OCTOBER 8, 2019 WORKSHOP MINUTES r v
oy%'t6 o
f OUR WM
VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
Virginia Beach, Virginia
October 8, 2019
Mayor Robert M. Dyer called to order the JOINT CITY COUNCIL/SCHOOL BOARD MEETING on
the CITY and SCHOOLS REVENUE SHARING FORMULA in Building 19, Tuesday, October 8, 2019,
at 2:00 P.M
Council Members Present:
Jessica P. Abbott, Michael F. Berlucchi, Mayor Robert M. Dyer, Barbara M.
Henley, Louis R. Jones, John D. Moss, Aaron Rouse, Guy K. Tower, Rosemary
Wilson, Vice Mayor James L. Wood and Sabrina D. Wooten
Council Members Absent:
None
School Board Members Present:
Chair Beverly M.Anderson, Daniel Edwards, Sharon R. Felton, Dorothy M.
"Dotty"Holtz, Laura K Hughes, Victoria C. Manning, Vice Chair Kimberly A.
Melnyk,Jessica L. Owens, Trenace B. Riggs, and Carolyn D. Weems
School Board Members Absent:
Carolyn T. Rye
2
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/SCHOOL BOARD WORKSHOP
SCHOOLS FUNDING FORMULA
2:00 P.M.
Mayor Dyer welcomed Farrell Hanzaker, Chief Financial Officer— Virginia Beach Public City Schools and
Jonathan Hobbs,Acting Co-Director—Budget and Management Services. Mr. Ferrell expressed his
appreciation to the City Council and School Board for their continued support:
City and Schools Revenue
Sharing Formula
FARRELL HANZAKER,CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER,VIRGINIA BEACH CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
JONATHAN HOBBS,DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES
October 8,2019
Here is an overview of School Funding:
2
Overview of School Funding
► City Council appropriates moneys to the Schools,and the Council can
choose to appropriate in lump sum or by the nine major classifications set
forth in state law.Once appropriated,there is no Virginia statute that
empowers the City Council to de-appropriate or withhold funding.
I. City Council does not have the power to dictate policies or priorities
regarding the oversight of Schools.The Virginia Constitution vests the sole
authority to oversee the Schools and the operation thereof with the School
Board.
I. At the end of the fiscal year,unexpended funds revert to the source of
funding(Commonwealth or City).Such reversion funds may be
subsequently re-appropriated by Council to the Schools.
October 8, 2019
3
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/SCHOOL BOARD WORKSHOP
SCHOOLS FUNDING FORMULA
(Continued)
The next two (2)slides provide a History of School Funding Formula:
History of School Funding Formula in 3
Virginia Beach
► School funding formula began in FY 1998
► Shared 7 largest revenue sources(real estate,personal property,
general sales,utility,cellular telephone,business licenses,and cable
franchise fees)
► 53.13%of revenues provided to Schools and 46.87%retained by City;if
revenues under or over performed through the year,City and Schools
shared increases or decreases accordingly
► Schools are required to pay for debt service and pay-as-you-go within
the amount allocated by the funding formula
► To request funding above the formula,the School Board would make a
formal,written request to City Council
History of School Funding Formula in 4
Virginia Beach (cont.)
► Original formula continued through FY 2012 with some
modifications when it was eliminated for one year
► In FY 2014 a new formula was established:
i 1 Fund 100%of local SOQ match with non-dedicated revenues
21 Take 34.11%of remaining,non-dedicated revenues for discretionary
local match
31 Add back Schools'dedications(5.25ft real estate)
October 8, 2019
4
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/SCHOOL BOARD WORKSHOP
SCHOOLS FUNDING FORMULA
(Continued)
From FY 2001 to FY 2020, the City's annual contribution to the schools increased by approximately$200-
Million:
S
State vs Local Funding
School Operating Fund
OIClonn Aa c011em
$ow e�dea f00wi0 be00n
s.+e
$450
$394
s o0
53da
$350 $3d
$330
$252
$250
$248
$200
3150
t P a t i i� ♦ t� �� f`c . _ _
State fintlmp —local FinWnP
Year Over Year Change in 6
City Contribution to Schools
540 $35M
$ac $25 M
$21 M$20M
$20 ""A$18M $15M 514M S15M S14M
$10 I $S M
($4M)
($10)
(515M)($14M)
($20)
02 03 04 05 OS 09 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 1d `.7 18 19 20
Fiscal Year
October 8, 2019
5
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/SCHOOL BOARD WORKSHOP
SCHOOLS FUNDING FORMULA
(Continued)
This slide provides the current formula calculation for FY 2019 and FY 2020. In FY 2020, the City provided
nearly$448-Million in local funding to the Schools:
FY19 FY20_ �--
Real Estate + 537,918,638 558,748,263
Personal Property + 159,729,356 163,497,601
Consumer Related + 167,923,378 171,041,115
Utility/Telecommunications + 49,337,837 49,578,224
Other + 33,760,629 33,791,632
School Dedications
Real Estate-40 nt9-Schools'Operadng 22,346,062 22,871,264
Real Estate-1.25 cents-Full-day Kindergarten w 6,983,141 7,147,270 P
City tions
Re lEtate-1. C u rr V n t
Real Estate-1.89 cents-General Fund �- 10,558,510 10,806,672
Real Estate-3.3 cents-General Government/sw Op — 10,055,723 18,868,793
Real Estate-2 cents-Roadways ew 11,173,026 11,445,632
Real Estate-0.47 cent-Outdoor Initiative - 2,625,661 2,687,374 Funding
Personal Property-0.30cent-Public Safety w 11,214,280 11,398963
Cigarette-16 cents-EDP 2,476,760 Z384,890
Cigarette
uomobilS Lietse-5S-d �,9� 745,278 Formula
Automobile license-$5-General Government -- 1,920,949 2,742,128
General Fund Non-Dedicated Formula Revenues = 868,480,147 885,569,161
State Required SOO Match 176,889,755 175,280,597
Net Revenue to be Shared 691,590,392 710,288,564
Formula Percent X 34.11% 34.11%
Discretionary Local Match = 235,401,4.43 242,779,429
School Dedications 29,329,177 30,018,534
State Required 5O0 Match + 176,889,755 175,280,597
Discretionary Local Match + 235,931,483 242,279,429
Formula Contribution from the City = 442,120,415 447,578,560
The current funding formula expired on June 30, 2018:
Current Status of School Funding 8
Formula
► The current funding formula expired on June 30, 2018
► City Manager wrote a letter to City Council on July 27,2018
recommending an extension to the formula for one year with
concurrence from the Superintendent of Schools
I. Consideration for a new/revised funding formula to be
in place for the FY 2021 budget cycle
October 8, 2019
6
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/SCHOOL BOARD WORKSHOP
SCHOOLS FUNDING FORMULA
(Continued)
Here are the Guiding Principles for the Revenue Sharing Formula:
Guiding Principles for the Revenue 9
Sharing Formula
► Fair and equitable
► Simplify current formula
► Ensure information is available early in the budget process
► Facilitate long-term planning
► CIP needs
► Workforce planning projection
► Share in City's economic growth
This graph illustrates the required local match per the State Standards of Quality(SOQ) and is the
benchmark for the current Revenue Sharing Formula:
Standards of Quality (SOQ)
Required Local Match
giva
gl® 8176 $177 8175
giro
$168
51.
$151 $152
o 3,50 8154
• sla
3133 8)26
8128
3,20
8114
3103
October 8, 2019
7
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/SCHOOL BOARD WORKSHOP
SCHOOLS FUNDING FORMULA
(Continued)
Here are three(3)funding formula alternatives City and School staff discussed:
11
Process for Revising New Formula
► Environmental Scanning
► City and Schools' staff met to discuss alternatives,including:
► Keeping current formula with SOQ requirement(maintain status quo)
► Adjusting formula for enrollment and population changes
► Sharing the revenue sources that are currently in the formula
The current formula is not consistent with established guiding principles and not a favored alternative:
12
Maintain the Current Formula
► Revenue shared based on the SOQ requirement
► Share in City's economic growth
► Does not facilitate long-term planning
► SOQ information is not available early in the process,which makes
annual budget plans uncertain
► The growth in SOQ from year to year can create abnormally high or
low formula impacts
► SOQ concept is not a well-known or understood concept
October 8, 2019
8
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/SCHOOL BOARD WORKSHOP
SCHOOLS FUNDING FORMULA
(Continued)
The alternative to share revenue but to adjust for changes in enrollment and/or population provided several
positives:
Adjust for Changes in Enrollment j 3
and/or Population
► Revenue shared but adjusted for enrollment and population
changes
► Shares in city's economic growth
► Facilitates long-term planning
► Information is available early in the process
► State funding already adjusts for enrollment changes
► Population growth doesn't necessary correlate to impacts on services
delivery
Here is the Proposed Alternative;Straight Revenue Sharing with the calculation process used:
Proposed Alternative 4
Straight Revenue Sharing
► How Revised Revenue Formula was developed
► Use same General Fund revenues as current formula
► Redirect all General Fund dedications with these exceptions:
►2.5 cent real estate tax that's in a lock box for Storm Water needs
► EDIP-cigarette tax that Is directed to Economic and Tourism CIP
► Outdoor Initiative-real estate taxes directed to Parks and Recreation CIP
► Subtract dedications from General Fund Revenues
► Calculate percentage that Schools FY 2019-20 local funding amount is of General Fund
revenue net of dedications
► Schools receive 46.75%of General Fund Tax revenues going forward
October 8, 2019
9
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/SCHOOL BOARD WORKSHOP
SCHOOLS FUNDING FORMULA
(Continued)
Here are Other Revenues Excluded from the Formula:
Other Revenues Excluded from the 15
Formula
► Non-General Fund Revenue Dedications are excluded from the Formula
► Real Estate Tax Revenue derived through TIFs and SSDs
► Real Estate Taxes dedicated to the ARP and Parks and Recreation for
Recreation Centers
► Hotel and Meals taxes dedicated to the TIP and TAP funds
This slide provides a comparison between the Current and Proposed Revenue Sharing Formulas:
FY20
Current RSF Proposed R5F
Real Estate + 558,748,263 + 556,74E,763
Personal Property + 163,097,601 + 163.497,601 1 6
Consumer Related + 1n,041,115 + 171,011,1ss
utility/Telarommunications + 49,578,224 + 49,578.224
Other + 33,791,632 + 33,792.632
School Dedications
Real Bute-4 cents-Schools'Operating `°' 22.871,264 my 0
Real Estate-L75 cents-Full-day Klyderprten a+ 7,147,270 sm, 0
•
City e Dedications
= Revenue
Real Estate-189ceMs-Gemral Fund �+ f0,806,6R > 0 '
Real Estate-0.8 cents-General Government " 4,574,253 0
Real Estate-2.5 cents-Stormwater a' 14,294,543 '- 14,294,540
Real Estate-0ce cent-Outdodwaysor
" 11p55,374 4 Sharing
632
Real Estate-0.47ceM-OutdoorinRirtive " 2687,374 � 2687,374
Personal Property-0.30 ceM-Public Safety + 11,388,363 "' 0
Cigarette-16 cents-EDIP 2384890 •" 2384890
CigarettAutomoe-SaMse-55-d * 745.276 " 0 Formula
Automobile llnrue-$5-General Goverment =.. 2742,176 '•• 0
General Fund Non-Dedicated Formula Revenues = 685.569,161 = 957,290,031
State Required 50QMatdr 175,280,597 '^ -
NetRevenuetobeShared 710,768,564 957,290,031
Formula Percent x 34.1191 x 46.75%',
Discretionary Local Match = 242,279,429 = 447,578,560
School Dedications 30,018,534 0 li
State Required SOO Match + 175,280,597 + 0
Discretionary Local Matti + 243279,429 + 447,578,360
Formula Contrtbuticn from she City = 417,578,560 (= 447,578,560 'Formula percentage rounded to the nearest hundredth
October 8, 2019
10
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/SCHOOL BOARD WORKSHOP
SCHOOLS FUNDING FORMULA
(Continued)
Here are the recommendations Moving Forward:
17
Moving Forward
► Request School Board and City Council have public input at a future
meeting
► Vote on Revised Revenue Sharing Policy following public input
► Proposed Revenue Sharing Formula continues until June 30,2024
► Similar to current policy,School Board would submit a request to City
Council for a tax increase to fund needs above the funding formula
18
Questions or Comments?
Mayor Dyer expressed his appreciation to Mr. Hanzaker and Mr. Hobbs for the presentation.
The City Council/School Board Joint Meeting ADJOURNED at 3:31 P.M.
October 8, 2019
11
GNU+:BE4:�
rre74- 44
r o �l
ov t� f
je
45 Of OOft NATO^9
VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
Virginia Beach, Virginia
October 8, 2019
Mayor Robert M. Dyer called to order the CITY COUNCIL'S DISCUSSION, in the City Council
Conference Room, Tuesday, October 8, 2019, at 3:45 P.M
Council Members Present:
Jessica P. Abbott, Michael F. Berlucchi, Mayor Robert M. Dyer, Barbara M.
Henley, Louis R. Jones, John D. Moss, Aaron Rouse, Guy K. Tower, Rosemary
Wilson, Vice Mayor James L. Wood and Sabrina D. Wooten
Council Members Absent:
None
October 8, 2019
12
CITY COUNCIL'S DISCUSSION
BUDGET
3:45 P.M.
Mayor Dyer welcomed David L. Bradley,Acting Deputy City Manager. Mr. Bradley expressed his
appreciation to the City Council for their continued support:
Budget Update
Here is an overview of Early Projection of General Fund Revenue:
Early Projection of General Fund Revenue
❑ The Department of Budget and Management Services
projects non-department revenue for the General Fund in
September each year
❖ Estimated revenue growth of 2.4%
❑ Department specific revenue is updated by departments
with their budget submission
2
October 8, 2019
13
CITY COUNCIL'S DISCUSSION
BUDGET
(Continued)
The next two (2)slides provide Some of the Bigger FY21 Funding Drivers:
Some of the Bigger FY21 Funding Drivers
❑ 2%Compensation Reserve($8 million)
❑ $4.2 Million Public Safety Workforce Development
❖ Fire, Police, EMS,and Sheriff-future cost of$500K per year
❑ Four year phase-in of Sheriff Pay Parity
❖ Each phase-in year cost$750,000
❑ Fire/EMS Burton Station-Operating Budget Impacts
e• 15 Firefighters and 8 Paramedics partially funded FY 20
❖ Additional 15 Firefighters and 4 Paramedics needed upon opening
of facility
3
Some of the Bigger FY21 Funding Drivers (cont'd)
❑ Increase in Employer Healthcare Costs -TBD
❑ Increase in the Virginia Retirement System (VRS) Rate-TBD
❑ $775K lease payments (Public Works, Planning and IT)
❑ $79 Million for Renovation of Buildings 1, 2 and 11 not in the
current six-year CIP
❑ Future funding plan for VB Strong Center (Possibly Grants)
4
October 8, 2019
14
CITY COUNCIL'S DISCUSSION
BUDGET
(Continued)
Here is a History of Targets between FY12 and FY20:
History of Targets
Public Safety/ Non-Public Safety
Constitutional
FY 12 97.5% 93.4%
FY 13 98% 97%
FY 14 98% 96%
FY 15 98% 96%
FY 16 98% 96%
FY 17 98% 95%
FY 18 100% 100%
FY 19 100% 100%
FY 20 99% 99% 5
What is FY21 Target?
98% Set For All Departments
6
October 8, 2019
15
CITY COUNCIL'S DISCUSSION
BUDGET
(Continued)
Here are the Key Dates:
Key Dates
CIP Submissions November 5
Budget Submissions November 26
CIP Caucus January 24
Proposed Budget Presentation March 24
Adoption of FY 2020-21 Budget May 12
7
Vice Mayor Wood asked when the State will make a decision on the request for a$20-Million loan to the
City for buildings 1, 2 and 11?
Mr. Bradley advised the City has applied for a$20-Million interest free loan and a$10-Million grant from
the State and expects a decision to be made sometime in November. Mr. Bradley advised the cost for all
three (3) buildings is approximately$79-Million.
Council Member Moss asked if there is a process for reviewing and prioritizing CIP's within the budget?
Mr. Bradley confirmed yes and advised this is done each year for every CIP.
Council Member Henley asked if the Sandbridge TIF and SSD are being reviewed?
Mr. Bradley advised there is an analyst currently looking at both the TIF and SSD.
Council Member Moss would like to see options for accelerating the backlog on ditch and canal
maintenance. Council Member Moss advised he understands the fifteen (15)year plan but does not believe
the funding for that maintenance has to wait two (2) more years to begin.
Council Member Henley asked Council Member Moss if the Bond Referendum will include discussion on the
debt ceiling?
Council Member Moss advised it would and stressed the importance of having the Bond Referendum
discussion at the next City Council Meeting.
October 8, 2019
16
CITY COUNCIL'S DISCUSSION
BUDGET
(Continued)
Council Member Tower asked if staff is able to provide all of the information necessary or should there be
outside help involved.
Mr. Leahy advised there is a shortage of engineers right now due to several retirements and the tragedy on
May 31''where the City lost many engineers. Mr. Leahy advised the Dewberry Study provided information
on Sea Level Rise and CDM Smith is providing information on the stormwater infrastructure work, those
consulting resources are being used but do come at a higher cost.
Council Member Wilson asked if it would beneficial to have a poll to see if the public would like to have a
bond referendum?
Mr. Leahy advised the question can be added on the community satisfaction survey.
Mayor Dyer advised periodic discussions with City Council and staff is important and he would like to look
at ways to accelerate the ditch and canal maintenance as wel j.knowing the status on staffing so those things
can be included in the budget. Mayor Dyer expressed his appreciation to Council Members for the
discussion.
17
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFING
FLOOD MANAGEMENT ELEVATION PROJECTS
AND PROPERTY ACQUISITION GRANT
4:26 P.M.
Mayor Dyer welcomed Kimberly Tempesco, Senior Emergency Planner—Emergency Management. Ms.
Tempesco expressed her appreciation to the City Council for their continued support:
A A
I■'F
A
FMA GRANT PROJECTS
CURRENT & FUTURE
KIMBERLEY A.TEMPESCO
OCTOBER 8,2019
The Pilot Program involves Homeowner Contracting and has proven to be successful with a 35-45%
reduction in costs:
KEY TO SUCCESS OF PILOT PROGRAM
FEMA REGION III STANDARD PROCESS(OLD METHOD) PILOT PROGRAM-HOMEOWNER CONTRACTING
City managed construction projects on private property Homeowner choosing their own contractor and managing their own
construction
Through 3 bid processes only 1 or 2 bidders(lack of competition) Multi-award for 12 contractors&5 engineer/architect firms
resulting in numerous bid busts
Conservative city time estimate resulted in at least$175,000 salary City(OEM)managing grant only and providing program guidance to
equivalent annually(most not recoverable) ensure compliance(grant allows administration allowance)
City incurred additional expenses for at least 2 homes as a result of post City agreement is with homeowner not contractor
project claims(not recoverable under grant)
From time of grant application it took over 5 years to elevate 7 houses Timeframe greatly reduced once awarded all homes can begin
and 3 years later 1 is still being monitored following construction immediately(12 estimated to be completed by end of 2019)
complaints
Project costs reduced by at least 35-45%by virtue of privatizing the
contract(not a city project)
2
October 8, 2019
18
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFING
FLOOD MANAGEMENT ELEVATION PROJECTS
AND PROPERTY ACQUISITION GRANT
(Continued)
Here is the 2013 Homes Price Cost Comparison:
2013 Homes Price Cost Comparison
II SF(FP) I Original Bid*1 Bid*2 I Adjusted Homeowner I Reduction
Budget Budget Bid
A 1161 $114,248 $339,804 $293,164 $196,000 $185,202 45%
B 1495 $141,603 $333,111 $286,511 $210,000 $215,000 35%
C 1790 $174,854 $383,521 $333,021 $210,000 $225,000 41%
D 1306 $126,123 $366,728 $309,528 $210,000 $210,000 42%
The Tanager Trail and Broad Bay Road homes are complete:
bra
` OO to t'.
S 4
it tol „C'''‘ till
e
ce
O."
oec
�
a _
P°°
COMPLETED HOMES
TANAGER TRAIL & BROAD BAY ROAD
October 8, 2019
19
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFING
FLOOD MANAGEMENT ELEVATION PROJECTS
AND PROPERTY ACQUISITION GRANT
(Continued)
The Northgate property in Princess Anne Plaza is due to be complete by September 24th:
0 lii i i -a
. �„ n II It e 4 alia f, VT, A_ i
M
.r
r
iiiiiiir
15-45 DAYS OUT
NORTHGATE COURT*LYNNHAVEN DRIVE
LYNNHAVEN DRIVE'29TH STREET
The Canal Road homes are due to be complete at the end of November and the Wake Forest Street
home by mid-December:
,,,
a 2' /•
1 (f Li ) '�I
._ _
{
60-75 DAYS OUT -
CANAL ROAD(3)
WAKE FOREST STREET --
October 8, 2019
20
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFING
FLOOD MANAGEMENT ELEVATION PROJECTS
AND PROPERTY ACQUISITION GRANT
(Continued)
Here is the Preconstruction Status for the remaining homes in the 2016 grant:
w �
r
ADDRESS STATUS
58TH Street CBPA Preconstruction Mtg held 9/23,breaking ground now
Lynnhaven Drive CBPA Preconstruction Mtg held 9/26,breaking ground now
Alpine Road Structural Design Complete,Soil Samples in Progress
Breezy Road Structural Design in Progress
Goodspeed Road No progress yet
PRECONSTRUCTION STATUS
INCLUDES ALL REMAINING HOMES IN 2013,2015&2016 GRANTS
Here is an overview of Future Grant Applications:
FUTURE GRANT APPLICATIONS
HOW PROPERTIES ARE IDENTIFIED FOR CONSIDERATION
tt` SRL(100%)or RL(90%)property • Review of SRL list for best qualified properties
SP\ (74 properties not already in progress)
� • NFIP Insured • Start with smaller single family homes(less
than 2000 sf)
• Cost Beneficial to Mitigate(BCR>1.0) • >$75,000 in flood claims
• Predetermined benefits • NFIP Insured Status
• <$175K Elevation(Not feasible in Ve)
• <$276KAcquisition • Start with about 15 properties in hopes of
• By BCA calculation getting 10(VDEM limit)to include on grant
• Flood Module(requires elevation cert.) • Review properties of concern with PW to
• Damage Frequency Assessment Module ensure no conflict with Stormwater or other
(based on historical or anticipated claims) plans
• Voluntary Participation • avai Run labl preelimdatainary benefit cost analysis with
• Send letters of interest to owners that they
may qualify
• If interested-proceed with next steps
October 8, 2019
21
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFING
FLOOD MANAGEMENT ELEVATION PROJECTS
AND PROPERTY ACQUISITION GRANT
(Continued)
This chart provides a comparison of FMA Mitigation Advantages and Disadvantages:
ACTION COMPARISONS
FMA MITIGATION ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
ALL TYPES • Reduce#of non-compliant structures • Limited federal funding available
• Points for CRS • Only most severe properties qualify
• Increased community resiliency
• Fulfills Hazard Mitigation Plan actions
ELEVATION • Retain taxable structure at increased value • Home may not be fully compliant with building
• Floodplain Compliant Structure I code(same home just higher)
• Reduced Flood Insurance
ACQUISITION • Removes floodprone structure • Removes taxable structure
• Removes all risk from property • Must remain open space (SW pipe-Yes,pump
• Increased open space(flood storage) station-No)
RECONSTRUCTION • New home is fully building code compliant • Funding capped at$150K
(Demo-Rebuild) • Reduced flood insurance rates • Owner would have to pay the balance
• Increase in value for new home • New structure must be within 10%of original SF
• Unknown challenges with mortgage companies
• Not many grants awarded nationally
This slide provides an overview of the differences between Acquisition, Elevation and Reconstruction
Actions:
WHICH ACTION IS BEST?
ACQUISITION [ELEVATION RECONSTRUCTION
• Strategically located • Area where open space not • Area where open space is not
• Adjacent to city property desirable-not feasible for acquisition desirable-not feasible for acquisition
• Area identified for city open space • Structure is sound enough to elevate • Homes with no mortgage
• Area identified for allowable flood • Owner desires elevation • Older homes not structurally sound
control use (pipes,storage,etc) for elevation
• Property can be acquired and • Owner desires home of same or
demolished for<$276K smaller size
• Still likely to flood even with • Owner able to pay the difference
neighborhood stormwater projects (estimated at$50-100K for 1500 sf)
October 8, 2019
22
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFING
FLOOD MANAGEMENT ELEVATION PROJECTS
AND PROPERTY ACQUISITION GRANT
(Continued)
This chart shows where most of the Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL) homes are clustered:
`.tvHERE ARE OUR SRL PROPERTIES?
Broad Bay Estates 3 Remaining homes after the ones in progress are larger with fewer
claims(5 in progress currently)
Lynnhaven Colony 10 7 being considered for 2019 grant-the others are too large
Princess Anne Hills 7 Remaining homes are over 3200sf and have fewer claims
Windsor Woods 5 4 adjacent to park and are modeled by PW in all conveyance
scenarios to still flood after all proposed improvements due to
elevation-proposed for 2019 acquisition grant
Princess Anne Plaza 9 4 identified for acquisition,all have FFE>2 feet above BFE-difficult
to qualify for elevation
The Lakes 9 All SRL are attached homes and cannot be considered for elevation
unless both sides qualify-none do
Rosemont Forest 6 All SRL are attached homes and cannot be considered for elevation
unless both sides qualify-none do
Sandbridge 8 V-Zone,require deep helical piles,Most are much larger homes
No recent flood events(most earlier than 2003)&most aren't
primary residences
Pungo/Blackwater/Creeds 4 Base Flood Elevation is AE-3,first floor elevations run at or above
BFE(there are also 5 RL properties and 2 additional not insured)
Here is an overview of the proposed Elevation and Acquisition Applications:
Next Ste.: 2019 FMA Application Recommendations =
MP-
(due November 8)
ELEVATION APPLICATION ACQUISITION APPLICATION
•Include 4 homes that were removed from 2013&2015 •Discussed with CM,DCMs,Legal,PW,DHNP for concurrence to t=
grant explore further(March 2019)
•Include up to 6 other homes(VDEM limit of 10) •Identified PA Plaza&WW properties that met the criteria for
•Most flood-prone areas mitigation and are strategically located to be better suited for
•PAP/WW,Lynnhaven Colony,Southern Watershed acquisition than elevation.
•Greatest number of flood claims •4 adjacent to city owned park(green space&flood storage)
•Feasibility of elevation(size and condition) •4 identified by PW as being potential locations for
•Most cost beneficial(BCA) stormwater pipes
•Owner interest(voluntary program) •2 interested,2 not,4 did not respond
•Estimated acquisition values are below the predetermine
benefits level($276k)meaning they automatically qualify.
{
'Increases Community Resilience using available federal funding*Individual Life Safety Protection
Measures'Reduces Number of SRL Properties*Reduces Number of Non-Compliant Pre-FIRM
�•
Structures'Fulfills Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Items'Earns CRS Credits'
October 8, 2019
23
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFING
FLOOD MANAGEMENT ELEVATION PROJECTS
AND PROPERTY ACQUISITION GRANT
(Continued)
Here is an overview of the CRS Activity 510 Progress Report:
CRS ACTIVITY 510(FLOOD MANAGEMENT PLANNING)
PROGRESS REPORT
• Annual progress report for compliance with CRS
• Must be presented to City's governing body(council)and posted on City website for
review.
• Provides an update to mitigation actions identified in our Regional Hazard
Mitigation Plan (full plan update required by March 2022)
• Key Action Items in Report
• Entering CRS program
• Continued participation in NFIP
• Additional staff obtaining CFM certification
• Improved alerting/warning/notification systems(WAZE,RAVE)
• Elevate/Relocate/Retrofit SRL properties (10-12 will be elevated by the end of 2019)
• Acquire open space in strategic locations
QUESTIONS?
Mayor Dyer expressed his appreciation to Ms. Tempesco for the presentation.
October 8, 2019
24
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Robert M. Dyer DECLARED the City Council Workshop ADJOURNED at 5:00 P.M.
Am a Barnes, C
City Clerk
City of Virginia Beach
Virginia
October 8, 2019