Loading...
06-03-1993 Continued Meeting QOQK 15 rAG~~J46 ,. CONTINUED MEETING OF THE ISLE OF WIGHT COUNTY BOARD OF • SUPERVISORS HELD THE THIRD DAY OF JUNE IN THE YEAR .NINETEEN HUNDRED NINETY TI-IItEE 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 Caskey, 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. The invocation was delivered by Supervisor Bradby, // Chairman Edwards called for a public hearing on the following: Proposed Closing of Portion of State Route 711. New Towne Haven Lane. for Thirty (30) Days Chairman Edwards called for citizens to speak in favor of the proposed Route 711 road closure. County Attorney Crook confirmed that the County ran a publication in the newspaper for two consecutive weeks that the Board is considering recommending to the State Highway Commissioner the closing of a portion of State Route 711 (New Towne Haven Lane) from the new Carrollton Elementary School site to Route 258/32 for a period of thirty days between June. 18, 1993 and September 1, 1993 to allow completion of Route 711 in a shorter time frame and at less expense. Mr. Crook stated residents or citizens going to and from those residences located on Route 711 could also use an alternate or detour on State Route 665. Mr. Crook. stated the State Highway Commissioner has the sole authority to close Route 711 and under Section 33.1-193 of the Code of Virginia it is provided that "if it appears to the State Highway Commissioner necessary for the safety of the traveling public or for proper completion of work which is being performed to close any road. or highway coming under the State Highway Commissioner's jurisdiction to all traffic or any class of traffic. The State Highway Commissioner may close or cause to be closed a whole or any portion of such road or highway." Mr. Crook stated he has prepared a resolution for the Board's consideration requesting the State Highway Commissioner to consider closing that road for the reason stated. Peter Andrea, .Program Construction Manager with Power 1 . ~. ao~K 15 r~~~~4? Management, stressed to the Board that closure of Route 711 during the • construction process will permit the road to be completed within thirty days; otherwise the time will be extended. to betweeQ sixty and ninety days with an additional cost to the County. Chairman Edwards called for citizens to speak in opposition to the Route 711 road closure. Upon no one appAaring to voice their opposition, Chairman Edwards declared the public hearing closed and called for comments from the Board. Supervisor Spady stated he had received approximately six calls from residents living in the immediate area who voiced their objection to closing Route 711 because they did not want to travel on Route 665 due to its narrowness and sharp turns. Supervisor Spady further stated he understood their concerns as he has also driven on Route 665 and would object to using this road as well. if he lived in that area. Supervisor Spady continued he could not consciously vote to close Route 711 knowing the condition of Route 665. Supervisor Cofer stated he received two calls from area residents, one of which addressed the fact that there are two major farming operations that will be utilizing Route 665 during that period of time. Supervisor Spady stated that although he would prefer to save the County money and get the road completed sooner, he would like to point out that there is one place on Route 665 that is only ten feet wide and he could not therefore consciously vote to close Route 711 because of this safety issue. Supervisor Bradby requested the number of individuals presently utilizing Route 711. Supervisor Cofer stated he believed there were approximately thirty- four homes located on .Route 711. Chairman Edwards reiterated the County's experience on the bridge in Smithfield leading to the meat packing plants where construction lagged. on and therefore made it miserable to cross the bridge. Chairman Edwards stated two lanes. of traffic were traveling in a single lane during this construction. Roy Spears, general contractor for the Route 711 project and President of Shirley Construction, stated if the Board did not approve the closure of Route 711, there would be one lane of traffic consisting of approximately ten feet in width for sixty days or better. Mr. Spears suggested a compromise to Supervisor Spady's concern that in the dangerous areas of Route 665 safety devices be installed to alert motorists of the narrowing of the road. Supervisor Spady stated that while he did not disagree that motorists would probably utilize Route 665 to avoid the construction the motorists Z 4 eooK ~5 r~~~348 would at least have an option. on which road they wished to travel on. Mr. Spears stated the denial of the Route 711 closure could very possibly. slow. down the process. of having .the school built on time. Mr. Spears. advised the current proposal indicated that there would also be a cost impact in excess of $100,000 if the road is not closed during construction. Supervisor Bradby stated if the County .can save $100,000 and the contractor has agreed to make every attempt to address any safety concerns ..then the Board should favorably consider closing Route 711. Gary Edmonds, a nearby resident of Route 711, stated he opposed the. closure of Route 711 primarily because of the dangerousness of Route. 665. Mr. Edmonds stated approximately 400 vehicles are presently travelling Route 711 and if motorists are detoured to Route 665, the possibility of potholes in Route 665 is imminent. Mr. Edmonds pointed out that there .was. previously a serious accident on Route 665 which left a citizen paralyzed and .farm equipment traveling down the road leaves it impassable. Mr. Edmonds stated more citizens would have appeared in opposition to the Route 711 closing who were not able to take time off from work to be at the Courthouse at 2:00 p.m. Supervisor Bradshaw asked if .Route 665 could be improved if Route 711 was. closed. MacFarland Neblett, Resident Engineer with VDOT, stated Route 665 is primarily a dirt road. that contains some gravel and VDOT would maintain Route 665 in the same fashion as other dirt roads in the County. Mr. Neblett further stated there are at least two sharp blind curves on Route 665, one of which leads through a cemetery on both sides on the road. Because of this the road cannot be widened due to the grave sites which are up against the edge of the embankment. Mr. Neblett stated a traffic count was performed in 1985 on Route 711 between Route 665 and Routes 258/32 which. carried a traffic count of .350 vehicles and today the traffic count is probably between 350-400 vehicles per day. Mr. Neblett stated in 1985 the traffic count carried between 50 and 95 vehicles per day from Route 665 to Route 258/32 which probably still carries the same traffic count today, Supervisor Bradshaw asked Mr. Neblett if VDOT could install warning lights at the narrow curve on Route 665 if Route 711 was approved for closing. Mr. Neblett stated he would request VDOT's traffic engineer to review the matter if the closure of Route 711 was approved by the State Highway Commissioner to determine what can be done regarding safety in conjunction with the contractor. Mr. Neblett further stated the Board's decision today would be passed on the State Highway Commissioner for his final decision on the closure of Route 711.. Supervisor Bradshaw requested confirmation from Mr. ,Neblett that VDOT would take .every effort to make Route 665 as safe as possible for i~ 1 3 .f D 80QK ~~ •'A~•'•J~J traveling motorists. 1VIr. Neblett stated regarding safety, he is not sure what VDOT could do to make the blind curves any safer. Mr. Neblett reiterated that VDOT could not improve the site distance around the one curve because of the grave sites located on either side of the road.:. Mr. Andreu stated in regards to the contractor advising the Board earlier that there would be an additional $100,000 cost, this is the cost received today from a subcontractor and it is not concrete. Mr. Andreu stated this price could be lowered and he wanted the opportunity to negotiate the cost with the subcontractor. •At 2:20 p.m., Supervisor Bradshaw moved the- Board take a five- minute recess. The motion was unanimously (5-0) adopted. Upon returning at 2:25 p.m., Supervisor Spady restated his position on the dangerousness of Route 665. Supervisor Spady reiterated that although most citizens would probably choose to utilize Route 665 rather than proceed through construction, this decision should ultimately remain with the motorist. 1 Supervisor Bradshaw stated that either scenario presented its own set of problems. If the Board did not adopt the. resolution in support of the Route 711 closure -then the contractors will be pushed for time and there will be an additional expense to the County; however, if Route 711 is closed there will be some unhappy citizens. Supervisor Bradshaw stated he believed that VDOT would see that the necessary signage was installed to help with the safety issues and he hoped the citizens would understand and bear with the County for the next thirty days while the road is being built. Supervisor Bradshaw stated it is the Board's desire to work with County residents, however, sometimes it is impossible to satisfy all sides simultaneously. Whereupon, Supervisor Bradshaw moved the Board adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the School Board of Isle of Wight County, Virginia, is constructing a new Carrollton Elementary School on New Towne Haven Lane, State Highway 711 between the intersection of State Highway 711 with State Highway 258 and the intersection of State Highway 711 with State Highway 665; and, i~ WHEREAS, construction of the Carrollton Elementary School should be completed by September 1,1993, to enable said school to be open for the beginning of the 1993-94 school year; and, WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation is requiring the improvement of State Route 711 from its intersection with State Highway 258 to the location of said school, and in order to complete the construction 4 sooK 1~ rArr350 and improvements of said road so that said school can open September 1, • 1993, it is necessary to close the use of said road while the construction is in progress for a period of thirty (30) days between June 18, 1993 and September 1, 1993; and, WHEREAS, members of the public and residents of said road will have access from State Route 711 to State Highway 258 via State Route-665; and, WHEREAS, Section 331-193 and other statutes under Title 33.1 of the Code of Virginia allows the Commissioner of the Virginia Department of Transportation to temporarily close roads for the safety of the travelling public or for proper completion of work which is being performed. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board of Supervisors of Isle of Wight County, Virginia, that said Board of Supervisors recommends to the Commissioner of the Department of Transportation of the Commonwealth of Virginia the temporary closing of State Route 711, New Towne Haven Lane, from its intersection with State Route 258, south to its intersection with State Route 665, for a period of.thirty (30) days for proper completion of work- being performed on said road to be within the time frame of June 18,1993 to September 1,1993, and that traffic on State Route 711 proceeding. to and from State Highway 258 be by detour on State Route 665. The motion passed (4-1) with Chairman Edwards and Supervisors Cofer, Bradshaw and Bradby voting in favor of the motion and Supervisor Spady voting in opposition to the motion. // Chairman Edwards called for Old Business. County Administrator Standish stated that the Board of Supervisors at their May 20,1993 meeting adopted a motion that the Machinery & Tools #ax rate remain. at $.94 per $100 based upon his erroneous advice that the existing rate was $.94. Mr. Standish stated the Board may also wish at this time to allocate an additional $7,500 to the operating budget and $5,000 to the capital budget for the Isle of Wight Volunteer Rescue Squad budget for the next fiscal year. County Attorney Crook advised that the motion adopted by the Board was "to retain the tax rate on Machinery & Tools at $.94." However, the existing tax rate was $.95. This ambiguity .could be corrected by a simple motion; however, the Machinery & Tools tax rate was advertised in the newspaper at $.94. Mr. Crook advised that the tax rate cannot be set higher than what it was advertised and the Board will therefore be required to re- advertise the Machinery & Tools tax rate because if the County attempted to state that they meant for the tax rate to remain as is and it was $.95 and that .was contested and taken to court, then the County could .lose. Mr. Crook stated it was better .for the County to correct the tax rate now before it is assessed and paid and possibly contested. 5 . •. aoa~ 15.~~~r~51 Supervisor Cofer moved the Board authorize the County Attorney to advertise the Machinery & Tools tax rate to correct the prior advertisement and authorize a public hearing to be held. The mation was unanimously (5-0) adopted.. Supervisor Cofer moved that $7,500 be transferred from .the contingency account to the Isle of Wight Volunteer Rescue Squad budget and that. $5,000 be added to the Capital Budget for the Isle of Wight Volunteer Rescue Squad budget. The motion was unanimously (5-0)~ adopted. Supervisor Bradby requested the Board's clarification on how many . participants -the County funded for the companion aide program. Supervisor Bradby stated he was under the assumption that the County would maintain the number of rnmpanion aides at sixty five and he now understands there is not sufficient funds in the budget to accomplish this. . Chairman Edwards stated there are currently sixty-five individuals in the companion aide program .and the County is providing sufficient funds to keep the existing sixty-five participants in the program, however, if a participant becomes deceased, then the County does not intend to replace them. If the County incurs this situation, the Director of Social Services is welcome to approach the Board at that time. Supervisor Cofer pointed out that the reason the County is funding sixty-five participants .today is because when Social Services asked for a tremendous increase in the local funding the previous year, Social Services only had approximately 33 participants and the Board had discussed keeping the number at 50-55 participants, but there was .apparently sufficient funds for Social Services to allow sixty-five participants. Supervisor Spady assured Supervisor Bradby that no participants in the current program would be eliminated. Supervisor Cofer stressed that the Board stated specifically that. the participants in the program today will remain funded. Supervisor Cofer asked Supervisor Bradshaw if Social Services did anything with the $.40 per increase the Social Services Board was going to allow the Companion Aides. Supervisor Bradshaw stated he had to leave the So©al Services Board meeting last week due to ill health. Supervisor Cofer stated the Finance Committee calculated sufficient funds in the Social Services budget to provide a $.20 increase for Companion Aides because they felt $.20 was an adequate increase. Supervisor Bradby stated his concern was only that the County maintain the sixty-five participates. Supervisor Cofer stated there was sufficient .funds at a $.20 increase for the sixty-five. participants. 600% 15:'AG',.~5~ ,, Supervisor Spady stated if Social Services provides the $.40 an hour • increase to the -Companion Aides and does not take the. Finance Committee's recommendation of $.ZO then Social Services will not have sufficient funds. Supervisor Bradby requested the Finance Committee to inform the other Board members when they meet so that all Board members are aware of the matters being considered.. Chairman Edwards requested County Administrator Standish to have his secretary begin the scheduling process to set a meeting between County and Town. representatives relative to a sewer system in Windsor. County Attorney Crook stated the Board previously indicated they wanted him to prepare a street lighting policy and he has several questions for .the Board on the matter. County Attorney Crook stated the County Administrator provided a number of recommendations and background information to the Board and the previous street policy provides .simply for five dwellings, commercial establishments, churches, or a combination thereof to be located on either side of a thoroughfare within a distance of 600 feet. The County Administrator also provided information on how many of same there were in the County including the Town of Smithfield and the Town of Windsor. Mr. Crook asked if the Board wished the policy to include the dwellings or structures within the town limits of Windsor and Smithfield? Supervisors Cofer and Bradshaw replied no. Mr. Crook stated he -must be very detailed in preparing the street lighting policy and asked if the five structures or dwellings, etc. included all occupied structures? Supervisor Cofer replied yes. County Attorney Crook asked if the Board wished to provide street lights only upon written request. Supervisor Cofer replied yes. Supervisor Bradshaw inquired if the County ~ has already received written requests from citizens. County Administrator Standish advised the County has received written requests. County Attorney Crook stated regarding. written requests for street lights, does that mean a request from any one dwelling or structure or does the .Board want the request to come from all five of the dwellings or structures. Supervisor Spady stated he thought the request should be from all because the County may incur problems if one individual requests a street 7 ft ao~x 15~~~353 light and the other four property owners do not want it. County Attorney Crook asked if this policy affects new subdivisions. Supervisor Cofer replied no. County Administrator Standish stated when the report was provided to the Board it did not address anticipated development and the Board may wish to review the policy relative to requiring the developers to install the street lights and pay for them ten years in advance as they do in other communities. If a subdivision is constructed without street lights and without the funds to pay for them, then there is nothing to prohibit the homeowners from petitioning the Board to install the street lights at the County's cost whereas it could have been the developer's cost. County Attorney Crook stated this is not in the current Subdivision Ordinance but could be added by amendment. Supervisor Cofer stated the Town of Smithfield incorporated this into their Subdivision Ordinance and that he would suggest that within the County's Subdivision Ordinance it be a requirement of the developer to furnish the street lights. County Attorney Crook indicated he would initiate an amendment to the County's Subdivision Ordinance with staff and the Planning Commission. Supervisor Cofer stated he would recommend it go through the Subdivision Ordinance. The developers should be made aware of this when they make application with the County. County Attorney Crook stated the County Administrator in his earlier letter to the Board said it would be helpful if the resolution referenced that the consideration of approval of street light requests be contingent upon budgetary considerations, i.e., funds available in the fiscal year budget and asked the Board if they wanted this to be a part of their policy. Supervisor Spady stated the County must budget for a certain amount of lights per year and if .the County has more requests than funds then the County may have to wait until the following year to budget for these. Supervisor Bradshaw stated there is already a certain amount of money included in the budget for this purpose. County Administrator Standish stated the County has budgeted for existing lights only, and new lighting installations would increase the cost. Supervisor Bradshaw asked the County Administrator how the County could handle funding for new street light requests. County Administrator Standish replied it could be handled in two 8 aooK ~5 rac~~54 ,. ways: either adjust the County's budget or defer until the following year • on new street light requests. County Attorney Crook stated according to .the figures provided the Board by the County Administrator the Board should anticipate a cost of $45,000 for the first year of the new street lights policy. Supervisor Spady stated technically representatives of the Towns of Smithfield and Windsc-r could point out that they also pay County taxes and under the proposed street lighting policy they would like for the County to incur the cost of their existing street lights that meet the requirements of the Count}~s policy. Supervisor Bradshaw stated citizens living in Smithfield and Windsor pay taxes twice; once to the County and then to their respective. town. Supervisor Cofer pointed out that the taxpayers in the towns receive additional services for their money such as trash collection and police protection. Chairman Edwards stated he would not be against incurring the cost of Ughts in the. towns of Smithfield or Windsor. // Chairman Edwards called for New Business. There was no new business for discussion by the Board. // County Attorney Crack requested an executive session pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, under Section 2.1-344 A7 for advice of counsel and staff concerning contract negotiations and pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, under Section 2.1-344 Al for advice of counsel and staff concerning employment of consultants. At 2:53 p.m., Supervisor Cofer moved the Board go into executive session for the reasons stated by the County Attorney. The motion was unanimously (5-0) adopted. Upon returning to open session at 3:30 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, 2.1-344.1A of the Code of Virginia requires a certification 1 9 ~i I ~~ 111 i- eoo~ 15 ;~acr~55 • by this Boazd of Supervisors that such executive meeting was conducted in . conformity with Virginia law; NOW, THEREFORE, BE Tf RESOLVID 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 executive meeting to which this certification resolution applies, and (ii) only such public business matters as were identified In the motion convening Su execvtlv~e meeting were heard; discussed or considered by the Board of pervlsq . VOTfl _, AYESr. 5 . NAYS: 0 ABSENT DURING. VOTE: 0 ABSENT DURING MEETING: 0 . The motion was unanimously (5-0) adopted. 1 ' // At 3:31 p.m., Supervisor Cofer moved the Board adjourn. The motion was unanimously (5-0) adopted. Steve W. Edwards, Chairman . ~ r"" Myles Standish, Clerk " 10 i is '~