Issue Monday 27 August 2001 Water Safety Uncertain RWSA Assistant Director: no data on tOxicitY'' of sediment. have At the city council meeting August:20, a local man who ran for city council last year, Blair Hawkins, called into question the healthfulness of the municipal water supply. Mr. Hawkins read a copy of a letter he has written to Cole Hendrix, acting director of the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority and Rivanna Solid Waste Authority, former city manager. Shortly after the speech, assistant director Eugene K. Potter read a report summary on solutions to possible future water shortages. Here is Mr. Hawkins' sPeech: According to a nurse at HOspice of the Piedmont three years ago, this region has a high incidence of cancer of the pancreas. The pancreas is part of the digestive system. My father died fror~ it. State Senator Emily Couric suffers from it. One thing they have in common is the water. This community has been presented a false 'choice betwee'n a new reservoir and future water shortages. The water safety has been taken for granted. One reason giVen fora new reservOi~Ts the siltation of existing reservoirs. Silt and sediment are not the only things accumulating at the bottom of our drinking water. Heavy metals and heavier-than-water c~mpoun-ds from runoff are also building up.. As the. sediment grows deeper, the body of water becomes more shallow. The volume of water between the sediment and intake valves becomes .less able to bUffer increasing concentrations of chemicals. In addition to the health conce~'n, siltation threatens the integrity of a dam. Only a few years ago after several days of heavy rain, the Sugar Hollow Reservoir was placed on a dam failure alert because sediment had rapidly built up against the back of the dam. Dams are constructed to contain water. They are not strong enough to hold back the same' volUme of silt.' The flash flood of a dam failure can cause property damage and loss_of life. Another reason to bUild a new reservoir is becaUSe someone else will pay half. Without the discoum, the water authority would have only enough money for routine maintenance of existing supply. Routine dredging would also periodically, cleanse the river bottom. A grant for a new reservoir influences us to neglect current infrastructure. Ou~ide money is outside control. When a reservoir has filled up with silt, then what? Do we give the property back to the original owners because the public no longer has a use for their land? Or does the land go to political patrons? A Political Newspaper of Contribution Sugar HOllow Reservoir When the new reservoir has filled up with silt, do we simply build another one? When that reservoir fills up, just build yet another one? This process is unsustainable. It will lead to shortages, of drinking water. Before we build new, the water authori~ should reestablish publiC confidence in capacity and quality of existing water resources. At the beginning of his report, Mr. Potter responded to some of the issues raised. He said he is unaware of any health concern regarding the water supply. This-concern became public in April- of. last year at the Green Vision political forum at the Gordon Avenue library. Along with 30 witnesses including press were council members, Kevin Lynch, Meredith Richards, and Maurice Cox. At the forum, Mr. Hawkins gave to Lynch and others a pamphlet citing this concern as motivation to conduct an ecologic survey. The pamphlet also recommended the updating of civil emergency preparedness plans. Mr. Potter said there is no grant to build a new reservoir. He did not address dam failure or sustainability directly. The director "doubts seriously" there is anything to worry about from. the sediment. (continues page 8) Labor Cleansing THA T WAS THEN THIS IS NOW Series After a recent news conference with the mayor and county chairwoman, a neighbor of the Ivy Landfill asked a reporter, Where are we, in Goebbels' Germany? (Daily Progress, July 18) A year ago I don'tthink the only daily local paper would have pdnted such a silly comparison. Public opinion is shifting as history comes baCk to haunt. (continues next page) THE WITNESS REPORT, P.O. Box 32.00, Charlottesville, VA 22902 Charlottesville, Virginia Page 2 Monday 27 August 2001 The Democrats have held a majority on city council for over a half century. The Dems closed the schools to block integration in the '50s. The Dems conducted urban renewal and constructed two concentrated hoUsing projects after Jim Crow laws were struck down. The Democrats also built a futuristic pedestrian mall in the historic downtown with only two votes in a five member city council. After 25 years, the Observer (Jul. 11) implies that Charles Barber, Mitch Van Yahres and Cole Hendrix are responsible for the mall. But City manager has no vote. Lc~ng-established businesses, already hurting and scared by urban renewal, began a flight to the county, But they hadn't moved far enough. Because state law permits a city to annex adjacent sections of the county as the city grows, the Dems now threatened to annex to "make up for the lost revenue. Rather than come under city control and have to move again, county residents decided to appease the city with an annual payoff. That non-aggression treaty, known as revenue sharing, was negotiated in the early '80s. The largest and most controversial annexation was Barracks Road Shopping Center in 1963 at 2,514 acres. The city has annexed 8 times. First and smallest in 1818 at t8 acres. Most' recent in 1968 at 51 acres. Charlottesville has grown from 38 to 6;683 acres. (Albemarle, Jefferson's County 1727-1976. John Hammond Moore, 1976.) So that is how the county became RePUblican and the city remains Democrat. The Dems instituted programs that effectively purged the city of political opposition. The city's current Republican party is weak and a photocopy of the Democrats. Last year three independents campaigned actively for council. The new chairman of the city Republican party, Robert Hodous, wrote an article in the weekly Observer that spoke at length on county planning. One wonders why he didn't take the opportunity to talk ab. out city issues. For example, a city attorney retired recently. He was legal counsel for-the city from 1968-70 and then beginning again in the '80s. His first term coincided with a reign of terror. You didn't know when an agent would show up with not~ce of eviction and a check for a fraction of the property's value.. Sometimes the city allowed you to remain on the property but charged you rent. Some homeowners were so certain the city's-actions were unlawful that they went to court, where they lost. 'Did Mr. Gouldman retire a second time for the same reason as the first? In the last year or so, there was a play called Vinegar Hill, named after the first victim of urban renewal. A local man,_ whose family lost property to make way for Garrett Square, was one of those independents. Does the .former or current city attorney- advise that a government program to buy and improve property so someone else can own it is Constitutional? Francis Fife, a president of Virginia National Bank when he entered' public life, city councilor through the '70s, has stated that Vinegar Hill was a mistake. Is he THE WITNESS REPORT ready to make the same statement of Garrett Square? When renewal fever began, poor people mainly held mortgages with People's National Bank, one of the few banks that turned a profit during the Great Depression. People's merged with a Norfolk bank in 1963 to form Virginia National. Virginia National became Sovran twenty years later. Virginia National came back to life about 3 years ago. Who profited from urban renewal? Mitch Van Yahres was also on city council throughout the '70s. Today be remains in pUblic office; only with greater influence. None of these people has been held accountable. How is this possible? You won't find much at the Historical Society, Alderman andthe public libraries. Totalitarian governments routinely erase history. We have a bogus UVA Civil War marker, but nothing to mark that the city's first public school opened in 1870 on Garrett Street. Twenty years later it moved into the Midway Manor built in 1828 at the top of Vinegar Hill. Torn down during urban renewal, it became the site of city market and festivals. It's as if two centuries of history disappeared along with the buildings. The city wants to unload Jefferson School, a symbol of-atrocity. Ix and Sons Textile Factory, once the largest employer in town, has closed. The city made no effort to help the failing business or attract similar industry. Jefferson School, built 1926. The city's final solution is the ethnic cleansing of labor. It is in full swing as I write this essay. The living wage hurts workers. JAUNT Separates' and stigmatizes the needy. Teachers believe a black child is dumber than other children. How much have things really changed? The targeted class has expanded. Instead of deporting ,or killing the poor, the city enslaves them with programs that hurt in the name of help. The recent doubling and tripling in parking citations makes it harder for people to rise out of poverty. An affluent person simply pays the fine. Failure to pay child support can lead to loss of driving privileges. If you lose your license, you really are unable to support your family. What about driving while poor? An older model car is likely to be in violation of some statute. On balance, it would be a good idea to move to a friendly town until you work your way out of poverty. Charlottesville, Virginia Page 3 Monday 27 August 2001 The latest ultimate goal of city council's public relations distraction is for the city to'become a tourist attraction. Tourists travel to pretty areas, not to see blight. This focus on appearances comes at the expense of liberty and pursuit of happiness. When every last blue collar worker has moved to a county with fewer zoning restrictions and thus more freedom, when business has relocated closer to its workers and customers, the city will .grind to a halt. Democrats will continue to be elected by rich political patrons and by poor blacks even as they both are cleansed. No tourist will visit for lack of services and beauty. The city will become a blighted Dorian Gray. Its exterior will finally reflect its interior. A fishbowl without a soul. One ray of hope is that the remaining few craftsmen will be able to charge a thousand dollars an hour: The pendulum will swing the other way. SupplY and demand will make laborers wealthy. Then the Democrats will proclaim how much they have always supported'the working man. TWIt Downtown Recreation Center" because that would remind us of the building's historic significance. We don't need a reminder. Any tourist can see that the building next door, the City Hall Annex, is the obvious choice for modification. The tourist is here to see the Armory, not the Annex. City Halt, the Annex and the Armory have public restrooms already. City Hall and the Annex are close¢ to Fridays after Five. These bathrooms are locked dudng the weekly festival, but the ones at the Arm ory are open.. For half a million dollars, you could hire 2 bathroom attendants at $20 an hour for 4 hours a week 26 weeks a year for 120 years. Math check: (2) (205/h r) (4h r/wk) (26wldyr) ( 120yr)=$499,200. For future reference, Carver Rec was not built in 1926. JeffersOn School was. TWit Armory Loses Prestige Media Bias or Revisionist History? National Guard Armory The city has received a half million dollar grant from the National Park Service so the city can shifta million to new air conditioning and bathrooms at the rear of the Downtown Rec Center. J&ke Mooney of the Daily Progress (Aug. 16) also referred to the center as the "68- year-old building." Margie Smith of the Observer called it "the 68-year- old Downtown Recreation Center" (Aug. 22). Houston, we have a problem; There is no 68-year-old DowntoWn Rec Center. No rec hall was built in the darkest~days of the Great Depression. A National Guard Armory was built on the site. Neither newspaper mentioned National Guard or Armory. The reporters don't know about local history. They simply pass government statements on to the reader. The city does no[ call it the "National Guard Armory_ From left, City Hall, Monticello Hotel, Annex,' NGIC, Armory James Madison Ponders How easy is it to shut down a newspaper? -Editor's Note~ ' .......... ~ The Witness Report is the incarnation of a grass- reots mobilization to assert the Bill of Rights as the SUpreme Law. This newspaper is a collection of first- hand accounts, thoughtful essays, and political cartoons critical of government. Here you report the news. TWR is a for-profit enterprise of contribution. Anyone who contributes a report, money to keep the paper alive, oi' a thank you note will be mailed the next issue. If I decide not to print your report, I will tell you why. Hand- written letters receive priority. No funds from government or subsidized business will be accepted. That would be a conflict of interest. TWR might be influenced not t'o print a hard-hitting news story because the advertising revenue stream mightdry up. Every article on government is publicity. Of course, government workers are witnesses and are invited to write .in, Selection of your report is based on merit of content, not status of the writer. Established media have a few gener~il rules in selecting content. The writer should have a title or abbreviation behind his name, represent a group, be in legal trouble, be wealthy enough to hire a lawyer and pay the filing fee for a lawsuit, or have an office. You receive from your report the same benefits as I do. Your work is published. You can list it on your - THE WITNESS REPORT Charlottesville, Virginia Page 4 Monday 27 August 2001 resume. It might lead to a job offer. You retain copyright of your work. In addition, you can say you tried to make the world a better place even as it got worse. No anonymous reports or sources will be printed. Anonymity promotes Iow self-esteem. The Bill of Rights seeks to create a meritocracy. My critics will say this paper is a Vehicle for my personal aggrandizement: They are right. Anyone can start a newspaper. I am the owner, editor and only paid employee: If the paper grows, the first person I hire will be an accountant. A newspaper like this one cannot sustain itself very long. It will be published roughly once a month then weekly as local elections approach in the spring. I'm not sure about its future after that. I expect to run a loss for the life of the paper. This community cries out for a newspaper. I cry out. Got tired of crying. I sense there is a market for creative nonfiction with historical perspective. There's the idea. You are reading the hard work. Why not capitalize? Seize the'opportunity to provide a quality Product. Though ! have no children, I still have a responsibility to act as a role model. ! need to show that anyone can start a business with no money because I don't have any. This paper is the cheapest, boldest venture I can think of right now. Because it is a business and I hope it makes me rich, a $35 business license is required. The fee is the only requirement for the lice nse. Can a press be shut down if it makes no money? Business tax should be paid on profit, not on Startup investment. if someone wants tovolunteer to help with the paper, I'm not sure it's legal. I pay less than minimum wage. I guess you can volunteer to.work for a pdvate company. But I can't give you even five bucks for gas. That would be income. Hurdles at the starting gate. TWRcould be shut down in other ways. I might be sued for not telling the truth; If the accused is presumed to be innocent, the accuser is assumed to be lying and must present evidence. I don't have to prove I printed truth. The suit-filer must prove I pdnted a falsehood. It's hard to prove a negative. Even so, the cost of defending myself would drain any funds available for Xeroxing. Individual reporters themselves might be sued. The freedom of the individual to report news is radical. I could be falsely accused of any number of crimes. If someone mentions drugs or children, Fourth Amendment protections evaporate. Arrested and thrown in jail because I cannot readily prove a negative. Aqcording to Elizabeth Colleen, asst. Commonwealth's Attorney last summer, they can hold you in jail as long as they want as long as a bond hearing is scheduled. T. here.would likely be pile-on. The DA might charge a robber with abduction because the victim was detained for the duration of the robbery along with trespassing, weapons, driving without a license. The real crime ~s THE WITNESS REPORT robbery. I guess the prosecutor hopes something will stick. Makes good copy in the press. So I could sit in jail a week or two. Newspapers report the charges. Then I get out on bail. I probably won't have a job, will have lost wages, can't pay the rent. My reputation is ruined~ If I am released at the bond hearing on personal recognizance, I'm still homeless and jobless. If I have a court-appointed lawyer, I'm in big trouble. The public defendor does not wdrk for the accused. He works for the same person as the prosecutor because they both are paid from the same source. He can't work for you if you don't pay him. If I sell what few assets I' have, like a car, for bail or a lawyer, I have no transportation when the legal matter is over. No way to move away. If the case is dismissed, I will betold "yo~'re free to go." Go where? Like many in this country, I am one false accusation away from financial ruin. Not likely to stick around after that. Certainly won't be participating in politics. It's not that difficult to shut down anyone. High profile cases illustrate the point. The wealthy Oliver Kuttner has met the blight ordinance. We now know it applies to the rich with one difference.- For the rich, a crime must occur before the city moves in.' For the poor, no crime need occur. Blighted property is presumed to promote crime in a poor neighborhood. No court order is needed to take the preperty if not cleaned up. In writing, city manager Gary O'Connell has given Kuttner a week to clean house before the-city moves in. Will the city take back land it sold for $10,000? Its owner has spent $40,000 for environmental cleanup of coal and petroleum tanks the city did not clean u p when they owned it. Kuttner can't improve it quickly because the B.A.R. won't ap prove anything they don't like. It doesn't matter that anything would be an improvement. Orchestrated pincer maneuver?. Or business as usual? The big question of the day is not about murder. It is about property. Will the city retake the coal tower without a court order? Does blight nullify due process? After two centuries, is violation of due process now a lesser crime than murder? Craig Nordenson remains in jail without bail c.l~arged with a double homicide. His lawyer did not ask for bail. So Mr. Nordenson is in jail on the advice of a court- appointed attorney, not the order of a judge. If Craig Nordenson wants to tell us what happened, the next issue is due out first week of October. I hope his lawyer advises.against writing TWR. But he still has the right to. I'm not afraid of what he might say. You are. That's why this is the most dangerous newspaper in town. Copyright © 2001 Blair Hawkins THE WITNESS REPORT P.O. Box 3200 Charlottesville, Va. 22902 Charlottesville, Virginia Page 5 Monday 27 August 2001 Parking Ticket or Tax Notice? 1'. Violation of meter ordinance 2. Overtime parking 3. ? 4. Parking in bus stop/taxi stand 5. Parking with left side to curb 6. Double parking 7. Parking in loading zone 8. ? 9. other 10. No city license 11. Parking in prohibited zone 12. Parking within 15 feet of fire hydrant 13. Blocking Driveway 14.? 15. Parking 20 feet of intersection 16. Parking in permit zone 17. Yellow painted curb 18. No parking anytime 19. No' parking designated hours 20. No parking 3:00 to 5:00 am downtown 21. No parking dual wheeled veh. overnight 22. Handicapped space 23. ? 24. Obstructing traffic 25. Parking on sidewalk Sum Total Before Factor After July 1 (5/10) 3 = 15/30 (15/30) I = 15/30 (15/30) 2/3 = 10/20 (10/20) 1.5 = 15/30 (10/20) 2 = 20/40 (10/20) 1.5 = 15/30 ? (10/20) 3.5 = 35/70 (10/20) I =_ 10/20 (10/20) 2.5 = 25/50 (10/20) 2 = 20/40 ? (10/20) 1.5 = 15/30 .(10/20) 2.5 =-25/50 (10/20) i -- 10/20 (10/20) 2.5 = 25/50 (10/20) 1.5 = 15/30 (10/20) 1 = 10/20 (10/20) I = 10/20 (50/TO0) 2 = 100/200 ? (15/30) 2 = 30/60 (35/70) 2 = 70/140 $ 265/530 490/980 Sam pie parking tickets are on the following, page. The listing above is sorted by ticket number, not ordinance number. Four numbers are missing. I don't know if these were repealed or if they can be written under "other". Of the 20 infractions, one became cheaper. Five remained the same. Twelve increased but less than tripled. "Meter violation" tripled. "No city license" went UP 350 percent. Nineteen of the twenty infractions involve where or when your car is parked. Only Offense number 10 is not related to the location of your car. It is not a parking violation. The purpose of number !0 is to enforce collection of personal property tax. Not paying the tax does not result in a summons. Not paying the ticket does. The city's last-minute attempt to collect the soon-to-be-eliminated car tax is apparent. The city Will not let you pay the ticket until you pay all back personal property taxes you owe anywhere in the state. If you cannot afford to pay, you cannot avoid court. The city will not grant extensions to pay. Four days after the ticket, your onlyoption is to convince the judge you don't owe the tax. Dear Govemor Gilmore, Please do not give-UVA eight million dollars to build a new library next to a perfectly good library. P/ease send the grant to the Charlottesville city treasurer on condition that city council repeal infraction number Ten. -The repeal would go a.long way in restoring goodwill of working-class citizens toward government. If that is not feasible, please declare a state-of- emergency end to the car tax in the name of Due Process. Ours is not the only community suffering from last-minute car tax crunch. Greene county sheriff Willie Morris has-come under fire for telling his deputies to keep peace and safety, not collect tax. The Sheriff is elected as a check against unrestrained greed of local government. Please expedite repeai of the car tax. TWR THE WITNESS REPORT Charlottesville, Virginia Page 6 Monday 27 August 2001 Before July 1 After July I CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA POLICE DEPARTMENT LIC: STATE: DECAL: LOCA~ION: - MAKE: OFFICER: DATE: ' TIME: A.M. r-'-t [] 01: [] 05: [] o4i [] 0~: [] 07: [] 12: TRAFFIC ORDINANCE VIOLATION (Article ¥ Chapter 15 of Charlottesville City Code) $5.00 FINE [$10.O0 If Paid After 96 Hours) 15-176 Violation of Meter Ordinance $10.00 FINE ($20.00 if paid after 96 hours) 15-136 Parking With Left Side to Curb 15-147 Parking in Bus Stop/Taxi Stand 15-137 Double Parking 15-178(d) Parking in Loading Zone 15-.12g Parking Wfthi0 15 Feet of Fire Hydrant. [] 13: 15-129 Blocking Driveway [] 15: 15-129 Parking 20 Feet of intersection [] 16: 15~~one -Emo: r- 11: Parkin~j in Prohibited Zone: [] 17: 'E~ 18: · ~[] 19: -~[] 20: --[] 09: [] 02: [] 24: [] 25:' [] 22: 15-1 35 Yellow Painted Curb t 5-138 No Parking at Any Time, 15-139 No Parking - Designated Hours 15-143 No Parking - 3:00 to 5:30 a.m. Downtown 15-144 No Parking - Dual Wheeled Veh. Overnight __ Other $15.00 PINE-($3G;0O if paid after 96 hours) 15-140 Overtime Parking 15-145 Obstructing Traffic $35.00 FiNE ($70.00 if paid after 96 hours) ' 5-151 Parking on Sidewalk $50.00 FiNE ($100.00 if paid after 96 hours) 5-133 Handicappeo Space LIC: STATE: DECAL: LOCATION: · OFFICER; MAKE: A.M.-~3 DATE: TIME: RM. F'--I [] [] :0 11: 17: 20: 21: TRAFFIC ORDINANCE VIOLATION (ArticJe ~' Chapter 15 of Charlottesville City Code) $10.OO FINE ($20.OO If Paid After 96 Hours) Parking in Prohibited Zone: 15-135 Yellow Painted Curb 15-143 No Parking - 3:00 to 5:30 a.m. Downtown. 15-144 No Parking - Dual Wheeled Veh. O.vern~ght [] 01: [] o5: [] 04: [] 07: [] 15: [] 19: ~[] 02: [] 09: $15.00 FINE ($30.00 If ~aid, After 96 Hours) 15-176 Violation of Meter urainance 15-136 Parking with Left Side to Curb 15-147 Parking in Bus Stoe /Taxi Stand 15-178 (d) Parking in Loading Zone 15-129 Parking 20 Feet of Intersection 15-139 No Parking - Designated Hours 15-140 Overti me Parking. · Other. $20.00 FiNE ($40.00 if paid after 96 hours) [] 06: 15-137Double Parking [] 13: 15-129 Blocking Driveway $25.00 ,FINE,(,$,50.00 ifpaid after 96 hours) [] 12: 15-129 ParKing within 15Feetof Fire Hydrant [] 16: 15-204 Parking in Permit Zone w/o Permil. [] 18: 15-138 No Parking at Any Time $30.00 FINE ($60,00 if paid after'96 hours) [] 24: 15-145 Obstructing Traffic $35.0(YFINE~($70,00,,if paid after 96 hours)¢/¢~ [] 10: 15-134 (a) No L;ity or uounty License $70.00 F. INE ($14..0.0,0 if paid after 96 hours) [] 25: 15-151 ParKing on ~iaewalk $100.00 F!NE ($200;b0 if paid after 96 hours) :~[] 22: 15-133 Handicapped Space - NOTICE OF DUE PROCESS RIGHTS You are entitled to a review of this parking ticket by submitting in writing your reasons for contesting the fine to the City Treasurer's Office on the first floor of City Hall, 7th and East Main Street, P.O. Box 911, Charlottesville, Virginia 22902. The office is open from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except legal holidays. If you have neither paid the applicable fine nor requested review within 96 hours of issuance of this notice of violation (or by the close of the next business day, if tli'e notice was issued on a weekend), the fine will double, as shown. You will also be presumed to have 'wa ved your riqht to administrative review and will be summoned to General District Court. Conviction in court will s~ ~Ests in addition to the doubled fine. The registered owner of a vehicle is legally responsible for payment of parking fines, even if someone else parked the vehicle unlawfully. AnY vehicle illegally parked with more than four uncontested and unpaid parking viblations WILL BE TOWED. DO-NOT MAIL CASH THE WITNESS REPORT Charlottesville, Virginia Page 7 Monday 27 August 2001 City of Charlottesville General District Court 606 East Market Street Charlottesville VA 22902 - Thursday, tuly 19, 2001 SUmmons city of Charlottesville to wit: Yot;..m~ hereby l~eing sunm~oned to appear before the General District COurt of the City of Charlottesville at Ticket Information 9:00 AM on Thursday, August 2, 2001, to answer a .charge of the parking ordinance violation stated below. Ticket No Date Issued Violation I~f payment of'the fine Or fines is received on or before ~ 5/8/01 10: No City License 4:00 PM on August-l, 2001 you will not need to appear in court. If you wish {o make payment, you may do so by detaching and mailing the form below. Be advised that if this fine is not paid, failure to appear in court will result in a served summons by the Sheriff': Department, and additional court costs of $30.00 will be applied. License No Fine $20.00 Total Due: $20.00 For your records: Check #~ - - '~. ~ · - ........ ~ '--- - Amount Paid-: 'Date Paid: Detach and Return NOTICE OF FAILURE TO PAY' FINE FOR'ILLEGAL PARKING CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY TREASURER'S OFFICE P.O. BOX 9048 C}IARLOTTESVlLLE, VIRGINIA 22902 PHONE 804-970-3146 VIN: LICENSE OUR RECORDS INDICATE THAT THE PARKING VIOLATION CITATION DESCRIBED HEREIN WAS ISSUED TO A VEHICLE REGISTERED TO YOU AS OWNER~ AND PAYMENT HAS NOT BEEN RECEi'VED. -YOU MUST PAY FINES SHOWN WIT!tIN FIVE (5) DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE. FAILURE TO DO SO WILL RESULT IN A SUMMONS BEING ISSUED AND SERVED UPON YOU WITH ADDITIONAL COURT COSTS. MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE' TO: CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE 7/i i/0i i 0 No City License .$70.00 RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH PAYMENT THE WITNESS REPORT Charlottesville, Virginia Page 8 Monday.27 August 2001 Water Safety Uncertain (continues frOm front page) The delivery of his report was monotone, technical, and hard to hear. Mr. Potter referred to graphics only he and council could see. No copies of the report or report summary were available to the public. After the report, the director responded to questions from city council. He did not take q~uestions from the audience. Kevin Lynch and Meredith Richards asked the most- informed questions. They've had a year to think about it. Mayor Caravati pointed out that most-recent water demand projections over-projected by half. Mr. Potter responded that the models have improved. Maurice Cox and David Toscano did not ask a queStion, perhaps because the topic had been adequately discussed. Director Potter further stated that RWSA periodically conducts core drilling of the sediment on the floor of reservoirs. The sampling began in the '70s and takes place about every 6 years. The last drilling was 1994 to determine geologic composition and infer origin of erosion. No core sample has been sent to a medical lab for analysis. Director Potter also said the cost of a new reservoir is about the same as long-term routine dredging. The 62-page report is at www. rivanna.or.q. Public forum on water issues September 27 at Monticello High Sc hool. TWR Drought or Dry Spell? CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 1874 18a~r 1924 I g49 1974 Ys~r 3?year_swithrnissi~gda. ta L~catio~: 38,63N 78.52W When.asked why no water restrictions had been ordered during the drought of 1'999, former RWSA director Petrini in April of last year at the Sierra Club forum explainS. Water levels had not fallen below 60%. If them is no water shodage, there is no drought no maEer how severe the dry spelL~- Annual rainfall has THE WITNESS REPORT ranged from 23 inches in 1930 to 72 inches in 1937 (some years missing.) TWR Ragged Mountain Upper ReServoir South Cole Hendrix Reservoir of Shame Freedom of the Individual to Report New~ Charlottesville, Virginia ' Extra Wednesday 26 September 2001 First War on Terrorism For three centUries prior to the American Revolution, the Barbary pirates of north Africa preyed on merchant ships passing through 'the Mediterranean Sea. Ships whosemother countrieshad not paid adequate tribute risked capture. Crew and passengers risked enslavement. When Thomas Jefferson became president, one-fifth of the federal budget went to the Moslem"states of Morocco, Algiers, Tunis; and Tripoli-, either for ransom of American citizens or for safe passage of American ships. Jefferson,. a proponent of a small peace-time military, reduced the size of the navy in March 1801. Two months later the ruler of Tripoli declared war on the U.S. Nothing much happened until 1804 when the U . S. S, .Constitution be mbaxd~ed.T_ripoli.._."t'.he frigate Philadelphia had run aground and was captured. Twenty-five-year-old lieutenant Stephen Decatur and small'crew sailed a captured schooner into the harbor at night. They set fire to the Philadelphia to prevent its use by the enemy and made a safe getaway. As the American navy blockaded the region, ground troops captured the enemy'stro_ng~ hold of Derna after a 500-mile march across the same desert made famous in World War II. William Eaton, American consul at Tunis and former army officer, led a coalition force of 16 members of the U.S. navy and marines, 40 Greeks, a squadron of Arab cavalry, a hundred nondescripts and a fleet of camels. While the land force made ready, the captain of the Constitution sought to incite political unrest by supporting a rival ruler then in exile in Egypt. The assembly marched w.est from Alexandria to capture the town of Derna. The ruler of Tripoli negotiated peace with Captain Bainbridge of the Philadelphia who, along with his crew, had been imprisoned. Politics quickly turned against heroism. The Jefferson administration repudiated Tripoli's rival ruler and William Eaton as well. Peace was preferred with the man who had started the war. The final destruction of the pirate nests-'was delayed until 1815 when the American navy forced surrender of Algiers. (USA:' History with Documents, Vol. 1. Jack Allen and John L. Betts, 1971.) (The_ Oxford History.of the American People. Samuel Eliot Morison, 1965.) Town Holds Prayer Vigil (Thursday 13 September 2001) Established 27 August 2001 P.O. Box 3200; Charlottesville, Va. 22902