RSS

Tag Archives: Stormwater

What can FOIA mean to you? Here is one example concerning stormwater in Christiansburg, VA

24 Jun

Well, that will depend upon what area your interest direct you to
explore. For instance, over a year ago, I did a FOIA request of the
Town of Christiansburg for Minutes of Town Council and planning
Commission Meeting Minutes from 2001 through 2008. I received all of
the Town Council minutes and some of the Planning Commission minutes.

Rather
than have to dig through those documents when I have a question or am
looking for a pattern, I scanned them and set them up as searchable
.pdf documents. This gave me a fairly useful tool for allowing my mind
to wander.

For instance when searches were done on stormwater and flood/flooding:

Did you know that from July through December of 2001, there was no mention of any of those words in the Town Council Minutes.

In the 2002 calendar year, there were 18 instances where stormwater/flood/flooding issues were addressed with the Town Council.

In the 2003 calendar year, there were 12 instances where stormwater/flood/flooding issues were addressed with the Town Council.

In the 2004 calendar year, there were 3 instances where stormwater/flood/flooding issues were addressed with the Town Council.

In the 2005 calendar year, there was 1 instance where stormwater/flood/flooding issues were addressed with the Town Council.

In the 2006 calendar year, there were 3 instances where stormwater/flood/flooding issues were addressed with the Town Council.

In the 2007 calendar year, there were 2 instances where stormwater/flood/flooding issues were addressed with the Town Council.

In the 2008 calendar year, there were 5 instances where stormwater/flood/flooding issues were addressed with the Town Council.

Now,
I will be looking at these much more closely for a future report but
what is abundandently clear is the fact that most of these
‘discussions’ came from citizens who were suffering the negative
effects of stormwater/flood/flooding.

There were a few
occasions, during times when ‘stormwater’ was made a major issue by
citizens, that stormwater was brought up by Council members in relation
to rezoning/development issues.

I will note that during the time
that Mayor Linkous was in office, these issues were brought up more
frequently, and the people bringing them up during those times were:
Mr. Ballengee, Mr. Barber, and Mrs. Carter. Also, it should be noted
that the large ‘growth spurt’ which generated massive amounts of
impervious surfaces began around 2005.

Many of the areas
mentioned in the minutes are still having problems with
stormwater/flood/flooding (as noted in the recent flooding problems
reported in Christiansburg.

So I found some information. What
good is it? Well, by itself, it isn’t much. If you take the time to
make use of some of the other documents open to the public, you can
begin to get a bit of the bigger picture. These other documents are
found on the internet and include things like the latest DCR provided
rules and regulations for stormwater management (comparing that to the
Town of Christiansburg Code has been a real experience!) and the
various State Codes specific to stormwater management and flooding.

What
is troublesome is the number of times that Town Council members heard
about citizen fear of stormwater issues related to new development and
went ahead and approved the development with the understanding that the
Town Manager would make sure that all was done correctly to insure
safety. This is the same Town Manager would couldn’t manage to upgrade
the Town’s Storm Water Ordinance.

At the 3/4/2003 Town Council
meeting then Councilman Ballengee specifically asked about any problems
related to recent heavy rains. The Town Manager noted that there had
been minor flooding and minor road destruction and that all reports
were handled according to Town procedure. There does not appear to be
any further discussion of what this “Town procedure” might have been.

One
quickly gets the same impression from those historic minutes that one
can get from recent Town Council minutes. That impression is that the
Town Council hears about issues, the Mayor trustingly hands the issue
over to the Town Manager, and no further discussion ensues.

At
the most recent Town Council Meeting, I specifically asked Council what
was being done to keep the flooding from reoccurring. The question was
fielded by the Mayor and passed off to the Town Manager who simply
responded that the flooding was being investigated. Nothing was offered
to report that any steps were being taken to deal with the issue and
yet town work crews have been seen in multiple locations trying to pump
out the accumulated silt and debris from storm drains. Routine
inspection and maintenance? If there is such a thing within the Town,
then has that schedule been modified as the amount of silt and debris
from construction sites have multiplied? Are we still doing things the
way we have for the last 30 years? Personally, I’ve never seen this
type of work performed before, but I’ve only been living here for the
last 10 years and I have not been watching every storm drain every
minute of every day:)

One thing I will say is that I have the
utmost respect for those workers who are doing the job. They are not
the ones who created the problems. They were not the “DECIDER”
determining what constituted a problem with runoff from sites or
whether proper measures were taken to curb that runoff before it got
into the system and created problems. They are simply the ones who have
to clean up other people’s messes.

Nope, I haven’t been off
the FOIA topic here. I’ve just given an example of how anybody can use
that information that he/she has the right to obtain. There are a lot
of other examples out there. You can start looking at some of them on
my citizen’s information website MyVAResources.com. Or take a closer look at how the FOIA process has worked in Christiansburg at the Citizen Initiative for Transparency site.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 24, 2009 in FOIA, Land Use

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Web source for Soil Survey Maps. Where are minimum standards acceptable?

06 Jun

The United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service has a nice website where you can obtain information about the soil under and around your home, throughout the town, city, county or state where you live.

It is called Web Soil Survey and is located at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm (or simply click the address as it has the link built into it.

It does take a few minutes to learn how to use it and waiting for the maps to populate gives just about enough time to fill up the coffee cup.

Here are some samples I did in about an hour. They are focused on the Cambria area but can be replicated with any neighborhood in town. I found it easiest to set the AOI (Area of Interest by Using a street address then zooming either in or out until I defined the area I wanted. Note that definitions and data are also in the packages. The colors red, yellow and green are used to identify how suitable certain land is for certain uses. The definitions of these are available on the written reports, but in general Red means you should not do it there without making some big changes from standard practices, Yellow means you may need to add a few things to make it workable, Green means that standard practices are generally adequate.

Map and Report 1:

Suitability for Dwellings with Basements

Suitability for Dwellings without Basements

Suitability for Small Commercial Buildings

Suitability for Local Roads and Streets

Suitability for Pond and Reservoir Areas (Stormwater Retention Ponds)

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 6, 2009 in Land Use

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Christiansburg, VA Comprehensive Plan and Stormwater/Flooding….Interesting Reading

31 May

Remember that little old document I’ve spoken of several times in the past, the Comprehensive Plan? Well Chapter 9 of that document “Natural Environment and Existing Land Use (or use the full text document available at christiansburg.org) provides some interesting insights into flooding, stormwater management, and the uh…lack there of within the Town of Christiansburg. This version, adopted in 2003 (and to be reviewed and modified if necessary every 5 years and completely revised every 10 years – these are minimum standards per State Code). It was reviewed by the Planning Commission and it was determined that no modifications were necessary, that it was just fine the way it was.

There is a section on soils that uses data from a 1985 soil survey done for Montgomery County in September 1985. I have a copy of this document and will be scanning some of the maps to load online. This data included soil types for the Town of Christiansburg. In paragraph 1 of this Soils section it is noted: “While a general survey of this type cannot replace detailed on-site soils investigations, this, this survey can significantly enhance the ability of the Town to make broad based planning and land use decisions.”

The document then provides information of 2 dominate types of soils groups in Christiansburg. They are noted in a very nice little two color General Soil Map that simply identifies classes of soils. Nothing is there to address slope and the issues related to runoff, stormwater, and possible flooding. Pretty but pretty uselss for effective planning. But it requires a lot less work to look at and make judgments.

However, that is just one map of many in this particular document. Sheet 31 of the actual Soil Map is specific to the Town of Christiansburg. What it contains, is a more specific analysis than the generic map the Town of Christiansburg elected to use in the Comprehensive Plan. This map even gives information on those areas which have a high likelihood of problems with runoff and rapid soil saturation in certain areas. Additionally it councils against development in certain areas due to soil types and slopes. This is a really kewl document. 1985 is the most current map available. Much of what is now Christiansburg was not noted as being part of Christiansburg when the map was made. The only way to make effective land use decisions would have been to use these more specific maps.

The Hydrology section of the Comprehensive plan notes that the “Town of Christiansburg is drained primarily by Slate Branch and Crab Creek and its tributaries: Town Branch and Walnut Creek.”

And (can we say karst? Well, if you do say karst there are a whole lot of legal issues that come up as to how that has to be manaed.): “According to the Groundwater Map of Virginia, the Town of Christiansburg lies within the Carbonate Groundwater Area of the Valley and Ridge Province. Due to the prevalence of carbonate bedrock (limestone and dolostone), the presence of underground drainageways in Christiansburg is fairly widespread. Such paths are formed when slightly acidic groundwater dissolves the bedrock, forming breaks, fractures, and caves.” (This slightly acidic groundwater is caused when water releases some of the carbon it has temporarily trapped as it travels to and across the earth. Increase carbon in the air by increasing traffic, loss of vegetation that removes carbon from the air, and carbon based fuels in asphalt or on the roads, and voila, you have increased the amount of carbon available for release and decreased the water pH – more acid. The action of the acid on the rock results in things like sinkholes, collapsing pavement and driveways, etc.).

Another section “Floodplains” starts with: While the majority of Christiansburg lies in upland areas not generally subject to flooding, the Town does experience limited flooding from Crab Creek and its tributaries. Some of the most severe flooding has been the result of heavy rains associated with major weather fronts or local thunderstorms, as occurred in 1940, 1972, and 1978.

In the “Storm Draininage” subsection of “Floodplains” I found: “Storm drainage within the Town of Christiansburg is accommodated in part by a publicly maintained closed conduit system as well as by paved and grassed ditches. Developers are required to install underground storm drains as well as curb and gutter or paved ditches where the potential for erosion is high. (Those areas can be easily identified on the map I noted previously – yes, I will be putting it online.) Public storm drainage improvements were made by construction of underground storm piping along Roanoke Street, between Robers and Main Streets, which was completed in the early 1990′s.”

“Localized storm drainage problems have been experienced along Route 460 near the Corning facility, the New River Valley Mall area, along College Street, along Ellett Road, near Silver lake Road, and in the Hans Meadow area. The Town has acquired property for the installation of a storm water facility to alleviate the problems experienced in the Hans Meadow area.”

“After periods of concentrated precipitation (storm events of 50-100 year recurrence intervals), ponding and the eventual inundation of Route 460 have occurred. The severity of this flooding has warranted temporary closure of the road on several occasions; this situation was corrected.”

“The Town is now required to do regional storm water planning as required by the Town’s classification as an urbanized area. The Town anticipates requiring the Phase II Stormwater planning be implemented on a Town-wide basis, though only required to do so for the areas classified as urban.”

Well that’s a few of the highlights. Believe me, there is a lot of other very interesting information found in that document. And, if you compare it other documents existing with other agencies, it can get real entertaining, like a horror movie.

Ultimately, this shows the significant role that Planning Commission members of the past and those current play in whether stormwater issues have been dealt with effectively. Was proper judgment used in determining where new construction occurred? Was the actual topography of the land taken into consideration. Has anyone on the Planning Commission or the Town Council even heard of, much less looked at the map I referred to above that shows very specific information on the land within the Town of Christiansburg?

One of the most important duties a Town Council member has is in appointing qualified people to the Planning Commission. Of course, if the Planning Department is doing the job it should do and providing this type of information to the Planning Commission in the form of a staff analysis (assuming, of course, that they know that these other maps exist) then it falls upon the Planning Commission and Town Council members to read these documents before making landuse decisions.

Sorry ya’ll but you’re not going to solve stormwater issues, flooding, and pollution by throwing more concrete and asphalt on top of the land creating more runoff.

By the way, anybody else noticed all the roads crumbling? It is particularly noticeable in those areas where the Town has built up these little asphalt banks to prevent some properties from flooding. It looks like if you complain enough, they come out and dump a mound of asphalt where the roadway abuts your property. What does that do to your neighbor’s property?

There are some serious problems, and they have been around for awhile just getting worse as time goes by…….maybe money should have been put into stormwater management rather than some other things.

And another by the way, I did a bit of checking and there is a culvert under the road on Depot Street near Craig and Main that takes water from ditches and roadways and dumps them out on railroad property where it cascades down to drains dumping straight into Crab Creek. A few months back, there was an incident where a school bus dumped a tank full of diesel on Main right about where it would go into that drain. But, they washed it all off with water….straight into the storm drains……straight into Crab Creek. I asked the Town about management of such spills and if any reporting was necessary to EPA, etc. and I pretty much got the “we’ve taken care of everything” respoonse.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on May 31, 2009 in Environment, Land Use

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Stormwater Management in Christiansburg, VA

28 May

There’s a new page on my Special Studies section of MyVaRecources.com (informational site for citizens of the Town of Christiansburg and everywhere else this side of Pluto). (From any page on the site, simply click on the Special Studies link, then on the Stormwater link.)

Guess what the topic is …. “Stormwater“. There is very little discussion on the page, rather it is a collection of links that I found to be informative on the topic of stormwater. They cover a variety of the issues related to stormwater including: runoff, flooding, health hazards, environmental hazards, property damage, state laws, your rights under those laws, and general information sites.

A reader asked me a while back if I was really ignorant enough to believe that Town officials would read the blog. Well, the answer was and is, of course not! If they were that motivated to know about the problems around town, they would wait for someone to call them, they would be asking questions before making decisions, they would be demanding firm answers rather than “I think so.” They would already know about all of these sites and the information they contain. What I do, I do for citizens. Hopefully, there are some of those citizens who will decide to run for the office of Town Council or Mayor in the next election. It is my goal to be sure that citizens know their rights and that anyone running for office will be able to be effective leaders in the community.

I will note there there is/are one/or more elected/appointed official(s) that do/does read the blogs, does go to the sites, asks for more information, and is/are trying to make change. He/She/They is/are prevented from doing some of the things that need to be done by a block of those with voting power who insist things be done the way they have always been done. That is a problem that it will be up to voters to remedy. I could nearly guarantee that any citizen who spends 15 minutes looking at some of these information sites will know more about stormwater than most Town Council members. (Yes, I am being vague for a purpose. If you think citizens are the only ones that are being intentionally left in the dark, you are wrong!)

I will not provide information on who that/those may be but if you look at some of the vidoes or listen to some of the audios, or better yet, come to some of the meetings and see for yourself, you can tell who has done their homework and who hasn’t. I’ve been working hard to update the videos and all are loaded and ready to go except for the 5/19 Town Council Meeting which I am still working on. (Sorry, but trying to protect Historic Buildings from stormwater damage has to take priority.)

I understand that a citizen’s group is in the process of forming and when I hear more, I will let you know. I will be there! I have a few ideas of my own in the works and as soon as the rain slows down, it is going to be “Katie bar the door!” time. I want to see how the town responds before I get those going so that time and resources can be most effectively used…..planning….they’ll never figure out what I’m up to because they don’t understand planning:)

Anyway, if you have some time, check out the Stormwater page. If you find things on your own that could be added, let me know.

My thanks to all of you for your support and encouragement during these trying times. Your encouragement via emails and phone calls has kept me going! I’m feeling a lot like the David and Goliath scenario is in place. But, we all know how that one turned out!:)

Don’t forget to check out ThinkChristiansburg’s blog on Stormwater and the role of the DCR! Rain, Rain Go Away.
Have a great day!

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on May 28, 2009 in Citizen Participation, Environment, Historic Preservation, Land Use

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Flooding in Cambria, Christiansburg, VA

27 May

I’m sure there were problems all around town last night. I only know of the problems in Cambria because I was there. I was out in the rain, with my shovel trying to keep the rocks, chunks of asphalt (from uphill Depot St.), gravel, and sand from directing the water flow right into the Emporium and Electrical Supply again. The equipment from ServePro is still inside running inside the Emporium, trying to get all of the water out and save the building from further damage.

Last night the Town responded and lent a big hand. Once they saw what the problem was they had sandbags delivered to build a barricade to keep water going into the drain and not into the building. What a relief that was.

Now, with much more rain on the way, Town workers are out taking the sandbags away. I asked one of them why they were taking away the only protection we had for the Emporium. The response was, my boss told us to do it.

Okay, so the Town knows there is a problem, the Town takes steps to protect property from the problem. Knowing much more rain is on the way, the Town takes away the protection.

I’m standing here with my shovel and buckets ready to go out in the rain again because of the actions of the town.

Somebody out there, please try to help me make sense of what has just happened. I just cannot figure out this puzzle out. (mutter…mutter…do something to prevent damage, then undo it so more damange can occur). Glad I have that FEMA inspector’s number. Bet he’ll love the photos of all this activity too.

Oh….maybe they are going to do some sort of magic uphill to stop the flow of water. That would be a great thing. Hope that is what they have in mind. Or some other better action to prevent damage, I’d love to write about something positive being done.

Guess that’ll teach me to judge too quickly. Right after I posted this, the sandbags magically reappeared. Seems the Town doesn’t check with the National Weather Service to know that the rains coming over the next 3 days is going to be heavy with flash flood potential.

I am glad that the sandbags are there, perhaps it will save me a bit of labor. Thanks Town!

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on May 27, 2009 in Land Use

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

And here we go again….Flooding in Cambria

26 May

This has been a pattern long before Mr. Terpenny’s “1000 Year Event” (that isn’t substantiated by National Weather Service data). This time flooding was prevented because yours truly was out in the rain shoveling up the bushels of asphalt, rock, gravel, and red clay runoff that was clogging the drains. Water running off Depot street filled the drain at the back of the Emporium, running under the railroad track to the point that the discharge line from the roof of the Emporium was covered and a water spout over 4 feet high was coming out of where the roof drain pipe went into that underground pipe.

A call was made to the Town of Christiansburg, perhaps they will finally be convinced that there is a problem with drainage in this section of the road. Perhaps they will admit that runoff coming from up the hill is filling the drains with mud, sand, gravel, and rocks thus reducing the capacity of an already challenged system. Maybe not. Maybe they will simply continue to tell me that I am stupid and don’t know a thing about stormwater. Maybe they will just laugh and go on about their business. A Town Engineer did come out and look and just now, sandbags appeared in order to try to protect the Emporium. Fortunately, there was enough gravel, mud, sand, etc filling the roadway that in cleaning out the drains at the Emporium, I had enough to build a dam in front of the Depot to block some of the new flooding happening there.

Well, back to shoveling and moving water. Photos will follow:)

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
1 Comment

Posted by on May 26, 2009 in Land Use

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

What is an MS4 and what does it mean for Stormwater Management in Christiansburg?

23 May

According to the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation: Soil & Water Conservation: Virginia Stormwater Management Program Permits, MS4 is Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems Permit. Christiansburg is listed as one.

Way down on this page you’ll find a couple of interesting sections:
Stormwater discharges from Phase I municipal separate storm sewer systems are authorized under individual VSMP permits. Under these permits, the MS4 owner/operator must implement a collective series of programs to reduce the discharge of pollutants from the given storm sewer system to the maximum extent practicable in a manner that protects the water quality of nearby streams, rivers, wetlands and bays.

The programs must include elements to:

  • Operate and maintain structural stormwater controls.
  • Control discharges from areas of development and significant redevelopment.
  • Operate and maintain public streets, roads and highways.
  • Identify, monitor and control discharges from municipal waste treatment, storage or disposal facilities.
  • Control pollutants related to application of pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers.
  • Implement an inspection program to enforce ordinances, which prohibit illicit connections and illegal dumping into the MS4.
  • Screen the MS4 for illicit connections and illegal dumping.
  • Implement standard investigative procedures to identify and terminate sources of illicit connections or discharges.
  • Prevent, contain and respond to spills that may discharge into the MS4.
  • Limit the infiltration of sanitary seepage into the MS4.
  • Identify, monitor and control discharges from municipal landfills; hazardous waste treatment, storage, disposal and recovery facilities; facilities subject to EPCRA Title III, Section 313; and any other industrial or commercial discharge the permittee determines to be contributing a substantial pollutant loading to the MS4.
  • Control pollutants in construction site runoff.
  • Conduct public education on stormwater.

and
The second phase of MS4 regulations became effective March 23, 2003, and requires that operators of small MS4s in “urbanized areas” (as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau’s latest decennial census) obtain permit coverage for stormwater discharges. Click here for maps detailing current urbanized areas in Virginia.

Small MS4s include storm sewer systems operated by cities, counties, towns, federal facilities such as military bases, Veteran’s Affairs hospitals and research facilities, Department of Defense facilities and parkways, and state facilities such as VDOT, community colleges and public universities. Discharges from small MS4s are regulated under the General Permit for the Discharge of Stormwater from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (PDF).

Under that permit, small MS4s must develop, implement and enforce a program that includes the following “six minimum control measures”:

  • Public education and outreach on stormwater impacts.
  • Public involvement and participation.
  • Illicit discharge detection and elimination.
  • Construction site stormwater runoff control.
  • Post-construction stormwater management in new development and redevelopment.
  • Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations.

Guess their claim to fame on the public education end of things will be the town’s newly installed website that does have a page on stormwater. Guess the outreach, public involvement and participation must be interpreted as those times citizens come before council to complain.

Or maybe they’ll lay claim to blog articles like

Low Impact Development — Now THAT’S PROGRESSIVE

Low Impact Development Part 2: “What is this new LID stuff?”

Storm Water Management – In Christiansburg, In Virginia

The Many Faces of Storm Water

Where are the studies for stormwater and traffic? How old is that data?

Storms bring Stormwater … What does that mean for you?

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on May 23, 2009 in Citizen Participation, Land Use

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Will future stormwater cause more flooding or even a train derailment?

20 May

Go to myvaresources.com and go to the photo galleries link. One of the photo galleries listed there is the postflood one. Those are photos taken on a walk down the railroad tracks. As I pointed out to Town Council members last night, they really should look at them. Erosion of the banks (on the side where more asphalt paving is coming and the owner has had to add 2 drains to keep his property from flooding – both of which dump onto the bank of land I’ve photographed) washed down debris onto the track (I removed that), and there are piles of dirt and gravel that have pressed up against the outside rail and comes to within 1/4″ of the top of the rail in places. There is also one place where a power line is being pulled down by large limbs and trees that are on their way down that slope as well.

Hope the town is aware of this State Code:

§ 15.2-5149. Interference with railroad structures.

Whenever any railroad tracks, pipes, poles, wires, conduits or other structures or facilities which are located in, along, across, over or under any public road, street, highway, alley or other public right-of-way become an obstruction to, interfere with or are endangered by the construction, operation or maintenance of any system of the authority, the unit having ownership, control or jurisdiction over such public road, street, highway, alley or other public right-of-way may, as the exercise of an essential governmental function, order the safeguarding, maintaining, relocating, rebuilding, removing or replacing of such railroad tracks, pipes, poles, wires, conduits or other structures or facilities by the owner thereof at the expense of the authority, subject to the provisions of § 25.1-102.

(Code 1950, § 15-764.12; 1950, p. 1318; 1954, c. 554; 1958, cc. 400, 402; 1960, c. 430; 1962, cc. 130, 623, § 15.1-1250; 1968, cc. 355, 556; 1970, cc. 444, 617; 1972, c. 161; 1979, c. 280; 1980, c. 159; 1981, c. 610; 1983, c. 422; 1984, c. 554; 1994, c. 477; 1997, c. 587.)

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on May 20, 2009 in Economic Development, Environment, Historic Preservation, Land Use

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Stormwater Management Ordinances for Town of Christiansburg are MIA

19 May

I have dropped a lot of hints to see if people would look but nobody has mentioned anything yet. The Town of Christiansburg has posted the Town’s Code on its new and improved website.

At the webpage you will find options to be able to see or download individual chapter or the overall ordinance. Funny thing is that (I haven’t finished the line-by line analysis yet) in the individual Chapters there is a Chapter 10 Erosion and Sediment Control. It is a 14 page .pdf document.

Now, if you go to the full copy of the Code, Chapter 10 is titled: Erosion and Sediment Control and Stormwater Management. It is 47 pages long and broken down into 3 sections. These sections are: Article I. Erosion and Sediment Control, Article II. Stormwater Management, Article III. Illicit Discharge.

Maybe that is what was meant by the State of Virginia directive that the Town must update it’s Storm Water Management section of the Town Code. Maybe it was to remove it from visibility in order to be able to ignore it more effectively. Maybe the Town is actually working on the updates, but such a note should be found. Where is this update that was ordered? If the codes were out of complaince was that a significant part of why all of the flooding occurred.

What happened here was what is known as Urban Flooding, Flooding due to increases in impervious surfaces and sections of disturbed land surface. T he same amount of water fall would NOT have had the same impact 5 or 10 years ago.

I can just see the new real estate ads now: Free Personal Flotation Devices with Every Home Purchase!

New photos on myvaresources.com. Check ‘em out!

This omission in the Codes would be funny if the very thing that got me started on this whole process had not been the fact that I raised an issue on parking and was told I had no standing. To prove the point, I was provided a copy of the relevant State Code that did show that I had no standing. Unfortunately, the copy I was given was not complete. I went to the actual State Code and found that the lines that were omitted clearly stated that I did have standing and my request was valid. Once someone lies to me I never believe that person again without checking out what that person said. In this case the person was the Town of Christiansburg. Over time, they have proven that my beliefs were well founded.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on May 19, 2009 in Citizen Participation, Land Use

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Town Manager’s Learning Curve, or What another lie or bad information?

19 May

The Town Manager of Christiansburg was heard to say that he had been told by the National Weather Service that Christiansburg recently suffered what was more than a 1000 year flood. 1000 year event classification per National Weather Service is 4 1/4″ in 3 hours is 1000 year storm; 6 1/2″ in 3 hours. First off, try to find any reference to a “thousand year flood”. You will find a few but these are floods where hundreds of acers are flooded. You will not find it a definition of this ‘concept’ anywhere online. A phone call to the National Weather Service will yield that there is no such set standard for inches of rainfall in a specific timeframe to determine flood events.

Wikipedia does have informtion on the 100 year flood: A one-hundred-year flood is calculated to be the level of flood water expected to be equaled or exceeded every 100 years on average. The 100-year flood is more accurately referred to as the 1% flood, since it is a flood that has a 1% chance of being equaled or exceeded in any single year. Based on the expected flood water level, a predicted area of inundation can be mapped out. This floodplain map figures very importantly in building permits, environmental regulations, and flood insurance.

First, let me point out a few little details that the Town Manager may want to check out:
1. the National Flood Insurance Program has copies of current flood plain maps available online. More of that nasty Freedom of Information, Empowering Citizens junk:) Just looking at the section in Cambria, if this most recent rainfall would have met the criteria for a 100 year (much less than a 1000 year flood) businesses on both sides of Crab Creek along Cambria and Depot Streets would have been flooded, including some of those on the far side of Depot. The railroad tracks would have been underwater. All of those areas on the opposite side of the track from the Depot would have been underwater.
2.A Public Information Statement from the National Weather Service in Blacksburg VA notes unofficial precipitation totals for a 15 hour period ending at 8 AM Friday and shows the Christiansburg level at 2.37″. Having been in the Cambria area, I would argue that it was closer to a 4″ rainfall there, and there was one report of over six inches there from a source who had positioned a personal rainguage in a location where the level was compromised by flow from a roof.
3. A local Storm Report from National Weather Service Blacksburg, VA notes that there was a flash flood on North Franklin Street at Spradlin Farms that closed the road due to high water reaching a depth of 3 feet. Road was re-oped around 4:00 AM (What creeks are there in Spradlin Farm area? Shouldn’t that be high and dry if storm water management is adequate?)
4. At 2:40 AM the National Weather Service Blacksburg, VA released a flash flood advisory reporting flash flooding all across the town. (Flooding should be the result of water having no place to go. If there is more water trying to go into the same location, a phenomenon that occurs when you significantly increase the amount of impervious surface without upgrading stormwater management features to accomodate that flow.)
5. Also at 2:40 AM several basements reported flooded in various locations across town.

I spent part of today out taking more photos of damage in Cambria and in other areas. Those photos will be loaded on online in the next few days. They are currently enroute to storage. Those photos clearly show that the elevation of the railroad track is higher than either the Cambria Emporium or the Depot and the buildings on the other side of Crab Creek.

It should further be noted that the large grassy areas which are at a lower elevation that the Cambria Emporium or the Depot but are on the opposite side of the track are untouched by water flow or debris. In full investigative mode, I wandered down the track looking and taking photos on both sides. No evidence of flooding was found on the Creek side of the railroad tracks. However, there is extensive evidence to indicate that water running downhill from properties on the otherside of the track pushed debris up to the very edge of the track. A lot of debris flowed down a channel along side the track headed straight for….yep you guessed the Cambria Depot and Emporium, which ironically (NOT) did get flooded.

I’ll be loading the audio of today’s PC meeting in a bit but I was in another meeting with the camera so I only have partial videos of that meeting. The audio fortunately caught something I would have missed. A citizen asking for a rezoning to allow a used carlot, uphill from the depot and the train track, which will include a newly paved area for the cars to be parked upon.

The owner of the property noted that he had some problems with water running off of Depot St. onto his property but that the town had a drain there and that took care of it, pretty much. But, in the past 2 years he did add two drains of his own to keep his buildings from flooding. Those drains run downhill and drop off the slope at the tracks……(at about the same place I found where part of the slope had been washed away, several large limbs had been washed down, oh, and a large black cable that runs between two large wooden poles has been pulled down and is now tangled in the debris. Wanna bet the next good rain takes out that power line?

Walking down the track shows a clear path of water running down the track headed to Cambria Street. Debris is pushed up onto the track, maybe a train derailment in the future?

What in the heck is it going to take for these guys to get a clue and realize that it is stormwater management that is the issue? The Town needs to have professionals come in to look at these. (I have a nightvision feature on my camera and I can’t wait to see what the shots from the grates down inside those drains show:)

Back to processing audio and video recordings:) Got some more photo albums to put together on stormwater. Keep checking at http://myvaresources.com for updates of existing and new photo albums.

Mr. Terpenny, you might want to get those comments from ‘specialists’ in writing to present to Town Council. It is probably just that you accidentally mispoke again, but that is so common, you really should take steps to help keep those mistakes from happening. If you come up with a document I can verify, I will be happy to post it on my website.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on May 19, 2009 in Land Use

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

← Older posts
Newer posts →