5/3/1982 - Regular
5-3-82
40 1
Board of Supervisors
County Administration Building
430 E. Clay Street
Salem, Virginia
May 3, 1982
I
The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this
day in open session in the conference room located in the County
Administration building at 430 East Clay Street in Salem, Virginia, this
being a special meeting of the Board, called for 5:00 p.m. this day.
Members present: Chairman Edward C. Park, Jr., Vice-Chairman
Athena E. Burton, and Supervisors May W. Johnson, Robert E. Myers and
Gary J. Hinter.
Members absent: None
Others present: County Administrator Donald R. Flanders,
Director of Finance John M. Chambliss, Jr., Fire and Emergency Services
I
Coordinator Thomas C. Fuqua, Director of Utility Engineering and
Administration John R. Hubbard, County Attorney James E. Buchholtz,
VVKR representative Dan Bolt, and about 20 County citizens from the
Westward Lake area.
IN RE:
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Park called the meeting to order at 5:08 p.m. He was
advised that because it was a special meeting, it could not proceed until
all five Supervisors were present. Those present then waited for Super-
visor Minter, who arrived at 5:12 p.m.
The Chairman recognized Mr. Danny B. Bolt from the architectural/
engineering firm of VVKR, who was present to discuss core drillings on site
I
of new County Courthouse. Mr. Bolt advised that his firm had obtained
quotes from two firms, that both were good, reputable companies, and that
he was recommending award of the contract for the sub-surface investigation
,
I
i
I
I-
I
I
I
l...i
work to Law Engineering Testing Company because their price was $300
cheaper than the other firm's proposal.
,....-
5-3-82
402
IN RE:
RESOLUTION NO. 3127 ACCEPTING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION
OF A CERTAIN SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AGREEMENT ON BEI~LF OF
THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE RELATING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
NEW COURTHOUSE FACILITY.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia, as follows:
I
1. That that certain proposal of Law Engineering Testing Company to
provide certain subsurface exploration and testing of the site for the
Roanoke County Courthouse Facility, upon all and singular the terms and
conditions set out in a certain letter agreement on file in the office of
the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors for a sum not to exceed $3,400.00
be, and it hereby is, ACCEPTED: and
2. That the County Administrator be, and hereby is, authorized and
directed to execute on behalf of Roanoke County the aforesaid letter
I
I
agreement with Law Engineering Testing Company upon form approved by the
County Attorney.
Adopted on motion of Supervisor Robert E. Myers and the following
AYES:
Supervisors Myers, Burton, }1inter, Johnson and Park
I
recorded vote.
I
I
NAYS:
None
IN RE:
EXECUTIVE SESSION
At 5:15 p.m. Supervisor Johnson moved that the Board go into
executive session to meet with legal counsel, so the County Attorney and
other staff members could explain the provisions of the ordinance to be
considered for adoption as an emergency measure, said ordinance providing
for the inspection of water impoundment facilities in Roanoke County.
Her motion was adopted by a unanimous voice vote.
IN RE:
CALL TO ORDER
I
At 5:40 p.m. and on motion by Supervisor Myers and a unanimous
voice vote the session was again called to order.
The Chairman called for discussion of the water impoundment
ordinance. Supervisor Myers told those present, adoption of the ordinance
!
I--- .
was considered necessary to give the County the means of getting onto
.
I
~ll
I
I
I
~
5-3-82
403
t ",
private property to make an inspection of the dam at Westward Lake
Estates subdivision to see what is necessary to make it safe for those
residents living below the dam. Supervisor Myers then moved for adoption
of this emergency ordinance.
IN RE:
ORDINANCE NO. 3128 ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER OF THE ROANOKE
COUNTY CODE TO BE DESIGNATED CHAPTER 8.3 ENTITLED WATER
IMPOUNDMENT SAFETY CODE TO CONTAIN PROVISIONS FOR RIGHT OF
ENTRY, INSPECTION OF WATER IMPOUNDMENT FACILITY AND
STRUCTURES, PROVIDING FOR REMOVAL AND/OR REPAIR UPON
DETERMINATION OF IMMINENT DANGER, PROVIDING FOR RECOVERY
OF COST BY THE COUNTY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EMERGENCY.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County as follows:
1. That there be, and there hereby is, adopted a new Chapter of the
Roanoke County Code to be designated Chapter 8.3 entitled Water Impoundment
Safety Code to read and provide as follows;
CHAPTER 8.3
WATER IMPOUNDMENT SAFETY CODE
Section 8.3:1 Definitions. -As used in this code the following words
shall have the meanings respectively ascribed thereto;
1. "Board" means the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County.
2. "Administrator" means the Roanoke County Administrator or his duly
appointed designee.
3. "Impounding structure" means any structure or device, whether a
dam across a watercourse or other structure outside a watercourse, used
or to be used to retain or store waters or other materials. The term
"impounding structure" shall not include: (i) dams licensed by the State
Corporation Commission that are subject to a safety inspection program;
(ii) dams owned or licensed by the United States government; (iii) dams
constructed, maintained or operated primarily for agricultural purposes
which are less than fifteen (15) feet in height or which create a maximum
impoundment smaller than twenty-five (25) acre-feet; (iv) water or silt
retaining dams approved pursuant to Section 45.1-222 of the Code of
Virginia; (v) obstructions in a canal used to raise or lower water; (vi)
nonagricultural dams which are less than fifteen (15) feet in height or
which create a maximum impoundment smaller than twenty-five (25) acre-
feet; or (vii) dams not more than six feet in height regardless of storage
capacity or with a storage capacity of not more than ten (10) acre-feet
regardless of height. I
4. "Height" means the structural height of an impounding structure
which is defined as the vertical distance from the natural bed of the
stream or watercourse measured at the downstream toe of the impounding
structure to the top of the impounding structure.
5. "Watercourse" means a natural channel having a well-defined bed
and banks and in which water flows when it normally does flow.
6. "Owner" means the owner of the land on which an impounding
structure is situated, the holder of an easement permitting the construction
of an impounding structure and any person or entity responsible for maintainin
-
~
r
5-3-82
404 ·
an impounding structure, either by agreement or otherwise.
Section 8.3:2 Promulgation of Rules and Regulations by the Board.,
-The Board shall promulgate all necessary rules and regulations no less
stringent than those promulgated by the State Water Control Board to
ensure that impounding structures in the County are properly and safely
constructed maintained, repaired and operated.
I
I
Ii
I
i
I'
Section 8.3:3 County Impoundment Safety Technical Advisory Committee.
-The Board shall establish a County Impoundment Safety Technical Advisory
Committee to advise the Board upon impoundments within Roanoke County. The
County Impoundment Safety Technical Advisory Committee created and appointed
by the Board shall consist of at least five (5) persons qualified by
education, experience and professional training in the design, construction,
maintenance, repair and safety characteristics of water impoundment structure
or devices. The County Impoundment Safety Technical Advisory Committee shall
provide both technical review, and make recommendations to the Board pursuant
to any of the provisions of this code.
I
I'
Section 8.3:4 Safety Inspections. -No one shall have a right to main-
tain an impoundment structure which unreasonably threatens the life or
property of another. The Board upon recommendation of the Administrator or
any other duly authorized State or Federal agency shall cause safety inspecti DS,
not to exceed that of a phase 1 inspection report as established by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, to be made of impounding structures on such schedule
as it deems appropriate, the time of the initial inspection and the frequency
of reinspection shall be established depending on such factors as the
condition of the structure and its size, type, location and downstream hazard
potential. The owners of impounding structures found to have deficiencies
which could threaten life or property if uncorrected, shall take the correcti'~
actions, which may include a phase II inspection report as established by
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, needed to remove such deficiencies within
a reasonable time.
I
I
I,
I
I
Section 8.3:5 Unsafe Impounding Structures Presenting Imminent Danger.
-When the Administrator or any other State or Federal agency charged with
such responsibility, finds an unsafe impounding structure constituting an
imminent danger to life or property, the Administrator shall immediately
notify the Board and confer with the owner. The owner of an impounding
structure found to constitute an imminent danger to life or property shall
take immediate corrective action, which corrective action shall commence no
later than ten (10) calendar days following written notification of such
unsafe condition. If the owner does not take appropriate and timely action
to correct the danger found, the Chairman of the Board, or the Vice-Chairman
in the Chairman's absence shall have the authority to authorize the
Administrator to take immediate appropriate action, without the necessity
for a hearing, to remove the imminent danger. The County Attorney shall
bring an action against the owner of the impounding structure for the County'~
expenses in and about removing the imminent danger. There shall be a lien
upon the owner's real estate for the County's expenses in and about removing
the imminent danger. The owner may avoid the County's costs,and recover
any damages, upon proving that the impounding structure was known to be
safe at the time such action was taken, and that the owner had provided or
offered to immediately provide such proof to the Administrator before the
action complained of was taken. Nothing herein shall in any way limit any
authority existing under the Emergency Services and Disaster Law of 1973,
Chapter 3.2 of Title 44 of the Code of Virginia.
I
I'
Section 8.3:6 Unsafe Impounding Structures Presenting Nonimminent
Danger. -A. Within a reasonable time after completion of a safety inspection
of an impounding structure authorized by Section 8.3:4 of this Code, the
Administrator shall issue a report to the owner of the impounding structure
containing findings and recommendations for correction of deficiencies, if
any, which could threaten life or property if uncorrected. Owners who have
been issued a report containing recommendations for correction of deficiencie~
shall undertake to implement the recommendations contained in the report.
If an owner fails or refuses to commence or diligently prosecute the
implementation of recommendations for correction of deficiencies according
I
I
-I
!
LI
~
5-3-82
405
'" '-
, , "
I
to the schedule of implementation contained in an issued report, the
Administrator shall have the authority to issue an administrative order
directing the owner to commence implementation and completion of such
recommendations according to the schedule contained in the report with
modifications as appropriate. Within thirty (30)days after being served
by personal service or by certified mail with a copy of an order issued
pursuant to this section, any owner shall have the right to petition
the Board for a hearing. A timely filed petition, within the thirty (30)
day period, shall stay the effect of the administrative order.
The hearing shall be conducted before the Board or a majority of the
members thereof. The Board shall have the authority to affirm, modify,
amend or cancel such administrative order. Any owner aggrieved by a decision
of the Board after a hearing herein provided shall have the right to appeal
such final Board decision to the Circuit Court having jurisdiction in
Roanoke County within thirty (30) days following such decision.
B. The provisions of paragraph A of this section notwithstanding, if
in the opinion of the Administrator, changed circumstances justify reclassi-
fying the deficiencies of an impounding structure after issuance of the report
as an imminent danger to life or property the Administrator may proceed
directly under Section 8.3:5 of this Code for enforcement of his order, and
the owner shall have the opportunity to contest the factual basis upon which
the administrative order was issued.
I
Section 8.3:7 Right of Entry. -The Board and its agents and employees
shall have the right to enter any property upon consent of the owner or
custodian to perform such inspections and tests or to take such other actions
as it deems necessary to fulfill its responsibilities under this chapter.
If entry is denied, the Board may apply to any magistrate whose territorial
jurisdiction encompasses the property to be inspected or entered for a
warrant authorizing such investigation, tests or other actions. Such warrant
shall issue if the magistrate finds probable cause to believe that there is
an impounding structure on such property which is not known to be safe.
Section 8.3:8 Impounding Structure Safety Coordination. -The Administr or
shall coordinate all impoundment safety activities in the County, which
shall include, but not be limited to: (i) the maintenance of an inventory
of all impoundment structures, and of all other similar structures whether
or not regulated under this chapter to the extent the Board deems necessary;
(ii) the maintenance of a repository for record drawings of all such
structures to the extent the Board deems necessary; (iii) the maintenance
of an inventory of safety inspection reports by whomever made for each such
structure to the extent the Board deems necessary; and (iv) the maintenance
of a secondary repository for all impoundment structure safety emergency
action plans which are primarily filed with the Office of the Coordinator of
Fire and Emergency Services. The Board shall cause to be provided technical
assistance in the preparation, updating and execution of such plans. It
shall cause to be established uniform maintenance-of-records requirements
and uniform inspection standards to be applied to all impounding structures i
the County, and to be recommended for all other similar structures. It
may cause to be inspected state-owned or state-licensed impounding structures
on a cost reimbursable basis at the request of the state agency owning the
state-owned impounding structure or of the licensor of the state-licensed
impounding structure.
I
Section 8.3:9 Enforcement. -Any person or legal entity failing or
refusing to comply with an order issued pursuant to this chapter may be
compelled in a proceeding instituted in any appropriate court by the Board
to obey the same, and the court shall require the owner to comply therewith.
2. That in order to immediately provide for the welfare and safety
of the citizens of Roanoke County and their property an emergency is declared
to exist and this ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its
passage.
Adopted on motion by Supervisor Myers and the following, recorded vote.
AYES:
Supervisors Myers, Burton, Minter, Johnson, and Park.
NAYS:
None
~
~
5-3-82
406
Those present were advised the County Administrator would
commence work immediately to get in contact with the owners of the lake and
that if there were any danger, there was a plan of evacuation and that
they would be kept informed.
Mr. Sid Crosswhite, 5045 Crest Hill Drive in Westward Lake Estates,
asked if there were any governing bodies above the County Supervisors that
would have jurisdiction in this situation. He was told Roanoke County was
the only agency that could enforce the just-adopted ordinance. Mr. Cross-
white was aware that a letter had been received from one of the Lake owners
and asked what Mr. Frank Sellers said about what he would do to correct his
part. Copies of Mr. Sellers's letter were distributed to those interested.
I
Chairman Park asked if there were any other comments from the
citizens. An unidentified member of the audience asked if an inspection
could be made by the County tomorrow. The County Administrator answered
that it would be made as soon as possible. Chairman Park assured one of
the women in the audience that if possible, the dam would be made safe so
the water wouldn't have to be drained and would be available for later use
because water already impounded is valuable.
I
Supervisor Minter commented that the purpose of the water
impoundment ordinance was to give the County authority to take action to
make the dam safe.
An unidentified member of the audience asked that their situation
be made safe and requested regular inspections in the future. Supervisor
Myers told those present that if something wasn't done about their problem
soon, to please come to one of the Supervisors' regular meetings and let
the Supervisors know.
I
IN RE:
CONCLUSION
This hearing on the adoption of the water impoundment ordinance
was finished at 5:52 p.m. The Board meeting continued as a work session on
the County budget for 1982/83.
----
~
I
5-3-82
407
IN RE:
EXECUTIVE SESSION
I
At 7:25 p.m. Supervisor Minter moved that the Board go into
executive session to discuss a personnel matter. His motion was adopted
by a unanimous voice vote.
IN RE:
OPEN SESSION
At 7:45 p.m. on motion of Supervisor Myers and a unanimous
voice vote, the Supervisors returned to open session. A discussion was
held relative to correspondence regarding tax rates and payment of taxes
by renters.
IN RE:
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:50 p.m. a motion was made by Supervisor Johnson to adjourn
and the motion was adopted by a unanimous voice vote.
I
I