White smoke did not emanate from the board meeting room on
August 26, but the Goochland Board of Zoning Appeals finally ruled on an appeal
to the Benedictine College Preparatory (BCP) School’s plan of development for
its property on River Road.
Surgically “splitting the baby,” the BZA voted unanimously
to overturn only the portion of the POD dealing with storm water runoff,
everything else stands. The decision has no impact on the start of classes on
September 3.
The four member BZA—an appointment to fill a District 5
vacancy and designate alternates are expected soon—has been grappling with this
appeal since spring. Efforts to streamline the process only dragged things out.
Following the vote, BZA counsel Maynard Sipe explained that
only the drainage issue portion of the POD appeal was overturned. The ruling
carries a general expectation that county staff will work with BCP to
adequately address the storm water management issue.
(Space was reserved on the Goochland Circuit Court docket
earlier this month for November 5 to address the issue of BZA jurisdiction and expected
appeals to the August 26 decision.)
Appellant Andrew Thexton, who lives about 300 yards east of
the BCP property on the north side of River Road, testified under oath that,
since road improvements, which include a new entrance and turn lanes, were
completed, significant amounts of storm water runoff has been channeled onto
his property. During storms, Thexton said, water flows across the pavement with
sufficient velocity to force gravel onto River Road.
He contended that the storm runoff, shown in a video as a
torrent at the eastern edge of his property, backs up his home’s foundation
drains resulting in significant amounts of water in his crawl space. A photo of
a ruler under Thexton’s house seems to indicate that there had been between
five and nine inches of water there this summer.
Thexton said that while he has not yet seen indications of
mold in his crawlspace, he is concerned about possible health issues that could
arise from the moisture. Thexton said that he regularly inspects his HVAC and
other equipment located under the house and had never noticed moisture on the
vapor barrier before the BCP road improvements.
Thexton explained that water flowing on the south side of
River Road is forced to the north side by an “earthen dam” in the ditch just
west of the entrance to the Pembroke Farms subdivision, roughly opposite his
home.
When he learned of the plans to widen River Road, Thexton
said that he raised concerns with the county and VDOT about excess runoff
winding up on his property with little result. He contended that he never
received any response to enquiries made about the matter.
In response to a question from Yasmine Hamad, District 4,
about remedying the situation, Thexton opined that BCP could build a retention
basin to collect the runoff.
At that point, an attorney for Goochland observed that
Thexton has not established any bona fides in civil engineering and was not
qualified to speak on mitigation.
Then the county and BCP shared an hour for their side of the
story.
Goochland Plan of Development Administrator Debbie Byrd, a
professional engineer with more than 30 years of experience in erosion and
sediment control, explained that her job is to ensure that state and county
laws and regulations are followed. She also explained that VDOT is responsible
for all roads in the county, including approval of the road component, which
includes drainage, of a POD. She said that she approved the POD for BCP on January
29, 2013 after all of the parts were properly addressed, including storm water
runoff management along River Road as approved by VDOT.
Byrd then explained that VDOT uses formulas to determine
adequacy of outfalls that handle storm water based on specific criteria using
historical rainfall data. These formulas are designed to indicate if culverts
and channels that handle drainage in a particular area are either adequate or
need improvement.
She said that data “plugged into” this formula must be submitted
to VDOT by a licensed engineer. This seems to have been submitted by an
engineer retained by BCP.
In response to a question from Hamad, Byrd confirmed that
public hearings on the BCP relocation were held by the planning commission and
board of supervisors resulting in approval of a conditional use permit by special
exception in December of 2011.
Byrd visited the site on June 19, 2013, the day after five
and one half inches of rain fell in about twelve hours, and took photos of the
ditch on the south side of the road. On that day, she said, it was in good condition
with no erosion or sediment in the road and no sign of flooding in the ditch in
front of the Thexton property.
Dr. Richard Carchman District 1 explained the reasoning of
the BZA decision saying “a picture is worth a thousand words.” Compelling
images of torrents of rainwater coursing through the Thexton property during a
recent storm overrode lengthy technical arguments contained in briefs
undoubtedly more than a thousand words long. Also, a video of a school bus
easily and safely negotiating the new entrance from the BCP property onto River
Road refuted claims it could not handle vehicles expected to access the
property on a regular basis.
Before the final vote was taken, Hamad said that as a
Goochlander, she is proud that BCP chose to locate in the county, glad the
school is here, and hopes that all parties can come to a decision to address
the storm water situation.
A truncated appearance by BCP witness civil engineer Todd Borden
highlighted a paucity of data submitted to VDOT for use in the outfall channel adequacy
calculations. He contended that the VDOT application lacked an analysis of existing
drainage, so it would not be possible to calculate change caused by road
improvements.
Dr. Harriet “Dee” Phillips, District 3, supported this
contention saying that, in all the evidence presented, she failed to find
adequate documentation to support the VDOT decision on the water issue. She
contended that even minimal increases in storm water runoff from road
improvements should trigger mitigation efforts.
The narrow ruling by the BZA upheld most of the POD, which the
appellants argued had been improperly approved.
If this appeal was really about storm water runoff issues,
it seems to have been justified. All property owners must be protected from
adverse effects of storm water runoff caused by upstream development. If it was
designed to make BCP go away, it failed.
Members of the BZA are to be commended for approaching the
matter in a thorough and objective manner. They spent countless hours listening
to arguments, conferring with counsel, visiting the site, reading briefs,
researching state and local laws, and using their intellectual skills to arrive
at an impartial ruling.
Goochland is blessed to have such citizens willing and able
to contribute their time and talents to the well-being of the community.
No comments:
Post a Comment