03-04-1993 Regular Meeting
BOtr• ~5 ~a'`2~~
1
1
U
REGULAR MEETING OF THE ISLE OF WIGHT COUNTY BOARD OF
. SUPERVISORS HELD THE FOURTH DAY OF MARCH IN THE. YEAR
NINETIJEN ~-iLTNDRED NINETY THREE
PRESENT: Steve W. Edwards, Chairman.
O. A. Spady, Vice Chairman
Henry H. Bradby
Joel C. Bradshaw,. Jr. .
Malcolm T. Cofer
Also Attending: H. Woodrow Crook, Jr., County Attorney
Myles E. Standish, .County Administrator .
W. Douglas Casket',.. Assistant County.
Administrator/Community Development
Donald T. Robertson, Assistant to the
County Administrator
Carey H. Mills, Assistant Clerk
Chairman Edwards called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. and
recognized the presence of Darlene Byrd, Marian Smith and members of
Girl Scout Troop #803.
Supervisor Bradshaw delivered the invocation.
//
Chairman Edwards called for Transportation Matters.
Cliff Moieen, Assistant to the Resident Engineer, Virginia Department
of Transportation, advised Mr. Neblett had a conflict which prevented him
from. attending the meeting today. Mr. Moieen stated the Route 10 project
should be completed by the end of May and is 7% ahead of schedule
and the. Route 600 project has been delayed due to inclement weather
altfiough it is still on schedule.
Mr. Moleen advised the 1993 pre-allocation hearings for the Suffolk
District will be held on March 22, 1993 at 10:00 a.m. at the District
auditorium on Route 460. An update will be presented at that time on the.
new "ice tea" legislation to be presented. by Secretary Milligan and the
hearings are an opportunity for-.the municipalities to present their highway
needs with regards to the. primary, urban and interstate systems to the
Commonwealth Transportation Board. Mr. Moleen stated these comments
are used to develop the six-year improvements plan and suggested the
County prepare an ordinance similar to the one submitted the previous year
by the County. Mr. Moieen stated questions concerning the ISTEA .
legislation should be directed to Jeff Trigo out of VDOT's central office in
Richmond at (804) 225-3542.
County Administrator Standish noted the Board should now begin to
give consideration to proposed projects to be presented,to VDOT on March
22, 1993. Mr. Standish stated he would have the matter listed. on the
Board's March 18, 1993 agenda for further discussion.
1
9,O~M ~~ rwv~ ~3~
Upon there being no comments from Board members on the matter,
Chairman Edwards called for the second item in the agenda under
Transportation Matters, Carrollton School Turn Lanes.
Mr. Moleen stated the school's request -for the installation of a right-
turn lane on the eastbound lane has been presented to VDOT`s Traffic
Engineer who suggested a 150-font turn lane. be constructed. Mr. Moleen
further stated VDOT safety funding in the amount of $14,000 can be
obligated towards this effort and VDOT would like to make this a part of
the widening of Route 711.
Chairman Edwards asked at what level would a decision be made
regarding the School Board's request and the Transportation Safety,
Commission's endorsement of the request concerning a light at that
intersection.
Mr. Moleen replied at the District level and advised the Traffic
Engineer is reviewing the request now.
Supervisor Spady stated it may not be necessary to have a light
installed that functions at all times and moved the Board direct County staff
write VDOT to request their consideration of placing atime-controlled
traffic light at the intersection that would function only during school hours.
The motion was unanimously (5-0) adopted.
Chairman Edwards called for comments by the Board regarding
highway matters.
Supervisor Bradby noted the presence of .Henry Bell in the audience
and inquired about the status of Route 681.
Mr. Moleen reported that VDOT has not heard from the two
remaining landowners concerning VDOT's recent letters to them. Mr.
Moleen stated VDOT will contact them again and get their comments on the
matter.
Supervisor Bradby requested the ditches and drainpipes be cleaned
out in the Gravel Hill Baptist Church area on Route 10 in the Rushmere
community.
Supervisor Spady stated he had spoken with Mr. Neblett concerning
the ditches in the Carrollton area and since then he has reviewed the.
ditches with Mr. Ward. Supervisor Spady further stated a special type of
machine will be needed to perform this work which is .now located in
another district and requested VDOT to move this machine to the various
districts on an as-needed basis.
Supervisor Spady requested an update on Laurelwood Drive.
Mr. Moleen stated the matter is still under review and he would
request Mr. Neblett to provide a report on the matter at the Board's April
1, 1993 meeting.
G
2
,:
ao~K ~5~ :~,;~?31
Chairman Edwards requested VDOT to clean the pipe or- Route 636
. between Ennis Run Swamp and Route 460 at the first field on the left-hand
side.
i~
There being no citizens' concerns on highway matters, C h a i r m a n
Edwards called for a public hearing on the following ordinance:
An Ordinance to Amend and Reordain an Ordinance Providing
an Exemption. and or Deferral of Real Estate. Taxes for the
Elderly and Handicapped
County Attorney Crook stated the ordinance as now advertised
provides for an exemption of 100% if the income of the owner is less than
$6,000 with a maximum tax exemption of $500; 75% if the income is from
$6,001 to $12,000 with a maximum tax exemption of $500; and 50% if the
income is .over $12,000 with a maximum. tax exemption of $500. Mr. Crook
advised the proposed ordinance also continues the deferral program and
has been properly advertised for public hearing by the Board.
1
1
Chairman Edwards called for comments in favor of or in opposition
° to the proposed ordinance.
Grace Keen, a resident of the Newport District, spoke in favor and
commended the Board, County Attorney and County Administrator for
their efforts on behalf of County- citizens which she believed would give
them an opportunity to remain in their homes and maintain a way of life ',
that is beneficial to all.
Chairman Edwards called for comments from the Board.
Supervisor Cofer moved the Board adopt the following ordinance:
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN AN
' ORDINANCE PROVIDING AN EXEMPTION AND
OR DEFERRAL OF REAL ESTATE TAXES FOR
THE ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED
WHEREAS, the General Assembly for the Commonwealth of Virginia
has provided by various acts now embodied in Title 58.1, Chapter 32,
Article 2 of the Code of Virginia, as amended, that the governing body of
any county may by ordinance provide for the exemption from, deferral of,
or a combination program of exemptions from and deferrals of taxation of
real estate and mobile homes, or any portion thereof, and upon such
conditions and in such an amount as the ordinance may prescribe the real
estate and sole dwelling of anyone at least sixty-five years of age or anyone
found to be permanently and .totally disabled; and,
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors. of Isle of Wight. County,
Virginia, originally adopted such an ordinance for exemption of real estate
taxes on November 7, 1974 which was amended and reordained by said
Board of Supervisors on November 3, 1977 as a tax exemption ordinance I
but which was subsequently amended by said Board of Supervisors to a tax
3
80^~ ~J ~~;. ~~~
deferral ordinance on January 5, .1978, with .subsequent amendments of
February 5, 1981, and June 21, 1984; and,
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Isle of Wight County,
Virginia, does now desire that qualifying residents be allowed a choice of
tax exemption or tax deferral as hereinafter provided.
NOW, BE 1T ORDAINED BY TT-iE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
ISLE OF .WIGHT" COUNTY, VIRGINIA, that Section 15-7 of the Isle of
Wight County Code be amended to read as follows:
Sec 15 7 Exemption or Deferral for the Elderly and .Handicapped.
a) Real estate tax exemption or deferral,. is provided for qualified
(
property owners or partial owners who are either.
(1) Heads of households and sixty-five years of age and
older; or
(2) .Permanently and totally disabled and who are
eligible according to other terms of .this section as .provided in
subsection (b) of this section.
(b) Exemption or deferral shall be granted to qualifying
persons subject to the following provisions:
(1) The title to the. property for whichnhe~Cembpr131 of
deferral is claimed, is held or partially held o
the immediately preceding taxable year by the person claiming
the exemption or deferral;
(2) The person claiming the exemption or deferral was,
as of December 31 of the year immediately preceding the
taxable year, either:
a. Sixty-five years of age or
older; or
b. Permanently and totally
disabled, which, for the .
purposes of this section,
means to be unable to
engage in any substantial
gainful activity by reason. of
any medically determinable
physical or mental
impairment or deformity
which can be expected to
result in death or can be.
expected to last for the
duration of such .person's
life.
1
1
4
so~K 15 ,,,~:, ?_33
1
1
(3) The total combined income during .the
immediately preceding calendar year , from all
sources of the owners of the dwelling living therein
does .not exceed eighteen thousand dollars;
provided, that the first four thousand dollars of
income of each relative, other than spouse, of the
owner or owners, who is living in the dwelling,
..shall not be included in such total.
(4) The net combined financial worth, including
equitable interests, as of December 31 of the
immediately preceding calendar year, of the owners
and the spouse of any owner, excluding the value of
the dwelling and the land not. exceeding one acre
upon which it is situated, does not exceed sixty-five
thousand dollars..
(5) Changes in respect to income, financial worth,
ownership of property or .other factors occurring
during the taxable year for which. the affidavit
shown in subsection (f) (2) of this section is filed
and having the effect of exceeding or violating the
limitations and/or conditions of this section shall
nullify any relief from real estate tax liability for the
current taxable year and the taxable. year
immediately following.
(c) .When the person or persons claiming exemption or
.deferral conforms to the standards and. does not exceed the.
limitations contained in this section, the tax exemption. or
deferral is on the sole dwelling owned and occupied by the
applicant or applicants and up to one acre of land upon which
the dwelling is situated.
(d) If the person elects exemption, the real estate described in
this section shall be exempt from the. following percentages of
the real estate taxes based upon the total combined income as
described in paragraph (b) (3) above:
Range of Income Exemption
0 - $6,000 100% up to a maximum exemption of $500
$6,001- $12,000 75% up to a maximum exemption of $500
.$12,001 - $18,000 50% up to a maximum exemption of $500
Provided that if the ownership of the property for which the
application is made is not held solely by the applicant or jointly
with the applicant's spouse, then the amount of tax exemption,
hereunder, shall be in proportion to the applicant's ownership
interest in the subject real property, as than awnership interest
5
;.
.80~K 15 ~~~:~?34
may appear:
(e) If the person elects deferral. of real estate taxes granted by
this. section, the accumulated amount of taxes deferred shall be
paid, without penalty and without interest on the amount so
deferred upon the sale of the property or one year. from the date
of the death of the owner of the property, who received the
deferral, and from that time on interest shall be at the rate of
eight percent per annum until paid. Such deferred real estate
taxes shall constitute a lien upon such real estate.
(f) (1) The Commissioner of the Revenue or his
authorized designee shall administer the exemption
or deferral according to the general provisions of
this section. The Commissioner is hereby authorized
and directed to .prescribe forms and make such
further inquiry of persons applying for exemption,
or deferral, including the requirements of answers
under oath, production of certified tax returns and
appraisal reports or other proofs, as may be
reasonably necessary to determine income, financial
worth and qualifications,
(2) Annually, and not later than May 1 of the
taxable year, the person or persons claiming an
exemption or deferral must file a real ,estate tax
exemption affidavit with the Commissioner of .the
Revenue. The affidavit shall set forth, in a manner
prescribed by the Commissioner, the location and
assessed value of the property, the names of related
persons occupying the dwelling of which exemption
or deferral is claimed, the gross combined incomes
of such persons, the net combined financial worth of
such persons, the age or nature of the disability of
the applicant and, if the person is eligible for social
security, a certification by the Social Security
Administration or, if such person is not eligible for '
social security, a sworn affidavit by two medical
doctors licensed to practice in the state, to the effect
.that such person is permanently and totally disabled
as defined in subparagraph (b) (2) b. of this section.
(f) Any person who has title to real estate transferred to his
name after he becomes permanently and totally disabled or
reaches age sixty-five, .solely for purposes of obtaining .the
benefits permitted under this section, shall be disqualified from
obtaining the exemption or deferral created by this section.
(g) This section shall apply to tax bills due in June, 1993, and
semi-annually thereafter until amended or repealed.
The ordinance was unanimously (5-0) adopted.
n
1
6
T:
Chairman Edwards called for a public hearing on the following:
An Ordinance to Amend and Re-enact the Wetlands Zoning
Ordinance of Isle of Wight County
1
County Attorney Crook stated the General Assembly has made
changes in the statutes which necessitated adding some provisions, mostly
procedural, including the requirement of a bond if the Wetlands Board
deems it necessary, and also a penalty provision on Page 7, paragraph 14.
1V1r. Crook stated there is one change from the ordinance in the Board's
agenda' which is paragraph C on Page 5 which reflects a fee of $250. as
recently adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Crook explained that
rather than try to amend -the existing ordinance, he prepared an entirely
new ordinance and he has asked the Environmental Planner to review the
proposed ordinance which he does recommend to the Board .for their
approval.
Upon there being no comments from citizens in favor of or in
opposition to the proposed ordinance, Chairman .Edwards called for
comments from the Board.
i~
Supervisor Bradby moved the Board adopt the following amended
ordinance to reflect an amendment in paragraph C on Page 5 for a fee of
$250:
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REENACT
THE WETLANDS ZONING ORDINANCE OF
ISLE OF WIGHT COUNTY
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Isle. of Wight County,
Virginia, adopted a Wetlands Zoning Ordinance January 3, 1974, amended
December 2,1982, pursuant to an act of the General- Assembly embodied in
Section 62.1-13.5 of the Code of Virginia; and,
WHEREAS, Section .62.1-13.5 of the Code. of Virginia has been
repealed by the General Assembly and Section 28.2-1302 has been enacted
by said General Assembly effective October 1, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, Section .28.2-1302 of the Code of Virginia makes certain
changes in the Wetlands Zoning Ordinance which- can be adopted by
County; and,
l
~,
r
F
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Isle of Wight County,
Virginia, deems it advisable to adopt a new Wetlands Zoning Ordinance for
le of Wi ht ursuant to Section 28.2.1302 of the -Code of
the County of Is g p
3
Virginia.
J
THEREFORE,- BE IT AND IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ISLE OF WIGHT COUNTY, VIRGINIA, that
the Board of Supervisors adopt the following Wetlands Zoning ordinance
which shall supersede the Wetlands Zoning Ordinance heretofore adopted
by said Board of Supervisors as heretofore amended:
7
eaeK 15 ~,,tl, 23~
WETLANDS ZONING ORDINANCE
1, The governing body of Isle of Wight County, Virginia, acting
pursuant to Chapter 13 (Section 28.2-1300 et seq.} of Title 28.2 of the Code
of Virginia, adopts this ordinance regulating the use and development of
wetlands.
2. As used in this ordinance, unless the context requires a different
: meaning:
"Back Bay and its tributaries" means the. #ollowing, as shown. on the
United States Geological Survey Quadrangle Sheets for Virginia Beach,
North Bay, and Knott's Island: Back Bay north of the Virginia-North
Carolina state line; Capsies Creek north of the Virginia-North Carolina state
line; Deal Creek; Devil Creek;. Nawney Creek; Redhead Bay, Sand Bay,
Shipps Bay, North Bay, and the waters connecting them; Beggars Bridge
Creek; Muddy Creek; Ashville Bridge Creek; Hells Point Creek,; Black Gut;
and all coves, ponds and natural waterways adjacent to or connecting with
the above-named bodies of water. .
"Commission".means the Virginia Marine Resources Commission.
"Commissioner" means the Commissioner of Marine Resources.
"Governmental activity" means any of the services provided by this
county to its citizens for the purpose of maintaining this county, including
but not limited to such services as constructing, repairing and maintaining
roads; providing sewage facilities and street lights; supplying and treating
water; and constructing public buildings.
"Nonvegetated wetlands" means unvegetated lands lying contiguous
to mean low water and between mean low water and mean high water,
including those unvegetated areas of Back Bay and it tributaries and the
North Landing River and its tributaries subject to flooding by normal and
wind tides but not hurricane or tropical storm tides.
"North Landing River and its tributaries" means the following, as
shown on the United States Geological Survey Quadrangle Sheets for
Pleasant Ridge, Creeds, and Fentress: the North Landing River from the
Virginia-North Carolina line to Virginia Highway 165 at North Landing
Bridge; the Chesapeake and Albemarle Canal from Virginia Highway 165
at North Landing Bridge to the locks at Great Bridge; and all named and
unnamed streams, creeks and rivers flowing into the North Landing River
and the Chesapeake and Albemarle Canal except West Neck Creek north
of Indian River Road, Pocaty River west of Blackwater Road, Blackwater
River west of ,its forks located at a point approximately 6400 feet due west
of the point where Blackwater Road crosses the Blackwater River at the
village of Blackwater, and Millbank Creek west of Blackwater Road.
"Person" means any individual, corporation, partnership, association,
company, business, trust, joint venture, or other legal entity.
1
8
eo~K ~5 .,, : 2:~7
"Vegetated wetlands" means lands lying between and contiguous to
mean low water and an elevation above mean low water equal to the factor
one and one-half times the mean tide range at the site of the proposed
project in the county, city, or town in question, .and upon which is growing
any of the following species: saltmarsh cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora),
saltmeadow hay (Spartina patens), saltgrass (Distchlis spicata), .black
needlerush (Juncus roemerianus), saltwort (Salicornia spp.), sea lavender
(Limonium spp,), marsh elder (Iva frutescens), groundsel bush (Baccharis .
halimifolia), wax myrtle (Myrica sp.), sea oxeye (Borrichia frutescens), arrow
arum (Peltandra virginica), pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), big cordgrass
(Spartina cynosuroides), rice cutgrass (Leersia oryzoides), wildrice (Zizania
aquatica), bulrush (Scirpus validus), spikerush (Eleocharis sp.), sea rocket
(Cakile edentula), southern wildrice (Zizaniopsis miliacea), cattail (Typha
spp.), three-square (Scirpus spp.), buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis),
bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), tupelo
(Nyssa aquatica), dock (Rumes spp.), yellow pond lily (Nuphar sp.), marsh
fleabane (Pluchea purpurascens), royal fern (Osmunda regalis), marsh
hibiscus (Hibiscus moscheutos), beggar's tick (Bidens sp.), smartweed
(Polygonum sp.), arrowhead (Sagittaria spp.), sweet flag (Acorns calamus),
water hemp (Amaranthus cannabinus), reed grass (Pharagmites communis),
or switch grass (Panicum virgatum).
~~ ~~
"Vegetated wetlands of Back Bay and its tributaries or vegetated
wetlands of the North Landing River and its tributaries" means all marshes
subject to flooding by normal and wind tides but not hurricane or tropical
storm tides,: and upon which is growing any of the following species:.
saltmarsh cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora), saltmeadow hay (Spartina
patens), black needlerush (Juncus roemerianus), .marsh elder (Iva
frutescens), groundsel bush (Baccharis halimifolia), wax myrtle (Myrica sp.),
- arrow arum (Peltandra. virginica), pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), big
cordgrass (Spartina cynosuroides), rice cutgrass (Leersia oryzoides), wildrice
(Zizania aquatica), bulrush (Scirpus vatidus), spikerush (Eleocharis sp.),
cattail (Typha spp.), three-square (Scirpus spp.), dock (Rumex sp.)
smartweed (Polygonum sp.), yellow pond lily (Nuphas sp.), .royal fern
(Osmunda regalis), marsh ,.hibiscus (Hibiscus moscheutos), beggar's tick
(Bidens sp.), arrowhead (Sagittaria sp.), water hemp (Amaranthus y
cannabinus), .reed. grass (Pharagmites communis), or switch grass (Panicum
f
virgatum).
"Wetlands" means both vegetated and nonvegetated wetlands.
"Wetlands Board" or "board" means a board created. pursuant. to
Section 28.2-13Q3 of the Code of Virginia.
3. The following uses of and activities in wetlands are authorized
if otherwise permitted by law;
(1) The construction and .maintenance of noncommercial I
catwalks, piers, boathouses, boat shelters, fences, duckblinds, wildlife
management shelters, footbridges, observation decks and shelters and other
similar structures, provided that such structures are so constructed on
.pilings as tc3 permit the reasonably unobstructed flow of the tide and
9
j
BAnr ~~ ~ CM~~ .
preserve the natural contour of the wetlands.
(2} The cultivation and harvesting of shellfish, and worms for
bait;
(3) .The noncommercial outdoor recreational activities,
including hiking, boating, trapping, hunting, fishing, shellfishing, horseback
riding, swimming, skeet and trap shooting, and .shooting on shooting
preserves, provided that no structure shall be constructed except as
permitted in subdivision (1) of this section;
(4) Other outdoor recreational activities, provided they do not
impair the natural functions or .alter the natural contour of the wetlands;
(5) Grazing, haying, and cultivating and harvesting
agricultural, forestry or horticultural products;.
(6) Conservation, repletion -and research activities of the
Commission, the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, the Department of
Game and Inland Fisheries and other conservation-related agencies,
(7) The construction or maintenance of aids to navigation
which are authorized by governmental authority;
(8) Emergency measures decreed by any duly appointed
health officer of a governmental subdivision acting to protect the public
health;
(9) The normal maintenance and repair of, or addition to,
presently existing roads, highways, railroad beds, or facilities. abutting on
or crossing wetlands, provided that no waterway is altered and no
additional wetlands are covered.
' (10) Governmental activity in wetlands owned or leased by the
Commonwealth or a political subdivision thereof; and,
(11) The normal maintenance of manmade drainage ditches,
provided that no additional wetlands are covered. This. subdivision does
not authorize the construction of any drainage ditch.
4. A. Any person who desires to use or develop any wetland
within this. county, other than for the purpose of conducting the activities
specified in Section 3 of this ordinance, shall. first file an application for a
permit directly with the wetlands .board or with the Commission.
B. The permit application shall include the following: the
name and address of the applicant; a detailed description of the proposed
activities; a rnap, drawn to an appropriate and uniform scale, showing the
area of wetlands directly affected, .the. location of the proposed work
thereon, the area of existing and proposed fill and excavation, the location,
width, depth and length of any proposed channel and disposal area, and
the location of all existing and proposed structures, sewage collection and
D
u
10
r,
~a~- ~J ~. ~~~~
~_
treatment facilities, utility installations, roadways, and other related
appurtenances or facilities, including those on adjacent. uplands; a
description of the type of equipment to be used' and the. means of
equipment access to the activity site; the names and addresses of owners of
record of adjacent land and known claimants of water rights in or adjacent
to the wetland of whom the applicant has. notice; an estimate of cost; the
primary purpose of the project;. and secondary purposes of .the project,
including further projects; the public benefit to be derived from the
proposed project; a complete description of measures . to be taken during
and after the alteration to reduce detrimental offsite effects; the completion
date of the proposed work, project, or structure; and such additional
materials and documentation as the wetlands board may require.
C. A nonrefundable processing .fee to cover the cost of
processing the application, in the amount of Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars
($250.00), shall accompany each application.
5. All applications, maps; and documents submitted shall be open
.for public inspection at the office of Community Development of Isle of
Wight County and as specified in the advertisernent .for public hearing
.required under Section 6 of this ordinance.
6. No later than sixty days after receipt of a complete application,
the wetlands board shall hold a public hearing on the application.- The
applicant, local governing body, Commissioner, owner of record of any land
adjacent o the wetlands in question, known claimants of water rights in or
adjacent to the wetlands in question, .the Virginia Institute of IVlarine
Science, the.Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, the Water Control
Board, the Department of Transportation, and. any governmental agency
expressing an interest in the application shall be noti€ied of the hearing.
The board shall mail these notices not less than twenty days prior to the
date set for the hearing. The wetlands board shall also cause notice of the
hearing to be published at least once a week for two weeks prior to such
hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in this county. The published-
notice shall specify the place or places within this county where copies of
the application may be examined. The costs of publication shall be paid by
the applicant. I
7. A. Approval of a permit application shall require the
affirmative vote of three members of afive-member board or four members
of aseven-member board.
1
B. The chairman of the board, or in his absence the acting
.chairman, may administer oaths and compel the attendance of witnesses...
Any person may testify at the public hearing. Each witness at the hearing .
may submit a concise written statement of his testimony. The board shall
make a record of the proceeding, which shall include the application, any
written statements of witnesses, a summary of statements of .all witnesses,
the finds and decision~of the board, and the rationale for the decision.
C. The board shall make its determination within thirty days
of the hearing. If the. board fails to act within that time, the application
11
shall be deemed approved. •Within forty-eight hours of its determination,
the board .shall notify the applicant, and the .Commissioner of its
determination.. If the board fails to make a determination within the thirty-
day period, it shall promgtly notify the applicant and the Commission that
the application is deemed approved. For purposes. of this section, "act"
means taking a vote on the application. If the application receives less than
four affirmative votes from aseven-member board or less than three
affirmative votes from afive-member board, the permit shall be denied.
D. If the board's decision is reviewed or appealed, the board
shall transmit the record of its hearing to the Commissioner. Upon a final
determination by the Commission, the record shall be returned to the board.
The record shall be open for public inspection at the same office as was
designated under Section 5 of this ordinance.
8. The board may require a reasonable bond or letter of credit in
an amount and with surety and conditions satisfactory to it, securing to .the
Commonwealth compliance with the conditions and limitations set forth in
the permit. the board may, after a hearing held pursuant to this ordinance,
suspend or revoke a permit if the applicant has failed to comply with any
of the conditions or limitations set forth in the permit or has exceeded the
scope of the work described in the application. The board may, after a
hearing, suspend a permit if the applicant fails to comply with the terms
and conditions set forth in the application.
9. In fulfilling its responsibilities under this ordinance, the board
shall preserve and prevent the despoliation and destruction of wetlands
within its jurisdiction while accommodating necessary economic
development in a manner consistent with wetlands preservation.
10. A. In deciding whether to grant, grant in modified form or
deny a permit, the board shall consider the following:
(1) The testimony of any person in support of or in
opposition to the permit application;
(2) The impact of the proposed development on the
public health, safety, and welfare; and,
(3) The .proposed development's .conformance with
standards prescribed in Section 28.2-1308 of the Code of Virginia and
guidelines promulgated pursuant to Section 28.2-1301 of the Code of
Virginia.
B. The board shall grant the permit if all of the
following criteria are met:
(1) The anticipated public and private benefit of
the proposed activity exceeds its anticipated public and private detriment.
(2) The proposed development conforms with the
standards prescribed in Section 28.2-1308 of the Code of Virginia and
12 •
1
1
.•.
guidelines promulgated pursuant to .Section 28.2-1301 of the Code of
. Virginia.
(3} The proposed activity does not. violate the
purposes and intent of this ordinance or Chapter 13 (Section 28..2-1300 et
seq.) of Title 28.2 of the Code of Virginia.
C. If the-board finds that any of the criteria listed in ,
subsection B of this section are not met, the board shall deny the permit
application but allow the applicant to resubmit the application in modified
form.-
11. The permit shall be in writing, signed by the chairman of the
board, and notarized. A copy of the. permit shall be transmitted to the
Commissioner.
12. No permit shall be granted without an expiration date
established by the board.. Upon proper application, the board may extend
the permit expiration date.
13. No permit granted by a wetlands board shall in any way affect
the applicable zoning and land use ordinances of this county or the right
of any person to seek compensation for any injury in fact incurred by him
because of the proposed activity.
14. Violations; penalty. --Any person who knowingly, intentionally,
or negligently violates any order, rule, or regulation of the Wetlands Board
of Isle of Wight County, Virginia, or any provision of this ordinance, or any
provision of a permit granted pursuant to this ordinance, shall be guilty of
a Class 1 misdemeanor. Following a conviction, every day the violation
continues is a separate offense.
The ordinance was unanimously (5-0) adopted.
Chairman Edwards called for a public hearing on the following
application:
The application of Charles T. Darden for a change in zoning
classification from A-1, Agricultural Limited to C-M-1,
Conditional Industrial Limited, approximately .5 acre of land
located off the east side of Courthouse Highway (Route 258)
between Bob White Road (Route 652) and Scott's Factory Road
(Route 620) on Darden Farm Lane, in Newport Magisterial
District
Chairman Edwards called for citizens to speak in favor of or in
opposition to the proposed application.
Charles T, Darden appeared and staked he is interested in converting
his existing barns into storage bins.
Upon no one appearing in opposition to the proposed application,
13
i
Chairman Edwards called for comments from Board members.
Supervisor Cofer moved the Board approve the application of Charles
T. Darden and his request. for the withdrawal of the .50 acres of land from
the Courthouse Agricultural District. The motion was unanimously (5-0)
adopted.
Chairman Edwards called for a public hearing on the following
application
The application of Benns Church Properties for a change in
zoning classification from C-M-1, Conditional Industrial Limited .
to A-1, Agricultural Limited, 1.698 acres of land located adjacent
to the Floyd Smith borrow pit, off the. west side of Benns
Church Boulevard (Route 10) on Spring Lake Drive which is
between Isle of Wight Industrial Park Road and Oliver Drive
(Route 600) in Newport Magisterial District
W. Douglas Caskey, Assistant County Administrator/Community
Development, stated this is an application to satisfy the requirement of a
condition that was placed on the original condikional rezoning in 1986 by
the prior property owner, Floyd B. Smith, to rezone the property back to A-
1. Mr. Turner, in assuming charge of the property, has made this
application and the Planning Commission in discussing the request made
note that there was. at least one piece of equipment on the property. Mr.
Caskey stated the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend
approval of the rezoning to the Board.
Chairman Edwards called for citizens to speak in favor of or in
opposition to the proposed application.
Richard L. Turner stated the land is now used as an irrigation lake for
the surrounding farm land and the. remaining equipment, specifically a
broken-down crane, is owned by Floyd B. Sm 1 of the cranee but Mr. Floyd
spoken with Mr. Floyd regarding the remova
has not yet made arrangements for its removal.
Upon no one appearing in opposition to the proposed application,
Chairman Edwards called for comments from the. Board.
Supervisor Spady moved the Board approve the application of Benns
Church Properties. The motion was .unanimously (5-0) adopted.
Supervisor Spady requested County staff write to Floyd B. Smith
advising him the property has been rezoned and he is therefore requested
to move any remaining equipment from the property.
Chairman Edwards ,called for a public hearing on the following
Special Use Permit:
The application of Benns Church Properties for a Special Use
Permit to allow stockpiling, storage and blending of "fly ash"
1
1
14
1
1
1
with-sand to create a fill mixture which is used in construction
of roads, building pads and similar construction projects at the
Jackson borrow pit located on a tract of hand containing
approximately 160 acres owned by Benns Church Properties,
formerly owned by Don V. Jackson and which is situated west
of the Benn's Church intersection, off the west side of Benn's
Church Boulevard (Route 10) and which is bounded by the Kirk
property to the west, .property owned by Benns Church
Properties to the north, formerly. owned by Lone Star and
property owned by Benns Church Properties to the east and
south, formerly owned by Fedonchuk, in Newport Magisterial
District
Mr. Caskey stated a copy has .been distributed to the Board today
-from the Department of Air Pollution Control to Mr. Turner regarding
permitting by that State agency. Mr. Caskey further stated on Page 4 of the
report lists the conditions that have been proposed by the applicant and in
addition to that, the Planning Commission in its approval and consideration
of recommendation of the request to the Board made a stipulation that any
approval by the Board should be tied to the life of the Jackson Borrow. Pit
which has an expiration date of June 20, 1996.
County Attorney Crook stated there is one change in the way the
application was advertised. Mr. Crook stated he had the advertisement
corrected to add in -the third. line, after it refers to "a blending of fly ash
with sand", to add "and/or cement". In order to correct this, he has had the
advertisement changed, to reflect that and the order of publication reflects
that this was accomplished.
Chairman Edwards called for. citizens to speak in favor of or in
opposition to the proposed application.
Henry Morgan, Vice President of Isle of Wight Materials, stated
fourteen individuals are employed of which 78% live in the County. The
nature of Isle of Wight Materials is the extraction, processing and sale of
various fill materials, top soil, masonry sand and marl and the business has
been in operation since 1983. Mr. Morgan stated an average of $22,000 is
paid per year in taxes, licenses and fees to the County. In addition, sales
tax is paid on average sales of $2,000,000, a portion of which is returned to
the County and the proposed. application. before the Board today is a
request to allow the temporary stockpiling and blending of a coal-
. combustion by-product commonly referred to as fly ash with sand and/or
cement which will be provided by a sole source, the Chesapeake Energy
Center of Virginia Power. Mr. Morgan continued according to Webster's
definition,. fly ash is (1) the fine particles of ash of a solid fuel carried .out ,
of a flu of a furnace with the waste gases produced during combustion and
(2} such ash recovered from. the waste gases used chiefly as a reenforcing
agent in the manufacture of bricks, concrete, etc. Mr. Morgan stated the
Electric Power Research Institute defines fly ash as the silt-size by-product
from the burning of coal to generate electricity consisting of the inert, non-
combustible mineral matter in the coal and any unburned carbon that is
removed from the flu gas stream by air pollution control devices.. IVir.
I5
eocr 15 ...:?~.
Morgan refereed ~ to the various examples in front of the Board and
explained one was the unburned fly ash that Virginia Power must collect,
and which in previous years energy producers have Iandfilled. As landfill
costs have risen, Virginia Power has sought alternative uses in order to
avoid or contain the cost of such and have employed individuals to find
economic and environmentally sensitive safe reuse of this product.
Mr. Morgan introduced the foilowing individuals to the Board: Ron
Burkehead, Staff Environmental Specialist/Water Quality with Virginia
Power; Thinh T. Nguyen, Staff Engineer for Fossil and Hydro-Support with
Virginia Power; and Bill Jordan, Supervisor of Technical Services with the
Chesapeake Energy Center. Mr. Morgan stated part of Virginia Power's
efforts have included the use of ash marketers, such as Agglite Corporation,
.which is the proposed contractual supplier of his fly ash.
Mr. Peter Schmidt, President of Agglite Corporation, distributed a
brochure to the Board regarding Agglite's pelletization process. Mr.
Schmidt stated his company began its. association with Virginia Power to
mix the coal ash material with cement and pelletize it and make a iight-
weight aggregate .for use in manufactured concrete block. Mr. Schmidt
continued his plant began operation in early 1989 and the largest and fastest
growing area is in an area called flowable fill which is a grout-type product
that can be made various ways and is used for. a number of purposes to fill
utility trenches, used in abandoned tanks and lines, etc. Mr. Schmidt stated
his firm .has also worked closely with VDOT and other organizations to
, produce. aborrow-type product stabilized with cement used. in .lieu of
conventional fill materials in roadwork. What has brought his firm to the
point of discussions with Isle of Wight Materials is the mixing and
stabilization of a certain fraction of this material with sand to use as a
conventional fill. which is another step forward in beneficial reuse and
another means in which the material can be reused appropriately and under
the approved methodologies of the different .State departments. Mr.
Schmidt showed the. Board a slide presentation on the various uses of fly
ash to help the Board better understand more about what his firm's
activities are. Mr. Schmidt stated one of ,the biggest issues faced with fly
ash as part of the educational process is the derivative of the material of
which there is a wealth of material that has been conducted over the past
years.
Mr. Schmidt submitted a sample of soil taken from the County
complex near the well site several weeks ago that he had had analyzed
which showed that there is no fundamental difference between dirt and fly
ash in the leachate test because the temperature at which the fly ash is
burned combusts all the potentially-volakile elements. Mr. Schmidt stated
fly ash that is properly handled is innocuous and will not cause the public
harm.
Mr. Morgan requested the Board approve. the application to allow Isle
of Wight Materials to diversify their product line so that they might
possibly maintain or expand their employment and sales. Mr. Morgan
stated many localities spend considerable time and money in courting new
businesses to locate in their area while overlooking helping the existing
small businesses which are already there. Mr. Morgan continued stating
1
16
earn ~.5 ,~,::?45
that by approving the proposed. application, the Board will be further
recognizing the economic benefit of ash utilization, as well as the superior
engineering characteristics of the material, the reduced environmental
impact of beneficial reuse or recycling and recognizing the compatibility of
this proposal with the current land use.
Upon no one appearing in opposition to the proposed application,
Chairman Edwards called for comments from the Board..
Supervisor Cofer stated, if approved, what amount of fly ash would
be brought in on a monthly basis.
Mr. Morgan stated the State will allow a company to stockpile 75% of
what is anticipated to be sold in a twelve-month period and Isle of Wight
Materials projects the current sales to be roughly 10,000 cubic yards which
would allow them to stockpile roughly 7,500 cubic yards. This is largely
dependent upon how successful Isle of Wight Materials is on the market
and just what the market is, he stated.
Supervisor Spady referred to the letter to Peter Schmidt from Thinh
T. Nguyen of Virginia Power and pointed out that the second paragraph
starting with "however, the blending operation of the remaining CES's CCB
on site at the- Isle of Wight Materials Corporation with sand fills continues
at the County's instructions".
Peter. Schmidt stated this should have read "will continue at County's
instructions".
Supervisor Spady referred to the letter from Agglite to Isle of Wight
Materials which referenced the toxicity and characteristic leachate test and
that the fly ash is spoken about from both .stations, Yorktown and
Chesapeake. Supervisors Spady asked if Isle of Wight Materials will be
utilizing the Chesapeake station only.
Mr. Schmidt stated only the Chesapeake station would be utilized by
Isle of Wight Materials.
Supervisor Spady questioned how much of the fly ash is stockpiled
at Isle of Wight ,Materials now.
Mr. Morgan replied 'roughly 6,a00 cubic yards, although -they
anticipate stockpiling an additional 1,500 cubic yards.
Supervisor Spady questioned if fly ash is harder or softer than dirt
when used as a flowable fill material.
Mr. Schmidt replied the .fly ash material is harder than dirt, but softer
than concrete.
Supervisor Spady .asked if the fly ash received from Virginia Power
is treated immediately with concrete, or is it held until a user is found, then
mixed with rnncrete.
17
lso~K 15 ~~-:2~6
Mr. Schmidt replied it is held until a user is found and the fly ash
when received is stabilized until it is used.
Supervisor Spady asked what pelletizing is.
Mr. Schmidt replied his firm's patented process takes a 16-foot disc
pelletizer with afour-foot lift which turns about seven revolutions per
minute and dry ash is mixed with cement and moisture and chemicals are
added until it is a silk-like product which tunnels into this pan that is
turning and forms pebbles which spill out and the cement reacts with them
and turns them hard. .Then when it is cured, it is recovered for uses in
concrete block.
Chairman Edwards- asked Mr. Schmidt if placed side by side, could
you tell the difference between this fly ash and fly ash that is the result of
the burning. of petroleum.
Ron Burkehead, Virginia Power, stated both were black and looked
somewhat similar; however, a chemical analysis-would immediately identify
the two.
Mr. Morgan asked Mr. Burkehead if Virginia Power .was burning
petroleum coke in any of their plants now.
Mr. Burkehead replied Virginia Power ceased this in 1970.
Supervisor Bradby stated his concern over there being any chances of
contamination with water systems have been addressed; therefore, he had
no comments to make.
County Attorney Crook. asked how often. is the test analysis
performed by Virginia Power Systems Laboratory.
Mr. Burkehead stated on an irregular basis; however, the coal is
routinely tested for certain things, but the TCLP is not routinely conducted
on coal.
Thinh T. Nguyen of Virginia Fower .stated on the average, Virginia
Fower uses 60 to 80 tons per year and testing on fly ash is performed at
.least six times per year. Testing is done from time to time on the smaller
..projects as well, so it is probably tested on a monthly basis.
.County Attorney Crook asked if it would be a problem for Virginia
Power to provide the County with a monthly test.
Mr. Nguyen replied he believed this could be done- for the County
with no problem.
Supervisor Spady asked the percentage of concrete used when the
product is being blended with Plowable fill.
Mr. Schmidt stated the cement content. will vary; however,. it wilt
i
1
18
t
ean~ 1.~ ~:.~24?
normally be a 5% or 10% content depending upon .the strength requirement
of the project. ,
Supervisor Spady asked .Isle of Wight Materials at what percentage
aze they blending this with sand.
Mr. Mo gan stated anywhere from 10% to 40%, depending on the
user.
Supervi or Spady stated he would like to have one of the .conditions
be that the C unty could enter Isle of Wight Materials to test. this material
at any time a County desired.
Mr. Tur er stated he had no problem with this, but would request
that County a ployees alert his personnel when on the premises due to the
operation of angerous equipment.
Supervi or Spady stated he would also like to list a condition that Isle
of Wight Ma erials only keep a maximum of 7,500. cubic yards of the
material on si a at any one time.
Mr. Mo gan stated he did not have a problem with this and that one
of the reason they must stockpile the material at all is that the material is j
irregularly av ilable from Virginia Power.
County Attorney. Crook stated seven proposed conditions were ! ~,
proffered by t e applicant and this is a Special Use Permit which allows the ~,
Board to .add any .conditions which. are reasonable and necessary for the
regulation of this operation.
Mr. Tu ner explained regarding the monthly testing, there are times
when this ma erial is available and times when it is not available and there
may be a mo th that none. of the material is received. County Attorney
Crook. pointe out to Mr. Turner that Virginia Power said they would have
no problem roviding the County with monthly test results. '
Supervi or Spady requested Virginia Power to provide the County
with a copy f the test whenever it is performed.
Supervi or Spady moved the Board approve the application of Berms
Church Prop sties for a Special Use Permit with the following conditions:
1. U e of only coal combustion by-product from the
C esapeake Energy Center of Virginia Power.
Z. A equate record keeping by bill of lading to account
f r material...
3. S rage in~ accordance with State and Federal
r ulations to include a compacted clay liner with r
rn and ditches.
19
;,
.~o~~ ~.5~~248
4. Material will be compacted and kept moist to reduce
fugitive dust.
5. Material will be transported in trucks with covers
suitable for use that will prohibit spilling or dusting.
6. The life of the permit would coincide with the life of
the permit for the Jackson Borrow Pit which expires
June 20, 199b.
7. Hours of operation will be limited to hours
permitted for the Jackson. Borrow Pit.
8. All necessary permits required by State agencies will
be obtained prior to operation.
9. Monthly toxicity testing will be performed by
Virginia Power and submitted to the County.
10. County can enter and test at any time.
11. No more than 7,500 cubic yards can be stored on
site at any one time.
The motion was unanimously (5-0) adopted.
//
At 3:15 p.m., Supervisor Cofer moved the Board take afive-minute
recess. The motion was unanimously (5-0) adopted.
//
" Upon returning to open session at 3:28 p.rn., Chairman Edwards
called for Citizens' comments.
There were no citizens' comments offered for discussion by the Board.
11
Chairman Edwards called for the Community Development report.
W. Douglas Caskey, Assistant County Administrator/Community
Development, stated at the Board's meeting of July ?, 1988, the Board
adopted amendments to Section 10-11-13 of the County's Zoning Ordinance
which pertain to the regulation of borrow pik operations. Included among
these amendments was a provision dealing with the life of a permitted
borrow pit operation. which reads "All permits issued for borrow pits by the
Board of Supervisors will be for a period of five (5) years from the date of
issuance. Any extension of time or renewal of said permits will require
new applications be filed in accordance with all the terms of this
ordinance." Prior to the adoption of this amendment,: there were borrow pit
1
n
1
20
,:
gpnK ~J ~uG' ~4~~
operations in place and in the approval process of these operations, time
limitations were placed on the individual borrow pits and these time
limitations would vary in terms of creating certain expiration dates for the
proposed operations. Mr. Caskey stated he has discussed the question with
the County Attorney which pertained to the applicability of Section 10-11-13
in relation to those borrow pits which were in existence and operational as
of .the date this amendment was adopted and included in the agenda is a
list of six borrow pit operations and a description of their permit approval .
dates, their size, status and their permit expiration date where one is
available.
County Attorney Crook stated he has discussed the matter with Mr.
Caskey. When the Board adopted the time limit of five years on borrow pit
permits, the County had some that were issued prior to that time which do
not expire for several years and some that have no specified time limit on
them. County Attorney Crook further stated the Board could (1) say all
borrow pits. arelimited to the time of five years, or (2) that ordinance time
limitation would not apply to borrow pits already in operation, or (3) the
Board could have the ordinance time limitation apply to those borrow pits
which do not have a time limit specified. Mr. Crook stated the later would
be the best because when the County issues a permit for -ten years, the.
borrow pit owner operates on the basis that they would have ten years and
to come back and say they only have five may present a problem. When
the Board gets-into the economic commitment, then the Board gets into the.
grandfathering issue where you have gone so far and to suddenly have it
cut off causes a equitable issue.
Supervisor Spady moved the Board allow the borrow pits which .have
specified dates to continue to those dates; however, where there was no
specified date, the borrow pits should be limited to five years, which would
be July of 1993. The motion was unanimously (5-0) adopted.
1/
Chairman Edwards called for the County Attorney`s report.
County Attorney .Crook stated Lynn Dutton, Attorney for Norfolk
Southern wishes to address the Board concerning the Portsmouth charter
matter recently discussed by the Board and which he has written letters on
Lynn Dutton, Counsel for Norfolk. Southern, stated it is now better
than three years since she first appeared before the Planning Commission
seeking consideration of a rezoning and Special Use Permit for property on
which Norfolk Southern hoped to build and operate a coal ground storage
facility which would benefit both the County and Norfolk Southern. Ms. .
Dutton further stated the Planning Commission insisted on extensive
information and assessment of the impacts this project may .have on the
environment. Norfolk Southern performed this and appeared almost a year
later and reapplied for the rezoning and Special Use Permit and after
extensive consideration by both the Planning Commission and the Board, t
two years ago in February, the Special Use Permit was granted to Norfolk
Southern. Ms. Dutton continued at those. hearings, one of the individuals
Zl
who spoke and wrote letters out of his concern on what impact this project
. could have on the water supply for the City of Portsmouth was Mr. Spacek,
the Director of Public Utilities for the City of Portsmouth. Portsmouth has
a very strong interest in what happens in the County .and has had many
opportunities to express concerns about this matter with the County and the
various agencies whose opinions are requested and sought and whose
comments are considered prior t~ granting any kinds of permits. Ms.
Dutton stated Portsmouth s charter amendments had been submitted to
Virginia legislature via two bills: House BiII #1306 and Senate Bill .536, both
of which contained extensive additions to the powers of the City of
Portsmouth with respect to its concerns over its water supply. The original
bill gave the City of Portsmouth extensive powers of eminent domain to be
exercised outside of the City, which County Attorney Crook objected to.
.County Attorney Crook withdrew his opposition on the assurance by the
City attorneys of Suffolk and Portsmouth that all of these powers which
Portsmouth sought in their charter change would be limited to lands owned
by the City of Portsmouth. The City of Suffolk likewise withdrew their
opposition. Ms. Dutton stated this charter bill was not amended sufficiently
to restrict these powers of the City of Portsmouth to lands that its owns and
the. provision in this Bill that requires violations and petitions -for injunctive
relief with respect to any regulations Portsmouth might pass about its water
supply all be tried in the City of Portsmouth is probably not legal. Ms.
Dutton requested the Board to reconsider their opposition #o this bill and
request that the Governor not sign it until there has been an opportunity to
consider amendments to the bill that will permit Isle of Wight County to
regulate use in the County and that would permit the Federal and State
boards and agencies to enforce their own laws and regulations in the
appropriate courts and before the appropriate boards.
Supervisor Bradshaw stated this would affect his and Chairman
Edwards districts regarding the growth planned for an industrial park, and
requested the Board take .immediate action on opposing the Portsmouth
charter amendment. Supervisor Bradshaw suggested authorizing the
County Attorney to send atelegram -with a letter to follow,
County Attorney Crook stated he had three various concerns about
the Bill and in speaking with the City Attorney in Suffolk he seemed to
believe that the amendment took .care of the problem of jurisdiction of
Portsmouth over the water system and anything connected therewith
outside the City of Portsmouth. The Suffolk City Attorney was satisfied
with the addition of the words "the lands" in the amendment. The only
thing the County had that was in any way involved would be the
watershed east of Windsor, south of Route 460, because none of the
waterworks or land was located in the County. Mr. Crook stated he was
not particularly happy with it even with the amendment and believes the
amendment can be interpreted in two ways because the amendment reads
"the City shall have the power tomake reasonable rules and regulations
and to enact ordinances with adequate penalties for promoting the purity
of its water supply for protecting the same from pollution and for
.protecting from injury its waterworks, .pipes, fixtures, lakes and land or
anything connected therewith and for these purposes to exercise-full police
powers and sanitary patrol over all lands comprised within the watershed
1
1
22
...
ao~K ~J .,.:;~~5~
tributary .wherever such lands may be located in the Commonwealth; to
impose and enforce adequate penalties for the violation of any such rules,
regulations and ordinances; in addition to prevent by injunction or other
legal remedy any pollution or threatened pollution of any such water
supply and any and all acts likely to impair the purity thereof or to
otherwise cause damage to or the destruction of the. waterworks, pipes,
fixtures, lakes and land and to prosecute any such violations of any such
rules, regulations and ordinances to obtain injunctive relief in the courts of
the .City,. regardless of the place of occurrence. of any violation or act." Mr.
Crook stated he thought.. that it was unconstitutional also because it is a
change of jurisdiction from where the act occurred. The City of Portsmouth
and City of Suffolk attorneys are saying this only applies to where they.
have waterworks and lands, but the language is so broad that you could
interpret it to mean any watershed. County Attorney Crook stated he
concurred with the request of Ms. Dutton that the Board send Norfolk
Southern's concerns to the Governor.
Supervisor .Cofer moved the Board direct the County Attorney to
register the Board's opposition to this Bill as quickly as possible- regarding
the Portsmouth charter amendment. .The motion was unanimously (5-0)
adopted.
County Attorney Crook stated he has the contract on the work to be
performed relative to the renovation of the old Smithfield High School for
the Paul D. Camp Community College site by Virtexco .which has been
prepared and recommended to the Board by the architect... Mr. Crook ',
further stated he had reviewed it prior to today advising that he did not
have a problem with it and forwarded it to the Board for their approval.
1VIr. Crook advised the contract provides for a fixed fee in the amount of
$375,932; deletes alternate bid #1 for the .laboratory _ furniture; deletes
alternate bid #3 for the horizonal mini blinds; adds alternate bid #2 to install
a six-inch water line; and adds alternate bid #4 to -install new plumbing
above the first-floor ceiling for the second-floor plumbing installation.
Supervisor Bradshaw moved the Board direct County staff to prepare
a resolution for the Board to .approve the contract with Virtexco and j
authorize the Chairman to sign the contract on behalf of the Board. The
motion was unanimously (5-0) .adopted.
County Attorney Crook stated he would have two matters -for
executive session later. in the meeting.
//
Chairman Edwards called for the County. Administrator's report. ~ !
County Administrator Standish stated the regional groundwater; study
has been an ongoing effort, fvr the past several years between the localities..
in Hampton Roads and the U.S. Geological Survey who anticipate a
$120,0 cast with Isle of Wight's share being $2,857.
Supervisor Bradshaw moved the Board continue participating in the
80~~ 15 ~,t~~25?
regional groundwater study at a cost of $2,857. .The motion was
unanimously (5-0) adopted.
Supervisor Bradby moved the Board adopt the following resolution:.
RESOLUTION TO APPROPRIATE EIGHT HUNDRED THIRTY-NINE
THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS FROM THE
1990 BOND ISSUE PROCEEDS FOR THE
COUNTY LANDFILL CLOSURE
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Isle of Wight,
Virginia has approved the closure of the County landfill; and,
WHEREAS, the funds in the amount of eight hundred thirty-nine
thousand two hundred dollars ($839,200) need to be appropriated from the
1990 Bond Issue .Proceeds to the Landfill Closure line item in the 1992-93
budget of the Counky of Isle of Wight.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT AND IT IS.HEREBY RESOLVED by the
Board of Supervisors of the County of Isle of Wight, Virginia that eight
hundred thirty-nine thousand two hundred dollars ($839,200) from the 1990
Bond Issue Proceeds be appropriated to line item 14-09-094-9419E-7016A
Landfill .Closure in the 1992-93 budget of the County of Isle of Wight.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Administrator of the
County of Isle of Wight, Virginia is authorized to make the appropriate
accounting adjustments in the budget and to do all the things necessary to
give this resolution effect.
The resolution was unanimously (5-0) adopted
Supervisor Bradshaw moved the Board adopt the following resolution:
RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE TWENTY NINE
THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED FIFTY-NINE DOLLARS
FROM THE .CITY OF SUFFOLK FOR
UNOBLIGATED 1991 VPSA BOND ISSUE SUBSIDY
FOR ROOF REPAIRS
WHEREAS, the. School Board of the County of Isle of Wight has
received an unobligated 1991 VPSA bond issue subsidy for roof repairs;
and,
WHEREAS, the funds in the amount of twenty nine thousand nine
hundred fifty-nine dollars ($29,959.00) need to be appropriated to the school
fund in the 1992-93 budget of the County of Isle of Wight, Virginia.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT AND IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the
Board of Supervisors of the County. of Isle of Wight, Virginia that .twenty
nine thousand nine hundred fifty-nine dollars ($29,959.00) be appropriated
to line item 1991 VPSA bond issue subsidy for roof repairs in the 1992-93
budget of the County of Isle of Wight, Virginia.
J
1
24
..,. .,,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Administrator of the
:County of Isle of Wight, .Virginia. is authorized to {Hake the appropriate
accounting adjustments in the budget and to do all the things necessary to
give this resolution effect.
[]
1
The resolution was unanimously (5-0) adopted.
Supervisor Bradshaw moved the Board adopt the following resolution: .
RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE
TWO HUNDRED NINETY-SIX DOLLARS
FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIIZGII~tIA .
TO THE SCHOOL FUND
FOR SECTION b19 PRESCHOOL GRANT
WHEREAS, the School Board of the County of Isle of Wight has
received a grant.award for Section 619 Preschool; and,
WHEREAS, the funds in the amount of two hundred ninety-six
dollars ($296) need to be appropriated to the school fund in the 1992-93
budget of the County of Isle of Wight, Virginia.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT .AND IT IS HEREBY .RESOLVED by .the
Board of Supervisors of the County of Isle of Wight, Virginia that two
hundred ninety-six dollars ($296} be appropriated to line . item Section 619
Preschool Grant funds in the 1992-93 budget of the County of Isle of Wight,
Virginia.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Administrator of the
County of Isle of Wight,. Virginia is authorized to make the appropriate
accounting adjustments in the budget and to do all the things necessary to
give this resolution effect.
The resolution was unanimously (5-0) adopted.
County Administrator Standish stated the Board has traditionally
recognized the month of April to recognize volunteers in the County and
County staff will work with the Parks & Recreational Facilities Authority
. staff and bring back a report to the Board on the anticipated costs.
County Administrator ~ Standish stated the proposers are present #o
make presentations. to the Board in executive session relative to employment
for the County's 1994 reassessment.
/1
Chairman Edwards called for Old Business.
1
There was no old business offered for. discussion by the Board.
//
Chairman Edwards called for New Business.
25
eoa~ 15 ~~~:-2a~
Chairman Edwards stated on April 14, 1493, the Bar Association
would be sponsoring an Investiture Ceremony with a reception to follow
for the new Judge for the Circuit Court, Rodham T. Delk, Jr. Chairman
Edwards further stated preliminary discussions suggested that the reception
be held on the grounds of the Courthouse for the reception and the only
expense involved for the County would be to possibly obtain a tent.
Chairman Edwards moved the Board direct the County Administrator.
to research the matter of providing a tent large enough for several hundred
individuals to attend this ceremony. The motion was unanimously (5-0)
adopted. _
//
Chairman Edwards called for Appointments.
Supervisor Cofer moved the Board appoint Ron Pack to the Industrial
Development Authority representing the Smithfield District for afour-year
term which expires in March of 1997. The motion was unanimously (5-0)
adopted. '
Supervisor Bradby moved the Board appoint Denise. Newby to the
Western Tidewater Community Services Board to replace James L. Windsor,
who resigned and whose term expires in December of 1993. The motion
was unanimously (5-4) adopted.
Chairman Edwards moved the Board appoint Donald T. Robertson as
the local official on the Western Tidewater Disability Services Board for a
one-year term. whose term expires in March of 1994. The motion was
unanimously (5-0) adopted.
Chairman Edwards moved the Board appoint Fred Walls as the
business representative on the Western Tidewater Disability Services Board
fora two-year term whose term expires in March of 1995. The motion was
unanimously (5-Q) adopted.
.Supervisor Cofer moved that the Board members continue in their
current Committee positions and that the Chairman be the ex-officio
member of all the Board's committees. The motion was unanimously (5-0)
adopted.
Supervisor Bradshaw moved the Board appoint R. Rawlston Rhodes
.representing the Carrsville District to the Wetlands Board whose term
expires in February of 1998. The motion was unanimously (S-0) adopted.
//
County Attorney Crook requested an executive session pursuant to
Section 2.1-344 Al of the Freedom of Information Act for the interview for
the proposals on appraisal services; Section 2.1-344 A7 of the Freedom of
Information Act for advice of counsel concerning contract negotiations; and
Section 2.1-344 A3 of the Freedom of Information Act on two items. for
1
1
1
26
.~
~.
BOOR ~5 r~t~ (..~r>
advice of counsel and staff :concerning acquisition or use of property for
public purposes. ,
At 4:00 p.m., Supervisor Cofer moved .the Board go into executive
session for the reasons stated by the County Attorney.
Upon returning to open session at 5:10 p.m., Supervisor Cofer moved
the Board adopt the following resolution:
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE MEETING
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has convened an executive
. 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, 2.1-344.IA of the Code of Virginia requires a certification
by this Board of Supervisors that such executive meeting was conducted in
conformity with Virginia law;
~i
.NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board. of Supervisors
hereby certfiesthat, 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 executive meeting to which this
certification resolution applies, and (ii) only such public business matters as
were identified in the- motion convening the executive meeting were heard,
discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors.
VOTE
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
ABSENT DURING VOTE: 0
ABSENT DURING MEETING: 0
The motion was unanimously (5-0) adopted.
Supervisor Spady moved the Board seek an extension of the option on
the Edwards' property: provided the funds for the option are forthcoming
from the promoters. The motion was unanimously (5-0) adapted,
1
Supervisor Bradshaw moved the Board appoint Supervisor Spady and
Cofer, assisted by the County Attorney and. County Administrator, to meet
with Smithfield Foods' representatives, Town of Smithfield representatives,
and HRSD to resolve the route of the Route 17 connector interceptor force
main. The motion was (4-0) ,adopted with all members voting in favor
except Chairman Edwards who abstained..
Supervisor Cofer moved the Board authorize the County
2~
1
~.
~onx ~.5 ~~~=25~
Administrator and County Attorney to enter negotiations with Pearson
. Appraisal Services for appraisal services. The motion was unanimously (5-
0) adopted.
Supervisor Bradshaw moved the Board authorize the County. Attorney
and .County Administrator to negotiate for the acquisition of the land
discussed in executive session. The motion was unanimously (5-0) adopted.
//
Chairman Edwards called #or approval of the February 4, 1993
minutes.
Upon recommendation by the County Attorney, Supervisor Bradby
moved the Board adopt the February 4, 1993 minutes of the Board. The
motion was unanimously (5-0) adopted.
//
At 5:12 p.m. Supervisor Cofer moved the Board adjourn. The motion
was unanimously (5-0) adopted.
Steve W. Edwards, Chairman
f~-s.
My~ .Standish, Clerk
1
1
1