Loading...
1979-09-26103 An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervis:ors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on SePtember 26, 1979, at 7'30 P..M. in the Board Room of the County Office Buildi'ng, Charlottesville, Virginia; said meeting being, adjourned from September 19, 1979. Present: Messrs. Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. (arriving at 7:35 P.M.), Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., F. Anthony Iachetta, C. Timothy Lindstrom and W. S. Roudabush (arriving at 7:33 P.M.). Absent: None. Officers Present: County Executive, Guy B. Agnor, Jr.; County Attorney, George R. St. John; and County Planner, Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Agenda Item No.. 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:40 P.M. / Agenda Item NO. 2. Crozet and Hollymead. Work Session - Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan re: Villages, Mr. Fisher noted that a memorandum had been received from Douglas W. Eckel, Senior Planner, dated September 14, 1979, and he recommended that'-the Board begin their discussion on these plans by discussing that memo. No. 1) Redrawn northern border for the Ivy Village: site selected for potential school to the west of Route 678 north of the village center (this site provisional dependent on future development patterns in Ivy area). 622 Key ~' Low Density Res, [] Commercial ~ Pubi[c Institutions L~J open space Type 1 Village Ivy Scale 1 "- 2000' Se t~be~ 1979 (Adjourned from September 19~_!979) Mr. Tucker said the Board had requested at its last work session on the Ivy Village plan that the staff2include on this map the one-acre development along the fence row that separates West Leigh, Meriwether Hills and Meriwether North. This new boundary also takes in twenty-five to thirty acres of vacant land, however some of that terrain is extremely steep and he did not think that it can be developed at more than a one-acre density. The staff also looked for a school site to be used if it is decided not to use the present Meriwether Lewis and Murray Elementary schools. One of the best sites is shown as being in an area sensitive to development because of its visual impact. It is a good-sized pasture and is fairly centrally located to the village itself. The site has good access if a new alignment is constructed for Route 678. Mr. Fisher asked the location of Locust Hill. Mr. Tucker said it is next to this recommended school site. The area just south o'f Locust Hill is Meriwether Lewis' birthplace. This area was originally included in the village boundary. Mr; Fisher asked if there were any historical groups interested in preserving any part of this property. Mr. Tucker said he did not know of any but he understands that this area is presently being considered for development and that the owners intend to cut off a five-acre tract with the Locust Hill estate. Mr. Dorrier said there is a Locust Hill foundation which has been established for the purpose of preserving that site and also to promote the Lewis and Clark story nation-wide. Anything the Board can do to help preserve that site would be a step in the right direction. Mr. Tucker agreed and said that some special mention of the historical significance of this site might be made in the Ivy village plan. Mr. Fisher agreed. Dr. Iachetta said an economic argument might be made for one centrally located site for a single school. If there is going to be the population growth in this area that is anticipated, it might be better to start with a brand new school rather than running two smaller schools. If the Board decides to select only one school site, then the enlargement on the western tip of the boundary would not be viable. Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission had recommended extending that western boundary far enough-to take Murray School into the Ivy Village boundary. Mr. Roudabush said he did not think this increase in the size of the Ivy Village wou~,d appreciably change the growth potential. Mr. Tucker said the population addition would probably be between 75 and 100 people. Mr. Lindstrom asked if all of the land in the Ivy Village drains into Ivy Creek. Mr. Tucker said yes. Mr. Lindstrom asked if there were any sites in the area that could be used for sediment impoundments. Mr. Tucker said~such a facility would have to be on the tributary that runs through the West Leigh area. Mr. Lindstrom asked the ultimate carry- ing capacity of the village after the sewer line is constructed. Mr. Tucker noted that all villages are recommended for~low density development and will not be served by public sewage treatment. Mr. Fisher asked that when the remaps are updated that the density specifications be included on each map. He also noted that the designation "open space" does not mean the land cannot be developed and suggested that this!designation be changed to other wording. He then noted that the Board would continue the discussion on the Ivy village after a response is received from the Highway Department concerning recommended road improvements. No. 2) Redrawn northern border for the Crozet Community decreasing the amount of proposed undeveloped industrial land. Mr. Tucker said at the Board's request, the staff had recmnsidered the industrial acreage shown for the Crozet community and had deleted about 60 acres. Community of Crozet Scale 1"- 2000' September 26, 1979 (Adjourned from September Mr. Lindstrom asked if this Crozet plan is projectad through the year 1995. Mr. Tucker said the plan will actually go beyond the' 1995 per'iod', but the ultimate carrying capacity of Crozet will be within the boundaries shown on this map. Mr. Lindstrom said he feels that the Board needs a map ~or~ll communities and urban areas in the County) showin~ the ultimate design capacity and a map that projects the next five-year time phase. The Board should then zone using that five-year map although~the map would be only a general reference map. Mr. Lindstrom said he is concerned that if the Board adopts the map being discussed today, and a citizen applies for a rezoning that is essentially ahead of its time, the courts will not recognize the distinction. Mr. Fisher said he felt Mr. Lindstrom's request was for a 1985 map which shows where utilities will be installed in that time period consistent with the capital improvements program and also shows land that is ready for development so the proper zoning can be applied when requests are received. He said this was done in the Tables in the revised Comprehensive Plan but has never been put on a map.. Mr. Lindstrom said when these msps are adopted, he feels the Planning Commission will use them as key reference materials in terms of zoning. Dr. Iachetta said there is an additional problem in the Crozet area since much of the density for that area is tied to completion of the interceptor line. Mr. Lindstrom said he feels this is a critical point and the staff should be requested to do a five-year map on the urban area and the Crozet and Hollymead communities. He noted that the urban area maps project a carrying capacity of 60,000 additional persons but during the next five-year time span the population increase is only projected to be 13,000+. Mr. Tucker said the s~.ff is working on a utilities plan and this plan will show the extension of utilities through the capital improvements program over a five-year period and utilities will govern the five-year growth period. Dr. Iachetta asked what would be done with the Crozet community plan if the interceptor line is not constructed in the foreseeable future. Mr. Tucker said the medium density area shown on the Crozet plan might have to be recomputed on a one-acre density, but until it is known that the interceptor will not be built, he would be reluctant to say that all of the area should be a one-acre density because the areas projected for medium density development might then be lost. Mr. Dorrier suggested putting the designation "1995 on all of the Comprehensive Plan maps so that people will know that they are not maps for the next five-year time span. Mr. Lindstrom said he feels that utilities are the real key to development. Dr. Iachetta suggested bhat the word "projected'might be added to the maps. Mr. Henley said in the Crozet community he did not think that 1985 will be much different from 1995. Mr. Fisher said the Crozet plan is predicated on the assumption that the interceptor line will be built. Dr. Iachetta said at this time there seems to be no other alternative but to think that the interceptor will be built eventually. If next spring, after the State Water Control Board has its hearings, the interceptor is not funded, then this Board might have to rethin~ the densities for the Crozet community. Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Lindstrom if he wanted two maps. Mr. Tucker said if the Board deoides to do this, he would suggest that an excess of densities be provided so there will be areas for competition. Mr. Fisher said there is a lot of money being spent on water and sewer lines and roads based on these plans. He said there seems to be a strong consensus to add "1995" to all maps. Mr. Lindstrom said the Board recently had before it an application for apartments on-roads that were inadequate although water and sewer was in place. If that area is shown as ~high density on these maps in the Comprehensive Plan, and the Board will not zone the land for that high density, he did not think that having 1995 noted on the maps will stop the courts from telling the Board to zone the land. Dr. Iachetta said if there are areas where it is felt that within this five-year revision what is being noted on the map will not take place, these areas can be shown for less intensive uses until the next revision of the Comprehensive Plan. Dr. Iachetta said there is no problem with the Crozet community because the key to a higher density in that area is utilities. Mr. Roudabush said it was never intended that the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance would be a perfect match. ~ They ~on't necessarily follow each other. Mr. Lindstrom said the courts do not look at it that way. Mr. Fisher said there seemed to be no resolution about a second set of maps. Mr. Lindstrom said if the Board is not going~to have a dual set of maps then it has to be careful about certain areas in the urban area. Mr. Fisher asked if there were any more concerns about~ the Crozet community to be dis~ .cussed tonight. Mr. Lindstrom asked the location of the proposed Lickinghole Creek impound- ment and if it would be of any benefit to sketch it on the Crozet community map. Mr. Tucker said it is shown on the Environmental Considerations map in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the question had been studied to see how such an impoundment would be handled. Mr. Tucker said there have been preliminary studies, but no engineering study to determine if it is feasible. This idea was a carry-over from the 1971 Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Fisher said he thought the Board should soon authorize a feasibility study of an impound- ment on Lickinghole Creek; first, to decide if it is feasible. If it is feasible, the benefi' to be derived Should be noted, the cost of the construction, if there is any federal money available for construction, and if the impoundment would be for purely conservation measures or a combination of conservation and recreational type measures. Mr. Lindstrom agreed saying~ the Board should not ignore the watershed as these.plans are considered. Dr. Iachetta said the concerns about surface water run-off need to be studied in other parts of the County also. On June 2, there was a 100-year rainfall that caused flooding~on Route 29 North. This past Friday there was a 10-year frequency~storm that caused the same type of flooding. Mr. Fishe~ said if the Board had nothing else to discuss on the Crozet community plan he Would suggest that the impoundment be noted on the map as a generalized designation. No. 3) Scaled down version of North Garden Village. and south and one-half mile east and west. / New village extem~s one mile north ~~e~r~,:~__CA_~iLourned from Se~tember~91~~ 108 Key : Low Density Res. -~ Commercial ~] Public Institutions BI open space Type t Village North Garden, Scale . - 2000 Mr. Tucker said the staff had reviewed the area and has reduced the area for development by 25 to 30%. The intensity of development has been lessened by extending the boundary only one mile north and south from Crossroads~on Route 29 South and about one-half mile east and west of Crossroads. Areas to the south of Zion Baptist Church, which were recommended for inclusion by the committee have been retained. Mr. Fisher said this map still shows a huge area for development, but this is an improvement over the previous plan. Mr. Lindstrom asked what the village designation will do for this area. Mr. Tucker said the staff feels that there is a community of interest at Crossroads with the commercial country store, post office and the fire department and quite a few houses. It provides an incentive for higher density development. Areas where road improvements might take place can also be identified. Mr. Henley said he felt that North Garden should be a village but the village could be re- duced in size. Mr. Fisher said he would like to study this village plan further with the staff and if there are any notes from the village committee he would like to read those. No 4) Industrial Site Analysis for the Scottsville town area. !,07 September 26~ 1979 [Adjourned frmm-Sept~ember 19, 1979) $cottsviJle Industrial Site Analysis Scottsville Industrial Site Analysis Site Industrial Acreage Number Priority1 (Approximate) Percent Under 10% Slope 5 75 100% 6 20 95% 5 l0 9O% 5 5O. 85% 2 35 90% (partially forested) Impacts on Surrounding Land Uses 1. Impacts residential and agricultural land. 2. Impacts both residential and institutional land to the south and east. 3. Impacts residential land to three sides. 4. Impacts residential land to the south; located behind local shopping center. 5. Impacts agricultural land. Source: USGS maps, Albemarle County Land Use Files. 1All sites except 5 lack water/sewer. Provision of water in the future is assumed for sites 1-4. Criteria used in ranking can be found in Table 3, Page 9 of ~he Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Fisher asked if Sit~s 4 and 5 have any effect on the Totier Creek Reservoir. Mr. Tucker said he did not believe they did but would have to check to be sure. Mr. Roudabush asked the reaction of industrial prospects to site number 5. He thought potential industries had looked at that site before. Mr. Dorrier said it was not this site but one directly across the road on the Valmont estate. Mr. Dorrier noted that he, Miss Ellen Nash and Mr. Tucker had discussed this list of industrial sites yesterday and had decided that number 4 was the best site for future use, although 'it is not ideal. This site could have access to both Route 6 and Route 20 and is relatively close to the Scottsville Shopping Center. If water is extended to the area in the future, this site could be served by p~blic water servic( Mr. Roudabush asked if the owner of site number 4 would object to such a designation. Mr. Dorrier said he felt the owner would, but selection of a site needs to be looked at from a nlannin~ standpoint. September 26, 1979 (Adjourned from September 19, 1979) I08 Mr. Fisher said site number ~ is located on fairly good roads and site number 5 already has utilities. It seems to be a choice between the two. Mr. Roudabush said that he knows both of these sites and he feels that number 4 would be the one that an industry would pick for ease of d~velopment. Dr. Iachetta asked if any of these sites have been reviewed by the S¢ottsville Citizens Committee. Mr. Tucker said no. Dr. Iachetta said he wou~d like to have these sites studied in more detail in relation to the questions asked today. Mr. Lindstrom also suggested that the Scottsville Committee be questioned about site number 4. At this time, Mr. Fisher recognized Miss Ellen Nash. Miss Nash endorsed an industrial site for the Scottsville area since an industry is needed for the citizens in Scottsville and the surrounding area for work. She also felt the community should be consulted on the selection of a site and noted that she felt that site number 4 was the best for this purpose. No. 5) Proposal for a Milton, Type I Village including borders and potential commercial center and residential land. -- - [~ Low Density Res. [] Commercial MILTON Scale 1"- 2000' Mr. Tucker said the commercial area has been limited to an area called Milton at the intersection of Routes 729 and 732. This computes to about 280 acres available for develop- ment. Mr. Lindstrom asked why the staff brought this proposal to the Board. Mr. Tucker noted that the Board suggested this at-the last meeting on the villages as an alternative for the Nix village plan. Mr. Lindstrom said he thinks he can vote for village plans for the Ivy and Earlysville areas, but beyond that he does not think there is any foundation for any of the village plans. Also, he does not feel it will discourage development in this area if Milton is not made a village. Dr. Iachetta said he could see no reason to change what is presently happening in the area. Mr. Dorrier said Milton was a thriving community in the county at one time and had a port on the Rivanna River. Mr. Fisher said if Milton is ~:be added the idea will have to be referred back to the Planning Commission for a public hearing. Mr. Roudabush suggested that the soil maps be studied further before any decision is made on including Milton as a village. !.09 Comrnuni~y of Hollymead ~ Sca'~e 1"-2000' Key ~ Low Density Res, ~ Med. Density Res, ~ High Density Res. ~ Commercia~ ~ Public ~nstitut~or~s ~ tndustriai Open Mr. Tucker said, as requested by the Board at their meeting on September '5~ 1979, the staff had restudied the industrial areas noted on a map shown on Page 14 Minute Book '15. On the above map, areas 2 and 4 have been dropped and area 5', which contained approximately 150 acres, has been reduced in size. About 40 acres were removed from that site, leaving two smaller sites that are usable. In determining locations of these sites, the staff worked with U.S.G.S. maps. Mr. Lindstrom asked the total amount of industrial acreage shown on the Comprehensive Plan amendments for the entire county. Mr. Tucker said it is about 500 acres. Mr. Lindstrom asked how this zoning classification will be handled on the new zoning map. Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission has not yet reviewed industrial zoning for the County, however, he did not think the Planning Commission is proposing any additional industrial land except the P.I.D. which has been zoned in the area north of Route 649. The area south of Route 649 will probably not be recognized on the new zoning map. Dr. Iachetta felt it would be desir- able not to show any additional industrial land until the prime site which has been rezoned has some activity. Mr. Lindstrom asked if any consideration had been given to the proposed Br~wood develop- ment north of Route 649.~ Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission had deferred action on this RPN request until the staff has time to review the area as an amendment to the Compre- hensive Plan as a potential community. Mr. Roudabush suggested that the Board not discuss the application until it is properly before the Board. No. 7) Report on the:-amount of commercially zoned, vacant land in the Route 29 North, 250 East corridors, Urban Area. Commercial Land Stock Albemarle Co. unty, 1979 Route 29 North, 250 East Corridors Route 29 (as shown on Map 1) acres Percent developed 273.553 49.5 undeveloped 278.759 50.5 Total 552.312 100 0 Route 250 E. (as shown on Map 1) developed 282.886 48.0 Undeveloped 306.151 52.0 Total 589.037 100.0 Source: 1979 Land Books, Albemarle County; Albemarle County Tax Maps. '1/ S~ 26 l~~~e_d ~rqm ~~19_7_9_~ Mr. Lindstrom said these' comprehensi~ve plan proposals show 549 acres of commercial and commercial office zoning instead of' the '165 acres projected by the Comprehensive Plan for the year 1995. He feels that such designations generate growth beyond what the County is capable of handling with present utilities and that the County should not overqu~alify itself in those catagories. Mr. Lindstrom said he is on the Virginia Association of Counties Task Force on Land Use Planning and this group has been discussing specific and use cases and how they relate to the Comprehensive Plan. It puts the county in a bind to designate lands for certain zonings and then try to resist requests for that zoning catagory. Dr. Iachetta said if there is really a surplus of commercial and commercial office zoning already in existence, the Board should not worry about .creating any additional zoning of this type in this five-year amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Lindstrom said the real conflict with industrial zoning is trying to preserve the good sites. Accomplishing the goals o~ the plan does not really preserve those sites; zoning will, but then zoning releases the land and makes it available for development at whatever rate the marketplace chooses to develop. This also eliminates any possibility of public input into such uses. Dr. Iachetta said it seems the County has already met the requirements for industrial zoning by showing four times as much of that zoning category as the current market requires. Also there is sharp competitiveness in that area. Mr. Fisher said the Board will have to deal with this problem on the Urban Area plans. Mr. Fisher noted that he had received many letters on the Comprehensive Plan amendments. A letter came today from Mr. Steve Amato representing Violet Hill~i!Associates. Agenda Item No. 5. Other Matters Not on the Agenda. Mr Fisher asked the progress of the Planning Commission on the new zoning ordinance and map and when it will hold its first public hearing. He said he is concerned that the Planning Commission might not finish its work this year and there will be several new members on the Commission beginning in January, 1980. Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission has completed its work on the Hollymead community. The rural areas, under the AF and RR districts, are being studied again. Next Monday the Commission will work on the villages. As soon as work on the zoning map is finalized, a public hearing will be held. He said the Planning Commission should be finished with both documents by the end of this calendar year. Dr. Iachetta said there might be five new members on the Planning Commission in 1980. If the Commission does not finalize its work before the end of the calendar year, Dr. Iachetta said he is in favor of calling it lip. Mr. Fisher then suggested that the next work session On the Comprehensive Plan amendments be held on October 11 at 1:30 P.M. in the Board Room. Mr. Dorrier asked if the Board will be discussing the Biscuit Run area at that session; if it is to be discussed a notice should be put in the paper to that effect. Mr. Lindstrom said he would like for the Planning Commission to know that the Board will try to finish the Comprehensive Plan amend- ments by the end of October and the Board would like to have the zoning ordinance in their hands as soon as possible. Agenda I~em No. 3. Memorandum: Employees Health Insurance Program. Memo to: From: Subj e ct: Board of Supervisors School Board Dr. Clarence McClure, Superintendent Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County ExecutiVe Employee Health Insurance Program In September 1978, when the h~alth insurance program for employees of the school division and the County general government was merged into a single contract, the Superintendent of Schools and theCCounty Executive were assigned the responsibility of reviewing the program at the end of the contract year and making rec~mmehdations as to changes needed in the coverage as well as the pro- cedure for continuing the program, i.e. by rebid or by renewal. ASsisted by the~Director'of Finance, this review has been completed. There are no changes recommended in the coverage, and the current contract, in our opinion, should be renewed for its second year with an increase in subscriber rates of 10%. Since the plan is experience rated annually, and subscriber rate calculated from claims experience, a contingent liability exists, particularly in inflationary periods, which should be ~unded by a contingency reserve account. It will be our recommendation in the FY 80-81 budget that an Insurance Reserve Fund be created for several insurance coverages, one of which will be the health insurance program, to reserve liabilities for experience rated programs that can either be funded more economically through insurance pools and/or self insurance, or that can meet accelerated inflationary costs or significant losses through this reserve fund. For the health insurance program ending September 30, 1980, a con- tingency reserve of $72.,000 will be requested to fund any actual paid claims which exceed the subscription income. Mr. Agnor then requested that the Board authorize him to sign an agreement for extension of the present Blue Cross/Blue Shield contract, with no change in coverage, but with an crease in subscriber rates of 10%. Motion to this effect was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Roudabush, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 4. Clarification: AHI~ Appropriation. Mr. Agnor noted that.when the Board had adopted an'appropriation ordinance on July 11, 1979, in the amount of $66,763 for the AHIP Program, the vote was 3-1-2. For an appropriation over $500, the State Code require~ that the apPropriation be made by a majority of the members of the Board and not.by a majority o£ the members present,, therefore this situation needs to be clarified. Motion n offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mr. Dottier, to adopt the following resolution: AYES: NAYS: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $66,763 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the General Fund and transferred to Code 18B.12 for the AHIP Program; this motion to clarify previous action taken by the Board on July 11, 1979, The motion carried by the following recorded vote: Messrs. Dorrier, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. Mr. ~isher. Agenda Item No. 5. Other Matters Not on the Agenda. Dr. Iachetta noted that as a result of the flood on June 2,1 he had asked the Engineering Department to look at the problem on Route 29 North to see ~f it had occurred because of the storm or because of man-made features. The report came to h~ after a second storm event which was not as severe as the situation on ~une, and verified his suspicion that the problem was aggravated by what man had done. On the night of June 2, 1979, major flooding occurred in the Berkeley - Four Seasons area as a result of a relatively short but intense rainfall. The residence at 2424 Commonwealth Drive was surrounded by water moving at high velocity. This water washed two automobiles into the creek in addition~to eroding away a large portion of the driveway and backyard. The homeowner's, a Mr. and Mrs. George L. Stark, were knocked down and nearly washed away by the moving water while attempt- int to escape from their flooded home. A short distance downstream, the Pizza Inn at the intersection of U.S. Route 29 and Dominion Drive, was flooded by water ponded behind a highway culvert. This water eventually rose to a point where it interrupted tra£fic on both lanes of Route 29. ]~ In response to this flooding, Dr. Anthony Iachetta has requested the County Engineer to study the problem and make recommendations., This report is in response to that request. The area studied i~ just north of the City of charlottesville and includes some of the most intensely developed land in the County of Albemarle. The basin includes the Four Seasons, Berkmar Drive and Berkeley areas which have already been developed. Areas currently under construction within the basin include the Wynridge-Minor Townhouse development and a portion of the Farber Mall. Both of these developments will require storm water detention but no control measures are currently in place. The coefficient of imperviousness (c) used in the rational formula is estimated to be 0.42 under the current state of development. When this basin is fully developed, this coefficient should rise to 0.54. This will result in a 30% increase in the rate of runoff. 'Increases above this are possible if the basin is extensively sewered or the main stream is channelized. The first part of this study is an attempt to determine the magnitude of the storm experienced. After that is known, the need for improvements can be better assessed. Estimation of rainfall~at any one point from rain gauge data at any other p~int is difficult at best due to the very localized nature of the storm. Recorded rainfalls varied from 4.67 inches at the McCormick Observatory to I~46 inches at the airport and 5;7 inches at the South Rivanna reservoir. The Soil Conservation Service has proposed a method by which rainfall data may be transposed from one basin to another. If thi's, method is used, there is a 90~ probability that the. rainfall Within thel Berkeley - Four Seasons basin was between 4.9 and 7.3 ~inches. For analysis purposeS,' a six. ho'ur rainfall of six inches has been assumed. This corre- sponds to the standard SCS des'ign storm of a 100 year return frequency. The basin studied has two Con'trollingdrainage features. This. first 'is a '6 foot by 6 foot concrete bax culvert passing under U.S. Route 29 to the ~rear of' the PiZza Inn. ~The box culvert has a drainage 'area of 490 acres. The second feature is a' 66 inch corrugated metal pipe (CMP) passing under Commonwealth Drive immediately to the north of Four Seasons Drive. This culvert has a drainage area of 309 acres. If the standard 100 year SCS design storm is applied to this basin, the 66 inch CMP quickly reaches its capacity and water flows across Commonwealth Drive. As this is occuring, the backwater of the culvert is reducing the capacity of two 66 inch CMP's passing under Four Seasons Drive approximately 375 feet upstream. When water first begins to overtop the single 66 inch CMP, the capacity of the twin CMP's is reduced to the point where water bypasses these pipes and flows through a small ditch on the south side of Four Seasons Drive. This water will then cross on both sides of the private residence at 2424 Commonwealth Drive and return to its natural channel. As the storm proceeds, Water rises behind the 6 foot by 6 foot box culvert ~ passing under Route 29 until both the north and south bound lanes are flooded. The pool caused by this restriction is several feet deep at the Pizza Inn site and reaches to within 100 feet of Commonwealth Drive. These calculations have been confirmed by field observations of high water marks shortly after the storm. This indicates that~ the storm that occurred was comparable to the 100 year storm and that the buildings flooded are within the 100 year flood plain. The second part of this study was an attempt to determine what measures might be taken to correct the existing problem. The culverts under Four Seasons Drive, Commonwealth Drive and Route 29 were adequate when originally constructed, but due to development are no longer so. The culverts passing under Four Seasons and Commonwealth Drive have a capacity of 280 CFS. This Capacity can now be expected to be exceeded on the average of once every two years. . The box culvert passing under Route 29 has "a capacity of 550 CFS. The capacity of this culvert can now be eXpected to be eXceeded more frequently than mnce every ten years. As development proceeds, these culverts can be expected to be overtopped even more frequently. Storm water detention will slow this change considerably, but cannot be expected to be one hundred percent effective. Various combinations of storm water detention and increase in culvert size were examined to determine how these flooding problems' might be corrected. Storm water detention alone could not relieve all flooding problems since many of the best pond sites are alrea~yddeve!oped and much of the land normally flooded~during storms has been filled, further reducing available storage. This fact is partic- ularly conspicuous since both the residence on Commonwealth Drive and the Pizza Inn were constructed on fill. Storm water detention, in conjunction with some increase in culvert capacity, could correct~all existing flooding, but has not been considered here since~the cost would be above that of increasing culvert capacity alone. Increasing the capacity of the storm drainage in the Berkeley - Four Seasons area to current Highway ~Department standards is possible. The capacity of the drainage at the intersection of Four Seasons and Commonwealth Drive could be increased to carry the 10 year storm under full development conditions by adding a second 66 inch CMP under Commonwealth Drive and improving the intake alignmant of the twin 66 inch CMP's beneath Four Seasons Drive. Concrete headwalls would be added to both inlets. The cost of these improvements is estimated to be approximately $30,000. These improvements would not completely prevent flooding of 2424 Commonwealth Drive during the 50 and 100 year storm but would greatly reduce the severity of the flooding. Improvements to prevent flooding of the Pizza Inn during the fifty year storm are possible but would be considerably more expensive. This would require the construction of two 6 foot by 6 foot concrete box culverts in addition to the existing box culvert. Concrete headwalls for the new box culverts would also be required. These improvements could most easily be made when Route 29 is graded to six lanes. The cost of these improvements, if done prior to the upgrading of Route 29, is estimated to be on the order of $200~000~©0. CONCLUSIONS 1. Storm drainage in the area of Four Seasons Drive and Commonwealth Drive is seriously inadequate. Flooding of this area will occur for storms of greater magnitude than the two year recurrance interval. More extreme storms may pose a threat to property and human life. The residence at 2424 Commonwealth Drive is in particular danger of flooding. 2. The drainage capacity in this area may be increased to carry the ten year ~torm after full development at a cost of $30,000. The accessed value of the building and lot at 2424 Commonwealth Drive is $44,300. 3. The 6 foot by 6 foot concrete box culvert passing under Route 29 is seriously inadequate. This culvert has insufficient capacity to carry the 10 year storm. Capacity may be increased to carry the fifty year storm after full development 0a~ at a cost of roughly $20 ~,000~00. 4. Current county drainage policy is inadequate to protect personal property and human life. 5. An evaluation was performed which indicated that the optimum drainage policy would require developers to use storm water detention to control peak flows to predevelopment levels for the two and ten year storm. Developers would also be required to define the 100 year flood plain. This alternative should be studied further. Dr. Iachetta asked that the Board authorize the County Engineer to study the situation further and then the Board immediately move forward to request the Highway Department to address the problem. Dr. Iachetta also noted that he had received a letter from the owner of Jefferson Supply Company on Berkmar Drive about this same problem. Mr. Fisher said if the rate of flow is increased in this area, it might cause problems further downstream and he would be reticent to authorize any improvement until the problem is studied further. Dr. Iachetta insisted that the problem had been caused by development which has taken place on the west side of the road. Mr. Henley said he could see no reason not to ask the Highway Department to look at the situation and make recommendations. Mr. Lindstrom suggested that the County Engineer make a report at the October 10 meeting and to also analyze the effect the release of this water would have on the eastern side ~of the road. Mr. Roudabush said if this is an engineering problem~ he did not think this Board should try to solve it. Dr. Iachetta said that is the reason he suggested the Highway Department be requested to come up with a solution. Mr. Fisher then requested a motion asking the Highway Department to try and resolve the problem but being sure that the Engineering Department keeps in touch with the Highway Department to be sure that the solution has no adverse effect on downstream property owners. Motion of this effect was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Mr. Lindstrom asked for a report on the Crozet~interceptor line.' Mr. Agnor salad the staff of the State Water Control Board has recently consummated a contract with Morton Frozen Poods. At the recommendation of the Water Control Board staff, Morton had complied with the consent order. The second recommendation of the staff was that the State Water Control Board reconsider the Crozet interceptor and its priority funding during their spring meeting. They emphasized to both George Williams and E. E. Thompson that this did not m~an they were allocat ing any money for this project, but it is a strong indication that the project will be considered on the five,year list at the next allocation hearing. Mr. Williams commented that the reception of the State Water Control Board staff was considerably warmer than it ~d been for several months toward this project as the final project in the 'Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority's pollution abatement program. It was noted by the RWSA staff that this is not only the final project of the program, but is also the key project in protectim~ of the South Fork Rivanna River Reservoir. Agenda Item No. 6. At 10:02 P.M., motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to adjourn this meeting until 0c~ober 3, 1979, at 2:30 P.M. in the Board Room of the County Office Building. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: None. Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. Chairman