Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/13/2005 - Special November 13, 2005 1211 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 November 13, 2005 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this day atThe Homestead Resort, Hot Springs, Virginia, this being a special meeting for the purpose of the annual retreat. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Altizer called the meeting to order at 1:10 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Michael W. Altizer, Vice-Chairman Michael A. Wray, Supervisors Joseph B. “Butch” Church, Richard C. Flora (arrived at 2:47 p.m.), Joseph P. McNamara MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Diane S. Childers, Clerk to the Board IN RE: REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS Supervisor Altizer requested the addition of two items: (1) Discussion regarding the School Board’s desire to install Astroturf at the area high school football fields, as well as the shared use of these fields with the County’s Parks, Recreation and Tourism Department. (2) Supervisor comments and discussion. There was a consensus of the Board to add these items to the agenda. November 13, 2005 1212 IN RE: TOURISM INITIATIVES FOR ROANOKE VALLEY Supervisor Altizer advised that the Mayors and Chairs of the four jurisdictions (Roanoke County, Roanoke City, City of Salem, and Town of Vinton) are scheduled to meet again in December to develop ideas for joint tourism initiatives that will then be presented to their respective Boards and Councils. He stated that the discussions will focus on how to make the Roanoke Valley a destination location. Some of the ideas which have been presented include the following: water park; aquatic center; development of Explore Park and how to connect it to the adjoining localities; trolley cars that can be used as shuttles to and from special events and sporting tournaments. Supervisor Altizer indicated that there will be future discussions regarding how to jointly fund these efforts and how to handle the associated revenues. Once the ideas are more fully developed, they will be presented to the respective localities. Supervisor Altizer stated that there will probably be a need for one or more joint meetings with all four participating localities. Supervisor McNamara inquired if there was any interest in expanding the County’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan into Roanoke City and have them share in the cost. Mr. Hodge advised that Roanoke City just commissioned a similar study by the same consulting group. Supervisor McNamara stated that the master planning process needs to be viewed from a joint perspective. He further noted that Roanoke City is now considering building two stadiums, which opens up the possibility of a joint amphitheater project and he stated that Explore Park might be a potential site. Mr. November 13, 2005 1213 Hodge stated that when staff met with representatives of the National Park Service last week, the possibility of an amphitheater at Explore Park was discussed and they were receptive to the idea. Supervisor Altizer stated that an amphitheater is one option being considered by Virginia Living Histories as part of the proposed park development, and whether or not this occurs will depend on market demand. He stated that the general consensus is that the amphitheatre would have to be between 5,000 and 10,000 seats. Supervisor Altizer further stated that the County should engage in discussions with Larry Vander Maten, Virginia Living Histories, regarding the amphitheater option and if he does not pursue it, then the County should look elsewhere for a potential site. He also indicated that one potential idea to be considered is the possible relocation of Mill Mountain Zoo to Explore Park. He noted that the zoo is losing money in its current location, and relocation to Explore Park seems to be a good fit that will offer the zoo an opportunity to grow. Supervisor McNamara inquired if the County could obtain a copy of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan study that was commissioned by Roanoke City. Mr. Hodge responded in the affirmative and stated that the County Parks, Recreation and Tourism Department study will be completed in the next month to six weeks. Supervisor McNamara inquired if there is any room at the new downtown YMCA for a natatorium. He indicated that this appears to be the best possible site for a natatorium if a 50 meter pool is installed, in addition to their current 25 meter pool. He stated that the advantage to centralizing this facility is that it also opens up the pool November 13, 2005 1214 space for the area swim teams who are finding it difficult to locate pool space. Mr. Hodge inquired if the City of Salem should be included in these discussions. There was a consensus to include each of the surrounding localities in any discussion regarding the natatorium. There was also a consensus of the Board that Supervisor Wray, who is a member of the YMCA Board of Directors, would speak with Cal Johnson, Executive Director of YMCA Roanoke Valley, to determine if they have an interest in pursuing this project and report back to the Board. In response to an inquiry from Supervisor McNamara, Mr. Hodge advised that the Parks and Recreation study currently is focused on Roanoke County facilities and activities. If the Board wishes this study to encompass the surrounding localities, this may be a larger study than what has currently been commissioned. Supervisor McNamara indicated that in his discussions with the consultant, he advised them that the study should be focused on a regional perspective. Supervisor Altizer stated that the Mayors and Chairs of the four jurisdictions came to an agreement that there would be no turf battles regarding regional initiatives, and that decisions would be made based on the “best fit” for a project. Supervisor McNamara recommended that staff examine the following data for the County of Roanoke, City of Roanoke, and City of Salem for comparison purposes: (1) revenues derived from the lodging tax; (2) the percentage each locality is charging for lodging tax, (3) the maximum percentages allowed for lodging tax. He recommended that the Board then engage in “what if” scenarios and advised that the November 13, 2005 1215 lodging tax represents a potential funding source for these regional projects. He stated that if all localities are charging the same rate, it removes the jurisdictional bias from the funding stream. Mr. Hodge advised that the Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) has approached the County regarding a possible increase in the tax rate with the increased revenues being dedicated to the CVB. Supervisors McNamara and Altizer voiced objections and stated that they would not support such a change. Mr. Mahoney advised that he thinks the County is currently at the maximum for the lodging tax. Supervisor Altizer inquired if the Board felt that the County is on the right track in trying to develop regional tourism initiatives. Supervisor McNamara inquired how the YMCA is currently funded. Supervisor Wray advised that funding is through memberships and donations. In response to a further inquiry from Supervisor McNamara, Supervisor Wray advised that the Executive Board has the authority to make decisions for the YMCA. Supervisor Church stated that people will come to our area because they are brought here by some purpose such as sporting tournaments for their children, not by our natural scenic beauty, and we must know our limitations. Supervisor Altizer concurred and stated that we are beginning dialogues that will examine our potential as well as our limitations, and attempt to determine what we can build upon to maximize our potential. He stated that Explore Park could be the foundation for these efforts and he also noted that sports marketing will be a big component. Supervisor Altizer stated November 13, 2005 1216 that he believes there is a five-year window to capitalize on the available land, which is growing scarce. IN RE: VIRGINIA’S EXPLORE PARK 1. Update on Explore Park Supervisor Altizer requested that Mr. Mahoney address the first reading of the ordinance to rezone Explore Park which will be on the Board’s November 15 agenda. Mr. Mahoney stated that there are two items to be considered by the Board: (1) A proposal to amend the County’s zoning ordinance to accomplish several goals. (2) The actual rezoning of Explore Park under the new changes to the zoning ordinance, which were accomplished in the first action item. Mr. Mahoney indicated that the consent agenda first reading for this item will be held on November 15; the Planning Commission will hold its public hearing on December 6; and if it progresses smoothly, the Board of Supervisors public hearing will be held on December 20. Mr. Mahoney stated that under the current zoning ordinance for the Explore Park District, it is very similar to a Planned Residential Development or a Planned Industrial Development in which the owner would present to the Board a detailed master plan. He advised that Mr. Vander Maten wants the County to change the zoning ordinance to go to a more traditional zoning similar to what is found in R-1 or C-2 districts where there is a list of uses that are permitted by right. Staff has worked with Mr. Vander Maten and his attorneys to develop a list of appropriate permitted uses for a family destination facility. Mr. Vander Maten would like to repeal the existing conditions put in place by the master November 13, 2005 1217 plan proffered by Explore Park in 1991/1992. Mr. Mahoney noted that at that time, the master plan was focused more on environmental protection use rather than a resort destination type of use. Mr. Mahoney indicated that the Board would have to repeal these conditions and go forward with new conditions proposed by Virginia Living Histories. Supervisor McNamara questioned why it is so important to Mr. Vander Maten to have a list of permitted uses when he does not yet know what he wants to do. Mr. Mahoney advised that Mr. Vander Maten would like to know what uses are permitted and which ones are not; then he will go forward with the creative planning process and development of the project. Supervisor McNamara further inquired what proposed uses would not be permitted. Mr. Mahoney responded that the following approach is being proposed: (1) Development of a list of permitted uses, such as: some commercial and retail (no residential); commercial indoor and outdoor recreation uses; and industrial use for a transportation terminal to move people from parking areas to the park. Supervisor Altizer stated that Mr. Vander Maten has also met with representatives from Norfolk and Southern Railroad to determine if it would be possible to have a link from Explore Park to downtown Roanoke. He advised that Mr. Vander Maten is also considering development of a depot along the river to transport people to Smith Mountain Lake. (2) Amendment of a portion of the existing County Code with respect to use and design guidelines to target those uses specifically. Mr. Mahoney November 13, 2005 1218 indicated that the master plan is not as detailed as what currently exists in the County Code. Mr. Mahoney noted that there is also a mapping problem. There are 1,100 acres that are owned by the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority (VRFA), of which approximately 400 acres are in Bedford County. He advised that approximately 770 acres are under the control of Roanoke County for zoning purposes, and he further noted that there are also some out parcels which must be considered. Supervisor Church inquired if Bedford County has been involved in these discussions. Mr. Hodge responded that Bobby Pollard, a member of the Bedford County Board of Supervisors, was recently appointed to the VRFA Board. Mr. Hodge further stated that Mr. Vander Maten has stated that typically with a rezoning, the potential impact on the surrounding community is examined and there is a physical facility that is proposed. This development, however, is a functional project and should be approached from the perspective of protecting the surrounding area with appropriate buffering; but due to the size of the project, what occurs inside the perimeter of the site needs to remain flexible within the guidelines established by the zoning. Supervisor Wray voiced concerns regarding the lack of specificity with respect to what is being proposed for development at Explore Park. Supervisor Altizer stated that the County controls what uses are not permitted and he noted that there will be many protections in the lease. Supervisor Altizer indicated that he has concerns about protecting the Rutrough Road area with buffering and that he would not support November 13, 2005 1219 any commercial access from that area. He stated that David Holladay, Senior Planner, is working to identify possible locations for additional entrances and noted that the most logical additional entrance would be near Hardy Road. Supervisor Altizer stated that he and Mr. Hodge met with Gary Johnson, Phil Francis, and Phil Noblett of the National Park Service (NPS) last week, and they were supportive of the proposed plans for Explore Park. He advised that the NPS feels that the development will benefit planned destination attractions that are being considered in other North Carolina localities that adjoin the Parkway. Supervisor Altizer stated that the concerns expressed by the NPS focused on the possible relocation of the Visitors Center, long-term traffic impact, and maintenance costs to the Parkway if road improvements are needed between Route 220 and Route 460. Supervisor Altizer stated that the NPS has advised that they would allow a private party to scrape the Parkway roads if they need to be cleared in the winter months to allow access to Explore Park. He further indicated that David Holladay has spoken with Leon Ringer, the consultant for the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, who put staff in touch with individuals in Arlington, Texas, which has utilized a similar ordinance process. In Arlington, this type of zoning is used for 100+ acre parcels designated as “festival complexes”. Mr. Hodge advised that if the rezoning is approved, this will start two processes: (1) Mr. Vander Maten will begin “shopping” the project for investors; (2) the Blue Ridge Parkway (BRP) will begin examining access to the site, as well as extension November 13, 2005 1220 of water and sewer lines. He advised that this will take approximately six months to a year for completion of the legal issues and environmental studies. He noted that before the BRP will allow the extension of water and sewer, they will need to examine the master plan and determine what Roanoke County will do regarding growth on the other side of the Parkway. He noted that the Parkway has indicated a desire to be involved from this point forward in discussions regarding Explore Park. Supervisor Wray stated that he would like to see information from other localities that utilize this type of zoning. Mr. Mahoney stated that Roanoke County can not rely on the protections of the lease because we are not a party to the lease. He noted that the draft ordinance on the consent agenda for November 15 is a significant change in that it is going back to a more traditional zoning classification, similar to what exists in the C-2 district. He advised that transportation and public utilities will be controlled by the BRP. Mr. Mahoney further noted that there are some large parcels of land on the other side of Rutrough Road that are owned by the VRFA that would be well suited for commercial uses. Supervisor Altizer stated that Mayflower Hills Park is also owned by the VRFA and if the park were to be moved, it should be in an area that is accessible to the residents of Mayflower Hills and that all relocation expenses should be paid by the developer. Mr. Mahoney advised that there is a requirement that certain percentages of the overall total acreage must remain open space. Supervisor McNamara stated that November 13, 2005 1221 the County should give Mr. Vander Maten as much opportunity as possible to be successful. 2. Funding for Explore Park for fiscal year 2006-2007 Supervisor Altizer stated that the current agreement for Roanoke County’s funding of Explore Park expires on June 30, 2006. He indicated that the Board must decide if, and to what degree, to continue funding Explore Park for the next two years. Supervisor Altizer recommended that the Board provide funding in an amount up to $250,000 beginning in fiscal year 2007, contingent upon matching funds from the state. He stated that he is currently trying to schedule a meeting with the Governor to discuss this proposal. He noted that if Explore Park does not get $500,000 in annual funding, the doors will be closed. Supervisor Church questioned how much funding has been provided to Explore Park over the last five years. Mr. Hodge advised that $500,000 per year has been provided for each of the past five years. Supervisor Church stated that all parties have been aware of this pending deadline for some time. Supervisor Wray voiced support for continuing funding on some level. Supervisor Altizer stated that the VRFA and River Foundation are asking the state for $500,000 per year in funding. IN RE: RECESS Supervisor Flora arrived at 2:47 p.m. Chairman Altizer declared a recess at 2:48 p.m. The Board returned to open session at 2:55 p.m. November 13, 2005 1222 IN RE: CONTINUATION OF DISCUSSION Supervisor Church stated that he has some reservations regarding funding for Explore Park and was not yet sure whether he would support continued funding. Supervisor McNamara voiced concerns about “showing our hand” to the state by declaring, in advance, the level of County funding. Supervisor Altizer stated that the County will need to determine what to do if the state does not come forward with funding. Mr. Hodge advised that if the state provides $250,000 in addition to their current $200,000 in funding, there will still be a $50,000 shortfall. Mr. Hodge questioned if the Board wants to amend their legislative program to add a request for state funding for Explore Park. Supervisor McNamara voiced support for amending the legislative agenda and requesting restoration of funding to the levels provided in 1995-1997 for Explore Park. There was a consensus of the Board to support an amendment to the legislative program requesting funding from the state for Explore Park. A resolution will be added to the November 15 agenda for this purpose. IN RE: UPDATE ON PROJECT SCHEDULING IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Mr. Hodge advised that the work load in the Community Development Department is generating the need for additional staff and space. He advised that the Greenway Commission offices on the second floor of the Administration Center have recently been moved to free up additional space. In addition, there is space available in November 13, 2005 1223 the area vacated by the Utility Billing Department which could be used for possible expansion of the Community Development Department into that area. Mr. Hodge stated that the department is working on implementation of the comprehensive plan updates to the zoning ordinances. He requested the addition of six staff in the department, and advised that recruitment of the new personnel will take approximately two to three months. The staff would be utilized as follows: two clerical staff for the front desk; two planners to focus on the proposed zoning ordinance revisions; and two Assistant Director positions to report to Arnold Covey that will oversee the engineering and planning functions. There was also general discussion regarding the increasing work load with respect to road issues and the need to provide assistance for Anthony Ford, Transportation Engineering Manager. Supervisor Wray inquired about problems experienced with the recent software implementation in the Community Development Department. Mr. Hodge advised that the NovaLIS software has been installed and is working well; however, the company is currently undergoing reorganization. Mr. Mahoney stated that NovaLIS is undergoing reorganization in Canada that is similar to Chapter 13 Bankruptcy in the United States. He advised that the restructuring plan should be available in the next several weeks, and there could be some resulting delays in implementation of this software in other departments of the County. Supervisor Wray inquired if staff in the County’s Information Technology Department can write code for this software. Mr. Hodge advised that if something November 13, 2005 1224 happens to NovaLIS, the County will be given the source code and our staff would have the expertise to do minor changes; however, we would not be able to address major rewrites of the software. Supervisor McNamara stated that in the long-term, the County should not be writing code. Supervisor Altizer inquired if there are other departments scheduled to implement this software. Mr. Hodge responded that the Commissioner of the Revenue is the next office scheduled for implementation. There was a general expression of concern voiced by the Board regarding continued implementation of software from a company that is in bankruptcy. There was a consensus of the Board to halt implementing this software in other departments at this time. Supervisor McNamara questioned what has changed in the Community Development Department that necessitates additional staff. Mr. Hodge noted the increasing requirements from the Department of Environment Quality (DEQ) with respect to stormwater management. He further stated that if the County wants to simply maintain our current level of service, we can do that; however if the Board wishes to support expansion into village centers, protection of steep slopes, and other issues, it will require additional staff. Supervisor Wray advised that he has received complaints regarding the amount of time it takes staff in the Community Development Department to respond to inquiries. November 13, 2005 1225 Mr. Hodge stated that for comparison purposes, Albemarle County has 79,000 residents and Roanoke County has 85,000. Albemarle County has 83 positions in their Community Development Department, which is 15 more than Roanoke County. Mr. Hodge noted that Albemarle has staff to focus on highway and transportation issues, planning for future developments, and stormwater management issues. Supervisor McNamara stated that this is a budget issue and should be addressed during the budget planning. Supervisor Wray commented that at times, there is a need to make adjustments throughout the year based on changing needs. Supervisor Flora stated that he would like to have information regarding the following: (1) If there is a demonstrated increase in the work load that necessitates additional staff; and (2) Whether or not the County is performing work that is over and above what is required by the state. Supervisor Altizer stated that the County should ensure that we have adequate staff to address slope protection, drainage, and erosion and sediment control issues. He indicated that there are many issues that will be facing the County in the future, and we need to make sure we have adequate staff. Supervisor McNamara indicated that the Board should not add staff mid- year but rather should address staffing needs during the upcoming budget cycle. Mr. Hodge stated that throughout the year, all members of the Board have voiced concerns about issues in Cherokee Hills, the Clearbrook Overlay, and slope protection issues in Falling Creek. He stated that it was his understanding that the Board wanted staff to be November 13, 2005 1226 proactive, not reactive. He advised that the need exists and the County is being short- sighted if we do not address transportation concerns, and he stated that these issues can not be handled by one person. Mr. Hodge stated that the Board had asked him to address concerns regarding the Community Development Department and he advised that he has been working on this for six months. He noted the upcoming development of I-73, proposed widening of I-81, and changes in the revenue sharing program have all had an impact on the functions of the Community Development Department. Supervisor Church inquired if public safety staff has been added mid-year. Mr. Hodge responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Church stated that he has not asked Mr. Hodge to add any additional staff. Mr. Hodge noted that Supervisor Church has had concerns regarding the work being done in Cherokee Hills. Supervisor Wray voiced support for increasing staff in the Community Development Department to address the needs that are already placing a strain on the staff. Supervisor Flora stated that there are problems in the department, but he does not know that additional staff will solve the problem. Supervisor Church indicated that if a six-month study has been ongoing, the Board should have been provided information before now. Mr. Hodge also advised that James City County has 52 staff in their Community Development Department. He indicated that unlike Roanoke County, neither James City nor Albemarle County is addressing drainage issues. November 13, 2005 1227 Supervisor Flora indicated that part of the problem may be related to the process being used by the department, which results in information not being disseminated in a timely manner. He noted that it would be easier for developers and homeowners if they have a single point of contact in the County. Supervisor Church requested that the Board schedule a work session to further discuss this issue. Supervisor Flora requested that staff provide the Board with an analysis that encompasses a five-year history of permits, etc. to examine what has changed with respect to the work load in the department. Supervisors Flora and McNamara requested that when staff uses surrounding jurisdictions for comparison purposes, they should select five localities that most closely resemble Roanoke County and use the same jurisdictions each time. They noted that this would provide greater credibility to the comparisons. IN RE: UPDATE ON RIDGE TOP AND SLOPE PROTECTION PROGRAM There was general discussion regarding how to define a ridge top, and it was the consensus of the Board that there are many difficulties in attempting to define and regulate protection of ridge tops. Mr. Mahoney advised that several localities have attempted to develop ridge top protection ordinances, but have subsequently backed off. He indicated that the localities that have enacted these types of ordinances are difficult to compare to Roanoke due to geographical differences, and he noted that Roanoke County will be on the cutting edge if we proceed. November 13, 2005 1228 Mr. Hodge reviewed the implementation schedule for the steep slope protection ordinances. IN RE: CAPITAL FACILITIES AND LAND BANKING Supervisor Flora advised that the schools have been working with County staff to identify tracts of land in South County that are available for a new school. He advised that there are three parcels of land owned by Len Boone behind the Poage Farm which would be suitable for this purpose. He stated that the option on the property is for $22,000 per acre and 100% of the property can be built upon. There was general discussion regarding the need for the County to be proactive in securing land for future capital needs, and the feasibility of having a staff person dedicated to locating and acquiring land for this purpose. Supervisor Flora inquired about the status of the option on the property next to Pinkerton Chevrolet. Mr. Hodge advised that two of the three individuals were willing to sell, but staff was not able to come to an agreement on a price with the third owner. Mr. Hodge advised that staff has met with the Vandelinde family regarding the purchase of their property for a possible Southwest County library branch. He advised that the Vandelinde family has also been approached by a church wanting to buy the property; however, the church wants to tear down the house. Mr. Hodge indicated that the family does not want to see the house torn down, and he has November 13, 2005 1229 committed to trying to preserve the house. There was a consensus of the Board to have Mr. Hodge proceed with the next phase of negotiations regarding this property. Mr. Hodge advised that County staff is interested in the property behind the Kessler Mill facility. He noted that the Finney site is no longer of interest due to problems with access. IN RE: INTERMODAL RAIL TRANSPORT Supervisor Altizer inquired if the Board is interested in pursuing this initiative and noted that an intermodal rail transport terminal is an economic development driver. Supervisor Wray stated that there has been double digit growth in intermodal transportation, and one terminal will remove 200 trucks from the highways. He stated that Roanoke is midway between Atlanta and New York and is the second busiest port on the east coast. He further advised that intermodal rail transport is an economic generator and will continue to grow. Supervisor Flora voiced support for any initiative that takes trucks off the highway. Mr. Hodge stated that he would like to receive more specific information before pursuing this initiative. He stated that the railroad is playing this close to the vest and much depends upon federal funding. He would like to have a presentation by the railroad to either Roanoke County or several localities. Mr. Hodge noted that the facility will be large and require approximately 40-60 acres, depending on the terrain, and it will November 13, 2005 1230 generate business growth around the area. There is a facility in Front Royal that is a 24 hour per day, 7 day per week operation and much has been done to minimize the impact on the surrounding neighborhood. He indicated that it might be possible for Roanoke County to be an active part of a regional effort with Roanoke City and/or Montgomery County, if they are interested. The four potential sites that have been mentioned are in the localities of Roanoke City, City of Salem, Montgomery County, and West Roanoke County. Mr. Hodge stated that he has received this information in general terms, and he has been told that the site in Roanoke County may be behind the Kroger warehouse. He advised that key considerations in selecting a site are that it must be on a main line branch of the railroad and must have interstate access. Mr. Hodge questioned if the Board wishes to consider this if the potential site is in Roanoke County. He further questioned if the Board would want to support it if the site is in another jurisdiction, and to what degree the Board wishes to participate. He noted that he has information that leads him to believe that Roanoke City is actively pursuing this facility. Supervisor Flora requested additional information regarding how the facility will look and the type of businesses that will be built around it. Mr. Hodge suggested that this would be best suited for discussion in a joint meeting. There was a consensus of the Board to move forward and obtain additional information. IN RE: ABSENCE Supervisor Churchleft the meeting at 4:00 p.m. November 13, 2005 1231 IN RE: POTENTIAL WORK SESSIONS: 1. Economic Development update 2. Stormwater management update Mr. Hodge advised that he would like to schedule work sessions in January 2006 to discuss economic development; stormwater management; and zoning ordinance amendments resulting from the County’s comprehensive plan update. He stated that staff will develop a listing of potential work sessions and these can then be prioritized by the Board. Supervisor Altizer requested that staff develop this listing on a quarterly basis. Mr. Hodge indicated that he would like to hold these work sessions on a date when there is not a regularly scheduled Board meeting. He requested that the Board set aside four hours each quarter to hold special work sessions, and he proposed that the format for these meetings consist primarily of discussions rather than presentations. There was a consensus of the Board to add three additional meetings per year for this purpose. Supervisor McNamara requested information comparing Roanoke County’s contributions to cultural agencies relative to the contributions made by Roanoke City. He asked that this information also reflect how much funding agencies are receiving from the hotel tax. He stated that cultural agencies keep indicating to him that Roanoke County funding is lacking. He indicated that if the comparison reflects this, then perhaps the County can address it. November 13, 2005 1232 Supervisor Altizer questioned if Roanoke County is planning to implement the requirements for agencies that were recently adopted by Roanoke City. Mr. Hodge advised that the funding agencies have seen overlap in services and some guidelines have been implemented; however, the City of Roanoke has taken these requirements one step further. Mr. Hodge requested that a work session be scheduled before any changes are implemented. IN RE: BOARD MEETING SCHEDULE FOR 2006 Supervisor Altizer proposed that the Board hold three additional meetings per year, one per quarter in the second, third, and fourth quarters. He further noted that there has been a request to schedule three joint meetings with Roanoke City to meet with representatives from the Water Authority, Airport Commission, and Resource Authority. Mr. Hodge advised that the purpose of these joint meetings will be to provide greater direction to the agencies. Supervisor Altizer also noted the need for additional work sessions to allow the Board time to discuss key issues or to hold meetings with the School Board. There was a consensus of the Board to schedule three additional work sessions in 2006. Supervisor Flora recommended that the meetings be held from approximately 5:30 p.m. until 8:00 p.m. IN RE: ASTROTURF FOR COUNTY SCHOOL FOOTBALL FIELDS Supervisor Altizer stated he has spoken with Drew Barrineau, School Board Chair, and there was a consensus of the School Board to move forward with November 13, 2005 1233 putting Astroturf on all school fields, beginning with Bogle Field. Supervisor Altizer stated that this is a shared program and total expenses will be between $700,000 and $800,000. He noted that there will be a policy change that will allow the County’s Parks, Recreation and Tourism Department to use the fields when they are not in use for school sports. This joint use agreement will benefit the County’s sports marketing efforts. Supervisor McNamara indicated that the County’s Parks, Recreation and Tourism Department should also be responsible for maintenance of the school fields because they do a better job. Supervisor Altizer advised that this policy directive must be conveyed to the schools by the School Board. Supervisor Altizer also questioned if a particular school elected not to Astroturf their field and instead requested that matching funds be applied to a facility upgrade, would the Board support such a change. There was a consensus of the Board that the funds will only be used for Astroturf on the fields. Mr. Mahoney advised that any policy must be very specific with respect to how many hours and on which days each party will have use of the fields. He noted that the Athletic Directors and Parks and Recreation staff must have specific information regarding when the fields will be available to them for use. He questioned if this would be a problem for either of the parties. Supervisor Flora suggested that Pete Haislip, Director of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism, meet with several of the school Athletic Directors to work out the details. There was a consensus of the Board to Astroturf one field every two years until all fields have been completed. November 13, 2005 1234 IN RE: BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION Supervisor Wray: (1) He requested a study of the Route 221 corridor with specific guidelines for what the Board would like to see. (2) He requested that the Board support keeping Route 221 on the road plan, particularly with the possible development of a new school in the area. (3) He expressed concerns that there is no career personnel at the Bent Mountain Fire and Rescue Station. The Board advised that there currently is paid personnel at the station 12 hours per day, five days per week. (4) He requested the development of a long-range plan for water and sewer in the Route 221 corridor. (5) He voiced support for maintaining a hard line stance with VDOT on I-73 until the County is certain that the Route 220 interchange will be built. (6) He suggested considering the possibility of County-wide wireless internet. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Chairman Altizer adjourned the meeting at 4:40 p.m. Submitted by: Approved by: ________________________ ________________________ Diane S. Childers, CMC Michael W. Altizer Clerk to the Board Chairman