Ordinances on towers, lighting in the works

WARM SPRINGS — The Bath County Planning Commission recommended approval of a conditional use permit and amending a county ordinance related to flood protection as well as holding discussions on three other ordinances at its monthly meeting Dec. 22.

Andrew Watkins of Watkins Custom Homebuilding and Watkins Properties requested the permit to operate an office from a shed located on his property in Millboro and to use a garage there for storage of items related to his construction business.

The property is zoned R-2, residential.

Planning director Sherry Ryder said Watkins was unaware he was violating zoning laws by operating the business from his property. He has done so since January 2007. The operation was brought to Ryder's attention by a neighbor, she said, and Watkins subsequently applied for the permit.

Watkins said his business has little impact on the surrounding area and causes little disturbance. He said two of his employees pick up a company truck there and occasionally me meets with vendors and receives shipments there. He said he receives UPS or Federal Express shipments about once a week.

There was no public comment on the permit application.

In response to a question from planning commission chairman Mike Grist, who represents the Millboro District, Watkins said he has just sold a house adjacent to his operation and the buyers are aware of what takes place there.

Grist also asked if there were any other properties Watkins could use for his business, and Watkins said at present, there are not. Watkins said he is planning to relocate the business to property he owns along Route 39 in the Panther Gap area, but has not been able to do so. Watkins estimated he would be able to relocate in two years and only requested the permit for that period of time.

"There is no provision in R-2 for what Mr. Watkins wants to do. The closest I could find was home occupation, and that's not it," Ryder said.

The commission recommended granting the permit for two years under the condition that no other business be operated from that location. The board of zoning appeals will decide on the matter at its January meeting.

Flood protection ordinance

Ryder said the Federal Emergency Management Agency has revised the county's flood maps. While the lines have not changed, she said aerial photography has been incorporated into them to make it easier to see if structures are in the flood plain.

The ordinance must be approved by the board of supervisors no later than its March meeting, since FEMA requires the revised ordinance be adopted by April 2, Ryder said.

Localities were provided with a model ordinance, and Ryder said the model followed Bath's for the most part. The FEMA model gave the county the option of allowing manufactured homes within the flood plain, but Ryder said she left the ordinance as it previously was, which did not allow them.

Commission member David Keyser asked Ryder if there had been any requests to place manufactured homes in the flood plain. Ryder said one such building permit was issued in error, but the applicants eventually decided to place the home somewhere else. Ryder said she was aware of no other requests.

There was a brief discussion on whether allowing manufactured homes would open the door for travel trailers, but Ryder said homes must meet building code and recreational vehicles do not meet code.

The commission recommended adoption of the amended ordinance with manufactured homes continuing to be prohibited in the flood plain.

Wind energy ordinance

Ryder has begun work on a wind energy ordinance for the county, and that work is in its early stages. The first draft of the ordinance was presented to the commission Dec. 22.

The draft ordinance limits the height of wind turbines to 199 feet. Ryder said that is to avoid having to have lights on them, which Federal Aviation Administration regulations require on structures 200 feet tall and higher. This would also eliminate the "strobe effect" from the turbines turning with lights on, she said.

Grist noted a section in the draft that would allow a commercial wind energy system to generate noise no louder than 45 decibels on the property the system is located on and no more than five decibels louder than adjacent properties.

"The average noise in rural areas is about 25 decibels. There is no way I would accept 45 decibels out in the country," he said.

He then asked Ryder the status of a study the county has agreed to enter into with James Madison University that would score potential wind energy sites in Bath County.

"I still haven't received anything back. I don't know what the story is. We still do not have the original agreement signed and sent back," Ryder said.

Grist said even though more than half the county is national forest property and the county has no direct control over that land, it is important an ordinance be in place because it would be taken into consideration should the federal government decide to allow wind energy development in the national forest.

"There are not a lot of places in the county for wind energy, but there are enough," Ryder said.

Grist said what Ryder has done thus far is a good start, and the commission agreed not to begin finalizing it until the JMU study is complete.

Anyone seeking more information on the proposed wind ordinance is asked to contact the planning office at 839-7236.

Telecommunications ordinance

A public hearing was held on a proposed telecommunications ordinance, designed mainly to regulate cellular phone towers in the county.

"I still call this an anti-telecommunications ordinance," John Lindsay said. Lindsay cited an 80-foot limit in the proposal limiting "personal wireless facilities" and said that would make it very hard for phone companies to put up towers.

Ryder explained the 80-foot limit would apply to such things as ham radio antennas or antennas used by businesses to dispatch vehicles as opposed to cell towers. The 80-foot limit is standard for smaller personal wireless facilities, she said.

Lindsay said he believes more towers are needed in the county and said if not for the large flag on one just installed along U.S. 220 in Alleghany County and the fact it is lighted at night, it would not be visible.

"I would sure like to have some type of cell service and decent computer service. Placing towers on ridge tops is not a problem since you have to have electricity and telephone lines up there. The ordinance mentions overlooks and tops of mountains, but I think the flagpole-type would look good there. I would like to see better communication in the county," he said.

Ryder said county attorney Michael Collins had suggested a provision in the proposed ordinance requiring companies to provide space on towers to the county at no charge be removed since he believes they cannot be required to do so.

"I have heard a lot of comments on both sides," Grist said. "We will need to spell out in detail what will be required under a CUP."

Commission member Mary Lynn Riner asked if the size had to be stated in the ordinance or if it could be left open-ended. Ryder said it can be left open-ended, but applicants may want to know a permit fee schedule based on height. Currently, Ryder said, the permit fee is $5,000 for cell towers.

Keyser said his concern was the section dealing with removing obsolete towers. "I feel in five to seven years, we will be using satellite phones and what we have now will be rendered useless. How will we police that?" he said.

Grist suggested Ryder consult Collins to make sure there is a legal way to tighten up the section dealing with tower removal. "I think we should hold it again. I think we are getting closer to a pretty fair ordinance," he said.

The commission agreed to hold the ordinance while Ryder works on more revisions including the tower removal provision and the wording involving mandatory free space for the county.

Outdoor lighting ordinance

"The more I read this, the more I get a little perturbed with it," Grist said. "When we started, we were addressing subdivisions and businesses with high-density light sources."

Grist said as the proposed ordinance has been discussed, it has evolved into more of a residential ordinance. Particularly, Grist said he has a problem with a section called "light trespass standard." That section would call for lights to be aimed to minimize light crossing property boundaries and would specifically require lamps installed on residential property to be shielded so they are not directly visible from other residential properties.

"I can see yard lights from three miles away. What's light trespass?" Grist said. "I think the ordinance ought to get to the point. There is a lot of good stuff in there. I think the intent was to regulate subdivisions and developers or those who were starting or renovating businesses."

He suggested all residential regulations be taken out of the proposal except for those involving developers or subdividers. He also said he would prefer to see lighting be addressed in the county's subdivision ordinance.

No action was taken regarding the outdoor lighting proposal and the commission will discuss it more later.

The commission is scheduled to meet again Jan. 26. At that meeting, it will hear a presentation on the wilderness plan for national forest land and will also consider capital improvement requests from various county agencies.