08-16-2012 Regular MeetingREGULAR MEETING OF THE ISLE OF WIGHT COUNTY BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS HELD THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST IN THE
YEAR TWO THOUSAND AND TWELVE
PRESENT: Alan E. Casteen, Chairman
JoAnn W. Hall, Vice - Chairman
Rex W. Alphin
Byron B. Bailey
Delores M. Darden
Also Attending: Mark C. Popovich, County Attorney
W. Douglas Caskey, County Administrator
Carey Mills Storm, Clerk
Chairman Casteen called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
Chairman Casteen delivered the invocation.
The Pledge of Allegiance was conducted.
Chairman Casteen called for Approval of the Agenda.
County Attorney Popovich requested the agenda be revised to include
the addition of a Promissory Note between the Isle of Wight County
Industrial Development Authority and the Isle of Wight County Board of
Supervisors under the County Attorney's report and consideration of a
paramedic for the Carrollton Volunteer Fire Department under the
Emergency Management report.
Supervisor Alphin moved that the agenda be approved, as amended.
The motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen,
Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and no
Supervisors voting against the motion.
Chairman Casteen called for Special Presentations /Appearances.
A dog and cat currently available for adoption at the County's animal
shelter were displayed.
The following 2012 Isle of Wight County Fair Queens were
introduced: Gracie Johnson, Wee Miss IOW County Fair; Kaylee Bracy,
Little Miss IOW County Fair; Madison Lowe, Junior Miss IOW County Fair;
Olivia Blatt, Preteen Miss IOW County Fair; Amanda Petroski, Teen Miss
IOW County Fair; and, Lea DeMatteo, Miss IOW County Fair.
The featured business owner was Mr. Dwain Wilkerson, Pharmacist
and owner of Davis Drug in Carrollton.
Mr. Rashard Wright, Director of Secondary Education and Early
College, briefed the Board regarding the I -sle21 initiative.
Chairman Casteen called for consideration of the Consent Agenda.
A. Resolution Declaring September Hunger Action Month
B. SWOT Analysis /Economic Development Strategic Plan
C. Grant Opportunity for Stormwater Program Development
D. Building Lease for the Head Start Program
E. May 10, 2012 Special Meeting Minutes
F. May 17, 2012 Regular Meeting Minutes
G. June 28, 2012 Regular Meeting Minutes
Supervisor Alphin moved that the Consent Agenda be adopted, as
presented. The motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors
Casteen, Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and
no Supervisors voting against the motion.
Chairman Casteen called for Regional Reports.
Supervisor Hall reminded the Board that the Chamber's annual meeting
will be held on September 6t" at which time new officers will be sworn in.
Supervisors Bailey and Hall reported that only routine business matters
had been discussed at the most recent meeting of the Western Tidewater
Regional Jail Board.
County Administrator Caskey reported that the Chairman and Vice -
Chairman had been reappointed for an additional one (1) year term on the
1)
Southeastern Public Service Authority. He advised that the focus was on
what other individual jurisdictions will be considering to do with regional
solid waste management post 2018.
Chairman Casteen called for Transportation Matters.
Jamie Oliver, Transportation Planner, updated the Board regarding the
Windsor sidewalk project.
H
Chairman Casteen called for Citizens Comments.
Mayor Richardson, Town of Windsor, reiterated the importance of the
economic development opportunities associated with the Shirley T. Holland
Intermodal Park. She expressed the desire of the Windsor Town Council that
the existing Windsor Middle School gym not be torn down when the new
middle school is built and to meet jointly with the Board of Supervisors.
Chairman Casteen requested County Administrator Caskey to contact
the Town of Windsor relative to potential dates for a joint meeting between
the two (2) bodies.
Herb DeGroft, on behalf of the Isle of Wight Citizens Association,
invited the Board to attend the September 9t" Day of Remembrance
Ceremony which will be held at 5:00 p.m. in the Memorial Gardens at the
County end of the James River Bridge.
Michael Uzzle requested a response to previous questions he submitted
several months ago to the Board. He distributed additional information to the
Board for which he would like a response and he recommended that the
County advertise the locations of polling places well in advance of the
election.
Chairman Casteen called for Board comments.
Regarding the proposed joint meeting with the Town of Windsor,
Supervisor Alphin commented for the benefit of the public that County
Administrator Caskey will be making contact with the Town regarding
potential meeting dates between the Board and Windsor Town Council.
Supervisor Hall requested that staff investigate Michael Uzzle's
suggestion that a wireless microphone be available for use by the public at
3
Board meetings for individuals who have difficulty getting up to the podium
to address the Board.
Chairman Casteen called for the County Attorney's report.
County Attorney Popovich presented for the Board's consideration a
renewal agreement between the County and Suffolk Energies T/A Griffin Oil
for fuel.
Supervisor Darden moved that the Chairman be authorized to execute
the Agreement with Suffolk Energies T/A Griffin Oil on behalf of the Board.
The motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen,
Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and no
Supervisors voting against the motion.
County Attorney Popovich advised that responsive to Supervisor
Bailey's previous appointment of Grace Keen to serve as an At -large member
on the Commission on Aging, he has drafted a proposed revision to that
organization's By -laws to allow for two (2) members for each election
district.
Supervisor Bailey moved to authorize the Chairman to execute the
amended By -Laws on behalf of the Board. The County Attorney is to amend
the By -Laws to allow for two (2) members from each election district and to
add Mrs. Grace Keen as an At -Large member. The motion was adopted by a
vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen, Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin
N oting in favor of the motion and no Supervisors voting against the motion.
County Attorney Popovich requested that the next item under his
section of the agenda entitled a Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of
General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds of Isle of Wight County,
Virginia, in a Principal Amount not to exceed $60,000,000 be considered
immediately following the public hearing tonight.
Supervisor Darden moved that the Resolution be considered
immediately following the public hearing as requested by County Attorney
Popovich. The motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors
Casteen, Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and
no Supervisors voting against the motion.
County Attorney Popovich presented a Promissory Note between the
Isle of Wight County Industrial Development Authority and the Isle of Wight
County Board of Supervisors.
Supervisor Alphin moved that the Chairman be authorized to sign the
Note on behalf of the Board. The motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with
4
Supervisors Casteen, Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the
motion and no Supervisors voting against the motion.
//
Chairman Casteen called for the Parks and Recreation report.
Mark W. Furlo, Director of Parks and Recreation, invited all to attend
the upcoming County Fair on September 13 -16, 2012.
Mr. Furlo addressed the issue of security for the 2012 Isle of Wight
County Fair. He requested the Board's consideration of overtime funds in
the amount of $16,000 to personnel associated with the Fair event.
Supervisor Alphin moved to appropriate $16,000 for overtime
personnel associated with security at the Fair. The motion was adopted by a
vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen, Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin
voting in favor of the motion and no Supervisors voting against the motion.
Chairman Casteen called for the General Services report.
Frank Haltom, Assistant Director of General Services, updated the
Board regarding the Implementation Plan for the Nansemond River TMDL.
He advised that the estimated initial cost of all management options
identified in the Plan is $460,000 and estimated annual maintenance is
$172,000, which have been budgeted for in the Consent Order and TMDL
line items in the Capital Improvements Program.
Donald T. Robertson, Director of Information Resources and
Legislative Affairs, advised that while funding has been identified in the
Capital Improvements Plan, it has not been included in the budget and is
being anticipated as part of the bond issue.
Melissa Lindgren, County Engineer, provided an update regarding
sewer disposal options associated with an additional restroom facility at Nike
Park. She advised that an unpermitted sewer discharge into Jones Creek
from a sand filter treatment facility was located and the Virginia Department
of Environmental Quality has requested a list of options for eliminating the
discharge or treating it to current standards. She advised that staff has
submitted a report to DEQ identifying both short and long -term solutions and
that staff is awaiting a response from DEQ regarding a plan of action. She
advised the most feasible solutions contained in the report include the
installation of a pump station and force main suitable for future development
to connect to the Eagle Harbor development and the installation of a small
onsite wastewater treatment plant to handle existing development.
I
Mr. Haltom advised that he would like additional time to review the
budgetary numbers relative to the cost of building a pump station versus an
onsite wastewater treatment plant.
Mr. Haltom, with respect to the issue of the sale of County properties,
advised that the Buildings, Grounds and Transportation Committee's
recommendation is that the US Development and Lavern and Cassel Ruffin
bids be rejected as being non - responsive and the Burckard and Owen bids for
the Stoup property also be rejected on the basis of being an insufficient bid
amount. He advised that the Committee also recommends that County staff
be authorized to contact US Development to express the County's interest in
working with them to develop an acceptable property purchase proposal for
further consideration by the Board and that County staff also be authorized to
procure services from suitable real estate companies for the marketing and
sale of the surplus County property.
Supervisor Bailey moved to accept the recommendations of the
Building, Grounds and Transportation Committee as outlined in the Board
report. The motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen,
Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and no
Supervisors voting against the motion.
Mr. Haltom provided an update on the Stormwater Management
Program advising that in March of this year, legislation (HB1065) was
adopted requiring the integration of the Erosion and Sediment Control Act,
Stormwater Act and Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act. He advised that the
new program mandate will require County staff to provide regular reporting
to the State, issue State permits and collect fees for the State. He advised that
capital and staffing funding requirements for these work efforts will be
increased and that the County's consultant is currently reviewing County
ordinances and operations with the intent of developing an implementation
plan and budget. He advised that potential funding options are also being
evaluated for the Board to consider during the FY2014 budget preparation.
Mr. Haltom requested authorization to a hire a part-time, standby truck
driver for refuse collection.
Supervisor Alphin moved to authorize Human Resources to advertise
and fill one (1) part-time standby truck driver for refuse collection. The
motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen, Darden,
Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and no Supervisors
voting against the motion.
Mr. Haltom requested authorization to hire two (2) regular part-time
and two (2) standby part-time Convenience Center Attendants.
Supervisor Alphin moved to authorize Human Resources to advertise
for and fill two (2) regular part time and two (2) standby part -time
I
convenience center attendants. The motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0)
with Supervisors Casteen, Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of
the motion and no Supervisors voting against the motion.
Chairman Casteen called for the Emergency Services report.
Joseph R. Chase, Chief of Emergency Services, requested the Board to
adopt a Resolution to Accept Donated Disaster Medical Support Unit from
Hampton Roads Planning District Commission for use by the Isle of Wight
County Department of Emergency Services.
Chairman Casteen moved to adopt the Resolution for use by the Isle of
Wight County Department of Emergency Services. The motion was adopted
by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen, Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin
voting in favor of the motion and no Supervisors voting against the motion.
Chairman Casteen moved to authorize the County Administrator to
execute the DMSU Acknowledgement of Receipt Agreement. The motion
was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen, Darden, Bailey,
Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and no Supervisors voting
against the motion.
Mr. Chase presented a request from Chief Acree of the Carrollton
Volunteer Fire Department to hire a Paramedic and requested the Board's
permission to work with Chief Acree regarding staffing of that Department to
supplement the volunteers when the call volume is high or the ALS
volunteers are not available with paid staffing.
Supervisor Bailey moved to approve the request for a paid paramedic
for the Carrollton Volunteer Fire Department. The motion was adopted by a
vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen, Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin
voting in favor of the motion and no Supervisors voting against the motion.
Chairman Casteen called for the County Administrator's report.
County Administrator Caskey presented a request that the County
appropriate $500 to host a table for Isle of Wight's nominee and family at the
Top Cop Awards Dinner in Virginia Beach.
Supervisor Darden moved that the Board appropriate $500 to host a
table for Isle of Wight's nominee and family. The motion was adopted by a
vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen, Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin
voting in favor of the motion and no Supervisors voting against the motion.
7
Pearl Taylor, Director of Food Services, Isle of Wight County Public
Schools, presented a budget amendment request from the Isle of Wight
County Public Schools' Food Services in the amount of $121,120.
Supervisor Hall moved to approve the requested FY2013 budget
adjustment for the Food Services fund in the amount of $121,120. The
motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen, Darden,
Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and no Supervisors
voting against the motion.
County Administrator Caskey presented a request by the Commissioner
of the Revenue to fill a staff vacancy in that office.
Supervisor Alphin moved that the vacancy request be approved. The
motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen, Darden,
Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and no Supervisors
voting against the motion.
County Administrator Caskey addressed the Board regarding the
creation of a proposed film documentary on peanuts by the Western
Tidewater Humanities Regional Council in association with the Virginia
Foundation for the Humanities. He requested authorization to sign the letter
Of support addressed to the Virginia Foundation for the Humanities included
in the agenda.
Supervisor Darden moved to authorize the County Administrator to
sign the letter of support for the film documentary on peanuts. The motion
was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen, Darden, Bailey,
Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and no Supervisors voting
against the motion.
Chairman Casteen called for Appointments.
There were no appointments offered.
Chairman Casteen called for Old Business.
Responsive to the advisement by the Commissioner of the Revenue that
reassessment values have declined by nearly 6% which resulted in an impact
of approximately $1.6 million on revenues for FY2012 -13 and that a tax rate
adjustment of four (4) cents will be required to produce adequate revenues to
maintain a balanced budget, Supervisor Hall moved to schedule a public
hearing on a proposed tax rate adjustment at the Board's September 20, 2012
0
meeting. The motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors
Casteen, Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and
no Supervisors voting against the motion.
i
Chairman Casteen called for New Business.
There was no new business offered for discussion.
Chairman Casteen declared a recess.
At 7:00 p.m., the Board returned to open session.
Chairman Casteen called for a public hearing on the following:
A. The application of Joest Properties, LLC, owner, and Joseph W.
Stradley and Estelle R. Stradley, applicants, to amend the
proffered conditions of approximately 9.76 acres of land located
on the south side of Windsor Boulevard (Route 460) in the
Carrsville Election District. The request is to amend Zoning
Case #ZA -1 -98 to allow for additional uses of the properties.
Tristian Barnes, Planner, represented the application.
Chairman Casteen called for persons to speak in favor of or in
opposition to the application.
No one appeared and spoke.
Chairman Casteen closed the public hearing and called for comments
from the Board.
Supervisor Alphin moved that the application be approved. The
motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen, Darden,
Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and no Supervisors
voting against the motion.
Chairman Casteen called for a public hearing on the following:
B. An Ordinance to amend and reenact the Isle of Wight County
Code by amending and reenacting Appendix B, Zoning, Article
VI (Overlay Districts) to reduce the minimum visual buffer for
structures, vehicular movements and parking areas; to specify the
9
required yard setbacks for structures, vehicular movements and
parking areas; and to make several technical amendments; and
Section 9 -1004 (Temporary Signs) to allow for on- premises and
off - premises signs advertising an auction; to make several
technical amendments; and, to allow for special award signs.
Matthew Smolnik, Assistant Director of Planning and Zoning,
represented the application.
Chairman Casteen called for persons to speak in favor of or in
opposition to the proposed Ordinance.
Sadie Boyer of the Newport District requested the Board to adopt the
proposed Ordinance stating that the 20 foot side and rear setback is a good
compromise for citizens, real estate developers and businesses. She stated
that she also endorses the $25 fee. She recommended a restriction on how
large and how long a temporary sign may be displayed.
Ed Easter of Hideaway spoke in favor of the proposed Ordinance. He
stated that staff, the previous Board of Supervisors and citizens have worked
diligently to determine how that community will look.
Ken Ricter, 15257 Candy Island Lane, inquired about the fairness of
the retail stores being charged a $25 fee for their signs. He stated while the
fee is not a significant amount, it is an inconvenience. He recommended the
development of a computerized system to alleviate the expense of having to
travel to the Courthouse.
Sharon Hart of the Newport District stated these decisions were made
for the better good of the County and she agreed that a 20 -foot setback is a
good compromise. She spoke in favor of the County charging a $25 fee for
signs to address the cost incurred by the County relative to enforcement and
documentation.
Chairman Casteen closed the public hearing and called for comments
from the Board.
Supervisor Bailey moved that the following Ordinance be adopted:
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REENACT
THE ISLE OF WIGHT COUNTY CODE BY AMENDING AND
REENACTING APPENDIX B. ZONING, ARTICLE VI (OVERLAY
DISTRICTS) TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM VISUAL BUFFER FOR
STRUCTURES, VEHICULAR MOVEMENTS AND PARKING AREAS;
TO SPECIFY THE REQUIRED YARD SETBACKS FOR STRUCTURES,
VEHICULAR MOVEMENTS AND PARKING AREAS; AND TO MAKE
SEVERAL TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS; AND SECTION 9 -1004
(TEMPORARY SIGNS) TO ALLOW FOR ON- PREMISES AND OFF-
10
PREMISES SIGNS ADVERTISING AN AUCTION; TO MAKE SEVERAL
TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS; AND TO ALLOW FOR SPECIAL
AWARD SIGNS.
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Isle of Wight County,
Virginia, has the legislative authority to make reasonable changes to the
ordinances that govern the orderly growth and development of Isle of Wight
County; and
WHEREAS, the Isle of Wight County Board of Supervisors is also
concerned about the compatibility of uses on public and private lands within
Isle of Wight County and seeks to allow flexibility in the administration of
the ordinance regulations while protecting the health, safety, and general
welfare of present and future residents and businesses of the County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Isle of Wight County
Board of Supervisors that Appendix B, Zoning, Article VI, Overlay Districts,
of the Isle of Wight County Code be amended and reenacted as follows:
6 -1003. Applicability
A. The Highway Corridor Overlay District shall include all lands within
five- hundred (500) feet of each side of the following arterial rights -of-
way, except within the Newport Development Service Overlay (NDSO)
District, which is regulated by Section 6 -2000.
1. United States Highway Route 58 Business, extending between
the corporate boundary of the City of Suffolk and the City of
Franklin;
2. United States Highway Route 258 (outside of the NDSO);
3. United States Highway Route 460;
4. Virginia Highway Route 10 Business and Route 10 Bypass
(outside of the NDSO);
5. Virginia Highway Route 32 (outside of the NDSO); and
6. Virginia Highway Route 260.
B. The boundary of the Highway Corridor Overlay District may either
follow a fixed distance as set forth in Item A. above or the defined
boundaries of a natural or man -made feature as determined by the
Zoning Administrator.
11
C. The boundary of the Highway Corridor Overlay District shall be shown
on the official Isle of Wight County zoning map and shall be delineated
as a surveyed line on any property proposed for development.
Sec. 6 -1004. - Affected development.
A. Review required. All proposed development activities located within the
Highway Corridor Overlay District shall be reviewed and approved by the
zoning administrator and the development review committee in accordance
with the regulations contained herein and Part 2 [section 7 -2000] of article
VII (development review). Any changes shall also receive such approval
before proceeding.
B. Development activity permitted within the district. There shall be no
expansion or enlargement of the existing condition of the lands, uses or
structures, or change in use as defined in section 5 -1003, change in use,
within the Highway Corridor Overlay District from the date of enactment of
this article henceforth, except as provided for by this section or by other
sections of this article.
C. Development activity prohibited within the district. These regulations are
supplementary to the permitted uses and requirements for the appropriate
underlying zoning district as contained in the Isle of Wight County Zoning
Ordinance. Uses prohibited in the underlying zoning district are also
prohibited in the Highway Corridor Overlay District. (7 -7 -05; 8- 20 -09; 8 -16-
12.)
Sec. 6 -1005. - Exemptions to the Highway Corridor Overlay District
requirements.
A. Single - family dwellings. The construction of detached single- family
dwellings on individual lots or parcels within the Highway Corridor Overlay
District which are not located within a residential subdivision are exempt
from this section. For the purpose of this section, a subdivision shall consist
of a minimum of five (5) lots all platted at the same time. Also, construction
of detached single - family dwellings on lots or parcels within a residential
subdivision are exempt if the subdivision plat was legally recorded prior to
adoption of this section.
B. Agricultural structures. The construction of bona fide agricultural
structures required for on- premises farming operations involving the
cultivation of crops or the raising and keeping of livestock and the
preparation of land for cultivation of crops are exempt from this section.
C. Forestry operations. Timbering or silvicultural activities is permitted
upon any lot, parcel, or tract of land located within the district except that
clear cutting in any district other than lands zoned RAC, shall not occur
within at least fifty (50) feet from any of the arterial rights -of -way as
designated in section 6 -1003.
D. Nonconforming sites developed or platted prior to November 5, 1992.
Exemptions, whether partial or total, from Highway Corridor Overlay
12
District site design provisions may be granted by the development review
committee in accordance with section 7 -2000 (development review) if it can
be sufficiently demonstrated that such requirements will create an undue
hardship upon an existing situation. In such cases, the development review
committee may require, the establishment of shared parking and access
easements between adjacent nonconforming properties or other consistent
provisions to accomplish the purpose and intent of the district.
1. A one -time exemption may be granted by the zoning administrator
for the expansion of an existing developed property to enlarge the total
square footage of the principle building by not more than twenty -five
percent (25 %) of the total floor area; however, in no case shall such an
expansion exceed twenty -five hundred (2,500) square feet. Any
subsequent future expansion of floor area will require compliance with
the standards of this district.
2. A one -time exemption may be granted by the zoning administrator
for a single accessory building of no greater than five hundred (500)
square feet. Any subsequent future expansion of floor area will require
compliance with the standards of this district. (7 -7 -05; 8- 20 -09; 8- 16 -12.)
Sec. 6 -1006. - Minimum visual buffer along the corridor right -of -way.
A. A continuous minimum visual buffer of fifty (50) feet shall be provided
between the right -of -way line of the subject arterial highway and all proposed
structures, vehicular movement and parking areas.
The purpose of the minimum visual buffer is:
1. To soften the appearance of structures, vehicular movements and
parking areas from the road;
2. To screen vehicular headlight glare on and off -site;
3. To lessen spillover light from on -site lighting;
4. To retain the naturally occurring buffer vegetation for its softening
effect.
B. Except in the RAC zoning district, no existing vegetation of any type,
size, or origin shall be altered or removed within the minimum visual buffer
unless it satisfies the requirements of section 6 -1007, permitted activity in the
minimum visual buffer.
C. This buffer shall be enhanced or created to meet the requirements of the
development frontage zone, as specified in article VIII, where existing
vegetation does not meet the development frontage zone requirements of
article VIII. (7 -7 -05; 8- 20 -09; 8- 16 -12.)
Sec. 6 -1007. - Permitted activity in the minimum visual buffer.
A. Within the minimum visual buffer there shall be no development,
clearing, grading, or construction activity with the following exceptions:
1. Roadway or driveway access to the portion of the site not in the
13
minimum visual buffer is permitted provided that it is approximately
perpendicular to the arterial public right -of -way;
2. Water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, electrical, telephone, natural
cable, and utility service lines may be installed below the surface of the
ground at right angles provided that the natural vegetation is preserved
and protected to the greatest extent practicable, and frontage zone
landscaping points requirements are met. Where such existing or
proposed utility easements substantially reduce the area devoted to
landscaping in the buffer below the frontage zone landscaping points
requirements, an additional amount of landscaping beyond the fifty (50)
feet may be required;
3. Sidewalks, or other pedestrian and bicycle paths designed to provide
continuous connection along the road corridor may be permitted,
provided that they can be constructed without materially reducing the
screening and visual softening capacity of the required landscaping;
4. Signs are permitted in accordance with article IX.
5. Clearing for sight distances is permitted at the entrances and exits to
any development as needed to provide for reasonable traffic safety, in
accordance with accepted traffic engineering practices recommended or
required by the Virginia Department of Transportation;
6. The trimming of existing limbs or branches of preserved trees is
permitted, when approved by the zoning administrator.
B. The following cases anticipate those situations where the development
review committee may determine that the minimum visual buffer
requirements may be reduced or removed:
1. Views and vistas of existing buildings which heighten the visual
experience serve as important points of spatial identification or contain
value as important historical resources;
2. Views and vistas of existing natural landscape /topographical features
of a particular- area of the district which correspond to certain high points
affording panoramic views, views involving settlement clusters, views of
water, tidal and nontidal wetlands, tributary streams, and other elements
of the physical landscape;
3. Views and vistas to existing recreational /open space areas, whether
natural or manmade, which serve to contribute to the overall visual
environment. Such uses include, but are not limited to, golf courses, state
or local parks, equestrian centers, and cemeteries, etc.
4. Views and vistas which give the observer an awareness of a
location's inherent character related to views of farmland, pastures, and
water activities, such as docks or other maritime activities.
C. Where a proposed development intends to further enhance or protect the
existing visual environment, the development review committee may exempt,
14
wholly or partially, the proposed development from the required minimum
visual buffer. Examples include the following:
1. A proposed development which by virtue of the characteristics of its
structures indicates innovation of design, a unique relationship with the
site, represents a focal point and establishes a particular identifying
element for the county;
2. A proposed development which exhibits innovative or unique uses of
site landscaping, or which combines in the use of the site, open
recreational areas such as described above. (7 -7 -05; 8- 20 -09; 8- 16 -12.)
Sec. 6 -1008. - Yard and height requirements.
A. Yard requirements.
1. The following yard requirements shall apply to any lot or parcel
located along the arterial rights -of -way, as designated in section 6 -1003;
a. Front yard setback: Fifty (50) feet
b. Side yard setback: Ten (10) feet
c. Rear yard setback Ten (10) feet
2. All lots not located along arterial rights -of -way shall follow the yard
requirements of the underlying zoning district; however, no structures
vehicular movements or parking areas, other than to provide
perpendicular access to the site, shall be permitted in the setback.
3. All corner lots along arterial rights -of -way with a corner side yard
along a street other than an arterial right -of -way shall meet the front
setback requirement of the underlying zoning district along the corner
side not fronting the arterial. No structures, vehicular movements or
parking areas, other than to provide perpendicular access to the site, shall
be permitted in the setback.
B. Height requirements. The maximum height of all structures shall be as
permitted by the underlying zoning district(s) and subsection 5- 2000.C,
building height limitations. (7 -7 -05; 8- 16 -12.)
Sec. 6 -1009. - Access and internal circulation.
The purpose and intent of this section is to maximize the functional capacity
and maintain the level of service of highways within the Highway Corridor
Overlay District; to minimize the number of access points to these arterials
and other public rights -of -way within the district; to promote the sharing of
access and the ability to travel between sites; to provide pedestrian
circulation networks among residential, commercial, office, civic and
recreational areas; and to enhance safety and convenience for land uses
within the district.
A. Access to arterial highways. Access from any parcel or lot having
frontage along an arterial highway within the district and in existence
prior to November 5, 1992, shall be permitted one (1) direct access point
lIWII
to said highway, unless an access plan is submitted and approved by the
zoning administrator and the Virginia Department of Transportation for
more than one (1) access point as provided for in subsection D. of this
section.
B. Access for two (2) or more lots under singular ownership. If two (2)
or more adjacent parcels are placed under one (1) common ownership
and /or control, such assembly shall be permitted only one (1) direct
access to the arterial highway within the district, unless an access plan is
submitted to, and approved by the zoning administrator and the Virginia
Department of Transportation for more than one (1) access point.
C. Access from lots or parcels not permitted direct access. Direct access
to arterial highways shall be provided by one (1) or more of the
following means for lots or parcels not permitted direct access to the
arterial, subject to approval by the zoning administrator and the Virginia
Department of Transportation:
1. Access to the site may be provided by an existing or planned
public road perpendicular to the arterial highway; and /or
2. Access to the site may be provided via the internal circulation of
a shopping center, an office complex, or similar group of buildings
having access in accordance with an approved access plan; and no
additional direct access shall be provided to the site from a public
street intended to carry through traffic over and above those
entrances which may exist to provide access to the shopping center,
office complex, or similar group of buildings; and /or
3. Controlled access to the site may be provided by a service drive
generally parallel with the arterial highway, but located behind the
minimum visual buffer as defined in section 6 -1006.
4. Access to the site may be provided by the use of reverse frontage
or double frontage lot layouts on parallel roads. All minimum buffers
shall be maintained as required by section 6 -1006.
5. Access to the site may be provided by the use of shared
entrances with those established or likely to be required on adjacent
sites to minimize curb -cuts or increase spacing between curb -cuts.
6. Access to the site may be provided by the use of deceleration or
turning lanes where access must be from the arterial highway with
sufficient capacity to avoid stacking or queuing of entering vehicles
on the arterial highway, in accordance with Virginia Department of
Transportation standards.
The means of access control provided shall be that which effectively
minimizes creation of new intersections and new individual site access
locations along the corridors and best preserves highway traffic capacity.
D. Access plan. An access plan shall be submitted and approved prior to
development plan approval for those lots or parcels which will generate
16
two hundred (200) Average Daily Trips (ADT) or more, or those
proposing more than one (1) access point to an arterial highway as
governed by the provisions of this section. Such access plan shall be
drawn to scale, including dimensions and distances, and clearly delineate
the traffic circulation system and the pedestrian and bicycle circulation
system as coordinated within the development and adjacent properties
including the location and width of all streets, driveways, parking aisles,
entrance to parking areas, walkways and bicycle paths. The location of
future transit stops shall also be shown within the access plan.
E. Traffic impact analysis. A traffic impact analysis shall be submitted
to, and approved by the zoning administrator under the following
circumstances:
1. Any proposed development which will generate two hundred
(200) average daily trips (ADT) or more based on vehicular trip
generation rates as defined by the Institute of Transportation
Engineers' publication, Trip Generation, or the Virginia Department
of Transportation.
2. At the request of the zoning administrator, when the proposed
development is expected to significantly impact the vehicular
movement on the arterial highways within the district.
The traffic impact analysis shall indicate the cumulative effect of the
relationship of the proposed development to traffic and road use in the
immediate and surrounding area for the arterial roads and all secondary roads
between the arterial roads that serve to provide access to the development.
F. Internal circulation. Sites shall be designed to achieve direct and
convenient vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle connections vehicular
circulation between adjacent properties and buildings in a single
development project. (7 -7 -05; 8- 20 -09; 8- 16 -12.)
Sec. 6 -1010. - Architectural and development guidelines for all
nonresidential uses.
The compatible relationship of architecture along highways within the
Highway Corridor Overlay District is of critical public concern for any
structures or site improvements. The purpose and intent of these architectural
guidelines and development standards is not to stifle innovative architecture
or development, but to assure respect for and to reduce incompatible and
adverse impacts on the visual experience from the highway.
A. Architectural guidelines. The architectural design of structures and
their- materials and colors shall be visually harmonious with the overall
appearance, history, and cultural heritage of Isle of Wight County, with
natural land forms and existing vegetation. Specific consideration shall
be given to compatibility with adjacent properties where such projects
demonstrate the county's character. Design and architectural features will
demonstrate consistency with the following provisions:
17
1. A shopping center, office complex or similar group of buildings
shall be arranged in such a manner to minimize the impact of vehicle
parking areas along the arterial with buildings fronting the arterial,
and parking being located towards the center of the development
away from the arterial. Parking in the side and rear of such sites shall
be encouraged.
2. Stucco, natural wood siding, brick, stone, decorative block,
cementitous siding or other materials with similar texture and
appearance are considered appropriate to county character and shall
be provided on all exterior elevations. Vinyl siding, flat or
corrugated metal and concrete block shall not be used for exterior
siding material on any building, except that vinyl siding may be used
as trim material. The exterior covering material shall extend to the
ground, except that when a solid brick or masonry perimeter
foundation is used, exterior covering material need not extend below
the top of the foundation.
3. Avoidance of long monotonous facade designs including, but not
limited to, those characterized by unrelieved repetition of shape or
form or by unbroken extension of line shall be avoided. Thirty
percent (30 %) of the square footage of the front wall area of the
walls fronting on a street shall be setback or offset at least ten (10)
feet from the remaining portion of the wall area fronting on a street.
4. No building facade (whether front, side or rear) will consist of
architectural materials inferior in quality, appearance, or detail to any
other facade of the same building. The intent of this requirement is
not to preclude the use of different materials on different buildings'
facades (which would be acceptable if representative of good
architectural design), but rather to preclude the use of inferior
materials on sides which face adjoining property and thus, might
adversely impact existing or future development causing a
substantial depreciation of property values.
5. Not less than sixteen percent (16 %) of the total area of any
facade visible from a public way (excluding work areas) shall consist
of windows and doors.
6. Large work area doors or open bays shall not open toward or
face the highway.
7. Heating, ventilating, and air conditioning equipment, duct work,
air compressors and other fixed operating machinery shall be either
screened from view or located so that such items are not visible from
the highway. Utility meters, aboveground tanks, satellite dishes,
antennas, etc., shall be similarly treated.
8. The exterior of the foundation walls shall be of brick or masonry
construction, except when the exterior wall material extends to the
ground in accordance with subsection 6- 1009.A.2.
0
9. Colors of paints and stains shall be nature - blending with
generally no more than three (3) colors per building. Semitransparent
stains are recommended for application on natural wood finishes.
10. Entryways and landings visible from public areas should be
covered by a roof that is an integrated and compatible component to
the roof and architectural treatment of the main structure.
11. Fencing along the highway right -of -way is discouraged, but if
used, such fencing shall be landscaped to minimize visibility from
the highway or be of a style which is harmonious with the rural,
agricultural and historical character of the county. Chain link fences
shall be prohibited.
B. Development standards. Proposed development within the district
should provide for visual compatibility and harmony with surrounding
natural land forms and vegetation; be protective of views and vistas from
the arterial highways within the district; and provide continuity of site
design within the proposed development. These objectives include the
following standards:
1. Earth moving, fill, grading, clearing of property, and the removal
of trees and vegetation shall be the minimum necessary to provide
for the use. In particular, activities that could cause disruption of
natural watercourses or disfiguration of natural landforms are
prohibited.
2. Proposed development shall be located and configured in a
visually harmonious manner with the terrain and vegetation of the
parcel and surrounding parcels. Structures shall not impede scenic
views from the main highway or from existing structures and the
natural environment.
3. Structures shall not dominate, by excessive or inappropriate
height or mass, any general development, adjacent building, or
natural landscape in an incompatible manner.
4. Architectural lighting shall be recessed under roof overhangs or
generated from concealed source, low level light fixtures.
5. Lighting shall be installed in accordance with article XI (outdoor
lighting requirements and restrictions) and shall be arranged to shine
inward so that it does not reflect onto adjacent properties or impair
the safe movement of traffic.
6. Vehicular movement and parking areas requiring five (5) spaces
or more shall be paved with concrete, asphalt, or other similar
material. Vehicular movement and parking areas requiring less than
five (5) spaces may be surfaced with gravel or other similar material
but must be served by paved entrances meeting Virginia Department
of Transportation standards. Concrete curb and gutter or other
stormwater management structure as approved by the zoning
lL
administrator shall be installed around the perimeter of all driveways
and parking areas. Drainage shall be designed so as not to interfere
with pedestrian traffic.
7. Outdoor storage and display areas shall be as permitted by the
underlying zoning district in the side and rear yards only, provided
that all outdoor storage and display areas shall be visually screened
from public rights -of -way, internal roadways, and adjacent property
using the screening zone standards found in article VIII.
8. Loading areas shall be permitted only in the side or rear yards
and shall be visually screened from public rights -of -way, and
adjacent property using the screening zone standards found in article
VIII.
9. Large trash receptacles, dumpsters and recycling bins, must be
completely screened from view of the street and any adjoining lot
using the screening zone standards found in article VIII.
10. Screening, when required, shall be installed in accordance with
the screening zone standards of article VIII and shall be depicted on
the landscaping plan.
11. Site development should include streetscape improvements.
These improvements are considered as those architectural or
functional facilities or structures that occur on -site but are not part of
the building and that encourage and facilitate human interaction with
the built environment. Examples include, but are not limited to, the
following: decorative light fixtures, fountains, sculptures, benches
and tables, planters, retaining walls, pedestrian and bicycle paths,
bicycle parking structures, trash receptacles and enclosures, vendor
areas, and fences. The following streetscape improvements are
required:
a. A customized entrance at the entry street intersecting the
arterial or collector which features a waterfall, sculpture,
monument, signage, ornamental landscaping, specialty
pavement, enhanced fence wall details, or boulevard median.
b. Sidewalks, or other pedestrian and bicycle paths, including
picnic and rest areas, as appropriate.
These improvements shall be designed to be consistent with all requirements
listed above, and shall be reviewed for aesthetic functionality and
compatibility with county character.
12. To the greatest extent possible; stormwater management
structures and facilities shall be placed outside of the landscaping
zones identified in article VIII. When placement of stormwater
management structures and facilities in a landscaping zone is
demonstrated as unavoidable by the applicant, and approved by the
development review committee, and is not prohibited elsewhere in
20
this ordinance, such structure or facility shall be landscaped in a
naturalized pattern utilizing native species and the landscaping points
required for the area encompassed by the stormwater management
structure or facility shall be disbursed throughout the remaining area
of the landscaping zone.
13. Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED)
principles should be incorporated into site design to maximize public
safety through effective design of buildings, parking lots and public
spaces. Principles include territoriality, surveillance, and access
control. (7 -7 -05; 8- 20 -09; 8- 16 -12.)
Sec. 6 -1011. - Reserved.
On Nov. 5, 2009, the section pertaining to sign regulations in Highway
Corridor Overlay (HCO) District was deleted. Formerly that section was
designated as 6 -1011; however, on Aug. 20, 2009, this ordinance was
amended to delete section 6 -1003 causing the renumbering of the
remaining sections. (7- 7 -05.)
Sec. 6 -1012. - Reserved.
On July 21, 2009, the section pertaining to tree protection (formerly
designated as 6 -1012 but renumbered as 6 -1011 by previous
amendments) was deleted.
Sec. 6 -1013. - Reserved.
On July 21, 2010, the section pertaining to landscaping requirements
(formerly designated as 6 -1013 but renumbered by previous amendments
as 6 -1012) was deleted.
Sec. 6 -1014. - Development plan review.
A. Applicability. All development proposed in the Highway Corridor
Overlay District and other applicable projects shall submit a development
plan to the zoning administrator for review in accordance with section 7 -2000
(development review). (7 -7 -05; 8- 20 -09; 8- 16 -12.)
Sec. 6 -1015. - Exceptions.
A. A request for an exception to the requirements of the Highway Corridor
Overlay District shall be made in writing to the zoning administrator for
consideration by the development review committee in accordance with
section 7 -2000 (development review). The request shall be accompanied by
those documents determined by the zoning administrator to be necessary for
the development review committee's consideration of the request.
B. The development review committee in formulating a decision shall
consider the following:
1. Such exception shall be no less beneficial to the residents or
occupants of the development, as well as neighboring property, that
would be obtained under the applicable regulation;
21
2. That the exception is reasonable because of the high level of design
and construction that will be incorporated in the development;
3. That the exception will result in design and construction that is in
accordance with accepted engineering and building standards.
C. Applicants shall be informed in writing of the outcomes of the
development review committee and the process for appeal to the board of
supervisors; in accordance with section 7 -2000 (development review) should
the request be denied. The board of supervisors, following a recommendation
by the planning commission shall direct its determination and findings to the
zoning administrator and the applicant in writing not more than five (5)
working days after taking action.
D. Any person or persons jointly or severally aggrieved by a decision of the
board of supervisors may present to the circuit court of the County of Isle of
Wight a petition specifying the grounds on which aggrieved within thirty
(30) days after the final decision of the board of supervisors. Costs shall not
be allowed against the board of supervisors, unless it shall appear to the court
that it acted in bad faith or with malice in making the decision appealed
therefrom. (7 -7 -05; 8- 20 -09; 8- 16 -12.)
Sec. 6 -2004. - Exemptions to the Newport Development Service Overlay
District requirements.
A. Single- family dwellings. The construction of detached single- family
dwellings on individual lots or parcels within the Newport Development
Service Overlay District which are not located within a residential
subdivision are exempt from this section. For purpose of this section, a
residential subdivision shall consist of a minimum of five (5) lots all platted
at the same time. Construction of detached single- family dwellings on lots or
parcels within a residential subdivision are exempt if the subdivision plat was
legally recorded prior to adoption of this section.
B. Agricultural structures. The construction of bona fide agricultural
structures required for on- premises farming operations involving the
cultivation of crops or the raising and keeping of livestock and the
preparation of land for cultivation of crops are exempt from the requirements
of this district.
C. Forestry operations. Timbering or silvicultural activities is permitted
upon any lot, parcel, or tract of land located within the district except that
clear cutting in any district, other than lands zoned RAC, shall not occur
within at least fifty (50) feet from any of the arterial rights -of -way:
1. United States Highway Route 17;
2. United States Highway Route 10;
3. United States Highway Route 32 and 258.
D. Nonconforming sites developed or platted prior to November 5, 1992.
Exemptions, whether partial or total, from Newport Development Service
22
Overlay District site design provisions may be granted by the development
review committee in accordance with section 7 -2000 et seq. (development
review) if it can be sufficiently demonstrated that such requirements will
create an undue hardship upon an existing situation. In such cases, the
development review committee may require the establishment of shared
parking and access easements between adjacent nonconforming properties or
other consistent provisions to accomplish the purpose and intent of the
district.
1. A one -time exemption may be granted by the zoning administrator
for the expansion of an existing developed property to enlarge the total
square footage of the principle building by not more than twenty -five
percent (25 %) of the total floor area; however, in no case shall such an
expansion exceed twenty -five hundred (2,500) square feet. Any
subsequent fixture expansion of floor area will require compliance with
the standards of this district.
2. A one -time exemption may be granted by the zoning administrator
for a single accessory building of no greater than five hundred (500)
square feet. Any subsequent future expansion of floor area will require
compliance with the standards of this district (7 -7 -05; 8- 20 -09; 8- 16 -12.)
Sec. 6 -2005. - Minimum visual buffer along the rights -of -way of arterial
highways within the district.
A. A continuous minimum visual buffer of fifty (50) feet shall be provided
between the right -of -way line of the subject arterial highway and all proposed
structures, vehicular movements and parking areas. For purposes of this
section, arterial highways within the district shall be:
1. United States Highway Route 17;
2. United States Highway Route 10;
3. Unites States Highway Route 32 and 258.
B. The purpose of the minimum visual buffer is:
1. To soften the appearance of structures, vehicular movements and
parking areas from the road;
2. To screen vehicular headlight glare on- and off -site;
3. To lessen spillover light from on -site lighting;
4. To retain the naturally occurring buffer vegetation intact for its
softening effect.
C. Except in the RAC zoning district, no existing vegetation of any type,
size, or origin shall be altered or removed within the minimum visual buffer
unless it satisfies the requirements of section 6 -2006, permitted activity in the
minimum visual buffer.
D. This buffer shall be enhanced or created, where such vegetation does not
sufficiently satisfy the standards set forth in article VIII for the development
23
frontage zone. (7 -7 -05; 8- 16 -12.)
Sec. 6 -2006. - Permitted activity in the minimum visual buffer.
A. Within the minimum visual buffer there shall be no development,
clearing, grading, or construction activity with the following exceptions:
1. Roadway or driveway access to the portion of the site not in the
minimum visual buffer is permitted to the portion of the site not in the
minimum visual buffer is permitted provided that it is approximately
perpendicular to the arterial public right -of -way;
2. Water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, electrical, telephone, natural
cable, and utility service lines may be installed below the surface of the
ground at right angles, provided that the natural vegetation is preserved
and protected to the greatest extent practicable, and frontage zone
landscaping points requirements are met;
3. Sidewalks, pedestrian pathways and bicycle paths designed to
provide continuous connection along the road corridor may be permitted,
provided that they can be constructed without materially reducing the
screening and visual softening capacity of the required landscaping;
4. Signs are permitted in accordance with article IX;
5. Clearing for sight distances is permitted at the entrances and exits to
any development as needed to provide for reasonable traffic safety, in
accordance with accepted traffic engineering practices recommended or
required by the Virginia Department of Transportation;
6. The trimming of existing limbs or branches of preserved trees is
permitted when approved by the zoning administrator;
7. When, in the opinion of the zoning administrator, the addition of
plantings and earthen berms or masonry walls would better achieve the
purposes of this district in lieu of the landscaping requirements of the
frontage zone.
B. The following cases anticipate those situations where the development
review committee may determine that the minimum visual buffer
requirements may be reduced or removed:
1. Views and vistas of existing buildings which heighten the visual
experience serve as important points of spatial identification or contain
value as important historical resources;
2. Views and vistas of existing natural landscape /topographical features
of a particular area of the district which correspond to certain high points
affording panoramic views, views involving existing patterns of
development, views of water, tidal and nontidal wetlands, tributary
streams, and other elements of the physical landscape;
3. Views and vistas to existing recreational /open space areas, whether
natural or manmade, which serve to contribute to the overall visual
I
environment. Such uses include, but are not limited to, golf courses, state
or local parks, equestrian centers, cemeteries;
4. Views and vistas which give the observer an awareness of a
location's inherent character related to views of farmland, pastures, and
water activities, such as docks or other maritime activities.
C. Where a proposed development intends to further enhance or protect the
existing visual environment, the development review committee may exempt,
wholly or partially, the proposed development from the required minimum
visual buffer. Examples include the following:
1. A proposed development, which by virtue of the characteristics of its
structures indicates innovation of design, a unique relationship with the
site, represents a focal point and establishes a particular identifying
element for the county;
2. A proposed development which exhibits innovative or unique uses of
site landscaping, or which combines in the use of the site, open
recreational areas such as described above (7 -7 -05; 8- 20 -09; 8- 16 -12.)
Sec. 6 -2007. - Yard and height requirements.
A. Yard requirements.
1. All parcels in the Newport Development Service Overlay District
along arterial highways, as designated in section 6 -2005, within the
district, shall comply with the following setbacks:
a. Front yard setback: Fifty (50) feet
b. Side yard setback: Ten (10) feet
c. Rear yard setback: Ten (10) feet
2. All lots not located along arterial highways, as designated in section
6 -2005, shall follow the yard requirements as designated by the
underlying zoning district; however, no structures, vehicular movements
or parking areas other than to provide perpendicular access to the site,
shall be permitted in the setback.
3. All corner lots along arterial rights -of -way with a corner side yard
along a street other than an arterial right -of -way shall meet the front
setback requirement of the underlying zoning district along the corner
side not fronting the arterial. No structures, vehicular movements or
parking areas, other than to provide perpendicular access to the site, shall
be permitted in the setback.
B. Height requirements. The maximum height of all structures shall be as
permitted by the underlying zoning district(s). (7 -7 -05; 2- 13 -07; 8- 16 -12.)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED by the Isle of
Wight County Board of Supervisors that Appendix B, Zoning, Section
M
9 -1004, Temporary Signs of the Isle of Wight County Code be amended and
reenacted as follows:
9 -1004 Temporary Signs
The following temporary signs, excluding those listed in Section 9- 1004.H
below, are permitted without a zoning permit. However, such signs shall
conform to the requirements set forth below as well as all other applicable
requirements of this ordinance except those contained in Sections 9 -1006.
A. Real estate advertising signs.
1. On- premises signs.
a. On premises signs advertising the sale, lease, or rental of
property or signs advertising an auction for the sale of real
estate and /or personal property shall be limited to one (1)
sign per lot per street frontage or frontage on navigable
waterway.
b. Signs in residential zoning districts and residential uses in
the NC, VC, and PD -MX districts shall not exceed four (4)
square feet in size and a maximum of four (4) feet in
height.
c. Signs in Rural Agricultural Conservation zoning districts
shall not exceed sixteen (16) square feet in size and a
maximum of six (6) feet in height.
d. Signs in commercial and industrial zoning districts shall
not exceed thirty -two (32) square feet in size and a
maximum of ten (10) feet in height. The height of all signs
shall represent a measurement from ground level to the top
of the sign structure.
e. Such signs shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet
from any property line, shall be located outside of VDOT
right of way and shall be located outside of the any sight
triangles related to public or private roadways, driveways,
or other points of ingress or egress.
2. Off - premises signs.
a. Off - premises signs advertising the sale, lease, or rental of
property shall be allowed in conjunction with a bona fide
"open house" showing only and shall not be erected for
more than three (3) days in a calendar week.
26
b. Off - premises signs shall be allowed for the advertising of
an auction for the sale of real estate and /or personal
property and shall not be erected for more than seven (7)
days prior to the auction and shall be removed no later than
one (1) day following the auction.
c. Such signs shall be limited to sixteen (16) square feet in
size and a maximum of four (4) feet in height.
d. Such signs shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet
from any property line, shall be located outside of VDOT
right of way and shall be located outside of the any sight
triangles related to public or private roadways, driveways,
or other points of ingress or egress.
B. Construction site or development project identification signs.
1. Such signs shall not be erected prior to the issuance of a land
disturbing permit for the property and shall be removed within
ten (10) days after the issuance of the final occupancy permit by
the Building Official.
2. One (1) project identification sign shall be permitted per
construction site or development project and limited to no more
than sixteen (16) square feet in size and a maximum of ten (10)
feet in height.
3. In addition, in the case of multiple principals at the construction
site or for the development project (e.g., owner, developer,
architect, engineer, contractor, or real estate or leasing agent),
each principal shall be allowed one identification sign limited to
no more than sixteen (16) square feet in size and a maximum of
ten (10) feet in height.
4. Such signs shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any
property line, shall be located outside of VDOT right of way and
shall be located outside of the any sight triangles related to public
or private roadways, driveways, or other points of ingress or
egress.
C. Political campaign signs.
1. Such signs shall not be located within public rights -of -way or
attached to public utility structures and shall be limited to
freestanding signs not more than sixteen (16) square feet in area
in residential zones and thirty -two (32) square feet in area in
agricultural, commercial and industrial zones.
27
2. Such signs shall be no more than five (5) feet in height and shall
be located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any property lines.
3. No sign shall be permitted to encroach into the sight triangle of
any street intersection.
4. Such signs shall be removed within seven (7) days following an
election, canvass or primary.
D. Special event signs.
1. Signs indicating a special event to be located on property where
the special event such as a grand opening, fair, carnival, festival
or similar event, excluding business promotions, sales and
services signs as outlined in Section 9- 1004.H below, is to take
place may be erected no more than thirty (30) days prior to the
special event and shall be removed no later than forty -eight (48)
hours after the special event has concluded. However, grand
opening signs shall be removed no later than thirty (30) days
after the first day of the grand opening.
2. No sign shall be greater than thirty -two (32) square feet in size
and a maximum of ten (10) feet in height.
3. Such signs shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any
property line, shall be located outside of VDOT right of way and
shall be located outside of the any sight triangles related to public
or private roadways, driveways, or other points of ingress or
egress.
4. Off - premises signs for special events sponsored by non - profit,
governmental or civic organizations may be permitted up to
thirty -two (32) square feet.
5. Grand opening and special event signs, as defined by Section 9-
1004.1), which contain or consist of pennants, balloons, ribbons,
streamers, banners, spinners, strings of lights, or other similar
moving or stationary devices, may also be erected in accordance
with the provisions of Section 9- 1004.D.1 (above).
E. Interior window or door display signs.
1. Signs advertising the sale or promotion of specific products,
services or events may be affixed to the interior of the transparent
portion of the window or door of civic, office, commercial or
industrial use types.
M
2. Such signs, individually or collectively, shall be limited to no
more than fifteen percent (15 %) of the surface area of the
transparent portion of the window or door to which they are
attached. (7 -7 -05; 2- 15 -06; 4- 18 -06.)
F. Sports registration signs.
1. On- premises or off - premises signs for sports team sign -ups
sponsored by non - profit or civic organizations may be permitted
up to four (4) square feet in size.
2. Such signs shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any
property line, shall be located outside of VDOT right of way and
shall be located outside of any sight triangles related to public or
private roadways, driveways, or other points of ingress or egress.
3. Such signs shall be removed by sponsoring non - profit or civic
organization no later than the opening day of the sports season
for which the signs are advertising, or the last day for sign -ups,
whichever comes first.
G. On- premises seasonal agriculture product promotions and sales signs.
1. Signs advertising the promotion or sale of seasonal agricultural
products being directly marketed to the general public, excluding
those listed in Section 9- 1004.A thru Section 9- 10041 above,
and Section 9- 1004.H below, may be allowed as follows:
a. Seasonal agriculture product promotions and sales signs
shall be limited to agricultural businesses where:
i. All advertised products are grown or raised on the
site or by the legal business entity in charge of the
farm operation; or
ii. The advertised product
from a substantial amoi
raised on the site, as
Administrator.
is a by- product, produced
nt of the product grown or
determined by the Zoning
b. Such signs may be displayed on the parcel at which the sale
is being held.
2. Signs not specifically listed in, and meeting the criteria of,
Section 9- 1004.G, shall be prohibited for the purpose of seasonal
agricultural product promotions and sales, except in the case of a
wayside stand, which is governed separately under this article.
►9'
3. Such signs shall be allowed as follows:
a. Banner signs, free - standing signs or flag signs may be
permitted up to a maximum of thirty -two (32) square feet
in size and six (6) feet in height, except a flag sign may be
permitted up to a maximum of ten (10) feet in height.
b. One (1) sign shall be permitted per frontage of the parcel at
which the sale is being held.
4. Such signs shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any
property line, shall be located outside of VDOT right of way and
shall be located outside of the any sight triangles related to public
or private roadways, driveways, or other points of ingress or
egress.
H. On- premises business promotions, sales and services signs.
1. Signs advertising the sale or promotion of specific products or
services, excluding those listed in Section 9- 1004.A thru Section
9- 1004.G above, may be displayed on the parcel of a legal
business within the County.
2. Signs not specifically listed in, and meeting the criteria of,
Section 9- 1004.H, shall be prohibited for the purpose of on-
premises business promotions, sales and services signs.
3. When there is only one (1) legal business in operation on a
parcel, such signs, individually, shall be allowed as follows:
a. Banner signs, free - standing signs or flag signs may be
permitted up to a maximum of thirty -two (32) square feet
in size and six (6) feet in height, except a flag sign may be
permitted up to a maximum of ten (10) feet in height.
b. One (1) sign shall be permitted per parcel, outparcel or
per separate, physically detached business as determined by
the Zoning Administrator.
c. Such signs shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet
from any property line, shall be located outside of VDOT
right of way and shall be located outside of any sight
triangles related to public or private roadways, driveways
or other points of ingress or egress.
4. When there is more than one (1) legal business in operation on a
parcel, such as a shopping center or mixed use building with
WE
individual public entrances per business, signs, individually or
collectively, shall be allowed as follows:
a. Banner signs may be permitted up to a maximum of
thirty -two (32) square feet in size provided that they are
attached to the fagade of the unit for which the promotion,
sale or service is located.
b. Sandwich board signs may be permitted up to a
maximum of ten (10) square feet in size on the sidewalk
immediately adjacent to the building fagade for which the
promotion, sale or service is located. The sign surface area
shall be calculated by using the area of only one (1) side of
such sign. The height of the sign shall not exceed four (4)
feet. Signs shall not reduce required egress less than five
(5) feet on a sidewalk.
c. One (1) sign shall be permitted per business.
5. The property owner, business owner, business manager or other
entity acting on behalf of the business applying for the zoning
permit, shall provide details of their request on forms provided
by the Zoning Administrator.
6. The property owner, business owner, business manager or other
entity acting on behalf of the business shall be required to obtain
a zoning permit for each application made to the County to erect,
install or display signs listed in Section 9- 1004.H.
7. Such signs shall be displayed no more than a total of thirty (30)
calendar days per business in a calendar quarter.
8. Any violation of this section shall be punishable by a civil
penalty of $150.00 for the first offense and $350.00 for every
separate offense thereafter. Each day that a violation continues
following the first offense shall be deemed as a separate offense.
The County will issue no more than two (2) written warnings for
the first documented violation at the place of business regarding
violations of this Section prior to the issuance of civil penalties.
Any future violations of this Section by the same business shall
be punishable by a civil penalty of $150.00 for the first offense
and $350.00 for every separate offense thereafter as defined
above, without the issuance of any additional written warnings
from the County.
I. Special award signs.
31
1. Signs announcing a specific award given to a business or other
entity may be displayed on the parcel where the business or entity
is located.
2. Such signs shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any
property line, shall be located outside of VDOT right of way and
shall be located outside of the any sight triangles related to public
or private roadways, driveways, or other points of ingress or
egress. (7 -7 -05; 6- 16 -11; 8- 16 -12)
The motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen,
Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and no
Supervisors voting against the motion.
Chairman Casteen called for a public hearing on the following:
C. Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of General Obligation
Public Improvement Bonds of Isle of Wight County, Virginia, in
a Principal Amount Not to Exceed $22,000,000.
County Attorney Popovich certified that the proposed Resolution has
been properly advertised for public hearing.
Chairman Casteen called for persons to speak in favor of or in
opposition to the Resolution.
No one appeared and spoke.
Chairman Casteen closed the public hearing and called for comments
from the Board.
Supervisor Bailey moved that the following Resolution be adopted:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF GENERAL
OBLIGATION PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF ISLE OF WIGHT
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, IN A PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $22,000,000
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 10(b) of Article VII of the
Constitution of Virginia and Section 15.2 -2639 (formerly Section 15.1-
227.40) of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended (the "Code "), Isle of
Wight County, Virginia (the "County "), has elected by affirmative vote of the
qualified voters of the County, to be treated as a city for the purpose of
issuing its bonds.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ISLE
OF WIGHT COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
32
I . It is determined to be necessary and expedient for the County to
finance the acquisition, construction and equipping of various public
improvement projects, including without limitation, facilities and equipment
related to administrative, utility, public works, economic and community
development, parks and recreation, and public safety purposes and uses (the
"Project "), to borrow money for such purpose and to issue the County's
general obligation public improvement bonds therefor.
2. Pursuant to the Constitution and statutes of the Commonwealth
of Virginia, including the Public Finance Act of 1991, there are authorized to
be issued general obligation public improvement bonds of the County in a
principal amount not to exceed $22,000,000 to provide funds to finance, in
part, the cost of the Project.
3. The bonds shall bear such date or dates, mature at such time or
times not exceeding 40 years from their dates, bear interest at such rate or
rates, be in such denominations and form, be executed in such manner and be
sold at such time or times and in such manner as the Board may hereafter
provide by appropriate resolution or resolutions.
4. The bonds shall be general obligations of the County for the
payment of principal of and premium, if any, and interest on which its full
faith and credit shall be irrevocably pledged.
5. The County intends that the adoption of this resolution be
considered as "official intent" within the meaning of Treasury Regulations,
Section 1.150 -2, promulgated under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended.
6. The Clerk of the Board, in collaboration with the County
Attorney, is authorized and directed to see to the immediate filing of a
certified copy of this resolution in the Circuit Court of Isle of Wight County,
Virginia.
7. This resolution shall take effect immediately.
The motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen,
Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and no
Supervisors voting against the motion.
Chairman Casteen called for a public hearing on the following:
Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of General Obligation Public
Improvement Bonds of Isle of Wight County, Virginia, in a Principal
Amount not to exceed $60,000,000.
County Attorney Popovich certified that the proposed Resolution has
been properly advertised for public hearing.
33
Chairman Casteen called for persons to speak in favor of or in
opposition to the Resolution.
No one appeared and spoke.
Chairman Casteen closed the public hearing and called for comments
from the Board.
Supervisor Darden moved that the Resolution Authorizing the Issuance
of General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds of Isle of Wight County,
Virginia, in a Principal Amount not to exceed $60,000,000 be adopted and
included as Attachment "A" to these minutes. The motion was adopted by a
vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen, Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin
voting in favor of the motion and no Supervisors voting against the motion.
Chairman Casteen called for a public hearing on the following:
D. An Ordinance to Amend and Reenact the Isle of Wight County
Code by Amending and Reenacting Chapter 16.1. Water. Section
16.1 -2. Additional Rules and Regulations and Section 16.1 -9.
Amounts - Generally.
County Attorney Popovich certified that the proposed Ordinance has
been properly advertised for public hearing.
Chairman Casteen called for persons to speak in favor of or in
opposition to the Resolution.
No one appeared and spoke.
Chairman Casteen closed the public hearing and called for comments
from the Board.
Supervisor Bailey moved that the following Ordinance be adopted:
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REENACT THE ISLE OF WIGHT
COUNTY CODE
BY AMENDING AND REENACTING CERTAIN DESIGNATED
SECTIONS OF
CHAPTER 16.1. WATER. ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL. SECTION 16.1 -2
AND
ARTICLE II. METERS. SECTION 16.1 -9. AMOUNTS — GENERALLY.
WHEREAS, the Isle of Wight County Board of Supervisors has
determined that it is necessary and appropriate to make certain technical
revisions to the water ordinance for Isle of Wight County Code.
Im
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Isle of Wight County
Board of Supervisors, Virginia, that effective July 16, 2012 Chapter 16.1.
Water. Article I. In General. Section 16.1 -2 is hereby amended and reenacted
as follows:
Sec. 16.1 -2. - Additional rules and regulations.
The County is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the
water system up to and including the water meter. All service lines beyond
the meter are the responsibility of the owner of the parcel. The County
reserves the right to adopt, from time to time, such additional rules and
regulations as it shall deem necessary and proper in connection with use and
operation and maintenance of the water system, which rules and regulations
shall become effective as though set forth in this chapter. (5- 21 -09.)
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED by the Isle of Wight County Board of
Supervisors that effective July 16, 2012 Article II. Meters. Section 16.1 -9.
Amounts – Generally is hereby amended and reenacted as follows:
Sec. 16.1 -9. - Amounts — Generally.
Meter service charges shall be determined on the following basis:
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, meter service
charges shall be based on the volume of water used as measured by meters
installed and maintained by the County;
(b) Meter service charges for water passing through meters are
hereby imposed upon and shall be collected on a regularly scheduled basis
from the owner or tenant of each improved property connected to the County
water systems. Such charges shall be as follows: Meter service charges shall
be in accordance with Table 16.1 -9 below. The County reserves the right
from time to time to amend the service charges in order to insure that the
utility system remains self - sustaining.
Table 16.1.9
35
BI- MONTHLY SERVICE CHARGES
CHARGES
Meter Size:
Up to and including 3/4"
$25.50
1 "
$84.00
1' /2"
$95.00
2"
$129.00
4"
$129.00
Unmetered Water Service
$70.00
Per 1,000 Gallon Metered Usage:
0- 50,000 gallons
$6.65
Over 50,000 gallons
$5.75
Master Meter:
Same rates as illustrated above.
The motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen,
Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and no
Supervisors voting against the motion.
Chairman Casteen called for a public hearing on the following:
E. An Ordinance to Amend and Reenact Chapter 3. Article V.
Cruelty to Animals.
County Attorney Popovich certified that the proposed Ordinance has
been properly advertised for public hearing.
Chairman Casteen called for persons to speak in favor of or in
opposition to the Resolution.
Nancy Hemingmay, Vice President, Isle of Wight Humane Society,
advised of that organization's opposition to any form of tethering. She
suggested the following guidelines in developing a County ordinance to help
prevent the type of tethering, neglect and abuse that is currently allowed to
occur in the County: number of hours; environment; time period from 10:00
p.m. until 5:00 a.m.; temperature limits between 32 degrees and 90 degrees
with the exception of cold tolerant breeds; not during extreme weather
events; age limit; provide proof that animals are spayed or neutered and that
owners have a license and their animals are vaccinated for rabies; animal
owners must have a permit to tether; and, the type of tethering that is
acceptable.
Waverly Trailer of the Hardy District distributed pictures of 2003
criminal cases which were prosecuted by the County's Animal Control
Department. He expressed concern with the enforceability of the proposed
ordinance.
36
Marleen White of the Hardy District spoke in opposition to the ban on
tethering noting that she owns two (2) dogs that she must keep on a runner or
leash for their and the public's safety. She advised that she has been
requested to tether them during hunting season so that they do not disturb
hunting on the adjacent Aberdeen Farms land.
Jen Forbes, representing People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals,
expressed support of a full ban on tethering because it is easier to implement
and enforce than a proposed ordinance which imposes limits on time or
temperature. She stated chaining dogs causes them to become aggressive and
territorial.
Robbie Younger of the Hardy District submitted a petition containing
124 signatures in support of a total ban on tethering which makes dogs
aggressive. She stated that tethering is cruel and inhumane.
Stephanie Done of Carrollton spoke in support of a total ban on
tethering.
Linda Seely of Hampton spoke against the tethering of animals due to
the horrible conditions in which they are forced to live. She stated the City
of Hampton banned tethering because they are compassionate and care about
animals. She stated tethering of dogs contributes to their aggression.
Karen Slumlin of Zuni stated that tethering, when done responsibly,
can be an appropriate method to allow an animal to be outside with its owner,
to be trained, socialized and protected.
Termara Thane of Dogs Deserve Better advocated for a ban on
unattended tethering. She stated that tethered dogs are three (3) times more
likely to bite and are unsocialized animals.
Ken Rictner spoke in favor of responsible tethering.
Sharon Hart of the Newport District stated there should be limits on the
amount of time a dog can be tethered with conditions on providing ample
food and shelter. She stated that there should not be a total ban on tethering
because some people can't afford a fence and may have to render their pets to
an animal shelter.
Michael Uzzell of Central Hill Road asked the Board to review the
minutes from a past issue regarding dogs running loose and attacking
livestock.
Abagail Adams of Bowling Green Road spoke against banning
tethering. She explained that her dog needs to be tethered for his protection
and she does not want to have to contain him to a pen when he is outdoors.
37
Patricia Lowe of Collosse Road stated that an ordinance to ban
tethering should be in place for law enforcement officials to use when
appropriate as in the case of abuse or neglect. She stated that she does not
agree with dog owners allowing their animals to run through other people's
property or in the road and she recommended that dogs be kept in fences or
inside the home.
Pinky Hipp of Morgarts Beach Road stated that she is committed to the
care of animals. She stated the Ordinance, as proposed, is unenforceable.
She stated people tethering their animals in a humane way are not the
problem and the County already has an existing cruelty ordinance for those
owners that are tethering their animals in an inhumane way. She stated the
number of law enforcement officers need to be increased so that the cruelty
ordinance can be enforced.
Mike Cobb of Carrsville spoke against a total ban on tethering. He
asked the Board to keep in mind those people that promote the humane
treatment of all animals and that adopting the proposed ordinance would
make criminals out of many animal owners. He requested the Board to
enforce the existing cruelty ordinance and not burden taxpayers with a
cumbersome ordinance that cannot be enforced.
Jane March of Zuni stated that animal cruelty laws currently in place
are sufficient to address tethering offenses and leash laws address loose
animals. She stated the proposed ordinance is simply something a
disgruntled neighbor can use as a hate crime and additional employees will
need to be hired to inspect yards and homes.
Ross Younger of the Hardy District stated a total ban on tethering is the
only way to enforce it. He expressed sympathy to those pet owners who do
tether their animals in a responsible manner, but he does believe that a total
ban on tethering is a good idea for enforcement reasons and Animal Control
officers need to be trained about what is and what is not an abusive or
negligent act of tethering.
Kay Burnett of Whispering Pines Trail spoke against the ban on
tethering and in favor of the existing animal cruelty ordinance. She stated the
County does not have sufficient law enforcement officers and the issue that
needs to be addressed is really animal cruelty.
Tony White of the Hardy District stated that her family's dogs are
tethered for their safety and she is opposed to a no tethering ban.
James Clark, Chief Deputy, Sheriff's Office, advised the Board that
enforcement of the proposed Ordinance is not possible with only two (2)
Deputies assigned to animal control efforts if a time limit is set. He stated if
the Board desires to adopt the Ordinance, as proposed, he is requesting that
the time limit be for a short period of time and he notified the Board that
Deputies will be using common sense when enforcing the Ordinance.
Chairman Casteen advised the Board that Janet Cornell of Smithfield
could not be present at the meeting tonight, but has voiced her opposition to
animal tethering.
Chairman Casteen closed the public hearing and called for comments
from the Board.
Supervisor Hall inquired if staff has the authority, under the County's
current ordinance, to address a situation in which an animal is suffering or
being abused from tethering.
Chief Deputy Clark responded that staff does have authority to address
situations in which animals are being neglected or abused.
Chief Animal Control Officer Barlow advised that the County's current
ordinance does allow for conviction of a person responsible for a cruelty
issue.
Supervisor Darden commented if the Board adopts the proposed
ordinance, Animal Control staff will have no choice but to issue a summons
to all persons who are tethering their animals, whether responsibly or not.
She stated the welfare of people, such as elderly, children and delivery people
that may come in contact with an animal that is not tethered also needs to be
taken into consideration. She stated this issue is not about tethering, but
about animal cruelty and if more authority is needed to prosecute negligent
dog owners under the animal cruelty law, then the Board needs to take
appropriate action to provide more authority.
Supervisor Bailey commented that the County is not after dog owners
who tether their well -taken care of dogs in a responsible manner, but those
who are cruelty treating their animals. He stated the Sheriff's office has the
authority to issue or not issue a summons, dependent upon their investigation
of the circumstances.
Chairman Casteen stated if animal cruelty laws were working, there
would not be animals that are being mistreated. He stated the Board need to
give them the latitude to make a responsible decision and enforce according
to the spirit of the law.
Supervisor Alphin stated that the proposed Ordinance does not allow
for those exceptions where tethering might be more humane. He stated that
he has trouble supporting the ordinance as proposed because it has the ability
to punish those who are not abusing their animals.
Supervisor- Alphin moved to deny the proposed changes to the cruelty
Ordinance. The motion was adopted by a vote of (3 -2) with Supervisors
39
Darden, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and Supervisors
Bailey and Casteen voting against the motion.
Chairman Casteen declared a recess. The Board returned to open
session.
County Attorney Popovich requested a closed meeting pursuant to
Section 2.2- 3711.A.7 of the Code of Virginia regarding consultation with
legal counsel requiring the provision of legal advice pertaining to volunteer
fire departments; pursuant to Section 2.2- 3711.A.7 regarding consultation
with legal counsel requiring the provision of legal advice pertaining to
probable litigation; and, pursuant to Section 2.2- 3711.A.I pertaining to a
personnel matter concerning a specific public official.
Supervisor Bailey moved to enter the closed meeting for the reasons
stated by the County Attorney. The motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0)
with Supervisors Darden, Bailey, Hall, Alphin and Casteen voting in favor of
the motion and no Supervisors voting against the motion.
Chairman Casteen moved to return to open session. The motion was
adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Darden, Bailey, Hall, Alphin and
Casteen voting in favor of the motion and no Supervisors voting against the
motion.
Chairman Casteen moved that the following Resolution be adopted:
CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED MEETING
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has convened a closed meeting on
this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the
provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and,
WHEREAS, Section 2.2- 3712.D of the Code of Virginia requires a
certification by this Board of Supervisors that such closed meeting was
conducted in conformity with Virginia law;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors
hereby certifies that, to the best of each member's knowledge, (i) only public
business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by
Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting to which this certification
resolution applies, and (ii) only such public business matters as were identified
in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed or
considered by the Board of Supervisors.
CI1;
VOTE
AYES: Bailey, Darden, Hall, Alphin and Casteen
NAYS: 0
ABSENT DURING VOTE: 0
ABSENT DURING MEETING: 0
Chairman Casteen moved that the Chairman be authorized to sign the
letter discussed in closed meeting to the volunteer fire departments. The
motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen, Darden,
Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in favor of the motion and no Supervisors
voting against the motion.
Supervisor Hall moved that County Administrator Caskey request from
the Department of Historic Resources a status report on Boykin's Tavern and
recommendations for its increased usage. The motion was adopted by a vote
of (5 -0) with Supervisors Casteen, Darden, Bailey, Hall and Alphin voting in
favor of the motion and no Supervisors voting against the motion.
Supervisor Darden moved that Roberts Rules of Order be suspended
and that the Board revisit the application of the Sprint cell phone tower which
was denied at the Board's July meeting.
Upon the advisement by the County Attorney that the motion must be
unanimous by the Board members, the motion was defeated with Supervisors
Darden, Bailey and Casteen voting in favor of the motion and Supervisors
Hall and Alphin voting against the motion.
County Administrator Caskey reminded the Board that the Franklin
Mill will be commissioned in the morning at 10:00 a.m. and that the
Governor will be in attendance.
At 9:30 p.m., Supervisor Alphin moved that the Board adjourn its
meeting. The motion was adopted by a vote of (5 -0) with Supervisors
Darden, Bailey, Hall, Alphin and Casteen voting in favor of the motion and
no Supervisors voting against the motion.
6 alu4n bivv�
Carey ills Storm, Clerk
41
r
A an E. Casteen, Chairman