1982-07-213.1.4
July 21, 1982 (Regular Night Meeting)
A regular meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, was held on.July 21,
1982, at 7:30 P.M., in Meeting Room #7 of the Albemarle County Office Building, Charlot-
tesville, Virginia.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. James R. Butler, Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke, Mr. J. T. Henley, Jr.,
Mr. C. Timothy Lindstrom and Miss Ellen V. Nash.
BOARD MEMBER ABSENT: Mr. Gerald E. Fisher.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Messrs. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive; George R. St. John, County
Attorney; and Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Director of Planning.
Agenda Item No. 1. Call To Order: The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M., by
the Vice Chairman, Mr. J. T. Henley, Jr.
Agenda Item No. 2. Public Hearing-Capital Improvement Appropriations.
in the Daily Progress on July 14, 1982.)
(Advertised
Mr. Agnor said this is a request for appropriation, and is the first appropriation
being handled under the new procedure of public advertisement before amending the adopted
budget. Mr. Agnor read the proposed list of projects to which this money would be appro-
priated. Mr. Agnor noted that a bid received on the Jack Jouett Middle School roof and
masonry repairs was accepted at $385,000 rather than the estimated advertised figure of
$555,500. (For details of requests, see minutes of July 7, 1982.)
Mr. Henley declared the public hearing opened. There being no one present wishing to
speak either for or against these appropriations. Mr. Henley declared the public hearing
closed. Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
that $1,120,725 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the Capital
Improvements Fund and coded to the following:
CODE PROJECT AMOUNT
9700-7060.11 Airport Runway Overrun $ 22,725
19.34 Jack Jouett Middle School Roof & Masonry Repairs 385,000
9700-7060.15 Piedmont Virginia Community College -
Softball Field Lights and Fence
Walton School Roof Repairs
Thomas Jefferson Fire Fighters Association -
Volunteer Fire Departments Advance
Vocational-Technical Center Roof Repairs
19.36
9700-7060.23
9700-7060.78
19.17K
Miscellaneous Repairs to Schools:
Curbing at Henley & Murray
Roof Repair at Murray, Yancey
and Stone Robinson
Retile Yancey Corridors
Repair Furnace at McIntire
Emergencies
$10,000
75,000
5,000
25,000
25~000
38,000
250,000
200,000
85,000
140,000
$1,120,725
The motion was seconded by Mr. Butler. There being no discussion on this matter,
roll was called and the motion carried by the following, recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Henley, Mr. Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Mr. Fisher.
Agenda Item No. 3. Crozet Library Building. Mr. Agnor reported that in accordance
with the discussion about this matter-at the July 14 meeting, the P.erry Foundation has
retained the services of an architect to study the C & 0 Railroad building in Crozet for
it's possible suitability as a library in that area. Mr. Agnor said Mr. Tucker would be
participating in that architectural review, and asked if the Board wished to accept the
offer to purchase the C & 0 Railroad Building made by the Perry Foundation, or wait for
the results of the architectural study.
Motion was offered by Miss Nash to hold off making a decision on this matter until
the architectural study is completed and the results reported to this Board. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Butler and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Henley, Mr. Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
ABSENT: Mr. Fisher.
315
July 21, 1982 (Regular N±ght Meeting)
Agenda Item No. 4. Flood Damage Report. Mr. Agnor summarized the Stormwater Drainage
Report, dated July 21, 1982, which was prepared by a committee consisting of represen-
tatives of the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation Resident Engineer,
County ExecUtive, County Attorney, County Engineer and Director of Planning. (Copy of
this report is on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors.) Mr. Agnor
noted that the report contains recommendations dealing with 1) existing developed areas,
and 2) planned growth areas. The principle recommendation is to consider developing a
Stormwater Drainage Plan for the drainage basins serving the urban area, Hollymead and
Crozet.
Mr. Lindstrom asked if a detailed drainage study of the County would show one hundred
year drainage areas in the County which might not have been shown in studies conducted by
the Army Corp of Engineers. Mr. Agnor said most likely such a study would give additional
information. Mr. Lindstrom then asked if additional one hundred year flood areas were
indicated by such a County study, would the same restrictions which presently exist in the
County Zoning Ordinance for flood districts apply. Mr. St. John said he was of the opinion
that such areas would be covered by the Zoning 0rdinance/~egulations. L~stly, Mr. Lindstrom
asked if the County could legally reimburse an individual for losses sustained during a
flood such as the County experienced in May. Mr. St. John said he was of the opinion that
it would be an unlawful expenditure of County funds to make such an expenditure.
Mrs. Cooke asked about the rules and regulations for obtaining flood insurance. Mr.
St. John said such insurance is~obtained from private insurance companies, but that the
insurance is underwritten by the Federal Government. Mr. St. John added that ~e could
find no regulation indicating that in order to be eligible, the property must be in a
designated flood area.
Miss Nash asked if a study were oonducted to determine the one hundred year flood
areas in the County, who would conduct the study and at what cost? Mr. Agnor said a
private firm would have to be hired and the cost would be high. Mr. Lindstrom asked if
such a study would identify areas which have flooding problems created by overdevelopment
or impervious surfaces. Mr. Maynard Elrod, County Engineer, answered that he would hope
that following a drainage survey, a computer analysis could be done which would help
identify such areas, then necessary improvements could be suggested .and a pro rata share
could be assessed to landowners or developers to make those improvements. Mr. Lindstrom
expressed concern that if such a map of problem drainage areas is developed, it would
create legal problems for the County, and possibly depreciate property values on some
structures. Mr. St. John said he did not feel there would be any legal liability against
the County if such a map were developed. Mr. St. John said if the County discovered that
an entire district were susceptible to flooding, then the Board could create a flood
control service district and could assess property owners accordingly in order to pay for
necessary improvements. Mr. St. John said he did not feel the Four Seasons area fits this
category because only a few homes are involved.
Mr. Butler felt it would be helpful to have someone familiar with flood insurance
rules and regulations make a presentation to the Board. Mr. Butler also felt that a
drainage study be helpful to would be helpful to property owners throughout the County to
determine whether they should attempt to purchase such insurance.
Mr. Henley said the Board would now accept comments from the public.. First to speak
was Dr. Vivian Gordon. Dr. Gordon suggested that it was "common knowledge" that the
Starks residence on Commonwealth Drive was prone to flooding. (NOTE: Problem with Starks
residence explained on June 9, 1982.) She felt that since a building permit was issued
for the Starks home, the County was partly responsible for the construction of this
building on an unsafe lot. Dr. Gordon said that since the third flood of the Starks
property in May, the family cannot get an insurance firm to issue flood insurance, and
that the Starks' were lured into believing the property was safe", since the installation
of the new culvert under Commonwealth Drive. She felt it was the County's moral respon-
sibility to compensate the Starks for their losses.
Next to speak was Mr. Nathaniel Goddard, who presented a written version of his
speech to the Board (on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors) Mr.
Goddard felt the Starks home should never have been permitted to be built on the lot, and
that the Board had an obligation to investigate the Condemnation of thel!property[
Mr. George Starks spoke next stating that the.flooding which took place on May 28,
was the third time he and his family have been forced from their home because of flood
waters. Mr. Starks said substantial damages, have been incurred from thoSe floods, but
none more damaging than the last flood which washed the home from it's foundation. Mr.
Starks felt the home should never have been permitted to be built, but since it has been
built, it is now the County's responsibility to compensate him and his family for loss of
the home.
Next to speak was Mr. Irving Andrews, a resident of Dominion Drive. Mr. Andrews
presented four photographs of his home to the Board indicating the elevated water level
during the May flood. Mr. Andrews said he never experienced flooding of this type until
the enlarged culvert was placed under Commonwealth Drive. Mr. Andrews said due to a
backup of water below Commonwealth Drive and above Route 29, flooding occurs even if the
rainfall is only moderate. Mr. Andrews requested that the Board enlarge the drainage pipe
at Route 29 to allow for the continued free flow of water from the Berkeley community.
Miss Karen Starps, a student of urban Planning at the University of Virginia, spoke
next. Miss Starps said a comprehensive flooding study should be made of the.County. She
also felt that a building permit should never have been permitted'for the Starks lot, but
since such a permit was issued, it is the responsibility of the County to condemn the
property and compensate the Starks for damages.
·. ' July 21, 1982 (Regular Night Meeting)
No one else from the public wished to speak and Mr. Henley asked if there were any
additional comments from the Board. Mr. Lindstrom asked Mr. St. John for his opinion on
the legality of condemning the Starks property and if there were any way the County could
legally compensate the Starks for damages.
Mr. St. John said he could find no legal way to condemn the property, because the
only occasion under which the Board can legally condemn is for benefit of the public;
there would be no public benefit from condemnation of the Starks property. Mr. St. John
then explained that there is no legal liability on the part of the County for the issuance
of the building permit for the Starks home, since the issuance of such a permit is a
governmental function done under State law.
Mrs. Cooke asked if there is any public record which indicated there actually was
"common knowledge"-of this flooding problem in the Four Seasons area as suggested by Dr.
Gordon. Mr. St. John said no documentation has'been found in any records of the Planning
Department, or the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Agnor noted that even if a citizen had
presented evidence that the Starks lot was prone to flooding, a building permit could not
have been denied on that basis.
Mr. Byron Coburn of the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation, stated
that if a study is conducted of flooding areas, the County must remember that each time a
culvert upstream is enlarged, it affects the flow and volume of water passing through
culverts further downstream. Mrs. Cooke asked if the Starks property could be studied as
a possible site for eliminating drainage problems downstream, thus allowing legal condemna-
tion of the property.
Mr. Starks disputed the opinions expressed by Mr. St. John about the County's~ability
to condemn his property or compensate him for his losses. Mr. Starks asked that the
County except it's responsibility and face the situation which he felt was unique.
Motion was then offered by Mr. Lindstrom to have the County Engineer make a preliminary
study of the flooding problem in the Berkeley/Four-Seasons area to determine how flooding
can be alleviated. The motion was seconded by Mr. Butler. Roll was called and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Henley, Mr. Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Fisher.
Motion was then offered by Mr. Lindstrom to have the County staff obtain information
on the costs, time, and personnel required to conduct a comprehensive flood survey of the
entire County, so that the Board can get an idea if such a study would be feasible. The
motion was seconded by Mrs. Cooke and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Henley, Mr. Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Fisher.
Agenda Item No. 5. Other Matters Not on the Agenda. Mr. Agnor requested Board
authorization for expenditure of Library State Aid Funds for FY 1982-83. Mr. Agnor noted
that State Aid was in the amount of $349,108 and Federal Aid $2,055, which is forty percent
more than anticipated.
Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Miss Nash, to authorize the County
Executive to sign said forms regarding the expenditure of State Aid funds by the Jefferson-
Madison Regional Library for fiscal year 1982-83. Roll was called and the motion carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Henley, Mr. Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Fisher.
Mr. Lindstrom said he had received a letter from Mrs. Esperanza Rogers of 101 Woodlake
Drive, regarding the abandonment of a strip of property off Dominion Drive. Mr. Lindstrom
said Mrs. Rogers was complaining that since this abandonment, no pedestrian traffic has
been allowed through that area. Mr. Lindstrom said the Four Seasons Home Owners Association
did not oppose the abandonment because they were lead to believe pedestrian access would
still be available. Mr. Lindstrom asked if there was anything that could be done in this
situation. Mr. Tucker'said one of the property owners involved in the abandonment was a
planning staff member, Keith Mabe, and Mr. Tucker felt that it was the intent of Mr. Mabe
and the other property owners who requested this abandonment to stop all vehicular and
pedestrian access through the abandonment of the right of way.
Agenda Item No. 6.
the meeting adjourned.
At 9:35 P.M., there being no further business, Mr. Henley declared