SEPTEMBER 24, 1973
i@ Oi@ 1 V J R C@ I A
iliootill"' 04- tlie (@,iiiiicil o' tlie C-itv o,@ Vir@iiiizi Beacii,
Vir,@iiii--, i@@i.s licIU' ii) tlic cc)ull(:,il iii ili Aciiiiiiiisti-ation
l,'Lij,lding iii tlie Poi@oll,,!l of I)riiic s )',,iiic,, oi) Moii(lay, September 24,
l@)/-3, at 2:00 p.ni.
Ilio illvc)c@itioli was b), l@lic K(,jijic@,til R. CarbaLl@.h, Our
Savior's f.utlicraii C:iltlrcll, Virgj)lii.
Couliciljiioii present: Joliji A. Bauj@i, H. Callis, Jr., @layor
Rol)ert B. Croinwell, .]i-. , Vico @!Li),or I . P,@;d Erviii, Goorge R.
I:crrell, Cliarles Cl@iieiic( @k. llollajid, D. I-lurray Malbon,
J. Curtis Payiie, Dniizil(I H. Idiodes, alid i@l@))-d F. l@laterfield, Jr.
Councilmeii absent: @N' o Ti c
ITEi'l #(,31-4
1
On motion by Councilpiaii (@ai-dn(-r, secc)iido(I by Counciliiian Ferrell, apd
b), recorded vote a!; follo@@s:
Ayes: Couiicilmeii Joliii A. Bauiii, C,,-Illis, Jr., @layor
Robert B. Croinwell, Jr., Vice @l@,i>,or ]@. Reid rrvin, (@,oorge R.
Ferrell, Cliarles tV. Gartliier, Clareiict, A. liollalid, D. @lurray
Malbon, J. Curtis llayne, I)onald Ii. I'liodes, aild Floyd E. 1'1/2'aterfield,
Jr.
Nays: Noiie
Absent: None
City Council approvecl tlie @linutes of tlie Regular @loetilig of
September 17, 1,973, aiid the reading of ,;aid Nlinutes dispensed
witli iiiasriiucli as eacli Coui.icilman lia" a copy of tlie stlbject
Miiiutes before Ilim.
ITE\f #(,375
PUBLIC NOTIC;E
Virginia:
Notice is herefn given that on Monday Se t
p eynber 24, 1973. at 2:00 P. M. (DST) in the
City Council Charnbers in the Adminirtration Building at the Municipal Center, Princess
Anne Station, Virginia Beach, Virginia.
The City Council of the City of Vir@inia Beach will Meet in accordance' with Virginia
Code Section 15.1-431 (as amended) for the purpose of holding a public hearing of the
proposed new Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and the proposed Official Zoning @laps
of the City of Virginia Beach.
The proposed Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and proposed Official Zoning Maps are
intended to replace, aftcr adoption, the prcsent Master Zoning Plan of the County of
Princess Anne and the Master Zoning Ordinance of thc resort City of Virginia Beach
and related zoning maps currently in effect.
The proposed Cornprehensive Zonin@ Ordinance text is available for perusal at all
Virginia Beach Public Libraries. Office of th@- City Clerk and the Office of the Depart-
ment of Planning. Copies of the text are for sile in tlkc Office of tlie Departrnent of
Planning for a fee of t-,vo (2) dollars. The pr(,T-,r,@sed Official Zoning IVaps are on c3i@-,-
play for pul3lic viewin,@ c-pptember 5th, 1973 throl,,gli ClIT3tei-nb-r 24th, 1973 bctl,,,ecl, tlie
hours of 9:00 A. M. and 5:00 P. %4., Moiiday tlirc)ugli .1.@ritlay, in tlic Adrriinistratioii
Buildin@, Nlunicipal CexiLer, Princcsi3 Anne Sl,,,ition, Vir,,,,iiiia Be,-ich, Viri,7inia.
All pcrf;ons wlio wisli to antcar before Cily Ciincil re@,a)-din@ thit3 niatter rnay repist(,Ir
itt 1:00 P.,\I. (DST), Scl)tc@iiber 2.4. 1973, ill tlie City Cliajnl)crs. zit tlie C;-Iy
Clerkle desl@.
City Gic,r,z
Virginia Beach Sun - Sep@ember 5tll, 12th and 19th. 1973
The Beacon - Septe-I)er 5th, lzth I.'Id 19th, 1973
Virginian-Pilot - Ser)ten-iber 5th, lzt.i and l@,th, 1973
Ledger Star - Septeinber 5th, lzth --nd 19th, 1973
The folloiviiig per-,;ojis spol@e on tlie Cc)mprel)ensive Zoiiing Ordinalice
and thc proposed Offi.cial Zoiiing @ialis:
Cominander Kirk-@,;ood, reprosolitiiig Captain ',Iaiideville, stated "we at
N.A.S. Oceaiia, look at tlie C--O aiid tlie @i.ssoci.ated maps as a giant
step forward iii a,,surinp tile corlipatibic development in and around
the ai.rfield environjitent. l@c lool, fc)rl,,ard to tlie continued co-
opera@ioii in pursiiit of tlie healtli, happiness of the citizens Oi
Virginia Beach, aiid in porpettiatipg N.A.S. Oceana as a viable master
jet base. Geiitler@ien, we tliank vou fur yolir cooperation in the past,
we look forward to the futui,o.ll
.1
@IR. JOIIN JA@IES:.
1. Refors to text of CZO - Page 72
Article R-9--Toivnliouses-
Section 582-B
Objects to term 'leach lot--toivnjiouse lot shall liave frontage on
a dedicated public street"
Suggests it is possible to liave A'private right of way
2. Refers to @lap F-1--Matter of Deiisity--Level Green Apartment
property, objects to A-1 Zonilig.
"This is the Level Gree)i apartment property, and most of you
Gentleinen wore menibers of Council a couple of years ago, @Ir.
Rhodes was tlien iiiayor, and as part of our proposel for a master
plan we voluiitarilv surreiidered approximately 800 use perr@lits
'on many of ivliich building permits were actually outstaiiding.
At the time @ve obtaiiied use periiiits, we transferred, actually we
exchanged zoiaijig, ive ivent back to sin@.le faiiiily on a large piece
of-land over 30 acres, and @@e, through your efforts, transferred
our use permits, a portion of tticm, to another piece of land i%7hich
was zoned apartinerits aiid which lias since been developed. Hoi,,ever,
there were 30 remaining acres aild at tlie time as part of this
traiisaction I remcmber distinctly @1r. Rhodes when he was presiding
requesting we not apl)ly for tlie use permit at that time, ivhich we
agreed to. The niatter came up tliat the Planning Commission, actuall
there was a lateral attach from aiiotlier developer. He seemed to be
disgruntled because held been cut froin 18 to 12 so the Plannin@
Commission, upon iny objectioii, left it at 18, but I now find th'at
apparently tlirougli your ivorkslioj)s, at which we liad no opportunity
to be heard, tliat wcld been cut down to A-1 zoning whicli is 12 per
unit, aiid I do liol)e tliat most of you will reniember that tliis was
part of an ne@.otiablc--an negotiated type of tliis, and it i,;as part
of a masterp lan. It's not a PTJD, but really this is rescoliding
sonictliijig that the Couzicil lias @ipproved in the past and there's
beeii no cliango in character tlie zi(Ijacent property whicli has been
developod at least 18 units per acre, and i%,e 1,'ould respectfully ask
tliat you put oiirs I)ack at 18."
]',efc l's to 11 - -@ I)i st 3-i --t- -111,Lcl,i ii @ictc,l - ll(,t(,l 01@(lill @ilicc ado!) t ('ti
I)Y Cotilicil to b 0 illt(' @@rzi t ecl ii; t0@is i)ot doiic
CZO roqui 1,1 , 0 00 @;qiiare i@c,c)t lot si--,e oi, cast side of Atl@ii,tic
Aveiiuc aiid in
liiiik-o.cl)ors ol).icct ,is illost lots @ire SO-fe@@t l@i(le
Density iii Di.,;trict is i-,iircalisti.c, tall@iilg aboiit 100 motel units
to tlie acre aiid SO 11),irtniciit-@ to tlie -,icrc
2. liciglit repulatioii iiiii@oalistic it 100 feet oii t)ie Oceanfront
3. Iliest sidc of Atlaiitic Avejiuc zojiocl B-4, heiglit regulation 45 feet
4. A-2 apartntejit 18 uiiit@s to acre tilirealistic
S. A-2 zoning use oiil), 30@@ of lc)t l story building would be sniall.
6. -A-4 is supposod to I)c a resoi-t con)nierci@.,il district iqith hi,,,Ii clensit,,
aiid you caii't e@,on scll a bo@it--sales should be permitted ill B-4
7. Parkiiig requircflicjits unrealistic--20-foot long isle width 25 feet--
6S foot spacc for oiie car
8. 0-1 Office District ]la-,3 lic@iplit lilikit of 45 feet wl)icli is too loi@
9. B-1 heiglit lii,lited to 3S foot--tc)o loiq
10. Questioiis tlie le@,,,ility of tlie Adiiiiiiistrative pyr)ccdure iqhich E,'i@@es
tlie I)Iaiiiiiiig I)irc,cto,- polqcl. to 'Otcriiiiiic (lucstioiiable @jjicert@lilities
wlicreiis, tlie State C()Jc pl@icos tlie i,,iattcr lindcr tlie Board of loiiijig
Apl)eals--Page.,; 4 ,iii(I 6 o[ tlie C-10.
MR. JOSEPH LYLE:
1. B-4 District--not intended for general application in City but
only to those areas of high deiisity tourist facilities--legislative
intent coniment, page 116.
2. Page 81--after indicating that B-4 is nceded on land between
Atlantic & Pacific Avenue you ptescribe A-2 density--low to medium
density should be B-4 not B-2
3. Specify 4S foot heiglit limitatioii on business property but 100
foof hbiglit liniitatioii oii beacli front--not consistent.
MR. ALDINE COFFcl,%,N, JR.-
1. Questioned the legality of chaii@;ing the proposed zoning in closed
sessions.
2. Refers to @lap D-8--Ilurds Restaurant
Plaiinip.g Cojiiiiiission specified B-] or B-2 that was changed prior to
to public advertisenient should be B-1 or B-2
3. Refers to E-5 and E-6-CZO-Zoncd A-2 was previously zoned C-L 3 by
Planiiing Comfliission. Property x,alued at $100,000. change to A-2
was not requcsted by oivners.
4. Jeniiings Property--North side tiolland Road 300 yards from Edlqin
Drive, request be restored to B-2, whicli is equivalent to present
C-L 2 - C-L 3
I'Icfc,rs to sliCiL! L:-4, j-,-7 11,,1 l)-@i
de ,; i i@ io II aclvortiscd by C:i'L@' CC)ul,@-
I'arcols have u,@e pc,l,
fOl: OUtLiOOI- ,illoived iii 1-1
E-4 is iic,%,; iiiclic@i,,.(,(] as B-S
6. B-2 ajid R-6--ijitc,)--,;cctioii of Sliore Drivc aiid Noi@tliamptoii Boulcvar(I
sliotild I)o 1-1
Notes 500 feet betiic,,cji advertisilig strtictures
Sliould be 1-1 iiot Cl,-3 or R-3 as slio%,,n
7. @lap D-4, B-7
D-4 North of l,"itcliduck Coriier, Sotitli of Virginia Bcach Boulevard
I-l"classific.ation sliotild al)l)]),
Parcel east of Lyiiiili@ive Bridge -SI)ould be I-1
8. Deiisity of di@elliii,., tinits in 11-2, 11-1 aiid 11-1 as a coilditioiied use.
iii P)-4 is citicstiojic(].
,Dcji.,;ity re(itiiremciits iaot adc,(Iu@ito to @illoiv many buildings beiiig
built to coiiforin to tlie statutes.
9.1 Sul,gests study of B-4 resort ar,-,a sliould ])c equivalent to fl-2
deiasities.
10. A building destroyed 25% or iitor(,, b), firc cannot be rebuilt ai-id losc@
its non-coiiforiiiijig st,,Itus. It is stiF@,,eslicd tlie origirial woi,din,@ by
tlie lllaiining Coni)iiissioii ivoulcl I)(,' noi@e al)pi,opriate.
@IR. FPANK BIJTI,EIZ:
1. Refors to slidc L--4 - propei-t), on Nlorris Drivc - Norfolk-Virginia
Beach Toll Road. Ijidicatcd tliis was -.oned August 10, 1970, aild a
use petnlit grantcd for a sign. 'Flie I'laiiiiiiig Coiimissioii reconimended
that tlie property I)e zoned 1-1 to coiiforni to nei,, zoning. Paper
pasted over this cliangod zoning from I-I to Office. Mr. Butler
indicated tliat stich cliange is ij;iproper iccording to Vir@inia Code
Section 15.1-493. Nlr. Butler qtios,tioned the legality of chaiiai.ng
the zoning after the Planning Coiiiniissions public hearing - prior
to the City Council public hoarilig.
MR. DICK MCCLUNEY - FAIRFI.ELD CIVIC LEACTJE:
1. Refers to slide E-3 - property beliind Kempsville Shopping Center -
currently zoiied C-1 liglit zoiiing compatible to C-L 1. Center is in
-middle of 3 and 4 residential zoning.
C-L 1 does not allow bulk storage, etc. Proposed B-2 permits
bus'lnesses not compatible. Citizens opposed to B-2 zoning.
Request cliaiige from B-2 to B-1 or retain B-2 and delete
conditional use for outside and bulk storage and contractors
yards.
MR. J. WILKS:
1. Refers to Rosen and Raskind property on Baker Road - slide D-2
and D-3 - 45 acres adjacent to I'@'esleyeii College.
First section containing 116 units and second section containing
96 units - coiistruction or under construction. Remaining portion
of 26 acres has different zoning.
First section zoned A-2 - 18 units to the acre.
Secoiid sectioii zoned A-3 - 24 units to the acre.
Remaiiiing 26 acres zoned 12 uni.ts to tlie acre. Roquests the entire
tract be zoiied A-2.
2. Refcrs to slide B-9 - ])ye Farm. Ilropei,ty fronts on Route 615.
Coiiditi.oiial s,)Ics colitrict ill 1903 I)rovides five acre comniorcial
site on cast side of G@eat Nlock l'ozi(I ('6]S). Requests that t@le
"floatiiig COII;@IL'rCia.1" J)r()pert)@ I)C' rctaiiie(i coiilparol)le to C-1, 1.
Ord@iiiaiice of I'@@briiai-), a floatiiig zon(-,.
3 @la), "li(,ai-in,, O' @i Ti n i 11 i@i th
15,000 fl@ot lot s s"'Itel ',,:i 1,@ 1-,,-3 froi:i I,.S,000
to 20,000 squ@ii-C fc)ot lot sile.
Requests considoi-atioll of tilu of lot !;ize.
@IIZ. SA@l HOUSI'ON, SIZ.
1. Refer to CZO S, 1 3 @ldiiiiiiisti,,Ition regarding zoning
Admiiiistrator, attciition @s dra@@n to lack of pclialtics-
cures and definitiojis of violatic)lls.
2. IZefers to peiialty for not postiilg si.gils on proporty ilidicatilig
intentioii to rozoiie.
3. Refers to "I)ressuroll oii Zoiiiiig A(imiiiistrator due to lack of
propor iiiforniatioji.
4. Refers to Page 7, (luestions 25@. TIIIC 01) deStrUCtion of non-
coliforliiilig structures by fire, to ;tringciit.
5. Regardi.ng usc of I)tjl,)Iic streets for coiiinici-cial pi-irposes
(i)aee 14).
6. Page 15 - definitioii of an @ttacliod dtqcllijig not comprolieiisive
enough.
7. Page 18 - definition of a I'l,lol)ilc lioiiie, Park" conflicts witli
Section 232 on page 42 (a) ancl (1)).
8. Page 26 - regarding wording concerning Transportation Plan,
should be ameiided.
9. Refers to Virginia Code Section 33.1-370 regarding the placing
of signs along highivays and their removal - refers to page 3S
regardiiig autliority of tlie City to impose sign restrictions.
10. Page 43 - suggcsts elimination of Section 232. Mobile Home
Parks in residential 4reas - conditional use on page 102 - B-1.
11. Page 45 - Section 234 - Riding Academies - conditional use 100
@eet from any property line - constant nuisance.
12. Page 51 - Article 3 - Suggests change in height regulations.
13. Page 55 - Section 402 suggest cliange in wording to iliclude
"the right-of-way" after "such" and before "street".
14. Pag@' 56 - Article 4 - should have some reasonable height
limitation in agricultural district.
15. Suggest consideration - moving townhouse classification
sections 580, S81, 582, 583, and 584 froft R-9 - page 70,
71, 72, and 73. Believe sliould go under apartitient districts
Article 6, beginning page 75.
16. Suggests that the dehsity problom is being "glossed" over.
17. Indicates that density ranges were worked out by citizens,
realtors, plaiiners and and suggests tlie adoption of the
formula rather thaii doubling it. As showii on page 10 of the
submissioji.
18. Discusses PUD and the various definitions of component parts
of thc CZO in relatioii to aiiswei's neoded on:
(a) Apartments
(b) Building perniits
(c) Condoniiniuins
(d) Cliurches
(e) Cluster
(f) .. I)uplcx
(g) Drive-in estiblisliii)CTIts
(h) Ilage 17 - Gi,oss Acyca,,,o
(i) Pago IS - @lol)ilo liojiic I)ark@,
(j) I)Iqcllil)i, @l"bile llojil'.s
C'
of
t, Ii c,, b c@) c Iifroil t@ @iiid c@ I tIi c (!C, II 1,i tTi ct
a(l@l i t ioll 13 - 4 - oiiil,, (,t t 11 "lle bc,"t of
l,ijid. fic,. subl@iitte@i :4 to c 'lull)@
the pi-obleiii@. A col)y is oil file ill (@l i-ic@, of tllc! City Clei,],,.
ROBI:]','I' A. AND LA'vl,]:iz:
1. Prol)crty of I,,. IZCIsor, 1.7iitorprises, opposit "Best Products"
on Ijidcl)ciideiic:c Botil.evard. Orii,,in@illy iised @i-q se,,vage disposal
plant, ciassifiecl as I noi%, li.,is I)c(,n rozoiicd l@-8 for dliplex.
Request tliat it ])e re,loiaed 1-1 or B-1, every otlior parcel in
this aroa is classified B-2, B-3, or 1-1.
2. Parcel - map f-'I-3 - triangulir 1-1/2 acres. Previously zoned
M-1 not rez oiicd B-2. Also slio@@ii oii map E-4. Submit I is
-industrial aiid should be I-1. Surrounding parcels zoned
I-1, I-2, or 0-1.
3. Parcel of ].and at intersoction of Baker Road and proposed
qxteiisioii of Five Forls Road, cliejat upderstood was to be
zoned @l-R, but not so classified. Requests be zoned NI-R.
MR. PALPII D. KAT]II:l@"LAN:
1. Noted original CZO iiiaps had slic@@n tlie property with a "B"
or "A" classi.ficatioii. Niap has been aillended to slioi%, residenti.al
classification, questi-ons the propriety of tlie action.
2. Refc!rs to map D-12. Tivo adjoining parcels both zoned
residential - one IZ-1 and t)ie otlier R-3. No basis for
difference in zoning, Subiiiits tliat oric.inal Plaiiiiin-.
Commission's zoning 1,'as propor and recluests original
zoning of business or apartriciit classifications be returned
(northwest corner of Pinewood Drive and 32iid Street, extended).
OCEA-N ISLAND INN NIR. IIERBFRT KI'l@@IER:
Refers to map B-7 Ocean Island Inii presciitly zoned with a T-2
Supplemeiit, iihicli does not exist in tlie iiew CZO. l'-2 is a
motel and permits a rcstaurant.
The @ZO proposes to classif), tho property B-4. Sucli classification
does not permit enou@,h uiiits in accordaiice with the present zonina.
Request is made to cliange to fi-1 or H-2. Your provisions for the
B-4 are simply too loi%,, in this iiistance wliere the owner has a T-2
Supplement.. He is entitled to an li-1 convorsion. B-4 is not
consistan@ with his present zoning.
TIDEI@IATER BUILDERS ASSOCIATION - NIR. liFRBERT KRA@IER:
Refers to Section 7, Amendniciits, Paragrapli 2 (Old City of Virginia
Beacli @laster Zoniiig Ordinance), wliich reads "Final action on such*
modification - goiii@. back one seiitence) any aincildment adopted by
the City Council may be modified from the form in which they were
advertised witliin tlic liiiiits necessary to relate property properly
such amendiiient or aiiiendments to tlie Zoning Plan and Ordinance.
Final action on sucli modifications shall bc subject to review and
report of the City Plaiining Commission prior to final passage by
the City Council of Virginia Beach".
It is noted that,this is after the Planiiing Commission hearing,
after the Planniiig Comniission recofliniendations to City Council,
aiid after your public ficaring, at %,;Iiicil time tlie law clearly states
you may niake modificatioiis.
Tlic i)rescnt Ordinance states you miist refor your decisions to the
Planiiing Comniission for their I'lic CZO draft, Section 107,
pagcs 9 aiid 10, is not a propcr legal soltitioli tv]iich you ought to
bc doijig. Paragriph "F" of Section 107 rcfors to riglit of City
Counci.1 to iiiodify lllziiiiiillf, Coiiimissioli recol@iliicll(titioiis, "ii)iere
sucli cliiiiges or corrrctioiis arc of @t li,,itiil,c, the
ii,odificatioii sliall i)c t(, i;ie Pl,,iiiiiint, Coiiii@lission for
rcvic;q all(I 1-cl)urt, 1)r.ior to l@iii.,ll 1) Cotincil
LAKI: NOR'I'll
]Zefc,rs to prol)ert@, loc@ite(I on tlie c--(,rnor of li-il@er Ro,,id Ind Nei@to@.' 'n
Road. Pfopei-ty i,(,comiiicii(ic!cl hv st@iff to I)c A-2. Coiistruction liis
started, origiiially ZOII('@l agi-ock] to 15 uiLit-,; 1)(,r acre dcnsity lip
to.Diainond Spriiip,@; Road. C'L@O tvolill Ili@illi@c clonsity to 12 uliits per
'i@liere is I)i,ol)crty licre ai)d liei@c tliat is proposed A-2 or A-1.
acre. I
It is iiot econoiiiic@illy feisible. l@e@luc,,;t to A-2 and A-1
comniercial.
@IR. RICIIAIZD BIZO[Jt)Y:
Refers to map J)-6 - parcel on Sliore I)rivc betiqcen Indi.an Hill Road
and Baylake Road. llircel liis a @i'-l Stil)plcinci)t@. Preseiit zoning
would I)crriit cojistriictioji of a niotel if a use I)Criiiit 1,,a-,; granted.
Under tlie CZO tlie lllaniiiii@@ Conimis@,io:i rccoTilillOI)Llcd a conversion to
vory sijiiilar zoiiiii@'. 'I'lic neiv desigiiitioi), is I'l-S (rcsidontial zolling
10,000 squarc foct). 1)0 ccoiic,,:@ic loss is only 3 or 4 buildilig
lots would be obi-@iiiiecl. IZ(,(Iuests @t -;tr,,ijglit conversiori to conforri
to T-1.
@IRS. RO@IN 1,ARSON - ]@AYI,j\Kl- IIINI:S L17A(@,tjE:
Refers to inap D-0, I)ai-col oii Slioi,c f),ive Is iioted above submitted
a IZesolutioii adol)tecl 1))' tlic@ J'ijics Clivic: Lea,@ue on Au@ust 30,
1973, ul)liol.diiii,, tlic,, cl@is,,ii-icitioii c)[ IZ-5, 11)1)licd to tlie stibjoct
1)1-ol)crty as beiii@3, to tlic devclol)i@iciit of tlic area.
MR. liENRY KEFI,ING:
Indicated that tlie 12S foot width of R-1 lots sliould be subject to
Council or Planiiiiig Co,,PjTissioii apl)ro%,al for variances in width due
to location of property on %@aterfroiit, @,liich would not permit a
truly rectangular lot. Suggest reviciq and correct.
NIS. CLAIRE FLOECE:
Objected to the specifications in the CZO regarding "COMMeTcial
and residential" keniiels regarding dogs - and particularly cats.
Claims persons noiv raisijig cats as a liobby i,,ould be required to
obtain a license to contiiiue even tliough tlie cats were given away
rather than sold. Objects to 2,000 @;quare foot requirement in
ordinance...
MR. ROBERT L. SINIIISON:
Refers to property in the Barbertoii area, map D-12, Block 8,
off 24th Street iiear tlac Little Tliearer, originally zoned by
use, is noi,, on maps as
Planniiig Commission for Iiigh densitn
A-1, whicli i,,c)uld be a density of 12. Property is directly
across creek froin BirLIneck Village, @@iiicli is zoned A-3. Another
apartmeiit, Barbertoll Apartments is A 4 in the same area. Requcst
is made for an A@3 classification.
@ir. Gerald 11,@ilonis-' @layor, iiienibers of the Coujicil, I'd like to eccil,
wliat iie b rt K a@iiier lizi-,; alreacly said, an(I tliat is Iiis appreciation fc)l, -,11
your time aiid cffort iii tlie CZO @tjid tho and I also would lile t, tiiank
the I'laiiniiig Departmelit for tlici2, tiiiie Illd effort too. I represent tlie
Davis Corner Civic League of Virginia Be@icli. 'Fhajik ),Ou gentlemen.
Not
Ii,. i@tissell Clizil)l;ijii tliat tllc City liecclecl
niotel.,, iliFl@hof-ci7@ ,i-jicl tlie bc.,nefits froi,t iliciii. Ii(!' also iiil)lied tliat lie
wazitccl iiiore hotcl-iiiotel zoiiiiips ill l@lie Cit),.
@Ir. 1). ll,,irry llol,,,,ii-d: Not pi,esent.
/V,,,, - O-e O,,,,C, C -,-/
Nir. Joel Sinith: .'I'lie sett)@icks 'oii miiiimum fi-oritige both R-2 and R-3 are set
at 30 foot set acks. Bot)i tlie old IZS-1 @iiil IZI@-3A, IZR-313 were at SO foot
setbacks. Tliis may cre@tte soi7le probleii, in cxistini, coitliiiuiiiti-es as far
as hoiiiesites and if thi@; is adopted we liavo a vtcaiit 30 foot lot and
h,ive a lioine in there.
@Ir. Robert Stei.n: o@@ii S acres ancl it is ctirrontly zoned B-4 and is adiacen
o tic aqate Colony tliat is 17 icres oit (3rozit -Neck l@oad. I request the
Council to consider ivhotlier or not a 11-4 classification is appropriate.
Tiie property currently liis a 'I'-2 sul)l)lc,,m(,nt, aiid I feel that this is a
downgrading of tlie property.
i\lr. Grover Ivright:l'lie ordiii,,ince in R-8 will not pormi.t the non-profit
institutions. I say (loiqn@,ridc this propci,ty becluse it niakes it
completely non-coiifoririiiig,. I requost a iiisti.tution be
periiiitted in the IZ-8 district @is a coiiclitional use.
Next I would like to represont Mr. Chi@is Yoder i@lio is a contractor in the
City and I tliink tlais is oii 17-12. Tlic pi,operty is noi,, zoned under t]iE,
Beacli Borough ciqssification wliich is B-2, which is general commercial.
This is on 10th Street on the soutli side between C@ispiin and @lediterrean
now zoned general coflimercial is prol)osed to be B-4 which is a doirn-grading
of this property and iqon't peritiit tlie use of the property in which it has
bcen used for a long tii,.ie. IVe would like yoti to consider convertiiig it to
industrial or B-2 wliich will perniit tlie i5torage and so-forth, tlie ware-
house Mr. Yoder lias been i-ising the propertr for. IVe don't want a doi@ngrading
of B-4.
.Now, the Mariner property, I do represent the @lariner. I suggest if you
change it from noiq what is peritiitted, i,,hich is a motel; if you dolqn-grade
tliat you aTe sure going to upsot that pl'ol)erty owner. I suggest to you
that you try to convert it to iihat is I)ermitted now and i-iot change it to
duplex.
I have a piece of property oii Sliore Drive whicli is next to the existing
Be-Lo. The front of the property is noi,, zoned commercial the rear of the
property is zoned duplex. There was an agreemont reached at the Planning
Comniission h'e"'aring tliat thc property be zoned B-2 but that it
was stopped at a distance of 100 feet from the center of Cape fienry Avenue
i,,hic)i i,;as thought to be a reasonable iccoj,.iodation, so that tlie propert)
could be used as conimercial on Shore Drive on tlie front and at the sam'e
time tliere ivould bo i 100 foot buffcr on tlie back, buffering the
plaiining from the otlier side, i@Iiicli i.'3 --oned resi.6ontial. We ask that it
be zoned the way the I'lanniiig Commission recoiniiieiided because there were
good reasoias for it.
?\Icxt we have some proportics includin@ the City @lirina wliicli is doiqn at
Rudee Inlet. The iiaterfront ),ou ]iivc, B-4 and wc tliink in ordcr to carry
out the intent of the iiivit,,ition of bids @@e thilik it ought to be B-2, on
the waterfront part of it. IVe ,tsk yoli to consider tliat.
Then, across the bridge, on tlie south side tlicre's a six acre parcel there
tliat is zoned general coiiiiiiercial aloiip, tlie iiator, and then a multi-faillily
ivith a T-2 behijicl it. You've got tlllt rccoiiii-,iciided as a 13-4. We stle,'gest
tliat I)zirc)lol tlie c)ther sicle iqc tliink tlie Ci.ty @f,,lrini ,;Iiould be, and that
is 11-2 witli B-2 along tlic watcrfront I)ccausc it is ilow goneral coinmercial
along tlic watcrfront.
cxt (2 i@- 13 c Ii i-, ne -@l to ti, c, I)oat rai@ll)
tllol is a p',')-Cc ill
I t Illd inclustri.,tl
tiler it,F, proposed to bc l@-6. f it l@,,is R-6
ancl tilci-efore we suggos@ tli@it it be cliiri@,cl tc) A-] - I
it ,!Oulcl con-,;titutc a SI)OT zoll;no wili@-11 @l-,; not lodgical.. I'@e suggcst
th,it it bo A-6-
Tliis is on Great Neck Road. It's prol)c)sci to be 1)-2 and tlie Planning
coiil]Tli-,Sion recommclidod tli,,it t)'(.' prol)el-tv I)c A-2. I'@c profcr the
Recomnielidation of A-21 or B-4.
@ir. Star Cromwell_ Aloii@, l@irst coic)ni@il Ro@iJ is zoncd 0-1 lip to the ty
I
-6j,&--oT lfiy -ropert%,. On thc, iiorti on(I of 'the prolierty mY Proper
,,,tl,rn l@
,]l o- t (,olonial Roacl- I'm
consists of approxiniitcly I,'-OO feet , F-ir
asking yoll if you l@olild, to challpc lily I-C),@icl zoning frOM iz-4 to 0-1,
i,ihich I tliiiik it slioul(I be.
r-,d@,rara @ll'rPIIY: I represciit tllc I,,,itcl)duck Civic League. It is noted
@ir. o tl,c time factor in iqhich
re are no req,liremcl)ts sct foitli I sification is
an applicant wlio has been g"zilltcd a in zo,iing clas ilizing tile
lc,c of Iii'; @ C)a fiith, by ut
requircd to show or 1)@ll-(2 e\'iLIc" 'o
Qi- the uses co)itaiiiccl in tilis P('tition. It is our belief tliat
property 11 -1 11 c that it maY
tinless a definate tiille ljrlit is set fc),@til in t c olci aiic ]io, sale
-111 spectil"iti@IC zc)"i'll. Rc-,-oiijiip, purely for t
encourage what iic c, c l@e, recucst ti@it the city Coiincil consider an
to obtain a Iiig]'CT Pric - I tiolloy or slicceeding oi@ner
tiflie linlit ii) Wilicli @l peti
establishiiicnt of a T)pro\,ed, cvidciice of his good
after a zoning chango lias bocii @l@. ignated purposes.
faith by precoeding to utilizc tho laiii for itis neiv3y des
if it is not used for its nei@ly desigiiate(I piirl)oses, it may be reverted
back to its former tise.
@l a m ;t on, Jr.: This parcel of land knoi,,n as parcel A, in KeTqrs-
villse BoHroouu'@gh slloulc@ be rcsidentiil. it has been zoned IZ@l since 1965.
1 wish for a re-zoniiig back to resideliti:il.
@ir. Ileter A@elasto- Slide E-6. I've been asked to appear on behalf
of Iv iisor lvoods Shoppiii@, Center l@Iiich is tlie succe.sor to Ferebee's Iiic.
of a iiumber of pieces of propert,@ ir,. tlie l,"indsor @@oods area. The parccl
tliat I'm speaking to yoti about is arouiid tl)e perimeter of P-1 propert%.
It appeared to tis that part of our propei@tv wis givcn a P-1 designatioll
and we would ask that it continuo ivith %@li;it tlie adjacent property is,
R-6.
If we may then go to slide E-5. Our office is council for the owner of
a quantity of"lots and a lar_ge parcel of land south of the Pembroke @Iall
area, Virginia Beacli Boulevard at tlie top. Norfolk-Soutliern Railway
riglit-a.-way in this area. This street t]),At is not open i,s called
Woodland Avenue, it gocs from Indepcndence over to a marsh area. It's
my uiiderstanding at tlie moricnt thit the T-rol)erty beti,7een Woodland and the
rail road is ctirrently zoned @',11-3. You can see it's been set for a
classification of B-3. 'Fhis proporty his bocn so zoiied for a long time
prior to 196S. I ask yoti gciitlemon to vzirify that and straight conve@t
that property into an iiidustrial catagor);.
If we may switch to platc E-4, tlie same client has maybe 400 parcels of
land on this map and I'd like to say tliat tliey arc 2S feet by 100. You
have in red, a S 112 triangluar parccl, i,.,Iiicli cui,rc,,ntly i,s zoned NII-3.
Y6u likciqise liave I)Iocls i@hic:h @t-re currei.tl), zoned 111-3. The original
recommendation i,,as for @ill of that to be 3. These have now been re-
catagori.zed I-1. Tlic railroad is ri.olit licrc,. Tliis a .5 1/2 acre
industrial site. Wc ivolild lil,-c to be alile to scll it as such. We see no
difficulty in tlie neigl)l)oflioo(I ,is far is the @IT-3 zoning.
Now if I itiight ro to I)robleri I to
sct I)ef-ol,c you I,'C'IltloT@iell @l l@@, i t 11 t,@, c, lic,, l' -t 11 enti o f@ \'i rgini,,i l@)c-,cli
I t, is i pircel o f I aiicl tll:i '@ i F, cu l@ I'C'Ilt I\- ZL@'I(@ I re s i (11-lit ial-cltil)lc,,x
T-2 stil)l)lemcnt, i@Iiicli is zi notc,,l zi it is tlic,,
@lotel It's shoiin lici,e as a 11-1 c@ii.a@or-.@. 11-1 is not, the clissificatioii
for tlic @lariner. At tli(2 ii,,orient, tlic, cill-i'cjlt zollill" Oil tlie pi-operty
the RD-2 i,!itli tlie T-2 sul)1)12i,,iciit i-ccliii ro,; ,, i@il3liniuin lot si,-e of 40,000
squarc feet. 11-1 i,:ould poi-)iiit only 14 O@)o sctti,,ii-e feet, in order to lia\,e
a motel . The miniriuni lot froiitipc iib%,- i,; 00 feet, it %,Tould be recILicod
to 100 feet. Tlie front -@Ot I),-ICI,- Of SO fcc,,t i,;oul(I be reduced to
3S feet. The sclu@Lre foota@lo I)er uiiit \@otild bc, reducecl fy-oin 2,000 feet to
740 sqtiare feet, should ti@il)lc,. tlie tis@, al)il ity of thc, property There is
,l corl)oration cilled tlie Nc)i,tli Sliore (@,ori)oralion, wlli.cli ownecl all the
proportv. IVitliiii the l@ist @leir scveril lots @@ere spull off on a
Jolin Sniltil) i,7]io filed an @,ilT)Iicatioii @,itti tli(, !)Iinni.ng Commission. At
tliat ti)Ro, lic recogni--cd tli@it he coiilcl i@ot any pormit graiited
for use of that pi-operty -is ,i niotel ,ind lie @@-@Itlidrciq it. If you gentlemen
give tli,,i@ 11-1, he coiild btiild. Yoii ire cioing, in effoct, you are permittiiig
sometlii.ng in the fiitui,o. tliit i,,ould iiot be peri'litted tocl@iy, and I say
pleasc to consider tlie li-I cl@i,-;sific,,Itioii liore,. Tliorc is in yc)ur 11-1
a requireinent tliat you liaxto ciii lia@,o iio iiioi-c tl)aii 50% of the
property developod. I'Iii,s cntire ai-ezi is alrc,,icly developed. But iviiat you
liaven't griarded ipiinst ]ilis alreid), li@il@-.1c,iiecl liere, tlic@, have abanded this
4-
property. All tlic), liix,e liere is a cotil e o, ci ),i a d ome cotiges.
Tliis is a spot zone iii tlie ciitire jioi-tli cnd i@Iiich li@is developed to its
capacity. I ask yotir consideratioi) don't ch,,iiige the zoning if
yuti have to make it P,-8 @@itli a noll-coliforinin,, St,'ItLIS, thit's a iqhole lot
bctter tliaii permitti3ig soitiothing t])@it COL11(i iaot be done today, iqas atteinpted
by the developer and he li,,id to Iiis ,ipplicatioii because it i,,as
inipropor.
There is on page 7 of the CZO text, a discussion of non-conforniing lots.
The iiortli end of tho be@icli is filled @@itli lots I:Iiat arc less than 75 feet
frontage, are less tlian 10,000 squ@irc fcet.
Under tlie languages it is now proposed; ciii an iiidividiiil remove a single
faiitil.y liotise on a 50 foot lot ajid constitict a c]Llplex on that lot tliat
has less than 10,000 S(iU@LI-0 foct?
The 50 foot lot ivas a non-conforT,,iing lot o@,en if the acloption of the old
ordiiiance.
Tlierc is a strip of laiid that runs perlial)s froil 63rd Street to 89t]i
Street, i,t is what i@olild I)c ifolly izoicl. 'Illis sti-ip of land is 100
feet wido. l@ill Tou pcrjqit ila@, lots to be constructed out of tliat
parcel of land? reflect oii tlic 75 foot fi@ontap
,-e roqliirements aiid
ivoiider if tliat is goin@ to ba.abrogatoci ly the creation of flag lots.
1. would ask t.bat it iqould not be so abro@@,itcd and that if thi, i,
loophole in tliis particlilar area, tliat i 1- be pluged now ivhile it is open.
Tliere is considerable conceri iii tlie arezi of the use of siigle-family
hoiiies, garage apar"mciits, duplcxes and iviiat-ha-%,e-yoLi, on a lease or rental
basis of less than one lieek duration. I ivould ask tliat in the definition
of use for the RH cata(,ory tliat tlie u-se l,e defiiied as one week or more.
Mr. Calvin Davis: I wotild like to draiq ),olir attention of page 15 of the CZO.
You lia,,,e broken doivn tli(@ diqelliiig unit cl@issific@ition into four classes.
Onc, tivo and tliree and multi-fafliilv, but, yet in your text under the R-8
you have goiie from diiplcx to I'lultifamil.N, i,,ith no triplexes entered. In
tlie Planning Comiiission recopimendation tiiat was in tile blue catalog had
triplexes in there. It equal.c,,d out to al)out S,000 square feet per unit.
It was a minimuin of 10 I-or thc duplex alici 15 for thc triplex. I was
woiidering irliy tliis ',Izis (Iol.eted from thc@ I'liiining Colllpiissi.on recommendations
and not the City Coulicil's because tile (I(,llsity is tlie same. Jtls
cliarging more tlie same @iinoli,it of land jr, tho dul)lex as in tliis duplex, but
You climated tlie tripl(@.xcs aiad an additioilal 5,000 square feet. You collic
up i%,itli, the saiiie density iiivolved, si,x uitits per acre.
Seeing how tlie density is the saine I iqotild like to see that put back into
tile code based on onc tliing, tliat the yi(,Icl is tllcl s,"me. Tho only tliilip
yc)u are doiiig is givi.11@l, somcbo(ly tlie in@Ic'T)("Icicilce of in,-;tead utt n
i lip just tiro tril)lc-,<os ivitil the same yield Zilld
tilrec duplexes, puttin,, p ul)
kccl)ilig
, tllc s,"lle squarc 1- o 0 t,@i0 t l@ I b o ,t 1) r (@,,i k i n c o n s t r t] c t i oil i n d
nOtIlilli, else. Tlicrc will, not I)e iyiy olli(@i, iiicre@if-,c on tlie la,d.
?@ll' Clj 11 ill 1) - 7 1) I C,l Oil t Ii(' tc;l) 1)(@ II of I I C, pll 1) )' 0 1 1 t.: 5 c- c
-iii '11,0;1 A.-Iiic Ii Ii a,, I)cen clcs iii,,; t (:@l iis i@- '1Iii I)iccc of I)ropol,t)' ll,'Il
@l cliont (-@i oill-S, -ir)(I liis bocii, for a nil);:!,
receiitly beeii purcli@iscd b), or
of ycars, @ I zolled mtil@ti-f@irlily. @j'])is I)rol)c,t,t,), li;is bc(,ii doivil-gradccl lo
a P,-9 classification. 'Flie, oivil(,r desil'o@@ tli,,it it I)c sti-aight convertcd
into a iiiulti-faiiiily zonin@ It this tini(-'.
E-11 please. Sectioii 8 of Kiiigs Gralit. Contlcmen on tlio map you will
see an area desigii@it(@d is P,-9 thit is oji thc ctst of Oce.,ina Air Biso.
Tliis I)roport), exteiids throtipli to So@itli )))irclnc,cl@ Potd. Recent].), a use
periiii.t t@as graiitcd oii this I)ai@cel tli@it ii@is pi-c@,iously zoiied mlilti-family.
The oivner dcsires tlii,,; I)rol)crty reiiiiiii iii a riiilti-family catagory. lie
bui.It apartniciits , for rcnt , iiot toi,,3i]iozis c,; , iiot siiiglo ly dwelIiII@s
aiad tlie structure i,,hicli ]io uses I @ti,i t;ii!i@li@ir %@itli. Tlqo stoi,y bllildiligs
can not be us"ed in tliis district and it @-lianges the use permit previously
isstied.
D-8 pleas_c: Adjacent to ChesapoiLiii Coloiiy is a piece of property ol@ned by
@ir. Ilerbert Siiii@tli, beti@eeii ti,;o otlier B-2 lr(-,,-.Is an(I it is sct off with
a set-back from tlie entorincc to Cli(,sil)oiin C:oloiiy. Mr. Sillitli desii,cs the
zoiiing to be consist@iiit with tlie otlior,@-, tll@it is B-2. It is currently
zojicd A-1.
B-6: GentlcTqcn I aiii reforrinl7 in tlii-,; 1),,ircol as to the top known is tllc
R-9, tlie Y@ICA 1)@irccl owned by Norvick I)e@,,elol)eiiicnt Associate@ on whicli
this tise pea-init, I believe, 380 or 38S il)@irtiiiciits at this time are boing
coii,trLIctcd iii condcjiiill!TliLlIft fisliioi). 'flii.s is one of tliose in whicli
I had to obtaiii from tlic City (a cliaiil)c iii zoiiiiig) in order to develope
tliis .
Tlic pcople involved only i@ant to build tlicir 380 or 385 units, they nre
not iiiteresto(I in buildijig any more iiiiits. Tlicy liave, I believe, tlie site
plaii qpproved by tlie (:ity ivliich liis ti@o Iiigii-rise toi@iers. Only occup),iiia
12 icres. If I can I)rc@ik i.t into tlie zoiiiiig, you @ire talkiiig about it
makes it iml)ossible rrr tlieni to construct it iiiiless you liailg your hzit
on a non-coiiforniing use,.
B-7: Tlie parcel of iirid C-p,.iiiial ipplic,,Itjon iqus boing clovelc)pcd ui)clcr
the nai,,ic of C@ipe llcjiry Toiqo."s. 'Flijs of lind coiltiiiis 7 or 8
aci-es . It, coiild 1)0 if-2, tlie I)rob!cTl i s t]),It you htx,c piit it in B-4
Tliey arc buildiiig ti,'O tol@ers of 400 tinits, 200 eacli. Tliis
is sijiiply not poi-i,.iissiblo, @-ou just tlie Ii I)t density. In tliis
spccial case, agai.n, I li,,id to obtain froiii thc City I'laniiiiii, Departi,icnt
certificatioii as to tlie actual zonijig ir) order to got tlie person to bii),
tlie propcrty.
D-12: Tlie property I'Ta referrein@ to is hore and in front is Judy Andersey
Realty, licybert liarrell Florist and I'm spcaking on behalf of Judy Andersey
and hor husband @,,ho oi,-n the propert),. 1'rol)orty in question is on each side
is flanked by B-2 zonij)g, tho prol)crtv is bc)i@-*iid, i1/2,hich she oi,7ns and is
cl.assified R-S her front property is @-2. I'liore is no access to the rear
property, it is curreiitlv zoiiocl mtilti-family. They perfer it to be B-2.
If you ivant to pilt it th@t @vay fine, otlior i@ise str@liglit convert it to
mtiltiple family aiid alloiq lier to come in for re-zoning, but, it is at
tl)is poiii@doiviigrLdcd iii the rear. You have tlie A-3 category of apartrentr,,
A straiglit convcrsioii is the appropriatc classification.
Text on page 72, R-9. @ly concern is in refercjice to section D, referrs
to each lot shall front oii dcdication street. I mi), be iriistaken, you
have now eliminated the situation of cILister development which permitted
access to public strec,,ts, and alloiis Lindoi, certain concepts, the right
of internal private s.trects.
On behalf of the VirgiTlia Beach Keniiel Club, T would lilce to reiterate
...... proposed ordinaiace canie out of a mecti.ng of the club.
Mr. Spain presented the ordinance to the City Council for their consider-
ation.
B-5: Greenwell Road Batagelia, a matter about this has been before you
recently for a hearing, I bel.ieve in view of this, should best be in multi-.
faniily category.
@IR. TliO@L%S C. l@RO@'LES:
D-10 - Tliis property is iio@,, this property is located just Soutli of
the Virgi*i-iia Pezicl) Hosl)ital on tlie sai-,ic sidc of tlie road, cast side of
First Colonial Road. 'flic propei--,)@ has alivays been treated, at least
duriiig the last S or 6 years, beeii treated in the City as - acknoi@ledged
that tlie), wantod to get aiiytliin@ tliat i@as medically or facilities tliat
would be niedically related iiito tliat area. IVIiat I'm asking you to do
is coiisider chaiiging tliat iiito an office coiiil)lex. Actually the property
to tlie north, east and solitli is alread), an office district. Noi-j,- I
miglit state this is not conversion. You all liave been treati.ng this
as sucli in tlie past and I tliink it iqould bc a ve-ry logical change and
I do recommend tliis.
Tlie other piece of property %,Ihicli I think is probably an error iii
tlie part of tlie Cotincil is E-5. Piece of property ivhich was recently
chaiigod to industrial zoiiiiig. It's oi@ned by Dixon @lanufacturin@
Comp,any. Wliat Iljii asking you to do is to change it back industrial.
He's putting some i@areliouses on tlie I)roperty and lie already gotten
a buildijig permit and I tliink brolen grotind. Tliis is 0-1 aild l@hat
you'vo doiie is takeii Iiis I)ropert), and brotight it into the 0-1
district. So i,;Iiat I'm ask-ing you to do is to just Diove your indiistrial
bouiid and get Iiis property b,,icl@ iiito tlio iiidustrial zoning. It's just
nortli of Ldiviii Drive. l';Iiat lljii asliilg you to clo is just bring tlie
industrial. zoning dowii 125 feet i@Iiicli is liollaiid Road aiid Indepeiidcnce
Boulevard.
On iiiotion b), (louiicilm@in ]@liodes, @@ecciiled I)y Couiici.l,jiii3i IVaterfi(@jd,
and by recordod vote a.,; follol,'S:
Ayes: Councilnicii Joliii A. 13aum, l@obert Ii. CIllis, Ji,., @layor Robcrt
B. Croiiiiiell, Jr., Vice @layor F. l@ei(i Ervi.ii, George R. Ferrell, Cliarles
W. Gardner, C]-areiice A. ilollan(l, 1). \Iurr@iy @ialboii, J. Curtis ilayne,
Donald ii. Rliodes, and l@loyd E. tviterficid, Jr.
Nays: None
Abscnt: None
City Council deferrod action oji tlie Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance
and related Zoning @Nlaps foi@ fui,tl)er study.
ITENI #6376
On motioii by Councilman G,,irdner, secojidecl by Councilman Ferrell,
and by recorded vote as follows:
Ayes: Councilmell John A. Bauiii, Robert H. Callis, Jr., Mayor
Robert B. Cromwel-1, Jr., Vice Mayor l-,. Reid Ervin, George R.
Ferrell, Charles t@. Gardiici@, Clarence A. Holland, D. Murray
Malbon, J. Curtis Payne, Donald Ii. Riiodes, aiid Floyd E.
Waterfield, Jr.
Nays: None
Absent: None
In the 1971 Parks and Recreation Capital Projects Fund, $240,000
was appropriated for the development of Nit. 'rraslimore Park. Of
this amount, $120,000 was pro-vided fi,oiii sale of bonds, and $120,000
was to be funded by the U. S. Bureau of Outdoor Recreation and tlie
Virginia Commission of outdoor Recreation. These l,tter funds are
to be paid on a reimbursement basis and'irtust be expended first by
the City.
Therefore, in order to make these fuiids available, City Council
approved on s6Cond reading a loan of $120,000 from the General
Fund to the Parks and Recreation Capital Projects Fund, to be
repaid when Federai and State fuiids are received.
ITEM #6377
Councilm4n Rhodes made a motion, seconded by Councilman Gardner, to
approve on second reading tlie Ordinaiice to amend and reordain Chapter
37 of the Code of the City of Virginia Beach by adding thereto a
new Article III pertaining to water service charges.
Vice Mayor Ervin offered a substitute motion, seconded by Councilman
Baum, to approve tlie Ordiiiance with tlie following change:
Section 37-32 Consumer Rates
"In addition to the charges provided for in
Section 37-31 each coiisumer shall pay for
all water consumed 80cts per 1,000 gallons per
quarter, provided that the minimum charge per
quarter shali be $3.0011
Delete the paragraph which reads as follows:
"Where a consunior uses more than one meter,
the rates prescribed by tl)is section shall
apply separately to eacii rnetor and th,
reading of said meters shall. not ])e consolidated
in applying said rates,
Ayes: Councilmell John A. Baun,, Robert 11. Callis, Jr., and Floyd
E. Waterfield, Jr.
Nays: (.ouiicili,,icii ,!a\,or IZol)oi,t B. J2,., Georile IZ. Feri,cl.),
I
Cliarlos 11/2'. Gardii,@i A. llc)ll, ii(l, D. @itirray @l@t I)on, J. Ciii,tis
Payne, aiid Dojial@l l@@. l@llocl,.,s
Absent: None
The substitute motioii was lost.
ITE-@t #6-)78 (b)
City Couiicil theii voted oii tlie origiiaal motion to approve on
second readi.ng tlie followiiig Ordin@iiice. to aiiielid and reordain
Chapter 37 of tlie Code of tlie City of Virginia Beach by adding
thereto a now Article III portainilig to water service charges.
Ayes: Councilmen Jolin A. Baum, @layoi- Robert B. Cromwell, Jr.,
Vice Mayor F. Reid Ervin, George R. @7orrell, Charles W. Gardner,
Clar-ence A. Holiajicl, D. Murray @Ialbo3i, J. Curtis Payne, Donald
H. Rhodes, and Flo),d E. Ilaterfield, Jr.
Nays: Councilman Robert 11. Callis, Jr.
Absent: None
City Council approved on second read@jip the following Ordinance
to amend and reordain Chapter 37 of tlac Code of the City of
Virginia Beach by adding thereto a nc@,; Article III pertaining to
water service charges:
CliA-
()F (,,i@l'Y OF V17@GINIA
FY A NEil AIITICLE
-@O Si@,RVICi@' (',il@'kRGES.
I
BE IT ORDAINT,70 !')Y T1117 COUNCIL OF CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH,
VIRGINIA:
That Chapter tl-ii-rty-sc@ven of the Code of the City of Virginia Beach
be a@ended and reoriain-,-,d to read ai,, follows:
ARTICLE III. Service charges.
Section 37-31. Meter service charges.
Each consumer sliall piy a nieter s(@i-vice charge as follows for each
meter connecting,his preinises with the city water system:
5/8 inch nieters .............................. $2.15 per quarter
3/4 inch meters .............................. $2.90 per quarter
1 inch uieters .............................. $5.75 per quarter
1 1/2 inch meters ............................. $13.00 per quarter
2 inch mecers .............................. $18.00 per quarter
3 inch rieters ............................. $36.00 per quarter
4 inch nieters ............................. $65.00 per quarter
6 inch meters ............................ $144.00 per quarter
8 incti meters ............................ $288.00 per quarter
10 incti meters ............................ $454.00 per quarter
12 inch meters ............................ $6,18.00 per quarter
Section 37-32. Constimer rates.
In addition to the c'Liarges provided for in section 37-31, ea-Ch
consumer shall pay as follows for water consumed:
0 - 30,000 gallons 82i per 1,000 gallons per quarter,
providcci that the minimum charge
per quarter shall be $3.00
30,001 - -50,000 @illons 7'oi per 1,000 gallons per quarter
50,001 - 100,000 gallons 70@, pei-- 1,000 gallons per aluarter
all over 100,000 gallons 60i per ]-,OOO gallotis per quarter
Where a coiis,,-iriier tisc@s niore t-,Iian o.,ie riiet(@r, the rates prescribed
by this section shall- apply sepai-ately to each meter and the readings
of said meters sliill not be consolidated in applying said rates.
Any ordinance or any part bf any ordin@ince in conflict with the
provisions of this chapter shall be aild hereby is repealed to the extent
of such conflict.
This ordinance shall be in effect and apply to all accounts billed
after September 24, 1973.
First reading: September 17, 1973
Second reading: Septeinber 24, 1973
Adopted by the Council of the Citv of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on
the 24th day of September 1973.
ITEM #6,379
011 motion by COullcilman Waterfield, seconded by COu-tilman Payne,
and by recorded "t, as follows:
Ayes: COuncil-e JOhn A. Baum, Robert Fl. Callis, Jr.. Mayor
Robert B. m n,
Ferre Cro,,,-", Jr., Vice Mayor F. Reid l@'rvin, Ge;rge R.
Malbon fo],
ll,,.Charles W, Gardner, Clarence A. i
, J. C,,rtis Payne - ,d, D. Murray
Waterfield, Jr. Doiiald ii. Ri,ode,;, an(i Floyd E.
Nays: None
Absent: None
aiii section 17 n
a,id to repeal Ordi -22.1 of the Code Of tlie CitY Of Virginia Beach
city C?Ullcil approvcd on seco d readill an ordinance to a,,,d ar,d
reord
riance Number 467:
ReqLie.,ited. by: City Maiiiger
AN ORI)INANCII l.'O Al@l D t,@@'D REORDAITL
SECTION 17-22.1 0'r- THL CODE Or Tll-'
CITY OF VIRGINIA BFACU AN9 TO REPEAL
ORDINANCE NU@IBER 467.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH,
VIRGINIA:
That Section 17-22.1 of the Code of the-City of Virginia Beach
is amended and reordained to read as follows:
Any firm, corporation or individual desiring to deposit garbage
or ref@se at any city disposal area shall pay the following fees for
such disposal:
(1) Where it can be established to the satisfaction of the
director of community services that refuse or garbage brought to a
city disposal area is collected primarily within the City of Virginia
Beach, the director of community services may authorize a special
permit for disposal of the refuse or garbage upon payment of an annual
application fee of $15.00 in addition to a service charge based upon
the cost of handling and disposing of such refuse or garbage.
(2) Whenever refuse or garbage is biought to any city disposal
area by persons other than residents with a current city decalcomania
properly displayed as provided in Section 22-74.1 or those authorized
by special permit under Section (1) a fee of $3.12 per ton, or a
minimum fee of $1.00 shall be charged for the service.
(3) Special fees.
(a) Tire Cutting: Thirty-five cents per tire.
(4) Scales and collection procedures. The director of community
services, in conjunction with -Lhe director of finance, shall provide
such scales and collection procedures as they may determine to be
necessary to ensure the efficient collection of the fees hereby im-
posed; provided, that the director of community services shall have
the authority to establish categories of waste that are unacceptable
for discharge.
(5) Hours of operation. 7:30 A.M. to 4:00 P.M., Monday throtigh
Saturday. City disposal areas shall be closed on legal holidays.
Ordinance Numbcr 467 is hereby repealed.
An emergency exists and this ordinance shall be effective from
date of adoption.
First reading: Septeltiber 17, 1973
Second'reading: September 24, 1973
Adopted by the Council of the city of Virginia Beach on the
24thday of September 1973.
ITEM #6380
1
On motion by Councilman Gardner, secoiided by Councilman Holland,
and by recorded vote as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen John A. Baum, Robel,t ii. Callis, Jr., @layor
Robert B. Cromwell, Jr., Vice Mayor l@. Reid Ervin, George R.
Ferrell, Cliarles W. Gardiier, Clarence A. Holland, D. Murray
Malbon, J. Curtis Payne, Donald H. Rliodes, and Floyd E. Waterfield, Jr.
Nays: None
Absent:,, None
City Council adopted tile following Resolution requesting the Board of
State Building Code, Review to autilori7e amendments to the Virginia
Beach Building Code relating to coastal areas:
Re(luested by; Vice tviiyor F. l@c@id Ervill
Thc-, repulir iiitctin(, of th.
L' ('o i] Of tile C!tY of Virginia f,(.,acti
Virginia, was liel(I in th(@ Council C!i,ii)ber- of the City on
' 1973, at tk@o o'clock 1).m.
On motion bv Mr. -inci secon(3c,.d by Mr.
the following resolution wns unaniiiioti-ly adoptec3:
R E S 0 T@ U T I 0 N
WHEREAS, coridi.tions exipt @,7ithin the City of Virginia Beach
concerni.ng the strength and stability of all buildings located on the
oceanfront and Cliesapeake )3ay front areas; and
WHEREAS, on jul.y 17, 1973, the Board of State Building Code
Review authorized the City of Virginia Beach to continue the use
of the Southern Standard Building Code (1972 Revision); and
WHEIZEAS, the Board of State Building Code Review prohibits any
amendments that are not approved by such board; and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Virginia Beach desires to
require certain amendments to the Building Code that will alievate
these conditions;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that tlie Board of State Building Code
Review is requested to authorize the following atndndments to the
Virginia Beach Building Code by adding the following;
1303.7 - SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS - COASTAL AREAS
1. All building on the oceanfront shall be constructed on
pilings.
2. All buildings located on the Chesapeake Bay shall be
required to be constructed on pilings unless expressly waived by
the building official upon submission of alternate foundation
proposal designed to resist storm conditions.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Clerk of Council is directed
to forward a copy of this resolution to E. A. Ragland, Secretary,
Board of State Building Code Review.
#63@l
On ]notion by Couriciiiiiall M,,.Ilboii, @';OcOllclccl ])Y Coulicili,,iaii Rlio(les, and
by recorded vote as follows:
Ayes: COuncilnierl Jollji A. Bauni, Robert Ii. Callis, )r., Mayor Robert
B. Cromwell, Jr., vicc,
, Mavor l,. Reid Li'viii, George IZ. Ferrc-,Il, Charles
W. Gardner, Clarence A. li'olland, D. @lurr@iy @Ialbon, J. Curtis Payne,
Donald 11. ]Zliodes, and Floyd E. i@Taterfield, Jr.
Nays: None
Absent: None
CitY Council approved tile following tax refunds ill the amount of
$ 17 7 6 . 0 0
'10; ',Ifr. Dale.Bir@soii C!Zy Alt@:-nev
RO.11: ttr. V. A. L-tlicri(i,@e, Tre@I.-.urer Ditt.--@,cpteml-)(,r 17, 1973
CT: Applicdtion for Tax acfuiids:
cat
--n= rcfund Of tzxcn tctaling 36 1. 00
ertlficd for payment, as s,!t forl'tl below: Y-
V. A. Etheridi!c!, Treisuror
Tax Type
Name -. Ticl@et/
Year of Ta- ation
Number No. est
ks Enterprises Inc 1/2 & 2/2
Frank B Banks 1972 RE #02353
-5-72 1 223 30
k,, 7nter prises Inc
I ink B Banl@s 1973 #002529 2 6 20-73 115.20 1-15 20
ert Alfred 1973 CD #T4225 9-10-:73 7.50
esa J. Tucker 1973 CD #65735 1-17-73
15.00
nonlicAti@ns fn'r
4 -i
.i,ignn C i t v
c.r Ll i(@d fj J),Aymctlt, a sSUL 1.)Ciow:
t@. Etheridrf!. Trrlstjrvr
Tax c
Year of @l L
i@,i j. d Base
r
7 3 5 . 00
t
0 1 1 C,
I c i
#6384
Oii motiori by Couiicil'iiian P,,iync,, secoiide,l i)%, COLincililian @Ialboll, @)lld
by recorded vote as follows:
Ayes: Couiiciliiien Jolin A. Bauiii, Robert 11, Callis, Jr., Mayor
Robert B. Croiiiwel)., Jr., Vicc, @liyor l@. 1',cid I-'rviii, George R.
Ferrell, Charles @V. C;ardner, Clarence A. liolland, D. Nlurray
@ialbon, J. Curtis Payjie, I)onald H. itid l@1c)yd E. Watei-field,
Jr.
Nays: None
Absent: None
City Council approved a Bingo/Raffle permit for the Green Run
liomes Association.
ITEM #6385
Or@ motion by Councilman PIiodes, seconde(I by Couiiciliiian Malbon,
and by recorded vote as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Jolin A. Baum, ]Zobel-t 11. Callis, Jr., Ma yor
Robert B. Cromwell, Jr., Vice l@. Reict Ervin, George R.
Forrell, Charles,IV. Gardner, Clareiice A. lfollan(l, 1). MLirray
Malbon, J. Curti-- Payne, Donald il. Rh,ides, and l@loyd Waterfield,
Jr.
'4ays:
None
Absent: None
Sheriff John E. Marr requested additiorial funds for the
purcliase of a large outdoor freezer for tlie use at the City
Jail. This request has been certified by the State Departmelit
of Welfare and Institutions. Therefor, City Couiicil appropriated
$2,370. from Reserve for '@'ontingencies, tc) be distributed as follows:
$2,270. to Account #856 (freezers) aii@i $100. to Accouiit #302 (building
materials and supplies).
II'EM N6")86
Mr. Richard Coradi, reproseiitiiig Broa(i Bay Sailing Association,
amalgamated Civic League of Broad Bay, and Mr. Coradi is also
Chairman.-of the Watorways Committee ol- Cape Henry Shores League
Association. Mr. '@-oradi requested th(, dredging of Long Creek, in
his statemeiit he sited several reason,@ and asked City Council to
do the following:
1] Renioval of certain relatively small bars, which are iii
Long Creek.
21 Dredging Long Creek on a continued basis
3] Bar at Marker #1 to be removed iinmediately
Mr. Coradi stated tlie problem could bc, a hazzardous one due to the
shoaling.
Mr. W, W. Fleming, Jr., Director of Coinmun.ity.Services, stated he
would have to review tlie problem and i,eport back to City Council
iii two weeks.
ITLNI #6387
Oii Diotion by CouiicilDiii,, Rhodes, seconcled I)v Counciljiian Waterfield,
and by recorded vote as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Jolin A. Baum, Robert fl. Callis, Jr., Mayor
Robert B. Cromwell, ii-., Vice Mavor F. Reid 1'rvin, George R,
Ferroll, Charles W. Gardner, Cla@eiice A. flollaiid, D. Murray
Mall)on, J. Curtis Payne, Donald 11. Rliodc-;, aiid Floyd E.
Waterfield, Jr.
Nays: None
Absent: None
City Council, after consideration of tlie ilidependent appraisal of
the Bow Creek Country Clul) property prepared and submitted to the
City.Co.uiicil by Mr. @Vill.iain J. Jonak, a licc@nsed Real Estate Appraiser,
coinmissioned by tlie City, agreed tliat subject to a public referendum
indicating approval, and tlie sale of City bonds to provide the funds
to purchase the Bow Creel@ CountTy Club property for one million
thirty five tliousand dollars [$1,035,000], consistiiig of the real
propert@, the clubhouse building, tlie swimjiiillg pool an(I the golf
pro sliol), but excluding the 7 more or less acres jiot owned by the
Bow Creek Country Club aiid the motel property.
A ITEM #7387 (a)
Vice @layor Ervin stated for tlie record that a decision of this
nature is too far-reaching for Councills actioii'alone and that
is the reason for the public referenduln.
ITEM #6388
On motion by Councilman Ferrell, seconded'by Councilman Rhodes,
and by recorded vote as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen John A. Batim, Robert ii. Callis, Jr., Mayor
Robert B. Cromwell, Jr., Vice Nlayor F. Reid Ervin, George R.
Ferrell, Charles W. Gardner, Clarence A. flolland, D. Murray
Malbon, J. Curtis Payne, Donald Ii. Rhode,,-,, and Floyd E.
Waterfield, Jr.
Nays: None
Absent: None
City Council noted its intention to hold a closed meeting on Monday,
October 1, 1973, for the purpose of discussing items permitted fOT
discussion under Sectioii 2.1-344, Subparigraph 1 and 6 of the
Freedom of Information Act of tlie Commoni@ealth of Virginia.
ITEM #6389
On m@qon by Councilman Ferrell, seconded by Councilmaii Callis, and
by v ous vote, the meeting adjourned.
:la @j, a, City ClerF Robert B. Cromwell, Jr., Mayor
v
City of Virginia Beacli,
Virginia
Septeniber 24, 1973