The URL can be used to link to this page

DECEMBER 9, 2003 AGENDACITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH "COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME" CITY COUNCIL MAYOR MEYERA E OBERNDORF At -Large VICE MAYOR LOUIS R JONES, Bayside - District 4 HARRY DIEZ,EL, Kempsville -District 2 MARGARET L SURE Centerville - District 1 REBA S McCLANAN Rose Hall - District 3 RICHARD A MADDOX Beach - District 6 JIM REEVE Princess Anne - District 7 PETER W SCHMIDT At -Large RON A VILLANUEVA At -Large ROSEMARY WILSON At -Large JAMES L WOOD Lvnnhaven -District 5 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JAMES K SPORE, City Manager LESLIE L LILLEY, City Attorney RUTH HODGES SMITH MMC City Clerk December 9, 2003 Ill. CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS A. RETAIL STUDY SURVEY John Melaniphy, Consultant B. VOLUNTEER COUNCIL ANNUAL REPORT Mary Russo, Volunteer Coordinator C. HEALTH CARE ISSUES ADVISORY GROUP Larry Spencer, Assistant City Attorney II. CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION A. CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION VISIT re REVISED AICUZ REGULATIONS B. PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD Proposed Changes to Composition III. REVIEW OF AGENDA ITEMS IV. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS CITY HALL BUILDING 1 2401 COURTHOUSE DRIVE VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456-8005 PHONE (757) 427-4303 FAX (757) 426-5669 EMAIL Ctycncl@vbgov com - Conference Room - 1:00 PM V. INFORMAL SESSION - Conference Room - 4:OOPM A. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E Oberndorf B ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL C. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION VI. FORMAL SESSION - Council Chamber - 6:OOPM A. CALL TO ORDER '- Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf B INVOCATION: Reverend Joe Warren Abundant Harvest Church C. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA D. ELECTRONIC ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL E. CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION F. MINUTES 1. INFORMAL AND FORMAL SESSIONS December 2, 2003 G. AGENDA FOR FORMAL SESSION H. PRESENTATION 1. GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION (GFOA) AWARD Department of Management Services I PUBLIC HEARING 1. EXCESS PROPERTY at North Landing Road and Princess Anne Road J. CONSENT AGENDA K. L. RESOLUTIONS 1. Resolution concurring with issuance by the Industrial Development Authority of Mathews County, re a Revenue Bond not to exceed $5,000,000 for the UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C. at Witchduck and Grayson Roads. 2. Resolution referring to the Planning Commission proposed amendments to § 201 of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO), re the parking of motor vehicles on certain portions of residential lots. 3. Resolution to AMEND the revised recommendations of the Council Committee eliminating Virginia Beach residency as a necessity for the citizen appointments to Boards and Commissions. ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance to AMEND §§ 35-139, 35-140, 35-143.1, 35-144, 35-162, 35-166, 35-187, 35-188, 35-192, 35-252, 35-253, 35-258, 35-260 and ADD §§ 35-147, 35-168, and 35-194 of the City Code re assessment and collection of admission, meal, lodging, short-term rental and telecommunication service taxes. 2. Ordinance to DECLARE EXCESS PROPERTY at the intersection of Princess Anne Road and North Landing Road: and: AUTHORIZE the City Manager to convey this property to Kellan & Eaton, Inc. as part of a PROPERTY EXCHANGE. (DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE) 3. Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE $442,943 from the U.S. Department of Justice to the Police FY 2003-2004 Operating Budget re internal affairs software and database development, training and project evaluation. El W, N Ordinance to APPROPRIATE $380,000 anticipated revenue from the State to the Police FY 2003-2004 Operating Budget re extradition of prisoners. Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE $49,991 from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to the Fire FY 2003-2004 operating budget re a part-time program manager and associated equipment to initiate a Medical Reserve Corps program. Ordinances to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE cash payments in lieu of park reservation re "Park Playground Renovations": a Dam Neck Court Subdivision $ 9,915 b. White Acres Subdivision $29,900 C. Brinkley Estates Subdivision $20,000 d. Thoroughgood, Section 8, Part 4 Subdivision $24,000 M. 7. Ordinance to APPROVE a Cooperative Agreement between the City Council and the School Board re provision of legal services to the Board by the Office of the City Attorney in FY 2004. PLANNING 1. Application of STEPHEN WRAY O'NEAL for the expansion of a nonconf arming use re adding and constructing a detached garage at 420 Davis Street. ((DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE) Indefinitely Deferred: Recommendation: August 26, 2003 APPROVAL 2. Applications of BERKSHIRE -HUDSON CAPITAL, XI, LLC re Chang_o, f Zoning Distract Classification: (DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE) a. From B-1 Neighborhood Business District, B-2 Community Business District and AG -2 Agricultural District with Historic and Cultural Overlays to Conditional B-2 Community Business District with Historic and Cultural Overlays east of Princess Anne Road and North Landing Road. b. From B-2 Community Business District with Historic and Cultural Overlays to AG -2 Agricultural District with Historic and Cultural Overlays at Princess Anne Road and Courthouse Drive. Deferred: November 25, 2003 Recommendation: APPROVAL 3. Application of PHIL M. BONIFANT for a Conditional Use Permit re a Country Inn at 2252 Indian River Road. (DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE) Recommendation: APPROVAL 4. Application of K.A.H. PROPERTIES, L.L.C. for a Conditional Use Permit re motor vehicle sales and service at 3112 Virginia Beach Boulevard. (DISTRICT 5 - LYNNHAVEN) Recommendation: APPROVAL 5. Application of MARVIN M. and GAYLE B. ROLLINS for a Conditional Use Permit re alternative residential development at 480 Princess Anne Road. (DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE) Staff Recommendation: DEFERRAL Planning Commission Recommendation: APPROVAL 6. Applications of KEMPSVILLE-CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES, L.L.C. at 2001 Centerville Turnpike: (DISTRICT 1 — CENTERVILLE) a. MODIFICATION to a Conditional Use Permit (Approved by the City Council February 11, 2003 b. Change of ZoningDistrict Classification from R-51) Residential Duplex District to Conditional B-2 Community Business District C. Conditional Use Permit re mini -warehouse Recommendation: APPROVAL 7 Application of HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES, a Virginia General Partnership for a Change of ZoninjzDistrict Classification from R-10 Residential District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District at Herbert Moore Road and Campus Drive. (DISTRICT 2 — KEMPSVILLE) 91 a Recommendation: APPROVAL Application of SILVER HILL -SALEM, L.L.C. at Lynnhaven Parkway and Salem Road: (DISTRICT 1 — CENTERVR LE) a. Change of Zoning from Conditional B-2 Community Business District to Conditional 0-2 Office District b. Conditional Use Permit re housing for seniors Recommendation: APPROVAL Applications of PUNGO INVESTORS, INC. at Stowe Road and South Stowe Road: (DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE) a. Petition for a Variance to § 4.4 (b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet all the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) b. Conditional Use Permit re alternative residential development Staff Recommendation: DEFERRAL Planning Commission Recommendation: APPROVAL 10. Application of NUCHAEL CARR for a Conditional Use Permit re a recreational facility of an indoor / outdoor nature (skate park) and church at 5405 Indian River Road. (DISTRICT 1 — CENTERVILLE) 11. 12. 13. 14 Recommendation: ALLOW WITHDRAWAL Applications of ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. re Flanagan's Lane at Princess Anne Road: (DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE) a. The discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of b. Change of Zoning from AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional PD- H. Planned Unit Development District (R-30 and P-1) C. Petition for a Variance to § 4.4 (b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet all the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) at the intersection of Sandbridge Road Recommendation: APPROVAL Applications of ALCAR, L.L.C. at Nimmo Parkway and Rockingchair Lane: a. Changeo Zoning District Classification from AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional R-10 Residential District b. Conditional Use Permit for Open Space Deferred: Recommendation: OCTOBER 28, 2003 APPROVAL Application of CAVALIER GOLF and YACHT CLUB fora Conditional Use Permit re a marina expansion at 1052 Cardinal Road. (DISTRICT 5 - LYNNHAVEN) Deferred: Staff Recommendation: Planning Commission Recommendation: May 27, 2003 APPROVAL APPROVAL LOST TO A TIE VOTE Ordinances of CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH re Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance and further re conforming references to renumber sections to AMEND and REORDAIN : a. Sections 5.10, 6.1 and 6.3 of the Subdivision Ordinance, Appendix B of the City Code b. Site Plan Ordinance, Appendix C of the City Code re C. § 1.6 of the Tree Planting, Preservation and Replacement Ordinance, Appendix E of the City Code d Appendix F of the City Code re identification and protection of Resource Protection Area buffers, designation criteria, land use, development performance criteria and variances Recommendation: APPROVAL e. Establishing TRANSITION RULES for amendments to Appendix F. f. Section 2-452.1 of Chapter 2 of the City Code re Boards, Commissions and Committees. N. APPOINTMENTS BOARD OF BUILDING CODE APPEALS CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION AREA BOARD COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD FRANCIS LAND HOUSE BOARD OF GOVERNORS HAMPTON ROADS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE PLANNING COMMISSION RESORT ADVISORY COMMISSION (RAC) SOUTHEASTERN VIRGINIA AREA -WIDE MODEL PROGRAM (SEVAMP) VIRGINIA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (VBCDC) O. UNFINISHED BUSINESS P. NEW BUSINESS Q ADJOURNMENT ********** If you are physically disabled or visually impaired and need assistance at this meeting, please call the CITY CLERK'S OFFICE at 427-4303 Hearing impaired, call TDD only 427-4305 (TDD - Telephonic Device for the Deaf) *********** Benda 10/9/03 /sb www vbgov com December 9, 2003 I. CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS - Conference Room - 1:00 PM A. RETAIL STUDY SURVEY John Melaniphy, Consultant B. VOLUNTEER COUNCIL ANNUAL REPORT Mary Russo, Volunteer Coordinator C. HEALTH CARE ISSUES ADVISORY GROUP Larry Spencer, Assistant City Attorney II. CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION A. CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION VISIT re REVISED AICUZ REGULATIONS B. PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD Proposed Changes to Composition III. REVIEW OF AGENDA ITEMS IV. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS V. INFORMAL SESSION - Conference Room - 4:OOPM A CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf B ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL C RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION VI. FORMAL SESSION - Council Chamber - 6:OOPM A CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf B. INVOCATION: Reverend Joe Warren Abundant Harvest Church C PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA D. ELECTRONIC ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL E. CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION F. MINUTES I. INFORMAL AND FORMAL SESSIONS December 2, 2003 G. AGENDA FOR FORMAL SESSION N5 OF OUR fVAS�O �P�Allt#tAn CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL WHEREAS: The Virginia Beach City Council convened into CLOSED SESSION, pursuant to the affirmative vote recorded here and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and, WHEREAS: Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the governing body that such Closed Session was conducted in conformity with Virginia Law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Virginia Beach City Council hereby certifies that, to the best of each member's knowledge, (a) only public business matters lawfully exempted from Open Meeting requirements by Virginia Law were discussed in Closed Session to which this certification resolution applies, and, (b) only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening this Closed Session were heard, discussed or considered by Virginia Beach City Council. H. PRESENTATION I GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION (GFOA) AWARD Department of Management Services Government Finance Officers Association 203 North LaSalle Street, Slate 2700 Chicago, Illinois 60601-1210 312 977 9700 fax 312 977 4806 L�1 r�L Ji �f7F J�! i �ei Ali ii �7 ER C -OF .. November 24, 2003 Mr. Jim Spore City Manager City of Virginia Beach City Hall Building 2401 Courthouse Drive Virginia Beach, Virginia 23456 Dear Mr. Spore: I am pleased to notify you that City of Virginia Beach, Virginia has received the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for the current fiscal year from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). This award is the highest form of recognition in governmental budgeting and represents a significant achievement by your organization When a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award is granted to an entity, a Certificate of Recognition for Budget Presentation is also presented to the individual or department designated as being primarily responsible for its having achieved the award This has been presented to. Department of Management Services We hope you will arrange for a formal public presentation of the award, and that appropriate publicity will be given to this notable achievement A press release is enclosed for your use. We appreciate your participation in GFOA's Budget Awards Program. Through your example, we hope that other entities will be encouraged to achieve excellence in budgeting. Sincerely, Stephen J Gauthier, Director Technical Services Center Enclosure www gfoa org PUBLIC HEARING EXCESS PROPERTY at North Landing Road and Princess Anne Road CONSENT AGENDA THE SEACU'A SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 20013 PUBLIC HEARING SALE OF CITY PROPERTY The Virginia Beach City Council will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on the disposition and sale of 0 76± acre (approximately 66' x 501') of undeveloped city property to Kellam & Eaton, Inc , which property is currently part of a 10 58± -acre linear parcel known as GPIN '2403-38-2805-0000 and ;s located near the intersection of North Landing Road and Princess Anne Road The hearing will be held Tues- day, December 9, 2003 at 6 00 p m , in the Council Chambers of the City Hall Building (Building #1) at the Virginia Beach Municipal Center, Virginia Beach, Virginia The parcel is currently leased by Kellam & Eaton, Inc for parking at its hardware store The purpose of this hear- ing will be to obtain public input to determine whether this property should be declared "Excess of the City's needs" and conveyed to Kellam & Eaton, Inc If you are physically disabled or visually impaired and need assis- tance at this meeting, please call the CITY CLERK'S OFFICE at 427-4303, Hearing impaired, call TDD only 427-4305 (TDD - Tele- phone Device for the Deaf) Any questions concerning this matter should be directed to the Office of Real Estate, Building #2, Room 392, at the Virginia Beach Mun;cr pal Center The Real Estate Office telephone number is (757)427.4161 Ruth Hodges Smith, MMCA City Clerk Beacon November 30. 2003 10880341 K. RESOLUTIONS 1. Resolution concurring with issuance by the Industrial Development Authority of Mathews County, re a Revenue Bond not to exceed $5,000,000 for the UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C. at Witchduck and Grayson Roads. 2 Resolution referring to the Planning Commission proposed amendments to § 201 of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO), re the parking of motor vehicles on certain portions of residential lots. 3. Resolution to AMEND the revised recommendations of the Council Committee eliminating Virginia Beach residency as a necessity for the citizen appointments to Boards and Commissions. ►r�L1�8F„t1'. z 0 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Resolution concurring with the issuance by the Industrial Development Authority of Mathews County, Virginia of Revenue Bonds in an amount not to exceed $5,000,000 (UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C.) Series 2003 MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: The City of Virginia Beach Development Authority has considered the request of UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C. a Virginia non -stock, non-profit corporation, for the issuance by the Industrial Development Authority of Mathews County, Virginia, of its revenue bond in an amount not to exceed $5,000,000 to assist UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C. in financing a campus complex to be located at the intersection of Witchduck and Grayson Roads in Virginia Beach, Virginia to provide facilities for educational, social and recreational activities, including an approximately 126,000 square foot two-story building and outdoor recreational facilities. The facilities will be owned by UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C. and used by Tidewater Jewish Foundation, the Hebrew Academy of Tidewater, Jewish Family Services of Tidewater, the Jewish Community Center of Southampton Roads and the United Jewish Federation of Tidewater. The proceeds of the bond will also finance the cost of issuing the bond. ■ ■ Considerations: The matter comes before Council for its approval pursuant to § 15.2-4905 of the Code of Virginia which requires the City Council to concur with the issuance of the bond by the Industrial Development Authority of Mathews County, Virginia. ■ Public Information: The request was duly advertised on November 20, 2003 for public hearing before the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority, which has adopted a Resolution recommending that the City Council approve the issuance of the bonds. ■ Alternatives: Not Approve ■ Recommendations: ■ Approval ■ Attachments: IDP Submission to Council Location Map Resolution for City of Virginia Beach Affidavit and Notice of Public Hearing Record of Public Hearing Development Authority's Resolution Disclosure Statement Authority's Statement Fiscal Impact Statement Summary Sheet Letter from Department of Economic Development dated November 20, 2003 Resolution of Industrial Development Authority of Mathews County, VA APPROVAL Submitting Department/Agency:' Development Authority Vanessa T. Valldejuli of Counsel City Manager:&,-�i F \Data\ATY\Forms\D LAUTH\BOND\WORK\da1561 agd A RESOLUTION CONCURRING WITH THE ISSUANCE BY THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF MATHEWS COUNTY, VIRGINIA, OF A REVENUE BOND IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $5,000,000 FOR THE UJFT COMMUNITY CAMPUS, L.L.C. WHEREAS, there has been described to the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority (the "VBDA") the plans of UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C., a Virginia non -stock, non-profit corporation (the "Company") the principal business address of which is 5041 Corporate Woods Drive, Suite 150, Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462, for the issuance by the Industrial Development Authority of Mathews County, Virginia (the "Mathews Authority"), of its revenue bond in an amount not to exceed $55000,000 to assist the Company in financing a campus complex to be located on an approximately 20 acre parcel east of the intersection of Witchduck and Grayson Roads in Virginia Beach, Virginia, to provide facilities for educational, social and recreational activities, including an approximately 126,000 square foot two-story building and outdoor recreational facilities to be owned by the Company (the "Project"), and used by the Tidewater Jewish Foundation, the Hebrew Academy of Tidewater, Jewish Family Services of Tidewater, the Jewish Community Center of Southampton Roads and the United Jewish Federation of Tidewater The proceeds of the bond will also finance the cost of issuing the bond; and WHEREAS, the above facilities will be owned by the Company and will be located in Virginia Beach, Virginia; and WHEREAS, a public hearing with respect to the bond as required by Virginia law and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), was held by the VBDA on November 20, 2003, and WHEREAS, the Mathews Authority also held a public hearing with respect to its bond on October 22, 2003, and adopted an approving resolution (the "Mathews Authority Resolution") with respect to the bond on that date; and WHEREAS, the VBDA has adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach (the "Council") concur with the Mathews Authority Resolution; and WHEREAS, § 15.2-4905 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended (the "Virginia Code"), provides that the Council must concur with the adoption of the Mathews Authority Resolution prior to the issuance of the bond; and WHEREAS, the Code, provides that the highest elected governmental officials of the governmental unit having jurisdiction over the area in which any facility financed with the proceeds of a private activity bond is located shall approve the issuance of such bond; and WHEREAS, the property is located in the City of Virginia Beach and the members of the Council constitute the highest elected governmental officials of the City of Virginia Beach; and WHEREAS, a copy of the Mathews Authority Resolution, the VBDA's resolution and a statement in the form prescribed by § 15.2-4907 of the Virginia Code have been filed with the Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH: 1. The Council concurs with the adoption of the Mathews Authority Resolution and approves the issuance of its bond by the Mathews Authority to the extent required by the Code and § 15.2-4905 of the Virginia Code 2. The concurrence with the Mathews Authority Resolution, and the approval of the issuance of the bond, as required by the Code and § 15.2-4906 of Virginia Code, does not constitute an endorsement to a prospective purchaser of the bond of the creditworthiness of the Company and the bond shall provide that the City of Virginia Beach shall not be obligated to pay the bond or the interest thereon or other costs incident thereto and neither the faith or credit nor the taxing power of the Commonwealth of Virginia or the City of Virginia Beach shall be pledged thereto. 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the day of 92003. R-1 CA9045 11/26/03 F \Data\ATY\Forms\DEVAUTH\BOND\WORK\ca9045 res doc 'V�7 a t t � V'Mf,..• 7 `s'- r VIRGINIA BEACH November 20, 2003 The Honorable Meyera E. Oberndorf, Mayor Members of City Council Municipal Center Virginia Beach, VA 23456 Virginia Beach Development Authonty 222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 1000 Virginia Beach, VA 23462 (757)437-6464 FAX (757) 499-9894 Website www vbgov corn Re: UJFT Community Campus, L.L. C. Project, Series 2003 Industrial Development Revenue Bonds Dear Mayor Oberndorf and Members of City Council: We submit the following in connection with project UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C. located at Witchduck and Grayson Roads in the City Virginia Beach, Virginia. (1) Evidence of publication of the notice of hearing is attached as Exhibit A, and a summary of the statements made at the public hearing is attached as Exhibit B. The City of Virginia Beach Development Authority's (the "Authority") resolution recommending Council's approval is attached as Exhibit C. (2) The Disclosure Statement is attached as Exhibit D (3) The statement of the Authority's reasons for its approval as a benefit for the City of Virginia Beach and its recommendation that City Council approve the concurrence of the bonds described above is attached as Exhibit E (4) The Fiscal Impact Statement is attached as Exhibit F. (5) Attached as Exhibit G is a summary sheet setting forth the type of issue, and identifying the Project and the principals. (6) Attached as Exhibit H is a letter from the appropriate City department commenting on the Project. Very truly yours, RGJ/VTV/rab Enclosures PROJECT NAME PROJECT LOCATION: TYPE OF PROJECT UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C. Revenue Bond Intersection of Witchduck and Grayson Roads. Virginia Beach, VA Facilities for educational, social and recreational activities EXHIBIT A THE VIRGINIAN -PILOT NORFOLK, VIRGINIA AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION The Virginian-Pilot --------------------------------------------------+--------------------------- KAUFMAN & CANOLES, P.C. 150 W MAIN ST NORFOLK VA 23510 REFERENCE: 10236406 836191v3 10820060 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEA State of Virginia City of Norfolk This day, D. Johnson personally appeared before mel and after being duly sworn, made oath that: I 1) She is affidavit clerk of The Virginian -Pilot, a newspaper published by Landmark Communications Inc., in the cities of Norfolk, Portsmouth, Chesapeake, Suffolk, and Virginia Beach, Common- wealth of Virginia and in the state of North Carolina 2)That the advertisement hereto annexed has been published in said newspaper on the date stated. PUBLISHED ON: 11/06 11/13 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING x0 BE HELD B! THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR THE BENEFIT OF UJFT COMMUNITY CAMPUS, L LC Notice is hereby given that the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority (the Virginia Beach Authority), whose address is 222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 1000, Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462 will hold a public hearing on the plan of financing of UJFT Communrty Campus, LLC , a Virginia non -stock, noir-profit corporation (the Company), the principal business address of which is 5041 Corporate Woods Drive, Suite 150, Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462, for the issuance by the Industnal Development Authority of Mathews County, Virginia (the Mathews Authority) of its revenue bond in an amount not to exceed $5,000,000 to assist the Company in financing a campus complex to be located on an approximately 20 acre parcel east of the intersection of Witchduck and Grayson Roads in Virginia Beach, Virginia, and near Virginia Beach Free Will Baptist Church, to provide facilities for educa- tional, ducestional, social and recreational activities, including an approximately 126,000 square foot two-story budding and outdoor recreational facili- ties to be owned by the Company (the Project), and used by the Tide- water Jewish Foundation, the Hebrew Academy of Tidewater, Jewish Family Services of Tidewater, the Jewish Community Center of Southampton Roads and the United Jewish Federation of Tidewater The proceeds of the bonds will also finance the cost of issuing the bonds The public heanng, which may be continued or adjourned, will be held at 2 00 p m on November 20, 2003 before the Virginia Beach Authority at its offices located at 222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 1000, Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462 Any person interested in the issuance of the bonds should appear and be heard Any person who is disabled and will require an accommodation in order to partici- pate in the public hearing may call the Virginia Beach Authority at 431-6464 Please place such call at least three (3) days in advance of the meeting and public hearing The bonds will not constitute a debt or pledge of the faith and credit of the Commonwealth of Virginia or any political subdivision thereof, including the Virginia Beach Authority Neither the Commonwealth of Virginia nor any political subdivision thereof, including the Virginia Beach Authority, Shall be obligated to pay the bonds, or the interest thereon, or other costs incident thereto, except from the revenues and monies pledged therefor, and neither the faith and credit nor the taxing power of the Commonwealth of Vir- ginia nor arty political subdivision thereof, including the Virginia Beach Authority, will be pledged to the payment of the principal of or interest on such bonds or other costs incident thereto CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITI VP November 6 and November 13 2003 10820060 TOTAL COST: 662.69 AD SPACE: 94 LINE FILED ON: 11/14/03;1 ,r i t, -------------- ----------------------------- Legal +- - - Legal Affiant:_ - i1 f Sub6pribe 2thh' d s to before in my c ty and state on the day and year afore id Notary: M�commission expires January 31, 2004 EXHIBIT B NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD BY THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR THE BENEFIT OF UJFT COMMUNITY CAMPUS, L.L.C. Notice is hereby given that the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority (the Virginia Beach Authority), whose address is 222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 1000, Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462, will hold a public hearing on the plan of financing of UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C., a Virginia non -stock, non-profit corporation (the Company), the principal business address of which is 5041 Corporate Woods Drive, Suite 150, Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462, for the issuance by the Industrial Development Authority of Mathews County, Virginia (the Mathews Authority) of its revenue bond in an amount not to exceed $5,000,000 to assist the Company in financing a campus complex to be located on an approximately 20 acre parcel east of the intersection of Witchduck and Grayson Roads in Virginia Beach, Virginia, and near Virginia Beach Free Will Baptist Church, to provide facilities for educational, social and recreational activities, including an approximately 126,000 square foot two-story building and outdoor recreational facilities to be owned by the Company (the Project), and used by the Tidewater Jewish Foundation, the Hebrew Academy of Tidewater, Jewish Family Services of Tidewater, the Jewish Community Center of Southampton Roads and the United Jewish Federation of Tidewater. The proceeds of the bonds will also finance the cost of issuing the bonds. The public hearing, which may be continued or adjourned, will be held at 2:00 p.m. on November 20, 2003, before the Virginia Beach Authority at its offices located at 222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 1000, Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462. Any person interested in the issuance of the bonds should appear and be heard. Any person who is disabled and will require an accommodation in order to participate in the public hearing may call the Virginia Beach Authority at 437-6464. Please place such call at least three (3) days in advance of the meeting and public hearing. The bonds will not constitute a debt or pledge of the faith and credit of the Commonwealth of Virginia or any political subdivision thereof, including the Virginia Beach Authority. Neither the Commonwealth of Virginia nor any political subdivision thereof, including the Virginia Beach Authority, shall be obligated to pay the bonds, or the interest thereon, or other costs incident thereto, except from the revenues and monies pledged therefor, and neither the faith and credit nor the taxing power of the Commonwealth of Virginia nor any political subdivision thereof, including the Virginia Beach Authority, will be pledged to the payment of the principal of or interest on such bonds or other costs incident thereto. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY To be published in The Virginian Pilot on Thursday, November 6, 2003, and Thursday, November 13, 2003 #868148 v1 EXHIBIT C CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY RECORD OF PUBLIC HEARING (UJFT COMMUNITY CAMPUS, L.L C. REVENUE BOND) At 2:00 p.m. on November 20, 2003, the Chairman of the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority (the "Authority") announced the commencement of a public hearing on the request of UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C., a Virginia non -stock corporation ("UJFT"), and that a notice of public hearing was published once a week for two consecutive weeks in The Virginian -Pilot, the second publication being not less than six (6) days nor more than twenty-one (21) days prior to the hearing. The Chairman indicated that a copy of the notice and a certificate of publication of such notice have been or will be filed with the records of the Authority and will be provided to the Clerk of the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach. The following individual appeared and addressed the Authority: Mr. George Consolvo appeared on behalf of UJFT. Mr. Consolvo described the revenue bond of UJFT which is utilized to finance the construction of a campus complex to be located on an approximately 20 acre parcel east of the intersection of Witchduck and Grayson Roads in Virginia Beach, Virginia, to provide facilities for educational, social and recreational activities, including an approximately 126,000 square foot two-story building and outdoor recreational facilities to be owned by the UJFT, and used by the Tidewater Jewish Foundation, the Hebrew Academy of Tidewater, Jewish Family Services of Tidewater, the Jewish Community Center of Southampton Roads and the United Jewish Federation of Tidewater. Mr. Consolvo further added that it is necessary under federal and Virginia law that the Authority hold a public hearing and that the issuance of the Bond by the Industrial Development Authority of Mathews County, Virginia, be approved by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach. Mr. Consolvo closed his remarks by noting that the presence of the campus complex will enhance educational, social and recreational activities in Virginia Beach. The Authority then adopted a resolution (a) recommending that the Council of the City of Virginia Beach approve the issuance of the Bond in an amount up to $5,000,000, (b) directing the transmission of a Fiscal Impact Statement with respect to the Bond to the Council of the City of Virginia Beach and (c) requesting that its recommendation be received at the next regular or special meeting at which this matter can be properly placed on the Council's agenda for hearing. #868149 v1 EXHIBIT D RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WHEREAS, there has been described to the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority (the Authority) the plans of UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C., a Virginia non -stock, non-profit corporation (the Company) the principal business address of which is 5041 Corporate Woods Drive, Suite 150, Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462, for the issuance by the Industrial Development Authority of Mathews County, Virginia (the Mathews Authority), of its revenue bond in an amount not to exceed $5,000,000, to assist the Company in financing a campus complex to be located on an approximately 20 acre parcel east of the intersection of Witchduck and Grayson Roads in Virginia Beach, Virginia, to provide facilities for educational, social and recreational activities, including an approximately 126,000 square foot two-story building and outdoor recreational facilities to be owned by the Company (the Project), and used by the Tidewater Jewish Foundation, the Hebrew Academy of Tidewater, Jewish Family Services of Tidewater, the Jewish Community Center of Southampton Roads and the United Jewish Federation of Tidewater. The proceeds of the bond will also finance the cost of issuing the bond; and WHEREAS, the above facilities will be owned by the Company and will be located in Virginia Beach, Virginia; and WHEREAS, a public hearing with respect to the bond as required by Virginia law and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code), was held by the Authority on November 20, 2003; WHEREAS, the Mathews Authority also held a public hearing with respect to its bond on October 22, 2003, and adopted an approving resolution (the Authority Resolution) with respect to the bond on that date; and WHEREAS, the Company has elected to proceed with a plan of finance pursuant to which the bond will be privately placed with Bank of America, N.A. (the Lender), for its own account and for investment purposes; and WHEREAS, the Company in its appearance before the Authority has described the debt service cost savings relating to the issuance of the bond as a qualified tax-exempt obligation within the meaning of §265(b)(3) of the Code and the social, educational, recreational and other benefits to the City of Virginia Beach to be derived from the issuance of the bond to finance the Project, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY: 1. It is hereby found and determined that the issuance of the bond will benefit the inhabitants of the City of Virginia Beach and promote their safety, health, welfare, convenience and prosperity. 2. To assist the Company, the Authority hereby recommends that the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia (the Council), concur with the Approving Resolution, the form of which has been presented at this meeting, as required by § 15.2-4905 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended (the Virginia Code), and hereby directs the Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Authority to submit to the Council the statement in the form prescribed by §15.2-4907 of the Virginia Code, a reasonably detailed summary of the comments expressed at the public hearing held by the Authority pursuant to § 15.2-4906 of the Virginia Code, and a copy of this resolution 3. All costs and expenses in connection with the financing plan shall be paid from the proceeds of the bond to the extent permitted by law or from funds of the Company and the Authority shall have no responsibility therefor. 4. All acts of the officers of the Authority which are in conformity with the purposes and intent of this resolution and in furtherance of the issuance and sale of the bond are hereby approved and confirmed. 5. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. The undersigned hereby certifies that the above resolution was duly adopted by a roll call vote of the commissioners of the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority at a meeting duly called and held on November 20, 2003, and that such resolution is in full force and effect on the date hereof. Dated: 40Y fl 312004 #868123 vl Secretary, City of Virginia ach Development Authority 2 EXHIB IT E - DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Date: November 20, 2003 Applicant's Name(s): UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C. All Owners (if different from applicant): N/A Type of Application: Rezoning: From To Conditional Use Permit: Street Closure: Subdivision Variance: Other: Revenue Bond issued through the Industrial Development Authority of Mathews County, Virginia The following is to be completed by or for the Applicant: 1. If the applicant is a CORPORATION, list all the officers of the Corporation: See attached schedule. 2. If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM or other Unincorporated Organization, list all members or partners in the organization: N/A The following is to be completed by or for the Owner (if different from the applicant) 1. If the Owner is a CORPORATION, list all the officers of the Corporation: N/A 2. If the Owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM or other Unincorporated Organization, list all members or partners in the organization: N/A UJFT COMMUNITY CAMPUS, L.L.C. By: _ 44j -1V Its: BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS OF UJFT COMMUNITY CAMPUS, L.L.C. Robert O. Copeland, Manager Robert H. Josephberg, Manager Ron Kramer, Manager Philip S. Rovner, Secretary Tidewater Jewish Foundation, Inc. - Single Member #868145 v1 Schedule to Disclosure Statement VIRGINIA BEI�,LCH EXHIBIT F Virginia Beach Development Authonty 222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 1000 Virginia Beach, VA 23462 (757)437-6464 FAX (757) 499-9894 Website www vbgov corn INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF MATHEWS COUNTY, VA UJFT COMMUNITY CAMPUS, L.L.0 REVENUE BOND The Authority recommends approval of the captioned financing. The financing will benefit the citizens of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, by providing improved educational social and recreational facilities which promotes the health and welfare of the City's Citizens. EXHIBIT U FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY The undersigned applicant, in order to permit the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority submission of the following uiformation in compliance with Section 15 2-4907 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, states Name of applicant UJFT Community Campus, L L.C. Facility Located in Virginia Beach, Virginia 1. Maxunum amount of financing sought 2. Estimated taxable value of facility's real property to be constructed in the locality 3 Estimated real property tax per year using present tax rates 4 Estimated personal property tax per year using present tax rates 5 Estimated merchant's capital tax per year using present tax rates 6 a. Estimated dollar value per year of goods that will be purchased from Virginia companies within the locality b Estimated dollar value per year of goods that will be purchased from non -Virginia companies within the locality C Estimated dollar value per year of services that will be purchased from Virginia companies within the locality d Estimated dollar value per year of services that will be purchased from non-Virguna companies within the locality 7 Estimated number of regular employees on year round basis 8 Average annual salary per employee Dated. November 20, 2003 #868144 v1 $5,000,000 23,000,000 -0- -0- -0- 300,000 100,000 100,000 -0- 120 20,750 UJFT COMMUNITY CAMPUS, L.L C. By Y, "'v1 iv Authorized Representative CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By Ch T EXHIBIT H SUMMARY SHEET CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CONCURRENCE WITH INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF MATHEWS COUNTY, VIRGINIA UJFT COMMUNITY CAMPUS, L L.C. REVENUE BONDS 1. PROJECT NAME: 2. LOCATION: 3. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: 4. AMOUNT OF BOND ISSUE: 5. PRINCIPALS: 6. ZONING CLASSIFICATION: a Present zoning classification of the Property UJFT COMMUNITY CAMPUS, L.L.C. Witchduck and Grayson Roads Virginia Beach, VA Facilities for educational, social and recreational activities $5,000,000 See attached Schedule b. Is rezoning proposed: Yes No X C. If so, to what zoning classification? N/A BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS OF UJFT COMMUNITY CAMPUS, L.L.C. Robert O. Copeland, Manager Robert H. Josephberg, Manager Ron Kramer, Manager Philip S. Rovner, Secretary Tidewater Jewish Foundation, Inc. - Single Member #868146 v Schedule to Summary Sheet VIRGINIA BEUckCH Mr. Robert G. Jones Chairman Virginia Beach Development Authority 222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 1000 Virginia Beach, VA 23462 EXHIBIT I November 20, 2003 Viiginia Beach Development Authority 222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 1000 Virginia Beach, VA 23462 (757) 437-6464 FAX (757) 499-9894 Website www vbgov com Re: UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C. Industrial Development Revenue Bonds Dear Bob: It is the finding of the Department of Economic Development that the proposed issuance of $5,000,000 in revenue bonds to assist the company in financing a 126,000 sq. ft. two-story building and outdoor recreational facilities to be located east of the intersection of Witchduck and Grayson Roads in Virginia Beach will be in the public's best interest and benefit the citizens of Virginia Beach. This proposed project will increase annual employment, stimulate the local economy, increase the tax base, and provide educational, social and recreational facilities that will promote the health and welfare of the City's citizens. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have. Sincerely, Mark R. Wawner Project Development Manager MRW:lls EXHIBIT J RESOLUTION OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF MATHEWS COUNTY, VIRGINIA WHEREAS, there has been described to the Industrial Development Authority of Mathews County, Virginia (the Authority), the plans of the UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C. (the Company) for the issuance of the Authority's revenue bond (the Bond) in an amount not to exceed $5,000,000; and WHEREAS, the Company has elected to proceed with a plan of finance pursuant to which the Bond will be privately placed with a group of banks lead by Bank of America, N.A. (the Lender), for its own account and for investment purposes; and WHEREAS, the Company in its appearance before the Authority has described the debt service cost savings relating to the issuance of the Bond as a "qualified tax-exempt obligation" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code), and has represented that the Company is a corporation described in Section 501(c)(3) of the Code which is not organized and operated exclusively for religious purposes and which is exempt from federal income taxation pursuant to Section 501(a) of the Code; and WHEREAS, the Company in its appearance before the Authority has described the educational, health, recreational and other benefits to the City of Virginia Beach (the City) and the Commonwealth of Virginia to be derived from the issuance of the Bond and has requested the Authority to agree to issue the Bond under the Industrial Development and Revenue Bond Act, Chapter 49, Title 15.2, Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended (the Act), to assist the Company in permanently financing a campus complex to be located on an approximately 20 acre parcel east of the intersection of Witchduck and Grayson Roads in Virginia Beach, Virginia, to provide facilities for educational, social and recreational activities, including an approximately 126,000 square foot two-story building and outdoor recreational facilities to be owned by the Company (the "Project"), and used by the Tidewater Jewish Foundation, the Hebrew Academy of Tidewater, Jewish Family Services of Tidewater, the Jewish Community Center of Southampton Roads and the United Jewish Federation of Tidewater; and WHEREAS, the proceeds of the bond will also finance land acquisition and site preparation costs and the cost of issuing the bond; and WHEREAS, a public hearing has been held by the Authority as required by the Act and Section 147(f) of the Code on the date hereof; WHEREAS, there have been presented to this meeting the forms of the following documents and instruments which the Authority proposes to execute to cavy out the transactions described above: 15. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. The undersigned hereby certifies that the above resolution was duly adopted by roll call vote by a majority of the directors of the Industrial Development Authority of Mathews County, Virginia, at a meeting duly called and held on October 22, 2003, and that such resolution is in full force and effect on the date hereof. Dated: October 22, 2003 #868121 v1 Sec ary, Industrial Dt pment Authority of Mathews County, Virginia El RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE BY THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF MATHEWS, VIRGINIA OF A $5,0001,000 REVENUE BOND FOR THE UJFT COMMUNITY CAMPUS, L.L.C. WHEREAS, Chapter 49, Title 15.2, Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, authorizes the creation of the Industrial Development Authority of Mathews, Virginia (the Authority), and empowers the Authority to assist the UJFT Community Campus, L.L.C., a Virginia non -stock, non-profit corporation (the Company), by the issuance of a $5,000,000 revenue bond of the Authority (the Bond) to assist the Company in permanently financing a campus complex to be located on an approximately 20 acre parcel east of the intersection of Witchduck and Grayson Roads in Virginia Beach, Virginia, and near the Virginia Beach Free Will Baptist Church, to provide facilities for educational, social and recreational activities, including an approximately 126,000 square foot two-story building and outdoor recreational facilities to be owned by the Company (the "Project"), and used by the Tidewater Jewish Foundation, the Hebrew Academy of Tidewater, Jewish Family Services of Tidewater, the Jewish Community Center of Southampton Roads and the United Jewish Federation of Tidewater, and payment of a portion of the cost of issuing the Bond; and WHEREAS, the Company has its principal place of business at 5041 Corporate Woods Drive, Suite 150, Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462; and WHEREAS, Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code), requires approval by this Board of the issuance of any private activity bonds by the Authority after the Authority has held a public hearing to consider the issuance of such bonds as purchaser of the Bond of the proposed use of the proceeds of the Bond or the creditworthiness of the Company and, as required by Virginia law, the Bond shall provide that neither the Commonwealth of Virginia, Mathews County, Virginia, nor the Authority shall be obligated to pay the principal, or premium, if any, of the Bond or the interest thereon or other costs incident thereto except from the revenues and monies pledged therefor and neither the faith and credit nor the taxing power of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Mathews County, Virginia, or the Authority shall be pledged thereto. Section 4: - That this resolution shall be in effect from and after its adoption. Approved by the following roll call vote (list names of Board members): Ayes: I Nayes: Geneva L. Putt None Charles E. Ingram Kevin L. Mitchem Michael C. Rowe C. Gerald Sadler Absent: None A copy teste: ell #863155 v1 3 Abstentious: None CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: A Resolution Referring to the Planning Commission Proposed Amendments to Section 201 of the City Zoning Ordinance Pertaining to the Parking of Motor Vehicles on Certain Portions of Residential Lots MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: Current zoning regulations do not restrict the location in which automobiles may be parked on residential lots. Councilmembers McClanan and Wood have requested that a resolution referring to the Planning Commission proposed City Zoning Ordinance amendments be placed before the City Council. ■ Considerations: The proposed amendments would prohibit the parking of motor vehicles within required setbacks in front yards or side yards adjacent to streets on lots located in residential zoning districts, except within a garage, carport or other covered parking area or on a driveway. The resolution to be acted upon by the City Council refers the proposed amendments to the Planning Commission for a recommendation. ■ Public Information: The resolution is to be advertised only one time; the proposed amendments, however, would be advertised once per week for two successive weeks prior to the public hearings before both the Planning Commission and the City Council. ■ Attachments: Resolution and proposed amendments to CZO Section 201 Recommended Action: Submitting Department/Agency: Requested by Councilmembers McClanan and Wood City Manager: F.\Users\W Macali\W p\Ordres\lawnpark ing arf wpd 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Requested by Councilmembers Reba S. McClanan and James L. Wood A RESOLUTION REFERRING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 201 OF THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE, PERTAINING TO THE PARKING OF MOTOR VEHICLES ON CERTAIN PORTIONS OF RESIDENTIAL LOTS WHEREAS, the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice so require; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: There is hereby referred to the Planning Commission, for its consideration and recommendation, proposed amendments to Section 201 of the City Zoning Ordinance, pertaining to the parking of 13 motor vehicles on certain portions of residential lots. A true 14 copy of such proposed amendment is hereto attached. 15 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 16 Virginia, on the day of CA -9066 wmm\ordres\lawnparking.res December 2, 2003 R-1 Approved as to Legal Sufficiency: City Attorney's Office 2003. Requested by Councilmembers Reba S. McClanan and James L. Wood 1 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 201 OF THE CITY 2 ZONING ORDINANCE BY PROHIBITING THE PARKING OF 3 MOTOR VEHICLES ON CERTAIN PORTIONS OF 4 RESIDENTIAL LOTS 5 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA 6 BEACH, VIRGINIA: 7 That Section 201 of the City Zoning Ordinance be, and hereby 8 is, amended and reordained by the addition, to read as follows: 9 Sec. 201. Yards. 10 . . . . 11 (g) Parkina of Motor Vehicles on Certain Portions of 12 Residential Lots. 13 (1) It shall be unlawful to park or store, or to cause or 14 allow to be parked or stored, on any lot in a residential 15 zoninct district, any motor vehicle within a required 16 front yard setback or a required side yard setback 17 adjacent to a street except within a garage, carport or 18 other covered parking area or on a driveway. 19 (2 )_ For purposes of this subsection, the following 20 definitions shall apply: 21 (A) "Motor vehicle" shall be as defined in Section 21-2 22 of the City Code; and 23 (B) "Driveway" shall mean an improved surface directly 24 connecting a garage or other approved parking area 25 to a street or alley. 26 Any person violating this subsection shall be assessed a civil 27 penalty in the amount of one hundred dollars ($100.00) for the 28 initial summons and not more than one hundred and fifty dollars 29 ($150.00) for each additional summons. The assessment of a civil 30 penalty shall not preclude the institution of a civil action by the 31 zoning administrator pursuant to section 103(a) of this ordinance. 32 Where a civil penalty for the violation of this subsection has been 33 assessed, the provisions of Section 217(b) and (c) shall apply, 34 mutatis mutandis. 35 . . . . 36 COMMENT 37 The proposed amendment would prohibit the parking of motor vehicles in required front yards 38 and side yards adjacent to a street, except within a garage, carport or other covered parking area or 39 on a driveway. A violation would be punishable as a civil, not criminal, violation, pursuant to which 40 a civil penalty in the amount of $100 for a first violation and up to $150 for each subsequent violation 41 would be assessed. The procedures applicable to civil violations for sign violations set forth in Section 42 217 of the CZO would also apply to violations of this ordinance. They include, among other things, 43 the right to contest the assessment of a civil penalty in court. 44 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 45 Virginia, on this day of , 2003. CA -8774 wmm\ordres\lawnparkingordin.wpd R-3 May 13, 2003 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: A Resolution Amending the Revised Recommendations of the Citizens Committee on Boards and Commission MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: On February 11, 2003, City Council adopted the Revised Recommendations of the Citizens Committee on Boards and Commissions. One of the provisions of the Revised Recommendations imposed a residency requirement that would prohibit the appointment of persons who live outside of the City of Virginia Beach. ■ Considerations: This resolution proposes striking the residency requirement and would thereby give City Council greater flexibility to appoint any individual whom City Council concludes would make a positive contribution to the City through service on a board or commission. ■ Public Information: The resolution is to be advertised as a normal agenda item ■ Attachments: Ordinance Recommended Action: N/A Submitting Department/Agency: City Council City Manager: F •\Data\ATY\Ordm\NONCODE \residencyarfwpd Requested by Vice -Mayor Lewis R. Jones 1 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE REVISED 2 RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CITIZENS 3 COMMITTEE ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 4 WHEREAS, City Council appointed a Citizens Committee on Boards 5 and Commissions, with the goal of preparing recommendations 6 regarding all aspects of the City's boards and commissions; 7 WHEREAS, the Citizens Committee presented its recommendations 8 to City Council and incorporated the suggestions of City Council 9 into its Revised Recommendations; 10 WHEREAS, the City Council on February 11, 2003 adopted those 11 Revised Recommendations; 12 WHEREAS, one of the provisions contained in the Revised 13 Recommendations imposed a residency requirement that would prohibit 14 the appointment of persons who live outside of the City of Virginia 15 Beach; and 16 WHEREAS, many nonresidents of the City work in the City and 17 make positive contributions to the City; 18 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY 19 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 20 That the recommendation concerning residency is hereby amended 21 as follows: 22 Membership on each Board and Commission shall 23 reflect the geographic, gender, ethnic and 24 occupational diversity of the City. 25 _ s an -s sura-}- — r e S ±de-- -rY 26 V±rg±nia Beach. 27 28 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia 29 on the day of , 2003. CA -9068 Ordin/noncode/residencyres.wpd R-1 December 4, 2003 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: City Attorney's Office 2 L. ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance to AMEND §§ 35-139, 35-140, 35-143.1, 35-144, 35-162, 35-166, 35- 187, 35-188, 35-192, 35-252, 35-253, 35-258, 35-260 and ADD §§ 35-147, 35- 168, and 35-194 of the City Code re assessment and collection of admission, meal, lodging, short-term rental and telecommunication service taxes. 2. Ordinance to DECLARE EXCESS PROPERTY at the intersection of Princess Anne Road and North Landing Road: and: AUTHORIZE the City Manager to convey this property to Kellan & Eaton, Inc. as part of a PROPERTY EXCHANGE. (DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE) 3. Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE $442,943 from the U.S. Department of Justice to the Police FY 2003-2004 Operating Budget re internal affairs software and database development, training and project evaluation. 4. Ordinance to APPROPRIATE $380,000 anticipated revenue from the State to the Police FY 2003-2004 Operating Budget re extradition of prisoners. 5. Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE $49,991 from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to the Fire FY 2003-2004 operating budget re a part-time program manager and associated equipment to initiate a Medical Reserve Corps program. 6. Ordinances to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE cash payments in lieu of park reservation re "Park Playground Renovations": a. Dam Neck Court Subdivision $ 9,915 b. White Acres Subdivision $29,900 c Brinkley Estates Subdivision $20,000 d. Thoroughgood, Section 8, Part 4 Subdivision $24,000 7. Ordinance to APPROVE a Cooperative Agreement between the City Council and the School Board re provision of legal services to the Board by the Office of the City Attorney in FY 2004. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: An Ordinance to Amend the City Code Pertaining to the Assessment and Collection of Admission, Meal, Lodging, Short -Term Rental and Tele- communication Service Taxes MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: The City of Virginia Beach levies taxes on admissions, meals, lodging, short-term rentals and telecommunication services. Historically, the businesses collecting these taxes have remitted payments to the Commissioner of the Revenue. After reviewing the current processes for assessment, receipt and collection of these taxes, Vice -Mayor Jones and Councilmember McClanan issued a report on April 8, 2003, which recommended that a system be created "in which trustee taxes are received and collected by the City Treasurer, with the Commissioner of the Revenue having the responsibility of discovering, registering and auditing businesses responsible for trustee accounts." By resolution adopted April 22, 2003, the City Council adopted this report and directed that its recommendations be implemented. ■ Considerations: The proposed changes, if adopted, should simplify and improve the process by which taxes are assessed, received and collected. The relevant sections of the City Code are amended to provide that the Commissioner of the Revenue will discover, register and audit businesses responsible for collecting admission, meal, lodging, short-term rental and telecommunication service taxes. The City Code is further amended to provide that the Treasurer will receive payments of these taxes, and collect these taxes when necessary. The ordinance also contains various housekeeping measures, such as an update which reflects that non-payment of meal taxes is now considered embezzlement under state law (punishable as a felony if over $200.00 is involved), and the establishment of a new system to create estimated assessments for businesses that fail to report their sales and the amount of taxes due. ■ Recommendation: Approval ■ Attachment: Ordinance Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Chief Financial Officer, Steven T. Thompson City Manager: �, -L F \Data\ATY\Orden\NONCODE\treasuertaxcollect.arf wpd 1 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE PERTAINING 2 TO THE ASSESSMENT AND COLLECTION OF ADMISSION, 3 MEAL, LODGING, SHORT-TERM RENTAL AND 4 TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICE TAXES 5 SECTIONS AMENDED: §§ 35-139, 35-140, 35-143.1, 6 35-144, 35-162, 35-166, 35-187, 35-188, 35- 7 192, 35-252, 35-253, 35-258 AND 35-260 8 SECTIONS ADDED: 35-147, 35-168 AND 35-194 9 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA 10 BEACH, VIRGINIA: 11 That Sections 35-139, 35-140, 35-143.1, 35-144, 35-162, 35- 12 166, 35-187, 35-188, 35-192, 35-252, 25-253, 35-258 and 35-260 of 13 the City Code are hereby amended and reordained and Sections 35- 14 147, 35-168 and 35-194 are hereby added to read as follows: 15 ARTICLE VI. TAX ON FeReEE&SE eF FeeB NT RESTAURANTS MEALS 16 Sec. 35-139. Collection. 17 (a) Every person receiving any payment for a meal subject to 18 the tax levied under this article shall collect the amount of tax 19 imposed under this article from the purchaser on whom the same is 20 levied, or from the purchaser paying for such meal, at the time 21 payment for such meal, is made. The taxes so collected shall be 22 held in trust for the city by the person required to collect such 23 taxes until remitted as provided in this article. The wrongful and 24 fraudulent use of such collections other than remittance as 25 provided by this article constitutes embezzlement, as provided by 26 Code of Virginia § 58.1-3833. 27 (b) No blind person operating a vending stand or other 28 business enterprise under the jurisdiction of the Department of the 29 Visually Handicapped and located on property acquired and used by 30 the United States for any military purpose shall be required to 31 collect or remit such taxes. 32 COMMENT 33 The General Assembly amended Code of Virginia § 58.1-3833 to provide that failure to remit 34 meal taxes constitutes embezzlement, an offense punishable as a felony if the amount of the tax 35 exceeds $200. 36 Sec. 35-140. Reports and remittances generally. 37 (a) The person collecting any tax as provided in section 38 35-139 shall make out a report, upon such forms created by the 39 treasurer e-ftd that shall request all setting forth such information 40 as that the commissioner of the revenue and the treasurer may 41 rrescr±be a require, 42 and shall sign and 43 deliver such report to the city treasurer with a remittance of such 44 tax. Such reports and remittances shall be made on or before the 45 twentieth day of each month, covering the amount of tax collected 46 during the preceding month. 47 (b Late filing penalty 48 (1) If a report is not filed on or before the due date 49 set forth in subsection (a) above, there shall be added a penalty 50 in the amount of ten (10) percent of the tax assessable on such 51 return or ten dollars ($10.00), whichever is areater; provided, 2 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 however, that the Penalty shall in no case exceed the amount of the tax assessable. Such penalty shall not be assessed until the day after the report is due. Any such penalty, when assessed, shall become part of the tax. No penalty for failing to file a report shall be assessed if such failure was not the fault of the taxpayer or was the fault of the commissioner of the revenue. The commissioner of the revenue shall make determinations of fault relating to failure to file a report. c) The treasurer shall provide the commissioner of the revenue by the 15th of each month with copies of all reports submitted in the preceding month by persons required to collect the tax levied by this article. The new subsection (b) establishes a penalty for failing to file reports. Subsection (c) provides that copies of reports shall be provided to the Commissioner of the Revenue for audit purposes. Sec. 35-143.1. Willful failure to file returns or bo vay7'collect— or truthfully account for tax. (b) Any corporate or partnership officer as defined in this section, or any other person required to collect, account for, or pay over the tax imposed under this article, who willfully fails to collect or truthfully account for or pay over such tax, or who willfully evades, or attempts to evade such taxes 3 76 shall, in addition to any other penalties imposed by law, 77 be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. 78 . . . . 79 COMMENT 80 The General Assembly has provided that the failure to remit meal taxes constitutes 81 embezzlement, which, in most cases, will be a felony that the Commonwealth's Attorney will 82 prosecute. For this reason, the provisions of this subsection relating to paying over the tax are deleted. 83 The failure to report such taxes remains punishable as a misdemeanor. 84 Sec. 35-144. Procedure upon failure to collect-, report, etc. 85 (a) If any person, whose duty it is so to do, shall fail or 86 refuse to collect the tax imposed under this article and to make, 87 within the time provided in this article, the reports and 88 remittances mentioned in this article, the commissioner of the 89 revenue shall obtain 90 facts and information on whi necessary to base ____ create an 91 estimate of the tax due. Dts soon--zrsthe colLU _________ of b=aba--" 92 95 , Within ten days from the date the tax was 96 due, he shall proceed to determine and assess against such person 97 the tax and late filing penalty established at section 35-140 (b), 98 and shall notify such 99 person, by hand delivery, facsimile or certified mail sent: ttn L_- 100 , of the total amount of such tax and 4 101 penaltiesL and a copy of the assessment shall be delivered 102 simultaneously to the treasurer. jIthe total amount thereof shall 103 be payable within ten (-18) days frovt the dette of such nut±ce 104 immediately, and the treasurer shall proceed to collect same as 105 authorized by law. 106 (b) It shall be the duty of the commissioner of revenue to 107 ascertain the name of every person operating a food establishment 108 in the city, liable for the collection of the tax levied by this 109 article, who fails, refuses or neglects to collect such tax or to 110 make, within the time provided by this article, the reports or 111 remittances required by this article. The __-.-___tl_ 112 treasurer may apply for the issuance of a warrant or summons for 113 such person, or, in the case of violations of Code of Virginia § 114 58.1-3833, request the assistance of the Commonwealth's Attorney, 115 as provided by law. 116 (c) Any person issued an estimated assessment as described in 117 subsection (a), who is aaarieved by the assessment, may apply to 118 the commissioner of the revenue for correction as provided by Code 119 of Virginia § 58.1-3980. 120 COMMENT 121 The proposed changes in (a) require the Commissioner of the Revenue to create an assessment 122 within ten days if a business fails to report meals taxes that it has collected. Once created, the 123 Commissioner then transmits the assessment to the business and the Treasurer. 124 The change in (b) refers to changes in state law that make the failure to remit meal taxes a 125 felony. The responsibility for pursuing criminal prosecution is shifted to the Treasurer. The new 126 language in (c) makes clear that estimated assessments provide may be appealed by tax payers. 9 127 Sec. 35-147. Duties of commissioner of the revenue and city 128 treasurer. 129 _(a) The commissioner of the revenue shall be charged with 130 auditing the reports required by this article, ensuring that food 131 establishments are registered to collect the tax levied by this 132 article, and responding to all inquiries that may be made by 133 taxpayers or persons operating food establishments. 134 (b) The city treasurer shall be charged with the receipt and 135 collection of the taxes imposed and levied by this article, and 136 shall cause the same to be paid into the general treasury of the 137 city. 138 COMMENT 139 The proposed new section clearly sets out the general duties, under this Article, of the 140 Commissioner of the Revenue and the Treasurer. 141 ARTICLE VII. TAX ON TRANSIENTS OBTAINING LODGING 142 Sec. 35-162. Reports and remittances generally. 143 (a) The person collecting any tax as provided in section 144 35-139 shall make out a report, upon s=ch forms created by the 145 treasurer an -d that shall request all sett±ng forth such information 146 a -s that the commissioner of the revenue and the treasurer may 147 Prescribe a require, 148 and shall sign and 149 deliver such report to the city treasurer with a remittance of such 150 tax. Such reports and remittances shall be made on or before the M 151 twentieth day of each month, covering the amount of tax collected 152 during the preceding month. 153 (b) Late filing penalty. 154 (1) If a report is not filed on or before the due date 155 set forth in subsection (a) above, there shall be added a penalty 156 in the amount of ten (10) percent of the tax assessable on such 157 return or ten dollars ($10.00), whichever is greater; provided, 158 however, that the penalty shall in no case exceed the amount of the 159 tax assessable. Such penalty shall not be assessed until the day 160 after the report is due. Any such penalty, when assessed, shall 161 become part of the tax. 162 (2) No penalty for failing to file a report shall be 163 assessed if such failure was not the fault of the taxpayer or was 164 the fault of the commissioner of the revenue. The commissioner of 165 the revenue shall make determinations of fault relating to failure 166 to file a report. 167 (c) The treasurer shall provide the commissioner of the 168 revenue by the 15' of each month with copies of all reports 169 submitted in the precedina month by persons required to collect the 170 tax levied by this article. 171 COMMENT 172 This new subsection established a penalty for failing to file reports. It also provides for copies 173 of reports to be provided to the Commissioner of the Revenue for audit purposes. 7 174 Sec. 35-166. Procedure upon failure to collect report, etc. 175 (a) If any person, whose duty it is so to do, shall fail �r 176 to make, 177 within the time provided in this article, any report required by 178 this article, the commissioner of the revenue shall proceed in D 179 obtain facts and information on Wh± 180 necessary to bases create an estimate of the tax due. 181 �f.�1�rZ•7111aMM-1�� •�•� �.�•r vl�•-�•l�a->t .��•r�-1-��.1-1*�S��l-�*� _i��l� �•�R�i-�-� ��.��t��•fr ��•i-i�1-111 �1 1•lA��•l=r: .��l��R-��IC�_*►1►7�1�*l�t�J-�-1�•�•**��i9P+`�4EMEM 185 Within ten (10) days from the date the tax was due, he shall 186 proceed to determine and assess against such person the tax and the 187 late filing .penalty established at section 35-162 (b), 188 prov±deci for by th±s art±cie and shall notify such person, by 189 req±steredlhand delivery, facsimile or certified mail, sent to 190 , of the total amount of such tax and 191 penalties and a copy of the assessment shall be delivered 192 simultaneously to the treasurer. tThe total amount thereof shall 193 be payable wilnhin t:en (±E)) days front the date of Stich 194 immediately, and the treasurer shall proceed to collect same as 195 authorized by law. 196 (b) It shall be the duty of the commissioner of xevenne the 197 revenue to ascertain the name of every person operating a hotel in 198 the city, liable for the collection of the tax levied by this 199 article, who fails, refuses or neglects to collect such tax or 200 make, within the time provided by this article, the reports or 201 remittances required in this article. The + -+ - f ren --nue 202 treasurer may apply for the issuance of a 203 warrant or summons for such person in the manner provided by law_ 206 coart of the city. 207 _LcL Any person issued an estimated assessment as described in 208 subsection (a), who is aggrieved by the assessment, may apply to 209 the commissioner of the revenue for correction as provided by Code 210 of Virginia § 58.1-3980. 211 CON�IlIIVIENT 212 The proposed changes in (a) require the Commissioner of the Revenue to create an assessment 213 within ten days if a business fails to report meals taxes that it has collected. Once created, the 214 Commissioner then transmits the assessment to the business and the Treasurer. 215 The change in (b) provides for the Treasurer to apply to the magistrate for a summons or 216 warrant to be issued. Finally, the new subsection (c) makes clear that estimated assessments may be 217 appealed. 218 Sec. 35-168. Duties of commissioner of the revenue and city 219 treasurer. 220 (a) The commissioner of the revenue shall be charged with 221 auditing the reports required by this article, ensuring that 222 lodging places are registered to collect the tax levied by this e 223 article, and responding to all inquiries that may be made by 224 taxn)ayers or persons operating lodging places. 225 ,b) The city treasurer shall be charged with the receipt and 226 collection of the taxes imposed and levied by this article, and 227 shall cause the same to be paid into the general treasury of the 228 city. 229 COMMENT 230 The proposed new section clearly sets out the general duties, under this Article, of the 231 Commissioner of the Revenue and the Treasurer. 232 233 ARTICLE VIII. ADMISSIONS TAX 234 Sec. 35-187. Reports and remittances generally. 235 (a) The person collecting any tax as provided in section 236 35-186 shall make out a report, upon scch forms created by the 237 treasurer a� that shall request all sett±ng forth stch information 238 e -s that the commissioner of the revenue and the treasurer may 239 rrescr±be a require, 240 cu±lected and tem to be cu±lected and shall sign and 241 deliver such report to the k-orrmtrss______ of cit 242 treasurer with a remittance of such tax. Such reports and 243 remittances shall be made on or before the twentieth day of each 244 month, covering the amount of tax collected during the preceding 245 month. 246 (b) Any person uper..t±nq any place -Qf er1rtt:2Se!1rteTT1! U r- •-- - 10 249 Of ILLCL - ■ • -MINUM • • • t t ♦ t - t ■ t t t -- • • • t • 111 11111111111111 111 '111 WN-ALWIFIRMAt t --INt • • • �!llt��7lC ��tit,•L��■lli��■��ltl■•!i■l►=tlt��iti■•�i�t�l■*��li�t�ll��■*!*��i��!•1�IIltLI■!!�'y � �1��Il�t*� �R��=tl�ldtl�itw+li•��li��Illt1lt■)l��l�'�!!*�tll��!/lt��t■�= lll��t��1��Rs-lllti�� 255 are requiredr 256 (b) Late filing penalty. 257 (1) If a report is not filed on or before the due date 258 set forth in subsection (a) above, there shall be added a penalty 259 in the amount of ten (10) Percent of the tax assessable on such 260 return or ten dollars ($10.00), whichever is crreater; provided, 261 however, that the penalty shall in no case exceed the amount of the 262 tax assessable. Such penalty shall not be assessed until the day 263 after the report is due. Any such penalty, when assessed, shall 264 become part of the tax. 265 (2) No penalty for failing to file a report shall be 266 assessed if such failure was not the fault of the taxpayer or was 267 the fault of the commissioner of the revenue. The commissioner of 268 the revenue shall make determinations of fault relating to failure 269 to file a report. 270 (c) The treasurer shall provide the commissioner of the 271 revenue by the 15th of each month with copies of all reports Rohl 272 submitted in the preceding month by persons required to collect the 273 tax levied by this article. 274 (cd) If the remittance under this section is by check or money 275 order, such check or money order shall be payable to the city 276 treasurer. 277 COMMENT 278 The existing references to the Commissioner of the Revenue are replaced with the Treasurer 279 to reflect that reports and remittances will now be made to the Treasurer. The former subsection (b), 280 which permitted quarterly filings of admission tax, has not been used in the past and being deleted. 281 The new subsection (b) establishes a penalty for failing to file reports. Subsection (c) provides that 282 copies of reports shall be provided to the Commissioner of the Revenue for audit purposes. 283 Sec. 35-188. Reports, remittances and deposits by temporary or 284 transient places of amusement or entertainment. 285 (a) Whenever any place of amusement or entertainment of a 286 temporary or transitory nature makes an admission charge which is 287 subject to the tax levied by this article, or does not make such an 288 admission charge but does sell refreshments, services or 289 merchandise which is subject to the tax levied by this article, the 290 ,........______-_- of re _ -_--- treasurer may require the report and 291 remittance of the requisite tax to be made on the day following its 292 collection, or on the day following the conclusion of a series of 293 performances or exhibitions, or at such other reasonable time or 294 times as he shall determine. Failure to comply with any such 295 requirement of the ---Of =eVeTlue treasurer as to the 296 report and remittance of the tax so required shall be unlawful. 12 297 (b) Before any temporary or transient place of amusement or 298 entertainment mentioned in subsection (a) above shall begin 299 operation and before any license shall be issued therefor, if a 300 license is required, the person operating the same may be required 301 by the r - =___ __ of the _ _--___ __ treasurer to deposit w±th 302 a sum of money, to be estimated by the commissioner 303 of the revenue sufficient to cover the tax required to be collected 304 by such person under the provisions of this article, as security 305 for the collection and payment to the city of such tax. At the 306 conclusion of such temporary or transient operation in the city, 307 such person shall file with theonnYrisscn=_ of _ _ _ _____ treasurer 308 the report required by this article and pay such tax collected to 309 the city. Upon the filing of such report and the making of such 310 payment, the city treasurer shall refund such deposit. Should any 311 such person fail to file such report and pay such amount of tax 312 collected within five (5) days from the termination of the 313 operation of such amusement or entertainment, the commissioner of 314 revenue may thereupon assess such person with such tax at the 315 amount of such deposit and the city treasurer shall retain such 316 deposit in full payment of the tax collected by and due the city by 317 such person. 318 COMMENT 319 The section is amended to reflect that reports and remittances will now be made to the 320 Treasurer. 13 321 Sec. 35-192. Procedure upon failure to collect, report, etc., 322 taxes. 328 information on wh±7 323 (a) If any person, whose duty it is so to do, shall fail-crr 324 refuse to coHect tile taA& under the article and to make, 325 within the time provided in this article, any report and _ ____- _ _____ _ 326 required by this article, the commissioner of the revenue shall 327 proceed in such manner as he may deem best to obtain facts and 328 information on wh±7 necessary to base ____ create an estimate of 329 the tax due. l�rP 1a.1*��liw.�-.* .��!**t.��.11r�.mil•,.��f•�*1=��.z•*•��=�•ls�,•ls�..�...1�>.�=e�.�t��ti�J L�l�i��t��.�1�1.�.i.=�i�l��R 1�1�f*�s��:��.a��i��t�*�»�i!��sia�_ 1 ii��.4� _■ 333 , Within ten (10) days from the date the tax was due, he 334 shall proceed to determine and assess against such person the tax 335 and the late filing penalty established at section 35-187 (b) 336 and shall notify such 337 person, by registered hand -delivery, facsimile or certified mail, 338 of the total amount of such tax and penalties and a copy of the 339 assessment shall be delivered simultaneously to the treasurer. 340 tThe total amount thereof shall be payable within ten (±O) darnr 341 fr-Ulft HIM CiMte Of st2ch nutice immediately, and the treasurer shall 342 proceed to collect same as authorized by law. 343 (b) It shall be the duty of the commissioner of the revenue 344 to ascertain the name of every person operating a place of 345 amusement or entertainment in the city, liable for the collection 14 346 of the tax levied by this article, who fails, refuses or neglects 347 to collect the tax or to make, within the time provided by this 348 article, the reports or remittances required in this article. The 349 ___________ __ p_ of revenue treasurer may aT)ply 350 for the issuance of a warrant or summons for such person in the 351 manner provided by law 352 the genera± district court of the citry. 353 (c) Any person issued an estimated assessment as described in 354 subsection (a), who is aggrieved by the assessment, may apply to 355 the commissioner of the revenue for correction as provided by Code 356 of Virginia § 58.1-3980. 357 COMMENT 358 The proposed changes in (a) require the Commissioner of the Revenue to create an assessment 359 within ten days if a business fails to report meals taxes that it has collected. Once created, the 360 Commissioner then transmits the assessment to the business and the Treasurer. 361 The change in (b)recognizes that the Treasurer will be tasked with applying to the magistrate 362 for a summons or warrant to be issued in appropriate cases. Finally, the new subsection (c) makes 363 clear that estimated assessments may be appealed. 364 Sec. 35-194. Duties of commissioner of the revenue and city 365 treasurer. 366 (a) The commissioner of the revenue shall be charged with 367 auditing the reports required by this article, ensuring that 368 persons chargina for admissions to events are registered to 369 collect the tax levied by this article, and responding to all 370 inquiries that may be made by taxpayers or persons charging for 371 admissions to events. 15 372 (b) The city treasurer shall be charged with the receipt and 373 collection of the taxes imposed and levied by this article, and 374 shall cause the same to be paid into the general treasury of the 375 city. 376 COMMENT 377 The proposed new section clearly sets out the general duties, under this Article, of the 378 Commissioner of the Revenue and the Treasurer. 379 ARTICLE XII. SHORT-TERM RENTAL TAX 380 Sec. 35-252. Short-term rental tax. 381 . . . . 382 (b) Daily rental property defined. For purposes of this 383 section, "daily rental property" means all tangible personal 384 property held for rental and owned by a person engaged in the 385 short-term rental business, except trailers, as defined in section 386 tsection 46.2-100- of the Code of Virginia and other 387 tangible personal property required to be licensed or registered 388 with the department of motor vehicles, department of game and 389 inland fisheries, or the department of aviation. 390 . . . . 391 (e) Collection, return and remittance of tax. Every person 392 engaged in the short-term rental business shall collect the rental 393 tax from the lessee of the daily rental property at the time of the 394 rental. The lessor of the daily rental property shall transmit a 395 quarterly return to the - _ ____ treasurer, ME: 396 indicating the gross proceeds derived from the short-term rental 397 business and shall remit therewith the payment of such tax as is 398 due for the quarter. The return shall be created by the treasurer 399 and shall request all information that the commissioner of the 400 revenue and the treasurer may require. The quarterly returns and 401 payment of tax shall be filed with the ___LULL_________ of revenue 402 treasurer on or before the twentieth day of each of the months of 403 April, July, October and January, representing, respectively, the 404 gross proceeds and taxes collected during the preceding quarters 405 ending March 31, June 30, September 30 and December 31. The return 406 shall be upon such forms and setting forth such information as the 407 commissioner of revenue may require, showing the amount of gross 408 receipts and the tax required to be collected. The taxes required 409 to be collected under this article shall be deemed to be held in 410 trust by the person required to collect such taxes until remitted 411 as required in this article. 412 (f) Procedure upon failure to collect, report or remit taxes. 413 If any person, whose duty it is so to do, shall fail or refuse to 414 collect the tax imposed under this article and to make, within the 415 time provided in this article, the returns and remittances required 416 in this article, the commissioner of the revenue shall proceed in 417 SUCh RMITTe= etS he ILMY deelft beSt to obtain facts and information err 418 wh±ch necessary to base f _= create an estimate of the tax due. fs 419 S0011 CLIL) tile %_-%a.LLLLLL_L1S_L0!Te= Uf =eVet le hall procu=e SnCh facts arid 17 U. - .. - .. ... � �wZ�1=�.�.��l��l■�•��rt*!�•�•1=�.��r.�•c.�•J•��.,•t•w��1��.1.1��.��1.�1�_�.��:*�t�.i.�•1� 423 Within ten (10) days from the date the tax was due, he shall 424 proceed to determine and assess against such person the tax,— 425 penait7 and ±nterest provided for by th±s errtic±e and the late 426 filing penalty established in subsection (a) below, and shall 427 notify such person, by reg±stered hand -delivery, facsimile or 428 certified mail, sent to h±s ±ast known p±ace Of address,, of the 429 total amount of such tax,— and penalty and ______ __ _L and ____ __ tetl- 430 431 ofsucha copy of the assessment shall be delivered 432 simultaneously to the treasurer. in the event such taX _LS 1.10t Inetid 433 The total amount 434 thereof shall be payable immediately, and the treasurer shall 435 proceed to collect same - 436 of tiie eode of V±rq±nia as authorized by law. 437 (g) Failure or refusal to remit tax; 438 penalty. If any person, whose duty it is so to do, shall fail or 439 refuse to remit to the of revenue the tax required to 440 be collected and paid under this article within the time specified 441 in the article, there shall be added to such tax a penalty in the 442 amount of ten (10 ) percent of the tax past due or the sum of ten 443 dollars ($10.00), whichever is the greater. The assessment of such 18 444 penalty shall not be deemed a defense to any criminal prosecution 445 for failing to make any return or remittance as required in this 446 article. , � 7�r ��i� ��tat� __tom=��t��_tR��R��s��!1�sR��t��1��•L.�� • � I 448 and interest for failure to pay the tax assessed pursuant to this 449 article shall be assessed on the first day following the day such 450 quarterly installment payment is due. 451 (h) Late filing penalty 452 M- If a report is not filed on or before the due date 453 set forth in subsection (a) above, there shall be added a penalty 454 in the amount of ten (10) percent of the tax assessable on such 455 return or ten dollars ($10.00), whichever is greater; provided, 456 however, that the penalty shall in no case exceed the amount of the 457 tax assessable. Such penalty shall not be assessed until the day 458 after the report is due. Any such penalty, when assessed, shall 459 become part of the tax. 460 (2) No penalty for failing to file a report shall be 461 assessed if such failure was not the fault of the taxpayer or was 462 the fault of the commissioner of the revenue. The commissioner of 463 the report shall make determinations of fault relating to failure 464 to file a report. 465 (hi) Exclusions and exemptions. No tax shall be collected or 466 assessed on (i) rentals by the commonwealth, any political 467 subdivision of the commonwealth or the United States, or (ii) any 19 468 rental of durable medical equipment as defined in subdivision 22 of 469 section 58.1-608 of the Code of Virginia. Additionally, all 470 exemptions applicable in chapter 6 of title 58.1 of the Code of 471 Virginia (section 58.1-600 et seq.) shall apply mutatis mutandis to 472 the daily rental property tax. 473 (±j.) Renter's certificate of registration. Every person 474 engaging in the business of short-term rental of tangible personal 475 property shall file an application for a certificate of 476 registration with the commissioner of the revenue. The application 477 shall be on a form prescribed by the commissioner of revenue and 478 shall set forth the name under which the applicant intends to 479 operate the rental business, the location and such other 480 information as the commissioner may require. 481 Each applicant shall sign the application as owner of the rental 482 business. If the rental business is owned by an association, 483 partnership or corporation, the application shall be signed by a 484 member, partner, executive officer or other person specifically 485 authorized by the association, partnership or corporation to sign. 486 Upon approval of the application by the commissioner of the 487 revenue, a certificate of registration shall be issued. The 488 certificate shall be conspicuously displayed at all times at the 489 place of business for which it is issued. 20 490 The certificate is not assignable and shall be valid only for the 491 person in whose name it is issued and the place of business 492 designated. 493 (tk) Criminal penalties for violation of article. Any person 494 violating or failing to comply with any provision of this article 495 shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor. Provided however, if the 496 amount of tax due and unpaid for any quarterly installment exceeds 497 one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), any person failing to remit 498 payment when due shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. The 499 treasurer may apply for the issuance of a warrant or summons for 500 such person in the manner provided by law. 501 (1) Copies of reports; appeal of estimated assessment. (i) 502 the treasurer shall provide the commissioner of the revenue by the 503 15' of each month with copies of all reports submitted in the 504 preceding month by persons required to collect the tax levied by 505 this article, and (ii) any person issued an estimated assessment as 506 described in subsection (f), who is aggrieved by the assessment, 507 may apply to the commissioner of the revenue for correction as 508 provided by Code of Virginia § 58.1-3980. 509 (m) Duties of the commissioner of the revenue. The 510 commissioner of the revenue shall be charged with auditing the 511 reports required by this article, ensuring that short-term rental 512 businesses are registered to collect the tax levied by this 21 513 article, and responding to all inquiries that may be made by 514 taxpayers or rental businesses. 515 (n) Duties of the city treasurer. The city treasurer shall 516 be charged with the receipt and collection of the taxes imposed and 517 levied by this article, and shall cause the same to be paid into 518 the general treasury of the city. 519 COMMENT 520 The proposed changes in this section (g) provide that the reports and remittances go to the 521 Treasurer and (2) establish procedures for estimated assessments to be created and collected if reports 522 are not submitted. The interest provision is also removed, since interest has not been charged in the 523 past and the current computer system cannot calculate interest. The addition of (k) provides that the 524 Treasurer shall be responsible for pursuing criminal penalties for persons who refuse to remit taxes 525 they have collected. The new subsection (1) makes clear that estimated assessments may be appealed. 526 Finally, at (m) and (n), the general duties, under this Article, of the Commissioner of the Revenue and 527 the Treasurer are established. 528 ARTICLE XIII. LOCAL TELECOMMNICATION SERVICE TAXES 529 Sec. 35-258. Duty of service provider to collect, report and 530 remit; penalty and interest. 531 . . . . 532 (b) It shall be the duty of every service provider, in acting 533 as the tax collection medium or agency for the city, to collect 534 from each consumer, for the use of the city, the taxes imposed and 535 levied by this article at the time of collecting the purchase price 536 charged for the service. The taxes so collected during each 537 calendar month shall be reported and remitted by each service 538 provider to the k - )f Hie revenue treasurer on or before 539 the fifteenth day of the second calendar month thereafter. A+i- OW � , S��\��.�■f **i-i��=•�� .i�3��t�i-l��•L�1.�.,•�■�*L��R.JlUl��►��tl*l:.lf�-��l��t�•L�f*l■i- 543 . The required report shall be created by 544 the treasurer and request all information that may be required —±il 545 Stich may be prescribed by the commissioner of the revenue. 546 (c) Failure to report or remit the taxes so collected to t___ 547 Oft___ _ _ _ _____ on or before the due date set forth in 548 subsection (b) of this section shall result in a penalty of ten 549 (10) percent of the amount due or ten dollars ($10.00), whichever 550 is greater, which shall be added to the amount due; provided, 551 however, that the penalty shall not exceed the amount due. irr l.a��.11��C vet•��1.,1•��ll�tt■l*i��_[�1■��[ v�■lll��■!•-�.t��=��t- �a■l+�R• .1� 555i der. 556 (d) The treasurer shall provide the commissioner of the 557 revenue by the 15th of each month with copies of all reports 558 submitted in the preceding month by persons required to collect the 559 tax levied by this article. 560 COMMENT 561 In subsections (b) and (c), language referring to receipt of these taxes by the Commissioner of 562 the Revenue is amended to reflect that reports and remittances will be received by the Treasurer. The 563 interest provision is also removed, since interest has not been charged in the past and the current 564 computer system cannot calculate interest. Subsection (d) provides for copies of reports to be provided 565 to the Commissioner of the Revenue for audit purposes. 23 566 Sec. 35-260. Duties of commissioner of the revenue and city 567 treasurer. 568 (a) The commissioner of the revenue or his du±y anthorined 569 agents shall be charged with auditing the reports required by this 570 article, ensuring that service providers are registered to collect 571 the tax and levied by this article, 572 573 t=CLITSMitting t1jerrt to Hie c±ty treasti=er, and responding to all 574 inquiries that may be made by taxpayers or service providers. 575 (b) The city treasurer shall be charged with the receipt and 576 collection of the taxes levied by this article, after 577 578 Lil s _ _ __ -__ and shall 579 cause the same to be paid into the general treasury of the city. 580 COMMENT 581 This section is amended to reflect that tax reports and remittances will now be provided to the 582 Treasurer. 583 Sec. 35-263. Compensation for collection of E-911 tax. 584 Pursuant to section 58.1-3813.1 of the Code of Virginia, as 585 amended, whenever the tax imposed by section 35-254(d) of this 586 article is collected by the service provider acting as the tax 587 collection medium or agency for the city, such service provider 588 shall be allowed as compensation for the collection and remittance 589 of the tax three (3) percent of the amount of tax due and accounted 24 590 for. The service provider shall deduct this compensation from the 591 payments reported and remitted to the __ ____ __ _ _____ 592 treasurer in accordance with section 35-258(b). 593 CONMENT 594 The reference to the Commissioner of the Revenue is changed to reflect that reports and 595 remittances will go to the City Treasurer. 596 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: 597 That this Ordinance shall be effective on February 1, 2004. 598 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this day of , 2003. CA -8903 DATA/ORDIN/PROPOSED/35-139etalsord.wpd R13 - November 25, 2003 APPROVED CONTENTS: Chief Financial Officer 25 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: ZA � § � C'- -, �� City AttornqVs Office CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Excess City Property I North Landing Road and Princess Anne Road MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 NOTE: THIS MATTER IS TO BE CONSIDERED TOGETHER WITH ANOTHER ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA: THE APPLICATION FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FOR TWO PARCELS FROM B-1, B-2, AND AG -2 TO B-2 AND FROM B-2ToAG-2 AFFECTING PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF PRINCESS ANNE ROAD AND NORTH LANDING ROAD. ■ Background: David Kellam, President of Kellam & Eaton, Inc., proposes to acquire a portion of a 10.58 -acre strip of land owned by the City of Virginia Beach. This 66 -foot -wide strip of land is an abandoned railroad right of way, which runs eastward from the intersection of Princess Anne Road and North Landing Road to the Foxfire subdivision. Mr. Kellam wants to acquire 502 linear feet (approximately 0.76± acres) of this strip of land ( the "Proposed Excess Property) to incorporate it into a redevelopment plan for a pedestrian -friendly retail village, anchored by an Eckerd Drug store, to be constructed in the vicinity of the existing Kellam & Eaton Hardware Store (the "Redevelopment Plan"). In lieu of a cash payment for the Proposed Excess Property, Mr. Kellam has offered a property exchange. In exchange for the City quitclaiming its interest in the Proposed Excess Property, Mr. Kellam would convey to the City a 70± foot -wide and 520± foot -long public access easement (the "Public Access Easement) to be improved at the developer's expense with a pedestrian plaza and sidewalk improvements, and a variable -width drainage easement across the Kellam and Eaton, Inc. property. The Public Access Easement would connect the public right of way at the intersection of Princess Anne Road and North Landing Road with the remainder of the 10.58 -acre strip of land. The Redevelopment Plan will not be possible without this property exchange, because the Proposed Excess Property lies between two parcels of land owned by Kellam & Eaton, Inc. Kellam & Eaton, Inc. plans to retain ownership of its property and enter into a 70 -year lease with the developer, Berkshire -Hudson. Agenda Item Excess Property / Kellam & Eaton, Inc. Page 2 The Historical Review Board has reviewed and approved the Redevelopment Plan, after considering its architectural detail, site layout, landscaping, and overall compatibility with the Historic Courthouse Overlay District. Council has previously declared as excess and disposed of portions of this 66 -foot - wide strip of land. The City acquired the Proposed Excess Property in 1985 from the Commonwealth of Virginia and has not put it to any public use. Kellam & Eaton, Inc. has been leasing the area for parking for its hardware store since 1990. The Commonwealth of Virginia purchased the property in 1952 from Norfolk and Southern Railroad Co., when the railroad ended its Pungo railroad line. ■ Considerations: The Excess City Owned Real Property Committee and City staff reviewed the applicant's request and determined that the City has no need for the Proposed Excess Property. The Committee and staff have no objection to the City Council conveying the property to Kellam & Eaton, Inc. as part of a property exchange. ■ Public Information: Advertisement for public hearing as required by §15.2-1800 of the Code of Virginia and advertisement of City Council Agenda ■ Alternatives: Declare the Proposed Excess Property to be in excess of the City's needs and convey same to Kellam & Eaton, Inc. in exchange for the Public Access Easement, pedestrian access improvements and drainage easement, or retain ownership of the subject site ■ Recommendations: Staff recommends that Council adopt the ordinance and declare the Proposed Excess Property (0.76± acres) to be in excess of the City's needs and authorize the City Manager to convey same to Kellam & Eaton, Inc. under terms stated herein and pursuant to any other terms that the City Attorney's Office deems necessary to protect the City's interests in this property exchange. ■ Attachments: Ordinance, Summary of Terms, Location Map, and Plat Recommended Action: Approval of the ordinance Submitting Department/Age cy: P lic Works / Real Estate City Manager: 1 AN ORDINANCE DECLARING AS EXCESS 2 CERTAIN CITY -OWNED PROPERTY 3 LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF 4 PRINCESS ANNE ROAD AND NORTH 5 LANDING ROAD AND AUTHORIZING CITY 6 MANAGER TO DISPOSE OF SAME AS PART 7 OF A PROPERTY EXCHANGE 8 WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach acquired title to an abandoned 66- 9 foot -wide railroad right of way (the "Abandoned Railroad Property") in 1985 by Deed 10 recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in 11 Deed Book 2417, page 1540; and 12 WHEREAS, the City Council is of the opinion that a 502 -foot -long segment 13 of the Abandoned Railroad Property, as shown by the shaded area on the "Location Map 14 Showing Excess City Owned Property Adjacent to Princess Anne Road and North Landing 15 Road" attached hereto as Exhibit A, is in excess of the needs of the City of Virginia Beach; 16 WHEREAS, Kellam & Eaton, Inc., the owner of property adjacent to the 17 Abandoned Railroad Property, has proposed a property exchange, pursuant to which the 18 City would quitclaim its interest in the 502 -foot -long segment (approximately 0.76 acres) 19 to Kellam & Eaton, Inc. (the "Excess Property"), in exchange for dedication of a 70 -foot - 20 wide access easement, construction and maintenance of pedestrian plaza and sidewalk 21 improvements, and dedication of a drainage easement across Kellam & Eaton, Inc.'s 22 adjacent property. 23 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 24 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 25 1. That the Excess Property, containing approximately 0.76± acres, is 26 hereby declared to be in excess of the needs of the City and that the 27 City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a quitclaim deed 28 conveying the City's interest in said Excess Property to Kellam & 29 Eaton, Inc. 30 2. That the consideration for the conveyance of the Excess Property is 31 to be: (1) Kellam & Eaton, Inc. will dedicate to the City a 70 -foot -wide 32 pedestrian access easement over Kellam & Eaton, Inc.'s adjacent 33 property, which shall connect the public right of way of North Landing 34 Road and Princess Anne Road to the remainder of the 66 -foot -right 35 of way; (2) Kellam & Eaton, Inc. will dedicate to the City a drainage 36 easement of sufficient width to accommodate the relocation of 37 existing drainage pipes and maintenance of same; (3) Kellam & 38 Eaton, Inc. will construct at its expense pedestrian plaza and sidewalk 39 improvements within the public access easement; (4) Kellam & Eaton, 40 Inc. will relocate at its expense drainage facilities currently located in 41 the Excess Property area in a manner satisfactory to the City and (5) 42 any other terms or conditions determined by the City Attorney 43 necessary to protect the City's interests in the property exchange. 44 3. That the Excess Property shall be conveyed in accordance with the 45 attached Summary of Terms marked as Exhibit B, and such other 46 terms, conditions or modifications as may be satisfactory to the City 47 Attorney. 48 This ordinance shall be effective from the date of its adoption. 49 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the 50 day of , 2003. 51 CA -8998 52 PREPARED: December 3, 2003 PPROVED AS TO CONTENT C lic Works APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFIC ENCY Department of Law EXHIBIT A NORTH LANDING DGN M J S FKtrAKtu by r/w tNU �,Auu utr i vt-i vtstK n, Z.uus Exhibit B SUMMARY OF TERMS EXCHANGE OF EXCESS CITY PROPERTY ADJACENT TO KELLAM & EATON HARDWARE STORE LOCATED NEAR PRINCESS ANNE ROAD AND NORTH LANDING ROAD SELLER: City of Virginia Beach PURCHASER: Kellam & Eaton, Inc. ("Purchaser"), in conjunction with developer Berkshire -Hudson ("Developer") PROPERTY: Approximately 33,066± SF (0.76± Acre) SALE PRICE: None. The City will quitclaim its interest in the Excess Property in exchange for a public access easement with pedestrian plaza and sidewalk improvements at Kellam & Eaton, Inc.'s expense, and a drainage easement sufficient to accommodate replacement and maintenance of existing drainage facilities. CONDITIONS OF SALE: • Purchaser will resubdivide and eliminate all interior lot lines. • Purchaser and/or Developer are responsible for (1) designing and constructing adequately sized replacement drainage facilities in accordance with City standards; and (2) dedicating a drainage easement of sufficient dimensions to accommodate new drainage facilities and maintenance of and access to same. In the event the City must excavate around the new drainage facilities for maintenance, the City will make repairs to the facilities and backfill around the facilities up to ground surface but will not be responsible for replacing landscaping, pavers, signs, etc. • Purchaser will dedicate 70 -foot -wide public access easement over brick pavement and pedestrian seating area from Princess Anne Road and North Landing Road connecting the residual area to the east. • The City reserves the right to establish easements for drainage and utilities under, over, across and through the Purchaser's development site. • Purchaser and/or Developer shall develop pedestrian connectivity and plaza improvements in accordance with the preliminary site plan approved by City Council with the rezoning application. Purchaser and/or Developer shall be responsible for maintaining the public access easement and all improvements thereon. • Purchaser and/or Developer shall dedicate additional right of way for traffic signalization improvements at the northeast and southeast corners of the Princess Anne Road/ North Landing Road intersection to accommodate signal poles and/or cables. • Purchaser shall assume all obligations to Norfolk Southern and/or Dominion -Virginia Power with respect to the utility easements or leases affecting the Excess Property, including without limitation the obligation to pay for costs of relocating any facilities of Dominion -Virginia Power within the Excess Property. • Purchaser and Developer must sign an Property Exchange Agreement with the City setting forth the terms of the property exchange. • Such other terms, conditions or modifications that the City Attorney deems are necessary to protect the City's interests in this property exchange, including without limitation requiring a bond, reverter clause or other legal device. 05 0 0 0 w U (D O a vJ ti AV A-il �. ti N 29.36'11" E Q �� 181.60' EXISTING — PROPERTY LINE N 18'34'37" E 80 96' PARCEL FOUR 0.76 AC N/F CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DB 2417, PG 1540 HWY BK 2, PG 5-5E GPIN 2404-38-2805 s PROPOSED VARIABLE ♦ EASEMENT PROPOSED 0 0 TV\% 1WIDTH UP TO 72' PROPOSED /'-10' PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT 1 -0. PROPOSED �\ �ry Alo `- O�Q•��10' WIDE �O° �S. PEDESTRIAN ♦\ !y ,moo EASEMENT °` Dh huh ♦. SlO SOURCE NGVD 29, 1972 ADJUST EASEMENT/PROPERTY INFORMATION PROPOSED VARIABLE WIDTH 0 700 (30,482 SF) ACCESS EASEMENT THE JOHN R. McADAMS PROPOSED 10' WIDE 0.136 (5,941 SF) PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT COMPANY INC. PROPOSED TOTAL 0 836 (36,423 SF) EASEMENT AREA SNGII�i88RS/*PT A� /sUKMORS PROPERTY OF CITY OF VA 0 76 ACRES BEACH NOlUTUANDING ROAD ® PRmcgfl SHOWING EMSI' NG PARCEL THE JOHN R. McADAMS �"' OWNED BY Crff OF VIRGINIA BEACH & COMPANY INC. t=l PROPOSED EASEMENT AREA SNGII�i88RS/*PT A� /sUKMORS (n NOlUTUANDING ROAD RBSURCH TMNGU PMM NC DOa 14005 ZIP 27709-4005 DATEP.O. VIRGDRA BFA�CH (919) 3e1-5000 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Enhancing Cultures of Integrity Grant MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background The U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, has awarded the Virginia Beach Police Department a grant in the amount of $442,943 for "Enhancing a Culture of Integrity." This is the second grant that the Police Department has received from the COPS Office since 2002. It will allow the Department to expand on initiatives developed as a result of the first grant, "Creating a Culture of Integrity," as well as enhance other elements of operation designed to strengthen the relationship between police and the community. The funds are to be used as follows: • $305,905 for the continued development of an Early Intervention System computer application to track trends involving member behavior and performance • $20,945 for a sophisticated Internal Affairs (IA) database to handle employee complaint case management and to enhance IA office digital technologies • $95,000 for advanced leadership training through a seminar series using subject matter experts, the implementation of a Leadership Coaching Certificate Program, a Management Skills Course and Command Staff Team Building process • $21, 093 for a project evaluator partner as required by the grant (5% of budget) ■ Considerations: No matching funds from the City are required. ■ Public Information: Public information will be provided through the normal Council Agenda process. ■ Alternatives: Delay implementing the initiatives provided by the grant until such time as regular city funding can be identified. - " T ■ Recommendations: Approval of Ordinance. Attachments: Ordinance Grant Award Letter Recommended Action: Approve Submitting Department/Agency: Police City Manager: ��-• F:\Data\Aty\Orden\Noncode\Integrity Grantarf.doc I AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE 2 $442,943 FROM THE U. S. DEPARTMENT OF 3 JUSTICE TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S FY 2003- 4 04 OPERATING BUDGET FOR INTERNAL AFFAIRS 5 SOFTWARE AND DATABASE DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, 6 AND PROJECT EVALUATION 7 8 9 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA 10 BEACH, Virginia: 11 That $442,943 in grant funds is hereby accepted from the 12 U.S. Department of Justice and appropriated to the Police 13 Department's FY 2003-04 Operating Budget, for internal affairs 14 software and database development, training and project 15 evaluation, with federal revenue increased accordingly. 16 17 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 18 Virginia on the day of , 2003. CA -9057 Ordn/Noncode/Integrity Grantord.wpd R-1 November 25, 2003 Approved as to Content Management Services Approved as to Legal Sufficiency ( mwoo� < (. ity Attorney Office U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services Program/Policy Support and Evaluation Division 1100 Vermont Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20530 October 23, 2003 Chief Alfred M. Jacocks, Jr. Municipal Complex, Building 11 2401 Court House Drive Virginia Beach, VA 23456 RE: Award Number: 2003-HS-WX-0007VIRGiMik Dear Chief Jacocks: OCT 3 12003 I am pleased to inform you that your award for "Enhancing Cultures of Integrity" has been approved in the amount of $442,943. The project period for this award is September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2005. f!ti -in tbispa qe s the a*ard document that you pnd City Manager Spore must sign,. , On the back of the award document is a list of terms and conditions that willaPP Y 1 to Your award. Please besure to familiarize yourself with these terms and conditions. J } * �urTJ' ae_e t.t e . )7w grid `the award, please s Ylie enclosed aw rrrl document and re itrn `the 0' * atto the GOPSOO'ke•within 45d4s. 'Failure to submit the signed award document in this 45 -day period could result in COPS withdrawing your program and de -obligating your funds. Should you have any questions concerning this award, please do not hesitate to contact your program manager, Albert A. Pearsall, III, at (202) 616-3298 or Albert.Pearsall@usdoj.gov. Congratulations again on your award. We look forward to working with you to complete this important project. S' cereI Pam Cnmm to Acting,De_puiy Director Enclosures -9 J 1.. A 011 t�J CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Police Extraditions Special Revenue Fund Appropriation MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: The Police Department has leased an airplane for several years to conduct prisoner extraditions. The use of a leased airplane has resulted in substantial savings of police staff time formerly devoted to traveling to various sites by vehicle or commercial air to transport prisoners to Virginia Beach. The Commonwealth has also realized significant savings in reimbursements to cities conducting these prisoner extraditions through reduced airfare costs and other related travel expenses. Commercial airlines and car transportation are still used when the cost of the commercial fare is less than leasing the airplane. ■ Considerations: Operating funds have been appropriated since FY 1992-93 for the operation of the airplane. The full costs of the extraditions are covered by state reimbursement, and by federal reimbursement if a federal prisoner is transported. When transportation is provided to City officials for official City business, such costs are reimbursed to the Police Department's general fund by the appropriate City department. Due to a change in pilots prior to FY 2003-04, the operating budget was reduced to $200,000 from $586,040. Now that the new pilot has gained some experience and acclimated to his new position, flights are beginning to approach the expected service levels of prior years. To maintain current flight hours and use of commercial airlines, an additional appropriation of $380,000 is requested to increase spending authority through the end of FY 2003-04. This will bring the total authorized budget for the prisoner extradition fund to $580,000, in alignment with prior years. This increase accounts for expenses for the leased airplane and the use of commercial airlines and vehicle transportation for prisoner extradition purposes. Again, these expenses are eligible for reimbursement from the state and federal government for extraditions. ■ Public Information: Public Information would be handled through the normal Council Agenda public information process. ■ Alternatives: Without the additional appropriations, it is estimated that no additional flights could be made after December 31, 2003 ■ Recommendations: Approval of Ordinance ■ Attachments: Ordinance Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Police 45�� r--� City Manager: g F.\Data\Aty\Orden\Noncode\extraditionarf.doc 1 AN ORDINANCE TO APPROPRIATE $380,000 IN 2 ANTICIPATED REVENUE FROM THE STATE TO THE 3 POLICE DEPARTMENT'S FY 2003-04 OPERATING 4 BUDGET FOR THE EXTRADITION OF PRISONERS 5 6 WHEREAS, the Police Department conducts extraditions of 7 prisoners for the state, and reasonable expenses incurred 8 during transporting these prisoners are eligible for 9 reimbursement. 10 11 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 12 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, Virginia: 13 That $380,000 in anticipated revenue from the Virginia 14 Supreme Court is hereby appropriated to the Police Department's 15 FY 2003-04 Operating Budget, to conduct prisoner extraditions, 16 with state revenue increased accordingly. 17 18 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 19 Virginia on the day of , 2003. CA -9058 Ordin/Noncode/extraditionord.wpd R-1 November 25, 2003 Approved as to Content Management Services 1 T'+ Approved as to Legal Sufficiency S. S Y? City Attorneyvs Of i e CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Virginia Beach Medical Reserve Corps Grant MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: The Virginia Beach Department of Public Health (VBDPH) is a participant in the Hampton Roads Metropolitan Response System and is responsible for setting up and staffing Neighborhood Emergency Help Centers for distribution of mass vaccine and prophylaxis. This grant from the Department of Health and Human Services provides funding to establish a Medical Reserve Corps to strengthen the response capability of the VBDPH to a large-scale medical event. The VBDPH has partnered with the Virginia Beach Fire Department to initiate this grant. ■ Considerations: The City of Virginia Beach has a very strong history in volunteerism. A Citizen Corps Council (CCC) was established this past year as part of the local response planning and operational capability funded by the Department of Homeland Security. The target audience for the CCC is volunteers from the community. The Medical Reserve Corps (MRC) will continue that practice and focus on attracting, training and retaining a pool of volunteer medical professionals. Management of such a project requires development of recruitment and screening strategies, training and qualification strategies, as well as creation of the basic program curriculum. In addition, the program must develop long-term strategies to insure continuation of the MRC, not only in membership, but also insuring continuing education is provided to maintain awareness of new threats and appropriate medical prophylaxis. The VBDPH will provide the oversight administrative and program management staff. The Fire Department will serve as grantee and fiscal manager. The CCC will act as the advisory board for the project. It is the intent of this grant to create a self sustaining program managed by and comprised of volunteers from the medical community. Grant funds will cover a part-time program manager, all office supplies and printed materials, travel and training expenses, and personal issue items for volunteer members. The part-time program manager will be an employee of the Health Department, but this position will be funded in the Fire Department's operating budget. This grant has a three-year performance period with funding approved on an annual basis. $49,991 has been approved for first year funding. T ._ Subsequent years will be slightly reduced amounts to cover the part-time position and continuing operational costs. The part-time position is authorized only for the period of the grant. ■ Public Information: Public Information will be handled through the normal Council Agenda process. ■ Alternatives: Declining funds. However, this project would not be possible without this outside funding. ■ Recommendations: Approval ■ Attachments: Ordinance Grant award letter Recommended Action: Approve and Appropriate Funds Submitting Department/Agency: Fire City Manage . 1� F •\Data\Aty\Orden\Noncode\Med icalCorparf.doc I AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE 2 $49,991 FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 3 AND HUMAN SERVICES TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT'S 4 FY 2003-04 OPERATING BUDGET FOR A PART-TIME 5 PROGRAM MANAGER AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT TO 6 INITIATE A MEDICAL RESERVE CORPS PROGRAM 7 8 9 WHEREAS, the Health and Fire Departments have received a 10 grant to initiate a Medical Reserve Corps Program to solicit 11 medically -trained citizens to serve as volunteers during times 12 of local disaster. 13 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 14 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, Virginia: 15 1. That $49,991 in grant funds is hereby accepted from the 16 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and 17 appropriated to the Fire Department's FY 2003-04 18 Operating Budget to initiate a Medical Reserve Corps 19 program. 20 2. That a part-time program coordinator position (.75 FTE) 21 is approved for the Health Department in conjunction 22 with this grant; provided, however, that this position 23 is conditioned upon continued grant funding. 24 3. That federal revenue in the FY 2003-04 Operating Budget 25 is hereby increased by $49,991. 26 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 27 Virginia on the day of , 2003. CA -9059 Ordin/Noncode/MedicalCorpord.doc R-1 November 25, 2003 Approved as to Content: Management Services Approved as to Legal Sufficiency: ,4xMMMA City Attorney's defice DAA ISSUED MaID"M 2 CFDA NO 09/30/03 93 008 SUPERSEDES AWARD NOTIC[ dated N/A Enapl and my eew,,.r ftVISSM PrWAVAV OOP"" faaeh a.sea ue *hdeC, ie 1&w0C GRANT NO S.ADMINISTRATIVE CODES US2SGO3032-01-0 MPU -S2 Forsrarly' 1AuST No. S02-03-07 r tNOIRECTCOSTS-(Rate of 5&VV TADC) 0 TOTAL APPROVED BUDGET $49,991 I reaerI stwe_.. . , . . . _ ._ S49,991 LL Nor}Faaanl Share.. _ _ _ _ . $0 'Muse "Lot all mmdvv requirements, Swo= 10 adltnkow in Acoomm" whin PHS poky REMARKS (09w Tama b Condwns Attmhcd DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE OFFICE OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND SCIENCE OFFICE OF THE SURGEON GENERAL ROCKVILi.E, MARYLAND 20852 NOTICE OF GRANT AWARD AUTHORIZATION (Legislatlon/Regvl"on) MEDICAL RESERVE CORPS TITLE XVII, SECTION 1701 (0) (1), PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT AS AMENDED James K. Spore City Manager City of Virginia Beach Fire Department Municipal Center 2401 Court House Drive, Bldg. 1 Virginia Beach, VA 23456 a. Amount of PHS Pinasaal AssrMoVe P= Ilam 11 w) $49,991 b. Less UnoNgated Batence horn Prior Budget Pends G Leer CurA481146 Prior AWardis) Tho; Budget Period d. AMOUNT OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE THIS ACTION .- 1 s49,991 13 RECOMMENDED 1'UTURS "PORT (SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS AND SATISFACTORY PROGRESS OF THE PROJECT) YEAR TOTAL COSTVVIPENDS YEAR TOTAL COSTSfSTIPENDS X.02 501000 d. b. tm 50,000 a. r— 1 f 14, APPROVED DIRECT ASSISTANCE BUDGET (IN LIEU OF CASM a Amamt of PHS DIrea ASS{i ersm 0. Less Unobfigated Balance tram Prior Budget Penodat a Lesa C u nallathre Pw A*Wd(e) Tills Budgot Penod r d AMOUNT OF DIRECT ASSISTANCE THIS ACTION 1 1S PROGRAM INCOME SUBJECT TO 4SCFR PART 74. SUBPART F, Of SWILL 86 USED IN ACCORD WITH ONE OF THE FOLLOWING ALTERNATIVES (Solea One and Plato LETTER a Choc) L DEDUCTION b ADDITIONAL COSTS A c, MATCHING a OTHER RESEARCH (AddlDeduct Opdon) c OTHER (Sao REMARKS) le THIS AWARD IS BASED ON AN APPUCATION SU13MITTED TO AND AS APPROVED BY, THE PNS ON THE ABOVE TITLED PROJECT AND 1.4 SUBJECT TO TWE TERMS AND CONDITIONS INCORPORATFA EITHER DIRECTLY OR BY REFERENCE 04 THE FOLLOWIfex a The grant proprsm Mostallon cited above o The grant program reguo~ e4,d above Q This award nolea mduding Mm» rind oadltwns, it any, hoed betcw under Remarks d PHS GM" Polict Statement indi tg addenda In etNd as d the begloc" data of Bre bubo pend e. 45 CFR Pert 14 end 45 CFR Pon 82 as appI1=*, In the eveed tfwre we eotdlOM or adto *= Utoorxlelentpokas spiAcaMe to Bre grant, the above order of preeeda shd pteAL Aoceptarz*d Ire grarg4oms and corKfi is is Agmed9m Ry RE arsifte vdun fogda are drawn or otderwrse d from Lha Yee 1 INP Pita GRAM ANT OFRCE1t) PROJECT PERIOD MaID"M crib) Mo1D2y/Yr &&adgw FROM 09/30/03 THRoousl 1I Grants Mans 09/29/06 17 OBICLASS 41.45 TWe 1 BUDGET PERIOD MolDMIYr e ca-sm 1540722061A3 MofOayHr 1AuST No. S02-03-07 FROM 09/30/03 THRouc*N DOCUMENT NO. 09/29/04 ADMMtiTRr WA Cone TITLE OF PROJECT (OR PROGRAM) Demonstration Pro ect for M AWAr.MN M MT AND AVD U2SG03032A L City of Virginia Beach 21 a D. Fire Department C d a Municipal Center a 2401 Court House Drive, Bldg, 1 e Ira • J L Virginia Beach VA 23456 APPROVED -F PHS Cwant Frards Only I Total IlecNa I cows ndu&V grant funds and all oehor I 6rr-1 ' 4'(Soled one and Pbw NUMERAL to box) L Salaries and Wages. - $27,784 x >:ftnge Bertepls ,., . 2,125 Tots/ Panoruu) Cysts. _-_ _ ... $29,509 i Consultant Cosa _ , . , _ _ _._ . 0 L Equipment... ..... .„.._._. _ _. 4,550 Supplies _ . _ . _._ 14,125 } Travel........., _ _ _ _ _._.._ . 507 L POW Cwv4r pstrenN _ _ ._. _ ._.. 0 4)utpv" .. _ .. _ _. 0 ATAMAlons end Retnoval on _ ._ _ . _ _. 0 cOther._..___._ _ _ . _ _, ..,,... 900 Conon kmoontraaal G _ ...._ ._ _ 0 IL TwMe Reload Expenses. _ 0 IL Tran" Stdpend& . , _ ._ _.. �... 0 0. Tgnem Tuition and Fw& _............ . _.. C D Trakwe Tract_ _. _ ._ ................ 0 r tNOIRECTCOSTS-(Rate of 5&VV TADC) 0 TOTAL APPROVED BUDGET $49,991 I reaerI stwe_.. . , . . . _ ._ S49,991 LL Nor}Faaanl Share.. _ _ _ _ . $0 'Muse "Lot all mmdvv requirements, Swo= 10 adltnkow in Acoomm" whin PHS poky REMARKS (09w Tama b Condwns Attmhcd DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE OFFICE OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND SCIENCE OFFICE OF THE SURGEON GENERAL ROCKVILi.E, MARYLAND 20852 NOTICE OF GRANT AWARD AUTHORIZATION (Legislatlon/Regvl"on) MEDICAL RESERVE CORPS TITLE XVII, SECTION 1701 (0) (1), PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT AS AMENDED James K. Spore City Manager City of Virginia Beach Fire Department Municipal Center 2401 Court House Drive, Bldg. 1 Virginia Beach, VA 23456 a. Amount of PHS Pinasaal AssrMoVe P= Ilam 11 w) $49,991 b. Less UnoNgated Batence horn Prior Budget Pends G Leer CurA481146 Prior AWardis) Tho; Budget Period d. AMOUNT OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE THIS ACTION .- 1 s49,991 13 RECOMMENDED 1'UTURS "PORT (SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS AND SATISFACTORY PROGRESS OF THE PROJECT) YEAR TOTAL COSTVVIPENDS YEAR TOTAL COSTSfSTIPENDS X.02 501000 d. b. tm 50,000 a. r— 1 f 14, APPROVED DIRECT ASSISTANCE BUDGET (IN LIEU OF CASM a Amamt of PHS DIrea ASS{i ersm 0. Less Unobfigated Balance tram Prior Budget Penodat a Lesa C u nallathre Pw A*Wd(e) Tills Budgot Penod r d AMOUNT OF DIRECT ASSISTANCE THIS ACTION 1 1S PROGRAM INCOME SUBJECT TO 4SCFR PART 74. SUBPART F, Of SWILL 86 USED IN ACCORD WITH ONE OF THE FOLLOWING ALTERNATIVES (Solea One and Plato LETTER a Choc) L DEDUCTION b ADDITIONAL COSTS A c, MATCHING a OTHER RESEARCH (AddlDeduct Opdon) c OTHER (Sao REMARKS) le THIS AWARD IS BASED ON AN APPUCATION SU13MITTED TO AND AS APPROVED BY, THE PNS ON THE ABOVE TITLED PROJECT AND 1.4 SUBJECT TO TWE TERMS AND CONDITIONS INCORPORATFA EITHER DIRECTLY OR BY REFERENCE 04 THE FOLLOWIfex a The grant proprsm Mostallon cited above o The grant program reguo~ e4,d above Q This award nolea mduding Mm» rind oadltwns, it any, hoed betcw under Remarks d PHS GM" Polict Statement indi tg addenda In etNd as d the begloc" data of Bre bubo pend e. 45 CFR Pert 14 end 45 CFR Pon 82 as appI1=*, In the eveed tfwre we eotdlOM or adto *= Utoorxlelentpokas spiAcaMe to Bre grant, the above order of preeeda shd pteAL Aoceptarz*d Ire grarg4oms and corKfi is is Agmed9m Ry RE arsifte vdun fogda are drawn or otderwrse d from Lha Yee 1 INP Pita GRAM ANT OFRCE1t) (N,rea-TV4 104) crib) &&adgw - - Karen Cem 1I Grants Mans meet O(lioor OPHS 17 OBICLASS 41.45 TWe 1 e ca-sm 1540722061A3 1AuST No. S02-03-07 FV -CAN DOCUMENT NO. ADMMtiTRr WA Cone AMTACTM FINAnT AWAr.MN M MT so.d 3-1990790c Itx U2SG03032A G MPU -S2 d $49,991 21 a D. C d a 22a a d e Ira • J U I nwmu n 7 nanJ • I J7R rsn raj . cr t•r7r.17_4s7_An6I CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Dam Neck Court Subdivision - Cash Payment in Lieu of Park Reservation Ordinance to Appropriate Funding to Capital Improvement Program Project 4-970, " Park Playground Renovations" MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: The Dam Neck Court Subdivision is comprised of a 4.8 +/- acre site zoned R -5D residential district. The Dam Neck Court Subdivision is located on the west side of Dam Neck Road, at the intersection of Monet Drive. Section 4.5 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires a .58 -acre reservation, or.29-acre dedication, for open space. The Department of Parks and Recreation has followed the approved City Council Policy for Cash Payment in Lieu of Park Reservation, which identifies a payment process for dedications of generally less than one acre in size. The cash payment is based on the assessed value of the land multiplied by the dedication requirement. ■ Considerations: The representative of the Dam Neck Court Subdivision development has agreed to a cash -in -lieu of park reservation payment in the amount, as recommended by the Department of Parks and Recreation. The payment is based on the dedication requirement of .29 acres multiplied by the assessed value of $32,812 per acre. The payment would be appropriated to Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Project 4-970, " Park Playground Renovations," to provide City park playground improvements. ■ Public Information: The subdivision plans for the proposed development were processed through the administrative procedures of the Department of Planning, Development Services Center, and the Department of Planning. The files for these subdivision plans are accessible for public review. ■ Alternatives: There are no other alternatives beyond those mentioned above (land dedication, land reservation, or cash -in -lieu of payment) as set forth by Section 4.5 of the City Subdivision Ordinance. ■ Recommendations: Approval of Ordinance. ■ Attachments: Ordinance to appropriate $9,515 to CIP Project 4-970 Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Parks and Recreation 2R: 5 City Manageg. e— F.\Data\Aty\Orden\Noncode\DamNeckCourt ARF.doc 1 AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND 2 APPROPRIATE $9,915 20 TO CAPITAL 3 PROJECT #4-970, "PARK PLAYGROUND 4 RENOVATIONS," FOR PLAYGROUND 5 IMPROVEMENTS IN THE VICINITY OF 6 THE DAM NECK COURT SUBDIVISION 7 8 9 WHEREAS, the of developer the Dam Neck Court Subdivision, 10 Kopassis Construction Corporation, has agreed to a $9,915 cash 11 payment in lieu of a park dedication. 12 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 13 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 14 That $9,915 is hereby accepted from Kopassis Construction 15 Corporation and appropriated to Capital Improvement Project #4- 16 970, "Park Playground Renovations," for playground improvements 17 in the vicinity of the Dam Neck Court Subdivision, with revenue 18 from local sources increased accordingly. 19 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 20 Virginia on the day of 2003. CA -9063 Ordin/Noncode/DamNeckCourtord.doc R1 November 28, 2003 Approved as to Content Management Services Approved as to Legal Sufficiency Ci y ttorney' eloffic flu MyN� J, CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: White Acres Subdivision - Cash Payment in Lieu of Park Reservation Ordinance to Appropriate Funding to Capital Improvement Program Project 4-970, "Park Playground Renovations" MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: The White Acres Subdivision is comprised of a 17.15+/- acre site zoned R-40 single-family residential district. The White Acres Subdivision is located along the east side of White Acres Road at its intersection with Dunstan Lane. Section 4.5 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires a .52 -acre reservation, or .26 -acre dedication, for open space. The Department of Parks and Recreation has followed the approved City Council Policy for Cash Payment in Lieu of Park Reservation, which identifies a payment process for dedications of generally less than one acre in size. The cash payment is based on the assessed value of the land multiplied by the dedication requirement. ■ Considerations: The representative of the White Acres Subdivision development has agreed to a cash -in -lieu of park reservation payment in the amount, as recommended by the Department of Parks and Recreation. The payment is based on the dedication requirement of .26 acres multiplied by the assessed value of $115,000 per acre. The payment would be appropriated to Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Project 4-970, "Park Playground Renovations," to provide City park playground improvements. ■ Public Information: The subdivision plans for the proposed development were processed through the administrative procedures of the Department of Planning, Development Services Center, and the Department of Planning. The files for these subdivision plans are accessible for public review. ■ Alternatives: There are no other alternatives beyond those mentioned above (land dedication, land reservation, or cash -in -lieu of payment) as set forth by Section 4.5 of the City Subdivision Ordinance. ■ Recommendations: Approval of Ordinance. ■ Attachments: Ordinance to appropriate $29,900 to CIP Project 4-970 Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Parks and Recreation City Manage JY -01 F:IDatalAty%OrdinlNoncodelWhiteAcres ARF.doc T 1 AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND 2 APPROPRIATE $29,900 TO CAPITAL 3 PROJECT #4-9701 "'PARK PLAYGROUND 4 RENOVATIONS," FOR PLAYGROUND 5 IMPROVEMENTS IN THE VICINITY OF 6 THE WHITE ACRES SUBDIVISION 7 8 9 WHEREAS, the developer of the White Acres Subdivision, 10 Joseph Benedetto, has agreed to a $29,900 cash payment in lieu 11 of a park dedication. 12 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 13 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 14 That $29,900 is hereby accepted from Joseph Benedetto and 15 appropriated to Capital Improvement Project #4-970, "Park 16 Playground Renovations," for playground improvements in the 17 vicinity of the White Acres Subdivision, with revenue from local 18 sources increased accordingly. 19 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 20 Virginia on the day of , 2003. CA -9061 Ordin/Noncode/WhiteAcresord.doc R1 November 28, 2003 Approved as to Content Management Services Approved as to Legal Sufficiency ity Attorney' eOffice s f J� CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Brinkley Estates Subdivision - Cash Payment in Lieu of Park Reservation Ordinance to Appropriate Funding to Capital Improvement Program Project 4-970, "Park Playground Renovations" MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: The Brinkley Estates Subdivision is comprised of a 6.6 +/- acre site zoned R -5D residential district. The Brinkley Estates Subdivision is located on the west side of Dam Neck Road, north of the intersection of Monet Drive. Section 4.5 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires an .80 -acre reservation, or.40-acre dedication, for open space. The Department of Parks and Recreation has followed the approved City Council Policy for Cash Payment in Lieu of Park Reservation, which identifies a payment process for dedications of generally less than one acre in size. The cash payment is based on the assessed value of the land multiplied by the dedication requirement. ■ Considerations: The representative of the Brinkley Estates Subdivision development has agreed to a cash -in -lieu of park reservation payment in the amount, as recommended by the Department of Parks and Recreation. The payment is based on the dedication requirement of .40 acres multiplied by the assessed value of $50,000 per acre. The payment would be appropriated to Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Project 4-970, "Park Playground Renovations," to provide City park playground improvements. ■ Public Information: The subdivision plans for the proposed development were processed through the administrative procedures of the Department of Planning, Development Services Center, and the Department of Planning. The files for these subdivision plans are accessible for public review. ■ Alternatives: There are no other alternatives beyond those mentioned above (land dedication, land reservation, or cash -in -lieu of payment) as set forth by Section 4.5 of the City Subdivision Ordinance. ■ Recommendations: Approval of Ordinance ■ Attachments: Ordinance to appropriate $20,000 to CIP Project 4-970 Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Parks and Recreation City Manage F \Data\Aty\Ordm\Noncode\BnnkleyEstates ARF.doc 1 AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND 2 APPROPRIATE $20,000 TO CAPITAL 3 PROJECT #4-970, "PARK PLAYGROUND 4 RENOVATIONS," FOR PLAYGROUND 5 IMPROVEMENTS IN THE VICINITY OF 6 THE BRINKLEY ESTATES SUBDIVISION 7 8 9 WHEREAS, the developer of the Brinkley Estates Subdivision, 10 David Terry, has agreed to a $20,000 cash payment in lieu of a 11 park dedication. 12 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 13 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 14 That $20,000 is hereby accepted from David Terry and 15 appropriated to Capital Improvement Project #4-970, "Park 16 Playground Renovations," for playground improvements in the 17 vicinity of the Brinkley Estates Subdivision, with revenue from 18 local sources increased accordingly. 19 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 20 Virginia on the day of , 2003. CA -9062 Ordin/Noncode/BrinkleyEstatesord.doc R1 November 28, 2003 Approved as to Content Y Management Services Approved as to Legal Sufficiency City Attorney's Office s CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM , ITEM: Thoroughgood, Section 8, Part 4 Subdivision - Cash Payment in Lieu of Park Reservation Ordinance to Appropriate Funding to Capital Improvement Program Project 4-970, "Park Playground Renovations" MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: The Thoroughgood, Section 8, Part 4 Subdivision is comprised of a 10.59+/- acre site zoned R-20 single-family residential district. The Thoroughgood, Section 8, Part 4 Subdivision is located along the west side of Wakefield Drive. Section 4.5 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires a .64 -acre reservation, or .32 -acre dedication, for open space. The Department of Parks and Recreation has followed the approved City Council Policy for Cash Payment in Lieu of Park Reservation, which identifies a payment process for dedications of generally less than one acre in size. The cash payment is based on the assessed value of the land multiplied by the dedication requirement. ■ Considerations: The representative of the Thoroughgood, Section 8, Part 4 Subdivision development has agreed to a cash -in -lieu of park reservation payment in the amount, as recommended by the Department of Parks and Recreation. The payment is based on the dedication requirement of .32 acres multiplied by the assessed value of $75,000 per acre. The payment would be appropriated to Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Project 4-970, "Park Playground Renovations," to provide City park playground improvements. ■ Public Information: The subdivision plans for the proposed development were processed through the administrative procedures of the Department of Planning, Development Services Center, and the Department of Planning. The files for these subdivision plans are accessible for public review. ■ Alternatives: There are no other alternatives beyond those mentioned above (land dedication, land reservation, or cash -in -lieu of payment) as set forth by Section 4.5 of the City Subdivision Ordinance. ■ Recommendations: Approval of Ordinance. ■ Attachments: Ordinance to appropriate $24,000 to CIP Project 4-970 Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Parks and Recreation OL`�� City Manager k F \Data\Aty\Ordm\Noncode\ThoroughgoodARF.doc 1 AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND 2 APPROPRIATE $24,000 TO CAPITAL 3 PROJECT #4-9701 "PARK PLAYGROUND 4 RENOVATIONS," FOR PLAYGROUND 5 IMPROVEMENTS IN THE VICINITY OF 6 THE THOROUGHGOOD, SECTION 8, PART 7 4 SUBDIVISION 8 9 10 WHEREAS, the developer of the Thoroughgood, Section 8, Part 11 4 Subdivision, Charles Bowden, has agreed to a $24,000 cash 12 payment in lieu of a park dedication. 13 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 14 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 15 That $24,000 is hereby accepted from Charles Bowden and 16 appropriated to Capital Improvement Project #4-970, "Park 17 Playground Renovations," for playground improvements in the 18 vicinity of the Thoroughgood, Section 8, Part 4 Subdivision, 19 with revenue from local sources increased accordingly. 20 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 21 Virginia on the day of , 2003. CA -9064 Ordin/Noncode/Thoroughgoodord.doc R1 November 28, 2003 Approved as to Content Management Services Services Approved as to Legal Sufficiency r City Attorney's 6ffice CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: An Ordinance Approving a Cooperative Agreement Between City Council and the Virginia Beach School Board Pertaining to the Provision of Legal Services to the Board by the Office of the City Attorney in Fiscal Year 2004 MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: The Virginia Beach School Board has 13,000 employees and educates 74,000 students at 85 separate facilities via an operating budget of $495,000,000. During FY2003, the Office of the City Attorney provided legal services to the School Board and School Administration pursuant to a Cooperative Agreement between City Council and the Board. The Agreement, which expired on June 30, 2003, provides that "(t)his Cooperative Agreement ... may be revised, as necessary, and renewed each fiscal year ...." Pursuant to this provision, the School Board, at its meeting of December 2, 2003, approved a revised Cooperative Agreement for FY2004. ■ Considerations: Under the Cooperative Agreement between City Council and the School Board, the City Attorney's Office will continue to provide 4,125 hours of legal service to the School Division and will be reimbursed for the direct cost of those services. One Associate City Attorney (Kamala H. Lannetti), an Assistant City Attorney (Amy M. McDowell), and one legal secretary (Sheila A. Tsioutsias) are located in the School Administration Building, and the Associate City Attorney coordinates the delivery of additional legal services, as needed for the other attorneys in the City Attorney's Office, as well as outside counsel. Since the City Attorney was asked by the School Board to manage the Board and School Administration's legal business in FY96, the cost of outside counsel to the Board has decreased from $347,533 to $148,295 in FY2003. The legal services are provided at a cost of approximately $75 per hour, which is considerably below the $175-$295 per hour charged by outside counsel. This arrangement enables the School Board and City Council to devote more resources to education of the City's youth. While the legal services by the City Attorney to the Board have increased from 1,997 hours in FY96 to 4,153 hours in FY2003, the overall cost of legal services (in-house and outside counsel) paid by the Board has declined from $531,225 in FY1996 to $437,650 during this same period. For FY2004, the City Attorney has recommended, the Board has approved, and the Cooperative Agreement reflects a budget service level of 4,125 hours at a cost of $253,302. The attached ordinance approves the Cooperative Agreement for FY2004 and authorizes the Mayor to execute it on behalf of the City Council. ■ Public Information: The ordinance is to be advertised as a normal agenda item. ■ Recommendations: Approval ■ Attachments: Ordinance Cooperative Agreement Recommended Action: Approval �( WSubmitting Department/Agency: City Attorney (4,11 1 w'- "b�City Manage . k , N}'Z- F \Data\ATY\Ordm\NONCODE\L,EGALsvc arfO4 wpd 1 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A COOPERATIVE 2 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL 3 AND THE VIRGINIA BEACH SCHOOL BOARD 4 FOR THE PROVISION OF LEGAL SERVICES 5 TO THE BOARD BY THE OFFICE OF THE 6 CITY ATTORNEY IN FISCAL YEAR 2004 7 WHEREAS, the Office of the City Attorney provided legal 8 services to the Virginia Beach School Board and School 9 Administration in FY 2003 pursuant to a Cooperative Agreement that 10 was approved by the School Board on December 3, 2002, and by the 11 City Council on January 7, 2003; 12 WHEREAS, the Cooperative Agreement for FY 2003, which 13 expired on June 30, 2003, provides that "[t]his Cooperative 14 Agreement ... may be revised, as necessary, and renewed each fiscal 15 year ..."; 16 WHEREAS, a revised Cooperative Agreement for FY 2004 was 17 approved by the School Board at its meeting of December 2, 2003; 18 and 19 WHEREAS, City Council agrees that it is in the best 20 interests of the City and the School Board for the Office of the 21 City Attorney to continue to provide legal services to the School 22 Board pursuant to the revised Cooperative Agreement for FY 2004. 23 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 24 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 25 1. That the City Council hereby approves the 26 Cooperative Agreement for FY 2004, a copy of which is attached 27 hereto as "Exhibit A." 28 2. That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the 29 Cooperative Agreement on behalf of the City Council. 30 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 31 Virginia, on the day of , 2003. CA -9055 DATA\ATY\ORDIN\NONCODE\LEGALSvc04.ORD.wpd R-3 - November 24, 2002 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: Department of La 2 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE SCHOOL BOARD OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH FOR LEGAL SERVICES TO THE SCHOOL BOARD AND SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY IN FISCAL YEAR 2004 Factual Background: 1. City Charter Authority. Chapter 9 of the Charter of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia ("City Charter") provides that the City Attorney shall be the chief legal advisor of the City Council, the City Manager, and of all departments, boards, commissions and agencies of the City in all matters affecting the interests of the City, and that he shall have such powers and duties as may be assigned by the Council. 2. Appointment of City Attorney. The City Charter also provides that the City Attorney is appointed by the City Council and serves at its pleasure. 3. School Board Authority. The School Board is established by the Virginia Constitution, the City Charter, and provisions of general law, and is a body corporate vested with all of the powers and duties of local school boards conferred by law, including the right to contract and be contracted with, to sue and be sued, and to purchase, take, hold, lease, and convey school property both real and personal. 4. School Board Authority to hire Legal Counsel. The School Board is authorized by Section 22.1-82 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, to employ counsel to advise it, and to pay for such advice out of funds appropriated to the School Board. 5. Recognized reasons to share legal services. Both the City Council and the School Board have recognized that the reasons for sharing services of the City Attorney's Office include potential savings to taxpayers, expertise of the City Attorney's Office in City and School Board matters, institutional memory, and the ability of the City Attorney's Office to provide a wide range of legal services to the Board based upon the expertise of the attorneys in numerous specialized areas of the law. 6. Professional _iudgment of City Attorney. The Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct for the Legal Profession require the independent professional judgment of the Office of the City Attorney on behalf of its clients. 7. Potential ethical conflicts. The City Council and the School Board recognize that the potential for conflicting interests between the Council and the Board may arise and that, in such cases, the City Attorney must refrain from representation of interests which may conflict. 8. Identification of Conflicts. The City Council and the School Board also recognize that they must work together and with the City Attorney to identify any real or perceived potential for conflict at the earliest possible time, advise each other and the City Attorney of any such conflict as soon as it arises so as not to compromise the interests of the City Council or the School Board, and assist the City Attorney in avoiding any violation or appearance of violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility. 9. Continuation of Services. The City Council and the School Board further recognize that it remains in the best interest of the taxpayers of the City for the School Board to continue to use the legal services of the Office of the City Attorney to the extent that no real or 2 perceived conflict is present, and to the extent the City Attorney is budgeted and staffed to handle assigned legal business of the Board. Obiectives: The objective of this Cooperative Agreement is to define the scope and nature of the relationship between the City Attorney's Office and the School Board, to provide for the delivery of designated legal services to the School Board, and to avoid any real or perceived conflict in the delivery of those services. Agreement: NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council and the School Board hereby agree as follows: 1. Legal Staffing. The Office of the City Attorney will provide the equivalent of two and one half (2.5) full-time attorney positions (or 4125 hours per year) and one (1) secretarial position during FY 2004; these services to be provided as follows A. The City Attorney will dedicate one attorney on-site at the School Administration Building to the School Board and the School Administration who will devote all of her time (i.e., 1650 hours per year) to the provision of legal services to the School Board and School Administration. For the term of this Agreement, that attorney will be Kamala Hallgren Lannetti, Associate City Attorney. B. A second attorney will also be located in the School Administration building and will handle primarily School matters but, from time to time, may also handle City matters. The School Board and the City Attorney will come to 3 an agreement as to the attorney who will serve as the second on-site attorney. The City Attorney reserves the right to make this assignment. C. The remaining attorney hours will be provided by the other attorneys in the Office, based upon their various areas of expertise with school -related legal issues, and shall include representation in real estate matters, representation of the School Administration in personnel matters, general administrative and procedural issues, and general litigation. The City Attorney's Office will endeavor to handle as many other legal matters in-house as it is capable of handling subject to the provisions of this Agreement. D. During the term of this Agreement, and subject to reassignment in the judgment of the City Attorney, the selection of the dedicated attorneys shall be mutually agreed upon by the City Attorney and the School Board. Additionally, if a majority of the members of the Board expresses dissatisfaction with the legal services provided by the dedicated attorneys, or by any other attorney providing services to the Board, the City Attorney will meet with the Board to discuss and evaluate its concerns. Furthermore, if the Board and the City Attorney agree that the most reasonable way to address the Board's concerns is to assign another attorney or other attorneys to represent the Board, the City Attorney will use his best efforts to make such an assignment(s) as soon as possible. 4 2. Communication and reports. Throughout the term of this Agreement, the Office of the City Attorney will maintain an open line of communication with the Board and the Division Superintendent, and will keep them apprised, on a regular basis, of the status of all legal matters being handled on behalf of the School Board and School Administration; provided, however, that the Office of the City Attorney shall not communicate with the Division Superintendent concerning those matters being handled on a confidential basis for the School Board or for individual Board members in accordance with applicable Board policies and applicable provisions of the Superintendent's contract. Additionally, the Office of the City Attorney will provide the Superintendent and the School Board a quarterly report of the legal services and attorney hours provided pursuant to this Agreement and, upon request of the Board, the Board Chairman, or the Superintendent, will identify the amount of attorney hours expended in response to inquiries from individual Board members. 3. Management of legal affairs. The City Council and the School Board recognize and understand that the School Board shall be responsible for the management of its legal matters; that, to the extent contemplated by this Agreement, the City Attorney shall be designated as the chief legal advisor of the Board and the School Administration, and shall assist the Board and Administration in the management of the Board's legal matters; and that the City Attorney shall report to the Board concerning those matters he has been assigned by the Board to manage and/or handle on its behalf. 4. Ethical conflicts concerning representation of parties. The City Council and the School Board recognize the potential for real or perceived conflicts in the provision of legal 5 services by the City Attorney, and agree to be vigilant in advising the City Attorney of such issues as they arise. Additionally, the City Council and the School Board understand that in such cases, the City Attorney will refrain from participation on behalf of the School Board but, to the extent ethically permissible in accordance with the Rules and Procedures of the Virginia State Bar, will continue representation of the City Council. 5. Ability to provide legal services. The City Council and the School Board further recognize that the ability of the City Attorney's Office to provide legal services to the School Board is limited by the attorney hours allocated pursuant to this Agreement, the other provisions of this Agreement, and ethical constraints as they may arise. 6. Nature of Agreement. The parties agree that this Cooperative Agreement is not a contract to be enforced by either party but is rather an agreement setting forth the understanding of the parties regarding the parameters within which the Office of the City Attorney will provide legal services to the School Board and School Administration. 7. Payment for services. The City shall forward to the School Board IDT requests in the amount of $253,302.16 from its FY 2004 Operating Budget to the FY 2004 Operating Budget of the Office of the City Attorney to fund the annual salaries, benefits, and certain administrative costs of two and one half (2.5) attorneys and one (1) Legal Secretary. IDT requests of 25% of the total shall be made by the City and funds transferred by the School Board on or about July first, October first, January first, and April first. 2 8. Term and termination of Agreement. This Cooperative Agreement shall commence with the fiscal year of the parties which begins July 1, 2003 and ends June 30, 2004 and may be revised, as necessary, and renewed each fiscal year thereafter; provided, however, that each party shall give the other party notice of any intention to revise or not to renew the Agreement within one hundred twenty (120) days of the date of expiration of this Agreement, or any renewal hereof, in order that the other party will have the opportunity to make appropriate budget and staffing adjustments. SCHOOL BOARD OF CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH M Daniel D. Edwards Chairman CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH M Meyera E. Oberndorf, Mayor School Board of the City of Virginia Beach: This Cooperative Agreement was approved by majority vote of the School Board of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on , 2003. By: 7 School Board Clerk City Council of the City of Virginia Beach: This Cooperative Agreement was approved by majority vote of the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on , 2003. By: City Clerk PLANNING 1. Application of STEPHEN WRAY O'NEAL for the expansion of a noncon orminjuse re adding and constructing a detached garage at 420 Davis Street. ((DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE) 2 3. Indefinitely Deferred: Recommendation: August 26, 2003 APPROVAL Applications of BERKSHIRE -HUDSON CAPITAL, XI, LLC re Change of Zoning District Classification: (DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE) a. From B-1 Neighborhood Business District, B-2 Community Business District and AG -2 Agricultural District with Historic and Cultural Overlays to Conditional B-2 Community Business District with Historic and Cultural Overlays east of Princess Anne Road and North Landing Road. b. From B-2 Community Business District with Historic and Cultural Overlays to AG -2 Agricultural District with Historic and Cultural Overlays at Princess Anne Road and Courthouse Drive. Deferred: November 25, 2003 Recommendation: APPROVAL Application of PHIL M. BONIFANT for a Conditional Use Permit re a Country Inn at 2252 Indian River Road. (DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE) Recommendation: APPROVAL 4. Application of K.A.H. PROPERTIES, L.L.C. for a Conditional Use Permit re motor vehicle sales and service at 3112 Virginia Beach Boulevard. (DISTRICT 5 - LYNNHAVEN) Recommendation: APPROVAL 5. Application of MARVIN M. and GAYLE B. ROLLINS for a Conditional Use Permit re alternative residential development at 480 Princess Anne Road. (DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE) Staff Recommendation: DEFERRAL Planning Commission Recommendation: APPROVAL 6. Applications of KEMPSVILLE-CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES, L.L.C. at 2001 Centerville Turnpike: (DISTRICT 1 — CENTERVILLE) a. MODIFICATION to a Conditional Use Permit (Approved by the City Council February 11, 2003 b. Change ofZoningDistrict Classification from R -5D Residential Duplex District to Conditional B-2 Community Business District C. Conditional Use Permit re mini -warehouse Recommendation: APPROVAL 7. Application of HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES, a Virginia General Partnership for a Change o ZoningDistrict Classification from R-10 Residential District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District at Herbert Moore Road and Campus Drive. (DISTRICT 2 — KEMPSVILLE) Recommendation: APPROVAL 8. Application of SILVER HILL -SALEM, L.L.C. at Lynnhaven Parkway and Salem Road - (DISTRICT 1 — CENTERVILLE) a. Change of Zoning from Conditional B-2 Community Business District to Conditional 0-2 Office District b. Conditional Use Permit re housing for seniors Recommendation: APPROVAL 9. Applications of PUNGO INVESTORS, INC. at Stowe Road and South Stowe Road - (DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE) a. Petition for a Variance to § 4.4 (b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet all the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) b. Conditional Use Permit re alternative residential development Staff Recommendation: DEFERRAL Planning Commission Recommendation: APPROVAL 10. Application of MICHAEL CARR for a Conditional Use Permit re a recreational facility of an indoor / outdoor nature (skate park) and church at 5405 Indian River Road. (DISTRICT 1 — CENTERVILLE) Recommendation: ALLOW WITHDRAWAL 11. Applications of ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. re Flanagan's Lane at Princess Anne Road - (DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE) a. The discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of b. Change of Zoning from AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional PD- H. Planned Unit Development District (R-3 0 and P-1) C. Petition for a Variance to § 4.4 (b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet all the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) at the intersection of Sandbridge Road Recommendation: APPROVAL 12. Applications of ALCAR, L.L.C. at Nimmo Parkway and Rockingchair Lane: a. Change of Zoning District Classification from AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional R-10 Residential District b. Conditional Use Permit for Open Space Deferred: Recommendation: OCTOBER 28, 2003 APPROVAL 13. Application of CAVALIER GOLF and YACHT CLUB for a Conditional Use Permit re a marina expansion at 1052 Cardinal Road. (DISTRICT 5 - LYNNHAVEN) Deferred: Staff Recommendation: Planning Commission Recommendation: May 27, 2003 APPROVAL APPROVAL LOST TO A TIE VOTE 14 Ordinances of CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH re Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance and further re conforming references to renumber sections to AMEND and REORDAIN : a. Sections 5.10, 6.1 and 6.3 of the Subdivision Ordinance, Appendix B of the City Code b. Site Plan Ordinance, Appendix C of the City Code re C. § 1.6 of the Tree Planting, Preservation and Replacement Ordinance, Appendix E of the City Code d. Appendix F of the City Code re identification and protection of Resource Protection Area buffers, designation criteria, land use, development performance criteria and variances Recommendation: APPROVAL E. Establishing TRANSITION RULES for amendments to Appendix F. F. Section 2-452.1 of Chapter 2 of the City Code re Boards, Commissions and Committees. THE BEACON SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 2003 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Virginia Beach City Council will meet in the Chamber at City Hall, Municipal Center, 2401 Courthouse Drive, Tuesday, December 9, 2003, at 6 00 p m The following applications will be heard DISTRICT 1- CENTERVILLE 1 Silver Hili - Salem, L L C Application Change of Zoning District Classi- fication from Conditional B-2 Community Business to Conditional 0-2 Office on the south side of Lynnhaven Parkway) The Comprehensive Plan recommends use of this property for residential uses at or below 3 5 dwelling units per acre 2 Silver Hill Salem, L L C Application Conditional Use Permit for senior housing on the south side of Lynnhaven Parkway 3 Michael Carr Application Conditional Use Permit for a recreational facility of an indoor nature (skate park), recreational facility of an out- door nature (skate park) and church at 5405 Indian River Road 4 Kempsville-Centerville Associates, L L C Application Change of Zon- ing District Classification from R-50 Residential Duplex to Conditional B-2 Community Business at 2001 Centerville Turnpike The Compre- hensive Plan recommends use of this property for residential uses above 3 5 dwelling units per acre 5 Kempswlle-Centerville Associates, L L C Application Conditional Use Permit for a mini -warehouse facility at 2001 Centerville Turnpike 6 Kempsville-Centerville Associates, L L C Application Modification of Conditions for a Conditional Use Permit approved by City Council on February 11, 2003 at 2001 Centerville Turnpike DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE 7 Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in regard to certain ele- ments of the Subdivision Ordinance, Subdivision for Pungo Investors, L L C , southwest of the intersection of Stowe Road and South Stowe Road 8 Pungo Investors, L L C Application Conditional Use Permit for alter native residential development on property located southwest of the intersection of Stowe Road and South Stowe Road 9 Marvin M & Gayle B Rollins Application Conditional Use Permit for alternative residential development at 480 Princess Anne Road 10 AshviHe Park, L L C Application Change of Zoning District Classification from AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural to Conditional PD -H2 Planned Unit Development (R-30 & P-1) The Comprehensive Plan recommends use of this property for appropriate growth opportunities consistent with the economic vitality policies of the City of Virginia Beach 11 Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in regard to certain elements of the Subdivision Ordinance, Subdivision for Ashville Park, L L C , on the east side of Pnncess Anne Road 12 Ashville Park, L L C Application Discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Flanagan's Lane, 5350 2 feet east of Pnncess Anne Road 13 Phil M Bonifant Applicatiorr Conditional Use Permit for a country inn at 2252 Indian River Road DISTRICT 5 - LYNNHAVEN 14 K A H Properties, L L C Application Conditional Use Permit for motor vehicle sales and service at 3112 Virginia Beach Boulevard DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE 15 Hollis Road Associates, a Virginia General Partnership Application Change of Zoning District Classification from R-10 Residential to Conditional A-12 Apartment on the south side of Herbert Moore Road The Comprehensive Plan recommends use of this property for residential uses above 3 5 dwelling units per acre AMENDMENTS 16 Ordinance to amend and reordain Sections 510, 6 1 and 6 3 of the Subdivision Ordinance, Appendix B of the City Code, so as to conform references to renumbered Sections of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance 17 Ordinance to amend and reordain the Site Plan Ordinance Appendix C of the City Code, so as to conform references to renumbered Sections of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance 18 Ordinance to amend and reordain Section 16 of the Tree Planting Preservation and Replacement Ordinance Appendix E of the Citv Code, so as to conform references to renumbered Sections of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance 19 Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance (Appendix F of the City Code) pertaining to identification and protection of the Resource Protection Area buffers, Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area designation rriteria land use and development performance criteria, and variances All interested citizens aye invited to attend 66 Ruth Hodges Smith MMC City Clerk BEACON NOVEMBER 23 ani: NOVEMBEP 30 2003 10843007 THE BEACON SUNDAY NC`lEMBEF; 30, 2003 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Virginia Beach City Council will meet in the Chamber at City Hall, Municipal Center, 2401 Courthouse Drive, Tuesday, December 9, 2003, at 6 00 p m The following applications will be heard DISTRICT 1- CENTERVILLE 1 Silver Hill Salem, L L C Application Change of Zoning District Classi- fication from Conditional B-2 Community Business to Conditional 0-2 Office on the south side of Lynnhaven Parkway) The Comprehensive Plan recommends use of this property for residential uses at or below 3 5 dwellirlg units per acre 2 Silver Hill Salem, L L C Application Conditional Use Permit for j senior housing on the south side of Lynnhaven Parkway 3 Michael Carr Application Conditional Use Permit for a recreational facility of an indoor nature (skate park), recreational facility of an out- door nature (skate park) and church at 5405 Indian River Road 4 Kempsville-Centerville Associates, L L C Application Change of Zon- ing District Classification from R -5D Residential Duplex to Conditional B-2 Community Business at 2001 Centerville Turnpike The Compre- hensive Plan recommends use of this property for residential uses above 3 5 dwelling units per acre i5 I Kempsville Centerville Associates, L L C Application Conditional Use I Permit for a mini -warehouse facility at 2001 Centerville Turnpike i6 Kempsville-Centerville Associates, L L C Application Modification of Conditions for a Conditional Use Permit approved by City Council on February 11, 2003 at 2001 Centerville Turnpike DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE 17 Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in regard to certain ele ments of the Subdivision Ordinance, Subdivision for Pungo Investors, L L C , southwest of the intersection of Stowe Road and South Stowe Road 8 Pungo Investors L L C Application Conditional Use Permit for alter native residential development on property located southwest of the intersection of Stowe Road and South Stowe Road 9 Marvin M & Gayle B Rollins Application Conditional Use Permit for alternative residential development at 480 Princess Anne Road 10 Ashville Park, L L C Application Change of Zoning District Classification from AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural to Conditional PD -H2 Planned Unit Development (R 30 & P-1) The Comprehensive Plan recommends use of this property for appropriate growth opportunities consistent with the economic vitality policies of the City of Virginia Beach 11 Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in regard to certain elements of the Subdivision Ordinance, Subdivision for Ashville Park, L L C , on the east side of Princess Anne Road 12 Ashville Park, L L C Application Discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Flanagan's Lane 5350 2 feet east of Princess Anne Road 13 Phil M Bonifant Applicatiorr Conditional Use Permit for a cointry inn at 2252 Indian River Road DISTRICT 5 - LYNNHAVEN 14 K A H Properties, L L C Application Conditional Use Permit for motor vehicle sales and service at 3112 Virginia Beach Boulevard DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE 15 Hollis Road Associates, a Virginia General Partnership Application Change of Zoning District Classification from R 10 Residential to Conditional A-12 Apartment on the south side of Herbert Moore Road The Comprehensive Plan recommends use of this property for residential uses above 3 5 dwelling units per acre AMENDMENTS 16 Ordinance to amend and reordain Sections 5 10, 6 1 and 6 3 of the Subdivision Ordinance Appendix B of the City Code, so as to conform references to renumbered Sections of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance 17 Ordinance to amend and reordain the Site Plan Ordinance, Appendix C of the City Code, so as to conform references to renumbered Sections of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance 18 Ordinance to amend and reordain Section 16 of the Tree Planting Preservation and Replacement Ordinance, Appendix E of the Citv Code So as to conform references to renumbered Sections of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance 19 Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance (Appendix F of the City Code) pertaining to identification and protection of the Resource Protection Area buffers Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area designation criteria, land use and development performance criteria and variances All ^terested Cit Zens a'e invited to attend Ruth Hodges Smith MMC City Clerk BL�CON NOVWBER 23 end NOvEMBER 30 2003 10843007 1A 8 �, �o4 `" - +., y ti •N CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Stephen Wray O'Neal, Expansion of a Nonconforming Use — 420 Davis Street MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: An Ordinance upon Application of Steven Wray O'Neal for the Expansion of a Nonconforming Use on property located at 420 Davis Street (GPIN 1467490320). DISTRICT 2 — KEMPSVILLE This request, in a slightly different form, was reviewed by the City Council on August 26, 2003. That request was for the construction of a 1,200 square foot detached garage. Determining that the size of the garage was too large as a detached structure, City Council indefinitely deferred the matter, directing the applicant to consider an expansion of the existing house for an attached garage. ■ Considerations: The applicant has submitted a plan that depicts a 1,400 square foot addition to the existing nonconforming structure (dwelling unit). The existing structure is nonconforming, since the current zoning, B-2, does not permit single-family dwellings. The addition will be used to store a truck and a boat. As part of the total proposal, the applicant is also proposing to remove a portion of an existing detached garage/shed (reducing the size to 340 square feet) and to remove an existing carport (approximately 262 square feet) that is located directly on the southern property line. No encroachments into setbacks are being requested nor are they needed with this proposal. The proposed addition will be in-line with the existing structure and is proposed approximately eight (8) feet from the side property line. The setbacks in the B-2 district are more "generous" than in the residential and apartment districts. The side yard setback in the B-2 District is zero (0) feet ■ Recommendations: Pursuant to Section 105(e) of the City Zoning Ordinance, a nonconforming use may be enlarged only if the City Council finds that the proposal, as enlarged, will be "equally appropriate or more appropriate to the district than is the existing nonconformity " Staff concludes that the proposed enlargement is reasonable, will not have a detrimental impact on the surrounding area, and will be as appropriate to the district as the existing non -conforming use. Approval of the request, therefore, is recommended with the following conditions. Stephen Wray ONeal Page 2of2 1. The proposed addition shall not exceed the height of the existing dwelling on the property. 2. The proposed addition's footprint shall be limited in size to 1,400 square feet, as shown on the plan. 3. The existing accessory structure, consisting of a carport and a one (1) story frame structure, both depicted on the submitted plan, shall be removed as indicated on the submitted plan prior to the issuance of a final Occupancy Permit for the addition. 4. The proposed addition shall be no closer than the existing structure to any side property line. 5. The proposed addition shall be constructed of building materials that are complementary in style and color to the existing structure. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Resolution Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: ' e T -__— STEPHEN WRAY O'NEAL December 9, 2003 Background: This request, in a slightly different form, was reviewed by the City Council on August 26, 2003. That request was for the construction of a 1,200 square foot detached garage. Determining that the size of the garage was too large as a detached structure, City Council indefinitely deferred the matter, directing the applicant to consider an expansion of the existing house for an attached garage. General Information: REQUEST: Change to a Non -Conforming Use. The structure is a 1-1/2 story dwelling unit located on a parcel zoned B-2 Community Business District. A detached garage (1,200 square feet) was originally proposed in the rear of the property; however, the applicant has modified the request and has submitted a plan that depicts a 1,400 square foot addition to the existing nonconforming structure (dwelling unit). The existing structure is nonconforming, since the current zoning, B-2, does not permit single-family dwellings on parcels within this district. Change to a Non -Conforming Use STEPHEN WRAY O'NEAL Page 1 ADDRESS: 420 Davis Street m- GPIN: 14674960320000 ELECTION DISTRICT: 2 — KEMPSVILLE SITE SIZE: Approximately 32,700 square feet STAFF PLANNER: Carolyn A.K. Smith Major Issues: • Ensuring that the proposed addition and alteration to the nonconforming structure is no more detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood and is as appropriate to the district as the existing structure. 1111111=114 Photo of Existing Dwelling 4 � Change to a Non -Conforming Use •} STEPHEN WRAY O'NEAL Page 2 Land Use, Zoning, and Site Characteristics: Existing Land Use and Zoning The property has an existing one -and -one-half (1-1/2) story single-family dwelling on it and a one (1) story detached garage and carport. The applicant indicated that the existing detached shed/garage will be reduced in size from 680 square feet to approximately 340 square feet. In addition, the existing carport is also proposed for removal. The dwelling unit was built in 1940. An adjacent home to the south, built in 1948, encroaches onto the property. There is a 1 '/2 story frame house on this parcel. This property is also currently zoned B-2 Community Business District. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning North: Single-family dwelling / B-2 Community Business District South: • Single-family dwelling / B-2 Community Business District East: Davis Street • Single-family dwelling / B-2 Community Business District West: Apartments / A-18 Apartment District Zoning and Land Use Statistics Under B-2 Community Business regulations, this property could be developed by right with permitted uses identified in the City Zoning Ordinance for commercial properties such as bakeries, restaurants, household appliance repairs, boat sales, business and vocational schools, offices, child care facilities, dry cleaning agencies, etc. Other uses along this street include bulk storage, cleaning services, office -warehouse, and auto repair. Change to a Non -Conforming Use STEPHEN WRAY O'NEAL Page 3 Zoning History In the shopping center at the corner of Davis Street and Virginia Beach Boulevard, City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit for a church in 2001. Earlier that year, a bulk storage yard was approved on a parcel just to the south on Davis Street. Other Conditional Use Permits granted along Davis Street include Auto Sales and Storage, Motor Vehicle Sales, and a Rehabilitation Center. Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) The site is in an AICUZ area of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Natural Resource and Physical Characteristics The site is located within the Chesapeake Bay watershed. There are no significant natural resources on this site. Public Facilities and Services Water and Sewer City water and sewer currently serve this property. Public Safety Police: Adequate — no additional comments. Fire and Adequate — no additional comments. Rescue: Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan Map designates this area, consistent with the existing zoning, as supportive of retail, service, office and other uses compatible within commercial centers serving surrounding neighborhoods and communities. Ideally, parcels along Davis Street would develop more inline with office uses rather than some of the more "heavy" uses permitted by right under B-2 zoning. Change to a Non -Conforming Use STEPHEN WRAY O'NEAL Page 4 Summary of Proposal • The applicant is proposing to construct an addition, of approximately 1,400 square feet, to the existing structure to store a truck and a boat. • This site is currently zoned B-2 Community Business District and similar to the immediately adjacent parcel, which contains a single-family dwelling on it rather than a commercial use. • The applicant is proposing to remove a portion of an existing detached garage/shed (reducing the size to 340 square feet) and to remove an existing carport (approximately 262 square feet) that is located directly on the southern property line. • No encroachments into setbacks are being requested nor are they needed with this proposal. The proposed addition will be in-line with the existing structure and is proposed approximately eight (8) feet from the side property line. The setbacks in the B-2 district are more "generous" than in the residential and apartment districts. The side yard setback in the B-2 District is zero (0) feet. Evaluation of Request Staff concludes that the proposed addition is reasonable and supports this addition to a nonconforming use. The approximately 1,400 square foot addition to the existing structure is more in keeping with the residential character of the dwelling unit on the property as well as those on adjacent and surrounding sites. The request for expansion of a nonconforming use, therefore, is acceptable subject to the conditions listed below. CONDITIONS 1. The proposed addition shall not exceed the height of the existing dwelling on the property. 2. The proposed addition's footprint shall be limited in size to 1,400 square feet, as shown on the plan. 3. The existing accessory structure, consisting of a carport and a one (1) story frame structure, both depicted on the submitted plan, shall be removed as indicated on the submitted plan prior to the issuance of a final Occupancy Permit for the addition. Change to a Non -Conforming Use STEPHEN WRAY O'NEAL Page 5 4. The proposed addition shall be no closer than the existing structure to any side property line. 5. The proposed addition shall be constructed of building materials that are complementary in style and color to the existing structure. Change to a Non -Conforming Use STEPHEN WRAY O'NEAL Page 6 PQ COPD Di.�CLOSURE STATEMEh T Applicant's Name X �) / List All Current Property Owners` „ Llne APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a CORPORATION. list all officers of the Corporation below (Attach list if necessary) If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below (Attach 11st if necessary) ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization If the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Property Owner Disclosure section below: PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) I If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below (Attach list if necessary) i ❑ Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization i CERTIFICATION I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. nature Print Name Non -Conforming Use Application Page 8 of 10 Modified 10 16 2002 Change to a Non -Conforming Use STEPHEN WRAY VNEAL Page 8 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following. 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc below: (Attach list if necessary) 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant. (Attach hst if necessary) Islecheck here If the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1 List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc below (Attach list if necessary) 2 List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant (Attach list if necessary) Check here if the property owner Is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization & 2 See next page for footnotes Subdivision Vanance Application Page 11 of 12 Revised 10/1/2003 w V DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services (Attach list if necessary) ' "Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation_" See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2 2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2 2-3101. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, i am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing accor�j,ng to the instructions p this packa e. pliE s Slgnat Property Owner's Signature (if different than applicant) Subdivision Variance Application Page 12 of 12 Revised 10/1/2003 Print Name Print Name 1 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXPANSION OF A nonconforming because the B-2 2 NONCONFORMING USE FOR THE ADDITION TO A allow single-family dwellings; 3 NONCONFORMING DWELLING UNIT ON PROPERTY 4 LOCATED AT 420 DAVIS STREET, IN THE KEMPSVILLE 5 DISTRICT 6 WHEREAS, Steven Wray O'Neal, (hereinafter the 7 "Applicant"), has made application to the City Council for 8 authorization to expand a nonconforming use for an addition to a 9 nonconforming dwelling unit on a certain lot or parcel of land 10 having the address of 420 Davis Street, in the B-2 Community 11 Business District; and 12 WHEREAS, the said use is nonconforming because the B-2 13 Zoning District regulations do not allow single-family dwellings; 14 and 15 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 105 of the City Zoning 16 Ordinance, the enlargement of a nonconforming use is unlawful in 17 the absence of a resolution of the City Council authorizing such 18 action upon a finding that the proposed use, as expanded, will be 19 equally appropriate or more appropriate to the zoning district than 20 is the existing use; 21 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 22 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 23 That the City Council hereby finds that the proposed use, 24 as expanded, will be equally appropriate to the district as is the 25 existing use. 27 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 28 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 29 That the proposed addition to the Applicant's 30 nonconforming dwelling unit is hereby authorized, upon the 31 following conditions: 32 1. The proposed addition shall not exceed the height 33 of the existing dwelling on the property. 34 2. The proposed addition's footprint shall be limited 35 in size to 1,400 square feet, as shown on the plan. 36 3. The existing accessory structure, consisting of a 37 carport and a one (1) story frame structure, both 38 depicted on the submitted plan, shall be removed as 39 indicated on the submitted plan prior to the 40 issuance of a final Occupancy Permit for the 41 addition. 42 4. The proposed addition shall be constructed of 43 building materials that are complementary in style 44 and color to the existing structure. 45 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach on 46 the day of , 2003. 2 CA -8985 bkw/work/noncononeal.wpd R-2 -November 25, 2003 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: P1 nning APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: e)d�wl lx�& ZCIL�,_) City ey's Office NSF 195 ASSOCIATES PIN (F) PIN (F) S 29'20'00 W 80.1fi' PIN (F) S 29'20'00 W 100 21' �014 LINE ,$,0 H 0 � I + No. / 1500 1 _ Change to a Non -Conforming Use STEPHEN WRAY O'NEAL Page 7 • .., •` u SACS N .� mpn fn - V 7 C � 3 Y -LOT LOT Y o CAR 2 ' PORT � W y low o `'- LOT Z Z x GvERHUV�, to W c s N �tOR Ss 3 � c l N► 4.2'�+�` N # o co 3a�' H T 0 � � MI .✓ �`� 0 r POLE 20 g tD 'n N gS,p� Z .j 7 55 n56 12r %n,0 2 STORY +' AME HOUSE I n I •20 79 ss 5 OD I PIN (F) PIN (F)i PIN (F) I N 33 02'00' E 100.00' N 33'02'00' E 80.00' 935.60' TO VA. BEACH BLVD DAVIS STREET 1 50' Change to a Non -Conforming Use STEPHEN WRAY O'NEAL Page 7 • .., •` Zoning Change from B-2 to AG -2 - Blue Conditional Zoning Change B-1AG-2B-2 to Cond. B-2 Red ZONING HISTORY 1. 7/9/96 — CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (Communication Tower) — Granted 2. 8/26/86 — REZONING (Downzone to AG-1/AG-2) — Denied 3. 3/8/94 — REZONING (B-1 to Cond. B-2 Business) — Denied 4. 6/11/96 — REZONING (B-1 to Cond. B-2 Business) — Granted 5. 1/28/92 — REZONING (AG -2 to Cond. B-1 Business) — Granted 6. 1/9/86 — REZONING (AG -2 to B-1 Business) — Granted 7. 1/25/82 — REZONING (AG -2 to B-1 Business) - Granted f Nal` Ows r wy,4' s ► CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Berkshire -Hudson Capital, XI, LLX — Change of Zoning District Classification (B-1, B-2 and AG -2 with HC Overlays to Conditional B-2 with a HC Overlay; and, B-2 with a HC Overlay to AG -2 with a HC Overlay) MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: (a) An Ordinance upon Application of Berkshire -Hudson Capital, XI, LLX for a Change of Zoning District Classification from B-1 Neighborhood Business District, B-2 Community Business District and AG -2 Agricultural District with Historic and Cultural District Overlays to Conditional B-2 Community Business District with a Historic and Cultural District Overlay on property located east of the intersection of Princess Anne Road and North Landing Road, beginning at a point approximately 410 feet north of Courthouse Drive (GPIN 14949262400000, 24040127070000, 14949284550000, a portion of 24033828050000, and a portion of 24040232540000) The Comprehensive Plan recommends use of this property for appropriate growth opportunities consistent with the economic vitality policies of the City of Virginia Beach DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE (b) An Ordinance upon Application of Berkshire -Hudson Capital XI, L.L.C. for a Change of Zoning District Classification from B-2 Community Business District with Historic and Cultural District Overlay to AG -2 Agricultural District with Historic and Cultural District Overlay on property located on the east side of Princess Anne Road, approximately 450 feet east of the intersection with Princess Anne Road, and, on the east side of Princess Anne Road, approximately 850 feet north of Courthouse Drive (GPINS 2404012707; 2404023254) DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE The purpose of the requests is to rezone the property to accommodate a new retail center and to remove the irregular zoning boundaries that now exist on the site. The City Council deferred these items on November 25 at the request of the applicant. ■ Considerations: The 5 47 acre site (Request #a) is currently developed with a small restaurant building, Kellam & Eaton Hardware Store, and a saw sharpening shop There Berkshire -Hudson Page 2 of 3 are also some lumber sheds and warehouse buildings located behind the hardware store. The existing zoning on the site is mixed The majority of the site is zoned B-2 Community Business, a small corner of the restaurant site is zoned B-1 Neighborhood Business District and the northeast corner of the site is zoned AG -2 Agricultural District. In addition, the 5 47 -acre site proposed for rezoning lies within the Historic and Cultural Overlay District known as the Courthouse Historic District. The 0 80 -acre site (Request #b) is actually two separate pieces of property The northern piece contains the principal driveway to the residence north of the saw sharpening shop and also contains several mature trees. The eastern piece is behind the Kellam & Eaton Hardware Store and is not developed The 0 80 acre site is zoned B-2 Community Business District with Historic and Cultural District Overlay These pieces are `residuals' of existing B-2 zoning that will be left by the new configuration of commercial property as proposed The submitted site plan shows four separate buildings and associated parking areas. Two of the buildings are located in the front of the property, facing North Landing and Princess Anne Road There are two other buildings located in the back of the property These buildings face a pedestrian plaza area that has been designed as a public space and that will include areas of outdoor seating The buildings are set back 35 feet from North Landing and Princess Anne Road Brick sidewalks and landscaped area are shown within the 35 -foot setback There is very little parking that will be visible from the street, the majority of parking on the site is located behind the buildings The buildings have been designed using the architectural features found in the municipal center complex so that the new commercial center will complement its historic surroundings. Varied rooflines, brick arcades, false windows and building offsets are used to create a fagade that resembles a village, instead of the standard franchise look. The applicant has worked with the Historic Review Board for the past six months to coordinate the details shown on the proffered elevations Additional review by the Historic Review Board is required for the specific materials, signage, site lighting, and landscape plantings. This additional review will be coordinated with the site plan review through the Development Services Center Staff recommended approval of the requests There was no opposition to the requests. ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 11-0 to approve the request to Conditional B-2 with an Historic and Cultural Overlay as proffered and a change of zoning to AG -2 with a Historic and Cultural Overlay Berkshire -Hudson Page 3 of 3 ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement(s) Planning Commission Minutes Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval Planning Commission recommends approval Submitting DepartmentlAgency: Planning Departmenyjj I yo City Manager: 'Y-- '"bgV&t' BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 111 =-- N__ - - I October 8, 2003 General Information: APPLICATION 112-211-CRZ-2003 NUMBER: 112-211-REZ-2003 REQUEST: (1) Change of Zoning District Classification from B-1 Neighborhood Business District, B-2 Community Business District and AG -2 Agricultural District with Historic and Cultural District Overlays to Conditional B-2 Community Business District with a Historic and Cultural District Overlay (2) Change of Zoning District Classification from B-2 Community Business District with Historic and Cultural District Overlay to AG -2 Agricultural District with Historic and Cultural District Overlay ADDRESS: (1) East of the intersection of Princess Anne Road and North Landing Road, beginning at a point approximately 410 feet north of Courthouse Drive (2) East side of Princess Anne Road, approximately 450 feet east of the intersection with Princess Anne Road; and, on the east side of Princess Anne Road, approximately 850 feet north of Courthouse Drive Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON 1 # 1 & 2 Page 1 Map j 12� Map t to tale r Berkshire Hudson Cavi i AG r� CU C AG-1�; -2 , `1 AG -1 ur � t - 00 \ . fJCAL AND AGA =', - --• - . \ .A Di 1 O Zoning Change from B-2 to AG -2 - Blue Conditional Zoning Change B-1AG-2B-2 to Cond B-2 Red GPIN: (1) 14949262400000; 24040127070000; 14949284550000; a portion of 24033828050000; and a portion of 24040232540000 (2) 2404012707 and 2404023254 ELECTION DISTRICT: 7 - PRINCESS ANNE SITE SIZE: (1) 5.47 acres (2) 0.80 acres STAFF PLANNER: Barbara Duke PURPOSE: To rezone the property to accommodate a new retail center and to remove the irregular zoning boundaries that now exist on the site. .1I. Bpl_ Planning Commission Agenda °' 4L s October 8, 2003 == w BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 2 Major Issues: • The subject site is located in the Courthouse Historic District and the Transition Area. The degree to which the proposal is compatible with the Courthouse Historic District is important, as well as the degree to which the proposal meets Transition Area guidelines for non-residential development. • There is a 66 -foot wide strip of city property that extends through the subject site. This city property is an old railroad right-of-way that extends through the property from Princess Anne Road to the property boundary and then continues southeast to West Neck Creek. The degree to which the proposal incorporates this public space is important. • Both Princess Anne Road (North Landing Road to Seaboard Road) and Princess Anne Road (North Landing Road to James Madison Boulevard) are operating at maximum capacity. The degree to which the proposal addresses traffic impacts is important. Land Use, Zoning, and Site Characteristics: Existing Land Use and Zoning The 5 47 acre site (Request #1) is currently developed with a small restaurant building, Kellam & Eaton Hardware Store, and a saw sharpening shop. There are also some lumber sheds and warehouse buildings located behind the hardware store. The existing zoning on the site is mixed. The majority of the site is zoned B-2 Community Business, a small corner of the restaurant site is zoned B-1 Neighborhood Business District and the northeast corner of the site is zoned AG -2 Agricultural District. In addition, the 5.47 - acre site proposed for rezoning lies within the Historic/Cultural Overlay District known as the Courthouse Historic District. The 0 80 -acre site (Request #2) is actually two separate pieces of property. The northern piece contains the principal driveway to the residence north of the saw sharpening shop and also contains several mature trees. The eastern piece is behind the Kellam & Eaton Hardware Store and is not developed. The 0.80 acre site is zoned B-2 Community Business District with Historic/Cultural District Overlay. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning North: • Single-family homes / AG -2 Agricultural District Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 3 (Historic and Cultural Overlay District) South: . Office and retail complex / B-1 Neighborhood Business District (Historic and Cultural Overlay District) East: • Communication Towers and Wooded Floodplain / AG -1 &AG -2 Agricultural District West: . Municipal Center and surrounding businesses / 0- 2 Office District and B-2 Community Business District (Historic and Cultural Overlay District) Zoning and Land Use Statistics With Existing The property is currently developed with commercial Zoning: uses that could continue to operate, or the portion of the property zoned B-1 Neighborhood Business District and B-2 Community Business District could be redeveloped for any other use allowed in the B-1 Neighborhood Business District and/or B-2 Community Business District. With The property will be developed as a commercial center Proposed that contains a large Eckerd drug store, retail shops Zoning: and office space in accordance with the proffers and site plan. Zoning History Portions of the site were zoned commercial when the City Zoning Ordinance was initially adopted based on the boundaries of the existing businesses on the site. In 1986, a request by the City of Virginia Beach to downzone the property to AG -1 and AG -2 was denied. In 1996, a Conditional Use Permit for a communication tower was approved on property east of the site. There have been several rezonings from Agriculture to Business south of the site along Princess Anne Road. Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) The site is in an AICUZ of 65-70dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 4 Public Facilities and Services Water and Sewer There is a 16 -inch water main in Princess Anne Road fronting the property. There is an 8 -inch gravity sewer in Princess Anne Road fronting the property. This site must connect to City water and sewer. A sewer and pump station analysis of pump station 614 is required to ensure proposed flows can be accommodated. Transportation Master Transportation Plan (MTP) / Capital Improvement Program (CIP): Princess Anne Road and North Landing Road in this vicinity are two lane minor suburban arterials. These sections are not designated for improvement on the Master Transportation Plan map and no projects are programmed to improve them in the current six year Capital Improvement Program. Currently, Princess Anne Road/North Landing Road in this location is operating at maximum capacity. However, the volume of traffic on this roadway is expected to decrease after completion of CIP # 2.306 Princess Anne Road Phase IV, northwest of the subject site. CIP #2.306 Princess Anne Road Phase IV -- Phase IV of this VDOT project is for construction of a four -lane parkway from Dam Neck Road to Nimmo Parkway - Phase V (intersection of Holland Road and Nimmo Parkway) a distance of approximately 2.6 miles. A 250 -foot right-of-way will be acquired to provide for ultimate expansion to eight lanes in the future. Aesthetic treatments of landscaping, unique streetlighting, and signage will create a typical section that establishes an identifiable roadway. Landscaping costs were increased to include aesthetic treatments associated with the Princess Anne Corridor Study. This project also incorporates funding for other road improvements that will reduce the number of access points. Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 5 T Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Princess Anne Road — North Landing Road to 24,907 ADT ' 16,200 ADT ' 2 Existing Land Use - <2,036> Seaboard Road Proposed Land Use 3 - Princess Anne Road - North Landing Road to 15,428 ADT 16,200 ADT <2,551> James Madison Boulevard 'Average Daily Trips 2 as defined by existing zoning and not on current site usage, which is considerably lower 3 as defined by the square footage of the drug store and retail/office use as shown on the proffered sde plan Public Safetv Police: The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Fire and Fire Department comments will be addressed during detailed Rescue: site plan review for this project. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan Map shows that the subject site is within Transition Area, an area planned for appropriate growth opportunities, consistent with the economic vitality policies of Virginia Beach. This site is also identified as being part of the Courthouse Historic District. Within the Transition Area there are established guidelines for non- residential use as noted below. • Commercial development within the Transition Area should be thought of as Neighborhood Serving Centers. Design the commercial to meet the day-to-day needs of a limited residential population. • Provide opportunities to walk instead of drive. • Franchise development should respect the community character. • Wherever the commercial development occurs connectivity with the trail system planned for the Transition Area is important. Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 6 Summary of Proposal Proposal • The combined acreage of the two applications is 6.27 acres. Of the 6.27 acres, 5.47 acres is proposed for the commercial center. Of the 5.47 acres, 3.82 acres is zoned B-1 or B-2 Business District. 1.65 acres is zoned AG -2 Agricultural District. The applicant is proposing to rezone the entire 5.47 acres to Conditional B-2 Business District with a Historic/Cultural Overlay District. • The second part of this request involves another 0.80 acres of property outside of the commercial center limits. This 0.80 acres of property is currently zoned B-2 Business District. The applicant is requesting that this area be downzoned to AG -2 Agricultural District with a Historic and Cultural Overlay District. • The combined requests will result in an additional 0.85 acres, or 37,026 square feet, of commercial property in this location. • The 5.47 -acre commercial center includes a 66 -foot wide strip of property that is owned by the City of Virginia Beach. This City property is an old railroad right-of- way that extends through the property from Princess Anne Road to the property boundary and then continues southeast to West Neck Creek. The applicant has requested to buy the portion of the property from the City that is within the limits of the 5.47 -acre commercial center and has submitted an application for the declaration and sale of excess property to the Department of Public Works/Real Estate. That application is currently under review and will be forwarded to City Council for consideration in conjunction with this rezoning request. • The applicant has worked diligently with the City staff and the Historic Review Board over the past six months to address staff concerns related to the major issues outlined above. Site Design • The submitted site plan shows four separate buildings and associated parking areas. Two of the buildings are located in the front of the property, facing North Landing and Princess Anne Road. There are two other buildings located in the back of the property. These buildings face a pedestrian plaza area that has been designed as a public space and that will include areas of outdoor seating. Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 7 • The buildings are set back 35 feet from North Landing and Princess Anne Road. Brick sidewalks and landscaped area are shown within the 35 -foot setback. There is very little parking that will be visible from the street; the majority of parking on the site is located behind the buildings • The northeastern corner of this site is within the 100 -year floodplain. The applicant has submitted documentation, in the form of an approved Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (who administers this aspect of the floodplain program), showing revised floodplain boundaries based on new topographic surveys of the site. The revised area of floodplain indicates that the amount of floodplain impact due to the proposed development does not exceed the 5 percent threshold that is reviewed administratively and that the required mitigation can be provided on site. Vehicular and Pedestrian Access • The main entrance road shown on the plan has been shifted south of the existing entrance to Kellam & Eaton Hardware to align it better with the existing intersection. This main entrance road will become the fourth leg of the intersection of Princess Anne Road and North Landing Road. There is currently a traffic signal at this intersection and the applicant is aware that signal -timing modifications will be necessary. • In addition to the signal timing modifications, the applicant is required to install left and right turn lanes at the main entrance road. These turn lanes are shown on the plan. • There is an additional entrance/exit shown at the northern corner of the site. This entrance is designed primarily for delivery truck traffic and can be used by drive- through customers exiting the site heading north on Princess Anne Road. • The applicant has submitted a traffic impact study to Public Works/Traffic Engineering. The initial study was reviewed and the traffic generation and basic layout of the entrances has been agreed upon. The applicant and the Public Works/Traffic Engineering staff are currently discussing the details of the study and a resubmittal of the study will be necessary. The details such as turn lane length and signal timing will be coordinated during site plan review through the Development Services Center. • The pedestrian access proposed with this project is quite unique. Brick paver sidewalks, 10 feet in width, are shown along the right-of-way of North Landing/Princess Anne Road. Brick paver sidewalks, 5 feet in width are shown Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 8 along both sides of the main entrance road. These sidewalks connect to a pedestrian plaza at the back of the site located between two retail/office buildings that will front on the plaza. The plaza was designed as a public space with input from the Department of Parks and Recreation so that this area can be incorporated as a destination point on the planned bike trail that is envisioned in the Outdoors Plan for the old railroad right-of-way that runs through this area of the city. A brick paver sidewalk leads southeast from the pedestrian plaza to reconnect to the City right-of-way at the back of the site. • The applicant proposes to dedicate a perpetual public access/drainage easement over the main entrance road and sidewalks and the pedestrian plaza area in exchange for the purchase of the platted railroad right-of-way currently owned by the City that runs through the middle of the property. Architectural Design • There are four buildings proposed within the commercial center. The building with the largest footprint is the Eckerd drug store at 13,813 square feet. There are two one-story retail buildings with footprints of 7,200 square feet each and a two-story retail/office building with a footprint of 8,400 square feet. • The buildings have been designed using the architectural features found in the municipal center complex so that the new commercial center will complement its historic surroundings. Varied rooflines, brick arcades, false windows and building offsets are used to create a facade that resembles a village, instead of the standard franchise look. The applicant has worked with the Historic Review Board for the past six months to coordinate the details shown on the proffered elevations. Additional review by the Historic Review Board is required for the specific materials, signage, site lighting, and landscape plantings. This additional review will be coordinated with the site plan review through the Development Services Center. Included at the end of this report is a letter stating the position of the Historic Review Board. • The Eckerd building entrance will front on the main entrance road, with the west side of the building facing North Landing. A drive-through is located on the eastern side of the building. The Eckerd building is the only building on the site with a designated loading area. This loading area is well screened by a 14 -foot high brick wall that includes false windows and a false roof. These features make the wall appear to be part of the building structure when viewed from the roadway. • A unique aspect of the three retail/office buildings shown on the site plan is that these buildings will have double frontage, meaning they will have customer entrances on either side of each building. Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 9 Landscape and Open Space • The subject site is located in the Transition Area of the city where specific guidelines have been developed for residential and non-residential development. Open space and landscaping are an integral part of any project in this area. • As noted above in the Vehicular and Pedestrian Access portion of this report, the site plan incorporates a public open space amenity in the form of a pedestrian plaza that will connect to the future public recreational trail system planned for the old railroad right-of-way that runs through this portion of the city. Pedestrian accessibility has been well integrated throughout the entire site, from the sidewalks provided along both sides of the main entrance road, to the pedestrian plaza, to the design of the retail/office buildings with dual entrances. • The applicant has designed the buildings with green spaces instead of parking between the street and building fronts, most of the parking is hidden from the roadway view. • A landscaped median has been provided within the main entry road and there is a clock tower planned as a focal point at the entrance to the pedestrian plaza. • In addition to the 35 -foot wide roadway landscape buffer, the required landscaped areas and the detention pond areas, a total of 21.8 percent of the site is open space. This includes the pedestrian plaza area and a large area of open space in the northeast corner of the property. Proffers PROFFER # 1 As developed, the Property shall be developed for drug store/retail facility, together with additional structures to be utilized as retail/commercial and/or offices, subject to the restrictions of proffer #4 of this Agreement. No other uses shall be permitted on the property. Staff Evaluation: This proffer is acceptable. It reinforces the focus of this commercial center as primarily a neighborhood serving facility by eliminating some of the more intense uses associated with the B-2 zoning district. PROFFER # 2 As developed, the site layout and landscaping shall be substantially as shown on that certain exhibit entitled Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 10 "Eckerd Princess Anne Road and North Landing Road City of Virginia Beach, Virginia Preliminary Site Plan" prepared by John R. McAdams Company, Inc. and dated 09/08/03, which has been exhibited to City Council of the City of Virginia Beach ("City Council") and is on file with the Planning Department of the City of Virginia Beach ("Planning Department"). Staff Evaluation: This proffer is acceptable; see comments in Site Design section above. PROFFER # 3 The architectural design and building materials of the structures on the Property shall be substantially compatible with the architectural style and materials reflected in pages 1-16 of the architectural elevations dated September 18, 2003, and prepared by RBA Group Architecture, which elevations have been exhibited of City Council and are on file with the Planning Department. Staff Evaluation: This proffer is acceptable. The building elevations respect the community character and are compatible with the historic surroundings. PROFFER # 4 The following uses shall not be permitted on the Property; automobile repair facilities, automobile service stations, bingo halls, car wash facilities, flea markets, heliports and helistops, mini -warehouses, motor home sales and motor vehicle sales and rentals. Staff Evaluation: This proffer is acceptable. It reinforces the focus of this commercial center as primarily a neighborhood serving facility by eliminating some of the more intense uses associated with the B-2 zoning district. PROFFER # 5 A Certificate of Appropriateness shall be obtained from the Planning Department of the City of Virginia Beach prior to the development of the Property, which may be issued following review by the Historic Review board of the site layout; site landscaping; the architectural style and building materials of the structures, the location, size, number and character of the proposed signage; proposed exterior lighting arrangements. Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 1111 Staff Evaluation: This proffer is acceptable. The applicant has worked with the Historic Review Board for the past six months to coordinate the details shown on the proffered elevations. However, additional review by the Historic Review Board is still required for the specific materials, signage, site lighting and landscape plantings. This additional review will be coordinated with the site plan review through the Development Services Center. Included at the end of this report is a letter stating the position of the Historic Review Board. City Attorney's The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer Office: agreement dated September 17th, 2003, and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. Evaluation of Request The request for a change of zoning to Conditional B-2 Commercial Business District with Historic and Cultural District Overlay for 5.47 acres and the request for a change of zoning to AG -2 Agricultural District with Historic and Cultural District Overlay for 0.80 acres are acceptable. The proposal's strengths in addressing the Mayor Issues presented at the beginning of this report are as follows: 1. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this site as being within the Transition Area and the Courthouse Historic District. The proposed use, site layout and building elevations that have been proffered by the applicant are consistent with the non- residential guidelines for the Transition Area, and the Historic Review Board has approved the project as being compatible with the Courthouse Historic District. The site layout and building design also exceed the retail design guidelines listed in the zoning ordinance and incorporate many of the voluntary provisions therein. 2. There is a 66 -foot wide strip of city property that extends through the subject site. This city property is an old railroad right-of-way that extends through the property from Princess Anne Road to the property boundary and then continues southeast Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON I # 1 & 2 Page 12 to West Neck Creek. The existing right-of-way is in the location of the existing entrance to Kellam & Eaton Hardware. In order to redevelop this site as proposed, the location of the main entrance needed to be shifted to the south to properly align with the signalized intersection. The applicant has worked with the Departments of Planning, Parks and Recreation, and Public Works to relocate this public space to the new main entrance road. The new public space is well integrated into the overall project and will serve the purpose that has been planned for this public property as a destination point on the bike trail that is envisioned in the Outdoors Plan for the old railroad right-of-way that runs through this area of the city. A public access and drainage easement will be dedicated on the main entrance road and pedestrian plaza area. 3. Both Princess Anne Road (North Landing Road to Seaboard Road) and Princess Anne Road (North Landing Road to James Madison Boulevard) are operating at maximum capacity. The applicant is requesting approximately 37,000 square feet of additional commercial property. When the proposed use is compared to the existing zoning on the subject site, the difference in trip generation is an increase of around 500 trips per day. There are many factors that offset the increase in trip generation that make this proposal acceptable to staff. First, the applicant has prepared a site layout plan with only two entrance/exit points. The main entrance road has been relocated on the site to better align with the existing signalized intersection. Currently, there are three existing entrance/exit points, none of which align properly with the intersection. Second, the applicant has requested that property to the north outside of the project limits be downzoned to AG -2. This property fronts on Princess Anne Road and rezoning it to AG -2 will eliminate the possibility of another separate commercial use and entrance in this location in the future. Third, the applicant has designed the site and buildings to encourage and promote pedestrian traffic, which over the long run may reduce the actual vehicle trips generated by the proposed use. Lastly, when the new Nimmo Parkway is completed in late 2007, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial decrease in traffic on this section of Princess Anne Road and North Landing Road. The Planning staff, therefore, recommends approval of the request for a change of zoning to Conditional B-2 Commercial Business District with Historic and Cultural District Overlay for 5.47 acres subject to the proffer agreement and recommends approval the request for a change of zoning to AG -2 Agricultural District with Historic and Cultural District Overlay for 0.80 acres with no conditions. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezonina application may reauire Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 13 revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable Ci Codes. Planning Commission Octobe r BERKSHIRE -HUDSON Agenda 8, 2003 /#1&2 Page 14 L, B zjcyL vTZ LLI { �. . � _ _ �•� .J 1. � Y� » �� .. `1 _ `.[�`a'.rr N�: rf � {�• bl.; U+1 l »/��nTAfA Ji Jam. Ilk cci ol JZ �{ `r �� r' T'i�... �n3�'h ..+Yw. Y f fY`�.f •� ..+,� i y� xY ��• yam• , �� , tiRe. �• ��_ � _ `,.'� � �; f - Jq�AN` j Alanninn (_AmmicQinn LAA :ia; r f f CPR c � f � :n - mow. 3 y`F..:y - • `'�� 'F'A" •may IQf t �� A . ... ,. .- .. f , 00 41 � c� � N i S r�;r�l �` r. F• kf��`7 . \ � j`► �:' .. .l+M !^.r> 4'aSD�jry .•. J: 'V ��.�. �.•4 . _ .. � •,2i X -- <lot k �cz ` i. ,.... r• o � � T1s ,� J� `sy+ 1 B�cyL - Planning Commission Agendas s October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 17 z �i 0.0ft►. Lu uvM s`r7 me Ck z w cc �r "NOW lanning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 18 us z 0 C9 lu us �r ull us zu Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 19 flo Li z 0 us uu 0 go i9 z ..i aim CA z 0 sowaj ul z z r z Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 20 BUILDING I EAST ELEVATION I BUILDING '! WEST ELEVATION Planning Commission Octobe r BERKSHIRE -HUDSON Agenda 812003 #1 &2 Page 21 us z Cq 0 z r� z amt ul us Z CM co z �M Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 22 BUILDING 2 WEST ELEVATION BUILDING 2 EAST ELEVATION Planning Commission Octobe r BERKSHIRE -HUDSON Agenda 812003 /#1&2 Page 23 01--mrnnirnM l-0%rw%r„ic•C--i0%rn p i al l � , ,j �1 01--mrnnirnM l-0%rw%r„ic•C--i0%rn p i al l � , 01--mrnnirnM l-0%rw%r„ic•C--i0%rn p BUILDING 3 NORTH ELEVATION BUILDING 3 SOUTH ELEVATION •S�,,Nu BetC,s,4 Planning Commission Agenda Z Uv• � October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 25 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's Name: Berkshire -Hudson Capital Xl, LLC E1111111111111 List All Current Property Owners. David Kellam, Susan Kellam, Kellam and Eaton, Inc., City of Vug_ inia Beach 6 APPLICANT DISCLOSURE loomm( If the applicant is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below - 1004 (Attach list if necessary) 1=4 If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) Calm; Berkshire -Hudson Cat3ital Xl, LLC, a North Carolina limited liability company. Managing Members are Gary Davies, David Hill and James Fagan. ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. If the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Property Owner section below: PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) See separate Owners' Disclosure Statements If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach Inst if necessary) ❑ Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. �■�ri CERTIFICATION. ! certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. BERKSHIRE- ON CAPITAL XI, LLC By:_� Signat Print Kame Rezoning Application _Page 10 of 14�.,..-.. .... r.. t. Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 26 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's Name: Berkshire -Hudson Capital SCI LLC '�,,,,.■� List All Current Kellam and Eatonnc., Ci of ;9!4 Property Owners: David Kellam, Susan Kellam, , I Virginia Beach COO")APPLICANT DISCLOSURE on below: if the applicant is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporati �MA �� (Attach list if necessary) If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list it necessary) cow"; See se arate A licant Disclosure Statement ;4- [3 Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. If the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Property Owner section below: PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE if the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) it the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or otherNINCOon RPOR{AE Dh list ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organ if necessary) p Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other ]•004 unincorporated organization. E=004 CERTIFICATION: t certify that the information contained herein is true and fm.r{ a ate. David Kellam Print Name Signature - - Susan Kellam Print Name F Signature 4=0? P KEL AtUD TON �t�C, By. Print Name P Signature Bucy` Planning Commission Agenda 4. October 89 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON I # 1 & 2 .�,. Page 27 i!! DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach fist if necessary) Berkshire -Hudson Capital Xl, LLC, a North Carolina limited liability company. Managing members are Gary Davies, David Hill and James Fagan. ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. rf the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Property Owner Disclosure section below: PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) See separate Owner's Disclosure Statements If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach fist if necessary) ❑ Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate, I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, i am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days pnor to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. BERKSHIRE- A ON CAPITAL X(, LLC By: arra cx mes AppUcant's Print— Name See attach Propeft Owners' signature 12ace Property Owniks Signature (if different than applicant) Print Name Rezoning Appinaon Page 10 of 10 Revised 7/7/2003 Planning Commission Agenda October 8, 2003 BERKSHIRE -HUDSON / # 1 & 2 Page 28 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below. (Attach list if necessary) See Separate Applicant Disclosure Statement ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. If the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Property Owner Disclosure section below: PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) 0 Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing ac ding to the instructions in this package. David Kellam Applicant's Signature Print Name Applicant's Signature + .KELLA'M AND EATON, lW. 1 R03/ A -42U PEApplicant's Signature Susan Kellam Print Name W � V E+� la� Print Name Planning Commission Octobe r BERKSHIRE -HUDSON Agenda 812003 1#1&2 Page 29 Z O V Z DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) Berkshire -Hudson Capital XI, LLC, a North Carolina limited liability company Managing Members: James A. Fagan, Jr., Gary J. Davies and David P. Hill 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) See attached list. ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) See separate Owners' Disclosure Statements. 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) ❑ Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. 1 & 2 See next page for footnotes Conditional Rezoning Application Page 12 of 13 Revised 10/1/2003 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services (Attach list if necessary) See attached list 1 "Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation " See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va Code § 2 2-3101 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities, there are common or commingled funds or assets, the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis, or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities " See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va Code § 2 2-3101 CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing he instructions in this package BeC LC App"IlicW:iagature PrintName See separate Owners' Signature pages Prooertv Owner's Sicanature (If different than aDD11cant) Print Name Conditional Rezoning Application Page 13 of 13 Revised 10/1/2003 O V a List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary or affiliated business entity relationship with the applicant: 1. JDH Sunset, LLC 2. JDH-FL Realty Services 3. Berkshire -Hudson Capital 1 4. Berkshire -Hudson Capital II 5. Berkshire -Hudson Capital III 6. Berkshire -Hudson Capital IV 7. Berkshire -Hudson Capital V 8. Berkshire -Hudson Capital VI 9. Berkshire -Hudson Capital VII 10. Berkshire -Hudson Capital VIII 11. Berkshire -Hudson Capital IX 12. Berkshire -Hudson Capital X 13. Berkshire -Hudson Capital XI 14. Berkshire -Hudson Capital XII 15. Berkshire -Hudson Capital XIII 16. Berkshire -Hudson Capital XIV 17. Berkshire -Hudson Durham 18. Waterville Equities 1 19. Waterville Equities II 20. Waterville Equities III 21. Waterville/DE Equities 22. Newcastle Group East 23. Newcastle Group East III 24. Newcastle Group East IV 25. Newcastle Group, LLC 26. Newcastle Group II 27. Newcastle Group III 28. Newcastle Group IV 29. Newcastle Group V 30. Newcastle Group VI 31. Newcastle Group VII 32. Newcastle Group VIII 33. Newcastle Group IX 34. Durham Medical Investments 35. Eastham Investors 36. Marvin Retail Partners 37. Stockbridge Commons Retail 1 38. Stockbridge Commons Retail II 39. Woodruff Retail Investors 40. Lynchburg Crossing Partners 1 41. Hoffman Village Retail Partners 42. KDH Retail Investors 43. Zebulon Retail Investors 44. Hanes Mill Retail Partners Limited Partnership 45. Bristol-Cardiff Capital 1 46. Bristol-Cardiff Capital II 47. Bristol-Cardiff Capital III 48. Bristol-Cardiff Capital IV 49. Realty Services of the Carolinas 50. Nauset Light Equities 51. Biltmore Forest Equities 52. JDH-Ternion 1 53. JDH-Ternion II 54. Troon Equities 55. Troon Equities 1 56. Troon Equities III 57. Troon Equities IV 58. Gaffney Retail Partners 59. RS Retail Partners 60. KDH-DT Retail Investors 61. Kill Devil Hills Land Investors 62. Greenwood Retail Investors, LLC 63. Smithfield Retail Investors 64. Easley Retail Investors 65. Williamston Retail Partners 66. Henderson Retail Partners 67. Simpsonville Retail Partners 68. Perth Road Retail Investors 69. Upton Retail Investors 70. JDH Capital, LLC 71. Bells Mill Retail Investors, LLC 72. Scuffletown Retail Investors, LLC 73. Lenoir DT Investors, LLC 74. Greenville NC DT Investors, LLC 75. Beatties Ford Retail Investors, LLC 76. Harrisburg Retail Investors, LLC 77. Apex Retail Investors, LLC 78. Indian Trail Retail Investors, LLC 79. Rolesville Retail Investors, LLC 80. Strickland Retail Partners, LLC 81. Redbud Retail Investors, LLC 82. Monroe Retail Investors, LLC 83. Garner Retail Investors, LLC 84. Plaza Retail Investors, LLC 85. Tyre Neck Retail Investors, LLC 86. Lynnhaven Retail Investors, LLC 87. Cornerstone Commons Retail Investors, LLC 88. Steel Creek Retail Investors, LLC 89. Mt. Pleasant Retail Investors, LLC 90. Fuquay-Vanina Retail Investors, LLC 91. Brier Creek Retail Investors, LLC 92. Albemarle/51 Retail Investors, LLC 93. Maynard Retail Investors, LLC 94. Independence Retail Investors, LLC 95. Gloucester Retail Investors, LLC 96. Ahoskie Retail Investors, LLC 97. Campostella Retail Investors, LLC 98. N. Landing Retail Investors, LLC 99. Monticello Retail Investors, LLC 100. DT Plaza Albemarle Retail Investors, LLC 101. College Retail Investors, LLC 102. Leesville Retail Investors, LLC 103. Travelers Rest Retail Investors, LLC 104. Duraleigh Retail Investors, LLC 105. Smith Hines Retail Investors, LLC 106. Idlewild Market Retail Investors, LLC 107. Cabarrus Retail Investors, LLC 108. Anderson Mill Retail Investors, LLC 109. Falls of the Neuse Retail Investors, LLC 110. Stallings Retail Investors, LLC 111. Salem Retail Investors, LLC 112. Fairview Retail Investors, LLC 113. Eastwood Retail Investors, LLC 114. Leland Retail Investors, LLC 253316 List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary): John R. McAdams RBA Group Johnston, Allison, & Hord Troutman Sanders JDH Capital, LLC Kubulins Transportation Group Advantis 253314 Z O V Z DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) See separate Applicant Disclosure Statement 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) See attached list. ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) David Kellam 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) El Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. ' & 2 See next page for footnotes Conditional Rezoning Application Page 12 of 13 Revised 10/1/2003 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) See list attached to Applicant Disclosure Statement. 1 "Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. David Kel m Applicant's Signature Print Name See separate Owners' Signature pages ProDertv Owner's Slonature (if different than aDDlicant) Print Name Conditional Rezoning Application Page 13 of 13 Revised 10/1/2003 54� cum;, a Z O N L= r� Z DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) See separate Applicant Disclosure Statement 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) See attached list. ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) Susan Kellam 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) 0 Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. & 2 See next page for footnotes Conditional Rezoning Application Page 12 of 13 Revised 10/1/2003 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) See list attached to Applicant Disclosure Statement. 1 "Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. Susan Kellam Applicant's Signature / Print Name See separate Owners' Siqnature pages ProDertv Owner's Sianature (if different than aoolicant) Print Name Conditional Rezoning Application Page 13 of 13 Revised 10/1/2003 Z O cum;, .-a DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) See separate Applicant Disclosure Statement. 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) See attached list. ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) Kellam and Eaton, Inc. David E. Kellam, President and Treasurer; John S. Kellam, Vice President, Catherine E. Kellam, Secretary. 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) Princess Boro Development Corporation ❑ Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. ' & 2 See next page for footnotes Conditional Rezoning Application Page 12 of 13 Revised 10!1!2003 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) See list attached to Applicant Disclosure Statement. 1 "Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. Kellam,4nd Eaton, Inc. By: _6) Applicant's Signature Print Name See separate Owners' Signature pages Proaertv Owner's Sianature (if different than aoDlicant) Print Name Conditional Rezoning Application Page 13 of 13 Revised 10/1/2003 54� Z O N 0 A O <MOO Item #1 & 2 Berkshire -Hudson Capital, XI Change of Zoning District Classification East of the intersection of Princess Anne Road and North Landing Road District 7 Princess Anne October 8, 2003 REGULAR Ronald Ripley: The last part of our agenda deals with items to be heard and they will be heard in their regular order. Mr. Miller, will you call the first item. Robert Miller: The first items are Items #1 & 2, Berkshire -Hudson Capital XI. Ronald Ripley: I don't believe we have any opposition to this application. At least nobody is registered. I want to let the public know that this item would have been put on consent but we feel that it's such a unique development and probably of such public interest that it ought to be reviewed. So, we asked that the counselor to go over his application so that we can see it a little better. Tom Kleine: Good afternoon Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. For the record, my name is Tom Kleine and I'm an attorney with the firm Troutman Saunders in Virginia Beach and I'm here on behalf of the applicant, which is Berkshire -Hudson in this case. I'm also accompanied here today by Mr. Jim Fagan, who is a principal with Berkshire -Hudson and I would also note that Mr. & Mrs. David Kellam, who are owners of the subject property are also here in the audience this afternoon as well. This application comes to you with a recommendation of approval from the Planning Department. It comes to you after months and months, probably nine or so months of negotiations and work with the Planning Department staff. It comes to you after four formal presentations before the Historic Review Board and with an informal presentation before the Historic Review Board in which we worked out the architectural detail, the site layout, the landscaping and the overall compatibility of this proposed use with the historic courthouse overlay district where it is located and also with the new guidelines for retail and commercial uses within the Transition area. What we're proposing here at this site with which everyone is so familiar because it's right across the street of course is the Kellam -Eaton site. And, what we're proposing here is to utilize about 5.47 acres of that site for commercial purposes for a small pedestrian retail village. And, there is also a site plan. I have a colorized copy of it right here to show you. You will see what the retail village is that we have configured the retail village in a manner to encourage the pedestrian access to this site. And, also to ensure that it's compatible with the courthouse district What you would see when you entered the site on this property would be an Eckerd drug store to your left. Now, I will show you the elevations. If we could back up, and see if there's a previous elevation there, showing the elevations from Eckerd looking at it from Princess Anile Road. What you will see that it is an Eckerd that looks unlike any Eckerd that you've ever seen. This is an Eckerd that was designed specifically for this site, designed in consultation with the Historic Review Board and designed by taking into account the architectural features of the historic courthouse area and a lot of the comments to try to ensure that what we have is a pedestrian friendly localized shopping district and something that conveys that village effect so that you don't have kind of a large, more franchise look that you've seen. The architectural detail of course we've worked out with the Historic Review Board and will be looking at them with further detail on the exact materials that we have. If I can see the next elevation, this is what you would see actually from Princess Anne Road. As you enter, and if I could see the other Eckerd elevation, that is the elevation that you would see as you drove in to the central area there on your left. Again, there's been great detail to ensuring that's compatible. You'll see the arches. You'll see the columns and you'll see the other architectural detail and those would be the two most visible sides of the Eckerd as you enter. There is a small amount of parking that would be visible between Princess Anne Road and also from along the road but for the most part we've moved all of the parking to the back. There will be a small 3-4 foot knee wall that matches the wall that you see across the street at the courthouse to shield the parking that will also compliment some landscaping in this area. There will also be improvements in front of the Eckerd that will include a ten foot wide brick paver sidewalk for pedestrian access to the site and that sidewalk, of course will carry all the way across the front of the site and back into the pedestrian plaza, which I'll mention in a moment. On the other side as you will enter to your right, there will be another retail facility and that's retail building number one that you see. I believe the elevations are also enclosed in your package. And, the unique aspect about these retail and you can see the elevations for building number three. That would be your view from North Landing Road. And, what you're seeing there on your left is a portico feature that wraps around the side of the building complimenting the entrance, which will off to your left. And, what you will also see enforced is the store fronts on this side so that the pedestrians could walk across the street, enter it from the pedestrians sidewalk area but what is unique about all of the three retail buildings that we have on this site as we get further back is that they all have dual facades. So, we looked also at the Merchant Square concept that you have in Williamsburg and one of the comments was that we wanted to have something that was accessible for the pedestrians and attract them from the front but equally attractive from the back if you drive around the back. So, that's why we proffered elevations for all sides of these buildings so that you can see not only will you have that level of detail and attractiveness on the front from all the areas that you'll be able to walk to but you will also have it on the rear side as well. And, that's why you see in your package the front and back elevations. So, you'll have dual entrances very similar to what you have in Merchants Square. Now, there is a city right-of-way that runs through the heart of this property. It's a 66-foot wide right-of-way. Part of the proposal and part of the discussions with the city from the very beginning was that if we were to develop this site, they wanted us to incorporate a right-of-way feature for the benefit of the public into this site that would compliment the future plans for developing a bike trail that continues on down to the back of the site. And, so we have realigned this nght-of- way area and what you see going down to the heart of the site is a pedestrian plaza. Vehicles will go about half way into the site and you'll see the landscape island in the middle then the vehicles have to turn either side. And, as you go beyond that you have a pedestrian plaza very similar on a smaller scale, obviously than what you have in Merchants Square where vehicular traffic is restricted where people can eat out side or they can sit down or they can have recreational activities. They can bring their bicycles and also connect in the back, as you see here, ultimately to that right-of-way. So, it will serve as a gateway to that potential future development or that right-of-way further down beyond the site. Now, with respect to what the overall affect and you dust add additional elevations showing this structure over here, which is proposed to be a two-story and we anticipate that the second floor of that will used predominately for office so this will be more attractive for those uses. One other issue that I wanted to point out is with respect to the amount of additional commercial. This rezoning really adds very little additional commercial into this district. Actually, restricts the amount of commercial that fronts on Princess Anne Road. And, the way we've done that is that you can see from the zoning map that you have in front of you, there is a small amount of AG -2 back where our parking lot is. But the majonty of this site is already zoned B-2 or B-1 for commercial purposes. We are rezoning the entire site to Conditional B-2 but we're also, the applicant together with the owner of the property, the Kellams, have agreed to take a piece of property that you see there in blue that is currently zoned B-2 and a part of this application rezoned that back to AG -2. And, they're saying there's a piece of B-2 that runs in the back, this triangular piece that you're seeing in the rear, again, they have agreed to rezone that from B-2 back to AG -2. So, the overall effect of this on Princess Anne and North Landing is to restrict the amount of commercial that you have in that corridor and draw a line with respect to future commercial encroachment right here where I could continue. That is about a half -acre site that you see up there. The other aspect with respect to this site that I would point, in addition to that is, the traffic situation. We are restricting the access only to this ingress/egress point here, which would be the main entrance feature and to a right in and a right out. I went over and looked at the site today during our break and there are at least five different access points, where the Sushi bar is located, there is one apron that's divided in the middle so you have two access points there. There's an additional ingress point and there are some in front of the Kellam -Eaton site and then also down where the saw shop is located. We're restricting all of that to two and of course the site would coordinate with the signal at this location. So, with that said, we believe that we bring to you a application that is in conformance with the requirements of the Transition Zone, Historic Overlay District. We've worked very closely with the Planning staff and I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. Ronald Ripley: Does anybody wish to make any comment regarding this application? Barry. Barry Knight: Well, I'll dust make a comment since we're in the discussion phase and that's where we are now. Ronald Ripley: I was dust asking if there were any questions of the applicant? Lets ask that. Okay. We're going to move to the discussion phase. Thank you very much. Tom Kleine: Okay. I thank the Commission Ronald Ripley: Yes, Barry. Barry Knight: Knowing that there wasn't any opposition to this, I've been following it very closely because it is in the Princess Anne Borough. And I like the idea that it's pedestrian friendly. I know the Historical Review Board has really kept a close eye on this to keep it with the character of the courthouse area. And, noting that hopefully Nimmo Parkway is going to be completed very soon, further to the west of this project, the traffic will lessen. So, hopefully, we can get more pedestrian traffic from all the employees that work at City Hall because I think City Hall is going to be in this exact location for at least another 200 years. But, with saying that and at the appropriate time, I would like to make a motion for approval. I would like to say that I'm sure I speak for my fellow farmer that we're going to be very sorry to see Kellam -Eaton leave because they have been a great friend to us in the rural end of the city and us farmers. You have the Lowe's and the Home Depots around here but sometimes if we go there, and I'm sorry to say, we always have to come back to Kellam -Eaton to get some parts that they don't have. So, with that said, I'd like to make a motion for approval. Ronald Ripley: We have a motion to approve. Do I have a second? A motion by Barry Knight and seconded by Don Horsley. Is there any other discussion? Yes Don. Donald Horsley: I'll just echo a couple of comments that Barry made. This has been site that many of us hate to see go this direction but we knew it was inevitable that it will. And, I guess it's dust a matter of convenience that they have afforded the rural community from many, many years. I expect these changes will be conveniences that will be afforded to the rural community for many, many years to come to in a little bit different matter. So, I applaud the Kellam family for pursuing this venue and wish them well in the project. Ronald Ripley: Okay. We'll call for the question then. Where did Ed go? Stephen White: I have no idea. Can we do it by hand please? Ronald Ripley: Yeah. All in favor raise your hand aye. Opposed? ABSENT 0 AYE 11 NAY 0 ABS 0 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE ABSENT 0 WOOD AYE Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 11-0, the motion passes. Supplemental Information Zoning History CUP - Country !nn # I DATE REQUEST i ACTION 1 07/08/97 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (Heron's Ridge Golf APPROVED Course) Public Agencv Comments Public Works Master Transportation Indian River Road in the vicinity of this application is a Plan (MTP): two lane rural roadway. It is identified on the Master _ -- PHIL M. BONIFANT Agenda Item 14 Page 6 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Phil M. Bonifant — Conditional Use Permit (country inn) MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: An Ordinance upon Application of Phil M. Bonifant for a Conditional Use Permit for a country inn on property located at 2252 Indian River Road (GPIN 24034185340000). DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE ■ Considerations: The applicant desires to operate his current residence as a Country Inn. There will be two bedrooms on the ground floor that will be available for guests, while the rooms upstairs will be private quarters for the owners or onsite managers. Continental breakfast will be available on weekdays; a full homemade breakfast will be available on the weekends. Complimentary snacks and beverages will be available in the afternoon. There is an 18 by 36 foot, in -ground swimming pool with a surrounding deck and a small fitness room available for guests. The applicant is proposing to expand the driveway to provide a circular driveway that will eliminate the need to back out into the right-of-way and will provide adequate parking for guests. A decorative fence is proposed along the front of the property and additional landscaped areas will be provided in front of the residence/inn. The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because it is an appropriate use for the site. Staff recommended approval. There was no opposition to the proposal. ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 11-0 to approve this request with the following conditions: 1. A Certificate of Occupancy for the change of use must be obtained from Permits and Inspections prior to operating the residence as a Country Inn. 2. A Tourist Establishment Permit and a permit for the swimming pool must be obtained from the Virginia Beach Department of Public Health. Phil M. Bonifant Page 2 of 2 3. The development of the site shall substantially adhere to the site plan entitled "Site Plan for Use Permit, Parcel B-1", prepared by Bonifant Land Surveys, dated August 10, 2003. The site plan has been exhibited to City Council and is on file in the Planning Department. 4. The Country Inn is limited to two guest rooms. 5. Food and beverage service is limited to continental breakfast on weekdays, full breakfast service on weekends and complimentary snacks and beverages. Food and beverage service is limited to guests only and in no event shall seating capacity exceed twenty-five persons, including lodging guests. 6. A landscape plan shall be prepared by a landscape professional and submitted for review by Current Planning for the additional landscaping proposed in front of the dwelling and along the new fence line. The landscape plan must be approved prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 7. The proposed fence is shown at 5 feet in height. The zoning ordinance does not allow a fence over 4 feet in height within 50 feet of the right-of- way in Agricultural Districts. The applicant shall either reduce the height of the fence to 4 feet or obtain a Board of Zoning Appeals variance to allow the fence as shown on the site plan. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/A ency: Planning Department*j. 1�{ City Manager: J14 -210 -CUP -2003 PHIL M. BONIFANT Agenda Item 14 November 12, 2003 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Barbara Duke The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. Location and General Information REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for a Country Inn LOCATION: Property located at 2252 Indian River Road Ma a o .1 ole Whit M. Boni _ant go ' �'00W, West R&b 1 ✓ ,flw Q� 1CP1 4,�' AG -2 I �AG 11 CUP - Country Inn PHIL M. BONIFANT Agenda Item 14 y Page 1 GPIN: 24034185340000 COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 7 - PRINCESS ANNE SITE SIZE: 2.82 acres EXISTING There is an existing single-family residence and small orchard on the LAND USE: site. SURROUNDING North: • West Neck Creek / AG -1 Agriculture District LAND USE AND South: • Single family homes / AG -2 Agriculture District ZONING: East: • Single family home / AG -2 Agriculture District West: • Single family homes / AG -2 Agriculture District NATURAL The site backs up to wooded floodplain adjacent to West Neck Creek. RESOURCE There are some spots on the site, where the existing driveway and AND proposed driveway expansion are located, that are within the 100 CULTURAL year floodplain. The amount of fill within the floodplain that is FEATURES: proposed for the new driveway is minimal and can be reviewed administratively. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Major Issues The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this request. Staff's evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these issues are adequately addressed. • The subject site is located in the Transition Area and should be consistent with the Transition Area guidelines. • The use must be compatible with adjacent uses. PHIL M. BONIFANT Agenda Item 14 Page 2 a mid Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan Map shows that the subject site is within the Transition Area, an area planned for appropriate growth opportunities, consistent with the economic vitality policies of Virginia Beach. Summary of Propos� The applicant is requesting to be allowed to operate his current residence as a Country Inn. There will be two bedrooms on the ground floor that will be available for guests, while the rooms upstairs will be private quarters for the owners or onsite managers. Continental breakfast will be available on weekdays, a full homemade breakfast will be available on the weekends. Complimentary snacks and beverages will be available in the afternoon. There is an 18 by 36 foot, in -ground swimming pool with a surrounding deck and a small fitness room available for guests. The applicant is proposing to expand the driveway to provide a circular driveway that will eliminate the need to back out into the right-of-way and will provide adequate parking for guests. A decorative fence is proposed along the front of the property and additional landscaped areas will be provided in front of the residence/inn. Staff Evaluation Staff recommends approval of this request. Staff's evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials, adequately addresses each of the `Major Issues' identified at the beginning of this report. The proposal's strengths in addressing the `Major Issues' are as follows: PHIL M. BONIFANT Agenda Item 14 Page 3 -T-- (1) The subject site is located in the Transition Area and should be consistent with the Transition Area guidelines. The site is located on Indian River Road, south of Elbow Road. This portion of Indian River Road has been identified by the state as part of the Green Sea Byway and is included on the Map of Scenic Roads in Virginia. This site backs up to wooded floodplain adjacent to West Neck Creek that is a part of the property owned by the City as West Neck Creek District Park. The site is located approximately 700 feet west of the creek itself, where a future canoe launching facility has been identified in the Outdoors Plan. There are three golf courses in close proximity to this site, West Neck Golf Course, Heron's Ridge Golf Course and Lotus Creek Golf Course. The site is also close to Pungo village area at the intersection of Princess Anne Road and Indian River Road. The Country Inn is in a good location in terms of having amenities available to guests and is consistent with the Transition Area guidelines of promoting open space. Over 90% of this 2.82 acre site will remain as open space. (2) The proposed use must be compatible with adjacent uses. The uses surrounding this site are single-family homes on large agricultural lots. The proposal to rent two rooms to overnight guests in the subject dwelling will not negatively impact the surrounding properties. The applicant is providing adequate guest access and parking on the site and has adequate area on site to expand and upgrade the septic facilities to accommodate the guests. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request subject to the following conditions. Conditions 1. A Certificate of Occupancy for the change of use must be obtained from Permits and Inspections prior to operating the residence as a Country Inn. 2. A Tourist Establishment Permit and a permit for the swimming pool must be obtained from the Virginia Beach Department of Public Health. 3. The development of the site shall substantially adhere to the site plan entitled "Site Plan for Use Permit, Parcel B-1", prepared by Bonifant Land Surveys, dated August 10, 2003. The site plan has been exhibited to City Council and is on file in the Planning Department. 4. The Country Inn is limited to two guest rooms. 5. Food and beverage service is limited to continental breakfast on weekdays, full breakfast service on weekends and complimentary snacks and beverages. Food PHIL M. BONIFANT Agenda Item 14 Page 4 and beverage service is limited to guests only and in no event shall seating capacity exceed twenty-five persons, including lodging guests. 6. A landscape plan shall be prepared by a landscape professional and submitted for review by Current Planning for the additional landscaping proposed in front of the dwelling and along the new fence line. The landscape plan must be approved prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 7. The proposed fence is shown at 5 feet in height. The zoning ordinance does not allow a fence over 4 feet in height within 50 feet of the right-of-way in Agricultural Districts. The applicant shall either reduce the height of the fence to 4 feet or obtain a Board of Zoning Appeals variance to allow the fence as shown on the site plan. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. The site plan submitted with this conditional use permit may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. Conditional use permits must be activated within 12 months of City Council approval. See Section 220(8) of the City Zoning Ordinance for further information. PHIL M. BONIFANT Agenda Item 14 Page 5 Transportation Plan as a divided facility on a 100 foot right-of-way. There are no projects currently programmed to improve this section of roadway in the Capital Improvement Program Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Indian River 5,896 7,400 ADT Existing Land Use Road ADT ' -10 Proposed Land Use 3 -28 Average Daily Trips 2 as defined by single-family residence 3 as defined by country inn Public Utilities Water: I There is no City water service in the vicinity of this site 77771 Sewer: I There is no City sanitary sewer service in the vicinity of this site Public Safety Police: The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Fire and Rescue: Changing the use of this structure from a single-family home to a country inn (bed and breakfast) constitutes a change of use to R-1. This change of use must be approved by the Building Official. Fire Department concerns will be addressed during the building permit rocess. PHIL M. BONIFANT Agenda Item 14 Page 7 0 f2)31 (1) -.e PVW 10- f7 GOV~ N 2, 0 s?y Fr Resd 0 PROPOSED ECD a 6REA11ST 448 298 PROPOSED C ddryjq parkmS (Z) Exhibit B Proposed Site Plan EFVLAR6F- t scale i PROPOSED 1,rM Ferce fjj /79 85 Z7 30 30 Prevx%a r%IW ded,col,01 PHIL M. BONIFANT Agenda Item 14 Page 9 NA (U 10 00 a CX r3. Exhibit C Proposed Fencing PHIL M. BONIFANT Agenda Item 14 Page 10 K ` IF- DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Exhibit D Disclosure Statement APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) Ca( Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. If the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Property Owner Disclosure section below: PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) GYCheck here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. nf� Applicants Signature Print Name Property Owner's Signature (if different than applicant) Conditional Use Permit Application Page 10 of 10 Revised 71112003 Print Name PHIL M. BONIFANT Agenda Item 14 Page 11 Z DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) ® Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) ® Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. & See next page for footnotes Conditional Use Permit Application Page 10 of 11 Revised 10/1/2003 __ .w.�- - T T DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) SYKES, BOURDON, AHERN & LEVY, P.C. BONIFANT LAND SURVEYS ' "Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. Applicant's Signature Property Owner's Signature (if different than applicant) Phil M. Bonlfant not Name Print Name Conditional Use Permit Application Page 11 of 11 Revised 10/1/2003 Z Item #14 Phil M. Bonifant Conditional Use Permit 2252 Indian River Road District 7 Princess Anne November 12, 2003 CONSENT Dorothy Wood: We go on to Item #14, which is Phil M. Bonifant. It's an Ordinance upon Application of Phil M. Bonifant for a Conditional Use Permit for a Country Inn on Indian River Road in Princess Anne Borough with seven conditions. Mr. Bourdon. Eddie Bourdon: Thank you. Again, Eddie Bourdon, a Virginia Beach attorney representing the applicant and Mr. Bonifant is also here. All of the conditions contained in the staff s evaluation and recommendation are acceptable to the applicant. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Is there any opposition to Mr. Bonifant's Country Inn on Indian River in Princess Anne? Hearing none, Mr. Knight. Barry Knight: The applicant is requesting to be allowed to operate his current residence as a Country Inn. There will be two bedrooms on the ground floor for guests and the rooms upstairs for private quarters for the owners or onsite managers. There will be a continental breakfast on the weekdays and a full homemade breakfast will be available on the weekends and complimentary snacks and beverages. There is also a swimming pool on the site. Applicant is proposing to expand the driveway to provide a circular driveway to eliminate the need to back out on to the right-of-way, which is Indian River Road. We feel like this is an appropriate use for this site especially in Pungo, which is where is what is very near to and we kind of have a vision for that area and I think this fits in with that vision. I'll make another comment. Some of these meals are going to be prepared by Mr. Bonifant. I can certainly vouch for those because I've eaten dinner at his house a couple of times. He does a fine job. Dorothy Wood: Thank you Barry. Ronald Ripley: That would be a testimonial. Dorothy Wood: I'm sure we're looking forward to many fine meals for you then. Mr. Ripley, I would move to approve Item # 14 Phil M. Bonifant. Ronald Ripley: Okay. We have a motion to approve the consent agenda item as dust read. Do I have a second? Charlie Salle': Second. Item #14 Phil M. Bonifant Page 2 Ronald Ripley: Seconded by Charlie Salle'. Okay. Is there any discussion on the motion? Okay. We'll call for the question. Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 11-0, the motion passes. AYE 11 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 0 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD AYE Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 11-0, the motion passes. Supplemental Information Zoning History CUP Motor Vehicle Sales & Semzce # I DATE IREQUEST I ACTION 1 7-5-88 Conditional Use Permit (Automobile Repair) Approved 2 8-14-90 Conditional Use Permit (Automobile Sales) Withdrawn 3 8-28-89 Conditional Use Permit (Car wash) Approved 4 2-27-01 Conditional Use Permit (Motor Vehicle Sales and Approved Service) 5 10-14- Conditional Use Permit (Motor Vehicle Sales and Approved 97 Service) 6 4-24-89 Conditional Use Permit (Communication Tower) Approved K.A.H. PROPERTIES, LLC Agenda Item 15 Page 6 r'� 8 �U(+;s`xf#� CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: K.A.H. Properties, L.L.C. — Conditional Use Permit (motor vehicle sales and service) MEETING DATE: December 9. 2003 ■ Background: An Ordinance upon Application of K.A.H. Properties, L.L.C. for a Conditional Use Permit for motor vehicle sales and service on property located at 3112 Virginia Beach Boulevard (GPIN 14971537000000). DISTRICT 5 — LYNNHAVEN ■ Considerations: The request is an expansion of the Hall Auto Mall that exists to the west of the site. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing automobile repair establishment and the former bank building, and construct a single sales building and associated parking areas. Street frontage screening, interior coverage landscaping, and foundation screening are proposed with the development. Category IV screening is proposed along the northern property line adjacent to the residential district. The proposed building is typical of the style of building associated with the Hall Auto Mall projects. The proposed building is contemporary in design, constructed of light gray masonry or dryvit, trimmed with light gray metal fascia. The entrance is medium red metal panels. Storefront windows with metal trim are proposed. The applicant proposes to close two existing entrances on Virginia Beach Boulevard and one existing entrance on Kings Grant Road, in accordance with a request from the Department of Public Works / Traffic Engineering Division. An existing entrance at the westernmost edge of the property on Virginia Beach Boulevard, and the existing entrance at the northern portion of the site on Kings Grant Road will be used for access. A city sidewalk exists along Virginia Beach Boulevard. The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because it is the expansion of an existing use and represents a good redevelopment of these sites. Staff recommended approval. There was no opposition to the proposal. K.A.H. Properties Page 2 of 3 ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 with 1 abstention to approve this request with the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed substantially in accordance with the submitted plan titled "Conceptual Site Layout & Landscape Plan of HALL PROPERTY, Virginia Beach Boulevard and Kings Grant Road, Virginia Beach, VA", dated 10/20/03 and prepared by MSA, P.C. Said plan has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the City of Virginia Beach Planning Department. 2. The proposed building shall be constructed substantially in accordance with the submitted plan titled "Conceptual Elevations of HALL PROPERTY", Virginia Beach Blvd. & Kings Grant Road", prepared by Porterfield Design Center. Said plan has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the City of Virginia Beach Planning Department. 3. The site shall be permitted a monument style freestanding sign, no more than ten (10) feet in height, and two building signs, in accordance with the City Zoning Ordinance. There shall be no other signs, neon signs or neon accents installed on any wall area of the exterior of the building, windows or doors, light poles, or any other portion of the site. 4. There shall be no pennants, streamers, balloons, portable signs or banners displayed on the site or the vehicles. 5. Parking for customers, staff, and vehicle display areas shall be delineated on the site plan submitted for review to the Development Services Center of the Planning Department. Vehicles shall be parked within the designated areas, and no vehicles shall be parked or displayed within any portion of the public right-of-way. No vehicles shall be displayed on ramps. Vehicles shall not be used as barriers to prevent ingress or egress of the site. Storage of vehicles awaiting sale shall not obstruct Fire Department access to the site. 6. No outside paging or loudspeaker system shall be permitted. 7. All outdoor lighting shall be shielded to direct light and glare onto the premises; said lighting and glare shall be deflected, shaded, and focused away from adjoining property. Outdoor lighting fixtures shall not be erected any higher than 14 feet. 8. The two eastern most entrances on Virginia Beach Boulevard and the southern most entrance on Kings Grant Road shall be closed. K.A.H. Properties Page 3 of 3 ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement(s) Planning Commission Minutes Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department IU City Manager:k 1�� .'' H07 -211 -CUP -2003 sd _tl.a, K.A.H. PROPERTIES, LLC • Fes,} Agenda Item 15 November 12, 2003 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Faith Christie The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. REQUEST: LOCATION: GPIN: Location and General Informa#ion 4 Conditional Use Permit for Motor Vehicle Sales and Service Property located at 3112 Virginia Beach Boulevard Aiap H411 r No; to Stole O O 9-' 2 14971537000000 0 1_J • + ' yf rrs�s r1 Cl51M1D e ood 1 FRANCIS !A!m [AHS �h CUA Motor Yrhzde Sales & Semite CRAI K.A.H. PROPERTIES, LLC Agenda Item 15 Page 1 COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 5- LYNNHAVEN SITE SIZE: 1 acre EXISTING An automobile repair establishment, that is currently closed, and a LAND USE: bank occupy the site. The site is zoned B-2 Business. SURROUNDING North: • Single-family dwellings / R-7.5 Residential LAND USE AND . Virginia Beach Boulevard ZONING: • Across Virginia Beach Boulevard is a retail strip South: center / B-2 Business • Kings Grant Road • Across Kings Grant Road is a "BP" gasoline East: service station / B-2 Business West: • Hall Auto Mali I B-2 Business NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL There are no natural resources or significant cultural features FEATURES: associated with the site. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ 65-70dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Major Issues The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this request. Staffs evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these issues are adequately addressed. • Degree to which the proposal is compatible with the surrounding area. • Consistency with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Pan Map for the area. K.A H. PROPERTIES, LLC Agenda Item 15 Page 2 'N Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan Map designates this area as suitable for retail, service, office and other uses compatible within commercial areas serving surrounding neighborhoods and communities. The Comprehensive Plan policies and Map designation for this portion of the Little Neck Planning Area support commercial use expansion. Summary of Proposa The applicant desires a Conditional Use Permit for Motor Vehicle Sales and Service on the site. The request is an expansion of the Hall Auto Mall that exists to the west of the site. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing automobile repair establshment and the bank building, and construct a single sales building and parking areas. Street frontage screening, interior coverage landscaping, and foundation screening are proposed with the development. Category IV screening is proposed along the northern property line adjacent to the residential district. The proposed building is typical of the style of building associated with the Hall Auto Mall projects. The proposed builing is contemporary in design, constructed of light gray masonry or E.I.F.S. (exterior insulation finish system), trimmed with light gray metal fascia. The entrance is medium red metal panels. Storefront windows with metal trim are proposed. The applicant proposes to close two existing entrances on Virginia Beach Boulevard and one existing entrance on Kings Grant Road, in accordance with the Public Works / Traffic Engineering Division's request. An existing entrance at the westernmost edge of the property on Virginia Beach Boulevard, and the existing entrance at the northern portion of the site on Kings Grant Road will be used for access. A city sidewalk exists along Virginia Beach Boulevard. K.A.H. PROPERTIES, LLC Agenda Item 15 Page 3 1 Staff Evaluationqq Staff recommends approval of this request. Staff's evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials, adequately addresses each of the `Major Issues' identified at the beginning of this report. The proposal's strengths in addressing the `Major Issues' are (1) The proposed use is compatible with the surrounding area. Automobile sales and service exist to the west of the site and across Virginia Beach Boulevard to the east of the site. A gasoline service station exists to the east of the site across Kings Grant Road. Proposed Category IV screening along the northern portion of the site adjacent to the residential area will adequately shield the Belle Haven subdivision residents. (2) The Conditional Use Permit request for Motor Vehicle Sales and Service is consistent with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan for this area of the city. The redevelopment of the site will eliminate an automobile repair establishment housed in a gasoline station that was built in 1955, and eliminate two access points from Virginia Beach Boulevard and one from Kings Grant Road. The submitted preliminary site plan depicts a coordinated development in terms of building design, parking layout and landscaping of the site. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request subject to the conditions listed below. Conditions 1. The site shall be developed substantially in accordance with the submitted plan titled "Conceptual Site Layout & Landscape Plan of HALL PROPERTY, Virginia Beach Boulevard and Kings Grant Road, Virginia Beach, VA", dated 10/20/03 and prepared by MSA, P.C. Said plan has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the City of Virginia Beach Planning Department. 2. The proposed building shall be constructed substantially in accordance with the submitted plan titled "Conceptual Elevations of HALL PROPERTY", Virginia Beach Blvd. & Kings Grant Road", prepared by Porterfield Design Center. Said K.A.H. PROPERTIES, LLC Agenda Item 15 Page 4 plan has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the City of Virginia Beach Planning Department. 3. The site shall be permitted a monument style freestanding sign, no more than eight (8) feet in height, and two building signs, in accordance with the City Zoning Ordinance. There shall be no other signs, neon signs or neon accents installed on any wall area of the exterior of the building, windows or doors, light poles, or any other portion of the site. 4. There shall be no pennants, streamers, balloons, portable signs or banners displayed on the site or the vehicles. 5. Parking for customers, staff, and vehicle display areas shall be delineated on the site plan submitted for review to the Development Services Center of the Planning Department. Vehicles shall be parked within the designated areas, and no vehicles shall be parked or displayed within any portion of the public right-of- way. No vehicles shall be displayed on ramps. Vehicles shall not be used as barriers to prevent ingress or egress of the site. Storage of vehicles awaiting sale shall not obstruct Fire Department access to the site. 6. No outside paging or loudspeaker system shall be permitted. 7. All outdoor lighting shall be shielded to direct light and glare onto the premises; said lighting and glare shall be deflected, shaded, and focused away from adjoining property. Outdoor lighting fixtures shall not be erected any higher than 14 feet. 8. The two eastern most entrances on Virginia Beach Boulevard and the southern most entrance on Kings Grant Road shall be closed. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. The site plan submitted with this conditional use permit may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. Conditional use permits must be activated within 12 months of City Council approval. See Section 220(8) of the City Zoning Ordinance for further information. K.A.H. PROPERTIES, LLC Agenda Item 15 Page 5 7 6-11-02 Conditional Use Permit (Motor Vehicle Sales and Approved Service) 8 2-22-00 Conditional Use Permit — Expansion (Motor Vehicle Approved Sales and Service) Public Agency Comments Public Works Master Transportation Virginia Beach Boulevard in front of this site is an eight Plan (MTP): lane divided major urban arterial. It is identified on the Master Transportation Plan as a 150 foot divided facility. There are no plans in the current Capital Improvements Project list to improve the facility. Kings Grant Road is a two lane undivided local collector street. Traffic Engineering has no traffic count data on this street. Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Virginia Beach 42,702 56,240 Existing Land Use Boulevard ADT' ADT' -550 Proposed Land Use 3 - 131 ' Average Daily Trips Z as defined by Ewsting Uses 3 as defined by New Car Sales Public Utilities Water: There is a 20 -inch and an eight -inch water main in Kings Grant Road. In Virginia Beach Boulevard exist a 16 -inch and a 20 -inch water main. The site must connect to City water. Sewer: An eight -inch sanitary sewer exists main in Kings Grant road. Sewer and pump station analysis for Pump Station #252 is required to determine if flows can be accommodated. K.A.H. PROPERTIES, LLC Agenda Item 15 Page 7 - - T-- I - - __ Public Safety Police: In an effort to reduce opportunity for crime, the applicant is encouraged to review and incorporate safety by design concepts and (design) strategies contained in the CVB Planning Department's, "Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design - General Guidelines for Designing Safer Communities" booklet. A copy of this booklet can be obtained by contacting either the Planning Department or the Police Departments Crime Prevention Unit. Fire and Rescue: Fire hydrant must be within 400 feet of commercial structure. K.A.H. PROPERTIES, LLC Agenda Item 15 Page 8 1 Exhibit B Proposed Site O Plan t� AS Plan t�`A t�/f N N cr p8 OCL e'1N To 0 c ;; • '°oft $v cf� doflu o 2 � +• f 1• _ m i Ail``i y .� •Its ! , �T 4 .1' •.r• T i frf� i- :> o aD 2 --_ - -_ __ - k 3CL 20 Q c 1 Q. A a a �� 1 K.A.H. PROPERTIES, LLC Agenda Item 15 Page 10 I Exhibit C Proposed Building Elevation K.A.H. PROPERTIES, LLC Agenda Item 15 Page 11 4 DISCLOSURE STATEME Applicant's Name: Exhibit D Disclosure Statement List All Current Property Owners: APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach iist if necessary) �• �. ��, [].Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization If the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Property Owner Disclosure section below: PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) ❑ Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization CERTIFICATION: 1 certify that the information contained herein is true and ac rate. ignature Print Name Conditional Use Permit Application Page 8 of 12 K.A.H. PROPERTIES, LLC Agenda Item 15 Page 12 ii -26 -OZ, . .5.-AUli DISCLOSURE STAT EMEN'T APPLICANT DISCLOSURE is ie applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unini orporated `M�anization, complete the following: . List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, member.30, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) ❑ Check here If the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) 2 List all bij 'r - ; }hut is = i ,; f ,av, a ^rant• subsidiary' or affiliated business entity- relationship with the applicant. (ALLach nst if necessary) ❑ Check here If the pro) I/ owne, ; 1,�7i''a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporaf e i , }rganize !.i,. See next page fo, foot is j X09 �. . Con9ibonaf Use Permit Applicant n Page 10 of 11 Revised 10,'1=03 S 55AM, 8426566- IF rr1W —a r --It_r_-�:r �► ; STATEMENT 4ZIN' .310.1 UiSCO,L,SURE List all known contracts: -s c; buss, sses that f,gvp o, livid )vjdb ��Prvices with respect to the requested pronsar'il ►J,e, in( ,";sig but rant �fi,,itec; }� E ;�-�►;i�' ;s of architectural services, real estG`v-; � Yices, rr: , .C.��'i ��r' t^,��, An,3 10 4 - _ v.r, s (Attach list if necess�nll 1 "Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." 3 -se State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va Code § 2 2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in dete,mining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities. there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATiuN: 1 certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing I am resprmrvole for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at isast 70 prior to the scheduled public hearing accordin o the instructions in this Fos %iZ Tpoicants Signature — r : int Name Property Owner's Sign--.0::rn !if Ofkrent thi Name Condtional Us-- Permit Application Page 11 of 11 Rev,sed 1314/200:3 Item #15 K.A.H. Properties, L.L.C. Conditional Use Permit 3112 Virginia Beach Boulevard District 5 Lynnhaven November 12, 2003 CONSENT Dorothy Wood: The next item is Item #15, which is KAH Properties, L.L.C. It's an Application of KAH Properties for a Conditional Use Permit for a motor vehicle sales and service on Virginia Beach Boulevard in the Lynnhaven district with eight conditions. Billy Gamngton: Good afternoon Mr. Chairman. Ladies and gentlemen of the Planning Commission, for the record, I'm Billy Garrington here today on behalf of the applicant Mr. Kenneth A. Hall, owner of KAH Properties, L.L.C./Hall Auto World In Virginia Beach. Mr. Chairman, there are eight conditions on this Use Permit application in front of you today. I've dust spoken with Mrs. Christie outside. We would like to make a slight amendment to Condition #3. It has to do with the freestanding sign. If it could be kept on consent she has agreed to it. If not, I will dust let it be pulled off and heard in its regular order. Ronald Ripley: What would be the change? Billy Gamngton: The change would be that we would be allowed one monument sign to be ten feet in height as opposed to eight feet in height. That is still two feet lower than the maximum height that the zoning ordinance allows you to have in the City of Virginia Beach, and we would proffer that it would be a monument style sign and no taller than ten feet in height. Ronald Ripley: Does the Commission have any problem with that modification? Billy Gamngton: Thank you very much. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Dorothy Wood: Is there any opposition to KAH with their sign being changed in height? William Din: Does the City have any opposition to it? Robert Scott: We have no opposition. As long as its within the zoning ordinance. Dorothy Wood: And there is no opposition? Jan, would you please comment on this item? Barry Knight: I think that's mine Dot. Dorothy Wood: Okay Barry, sorry. Barry Knight: The applicant desires a Conditional Use Permit for motor vehicle sales and service on the site. The request is an expansion of the Hall Auto Mall that exists to the west of the site. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing auto repair establishment and the bank building and construct a single sales building with parking areas. The proposed building is typical in style of building associated with Hall Auto Mall projects. The applicant also proposes to close two existing entrances on Virginia Beach Boulevard and one existing entrance on King's Grant Road. It seems like on Virginia Beach Boulevard the car dealerships are really upgrading their properties and Mr. Hall seems to do a very goodjob. So the commission feels like this a proper use of this site and recommends approval subject to conditions with the change to Condition #3. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Mr. Ripley, I would move to approve Item #15 K.A.H. Properties. Ronald Ripley: Okay. We have a motion to approve the consent agenda item as dust read. Do I have a second? Charlie Salle': Second. Ronald Ripley: Seconded by Charlie Salle'. Mr. Miller. Robert Miller: I need to abstain from Item # 15. My firm is working on that project. Ronald Ripley: Any other abstentions? Okay. Is there any discussion on the motion? Okay. We'll call for the question. AYE 10 NAY 0 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD AYE ABS 1 ABSENT 0 ABS Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 10-0, the motion passes. Supplements! information Zoning History Mo Map t2ale Marvin & Gayle Rollins O O ARPAR ARPAgPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARP►RPAR RPl 1R RPAR RPAR ,. Q4 Q AG- ARPARPARP ARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPRPARPARPARPA ARPAR ARPARP AR PARPRPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPA RPARP ARPARP PARPARPARPARPARPARP►RPA PeP PARPA A PARPA qP ARP ARPARPARPARPRPARPA�*RP�PARPA PARPAR AG 'ter AR ARPAR ARPIRPAR ARP ARP RP RPRPARPARP ARP ARPARP ARPAR PA gPARPAR RP P RP I�2 4RPRPAR AARARPARPA RPARPARPARPARPARPARPAA ARPRPAR �.^ ARPARPAR AR PAR P RPARPARPAR PARPARPARPRPARPARP PARPRPAR AG -2 • 7✓ lllN(�r� A ARPARPAR ARPAR P ARPARPARPARPARP PARPARPARPARP PARPARPAR ARP►RP ARPARPA ARPARPARPARPRPARPARPARPA ARP PARPARPAR ARPAR ARPARPA ARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPA ARPARPAR Q d D•. p RPAR ARPARPRA ARPARPARPARPARPARP ►RPARPARPARPARPRPARP PAR ARP ARP PA ARP ARP ARP ARP IRP AR ARPARPARPARPARPARP. Q . OW111 �� .d RRP P ARP A ARPARPARPARPARPARP RPARPARPARPARPARPARPA ARPAR A ARPARPARPARPARPAPR PARPARPARPARPARPARPAR RD O C ARPAR ARPARPA PARPARP ARP ARPARPARP ARPARPARP 4RPARP ARP ARPARPAR R tp RPAR ARPARP PARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARF ARFARFAR ARPAR ARPARP PARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARP AR� w ._` RPARP PARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARP AR P ARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARP ARPARPARP A�2P AR ARP /� .2 y RPARP ARPARPARP►RPARPARPARPARPARP4 ARPRPARPARPARPARPRPA ARP ARP ARP AAi ARP ARP ARP RP AG-'Z�! - AG_ PARPARPARPAR q ARP ARP 4RP ARP ! ARP ARP 4ItP ARP r_ ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARPAR AG -1 4RP RP AFP AR 'V ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP AA ARP ARPARPA 1 I ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP AR ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP 4RP ARPAR �J ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARD ARP ARP ARP ARP AR ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP 4RP 4RP ARP AR ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP RP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP 4RP A ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP PA A ARP ARP ARP ARP ARPARPARP ARPARPA �I _2 ARP ARP ARPAR PARP ARPA RP ARP ARPA ARPARPA ARPARPARPARPARPARPARPAR r / * A�T'f'1 �7f1 ARPAR ►RPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPAR AR RPARPARPARP ARPARPARPARPARPAR O ►f•I-� b L(11�y AR PARPARPARPARP 6RPARPARPARPARPAR ARP Cb. MVVV Q AR PARP ARP ARPA RPARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARPARPARP ARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARP A ARFARFARP RPARPARPARPARPARPARPARPARP*ARPARPA PA ARPARPA ARPARPARPARP RPARPARPARPARPAR��P-p RP IRP ARP AR P ARPARA�IIId'ARP 4R ARPARPA ARPARP,,�pp RF ARF"ARP RF AG -2 RP ARP A RP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP AR ARPARPA A ARP } 'RPA RPARPA ARP ARPARPARPARP A A RPARPARPA ARPARPARPARPARP A ARPA ASG RP ARP ARPA AG�� ARP ARP ARPARPARP A RP ARP ARPA ARPARPARPARPARP A RPA AG -2 RPARPARPA AF ARPARPARPA A RPARPARP ARPARPARPARP RP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARPA A A A RP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP RP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP ARP F RP►RPARP ARPARP ARP ARPARPAR RPARP ARPARPARPARPARP RPA PARPARPARPARP AG -2 -i AG -i AG Ft RPARPARPAR C42 ARPARPA AG -1 PARP ARPA Q RPA ARP ARPARPAPPARP AG -1 • "' ` RPARP RPRP CUP - Alternative Residential Development # I DATE REQUEST ACTION 1 4-9-91 Subdivision Variance Granted 2 3-23-93 Conditional Use Permit (single-family dwellings) Granted MARVIN M. & GAYLE B. ROLLINS Agenda Item 22 TM Page 8 F . .s CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Marvin M. & Gayle B. Rollins — Conditional Use Permit (alternative residential development) MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: An Ordinance upon Application of Marvin M. & Gayle B. Rollins for a Conditional Use Permit for alternative residential development on property located at 480 Princess Anne Road (GPIN 23182421970000). DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE ■ Considerations: The applicant proposes to resubdivide the 48 -acre tract into a total of six residential building sites and one agricultural lot. The seventh lot, or "residual" lot, would be leased or sold for agricultural purposes only. The six lots are concentrated on the southern side of the property, most of which front Back Bay Landing Road. The existing dwelling (Lot 6) will continue to front Princess Anne Road. Lots 1 and 2 are shown south of Lot 6 and share an access point on Back Bay Landing Road. Lots 3, 4, and 5 are clustered on the southeastern corner of the property and also share an access point. Lot 3 is a flag lot positioned behind Lots 4 and 5. Section 405 permits one flag lot for this size subdivision without a variance. Lot sizes range from 1.2 acres to 2.6 acres, and average 1.8 acres. Staff concludes the applicant's proposal, while adequate, does not represent the optimum rural development plan as envisioned by the City Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommended a deferral of the request to the Planning Commission to allow staff and the applicant additional time to explore opportunities for change to the submitted plan. The Planning Commission, however, placed this item on the consent agenda because the felt the plan follows the Rural Residential Guidelines as provided in the Comprehensive Plan. There was no opposition to this request. Marvin Rollins Page 2 of 2 ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 11-0 to approve this request with the following conditions: 1. The property shall be subdivided into not more than six residential parcels and one additional residual parcel to be used for agricultural purposes only, substantially as depicted on the plan entitled "Preliminary Subdivision of Cypress Grove" dated October 10, 2003 and prepared by Gallup Surveyors and Engineers, Ltd. This plan has been exhibited to City Council and is on file in the Planning Department. 2. A protective buffer shall be provided adjacent to the on-going agricultural operation along the northern property line of Lots 3 and 6, the western property line of Lots 3 and 4, and the eastern property line of Lots 2 and 6. The buffer shall be 50 feet in width. The first 25 feet of such area adjacent to an on-going agricultural operation shall be heavily planted with a mixture of grasses and low growing indigenous shrubs; and the second twenty-five feet of such area adjacent to the structure shall be planted with a double row of trees with a minimum caliper of 1'/2 inches and should be centered no more than thirty feet apart. Such trees shall consist of a mixture of deciduous and evergreen. The required buffers shall be planted prior to occupancy of the residential lots. 3. A suitable legal instrument restricting the development of the property to no more than six residential lots shall be submitted with the final subdivision plat and shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court. The content and form of such instrument shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Recommended Action: Staff recommended deferral. Planning Commission recommended approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: cj,_�,, r�dn 177. K22 - 210 -CUP - 2003 MARVIN M. & GAYLE B. ROLLINS Agenda Item 22 November 12, 2003 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Ashby Moss The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. LecatiOn and General Information REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for alternative residential development. LOCATION: Property located at 480 Princess Anne Road JI" p nf.-cc Map Not to Scale Marvin' Gayle Rollins 1 p .^ .I • 0 •a.Fr4 -' c G If, "a r f w IP F f" 'r 4, s r.• Sf ` AG -2 d a AG- 14 C> WN °' c < A r -1 o% s -- / • -- ,^ _ r 7/ AG -2 j AG -1 r r AC -1 AG -1 t 1 f CUP - Alternative Residential Development MARVIN M. & GAYLF- B. ROLLINS Agenda Itern.22 M Page 1 GPIN: 23182421970000 COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 7 - PRINCESS ANNE SITE SIZE: 47.78 acres EXISTING LAND USE AND One single-family farmhouse and cultivated fields zoned AG -1&2 ZONING: Agricultural Districts SURROUNDING North: . Across Fitztown Road, single-family houses / AG -2 LAND USE AND Agricultural District ZONING: • East of Fitztown Road, cultivated fields that are included in the Agricultural Reserve Program (ARP). This property will be farmed along with the residual of the subject property / AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural Districts South: • Across Back Bay Landing Road, scattered residences and farmland / AGA and AG -2 Agricultural Districts East: • Single-family houses on large parcels fronting Back Bay Landing Road with / AGA and AG -2 Agricultural Districts West: • Across Princess Anne Road, cultivated farmland, some of which is included in the ARP / AGA and AG -2 Agricultural Districts NATURAL The subject property is currently cultivated farmland. Type I soils are RESOURCE concentrated on the southwest corner (where the existing house is AND located and two additional lots are proposed) and the eastern side CULTURAL (where the remaining three lots are proposed). Elevations average FEATURES: 9.5 feet and do not drop below five feet anywhere on the property. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. MARVIN M. & GAYLE B. ROLLINS Agenda Item 22 Page 2 BM Major Issues The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this request. Staff's evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these issues are adequately addressed. • Degree to which proposed subdivision design meets the Rural Residential Guidelines as listed in the Comprehensive Plan. qlComprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site as being within the rural area of the city. "It is a place where there is a significant presence of existing agricultural and other rural based economic activities. This area should remain rural into the foreseeable future and rely on sound rural planning to help retain its character and vitality." (p. 150) To assist in implementing the rural area planning objectives, the Comprehensive Plan provides Rural Residential Guidelines that are used to evaluate requests for increased residential density on properties zoned for agricultural use in the rural area of the City. These guidelines are listed below. • Subdivide residential lots on soils that possess the best drainage and water table characteristics using the minimum acceptable lot area necessary to achieve development objectives. • Illustrate the ultimate plan of development as well as anticipated development phases, if any. • Maximize the area of and avoid fragmenting remaining farmland and open space. • Locate protective buffers between proposed residential structures and abutting agricultural operations. These buffers should be at least 50 feet in width. The first 25 feet of such area adjacent to an on-going agricultural operation should be heavily planted with a mixture of grasses and low growing indigenous shrubs, MARVIN M. & GAYLE B. ROLLINS Agenda Item 22 Page 3 and the second twenty-five feet of such area adjacent to the structure should be planted with a double row of trees with a minimum caliper of 1'/2 inches and should be centered no more than thirty feet apart. Such trees should consist of a mixture of deciduous and evergreen. • Whenever possible, plan developments on non -farmland. In those cases where development is proposed within existing tree cover, design the placement of buildings and driveways so as to save and protect as many trees and other significant environmental features as possible. • Minimize all access points along rural arterial roadways. • Provide flag lots, where warranted to advance the purpose of this plan, taking into consideration the size of the lots within the subdivision, existing or future tree cover and other pertinent characteristics relating to the need for rural residential privacy and open space. Design appropriate widths for driveways serving flag lots. (e.g. fire truck access) • Provide longer distances for rural cul-de-sac streets than is otherwise permitted throughout the City. Locate roadway drainage ditches a sufficient distance from the edge of pavement to enable emergency vehicles to pass around road obstructions. • Provide greater streetlight separation distances than is otherwise permitted throughout the City. • Protect land for open space purposes through the use of a variety of legal instruments, such as deed restrictions, appropriate zoning classifications, protective easements or transfer to a stewardship agency (e.g. foundations or conservation groups), or through some other appropriate means. • Limit the annual rate of development so as to minimize burdens placed upon rural public infrastructure. Summary of Proposai7 The applicant proposes to resubdivide the 48 -acre tract into a total of six residential building sites and one agricultural lot. The seventh lot, or "residual" lot, would be leased or sold for agricultural purposes only. By right, under the existing agricultural zoning, the property could be subdivided into three residential building sites. Section 405 of the Zoning Ordinance offers an alternative to the by right development if City Council approves a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The alternative allows more dwellings if the development is consistent MARVIN M & GAYLE B. ROLLINS Agenda Item 22 Page 4 with the Comprehensive Plan's Rural Residential Guidelines as listed in the previous section. The maximum number of dwelling units permitted under the CUP alternative is based on the quality of the soils. Soils classified as Type 1 yield a density of one dwelling per five acres, and soils classified as Type 2 yield a density of one dwelling per ten acres. The soils on the subject property yield a maximum of six dwellings under the Section 405 alternative. The six lots are concentrated on the southern side of the property, most of which front Back Bay Landing Road. The existing dwelling (Lot 6) will continue to front Princess Anne Road. Lots 1 and 2 are shown south of Lot 6 and share an access point on Back Bay Landing Road. Lots 3, 4, and 5 are clustered on the southeastern corner of the property and also share an access point. Lot 3 is a flag lot positioned behind Lots 4 and 5. Section 405 permits one flag lot for this size subdivision without a variance. Lot sizes range from 1.2 acres to 2.6 acres, and average 1.8 acres. qlStaff Evaluation Staff recommends deferral of this request because the layout can be easily improved upon. Staff's evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials, adequately addresses the `Major Issue' identified at the beginning of this report. The proposal's strengths in addressing the `Major Issues' are (1) Residential lots are mostly located on soils with the best drainage and water table characteristics and use close to the minimum acceptable lot area necessary. (2) The area of remaining farmland is close to the maximum and is not fragmented. (3) Although protective buffers between proposed residential structures and abutting agricultural operations are not shown on the plan, the buffers are listed as a recommended condition of the Use Permit. (4) One flag lot is included as permitted in Section 405 to preserve more of the frontage along the existing public street and to minimize the number of access points. The driveway width serving the flag lot is adequate for emergency vehicle access. (5) The residual parcel will be protected for agricultural purposes through a suitable legal instrument as recommended in the conditions below. Y MARVIN M. & GAYLE B. ROLLINS Agenda Item 22 Page 5 However, a better rural development plan is possible. Under this scenario, lots 1 through 5 would be placed along the eastern border of the property. The lots would be served by a single - loaded cul-de-sac leading from Back Bay Landing Road. Lots would be kept to a one -acre maximum. This scenario would present a better rural residential development by: (1) Reducing the number of access points on the existing public road system to the minimum. (2) Preserving the open vista along the Princess Anne Road frontage. (3) Orienting the new houses so that they have a view of preserved farmland. c ItIc, Tv -TU Staff concludes the applicant's proposal, while adequate, does not represent the optimum rural development plan. Therefore, a deferral of this request is recommended to allow staff and the applicant additional time to explore these opportunities for change. If, however, this application is granted approval, Staff recommends the following conditions. Conditions 1. The property shall be subdivided into not more than six residential parcels and one additional residual parcel to be used for agricultural purposes only, substantially as depicted on the plan entitled "Preliminary Subdivision of Cypress Grove" dated October 10, 2003 and prepared by Gallup Surveyors and Engineers, Ltd. This plan has been exhibited to City Council and is on file in the Planning Department. 2. A protective buffer shall be provided adjacent to the on-going agricultural operation along the northern property line of Lots 3 and 6, the western property line of Lots 3 and 4, and the eastern property line of Lots 2 and 6. The buffer shall be 50 feet in width. The first 25 feet of such area adjacent to an on-going agricultural operation shall be heavily planted with a mixture of grasses and low growing indigenous shrubs; and the second twenty-five feet of such area adjacent to the structure shall be planted with a double row of trees with a minimum caliper of 1'/2 inches and should be centered no more than thirty^feet , MARVIN M. & GAYLE B. ROLLINS Agenda Item 22 Page 6 apart. Such trees shall consist of a mixture of deciduous and evergreen. The required buffers shall be planted prior to occupancy of the residential lots. 3. A suitable legal instrument restricting the development of the property to no more than six residential lots shall be submitted with the final subdivision plat and shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court. The content and form of such instrument shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. The site plan submitted with this conditional use permit may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. Conditional use permits must be activated within 12 months of City Council approval. See Section 220(8) of the City Zoning Ordinance for further information. MARVIN M. & GAYLE B. ROLLINS Agenda Item -22 Page 7 Public Agency Comments Public Works Master Transportation Princess Anne Road within the vicinity of this Plan (MTP): application is a two-lane rural road within a 50 -foot right-of-way. The current MTP identifies this facility as an undivided road within a 70 -foot right-of-way; however the proposed MTP calls for a 90 -foot right-of- way. There is no project listed for this section of Princess Anne Road in the current adopted Capital Improvement Program. Back Bay Landing Road and Fitztown Road are both within substandard rights-of-way (30 feet and 40 feet respectively). The minimum standard right-of-way is 50 feet wide_ Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Potential Land Use 2 — 30 ADT Princess Anne 3,524 12,000 Road ADT ' ADT ' Proposed Land Use 3 — 60 ADT 'Average Daily Trips 2 as defined by three single-family dwellings permitted under existing zoning 3 as defined by proposed six single-family dwellings Public Utilities Water/Sewer: There is no City water or sewer available to the property. Health Department approval is required for on-site water supplies and sewage disposal systems. Police: No comments. Fire and Rescue. I No concerns. Public Safety MARVIN M. & GAYLE B. ROLLINS Agenda Item 22 Page_ 9 i i I LU 'pH uAnOjZ4!A-- 4 + i . � y r ' N ' Exhibit B Proposed Site Plan ........ .. . ........ ..... .......... ............ �: ::: :: ............. .... ........ .. .. ......... . .................... ... ............ .. ..... . ..... ............ ...... ............ ........... ......... ... ...... . .... ....... . ... 1 .... ........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �x ... ......... . ..... X VFAM MARVIN M. & GAYS B. ROLLINS agenda Item 22 .1 - Page 11 DISCLOSURE STA'iEMENT Exhibit C Disclosure Statement APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below. (Attach list if necessary) If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) Pl Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. if the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Property Owner Disclosure section below. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below (Attach list if necessary) ® Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing ac �mg to the i ons in this package. Marvin M. Rollins Gayle B. Rollins App Signa re CA Pnnt Name Alta H. Ackiss Pr owner's Signature (d dflerent than applicant) Pnnt Name Conditional Use Permit Application Page 10 of 10 Revised 7/1/2003 MARVIN M. & GAYLE B. ROLLINS r Agenda Item 22 - Page 12 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) ® Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) ® Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. & See next page for footnotes Conditional Use Permit Application Page 10 of 11 Revised 10/1/2003 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) Sykes, Bourdon, Ahern & Levy, P.C. Gallup Surveyors & Engineers, Ltd. 1 "Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. 1 understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. �fWV&,; M- Marvin M. Rollins Gayle B. Rollins Ap it is Signa ure Print Name Property Owner's Signature (if different than applicant) Print Name Conditional Use Permit Applicabon Page 11 of 11 Revised 10/1/2003 O CMOD 'MM04a PQ COO",) Item #22 Marvin M. & Gayle B. Rollins Conditional Use Permit 480 Princess Anne Road District 7 Princess Anne November 12, 2003 CONSENT Dorothy Wood: The next item is Item #22, Marvin M. & Gayle B. Rollins. It's an application of Mr. & Mrs. Rollins for a Conditional Use Permit for alternative residential development on Princess Anne Road in the Princess Anne District with three conditions. Mr. Bourdon. Eddie Bourdon: Thank you again. Eddie Bourdon for the record representing the applicant and Mr. Rollins is here. We are in accord with the three conditions that are included in the staff recommendation and they are all acceptable to the applicant. Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Bourdon. Is there any opposition to Mr. & Mrs. Rollins' development on Princess Anne Road? Hearing none, we've asked Mr. Horsley, who is our farmer from Princess Anne to talk about this one. Donald Horsley: Well, the applicant proposes to subdivide a 48 -acre tract of farmland is what it amounts to, a total of six residential lots and one agricultural lot. The applicant has done a very good job in minimizing the acreage used for the building sites. I think according to my calculations it is somewhere between 10-12 acres is going to be used for the development. He's clustered these into two corners of the property. The property has an enormous amount of road frontage already so the idea of putting a cul-de-sac in to put these houses on really didn't receive much ment from us this morning. This area is possible 35 acres in rough math of farmland left which very closely follows the rural residential guidelines. It's for these reasons that we decided to put this on the consent agenda. Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Horsley. Mr. Ripley, I would move to approve Item #22 for Marvin M. & Gayle B. Rollins. Ronald Ripley: Okay. We have a motion to approve the consent agenda item as dust read. Do I have a second? Charlie Salle': Second. Ronald Ripley: Seconded by Charlie Salle'. Okay. Is there any discussion on the motion? Okay. We'll call for the question. AYE 11 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 0 Item #22 Marvin M. & Gayle B. Rollins Page 2 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD AYE Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 11-0, the motion passes. Supplemental InfoN Zoning History -- -' -- WWI •77 ,o% •77 10 Gp:n - See Apphcanm: # I DATE IREQUEST ACTION 1 1-12-99 Modification of Conditions Granted 12-19-88 Change of Zoning (R-8 Residential District to B-2 Withdrawn Community Business District) 2 11-12-96 Modification of Conditions Granted 3-18-85 Change of Zoning (R-8 Residential District to B-2 Granted Community Business District) 3 1-24-95 Conditional Use Permit (motor vehicle sales) Granted 9-14-87 Conditional Use Permit (auto service) Granted 4 7-11-88 Change of Zoning (R -5D Residential District to B-2 Granted Community Business District) 5 2-23-87 Change of Zoning (R-8 Residential District to B-2 Withdrawn KEMPSVILLE CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES Agenda Items 16, 17, & 18 Page 9 aux x <us S CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Kempsville-Centervilie Associates, L.L.C. — Change of Zoning District Classification (R-513 Residential Duplex District to Conditional B-2 Community Business District); Conditional Use Permit (mini -warehouse facility); and, Modification of Conditions (Conditional Use Permit approved on February 11, 2003) MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: (a) An Ordinance upon Application of Kempsville-Centerville Associates, L.L.C. for a Change of Zoning District Classification from R -5D Residential Duplex District to Conditional B-2 Community Business District on property located at 2001 Centerville Turnpike (GPIN 1455900384). The Comprehensive Plan recommends use of this property for residential uses above 3.5 dwelling units per acre. DISTRICT 1 — CENTERVILLE (b) An Ordinance upon Application of Kempsville-Centerville Associates, L.L.C. for a Conditional Use Permit for a mini -warehouse facility on property located at 2001 Centerville Turnpike (GPIN 14559003840000). DISTRICT 1 — CENTERVILLE (c) An Ordinance upon Application of Kempsville-Centerville Associates, L.L.C. for a Modification of Conditions for a Conditional Use Permit approved by City Council on February 11, 2003. Property is located at 2001 Centerville Turnpike (GPIN 14559003840000). DISTRICT 1 — CENTERVILLE ■ Considerations: The applicant is proposing to incorporate a 1.54 -acre parcel into a site previously approved for a mini -storage operation. A request to the rezone the 1.54 -acre parcel and an application for a Conditional Use Permit for the added parcel are required. The architecture and building materials will be identical to those approved under the existing Conditional Use Permit and proffered rezoning request for the larger parcel. There will be an on-site manager responsible for operation of the facility 24 hours a day, 7 days per week The hours of operation are 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m on Monday through Saturday and 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. on Sundays. Kem psvi I le-Centervi I le Page 2 of 3 Ingress/egress to this site is via an existing entrance off of Kemspville Road. This entrance will be shared with an outparcel to the east. No access to the site is proposed from Centerville Turnpike. This is also consistent with the existing approved plan. The Planning Commission placed these items on the consent agenda because they felt the proposed expansion to this parcel is an appropriate use for the parcel due to its size and configuration. Staff recommended approval. There was no opposition to the requests. ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 11-0 to approve this request with the following conditions and as proffered. 1. When the property is developed, it shall be developed substantially as shown on the exhibit entitled, "Layout and Landscape Plan for Addition to `AAAA' Self Storage, 1940 Kempsville Road, Virginia Beach, Virginia," prepared by Land Design and Development, Inc., dated August 8, 2003. One specific exception is all structures on the property shall adhere to the required setbacks from the ultimate right-of-way of Centerville Turnpike as outlined in the Master Transportation Plan. 2. The architectural design elements and exterior building materials shall be substantially in conformance with those depicted on the elevation entitled "AAAA Self Storage, Virginia Beach, Virginia," prepared by Andre Marquez Architects, dated September 26, 2002. 3. The internal property line shall be vacated prior to the issuance of a building permit for the construction of the proposed mini -warehouse facility. 4. The location of any and all dumpsters proposed shall be depicted on the final site plan and shall not be located in close proximity to any residentially zoned property. Location to be reviewed at final site plan review and approved by the Planning Director or his designee. Screening and landscaping shall be provided surrounding all dumpsters so that dumpsters are shielded from view from all adjacent properties. Said screening and landscaping shall conform to the requirements found in the City of Virginia Beach Parking Lot and Foundation Landscaping guide. 5. Any freestanding sign shall be monument style with a brick base that matches the brick depicted on building elevation referenced in Condition 2. Such sign shall not exceed a height of eight (8) feet and shall be externally lit from ground level. Kempsville-Centerville Page 3 of 3 6. The hours that the mini -warehouse may be open for customers access to the storage units shall be limited to the 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. 7. All exterior lighting shall be low intensity and residential in character and shall not be erected any higher than fourteen (14) feet. According to Section 237 of the City Zoning Ordinance, all outdoor lighting shall be shielded to direct light and glare onto the mini -warehouse facility. Said lighting and glare shall be deflected, shaded and focused away from all adjoining properties. 8. All fencing visible from either a public right-of-way or from the adjacent parcels to the southwest shall be wrought iron -style. No barbed wire, razor wire or any other fencing devices shall be installed on the roof or walls of the building or on the fence on the property. 9. No storage of flammable or hazardous materials shall be stored in any unit. 10. There shall be no electric or diesel power generator or generator fueled by any other source of energy located outside of any building. 11. Drive aisles shall be at least 18 feet wide to accommodate emergency apparatus. 12. No on-site business shall be conducted from any storage unit. 13. The units shall be used only for the storage of goods. The units shall not be used for office purposes, band rehearsals, or any other purpose not consistent with the storage of goods. No public assembly or continuous occupancy of the units shall be permitted. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement(s) Planning Commission Minutes Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: City Manage. e . S k Planning Department B11-210-CRZ-2003 Et - B11 -210 -MOD -2003 •'�` .� B11-210-CUP-2003 QV--.� k� Lp, VILLE CENTERVILLE ASSOC., LLC Agenda Items 16 179& 18 November 12, 2003 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Carolyn A.K. Smith The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. Location and General Information REQUEST: 16. Change of Zoning District Classification from R -5D Residential Duplex District to Conditional B-2 Community Business District. 17. Modification of Conditions of a Conditional Use Permit for mini - warehouse approved by City Council on February 11, 2003. 18. Conditional Use Permit for mini -warehouse. LOCATION: Property located at 2001 X11 yy f�f :n sv� elle Cente F1eo trot co Scnle Centerville IfAU < e-2 _ Turnpike, south o •� i .,� side of o 0 0 �• a =R•�� • Kms,/. �� Kempsville ;-10 - �•-�'= `r Road, 580 feet -2 west of °.2 ` B= �� o .� Centerville r� • . M Turnpike. 'r" � 2 l/}- �1 ! INC < v wsr.•� u � KEMPSVILLE CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES Agenda Items 16, 17, & 18 Page 1 GPIN: 14559003840000;14558133710000;14559004770000 COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 1 — CENTERVILLE SITE SIZE: 10.85 acres: 1.54 acres existing R -5D to Conditional B-2 and a Conditional Use Permit for mini -warehouse; Modification of Conditions of a Conditional Use Permit for 9.31 acres of B-2 Community Business District. EXISTING The majority of the site has been cleared recently in preparation of LAND USE: constructing an approved mini -storage facility. 9.31 acres is currently zoned B-2 Community Business District while 1.54 acres (the property proposed for rezoning) is currently zoned R -5D Residential Duplex District. SURROUNDING North: • Single-family dwelling, restaurant, auto sales, fuel LAND USE AND sales, veterinarian / R -5D Residential District, B-2 ZONING: Community Business District South: • Single-family dwellings and single-family dwellings under construction / R-513 Residential District East: • Centerville Turnpike, shopping center with mixed retail, single-family dwellings / B-2 Community Business District, R-7.5 Residential District West: . Kempsville Road, single-family dwellings, church / R -5D Residential District NATURAL The portion of the site proposed for the rezoning is currently wooded. RESOURCE The majority of the previously rezoned 10 -acre site has recently been AND cleared in anticipation of constructing an approved mini -storage CULTURAL facility. This site is located within the Southern Watershed FEATURES: Management Area. No significant environmental features are present on this site; however, the existing trees on the 1.54 acre site do serve as a buffer to the recently constructed residential to the south. The size of the caliper of the majority of the trees indicates that the site was harvested for timber at some point in the last 30 to 40 years. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. KEMPSVILLE CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES Agenda Items 16, 17, & 18 Page 2 Major Issues-IR' The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this request. Staff's evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these issues are adequately addressed. • Compatibility with adjacent residential properties and other surrounding uses. • Design of structure (architecture) sensitive to residential properties in the vicinity with the use of high quality building materials. • Ensure overall operational procedures are not disruptive to neighboring sites. Comprehensive lan"'M The Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as planned for retail, service, office and other compatible uses within commercial centers serving surrounding neighborhoods and communities. The Plan recognizes the importance of preserving and protecting "the character of existing stable neighborhoods against inappropriate land use intrusions while recognizing the legitimate public need for a limited amount of compatible support activities..." (page 51). A final plat recording single-family dwellings on the property to the south has recently been approved by the Development Services Center and development of that property has begun. The Plan's policies require adherence to high standards of appearance and function for future development in the Kempsville area as a means of buffering these future residential property owners and protecting property values. KEMPSVILLE CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES Agenda Items 16, 17, & 18 Page 3 Summary of Proposa The applicant is proposing to incorporate a 1.54 -acre parcel into a site previously approved for a mini -storage operation. A request to the rezone the 1.54 -acre parcel and an application for a Conditional Use Permit are required. The architecture and building materials will be identical to those approved under the existing Conditional Use Permit and proffered rezoning request for the larger parcel. There will be an on-site manager responsible for operation of the facility 24 hours a day, 7 days per week. The hours of operation are 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Monday through Saturday and 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. on Sundays. Ingress/egress to this site is via an existing entrance off of Kemspville Road. This entrance will be shared with the outparcel to the east. No access to the site is proposed from Centerville Turnpike. This is also consistent with the existing approved plan. As with the proposal in February 2003, the property owner has reserved a 43,194 square foot out parcel along Kempsville Road. Development of this parcel will have to adhere to Sections 243 to 249 of the City Zoning Ordinance regarding retail development. U919 0 Proffers 14 The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to "offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable," (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. KEMPSVILLE CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES Agenda Items 16, 17, & 18 Page 4 PROFFER # 1 When the Property is developed, it shall be developed and landscaped substantially as shown on the exhibit entitled "LAYOUT AND LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR ADDITION TO `AAAA' SELF STORAGE 1940 KEMPSVILLE ROAD, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA," dated August 8, 2003, prepared by Land Design and Development, Inc., which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Planning Department (hereinafter referred to as the "Site Plan"). PROFFER # 2 The external building materials and architectural design elements of the building shall be those depicted and described on the elevation entitled, "AAAA Self Storage, Virginia Beach, Virginia," prepared by Andrew Marquez, Architects, dated September 26, 2002, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (hereinafter referred to as the "Elevation"). PROFFER # 3 All exterior lighting shall be low intensity and residential in character and shall not be erected above fourteen feet (14') in height. In accordance with Section 237 of the City Zoning Ordinance, all outdoor lighting shall be shielded to direct light and glare onto the mini -storage facility. Said lighting and glare shall be deflected, shaded and focused away from all adjoining properties. Staff Evaluation of The proffers are acceptable as submitted. Due to the Proffers: imminent single-family development to the south and the presence of existing residential properties adjacent to the site, screening and design become extremely important. The recordation of a proffer agreement further solidifies the intent of the applicant and the expectations and predictability of the ultimate development. Note: Redtip Photina is depicted as the proposed buffer landscape material behind building "C."A substitute must be depicted on the final landscape plan submitted during detailed site plan review, as this plant is not acceptable. City Attorney's The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer KEMPSVILLE CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES Agenda Items 16, 17, & 18 Page 5 Office: agreement dated August 26, 2003, and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. R4Staff Evaluation Staff recommends approval of this request. Staffs evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials and the proffers, adequately addresses each of the `Major Issues' identified at the beginning of this report. The proposal's strengths in addressing the `Major Issues' are (1) With the imminent single-family development to the south, the configuration and size of this site, and the uses present on the parcel, the addition of this 1.54 acre piece into the mini -storage operation is ideal as future use of the property has become rather limited. (2) The architecture and building materials are proffered. These aspects are identical to the proposal approved by City Council in February of 2003. The addition of faux windows with dark brown shutters attempts to bring a "residential feel" to the building. (3) It is recommended that the hours of operation be restricted (Condition 6) and that the location of any dumpsters be controlled (Condition 4), as the proposed facility will be located adjacent to residentially zoned properties. The use of the property as proposed is acceptable, but only subject to the conditions recommended below and the proffers listed above, which will help to assure that the development is high in quality and will not be disruptive to existing and future residential development in the vicinity of this site. Conditions 1. When the property is developed, it shall be developed substantially as shown on the exhibit entitled, "Layout and Landscape Plan for Addition to `AAAA' Self Storage, 1940 Kempsville Road, Virginia Beach, Virginia," prepared by Land Design and Development, Inc., dated August 8, 2003. One specific exception is all structures on the property shall adhere to the required setbacks from the ultimate right-of-way of Centerville Turnpike as outlined in the Master KEMPSVILLE CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES Agenda Items 16, 17, & 18 Page 6 Transportation Plan. 2. The architectural design elements and exterior building materials shall be substantially in conformance with those depicted on the elevation entitled "AAAA Self Storage, Virginia Beach, Virginia," prepared by Andre Marquez Architects, dated September 26, 2002. 3. The internal property line shall be vacated prior to the issuance of a building permit for the construction of the proposed mini -warehouse facility. 4. The location of any and all dumpsters proposed shall be depicted on the final site plan and shall not be located in close proximity to any residentially zoned property. Location to be reviewed at final site plan review and approved by the Planning Director or his designee. Screening and landscaping shall be provided surrounding all dumpsters so that dumpsters are shielded from view from all adjacent properties. Said screening and landscaping shall conform to the requirements found in the City of Virginia Beach Parking Lot and Foundation Landscaping guide. 5. Any freestanding sign shall be monument style with a brick base that matches the brick depicted on building elevation referenced in Condition 2. Such sign shall not exceed a height of eight (8) feet and shall be externally lit from ground level. 6. The hours that the mini -warehouse may be open for customers access to the storage units shall be limited to the 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. 7. All exterior lighting shall be low intensity and residential in character and shall not be erected any higher than fourteen (14) feet. According to Section 237 of the City Zoning Ordinance, all outdoor lighting shall be shielded to direct light and glare onto the mini -warehouse facility. Said lighting and glare shall be deflected, shaded and focused away from all adjoining properties. 8. All fencing visible from either a public right-of-way or from the adjacent parcels to the southwest shall be wrought iron -style. No barbed wire, razor wire or any other fencing devices shall be installed on the roof or walls of the building or on the fence on the property. 9. No storage of flammable or hazardous materials shall be stored in any unit. 10. There shall be no electric or diesel power generator or generator fueled by any other source of energy located outside of any building. KEMPSVILLE CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES Agenda Items 16, 17, & 18 Page 7 11. Drive aisles shall be at least 18 feet wide to accommodate emergency apparatus. 12. No on-site business shall be conducted from any storage unit. 13. The units shall be used only for the storage of goods. The units shall not be used for office purposes, band rehearsals, or any other purpose not consistent with the storage of goods. No public assembly or continuous occupancy of the units shall be permitted. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable Ci Codes. KEMPSVILLE CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES Agenda Items 16, 17, & 18 Page 8 Public Agency Comments Public Works Master Transportation According to the MTP, the desired ultimate right-of-way Plan (MTP): width for Centerville Turnpike is 143 feet. Adequate land area was reserved parallel to Centerville Turnpike (approximately 24 feet) during the final site plan review for the mini -storage facility approved by City Council in 2003. Kempsville Road in the vicinity of the proposal is considered a four lane divided urban arterial. It is designated on the MTP as a 100 foot right-of-way divided with a bikeway. There are no plans within the CIP to upgrade this roadway. Traffic Calculations: Community Business District) Present Volume 2-23-87 Conditional Use Permit (auto center) Withdrawn 6-10-85 Change of Zoning (R-8 Residential District to B-2 Denied Community Business District) 6 2-13-84 Conditional Use Permit (borrow pit) Granted 5-18-81 Conditional Use Permit (communications tower) Granted 7 2-13-84 Change of Zoning (R-8 Residential District to B-2 Granted 27,000 Community Business District) - 88 ADT for R -5D 8 4-20-81 Conditional Use Permit (fuel pumps) Granted Public Agency Comments Public Works Master Transportation According to the MTP, the desired ultimate right-of-way Plan (MTP): width for Centerville Turnpike is 143 feet. Adequate land area was reserved parallel to Centerville Turnpike (approximately 24 feet) during the final site plan review for the mini -storage facility approved by City Council in 2003. Kempsville Road in the vicinity of the proposal is considered a four lane divided urban arterial. It is designated on the MTP as a 100 foot right-of-way divided with a bikeway. There are no plans within the CIP to upgrade this roadway. Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Existing Land Use — 406 ADT for mini - storage 27,000 17,300 - 88 ADT for R -5D Kempsville Road ADT' ADT' property Proposed Land Use — 513 ADT Average Daily Tnps 2 as defined by existing approved mini -storage facility plus 1 54 acres of R -5D property 3 as defined by the existing approved mini -storage facility at 406 ADT plus the addition of approximately 42,905 square feet of mini storage which equates to 107 ADT KEMPSVILLE CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES Agenda Items 16, 17, & 18 Page 10 Public Utilities Water: There is a 12 inch water main in Kempsville Road fronting the property. There is a 20 inch water main in Centerville Turnpike fronting the east side of the site. This site must connect to City water. Sewer: There is a 30 inch force main and a dry 12 inch sanitary sewer main in Kempsville Road fronting the property. There is a 20 inch force main in Centerville Turnpike fronting the east side of the site. This site must connect to City sewer. Public Safety Police: The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Fire and Rescue: Gated sites shall provide for Fire Department access using the Knox or Supra system and have a fail-safe operation in the event of a power failure. KEMPSVILLE CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES Agenda Items 16, 17, & 18 Page -11 ,�- � •i'� �` , �Y '�;�` t •, y; -t moi' 1 \ �'v' .Y � y �-}�+,' a r .� % � � 1, •. ./ �,• /.' � . i _,..� _yil r • ri. -'r'�Y - t� atm �'�>y ry C' ` I 1i�J �.� 1 , �; ?lh,• i 4 r.. ,� .yt' �* I �/ � •� mak' l � � � ` \moi.. .� �� i - /'✓` � _-�' +• !{ ^,`�'�� ;�,�R�.�f V t r i r f f Ii �� Exhibit B Proposed Site Plan POP OAS, .A i '3,• R C � ;* "'� S o a � ��'y�^Sr, +a yi i it •�-` �; lei, {+ '' � 31 '•'' `�, `fir `, ,j t /` , ,,� N`''6�,; b'� s' 1 ''►!S '� 1 Ft �«,�.j � � 'moi 6 �! a• / � ` � 'I�3 � 1 1 • � ^ 'aim � -` `+.� / ° r -' "" � � i 3 � o' •v AM4Ilk cc �Iknkuw 14 'v �► '� `� � + j 1 1 i 1 ReD ; i i J NM NN gN ,� ,n A\� Qi � w • N h Nl JW x•� » � , �✓ nnfS� � 36d .9- r y ti f � +Mri l � j a + f f � i s • • r a e• er■►�_4 llj KEMPSVILLE CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES Agenda Items 16, 17, & 18 Page 13 Exhibit C Item #16,17 & 18 Kempsville-Centerville Associates, L.L.C. Change of Zoning District Classification Conditional Use Permit Modification of Conditions 2001 Centerville Turnpike District 1 Centerville November 12, 2003 CONSENT Dorothy Wood: I will go to Item # 16, 17 & 18. This is by the Kempsville-Centerville Associates. Number 16 is an Application for Change of Zoning District Classification from R -5D Residential to Conditional B-2 Community Business District on Centerville Turnpike. Number 17 is an Ordinance upon Application of Kempsville-Centerville Associates for a Conditional Use Permit for a mire -warehouse facility on Centerville Turnpike. The next item is Item #18, an Ordinance upon Application of Kempsville- Centerville Associates for a Modification of Conditions for a Conditional Use Permit approved by City Council on February 11, 2003. These are all in the Centerville district and they have thirteen conditions. Mr. Bourdon. Eddie Bourdon: Thank you again. Eddie Bourdon, a Virginia Beach attorney representing the applicant and Mr. Martin the principal is here. We obviously agree with all the conditions. They are the same conditions that were approved by Council with the exception of a new site plan that incorporates that one additional parcel of property that is pretty well constricted to being added to this project to make it a viable land use. Dorothy Wood: Thanks Eddie. Eddie Bourdon: Thank you. Dorothy Wood: Is there any opposition to Items #16, 17 & 18? Hearing none. Jan, do you want to take this one? Janice Anderson: I'll take this one. The Commission believes that this is an appropriate land use for this strip of parcel. It is a small residential parcel with in an R -5D district. It's right south of the property that already has a Conditional Use Permit for a mini - warehouse. This is an appropriate use. To the south of it, there is a residential area. This strip is divided by a small utility parcel so this would be an appropriate land use to just add it to this parcel to be part of the mini -warehouse. One of the conditions is having a buffer 20 feet behind the residential area that abuts this extra piece of property and also Category IV landscaping. Dorothy Wood: Thank you Jan. Mr. Ripley, I would move to approve Items # 16, 17 & 18 for Kempsville-Centerville Associates. Ronald Ripley: Okay. We have a motion to approve the consent agenda items as dust Item #16,17 & 18 Kempsville-Centerville Associates, L.L.C. Page 2 Charlie Salle': Second. Ronald Ripley: Seconded by Charlie Salle'. Okay. Is there any discussion on the motion? Okay. We'll call for the question. AYE 11 NAY 0 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD AYE ABS 0 ABSENT 0 Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 11-0, the motion passes. FORM NO P S 1B AB !1Z / v i a d OF OUR NAS\ONS City Of Virgiri is Beac1-z In Reply Refer To Our File No DF -5804 TO: Leslie L. Lilley FROM: B. Kay Wilson INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE DATE: November 25, 2003 DEPT: City Attorney DEPT: City Attorney RE: Conditional Zoning Application Kempsville-Centerville Associates, L.L.C. & George W. & Joyce R. Doyle The above -referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on December 9, 2003. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated August 26, 2003, and have determined it to be legally sufficient and in proper legal form. A copy of the agreement is attached. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further. BKW Enclosure PREPARED BY 010 SYKES. BOURDON, W AHERN & LEVY, PC GEORGE W. DOYLE and JOAN R. DOYLE, husband and wife and KEMPSVILLE-CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company TO (PROFFERED COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS) CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia THIS AGREEMENT, made this 26th day of August, 2003, by and between GEORGE W. DOYLE and JOAN R. DOYLE, husband and wife, parties of the first part and KEMPSVILLE-CENTERVILLE ASSOCIATES, L.L.C., a Virginia limited habihty company, party of the second part, herein collectively referred to as Grantors; and THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Grantee, party of the third part. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the parties of the first part are the owners of a parcel of property located in the Centerville District of the City of Virginia Beach, containing approximately 1.54 acres as described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The parcel described in Exhibit "A" is hereinafter referred to as the "Property"; and WHEREAS, the Grantors have initiated a conditional amendment to the Zoning Map of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, by petition addressed to the Grantee, so as to change the Zoning Classification of the Property from R -5D Residential District to Conditional B-2 Community Business District; and WHEREAS, the Grantee's policy is to provide only for the orderly development of land for various purposes through zoning and other land development legislation; II and II GPIN: 1455-90-0384 1 PREPARED BY 012 SYKES. BOURDON. UEN AHERN & LEVY. PC WHEREAS, the Grantors acknowledge that the competing and sometimes incompatible uses conflict and that in order to permit differing uses on and in the area of the Property and at the same time to recognize the effects of change, and the need for various types of uses, certain reasonable conditions governing the use of the Property for the protection of the community that are not generally applicable to land similarly zoned are needed to cope with the situation to which the Grantors' rezoning application gives rise; and WHEREAS, the Grantors have voluntarily proffered, in writing, in advance of and prior to the public hearing before the Grantee, as a part of the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map, in addition to the regulations provided for the B-2 Zoning District by the existing overall Zoning Ordinance, the following reasonable conditions related to the physical development, operation, and use of the Property to be adopted as a part of said amendment to the Zoning Map relative and applicable to the Property, which have a reasonable relation to the rezoning and the need for which is generated by the rezoning. NOW, THEREFORE, the Grantors, for themselves, their successors, personal representatives, assigns, Grantees, and other successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement by or exaction from the Grantee or its governing body and without any element of compulsion or quid pro quo for zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit, or subdivision approval, hereby makes the following declaration of conditions and restrictions which shall restrict and govern the physical development, operation, and use of the Property and hereby covenants and agrees that this declaration shall constitute covenants running with the Property, which shall be binding upon the Property and upon all parties and persons claiming under or through the Grantors, their successors, personal representatives, assigns, Grantees, and other successors in interest or title: 1. When the Property is developed, it shall be developed and landscaped substantially as shown on the exhibit entitled "LAYOUT AND LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR ADDITION TO `AAAA' SELF STORAGE 1940 KEMPSVILLE ROAD, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated August 8, 2003, prepared by Land Design and Development, Inc., which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and 2 PREPARED BY 49W SYKES. BOURDON, DOI AHERN & LEVY PC is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (hereinafter referred to as the "Site Plan") . 2. The external building materials and architectural design elements of the building shall be those depicted and described on the elevation entitled, "AAAA Self Storage, Virginia Beach, Virginia", prepared by Andrew Marquez, Architects, dated September 26, 2002, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (hereinafter referred to as the "Elevation") . 3. All exterior lighting shall be low intensity and residential in character and shall not be erected above fourteen feet (14 1 in height. In accordance with Section 237 of the City Zoning Ordinance, all outdoor lighting shall be shielded to direct light and glare onto the mini -storage facility. Said lighting and glare shall be deflected, shaded and focused away from all adjoining properties. 4. Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. The above conditions, having been proffered by the Grantors and allowed and accepted by the Grantee as part of the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, shall continue in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes the zoning of the Property and specifically repeals such conditions. Such conditions shall continue despite a subsequent amendment to the Zoning Ordinance even if the subsequent amendment is part of a comprehensive implementation of a new or substantially revised Zoning Ordinance until specifically repealed. The conditions, however, may be repealed, amended, or vaned by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and executed by the record owner of the Property at the time of recordation of such instrument, provided that said instrument is consented to by the Grantee in writing as evidenced by a certified copy of an ordinance or a resolution adopted by the governing body of the Grantee, after a public hearing before the Grantee which was advertised pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. Said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with said 3 PREPARED BY SYKES. BOURDON, M AH£RN & LEVY. P C instrument as conclusive evidence of such consent, and if not so recorded, said instrument shall be void. The Grantors covenant and agrees that: (1) The Zoning Administrator of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, shall be vested with all necessary authority, on behalf of the governing body of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, to administer and enforce the foregoing conditions and restrictions, including the authority (a) to order, in writing, that any noncompliance with such conditions be remedied, and (b) to bring legal action or suit to insure compliance with such conditions, including mandatory or prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages, or other appropriate action, suit, or proceeding; (2) The failure to meet all conditions and restrictions shall constitute cause to deny the issuance of any of the required building or occupancy permits as may be appropriate; (3) If aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Administrator, made pursuant to these provisions, the Grantor shall petition the governing body for the review thereof prior to instituting proceedings in court; and (4) The Zoning Map may show by an appropriate symbol on the map the existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the Property, and the ordinances and the conditions may be made readily available and accessible for public inspection in the office of the Zoning Administrator and in the Planning Department, and they shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and indexed in the names of the Grantors and the Grantee. 4 WITNESS the following signatures and seals: GRANTORS: Ll� '-^�C�� (SEAL) George W. Doyle r C. (SEAL) ,,_ v Pan R. Doyle STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ,:r4day of August, 2003, by George W. Doyle and Joan R. Doyle, husband and wife. My Commission Expires: 3 PREPARED BY SYK£S, BOURDON. AHERN & LEVY. PC Notary Public WITNESS the following signature and seal: GRANTOR: Kempsville-Centerville Associates, L.L.C., a Virginia limited habihty company By: (SEAL) �Jys_se W. Martin, Managing Member STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 29th day of August, 2003, by Jesse W. Martin, Managing Member, Kempsville-Centerville Associates, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company. My Commission Expires: August 31, 2006 PREPARED BY SYKES, BOURDON. W ARERN & LEVY. P C Notary Pubhc PREPARED BY i SYK£S. GOURDON, AIERN & LEVY PC EXHIBIT "A" ALL THAT certain piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon, situate, lying and being in the Centerville District of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and being more particularly bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a pin located at the northernmost corner of "Parcel D-1" as depicted on that plat entitled "SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL D, PLAT OF PROPERTY OF LOLA DALE SPRUILL-EVANGALINE S. ROGERS-ARDATH S. PURDUE", which plat is recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Map Book 186, at Page 39; and from said point of beginning South 41* 03' 41" West a distance of 100 feet to a pin at the westernmost corner of Parcel D-1; thence continuing South 41' 03'41" West, a distance of 20.81 feet to a point on the boundary line of Parcel D-2; thence North 48° 40' 12" West, a distance of 559.34 feet to a pin at the westernmost corner of Parcel D-2; thence North 41" 03'41" East, a distance of 120.81 feet to a pin at the northernmost corner of Parcel D-2; thence South 48° 40' 12" East, a distance of 559.34 feet to the point of beginning. Said parcel contains 1.54 acres and is that portion of Parcel D-2 which lies north of Parcel D-1 as depicted on the above referenced "SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL D, PLAT OF PROPERTY OF LOLA DALE SPRUILL-EVANGALINE S. ROGERS-ARDATH S. PURDUE', recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Map Boom 186, at Page 39. GPIN: 1455-90-0384 CONDREZONE/ KEMPSVILLECENTERVILLE/ DOYLEPROPERTY/ PROFFER 7 Supplemental Information Zoning History Zoning Change R-10 to Conditional A-12 # I DATE REQUEST ACTION 1 8-28-01 Modification of Conditions (1,2,6) Approved 12-16- Conditional Use Permit (Church) Approved 97 2-11-92 Conditional Use Permit (Church) Approved 2 11-28- Rezoning (R-5 Residential to A-1 Apartment) Approved 83 3 1-18-82 Rezoning (R-5 Residential to A-1 Apartment) Approved 4 10-9-97 Rezoning (R-5 Residential to A-1 Apartment) Approved HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES Agenda Item 9 Page 6 *41 R , CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Hollis Road Associates, a Virginia General Partnership — Change of Zoning District Classification (R-10 Residential District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District) MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: An Ordinance upon Application of Hollis Road Associates, a Virginia General Partnership for a Change of Zoning District Classification from R-10 Residential District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District on property located on the south side of Herbert Moore Road, approximately 115 feet west of Campus Drive (GPINS 14682462570000; 14682473600000). The Comprehensive Plan recommends use of this property for residential uses above 3.5 dwelling units per acre. DISTRICT 2 — KEMPSVILLE ■ Considerations: The applicant proposes to rezone the site from R-10 Residential to Conditional A- 12 Apartment to develop the site with twenty (20) townhouses. The proposed density is ten units to the acre. The submitted conceptual site layout plan depicts lot sizes ranging in size from 1,935 square feet to 4,897 square feet, with an average lot size of 3,773 square feet. A stormwater management facility is depicted in the southeast portion of the site on a lot of 7,291 square feet. The proposed layout of the site is similar to the surrounding area. The proposed structures, transitional in style, are shown in two groups of four and six units each, with the driveways extending twenty feet (20) into the front yards. Each unit also has a garage. The submitted architectural elevations depict two-story structures. The buildings are constructed of horizontal vinyl siding and vinyl shake siding. Composition roofing shingles are proposed for the roofs. The entryways are six panel front doors with sidelights and are covered with a roof. The parcel is an undeveloped wooded site in the middle of the existing Campus East Townhouse subdivision. Campus East was developed in the early to mid 1980s and consists of vinyl clad townhouses with brick accent trim. The request is compatible with the surrounding uses and is consistent with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan Map and land use policies for this section of the Bayside Planning area. Hollis Road Associates Page 2 of 2 The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because it is compatible with the surrounding land uses. Staff recommended approval. There was no opposition to the proposal. ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 with 1 abstention to approve this request as proffered. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement(s) Planning Commission Minutes Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: er: S� C05-212-CRZ-2003 HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES Agenda Item 9 November 12, 2003 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Faith Christie The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. Location and General information REQUEST: Change of Zoning District Classification from R-10 Residential District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District LOCATION: Property located on the south side of Herbert Moore Drive, 115 feet west of Campus Drive. 7oning Change R-1 D to Conditional 4-12 GPIN: 14682462570000;14682473600000 COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: #2 - KEMPSVILLE HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES Agenda Item 9 Page 1 SITE SIZE: 1.94 acres EXISTING LAND USE: The existing site is wooded and undeveloped. SURROUNDING North: Herbert Moore Road LAND USE AND • Across Herbert Moore Road is a portion of the ZONING: Campus East Townhouse subdivision / A-12 Apartment South: Attached Dwelling (Townhouses) / A-12 Apartment • Chalk Court East: • Attached Dwelling (Townhouses) / A-12 Apartment West: Attached Dwelling (Townhouses) / A-12 Apartment NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL The site is the only undeveloped wooded R-10 Residentially zoned FEATURES: site within the Campus East Townhouse subdivision. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Major Issues The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this request. Staff's evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these issues are adequately addressed. • Compatibility with surrounding uses. • Consistency with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan Map for the area. HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES Agenda Item 9 Page 2 Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan Map designates this area as Suburban Residential / Medium and High Density, that is an area planned for residential uses at a density of 3.5 dwelling units per acre and above. The Comprehensive Plan policies and Map designation for this portion of the Bayside Planning Area supports single family residential development proposals that are well planned and designed, and proposed at a density that is consistent with that of the surrounding area. Summary of Proposa The applicant proposes to rezone the site from R-10 Residential to Conditional A-12 Apartment to develop the site with twenty (20) townhouses. The proposed density is ten units to the acre. The submitted conceptual site layout plan depicts lot sizes ranging in size from 1,935 square feet to 4,897 square feet, with an average lot size of 3,773 square feet. A stormwater management facility is depicted in the southeast portion of the site on a lot of 7,291 square feet. The proposed layout of the site is similar to the surrounding area. The proposed structures, transitional in style, are shown in two groups of four and six units each, with the driveways extending twenty feet (20) into the front yards. Each unit also has a garage. The submitted architectural elevations depict two-story structures. The buildings are constructed of horizontal vinyl siding and vinyl shake siding. Composition roofing shingles are proposed for the roofs. The entryways are six panel front doors with sidelights and are covered with a roof. HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES Agenda Item 9 Page 3 Proffers 'l The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to "offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable," (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. PROFFER # 1 When the property is developed, it shall be substantially in accordance with the "CONCEPTUAL SITE LAYOUT PLAN HERBERT MOORE ROAD SUBDIVISION" dated 6/20/03, prepared by MSA, P.C., which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning ("Concept Plan"). PROFFER # 2 Vehicular Ingress and Egress shall be via one (1) cul-de- sac from the south side of Herbert Moore Road and no more than twenty (20) residential dwellings shall be constructed on the property. PROFFER # 3 Each of the twenty (20) residential townhomes shall be two (2) story in height with no more than three (3) bedrooms in any unit. PROFFER # 4 The architectural design of the residential buildings will be substantially as depicted on the exhibit entitled "MOORE'S POND TOWNHOMES" dated 7/15/03, prepared by Dimensional Designs, Inc. ("Elevations"). PROFFER # 5 Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. Staff Evaluation of The proffers are acceptable. The proffers address site Proffers: layout, vehicular ingress and egress, density and HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES Agenda Item 9 Page 4 architectural design of the site. City Attorney's The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer Office: agreement dated 30 July, 2003, and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. Staff Evaluation Staff recommends approval of this request. Staffs evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials and the proffers, adequately addresses each of the `Mayor Issues' identified at the beginning of this report. The proposal's strengths in addressing the `Major Issues' are (1) The request is compatible with the surrounding uses. The parcel is an undeveloped wooded site in the middle of the existing Campus East Townhouse subdivision. Campus East was developed in the early to mid 1980s and consists of vinyl clad townhouses with brick accent trim. The proposed proffer agreement adequately addresses potential negative impacts. The site is depicted in the same layout design as the surrounding properties. The proposed buildings are comparable in design to those in the surrounding neighborhood. (2) The request is consistent with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan Map and land use policies for this section of the Bayside Planning area. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable Citv Codes. HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES M Agenda Item 9 Page 5 Public Agency Comments Public Works Master Transportation Baker Road near this application is a two lane Plan (MTP): undivided minor suburban arterial. It is designated on the Master Transportation Plan as a 70 foot undivided right-of-way. Herbert Moore Road in front of the site is a residential "cut -through" street, from Baker Road to Campus Drive. Currently only the Enoch Baptist Church, west of this site, fronts on Herbert Moore Road. Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic 13,000 13,600 Existing Land Use 673 Baker Road ADT ' ADT ' -113 Herbert Moore N/A N/A Proposed Land Road Use 3 - 173 Average vauy i rips z as defined by R-10 zoning 3 as defined by 20 Townhouses Public Utilities Water: There is an eight -inch water main in Campus Drive. City water does not front this site. A water main extension may be required from Campus_ Drive along Herbert Moore Road. Sewer: There is an eight -inch gravity sanitary sewer main in Campus Drive. City sewer does not front the site. A sanitary sewer main extension may be required from Campus Drive along Herbert Moore Road. Sewer and pump station analysis for Pump Station 336 is required to determine if flows can be accommodated. Public Schools School Current Capacity Generation 1 Change 2 Enrollment Williams Elements 743 673 7 6 HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES Agenda Item 9 Page 7 Bayside Middle 1,301 1,230 3 3 Bayside High 11907 2,003 3 3 °------`---n _------_a_ AL._ _......L..._ _t —4 .4..-1L &&. 6, A-&. .4 4. ..4 •.. 4-L.......L.....1 Uq= V!aLIV 1VVj VQ1U LQ U 1 ..u. RSG. v1.2LULa91La u.aa a.c uNa .rm c+WW a a .w. WW. 2 "change" represents the difference between generated students under the existing zoning and under the proposed zoning The number can be positive (additional students) or negative (fewer students) Public Safety Police: In an effort to reduce opportunity for crime, the applicant is encouraged to review and incorporate safety by design concepts and (design) strategies contained in the CVB Planning Department's, "Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design - General Guidelines for Designing Safer Communities booklet. A copy of this booklet can be obtained by contacting either the Planning Department or the Police Departments Crime Prevention Unit. Fire and Rescue: Fire hydrant should be within 500 feet of residential multi- family structure. Private fire hydrants must be maintained annually as identified in N.F.P.A. 25. HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES Agenda Item 9 Page 8 Exhibits Exhibit A Aerial of Site HULLIJ rcvr-w I Agenda Item 9 Page 9 tion Exhibit B Proposed Site Plan MON r V- 41 T1 U. U. h po Wt M H K C i of m n A -4 o A n HIR 4 tr tp lei of Ick rtY .S IR 024 in f" M"" V� *ZM— e} } • C 0 +i c� o� OC > Lm C o H O z '0a 1 CL t u 4 T V i I 1 � l � t 5 t 1 , 1 t l O ��m�3999939 �A N b VI V! N i�11 NV! Y! N A Obi• Of O� vtl. N ry A O0 o n � t � t t \ \ ` it ,- w \% 1i \1 _ r% N o° a uitQ �� HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES Agenda Item 9 ry Page 10 - �� 10 7 LC = O • 'OE U w0. m� .�aZ.5 � a 1NA 2ssss 111 • C 0 +i c� o� OC > Lm C o H O z '0a 1 CL t u 4 T V i I 1 � l � t 5 t 1 , 1 t l O ��m�3999939 �A N b VI V! N i�11 NV! Y! N A Obi• Of O� vtl. N ry A O0 o n � t � t t \ \ ` it ,- w \% 1i \1 _ r% N o° a uitQ �� HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES Agenda Item 9 ry Page 10 0 Exhibit C Proposed Building o t Elevation _Cox HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES Agenda Item 9 Page 11 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Exhibit D Disclosure Statement APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) Harry Newman, Partner Paul Warner, Partner ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. If the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Property Owner Disclosure section below: PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) ❑ Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. 1 understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. Hollis Road Associates Michael P. warner, Partner Apph 's Signature Print Name Bentley B. Anderson F>roperty5i3wes Signature (if dderent than applicant) Print Name Conditonai Rezorung Appbcahon Page 12 of 12 Rernsed 7/1/2 03 HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES Agenda item 9 Page 12 Z O V Z DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) Hollis Road Associates: Harry Newman, Partner, Michael P. Warner, Partner 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) ® Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. & See next page for footnotes Conditional Rezoning Application Page 12 of 13 Revised 10/1/2003 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) Sykes, Bourdon, Ahern & Levy, P.C. MSA, P. C. Dimensional Designs, Inc. ' "Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. Hollis Road Associates Michael P. Warner, Partner Applicant's Signature Print Name Property Owner's Signature (if different than applicant) Print Name Conditional Rezoning Applicabon Page 13 of 13 Revised 10/1/2003 1= A O Canso") Item #9 Hollis Road Associates, A Virginia General Partnership Change of Zoning District Classification South side of Herbert Moore Road District 2 Kempsville November 12, 2003 CONSENT Dorothy Wood: The next item is Item #9, which is Hollis Road Associates. It's an Application for Hollis Road Associates for Change of Zoning District Classification from R-10 Residential to A-12 Apartment. This is located on Herbert Moore Road in the Kempsville district. It has five proffers. Mr. Bourdon. Eddie Bourdon: Thank you madam secretary, again for the record, Eddie Bourdon representing the applicant. It's a proffered conditional rezoning. We obviously agree to all our proffered conditions. Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Bourdon. Is there any opposition to Item #9, Hollis Road Associates change of zoning from R-10 to A-12 with five proffers? Mr. Din. William Din: Once again, this is and if you could look at the map on the viewer, you can see that this is the last remaining undeveloped piece of property in the middle of all the other townhouses. It is currently R-10. It's going to be changed to A-12 Apartment and is compatible with all the adjoining surrounding uses. We didn't see any problems with this because it fits right in there, and there was no opposition. It was placed on consent for approval. Dorothy Wood: Thanks Will. Mr. Ripley, I would move to approve Item #9 for Hollis Road Associates. Ronald Ripley: Okay. We have a motion to approve the consent agenda item as dust read. Do I have a second? Charlie Salle': Second. Ronald Ripley: Seconded by Charlie Salle'. Mr. Miller. Robert Miller: I need to abstain from Item #9. My firm is working on that project. Ronald Ripley: Any other abstentions? Okay. Is there any discussion on the motion? Okay. We'll call for the question. AYE 10 NAY 0 ABS 1 ABSENT 0 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD AYE ABS Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 10-0, the motion passes. FORM NO P S 18 0 UV a Z 0 S OF OUR Npt��N City Of Virgirxia Beach Beach In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF -5795 INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE DATE: November 25, 2003 TO: Leslie L. Lilley DEPT: City Attorney FROM: B. Kay WilsonDEPT: City Attorney RE: Conditional Zoning Application Hollis Road Associates and Bentley B. Anderson The above -referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on December 9, 2003. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated July 30, 2003, and have determined it to be legally sufficient and in proper legal form. A copy of the agreement is attached. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further. BKW Enclosure PREPARED BY SYKES, BOUR®ON. AHERN & LM R.0 HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES, a Virginia general partnership BENTLEY B. ANDERSON TO (PROFFERED COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS) CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia THIS AGREEMENT, made this 30thday of July, 2003, by and between HOLLIS ROAD ASSOCIATES, a Virginia general partnership, party of the first part, Grantor; BENTLEY B. ANDERSON, party of the second part, Grantor; and THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Grantee. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the party of the second part is the owner of two (2) certain parcels of property located in the Kempsville District of the City of Virginia Beach, containing a total of approximately 1.94 acres as more particularly described as Parcels 1 and 2 in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, which parcels are referred to herein as the "Property"; and WHEREAS, the party of the first part as contract purchaser of the Property has initiated a conditional amendment to the Zoning Map of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, by petition addressed to the Grantee so as to change the Zoning Classification of the Property from R-10 to A-12; and WHEREAS, the Grantee's policy is to provide only for the orderly development of land for various purposes through zoning and other land development legislation; and GPIN: 1468-24-6257 1468-24-7360 -1- PREPARED BY SYKES. BOURDON, AHERN & LEVY. P C WHEREAS, the Grantors acknowledge that competing and sometimes incompatible uses conflict and that in order to permit differing uses on and in the area of the Property and at the same time to recognize the effects of change, and the need for various types of uses, certain reasonable conditions governing the use of the Property for the protection of the community that are not generally applicable to land similarly zoned are needed to cope with the situation to which the Grantors' rezoning application gives rise; and WHEREAS, the Grantors have voluntarily proffered, in writing, in advance of and prior to the public hearing before the Grantee, as a part of the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map, in addition to the regulations provided for the A-12 Zoning District by the existing overall Zoning Ordinance, the following reasonable conditions related to the physical development, operation, and use of the Property to be adopted as a part of said amendment to the Zoning Map relative and applicable to the Property, which has a reasonable relation to the rezoning and the need for which is generated by the rezoning. NOW, THEREFORE, the Grantors, for themselves, their successors, personal representatives, assigns, Grantee, and other successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement by or exaction from the Grantee or its governing body and without any element of compulsion or quid pro quo for zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit, or subdivision approval, hereby make the following declaration of conditions and restrictions which shall restrict and govern the physical development, operation, and use of the Property and hereby covenants and agrees that this declaration shall constitute covenants running with the Property, which shall be binding upon the Property and upon all parties and persons claiming under or through the Grantors, their successors, personal representatives, assigns, grantee, and other successors in interest or title: 1. When the Property is developed, it shall be substantially in accordance with the "CONCEPTUAL SITE LAYOUT PLAN HERBERT MOORE ROAD SUBDIVISION" dated 6/20/03, prepared by MSA, P.C., which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning ("Concept Plan"). -2- PREPARED BY . : , SYKES. BOURDON. N£RN & LEVY. R C 2. Vehicular Ingress and Egress shall be via one (1) cul-de-sac from the south side of Herbert Moore Road and no more than twenty (20) residential dwellings shall be constructed on the Property. 3. Each of the twenty (20) residential townhomes shall be two (2) story in height with no more than three (3) bedrooms in any unit. 4. The architectural design of the residential buildings will be substantially as depicted on the exhibit entitled "MOORE'S POND TOWNHOMES" dated 7/15/03, prepared by Dimensional Designs, Inc. ("Elevations"). 5. Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan review and, administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. The above conditions, having been proffered by the Grantors and allowed and accepted by the Grantee as part of the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, shall continue in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes the zoning of the Property and specifically repeals such conditions. Such conditions shall continue despite a subsequent amendment to the Zoning Ordinance even if the subsequent amendment is part of a comprehensive implementation of a new or substantially revised Zoning Ordinance until specifically repealed. The conditions, however, may be repealed, amended, or varied by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and executed by the record owner of the Property at the time of recordation of such instrument, provided that said instrument is consented to by the Grantee in writing as evidenced by a certified copy of an ordinance or a resolution adopted by the governing body of the Grantee, after a public hearing before the Grantee which was advertised pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. Said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with said instrument as conclusive evidence of such consent, and if not so recorded, said instrument shall be void. The Grantors covenant and agree that: (1) The Zoning Administrator of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, shall be vested with all necessary authority, on behalf of the governing body of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, to administer and enforce the foregoing conditions and -3- PREPARED BY SYKES, BOURDON. M AnFRN & LuvY. P C restrictions, including the authority (a) to order, in writing, that any noncompliance with such conditions be remedied; and (b) to bring legal action or suit to insure compliance with such conditions, including mandatory or prohibitory inunction, abatement, damages, or other appropriate action, suit, or proceeding; (2) The failure to meet all conditions and restrictions shall constitute cause to deny the issuance of any of the required building or occupancy permits as may be appropriate; (3) If aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Administrator, made pursuant to these provisions, the Grantors shall petition the governing body for the review thereof prior to instituting proceedings in court; and (4) The Zoning Map may show by an appropriate symbol on the map the existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the Property, and the ordinances and the conditions may be made readily available and accessible for public inspection in the office of the Zoning Administrator and in the Planning Department, and they shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and indexed in the name of the Grantors and the Grantee. me PREPARED BY . : SYK£S, POURDON. AIIERN & LEVY, PC WITNESS the following signature and seal: GRANTOR: Hollis Road Associates, a Virginia general partnership BSEAL) y•rt . Michael P. Warner, General Partner STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 31St day of July, 2003, by Michael P. Warner, General Partner of Hollis Road Associates, a Virginia general partnership. R Notary Public My Commission Expires: August 31, 2006 -5- PREPARED BY SYK£S. BOURDON, ARM & L£WY. PC WITNESS the following signature and seal: GRANTOR: - - :I'Anderson STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 1St day of August, 2003, by Bentley B. Anderson. My Commission Expires: August 31, 2006 Ka Notary Public EXHIBIT "A" PARCEL I: ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land, situate in the City of Virginia Beach (formerly Princess Anne County), State of Virginia, containing one acre, more or less, lying about one mile south of Diamond Springs Station on the Norfolk Southern Railroad, being known, numbered and designated as Tract 3, on the plat of the Hodgman Farm, which plat is recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach (formerly Princess Anne County), Virginia, in Map Book 6, at Page 25, reference to said plat is hereby made for a more particular description of said tract. GPIN: 1468-24-6257 PARC:FT. TT - ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land, situate in the City of Virginia Beach (formerly Princess Anne County), State of Virginia, containing one acre, more or less, lying about one mile south of Diamond Springs Station on the Norfolk Southern Railroad, being known, numbered and designated as Tract 4, on the plat of the Hodgman Farm, which plat is recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach (formerly Princess Anne County), Virginia, in Map Book 6, at Page 25, reference to said plat is hereby made for a more particular description of said tract. GPIN: 1468-24-7360 CONDREZONE/HOLUSROAD/PROFFER PREPARED BY • SYKES, BOURDON, AHERN & LEVY. P C -7- R4 Supplemental Information Map F-10 C�I��vr T -T;11— R"I' m l.l.(' Conditional Zoning Change from Conditional B-2 to Conditional 0-2 CUP Housing for Seniors Zoning History # I DATE IREQUEST I ACTION 1 3-14-00 ZONING CHANGE from Conditional B-2 Business to Granted Conditional B-2 Business (Modified Proffers on portion of the property) 7-1-97 CONDITIONAL ZONING CHANGE from R-10 Granted Residential to Conditional B-2 Business 8-28-90 ZONING CHANGE from R-10 Residential to B-2 Withdrawn Business 6-2-86 ZONING CHANGE from R-5 Residential to B-2 Denied Business 2 9-22-98 ZONING CHANGE from R-10 Residential to A-12 Granted Apartment with a PD -1-12 Planned Development overlay 3 8-27-02 ZONING CHANGE from R -5D Residential to Granted,--,, SILVER HILL= SALEM -LLC Agenda Items 1 & 2 Page 10 .a CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Silver Hill — Salem, L.L.C. — Change of Zoning District Classification (Conditional B-2 Community Business District to Conditional 0-2 Office District) and a Conditional Use Permit (housing for seniors) MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: (a) An Ordinance upon Application of Silver Hill — Salem, L.L.C. for a Change of Zoning District Classification from Conditional B-2 Community Business District to Conditional 0-2 Office District on property located on the south side of Lynnhaven Parkway, 317.05 feet west of Salem Road (GPINS 14757498330000; 14757572760000; portion of 14758427930000). The Comprehensive Plan recommends use of this property for residential uses at or below 3.5 dwelling units per acre. DISTRICT 1 — CENTERVILLE (b) An Ordinance upon Application of Silver Hill — Salem, L.L.C. for a Conditional Use Permit for housing for seniors on property located on the south side of Lynnhaven Parkway, 317.05 feet west of Salem Road (GPINS 14757498330000; 14757572760000; portion of 14758427930000). DISTRICT 1 — CENTERVILLE ■ Considerations: The applicant proposes to construct a 134 -unit independent living senior housing facility consisting of 92 two bedroom units and 42 one bedroom units. The resulting density is 14 units per total acreage, or 61 units per acre of developable land. The proffered rendering depicts a long, rectangular building with three "pop -outs" on the front side to break up the expanse of the building. There are four and one-half stories reaching a maximum height of 49 feet. All of the development proposed on this site is concentrated on the eastern side leaving 76 percent in open space. The total building footprint equals 28,880 square feet. Paved area, which equals 42,600 square feet, includes 105 parking spaces located in front of the building. This translates to 0.78 parking spaces per unit, which is acceptable for this type of land use. Stormwater management is provided through an expansion of an existing facility. Silver Hill — Salem, L.L.C. Page 2 of 3 A significant wooded buffer will remain behind the building on the western half of the site. The remaining wooded area will range between 205 and 285 feet in width from the top of Salem Canal's bank. The edge of the wooded area will be 20 feet from the back of the building. A 20 -foot setback is shown between the building and the southern property line. Although it is not specified on the plan, the Zoning Ordinance requires a Category IV landscape buffer in this area. The adjacent residential structures within the Southampton at Salem community are set back 15 feet from the property line. Staff recommended approval. There was opposition to the request. ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9 —1 with 1 abstention to approve this request as proffered and with the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed substantially as depicted on the submitted site plan entitled, "Silver Hill Salem Road" dated August 5, 2003 by WPL. Additional landscaping shall be provided where necessary to meet the requirements of the Zoning and Site Plan Ordinances. 2. The building shall be constructed substantially as depicted on the submitted rendering entitled, "Silver Hill at Salem Road." Building materials shall consist of a brown brick and cream colored beaded premium vinyl. 3. Management shall be available on-site seven days a week during daytime hours, and a live-in manager shall be employed. 4. The applicant shall adhere to the following provisions agreed to with the Fire Marshal. The provisions may be modified with the approval of the Fire Marshal: a. One extra firewall shall be added to reduce fire area over that which will be required by Code. b. Party walls, corridor walls, and ceilings shall be finished with 5/8 -inch sheet rock (type `X'). C. The fire alarm system shall have additional horn strobes added beyond standard coverage to improve the audibility after interior finishes are in place. The system shall also have the ability to add strobes to individual dwelling units for those with hearing disabilities. d. A key access box for the Fire Department shall be installed. e. The tenant lease shall stipulate that tenants must be able to take care of themselves and also self -evacuate or a 30 -day notice to vacate shall apply. Silver Hill — Salem, L.L.C. Page 3of3 f. Stairwells and tread configuration shall feature reduced rise and increased width, exceeding the Uniform Statewide Building Code. g. The applicant shall evaluate the feasibility of residential range hood fire suppression systems in each unit. h. A fire evacuation plan shall be developed and all residents and staff shall be trained with the plan. L A semi-annual fire drill shall be conducted to evaluate the evacuation plan and the residents' ability to evacuate the building without the use of elevators. J. The tenant use of the Nurse Call System shall be strictly monitored and if problems develop which abuse emergency services, the problem shall be handled by the property management. 5. As per the Uniform Statewide Building Code, non-ambulatory residents shall occupy no more than 10% of the floor space. These residents shall reside on the first floor. 6. On-site van service shall be provided for the tenants. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department �u City Manager: V� SILVER HILL - F10 - 214 - CRZ — 2003 F10 -214 -CUP -2003 SALEM, LLC Agenda Items 1 & 2 November 12, 2003 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Ashby Moss The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. MMLocation and General Information REQUEST: LOCATION: 1. Change of Zoning District Classification from conditional B-2 Community Business District to conditional 0-2 Office District. 2. Conditional Use Permit for housing for seniors. Property located south side of Lynnhaven Parkway, 317 feet west of Salem Road and west side of Salem Road, 600 feet south of Lynnhaven Parkway CUP H~ns for Sensors GPIN: 14757498330000; 14757572760000; portion of 14758427930000 SILVER HILL--- SALEM LLC Agenda Items 1 & 2 Page 1 COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 1 - CENTERVILLE SITE SIZE: 9.26 acres EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: Vacant / Conditional B-2 Community Business District SURROUNDING North: Across Lynnhaven Parkway, single-family LAND USE AND condominium development / PD -H2 (A-12) Planned ZONING: Unit Development with density no greater than 12 units per acre South: Multi -family condominium development / PD -H2 (R- SD) Planned Unit Development with density no greater than six units per acre East: Konikoff Dental Center/ Conditional B-2 Community Business District • Barnes office and services building / Conditional 13- 2 Community Business District • Across Salem Road, one single-family dwelling and large acreage of vacant land / R -5D Residential Duplex District West: Bellamy Plantation single-family development / PD - H2 (R-10) Planned Unit Development with density no greater than three units per acre NATURAL Seven of the nine acres on the subject site is floodplain or floodway RESOURCE along Salem Canal. Floodplain in this area is "subject to special AND restrictions" listed in Section 5B.5(c) of the Site Plan Ordinance. CULTURAL Most of this floodplain area is wooded. The wooded area currently FEATURES: extends across the property 200 to 300 feet east from the top of bank on Salem Canal. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. -4 SILVER HILL_SALEM-LLC Agenda Items 1,& -2 Page 2 4 Major Issues " The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this request. Staff's evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these issues are adequately addressed. • Compatibility of proposed use with surrounding area. • Adequate care and safety of seniors consistent with the City's "Report on Senior Housing Multi -family Issues: A Policy Report," dated July 1997. • Sensitivity of the development to floodplain area. • Site design and architectural compatibility with adjacent buildings consistent with existing proffers regulating development on the site. • Concerns of the Fire Department related to building code requirements. • Adequate parking provisions. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan recommends a variety of employment uses for the subject property, including business parks, offices, and appropriately located industrial and employment support uses. The proposed use is consistent with the Plan's provision for a diversity of housing meeting the needs of the City's older population. The Comprehensive Plan addresses these issues with these statements: "The opportunity to build retirement complexes incorporating high levels of outdoor recreation and other amenities in settings that take advantage of our unique environmental surroundings gives us the chance to significantly add to the broad base of amenities in the City. The challenge is not dust to attract such opportunities, but to site them well, taking into consideration nearby amenities, land use patterns, demand on public facilities, and proximity to necessary services." (p. 23-34) SILVER HILL--:- SALEM -LLC Agenda Items 1 A 2 Page 3 Summary of Proposa The applicant proposes to construct a 134 -unit independent living senior housing facility consisting of 92 two bedroom units and 42 one bedroom units. The resulting density is 14 units per total acreage, or 61 units per acre of developable land. The applicant intends to finance the facility through Virginia Beach Development Authority Tax Exempt Revenue Bonds. Forty percent of the units will be reserved for moderate -income residents (defined as 60% of the median income). Monthly rents are anticipated to range between $515 and $675. On site amenities will include a social hall, exercise room, library, and an arts and crafts room in the building and garden areas outside of the building. All of the development proposed on this site is concentrated on the eastern side leaving 76% in open space. The total building footprint equals 28,880 square feet. Paved area, which equals 42,600 square feet, includes 105 parking spaces located in front of the building. This translates to 0.78 spaces per unit. Stormwater management is provided through an expansion of the existing facility. The applicant proposes to fill 0.31 acres of floodplain in the area of the building footprint. Mitigation is shown on the plan to compensate for the loss of flood storage in an equal amount. The 0.31 acres of proposed filled area translates to 4.8 percent of the floodplain area on the property. Under Section 5B.5(c), the City Manager or Designee can approve up to five percent administratively if specified criteria are met. A significant wooded buffer will remain behind the building on the western half of the site. The remaining wooded area will range between 205 and 285 feet in width from the top of Salem Canal's bank. The edge of the wooded area will be 20 feet from the back of the building. A 20 -foot setback is shown between the building and the southern property line. Although it is not specified on the plan, a Category IV landscape buffer is required by the Zoning Ordinance in this area. The adjacent residential structures within the Southampton at Salem community are set back 15 feet from the property line. Vehicular access is coordinated with the adjacent dental office and office/service building There are two access points for these facilities on Salem Road, neither of which have a median break. A reciprocal cross access easement already exists over both access points, providing internal circulation between sites. SILVER HILL -= SALEM LLC Agenda Items 1 & 2 w Page 4 The proffered rendering depicts a long, rectangular building with three "pop -outs" on the front side to break up the expanse of the building. There are four and one-half stories reaching a maximum height of 49 feet. Brown brick is the primary exterior surface material, covering the bottom two to three stories. The upper portion of the building is sided with a cream -colored premium -grade beaded vinyl. The combination of brick and vinyl is used on all sides of the building. The gabled roof is covered with charcoal gray asphalt shingles. Proffers The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable," (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. PROFFER # 1 All residential units hereafter constructed upon the Property shall be leased to or occupied by households whose head, spouse, or sole member is sixty-two (62) years of age or older, handicapped or disabled in compliance with the Fair -Housing Act [42 U.S.C. §3601- 3619 (1977 and Supp 1994)] and applicable regulations promulgated pursuant thereto and the Virginia Fair Housing Law, §§36-96.1 et seq., Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. The residential units hereafter constructed on the Property shall be operated and maintained in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Virginia Fair Housing Law and the Fair Housing Act that are applicable to the Property at the time of site plan approval. PROFFER # 2 When the Property is developed with residential units, it shall be developed substantially as shown on the preliminary site plan entitled, "SILVER HIL, SALEM ROAD," prepared by W.P. Large, Inc., dated August 5, 2003 (hereinafter the "Site Plan"), which Site Plan is on file in the Planning Department. SILVER HILL -7- SALEMILC Agenda Items 1 & 2 Page 5 PROFFER # 3 When the Property is developed with residential units, not less than 55% of the primary exterior building material will be traditional face brick. Any vinyl siding used will be a premium grade equal to or exceeding Certainteed "Carolina Beaded" in quality. The trim will be white and the roof will be of charcoal gray shingles. When completed, the principal residential buildings shall be substantially as shown on the Rendering for the development of the Property (hereinafter "Rendering), which is on file in the Planning Department. PROFFER # 4 All Leases will contain a provision requiring cancellation on thirty (30) days notice if the tenant becomes incapacitated and a 24-hour caregiver is not employed. No more than 10% of the tenants will be non-ambulatory and they will reside on the first floor. PROFFER # 5 All exterior lighting including building lighting, ground or pole mounted fixtures will be directed downward, toward the interior of the site and away from adjoining properties. All exterior lighting will be consistent with the Illumination Engineering Society of North America's recommended standards. A lighting plan will be included for review with the detailed site plan review process. PROFFER # 6 The freestanding monument sign will not exceed eight (8) feet in height and will be constructed of materials matching the building exterior. Light fixtures illuminating the sign will be at ground level in landscaping beds. PROFFER # 7 Van service will be provided to tenants. PROFFER # 8 All landscaping will be as shown on the Site Plan. The City will not issue a final certificate of occupancy until such landscaping is installed. PROFFER # 9 Ingress and egress will be from Salem Road via the existing cross reciprocal easement recorded in the Clerk's Office, Circuit Court, City of Virginia Beach, in Map Book 267, at Page 80. PROFFER # 10 The trees on the property will be preserved as indicated on. ,:11, SILVER HILL = SALEMUC Agenda Items 1 & 2 Page 6 the Site Plan. Tree protection will be provided in the form of temporary metal fencing. PROFFER # 11 Grantor understands that further conditions may be required by the Grantee as a result of and during detailed Site Plan review and administration by all cognizant City agencies and departments to comply with applicable City Codes. Staff Evaluation of The proffers address most of the concerns presented by Proffers: this development proposal. Any outstanding concerns are addressed in the recommended conditions of the Use Permit listed at the end of this report. City Attorney's The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer Office: agreement dated August 27, 2003, and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. J Staff Evaluationqq Staff recommends approval of this request. Staff's evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials and the proffers, adequately addresses each of the `Major Issues' identified at the beginning of this report. The proposal's strengths in addressing the `Major Issues' are (1) The proposed senior housing facility presents an appropriate transitional use between the commercial and office buildings along Salem Road and the adjacent residential uses to the south and west. The buffer provided at the rear of the site is quite substantial. The buffer on the southern side is not extensive but meets the 20 -foot requirement of the Zoning Ordinance. (2) The Senior Housing Review Committee was very supportive of the applicant's efforts to provide much needed housing facilities for moderate -income seniors. The proximity of the site to useful services typically needed by this age group is adequate; in addition to van service, public transportation is available (HRT Route 12 serves this section of Lynnhaven Parkway); on-site amenities and access to open space is provided. Overall, the project meets the guidelines r SILVER HILL -=- SALEMUC Agenda Items 1 & 2 Page 7 T- provided in the City's "Report on Senior Housing Multi -family Issues: A Policy Report," dated July 1997. (3) The development plan complies with the Site Plan Ordinance's regulations governing "floodplain subject to special restrictions" and exceeds the 1997 proffers requiring a 100 foot buffer area adjacent to Salem Canal. (4) The proposal meets the primary intent of the1997 proffers, which was to provide a coordinated development plan for the entire southwest corner of Lynnhaven Parkway and Salem Road. The proffers specifically addressed vehicular circulation and architectural design, colors, and materials. The proposed site plan follows the vehicular access and circulation plan already established with the previous developments on the property. The proposed building design, materials, and colors of the building are complementary, but not uniform, to the existing buildings as required in the 1997 proffers. (5) The applicant has agreed to most of the Fire Department's recommendations to provide features beyond the minimum building code requirements and to manage the property in a way that reduces the likelihood of non-ambulatory residents. However, the applicant contends that the NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system strongly recommended by the Fire Department is cost -prohibitive. (6) Although Section 235(c) of the Zoning Ordinance requires one parking space per unit, it includes a provision for City Council to modify the number "when it is found that special conditions warrant such a modification." The applicant's experience with other senior facilities has demonstrated that the proposed ratio of 0.78 spaces per unit will be sufficient to serve the needs of the facility. Parking ratios are much lower at the applicant's other two Virginia Beach facilities: Silver Hill at Thalia facility has a ratio of 0.68 spaces per unit and Silver Hill at Mill Dam has a ratio of 0.61. In addition, peak parking demand for the residential facility is after business hours, and overflow parking may be available, if necessary, from the adjacent outparcel once it is developed. (The applicant will also own the outparcel if this application is approved). Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request as proffered and subject to the conditions below. Conditions 1 The site shall be developed substantially as depicted on the submitted site plan entitled, "Silver Hill Salem Road" dated August 5, 2003 by WPL. Additional landscaping shall be provided where necessary to meet the requirements of the Zoning and Site Plan Ordinances. 2. The building shall be constructed substantially as depicted on the submitted rendering entitled, "Silver Hill at Salem Road." Building materials shall consist of SILVER HILL— SALEM LLC Agenda Items 1 & 2 Page 8 a brown brick and cream colored beaded premium vinyl. 3. Management shall be available on-site seven days a week during daytime hours, and a live-in manager shall be employed. 4. The applicant shall adhere to the following provisions agreed to with the Fire Marshal. The provisions may be modified with the approval of the Fire Marshal: a. One extra firewall shall be added to reduce fire area over that which will be required by Code. b. Party walls, corridor walls, and ceilings shall be finished with 5/8 -inch sheet rock (type `X'). C. The fire alarm system shall have additional horn strobes added beyond standard coverage to improve the audibility after interior finishes are in place. The system shall also have the ability to add strobes to individual dwelling units for those with hearing disabilities. d. A key access box for the Fire Department shall be installed. e. The tenant lease shall stipulate that tenants must be able to take care of themselves and also self -evacuate or a 30 -day notice to vacate shall apply. f. Stairwells and tread configuration shall feature reduced rise and increased width, exceeding the Uniform Statewide Building Code. g. The applicant shall evaluate the feasibility of residential range hood fire suppression systems in each unit. h. A fire evacuation plan shall be developed and all residents and staff shall be trained with the plan. i. A semi-annual fire drill shall be conducted to evaluate the evacuation plan and the residents' ability to evacuate the building without the use of elevators. j. The tenant use of the Nurse Call System shall be strictly monitored and if problems develop which abuse emergency services, the problem shall be handled by the property management. 5. As per the Uniform Statewide Building Code, non-ambulatory residents shall occupy no more than 10% of the floor space. These residents shall reside on the first floor. 6. On-site van service shall be provided for the tenants. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. SILVER HILL = SALEM, LLC Agenda Items 9 & 2 Page 9 Public Agency Comments Public Works Master Transportation Salem Road in the vicinity of this application is a four Plan (MTP): lane divided minor suburban arterial. The existing right-of-way in front of the site is variable but reaches 120 -feet at its minimum width. The MTP designates this section as a divided road with a bikeway and scenic easement within a 120 -foot right-of-way. There is no project listed for this road in the current adopted Ca ital Improvement Program. SILVER HILL = SALEM -LLC Agenda Items 1 & 2 Page 11 Conditional B-2 Business 9-25-01 MODIFICATION OF PROFFERS on Change of Zoning Granted from R -5D Residential to Conditional B-2 Business 9-25-01 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (Fuel Sales in Granted Conjunction with Convenience Store) 7-14-98 ZONING CHANGE from R -5D Residential to Granted Conditional B-2 Business 3-28-88 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (Church) Granted 4-14-86 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (Church) Granted 3-26-84 ZONING CHANGE from R-8 Residential to B-2 Withdrawn Business 4 2-8-00 ZONING CHANGE from R-10 Residential to R -5D Granted Residential with a PD -1-12 Planned Development overlay 2-8-00 FLOODPLAIN VARIANCE Granted 11-10-98 ZONING CHANGE from R-10 Residential to Denied conditional A-12 Apartment 5 12-12-83 ZONING CHANGE from R-5 Residential to R-10 Granted Residential with a PD -1-12 Planned Development overlay Public Agency Comments Public Works Master Transportation Salem Road in the vicinity of this application is a four Plan (MTP): lane divided minor suburban arterial. The existing right-of-way in front of the site is variable but reaches 120 -feet at its minimum width. The MTP designates this section as a divided road with a bikeway and scenic easement within a 120 -foot right-of-way. There is no project listed for this road in the current adopted Ca ital Improvement Program. SILVER HILL = SALEM -LLC Agenda Items 1 & 2 Page 11 Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Potential Land Use 101000 28,200 2 — 4,802 ADT Salem Road ADT' ADT' Proposed Land Use — 350 ADT 'Average Daily Trips 2 as defined by 25% coverage of commercially zoned property 3 as defined by 134 nursing home units Public Utilities Water: There is a 16 -inch water main in Lynnhaven Parkway and another in Salem Road. This site must connect to City water. Sewer: There is a 16 -inch gravity sanitary sewer in Salem Road and a 10 - Inch sanitary sewer force main in Lynnhaven Parkway. City sewer is available. Analysis for sewer and pump station #443 is required to determine if flows can be accommodated. Public Safety Police: The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. A lighting plan should be submitted for review to determine consistency with the standards recommended by the Illumination Engineering Society of North America. 180 -degree peepholes should be installed in all residential unit doors. Fire and Rescue: The Fire Department has consistently expressed concern with independent living senior housing developments. Experience has demonstrated that with the target audience of senior citizens, many occupants are or eventually become non-ambulatory and incapable of self - evacuation during an emergency. According to the SILVER HILL" — SALEM LLC Agenda Items I & 2 Page -12 T Uniform Statewide Building Code, no more than 10% of the floor area can be occupied by non-ambulatory residents or otherwise used for an "institutional use." Independent living facilities fall under the residential classification, which does not require many of the life safety features and fire suppression forces required for institutional use groups. The applicant has agreed to several of the life safety features and stipulations of the Fire Department as listed in recommended Conditions 3 through 5. However, the Fire Department still affirms that the greatest protection for senior adults is to require the installation of an NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system. SILVER HILL --SALEM-LLC Agenda Items 14 2 r Page 13 h _ _ H a: A '. ,., . • ,� rv,,� r � — is ♦ 4�� r ti+ar LU now C l tit VI Y � to � ; - t•..t` `w zT",...-�..r Y.�'�'�_ - ��rr- ,. ,a'. a� it ♦ -1 �� ..O u.i X fir."' �"� � �,_ � y��4ti �� 41k';� � � t � �,', y � � r�`4 `► -., • i z oN N Exhibit site Conditior d NSAVHNN),-1 y LO't[r M _aS►ty iA S ~� vm to d r V n l0l61 b3LNO.Sv a'r� IV 1 a t a P 107 lu UN* cr f � ! O. S Y c - W 50� br ti 1� i OX Ic coo 40D 1 a 49 ti p} etc --00 Q N cy. 44 1 --------------------- E 1L1 co be Foe �g i' S v�i�hf i i d W < t .G '1 73,1 i�.�►�I eF" . (-'~+ hh �F o io .v x J �r aXi7 ti; p ] 1 I ' v t a t dAdiS pG�r ri t IUlI lz •`(i ( 1y Mvwwws � 1 to 0 0 0 0±5 a w! r - r �. N SILVER HILL _= SALEM LLC Agenda Items I & 2 Page -1 5 JI• V y Fv w Z�O� � n a s3 0Ei aw"h 0 ,. w LL ( WIM 5 8� g � s i AMM N3AVHNNAI Exhibit C Proposed Site 1 G Plan j Z rL � a o O Vt Sz .. w co�i bN�=-v ,O N h ,�. '.'� Cf Vl y. .�. Jf i 77. t I Q '.`f '503 NDN N ^ O01 NC1 4n � OI O Q S C� � N ? tIi +? �- M1 W i uu se, ca < ut d tl .Cat 0 WO 0 W q WCy,1> OC. C. .08W.O4 nw V41 V Z "aj Q?U{Qj :7 ? n C� i- I Yaaz 20 ttl I;y O O Isz E. 01— Nt a0 fltisn zMo oS I {O C7 i7QC d CV�C,a.t Q — O0 O W xz '�z 00 x?s'�000 za t -,M irtxiaa <0oau3i3 h h 1 ��VCY w"f^6 a i� --------------- -- ------ f t SILVER HILL -SALEMUC Agenda Items 1 & 2 Page _16 ISCLOSURE STATEME 1W]j Applicant's Name:Silver Hill - Salem L.L.C. List All Current Property Owners: Henry Overholt Family Trust APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) Exhibit E Disclosure Statement If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) Richard M. Waitzer Q Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. If the applicant is not the current owner of the property,,complete the Propert owner section below: PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below- (Attach Inst if necessary) Henry Overholt, Trustee Joseph Overholt, Trustee Q Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. CERTIFICATION: 1 certify that the information contained herein is true an0cc rote. , i 1 f"ti'J Richard M. Waitzer Signature Print Name Conditional Rezoning Application Page 10 of 14 SILVER HILL — SALEM,LLC Agenda Items 1 & 2 Page 18 4 eow*i Cann;, a C� H A O V DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) Silver Hill at Salem, LLC; Richard M. Waitzer, Sole Member 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) See Attached Affiliated Business Entity List ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) N/A 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) N/A ❑ Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. & See next page for footnotes Conditional Rezoning Application Page 12 of 13 Revised 10/1/2003 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) W.P. Large, Inc. - Engineering Services Rodrigo Belloso, A.I.A. - Architectural 1 "Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation " See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. SEE ATTACHED Applicant's Signature SEE ATTACHED Property Owner's Signature (if different than applicant) Print Name Print Name Conditional Rezoning Application Page 13 of 13 Revised 10/1/2003 O L= A O <MOOD Signature Page to Conditional Rezoning Application — Disclosure Statement. SILVER HILL AT SALEM LLC, a Virginia Hmited liability company By: ~" Richard M. Waitzer, Manager Joseph Overholt, Trustee of the William J. Overholt and Millie J. Overholt Irrevocable Trust, Dated December 22, 1976 Henry Overholt, Trustee of the William J. Overholt and Millie J. Overholt Irrevocable Trust, Dated December 22, 1976 #424226 v1 - Signature pages-gs 244 Mustang Trail, Suite 6 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 Telephone (757) 340-1806 Facsimile (757) 463-3675 Applicant Disclosure Statement Item Z Affiliated Business Entities Archers Green L.P. Archers Green II L.L.C. Boss -Daniel Corp. Central Park Commercial Place Corporate Woods L.L.C. Medical Arts Center Murray Wholesale Drug Corp. Oceana I L.P. Oceana II L.P. Professional Center East Professional Center West Signature Management Corp. Silver Hill At Great Neck Silver Hill At Thalia Sterling Partners III L.P. Volvo Brookside L.L.C. W aitzsp L.L.C. DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) Silver Hill at Salem, LLC; Richard M. Waitzer, Sole Member 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) See Attached Affiliated Business Entity List ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) N/A 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) N/A ❑ Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. & See next page for footnotes Conditional Use Permit Application Page 10 of 11 Revised 10/1/2003 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) W P Large Inc - Engineering Services Rodrigo Belloso, A.I.A. - Architectural Williams Mullen - Legal Services 1 "Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. SEE ATTACHED Applicant's Signature SEE ATTACHED Property Owner's Signature (if different than applicant) Print Name Print Name Conditional Use Permit Application Page 11 of 11 Revised 10/1/2003 PQ O A O <MOOD Signature Page to Conditional Use Permit Application — Disclosure Statement. SILVER HILL AT SALEM LLC, a Virgin ited liabi ity company By. , Richard Waitzer, Manager Joseph Overholt, Trustee of the William J. Overholt and Millie J. Overholt Irrevocable Trust, Dated December 22, 1976 Henry Overholt, Trustee of the William J. Overholt and Millie J. Overholt Irrevocable Trust, Dated December 22, 1976 #424226 v1 -Signature pages-gs 244 Mustang Trail, Suite 6 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 Telephone (757) 340-1806 Facsimile (757) 463-3675 Applicant Disclosure Statement Item 2 Affiliated Business Entities Archers Green L.P. Archers Green II L.L.C. Boss -Daniel Corp. Central Park Commercial Place Corporate Woods L.L.C. Medical Arts Center Murray Wholesale Drug Corp. Oceana I L.P. Oceana II L.P. Professional Center East Professional Center West Signature Management Corp. Silver Hill At Great Neck Silver Hill At Thalia Sterling Partners III L.P. Volvo Brookside L.L.C. Waitzsp L.L.C. Items #1 & 2 Silver Hill — Salem, L.L.C. Change of Zoning District Classification Conditional Use Permit South side of Lynnhaven Parkway District 1 Centerville November 12, 2003 REGULAR Ronald Ripley: Now this moves us to items to be heard in their regular order. I want to give notice to folks here that we're going to take one item. We have Items #1 & 2, which is going to be the first item to be heard. Items #3 & 4 will be the second. We're going to move Items #28, 29 & 30, which is the Ashville Park application. The reason why we're doing that is because the applicant has a number of people that they've flown in from out of town and they have a flight to make and so we're trying to accommodate them and they made the request. The Commission agreed to that. I dust wanted to give you notice on that. Mr. Miller, will call the first item? Robert Miller: The first item is Items #1 & 2, Silver Hill — Salem, L.L.C. Richard Waitzer: Good afternoon. I'm Richard Waitzer, the applicant for Silver Hill. A 134 -unit building designed to be affordable for our senior citizens. A building that will feature a social hall, computer land, arts and crafts room, library, fitness center, social programs and van service. This will be our fourth Silver Hill. We've tried to improve each facility. Silver Hill Great Neck was the first senior affordable development in the entire State that did not have a rent subsidiary. The need since we've developed Silver Hill in Great Neck is even greater. In these ten years, only seven non -assisted facilities that total 792 apartments have been built in Virginia Beach. With the exception of the one that opened in late July, the average building is 98 percent leased. That gives barely enough for then fortunate people to have to go to a nursing home or assisted living to pass away. The new project that is in lease, I think it was the fourth week of July is already 70 percent leased. We did a telephone survey on Monday to get these figures. Two years ago, I met with the Bellamy Plantation Civic League that represents the homes across the canal from this site. I heard their concerns. Many of them have been addressed. I've acquired two adjacent properties that neighbor us to increase the rear setback from 200 feet to 330 feet. We're now able to store any potential floodwater from the 100 -year flood on site rather than widening the Salem Canal. They have objected to the widening of the canal that had been done on the adjacent site to us when it was developed. In 1997, a 100 -foot tree buffer was proffered when this site was rezoned to B-2. Our plan relieves at least 200 feet of trees. We will be removing roughly two percent of the trees that are on that site Much of that site is impacted by the flood plain. The standard trees are one of the biggest assets for this site. We want them to be there. The exterior of the building has been upgraded. A minimum of 55 percent has been proffered to be brick. We've agreed with Planning Department's architectural committee to upgrade the vinyl to be used for the accent to the premium grade in Carolina bead style. This thickness carries a 160 -mile per hour wind resistant guarantee and will remain flat. The design and the materials and the colors we've agreed to compliment the existing developments. Public Works has estimated that our building will create 4,450 less car traffic then the present zoning if it was fully developed. We've agreed to all the various conditions suggested by the Planning Department. I understand that the neighbors fear that the development will devalue their property but I bring to your attention the fact that there were four tracks within a stone's throw of Silver Hill — Mill Dam Road, Great Neck that were vacant. All of them have been developed now. All of them have been developed with extremely nice homes. Most of them are brick and they sold out quickly. Silver Hill was not a detriment to their property. If anything it was a catalyst for higher quality development, I assure you we want to be a good neighbor. We want to be an asset to the community. It's a proven fact that grandparents want to live near their children and grandchildren but not with them. This is what we are trying to do. I'd be pleased to answer any questions you might have for me. Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Questions of the applicant? Are there any questions? Mr. Waitzer? The question in here and we discussed it this morning about the sprinkler system that was proposed. Did you have some objection to that? Richard Waitzer: The 13? Ronald Ripley: Yes. Richard Waitzer: Yes. I have discussed this with the Fire Marshal. Being a developer you realize the difference between the cost and because we are cost prohibited, we are adding an additional firewall to this building beyond the code. We are also adding another nser to each of the stairways and widening all of our threads. We've also agreed to use 5 eight -inch fire code sheet rock on the entire envelope of each apartment and only in the hallways. We've also agreed with the Fire Marshal that we will use a sounding device in the apartments that we can add a strobe light to for anybody that is hard of hearing. I agree that it will probably be ideal to use an institutional type of system, which is required in a hospital. We are an apartment building and we're trying to do the best we can. Ronald Ripley: Another question that I have is about the elevation. Was there any reason there are no decks on here or is that the nature of the way you would build it? It looks like everything is contained inside the building. There's nobody that can come outside the building except through the entranceways? Richard Waitzer: If we had decks we would encroach on the flood plain. We have to stay out of the flood plain. Ronald Ripley: Have you had any problems with noise or rowdiness at any of your other properties? Richard Waitzer: None. Absolutely none. Ronald Ripley: That's a good question. Okay. Richard Waitzer: I think the only people that have been called and the police have never been called. Unfortunately, the rescue squad does come. Ronald Ripley: That does happen. Sure. Richard Waitzer: That's the nature of the type of apartment. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Yes, Mr. Strange. Joseph Strange: I'm looking at this and trying to make it consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. It looked like the staff is trying to make that point that it is an opportunity to build with common complexes incorporating high levels of outdoor recreation and other amenities in settings that take advantage of our unique environment surroundings. In looking at this and asking how does this fit into to take advantage of our high level of outdoor recreation and unique environment surroundings? What is it about this project, that makes it fit into that kind of area? Richard Waitzer: We have some five acres of area that's going to remain natural for outdoor activities. Joseph Strange: Such as? Richard Waitzer: We're planning to have shuffleboard. We're thinking about a putting green, horseshoes. We don't need active activities. In fact, we've done a survey recently of our tenants and what would they like. These are the three things that came up. The biggest thing is to have seating outdoors such as benches. Joseph Strange: That will be back in the flood zone area? Richard Waltzer: Overlooking the canal. Yes. We're permitted to do that in the flood zone. There would be no development. It will be all left natural. If you'll notice, there is quite a large open area with no trees behind us. That is the natural tree. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other questions? I'm sorry, Kathy Katsias. Kathy Katsias: Size has been the mayor comments that we received from the neighbors. Have you tried to reduce? I see that you had reduced the size from 152 to 134 apartments. Richard Waitzer: Yes, I did. Kathy Katsias: Have you tried to configure the piece so that it wasn't to make it so massive? Richard Waitzer: This is an extremely difficult site because of the flood plain issue. To further reduce the number of apartments then we have to start reducing the services that we offer. So, it's a "catch 22." Ronald Ripley: Jan. Janice Anderson: Yes, thank you. If you could address if there has ever been parking problem because there is some concern about the parking. There is not a parking space per unit. You said you had other facilities similar. Have you had complaints about the parking with less than one parking space per unit in your other facilities? Richard Waitzer: We have had parking problems on Bonney Road. Silver Hill Great Neck has a .61 ratio. It is for 62 and older. We have never had a problem. When we built the one on Bonney Road we were building for 55 and older. We raised the ratio to .68 thinking that would be enough. It was not. I'm the first to admit it. However, we did some things to correct it. Number one, all of our personnel are in rented spaces off site which have alleviated the problem and number two, three years now the aging in place, we have many fewer cars. There is not a parking problem. We monitor this and we monitor like 2:00 a.m. We have a security guard. People come by to see if there are spaces. There is still a problem on holidays. We have a lot of visitors. Eventually, I'm sure that will take care of its self. Right now, we still have a problem. This proposal is for 62 and older. We're not going to have a couple with two cars like we do have on Bonney Road. We did not count on that but we did run into it. In addition, we own the out parcel in front. I don't know what I'm going to put on there but I assure you that I'm going to have the right for any overflow parking to get there. We have raised this ratio from .68 that we had on Bonney Road to .78. We think we have a plan. Ronald Ripley: Dot Wood has a question. Dorothy Wood: Mr. Waitzer, I hate to disagree but my husband and I are both 65 and I don't know which one would give up our car. I guess it would have to be him because he would certainly want two cars. Richard Waitzer: Excuse me Dot. The average age is dust over 75 now. Dorothy Wood: Thank you sir. I wanted to ask you and some of the residents told me that 1997 when the zoning was changed that it was proffered that this would be one story like office building. Of course, I wasn't on the Commission in 1997 so I don't really know or what I probably remember. Richard Waitzer: Ms. Wood, I don't know. It's not in the proffers. Dorothy Wood: It is not? Richard Waitzer: No ma'am. I have been told by people of the civic league they were shown a plan. I have not been able to find that plan I have asked the Planning Department at least one person. He has never seen it. He couldn't find anything in the file. I wanted to see that and I haven't found it yet. Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Waitzer. Richard Waitzer: I do know this. That proffer in 1997 contained a restaurant on Lynnhaven Parkway, which was smack in the flood plain and that what was approved. That's completely out. That land will not be developed. Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Waitzer. Ronald Ripley: Any other questions? Joe Strange. Joseph Strange: How many stories on your other facilities? Richard Waitzer: Four. Joseph Strange: They are all four stones? Richard Waitzer: There is an error in the write up. It is four stones. Joseph Strange: No. I mean your other facilities. Richard Waitzer: Oh, the others? I'm sorry, three. Joseph Strange: They're all three? Richard Waitzer: That is because of the flood plain. Joseph Strange: So when you compare this four to the other three you're not really comparing apples to apples? When you talk about reducing the value of people's houses. Richard Waitzer: Well actually, because of design changes and constructional changes we're about 4-5 feet taller. That is all. Ronald Ripley: Yes. Kathy. Kathy Katsias: What is the buffer in answer to your question, what is the buffer on your other properties that you have in Great Neck for instance between that and the adjacent townhouses. Richard Waitzer: Six-foot wood fence. Joseph Strange: We're talking about the distance. Richard Waltzer: Oh, the distance. I don't recall. I really don't recall. Kathy Katsias: Thank you. Ronald Ripley: The distance is not 300 feet is it? Twenty feet? Richard Waitzer: It's more like 20-30 feet. It's 300 feet to our property line. Ronald Ripley: Oh, I see. Richard Waitzer: We've got the canal and over 200 feet of trees. Those trees are taller than this building will be. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Richard Waitzer: Thank you very much. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other speakers? Robert Miller: Yes. There is a speaker in support, Judith Stevens Allison with the Citizens Committee to Protect the Elderly. Judith Allison: Hello. Judith Allison with the Citizens Committee to Protect the Elderly. I represent about 600 volunteers who work in our city and all the seven cities of Hampton Roads, about 1000 members. We visit people in nursing homes, assisted living facilities and also in their homes and apartments. I can tell you that we get calls at our office in Kempsville all the time looking for affordable housing. There is not enough of it in Virginia Beach. We have visited people in Silver Hill at Bonney Road because we were located there for seven years until we moved. We have also visited people at Silver Hill and I've heard good things from the people who live there about the way it's run and about the way their apartments are so I would encourage you to think about this because people out there want to be independent. Think about your own folks. They want their cars. They want to be independent. They want to have the independence that this gentleman is providing. They will be able to live there and shop handily. I would just hope that this would pass because this would help us so much with the housing situation for the people who are moving into that age. We need to be supportive of that. Thank you. Any questions? Ronald Ripley: I have a question. The people that would move into this apartment would they becoming from the immediate area more less? Judith Allison: Yes. Absolutely. That is what's been proven to happen in the other areas. They would be looking for that independence. They would be looking for that sense of self of space but still being comfortably near their families and the loved ones that they can interact with. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Are there any questions? Thank you very much. T-- Judith Allison: Thank you. Robert Miller: The speaker in opposition is Vincent Olivieri. Ronald Ripley: Is there anybody else to speak in favor of the application? Vincent Olivieri: Mr. Chairman, members of the Planning Commission. Fortunately, I do have all the information from 1997 including the site plan as well as the proffers and the agreement that was recorded and the agenda at that time. I would like to pass that out. I'm here on behalf of the Bellamy Plantation Civic League and they are opposing this request today. First I would like to ask the members who are here to stand up. Thank you. Importantly, this is not from our standpoint. This is not about senior housing. Mr. Waitzer does his project and we all recognize the need. This has to do with the use of the property. When Bellamy Plantation Community was developed, the property was zoned R-10, 10,000 square foot lots, three half units per acre. A total of 43 single-family homes could be built on the entire site. Most of these would have been one or two floor homes, sidelines at 20 feet. There would have been 30-40 feet between houses with the maximum height of 35 -feet, most of them would have been 25-30 feet in height. In 1997, when the property owner requested that the zoning be changed this community objected. After a series of negotiations an agreement was reached where by the zoning would be changed from R-10 to Conditional B-2 Community Business zoning with numerous proffers. This agreement was ultimately reduced to writing and was recorded in the Clerk's Office for the City. I provided each one of you with a copy of that agreement. As you can see that agreement addressed many significant issues. First, it required that the property be developed substantially in accordance with the preliminary site plan, which was prepared by Miller -Stephenson and Associates. I got a copy of that for all you that would like to see. Ronald Ripley: Could you pass that around? Vincent Olivien: Certainly. That wasn't a complete development of the site. There was a restaurant that was going to be on it and there was a business site on the front that was just developed almost slightly different than the original plan. There was still somewhat open space that would remain to be developed in the future. That was one of the issues. The second issue was that it set a standard for landscaping. Then it provided for vehicular access. There was a tree preservation plan requirement. This is important. It was a requirement that the appearance of the commercial center be substantially similar to the site elevations produced by the Miller -Stephenson group. Copies of those are actually attached to the agenda from 1997. On the last page of that if you would notice. What you saw was single lower two floor buildings. The Konikoff Office Building that has been developed there was in keeping with the plan and the Barnes property was also in keeping with the plan. Although, when Barnes wanted to develop his property there were some changes. They met with the community and addressed the changes. Everything was done and still in keeping with the 1997 proffers. That's key from our standpoint, which is the 1997 proffers. Sixty was a requirement that specific building materials would be used. The buildings were to be primarily of brick, drivet, stucco or wood with beige and brown shingles on the roof. They were very specific in this agreement in talking about colors. I'm talking about types of materials. Obviously, there was a requirement for code compliance. Finally, the agreement provided a list of acceptable uses, two pages in the proffer agreement that was recorded, listed all of the uses that could be put on this property. As you read through them you will see things like animal hospitals, bakeries, business studios, child care centers, drug stores, banks, florists, gift shops, medical and dental offices, small retail and specialty shops. Really, the intent was to restrict the development of this parcel to a low rise, good looking suburban type area that was compatible and complimentary to the surrounding community. On that basis the agreement was reached. My clients took the agreement seriously then and we take it seriously now. Even though they didn't sign the agreements as community associations don't sign proffers, they have significant input and have every reason to believe that this agreement would shape the future development of this parcel. They have a right to rely on this agreement. They did so in 1997 and they do today. When they purchased their homes this was a residential low-density zoning. This community group has been very active and instrumental in the resulting agreement. The 1997 proffers provided an opportunity for the landowner to develop its property in a more intense and profitable way but also to care of providing the community with an opportunity for a local business development. The current zoning is more intense than it was but it was agreed to and it was agreed to with a very comprehensive agreement. Now the new request for rezoning for the Conditional Use Permit, the intensity has kicked up not one notch but several notches. Rather than low, mid rise commercial buildings, we are dealing with a 49 foot high, 500 foot long building. This is a 25,000 square foot mass wall. This group would not permit 50 townhouses to be built end on end, twice as high as they normally are. That is what this building is. This is like what a four-story townhouse with 25 of them together. That is what you're looking at as opposed to individually placed buildings of smaller lower rising sizes. I've provided you with a copy of the Planning Commission agenda for June 11, 1997 where this rezoning was approved. The staff evaluation approved it at that time or recommended approval. What they said at the time was important. Staff said that although the Comprehensive Plan was no specifically recommend this type of commercial use, it is recognized that completed road improvements to Lynnhaven Parkway and scheduled road improvements to Salem Road would render this a mayor intersection and this site is suitable for office and commercial development. If developed in accordance with the submitted proffers. They further said that the proffered site plan, landscaped plan, architectural elevations and conditions ensure that this site would develop into an attractive well-designed commercial office complex. The proposed center has a pedestrian scale with buildings located adjacent to roadways and the proffers ensure it will develop with the neighborhood oriented Uses. An attractive two-story office building would be located on the corner parcel and will be the focus of the center. The development will be well buffered from the established residential neighborhood to the west by Salem Canal. The trees will be preserved within a 100 -foot drainage easement. Architecture, building materials, building colors, landscaping and freestanding signage are coordinated and of high quality. This was said in 1997, not 1947. It has only been 7 or 8 years. Time has not changed that much. Ask yourself this question. Does this proposed project that we see today meet the elements contained in 1997 proffers? I suggest to you that it does not. The proposed use of this project is overly intense and the design does not in keeping with the letter or the spirit of the 1997 proffers. On that basis alone, we request that this application be denied. We also believe that this property is not well suited for uses of senior citizen housing. In December 2001, the applicant came with request for a rezoning and a conditional use for this purpose. The staff recommended denial. Although they candidly acknowledge they were in favor of senior citizen housing, they felt there were too many issues against the proposed Use including incompatibility with the 1997 proffers. Ultimately the applicant requested a deferral and now we're back. In reviewing the current request, the Planning staff considered six major issues. Compatibility with surrounding use, senior citizen housing needs, flood plain development issues, site plan, architecture compatibility of the recent development, current proffers and prior safety issues and parking. This is how they responded on some of the issues. They found that the Use was compatible even though the southern buffer, which is adjacent to the condominiums, which is only 20 feet. In other words, the staff had no problem putting a 50 -foot high building next to a 20 -foot high condominium. I think that's not compatible. That's the decision you will all make. One of the other issues was the site design and architectural compatibility with 1997. This is where the planning service I believe has done a good service to everyone. Look at the 1997 site plan. The buildings were one and two story. They were spaced out on the property and there were open space between them. The 1997 proffered required specific building materials and they're not the same as being proposed today. Look at the Rose Building. It's brick and vinyl. It's 50 feet high and 500 feet long. You say that it's compatible with 1997 and what was agreed to back then is dust not true. In closing, we do not believe that the project is compatible with the 1997 proffers. This community agreed to the rezoning in 1997 based on those proffers. When proffers were modified for the Barnes site, it was with the advice and consent of the community. While we do not think this plan for the senior housing is a good one for this community, our objection is not based on senior housing alone. It is because of the 1997 agreements. If you ignore the proffers that were done, what kind of message are you sending to the community? Basically, those people acted in good faith in 1997 They worked with the owner at the time and they came up with a plan we could all live with. Now, all that is being thrown out the window because of a new plan. They are all opposed to it. I thank you for your time. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Are there any questions of Mr. Olivieri? Yes. Dorothy Wood: Question, I guess for Vinnie and for Kay, what impact did the 1997 proffers have on our hearing today? Kay Wilson: He's asking to change the proffers. Basically, it's a modification of proffers. He's changing the zoning of the property as well and including new proffers. The zoning changes, the proffers change. You can't count on the zoning always being in place. As well, you can't count on the proffers being in place because they can be modified. Dorothy Wood: I guess the people probably in Bellamy once thought they had these proffers in 1997 that they would remain. I can understand how they would feel that way. Ronald Ripley: Are there other questions of Mr. Olivieri? Thank you very much. Vincent Olivien: Thank you. Robert Miller: The next speaker is Rodney Voelker. Rodney Voelker: Good afternoon Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, I was the President of the civic league in 1997 when we fought with Planning and the proposed developers of this project at that time. At that time, the discussion was the greatest project, which is now the Southampton and Salem Condos. That was one of the mayor issues and we attended meetings with the builders and we came up with an agreement and they made the changes to satisfy us. Now we're faced with a marshy area of mosquitoes breeding. We can't spend much time outside due to the pests. The reason being when Dragas went in they striped the land from Salem Road to Salem Canal. We were supposed to have 100 feet of trees. We complained to Planning and they said we're sorry. It should not have happened. So, Mr. Waitzer is proposing to keep the trees. Dragas proposed to keep the trees but we have a swampy area back there. The wild foxes, falcons, owls and other creatures made their homes in that wooded area there. Now, they moved out and a lot of them moved into our homes. They are tearing off our roofs and moving into our sheds and everything else because they don't have a wooded area. My concern is that the proposed building is too tall and not in compliance with zoning changes as we agreed to during the rezoning debate agreed to in 1996-1997 timeframe. Trees were removed even though the developer said he would leave them. The architecture design that the City Council insisted upon and that you adhere to for Home Depot, the 7 -eleven, Salem Crossing and all those areas you fought hard to keep the design of that area very high architecture. This project will not be that type of design. Please keep the area zoned R-10 to B-2 Conditional. Thank you. Any questions? Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Are there any questions? Robert Miller: The next speaker is Kelly LaMar. Kelly LaMar: Good afternoon. I'm Kelly LaMar and I'm an adjacent property owner to the west of Salem Canal. I have a petition. We surveyed 85 percent of our 236 homes and 89 percent of those surveyed are opposed to changing the rezoning of the proffers. We feel that we have every right to rely on what Planning insisted was best for that parcel in 1997. Four other independent senior housing projects in the Kempsville area have a one to one or better parking ratio. We do drive by's. Dorothy Wood: Pardon me. Would you mind showing us your property? There's a pointer there. Kelly LaMar: We're all along here. Dorothy Wood: Your house ma'am? Kelly LaMar: I'm Lot #9. Dorothy Wood: Which is? Kathy Katsias: There's a pointer right there. Kelly LaMar: I'm blind as a bat. Ronald Ripley: You're nine lots in? Kelly LaMar: I'm Lot #9 from Lynnhaven Parkway. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Kelly LaMar: I would be the second lot from the corner of the building. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Kelly LaMar: You will see by the parking, I surveyed other senior housing projects and they all have a one to one or better parking ratio. These pictures show that seniors do have cars and they do use up parking spaces even in assisted living facilities. These photographs were taken midday on a Tuesday and Wednesday. There are serious concerns regarding the tree buffer as Mr. Voelker stated and the start point and how much will ultimately be remaining after setbacks, sidewalks, gardens, shuffleboard, walking trails. Applicant's site plan indicates a 100 foot buffer starting at our backyards on the far west side of the canal, which would include our bank and water where there are no trees. While a 100 -foot buffer may be sufficient for a one or two story building, it is not sufficient for a building this mass in size. There's no buffer for Southampton. We're concerned about safety of the seniors. The applicant will not install a sprinkler system. His method for insuring non-ambulatory residents is that the residents will self-report or risk eviction. We're concerned about 30 feet of trees falling on the building in a hurricane. We are not opposed to senior housing. We've absorbed seven of fourteen senior housing projects in Virginia Beach. We're not opposed to use of this parcel for senior housing. Ronald Ripley: Ms. LaMar, you're out of time. Kelly LaMar: Thank you. Ronald Ripley: If you want to summarize dust real quick. Kelly LaMar: Yes, I do. In summary, we dust feel that this project is too large. Your own Comprehensive Plan says that this area should not absorb intense change and development. This is where we stand on this issue. Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. That's all the speakers that we have. Mr. Waitzer, would you like to rebut please? Richard Waitzer: We all want senior housing but where? And what? There are certain economic factors that make this type of building that's going to be built. Whether it be mine or anybody else's. This is good site. It is near shopping. It is not far from all facilities particularly when we have van service. It is a difficult site that dictated many of the things that we have done. We tried the best we can to accommodate those concerns that the neighbors expressed to me two years ago. I don't know what else we could do. Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Okay. Is there discussion on the application? I'll discuss it if you all like if nobody is going to say anything? When I rode over and looked at this property, I try to visualize this what this would look like on the ground where you could see the elevations and you can see the site plan. I was here when Mr. Barnes came through and modified these conditions. I've kind of been involved and seen this property kind of evolve. I wasn't here originally in 1997 when Mr. Barnes came through. This property has been in front of us before. When I rode over there and looked at it, I try to think in terms of the scale of this building. The way I perceived it when I carne up on the intersection with the Konikoff Building, I see it as a stepping scale. I see the Konikoff Building as two stories up close to the road, which really pulls you visually to the building. I see this building in the background in the proper location. If this building was up on the road, it would be a different ballgame and I think your scale would be out of scale. In this case, locating the property where it is I think the scale is appropriate. I think it's moved away from Lynnhaven. It's moved away from Salem. I think the buildings in front of it break up the elevation that would fit in an appropriate way. I feel like the distance between the Bellamy neighborhood, almost a football field, trees are extraordinary, in my opinion. I think I mentioned in the informal meeting is that our company manages five of these facilities. I can think of a facility over in Chimney Hills that is next to a townhouse community. It's about a 20 -foot setback. This is very passive use. The seniors are extremely passive. They stay in the building and occasionally go out and walk around. They walk into shopping. They have eyes on the park and from a crime point of view. They are absolutely an outstanding neighborhood to have. They actually benefit the neighborhood from that point of view. They don't miss anything coming and going. I can tell you. That is a consideration that you need to consider. I think that the fact that this building doesn't have any decks ors it keeps everybody inside. They can go outside through the main entrance. They won't be sitting out on decks overlooking anybody's barbeque or anything like that. They are going to be in their home watching television not up next to the window. That's the typical way they are going to live. Things change. I'm respectful what the counselor said about the proffers but our whole Comprehensive Plan is dust changed dramatically and the whole City is coming to the realization that we have to think in terms of use and this is a classic mixed use of the intersection. I think that staff is absolutely correct in recommending approval of this. I think the mix use of this particular type of use in this area where seniors can actually walk to the shopping that is in place and the future shopping that will probably come across the street is the perfect place for them to be. It is not perfect for them to be back in the neighborhood. It's more appropriate to be on the fringe to be up into a retail area like this. For those reason, the scale, the location and the amount of buffers that's been applied here, I think the application ought to be approved. Will. William Din: I'd like to make a comment also. I think I agree with you Ron with what you said about this thing. Affordable housing for the elderly is really needed in this area. It provides a more diverse housing option to various people and especially the elderly. I think what was said is very true. There are grandparents of many of us want to stay in the same area. They want to live and be able to visit and have their children and grandchildren visit them. I thunk this provides an option for that. But in addition to that, I think this site and there is no guarantee of any site or proffers, that is put in place here but it is proffer and it is written in writing that they are going to keep the wooded buffer here. The wooded buffer is over 200 feet from the residential. This is an ideal site for that. Most projects like this do not have that option. They are on sites that limit where you can put it. I think this buffer is there. I think it's a good asset of this project. It is a passive use. It is very passive compared to the B-2 zoning that could be there. I think I'm going to be supporting this because of that. I think the diverse housing requirements of this area, is very new. Ronald Ripley: Gene. Eugene Crabtree: I've been sitting here and listening to everybody. As an individual who works daily and quite a bit of time with the retired military and we have over 20,000 retired military personnel and surviving spouses who reside in the City of Virginia Beach. The Department of Defense does not have any type of housing for our senior retired people when the reach the age that they can no longer feel like they can stay in a single- family home, we need for of these things. This is one that is close to shopping. It is close to drug stores, grocery stores and things. It's in walking distance for our retirees who would live in a facility like this to get to these amenities. We are concerned from time to time about the noise level in our air station. This is outside any noise levels so they won't be disturbed and routinely, our retirees and our senior citizens, when the sun goes down the door closes. They go down as well. So, there will be no noise or anything in the evening or any extra activity. I think the location of this particular place is much better than most of them throughout the City. Some many of them throughout the City they have to get in a van or a bus in order to go to a drug store, grocery store or whatever. This facility in this one here will allow them if they are ambulatory to get out and move and possibility get a little exercise in the process of doing that. Therefore, I think this is an outstanding project. I think it is something that is dire need in Virginia Beach for our older community and speaking for the military retired community, I think we ought pat this gentleman on the back for designing and putting this facility in this area. Ronald Ripley: Charlie Salle' would like to say something and then Dot Wood and then I think Joe, you wish to comment also? Charlie Salle': I was not on the Commission but I was in the Council Chambers when the Great Neck facility came up to discussion before City Council. And as I recall there was a lot of pretty vocal opposition to that project. Since it has been developed, I think everybody has come to the realization that perhaps there have been no problems. I think sometimes you picture in your mind something more terrible than it turns out to be. I was on the Commission when this property was rezoned and in fact, I think Mr. Barnes is here and I've seen so many applicants over the years I can't recognize them all but I do think I recognize Mr. Barnes because he's been here enough times. But, probably thinking back on those applications we were probably somewhat unrealistic in the design that were approved and the rezoning proffers that were approved with that application. I think the fact that the property has not developed over all these years probably indicates that although all the parties agreed to we're probably unrealistic and expectations of the property would develop with the proffers and conditions that were in place. It seems to me that this Use is a compatible use and a good transitional Use between a commercial office facilities and an existing condominium development. So, I think we all recognize the need for this type of facility. I think it will be compatible with the neighborhood and compatible with the surrounding developed areas. I think its probably another situation where we think its going to be a lot more terrible as far as the neighborhood is concerned and it will really turn out to be an asset to the community. Once it is developed I think the adjacent community fears will go away. So, therefore, I'm going to support the project. Ronald Ripley: Dot Wood. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. When I first came in I had a lot of concerns about the property because of the neighbors. I do really feel bad that the neighbors thought the proffers would last with the property. I think we need to do a better fob explaining to people that the proffers can change. I see where Mr. Waitzer has a huge buffer around his property. He has worked with the neighbors as far as upgrading. As a member of the Community Development Board, we are always looking for low cost housing for our seniors. I agree with Mr. Waitzer. I certainly don't want to live with my grandchildren although I want to live near them and because of this I will be supporting Mr. Waitzer and his Silver Hill. Ronald Ripley: Joe. Joseph Strange: Well, I certainly respect the opinion of the Commission members that have spoken but I guess I'm going to find myself in the minority here because I feel like we have senior citizens that are living in Bellamy Plantation also. We're talking about one property owner here. But in Bellamy Plantation we're talking about a lot of property owners. We're talking about a lot of property owners who put their faith in the negotiations that they so diligently decided to go through in 1997. These people are not -- T- inactive people. They participated within the system. They negotiated in good faith with their government. I wasn't there but I talked to a lot of people who were there. I think it's one of those moments where you would have been there and seen the negotiations that went on and how these negotiations were and how viable they but after going through these negotiations this community agreed on those proffers. They agreed to abide by them. I personally find it hard to go against churches and senior citizen homes but I'm going to have to oppose this project based on the fact that this community was negotiated in good faith since 1997. Ronald Ripley: Thank you Joe. Does anybody else have any comments? Okay, can we get a motion? Eugene Crabtree: I'd like to make a motion that we approve the application as presented with its conditions and proffers. Ronald Ripley: A motion by Gene Crabtree to approve. Seconded by Will Din. Mr. Miller. Robert Miller: I've been informed by the City Attorney's Office that we worked for the Overholt Family which owns the property that I will abstain from this application. Ronald Ripley: Okay. We're ready to vote. ABSENT 0 Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 9-1 with one abstention, the motion carries. AYE 9 NAY 1 ABS 1 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER ABS RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE NAY WOOD AYE ABSENT 0 Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 9-1 with one abstention, the motion carries. FORM NO P S 18 IA Bg- City of Virgirzia Beach In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF -5798 INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE DATE: November 25, 2003 TO: Leslie L. Lilley DEPT: City Attorney FROM: B. Kay Wilsorio DEPT: City Attorney RE: Conditional Zoning Application Silver Hill at Salem LLC and Henry & Joseph Overholt The above -referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on December 9, 2003. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated August 27, 2003, and have determined it to be legally sufficient and in proper legal form. A copy of the agreement is attached. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further. BKW Enclosure Prepared by and after recording return to: Williams Mullen 222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 1700 Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462 THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), made this 27th day of August, 2003, by, between and among HENRY OVERHOLT and JOSEPH OVERHOLT, Trustees of the William J. Overholt and Millie J. Overholt Irrevocable Trust, dated December 22, 1976 ("Overholt Trust") to be indexed as a grantor, SILVER HILL AT SALEM LLC, a Virginia limited liability company ("Silver Hill"), to be indexed as a Grantor (the Overholt Trust and Silver Hill are collectively referred to as the "Grantor"), and the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia ("Grantee"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantor has initiated a conditional amendment to the zoning Map of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, by conditional rezoning application of the Grantor addressed to the Grantee, so as to change the classification of the parcels described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property") and referred to therein as Parcel 2A -1A, Parcel 2A -2A and part of Parcel 3A, consisting of 9.26+/- acres, from B-2 (Commercial) to 0-2 (Office), located in the Princess Anne Borough, City of Virginia Beach, Virginia; WHEREAS, the Property previously was given zoning classification B-2 Conditional and subjected to certain conditions, all as set forth in that certain Agreement, dated May 27, 1997, by and between Joseph Overholt, Trustee of the William J. Overholt and Millie J. Overholt Irrevocable Trust, dated December 22, 1976, Hassell Lee Barnes, Jr., Denise G. Barnes and the City of Virginia Beach, recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 3759, at Page 1786 (the "Prior Zoning Agreement"); WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Grantor and the Grantee that this Agreement supercede and replace the Prior Zoning Agreement as to the Property and that the zoning classification, proffers and conditions set forth in the Prior Zoning Agreement no longer have any effect or be binding on the Property from and after the date of the recordation of this Agreement; WHEREAS, the Grantee's policy is to provide only for the orderly development of land for various purposes, including multi -family purposes, through zoning and other land development legislation; WHEREAS, the Grantor acknowledges that the competing and sometimes incompatible uses conflict, and that to permit differing uses on and 1n the area of the Property and at the same time to recognize the effects of the change, and the need for various types of uses, including those listed above, certain reasonable conditions governing the use of the Property for the protection of the community that are not generally applicable to land similarly 0-2 (Office) are needed to cope with the situation to which the Grantor's rezoning application gives rise; and GPIN: 1475-74-9833, 1475-75-7276, and 1475-84-2793 WHEREAS, the Grantor has voluntarily proffered in writing in advance of and prior to the public hearing before the Grantee, as part of the proposed conditional amendment to the Zoning Map, in addition to the regulations provided for in the existing 0-2 (Office) zoning district by the existing Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Virginia Beach (the "CZO") as in effect on the date the conditional rezoning is approved by Grantee, the following reasonable conditions related to the physical development, operation and use of the Property to be adopted as a part of said amendment to the new Zoning Map relative to the Property, all of which have a reasonable relation to the rezoning and the need for which is generated by the rezoning. NOW, THEREFORE, the Grantor, for itself and its assigns, grantees, and other successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement by or exaction from the Grantee or its governing body and without any element of compulsion or quid pro Quo for zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit or subdivision approval, hereby makes the following declaration of conditions and restrictions which shall restrict and govern the physical development:, operation and use of the Property when and if redeveloped for a use permitted under the following change to the 0-2 (Office) zoning classification, and hereby covenants and agrees that these conditions and restrictions shall constitute covenants running with the said Property, which shall be binding on the Property and on all parties and persons claiming under or through the Grantor, its assigns, grantees and other successors in interest or title, namely: 1. All residential units hereafter constnicted upon the Property shall be leased to or occupied by households whose head, spouse or sole member is sixty-two (62) years of age or older, handicapped or disabled in compliance with the Fair -Housing Act [42 U.S.C. §3601-3619 (1977 and Supp 1994)] and applicable regulations promulgated pursuant thereto and the Virginia Fair Housing Law, §§36-96.1 et se ., Code of Virginia, 1,950, as amended. The residential units hereafter constructed on the Property shall be operated and maintained in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Virginia Fair Housing Law and the Fair Housing Act that are applicable to the Property at the time of site plan approval. 2. When the Property is developed with residential units, it shall be developed substantially as shown on the preliminary site plan entitled "SILVER HILL SALEM ROAD", prepared by W.P. Large, Inc., dated August 5, 2003 (hereinafter the "Site Plan"), which Site Plan is on file in the Planning Department. 3. When the Property is developed with residential units, not less than 55% of the primary exterior building material will be traditional face brick. Any vinyl siding used will be a premitun grade equal to or exceeding Certau-iteed "Carolina Beaded" in quality. The trim will be white and the roof will be a hip roof of charcoal gray shingles. When completed, the principal residential buildings shall be substantially as sho,.,v-n on the Rendering for the development of the Property (hereinafter "Rendering"), which is on file in the Planning Department. 4 All Leases will contain a provision requiring cancellation on thirty (30) days notice if the tenant becomes incapacitated and a 24-hour caregiver is not employed. No more than 10% of the tenants will be non-ambulatory and they will reside on the first floor. 0 5. All exterior lighting including building, ground or pole mounted fixtures will be directed downward, toward the interior of the site and away from adjoining properties. All exterior lighting will be consistent with the Illumination Engineering Society of North America's recommended standards. A lighting plan will be included for review with the detailed site plan review process. 6. The freestanding monument sign will not exceed eight (8) feet in height and will be constructed of materials matching the building exterior. Light fixtures illuminating the sign will be at ground level in landscaping beds. 7. Van service will be provided to tenants. 8. All landscaping will be as shown on the Site Plan. The City will not issue a final certificate of occupancy until such landscaping is installed. 9. Ingress and egress will be from Salem Road via the existing cross reciprocal easement recorded in the Clerk's Office, Circuit Court, City of Virginia Beach, in Map Book 267, at Page 80. 10. The trees on the property will be preserved as indicated on the Site Plan. Tree protection will be provided in the form of temporary metal fencing. 11. Grantor understands that further conditions may be required by the Grantee as a result of and during detailed Site Plan review and administration by all cognizant City agencies and departments to comply with applicable City Codes. The zoning classification, proffers and conditions set forth in the Prior Zoning Agreement do not affect and are not binding on the Property from and after recordation of this Agreement. The above conditions, having been proffered by the Grantor and allowed and accepted by the Grantee as part of the aforesaid amendment to the CZO, shall continue in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes the zoning of the Property and specifically repeals such conditions. Such conditions shall continue despite a subsequent amendment to the CZO even if the subsequent amendment is part of a comprehensive implementation of a new or substantially revised CZO until specifically repealed. The conditions, however, may be repealed, amended, or vaned by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and executed by the record owner of the Property at the time of recordation of such instrument, provided that said instrument is consented to by the Grantee in writing as evidenced by a certified copy of an ordinance or a resolution adopted by the governing body of the Grantee, after a public hearing before the Grantee which was advertised pursuant to the provisions of § 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. Said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with said instrument as conclusive evidence of such consent, and if not so recorded, said instrument shall be void. The Grantor and Grantee covenant and agree that (1) the Zoning Administrator of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia shall be vested with all necessary authority on behalf of the governing body of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia to administer and enforce the foregoing 3 conditions, including (i) the ordering in writing of the remedying of any noncompliance with such conditions, and (ii) the bringing of legal action or suit to ensure compliance with such conditions, including mandatory or prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages or other appropriate action, suit or proceedings; (2) the failure to meet all conditions shall constitute cause to deny the issuance of any of the required building or occupancy permits as may be appropriate; (3) if aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Administrator made pursuant to the provisions of the City Code, the CZO or this Agreement, the Grantor shall petition the governing body for the review thereof prior to instituting proceedings in court; and (4) the Zoning Map may show, by an appropriate symbol on the map, the existence of conditions attaching to the rezoning of the subject Property on the Zoning Map and that the ordinance and the conditions may be made readily available and accessible for public inspection in the office of the Zoning Administrator and in the Planning Department, and that they shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and indexed in the name of the Grantor and Grantee. This Agreement has been prepared by C. Grigsby Scifres, Esq., of WILLIAMS MULLEN, Virginia Beach, Virginia, at the request and direction of Grantor. WITNESS the following signatures and seals: SILVER HILL AT SALEM LK, a Virginia 1' ited liab' ity com y It By: M. Wkitzer, Manager COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to -wit: 7' nO,tpkr!) raz 1 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this A49 day of Am4u-st, 2003 by Richard M. Waitzer, Manager of Silver Hill at Salem LLC, a Virginia limited liability company, who is personally known to me or produced fQ /A as identification. Notiry Public My commission expires: [Affix Notary Seal] El STATE OF �7?6L/ CITY/COUNTY Y CiverhoIt and y RTrust, ev%jc 4 la rust, n11 i o The foregoing instrument was acknowicoge ryfore me ch:�; �6L day of Au&aa, 2003 by Joseph Overholt, Trustee of the William 3. Overilwit and MiDie J. verholt Irrevocable Trust, who is personally known to me or produced ��tiQ� p y p �, as identification. My conu'nission expires. [Affix Notary Seal] 08-28-2003 03=19PM Henry Ov*olt, Trustee of4he William J. Millie J. Overholt Irrev= Dated December 22, 1976 STATE OF CIT /COUNTY OP to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ZS day of Hen Overholt, Trustee of the William J. Overholt and Millie I. Overholt who is personally known to me or produced as i Notary Publi Mycommission expires:�\"j x Notary seal] 1 0 P. 07 holt .0 GBoRG A ,1M 14.2004 = s LA �•`, ,,O��,,,. gust, 20�ff9;��b,,,,', vocable Trust, TOTAL P.07 EXHIBIT A ALL THOSE certain lots, pieces or parcels of land situate, lying and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, being known, numbered and designated as Parcel 2A-1 A, Parcel 2A - 2A and the westerly 15 feet +/- of Parcel 3A, as such parcels are shown on that certain plat entitled, "RESUBDIVISION PLAT OF PARCEL 2A-1, 2A-2 & 13 CREATING PARCELS 2A - 1A, 2A -2A, 3A AND 13A, SUBDIVISION PLAT OF PARCEL 2A, CREATING PARCELS 2A-1 & 2A-2 PLAT OF PROPERTY TO BE ACQUIRED FROM HENRY & JOSEPH OVERHOLT, TRUSTEES (DB 1629, PG 289) (DB 2786, PG 1201) KEMPSVILLE BOROUGH — VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA (MB 267, PG 80-81)", and dated November 29, 2000, which said plat is duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Map Book 292, at Pages 52 & 53; to which reference is hereby made for a more particular description, such property also being described as follows: Beginning at a point located on the western right of way of Salem Road, said point being 604.62' south of the intersection of the southern right-of-way line of Lynnhaven Parkway with the western right-of-way line of Salem Road, Thence proceeding along the western right-of-way line of Salem Road S.09" 17' 32" E, 50.00' to a point; thence turning and leaving said western right-of-way line, and proceeding S 800 39' 55" W, 200.93' to a point; thence turning and proceeding S 09" 17' 32" E, 195.03' to a point; thence turning and proceeding S 800 42'28" W, 530.09' to a point located in the Salem Canal, thence turning and proceeding in a northerly direction along the Salem Canal N 060 52' 55" W, 410.91' to a point; thence continuing N 10° 43' 58" W, 200.48' to a point; thence continuing N 130 06'47" W, 298.81' to a point located on the southern right of way line of Lynnhaven Parkway; thence turning and leaving the Salem Canal and continuing along the southern nght-of-way line of Lynnhaven Parkway N 81* 43'49" E, 172.07' to a point; thence continuing along the southern nght-of-way line S 860 48' 44" E, 7.57' to a point, thence continuing along said nght-of-way line N 830 50' 10" E, 197,02' to point,; thence turning and leaving said southern nght-of-way line and proceeding S 080 17' 11" E, 231.98' to a point of curve; thence proceeding along a curve to the left having a radius of 190.00' and a distance measured along the arc of 95.00' to a point of tangency; thence proceeding from said point of tangency S 360 56' 03" E 149.26' to a point thence turning and proceeding S 42° 01' 15" E 32.86' to a point; thence turning and proceeding S 090 17'32" E, 47.85' to a point; thence turning and proceeding S 210 41'51 " E, 120.32' to a point; thence turning and proceeding N 80° 39'55" E, 232.04' to a point, said point of beginning. IT BEING a part of the same property conveyed to HENRY OVERHOLT AND JOSEPH OVERHOLT as Trustees of a Declaration of Trust dated December 22, 1976 known as THE WILLIAM J. OVERHOLT AND MILLIE J. OVERHOLT IRREVOCABLE TRUST by deed from William J. Overholt and Millie J. Overholt, dated December 22, 1976, recorded in Deed Book 1625, page 246. IT ALSO BEING a part of the same property conveyed to HENRY OVERHOLT AND JOSEPH OVERHOLT as Trustees of a Declaration of Trust dated December 22, 1976 known as THE WILLIAM J. OVERHOLT AND MILLIE J. OVERHOLT IRREVOCABLE TRUST by deed from William J. Overholt and Millie J. Overholt, dated January 2, 1977, recorded in Deed Book 1629, page 289. 7 Map IJ -l8 Map Not to Scale qR Supplemental Information Zoning History 'ungo Investors LLC A -2 -AG-2 AG -1 G-2 EM AG -2 O� m AG -2 1 09/25/90 SUBDIVISION VARIANCE GRANTED 2 07/02/91 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT for single-family dwellin GRANTED 3 09/16/85 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT for single-family dwellings GRANTED J PUNGOINVESTORS,-LLC - Agenda Items 3 & 4 Page 8 os �, CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Pungo Investors, L.L.C. — Subdivision Variance and Conditional Use Permit (alternative residential development) MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: (a) Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in regard to certain elements of the Subdivision Ordinance, Subdivision for Pungo Investors, L.L.C. Property is located southwest of the intersection of Stowe Road and South Stowe Road (GPIN 24001353360000). DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE (b) An Ordinance upon Application of Pungo Investors, L.L.C. for a Conditional Use Permit for alternative residential development on property located southwest of the intersection of Stowe Road and South Stowe Road (GPIN 24001353360000). DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE ■ Considerations: The subject parcel is a total of 179.2 acres. The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into eight (8) residential building lots. The eight lots proposed are located on the eastern 1/3 of the site that is currently under cultivation. Lots 1, 4, 5 and 8 include areas that are below the 100 -year floodplain elevation of 5.5 feet. The majority of the lots are between four and seven acres in size. Lots 4 and 5 are considerably larger than the rest due to the fact that they include extensive wooded floodplain areas. The cul-de-sac street is proposed with a pavement width of 26 feet and roadside swales. The only common area proposed in the subdivision is the entrance feature that is mentioned in the application. The applicant has submitted deed restrictions that specify a minimum of 3,000 square feet of heated living space for each dwelling and specify exterior building materials as primarily brick, stone, stucco or cedar shake. The deed restrictions allow for horse boarding and other agricultural activities. In addition, a 100 -foot front yard setback is specified in the deed restrictions for all dwellings Pungo Investors Page 2 of 3 The current guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan were written to encourage alternative residential development, not standard layouts such as the one proposed. The current proposal, while providing a quality residential development, does nothing to preserve the rural character, protect environmental resources or preserve agricultural resources. One alternative layout that would better meet the guidelines would be to shift the new roadway to the north and locate all residential lots on the south side of the new roadway. This would mean the proposed new roadway could serve as the buffer between agricultural and residential uses. In addition, all of the new lots would have a more open view of the existing farmland to the north. The wooded floodplain would be located at the end of the cul-de-sac. This area could be dedicated to a conservation group or owned by the homeowners association with deed restrictions to preserve the area in its present wooded state. If the proposal is accepted as currently submitted, Staff concludes that the vision as expressed in the Comprehensive Plan for the rural area should be revisited. The Staff believes that acceptance of the current proposal and the acceptance in the past of others similar to it will continue to encourage more of the same. Multiple developments of this type, residential enclaves that do not relate to surrounding farmland and open space, will diminish the rural identity and character of this area and will emphasize conflicts between agricultural uses and residential uses as the area slowly transitions from true rural to large -lot estate residential. Staff concludes the weaknesses noted above could potentially be overcome through changes to the proposal, and therefore, has encouraged the applicant to agree to a deferral of this request to allow staff and the applicant additional time to explore these opportunities for change. Staff recommended deferral. There was opposition to the proposal. ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 11-0 to approve this request with the following conditions: 1. A protective buffer shall be provided along the northern property line of Lots 5 through 8 adjacent to the on-going agricultural operation. The buffer shall be 50 feet in width. The first 25 feet of such area adjacent to an on-going agricultural operation should be heavily planted with a mixture of grasses and low growing indigenous shrubs; and the second twenty-five feet of such area adjacent to the structure should be planted with a double row of trees with a minimum caliper of 1'/2 inches and should be centered no more than thirty feet apart. Such trees should consist of a mixture of deciduous and evergreen. 2. The road shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Public Works specifications entitled "Public Works Reduced Typical Section for 50 foot New Residential Minor Street", A-18 in Appendix A of the Public Works Specifications and Standards The applicant shall seek a variance from the Pungo Investors Page 3 of 3 Virginia Department of Transportation to allow state maintenance funding for the substandard pavement width request. If state maintenance funding is not granted, the Subdivision Variance Approval shall be considered null and void. 3. The preliminary subdivision plat, subdivision construction plan and final subdivision plat shall clearly delineate the limits of the 100 -year floodplain on Lots 1, 4, 5 and 8. 4. The property shall be developed in substantial conformance with the plan entitled "Back Bay Commons" dated August 1, 2003 and prepared by Midgette and Associates, P C. This plan has been exhibited to City Council and is on file in the Planning Department. 5. The entrance sign is to be as depicted in the submitted elevation. 6. No timbering shall be allowed within the wooded areas of Lots 4 and 5. Tree removal shall be limited to horse trails and removal of diseased and/or damaged trees. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Recommended Action: Staff recommended deferral. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department A*.W City Manager: er: J19 -210 -SVR -2003 r 7 1`x J19-210-CUP-2003 PUNGO INVESTORS, L.L.C. a 94.1 Agenda Items 3 & 4 November 12, 2003 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Barbara Duke The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. Location and General Information REQUEST: 3. Subdivision Variance to Section 4.1 (m) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires a minimum 30 foot paved width for residential streets. LOCATION: GPIN: 4. Conditional Use Permit for alternative residential development Property located on southwest corner of intersection of Stowe Road and South Stowe Road 24001353360000 `f o S Pun o Investors LLC Mapap Noe to Scale - A -2 �AG-2 J ! AG -1 G-21 I / L 1..> � �G-I ._ y o - r/ I AG -1 / AG -2 AG -1 AG-1AC I S CUP Aknrxarme Resdewwi Dftotomnent PUNGOINVESTORS,-LLC = Agenda Items 3 & 4 Page 1 T COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: SITE SIZE: EXISTING LAND USE: SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: 7 - PRINCESS ANNE 179.2 acres Forty-two (42) acres of the 179 -acre parcel are under cultivation. The remaining 137 acres consist of wooded floodplain. • Agricultural land / AGA and AG -2 Agricultural North: Districts with ARP designation • Agricultural land/ AGA and AG -2 Agricultural South: Districts East: • Single-family homes / AG -2 Agricultural District West: • North Landing River NATURAL The North Landing River borders the western edge of this property. RESOURCE Adjacent to the North Landing River is an extensive wooded AND floodplain that encompasses 137 acres of this 179 -acre property. CULTURAL The 42 acres outside of the floodplain, on the eastern 1/3 of the site, FEATURES: is under cultivation. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Major Issues The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this request. Staff's evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these issues are adequately addressed. • Degree to which proposed subdivision design meets the Rural Residential Guidelines as listed in the Comprehensive Plan. PUNGO INVESTORS, -LLC Agenda Items 3 & 4 Page 2 Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site as being within the rural area of the city. Rural planning objectives contained in the plan include: • Preserve the opportunity for continued agricultural production • Preserve the rural character • Protect environmental resources • Provide reasonable rural development opportunities • Defer need for urban infrastructure In order to attain these objectives, guidelines for rural residential development have been developed and are used to evaluate requests for increased residential density on properties zoned for agricultural use in the rural area of the City. These guidelines are listed below. • Subdivide residential lots on soils that possess the best drainage and water table characteristics using the minimum acceptable lot area necessary to achieve development objectives. • Illustrate the ultimate plan of development as well as anticipated development phases, if any. • Maximize the area of and avoid fragmenting remaining farmland and open space. • Locate protective buffers between proposed residential structures and abutting agricultural operations. These buffers should be at least 50 feet in width. The first 25 feet of such area adjacent to an on-going agricultural operation should be heavily planted with a mixture of grasses and low growing indigenous shrubs; and the second twenty-five feet of such area adjacent to the structure should be planted with a double row of trees with a minimum caliper of 1'/Z inches and should be centered no more than thirty feet apart. Such trees should consist of a mixture of deciduous and evergreen. • Whenever possible, plan developments on non -farmland. In those cases where development is proposed within existing tree cover, design the placement of buildings and driveways so as to save and protect as many trees and other significant environmental features as possible • Minimize all access points along rural arterial roadways. • Provide flag lots, where warranted to advance the purpose of this plan, taking into consideration the size of the lots within the subdivision, existing or future tree cover and other pertinent characteristics relating to the need for rural residential PUNGO INVESTORS, LLC Agenda Items 3 & 4 Page 3 privacy and open space. Design appropriate widths for driveways serving flag lots. (e.g. fire truck access) • Provide longer distances for rural cul-de-sac streets than is otherwise permitted throughout the City. Locate roadway drainage ditches a sufficient distance from the edge of pavement to enable emergency vehicles to pass around road obstructions. • Provide greater streetlight separation distances than is otherwise permitted throughout the City. • Protect land for open space purposes through the use of a variety of legal instruments, such as deed restrictions, appropriate zoning classifications, protective easements or transfer to a stewardship agency (e.g. foundations or conservation groups), or through some other appropriate means. • Limit the annual rate of development so as to minimize burdens placed upon rural public infrastructure. I mm� 'R Summary of Propria The subject parcel is a total of 179.2 acres. The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into eight (8) residential building lots. By right, under the existing agricultural zoning, the property could be subdivided into two lots. Section 405 of the Zoning Ordinance offers an alternative to the by right development if City Council approves a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The alternative allows more dwellings if the development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's Rural Residential Guidelines as listed in the previous section. The maximum number of dwelling units permitted under the CUP alternative is based on the quality of the soils. Soils classified as Type 1 yield a density of one dwelling per five acres, and soils classified as Type 2 yield a density of one dwelling per ten acres. The soils on the subject property yield a maximum of eight dwellings under the Section 405 alternative. The eight lots proposed are located on the eastern 1/3 of the site that is currently under cultivation Lots 1,4,5 and 8 include areas that are below the 100 -year floodplain elevation of 5.5 feet. The majority of the lots are between four and seven acres in size. Lots 4 and 5 are considerably larger than the rest due to the fact that they include extensive wooded floodplain areas. The cul-de-sac street is proposed with a pavement width of 26 feet and roadside swales. The only common area proposed in the subdivision is the entrance feature that is mentioned in the application. The applicant has provided no specific details of the entrance feature. PUNGO INVESTORS, -LLC Agenda Items 3 & 4 Page 4 The applicant has submitted deed restrictions that specify a minimum of 3,000 square feet of heated living space for each dwelling and specify exterior building materials as primarily brick, stone, stucco or cedar shake. The deed restrictions allow for horse boarding and other agricultural activities. In addition, a 100 -foot front yard setback is specified in the deed restrictions for all dwellings. Staff Evaluation Staff cannot support this request because the proposed layout is not good enough to warrant approval. Staff recommends a deferral to allow time for Staff and the applicant to discuss alternative site layouts. Staff's evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials, does not adequately address the `Major Issues' identified at the beginning of this report. The proposal's strengths in addressing the `Major Issues' are (1) The applicant has illustrated the ultimate plan of development and the total number of homes requested will not place a burden on the existing rural public infrastructure. (2) The residential lots are proposed on the eastern 1/3 of the property, on soils that possess the best drainage and water table characteristics. (3) The proposed cul-de-sac street is in keeping with the rural character of the surrounding area. It is proposed with a reduced pavement width of 26 feet and roadside swales. (4) The proposed dwelling units will be set back at least 100 feet from the roadway. However, the proposal's weaknesses in addressing the `Major Issues' are (1) The proposed development does not protect the sensitive lands within the wooded floodplain area for open space purposes. This area will be carved into two privately owned residential lots. No access for the other homeowners in the development is proposed. Although the Southern Watersheds Ordinance restricts construction in this floodplain area, silviculture and agricultural uses are still allowed. The deed restrictions proposed by the applicant could be revised to incorporate language that would designate a portion of this area as "common PUNGO INVESTORS, LLC Agenda Items 3 & 4 Page 5 open space area" for all homeowners or ensuring the entire area will be preserved in its present wooded state. (2) The proposed development does not maximize the area of remaining farmland and open space. Subdividing the entire wooded floodplain area into individual home lots minimizes the open space potential of this development. The farmland is separated into 4 to 7 acre lots that will primarily be used for residential purposes, not agriculture. The current guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan were written to encourage alternative residential development, not standard layouts such as the one proposed. The current proposal, while providing a quality residential development, does nothing to preserve the rural character, protect environmental resources or preserve agricultural resources. One alternative layout that would better meet the guidelines would be to shift the new roadway to the north and locate all residential lots on the south side of the new roadway. This would mean the proposed new roadway could serve as the buffer between agricultural and residential uses. In addition, all of the new lots would have a more open view of the existing farmland to the north. The wooded floodplain would be located at the end of the cul-de-sac. This area could be dedicated to a conservation group or owned by the homeowners association with deed restrictions to preserve the area in its present wooded state. If the proposal is accepted as currently submitted, then Staff concludes that the vision as expressed in the Comprehensive Plan for the rural area should be revisited. The Staff believes that acceptance of the current proposal and the acceptance in the past of others similar to it will continue to encourage more of the same. Multiple developments of this type, residential enclaves that do not relate to surrounding farmland and open space, will diminish the rural identity and character of this area and will emphasize conflicts between agricultural uses and residential uses as the area slowly transitions from true rural to large -lot estate residential. Staff concludes the weaknesses noted above could potentially be overcome through changes to the proposal, and therefore, encourages the applicant to agree to a deferral of this request to allow staff and the applicant additional time to explore these opportunities for change. Should this request be approved, Staff recommends the following conditions be attached to the Use Permit. Conditions 1. A protective buffer shall be provided along the northern property line of Lots 5 through 8 adjacent to the on-going agricultural operation. The buffer shall be 50 feet in width. The first 25 feet of such area adjacent to an on-going agricultural operation should be heavily planted with a mixture of grasses and low growing PUNGO INVESTORS, --LLC Agenda Items 3 & 4 Page 6 indigenous shrubs; and the second twenty-five feet of such area adjacent to the structure should be planted with a double row of trees with a minimum caliper of 1'/2 inches and should be centered no more than thirty feet apart. Such trees should consist of a mixture of deciduous and evergreen. 2. The road shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Public Works specifications entitled "Public Works Reduced Typical Section for 50 foot New Residential Minor Street", A-18 in Appendix A of the Public Works Specifications and Standards. The applicant shall seek a variance from the Virginia Department of Transportation to allow state maintenance funding for the substandard pavement width request. If state maintenance funding is not granted, the Subdivision Variance Approval shall be considered null and void. 3. The preliminary subdivision plat, subdivision construction plan and final subdivision plat shall clearly delineate the limits of the 100 -year floodplain on Lots 1, 4, 5 and 8. 4. The property shall be developed in substantial conformance with the plan entitled "Back Bay Commons" dated August 1, 2003 and prepared by Midgette and Associates, P.C. This plan has been exhibited to City Council and is on file in the Planning Department. 5. The street name "South Stowe Court" as shown on the submitted plan is not acceptable. The existing portion of the 50 -foot right-of-way is officially named Kilgro Road. If the developer does not wish to use the existing name of Kilgro Road, an application for a street name change must be submitted to the Planning Department. As part of this street name change application, three alternative street names must be provided. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. The site plan submitted with this conditional use permit may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. Conditional use permits must be activated within 12 months of City Council approval. See Section 220(8) of the City Zoning Ordinance for further information. PUNGO INVESTORS, -LLC Agenda Items 3 & 4 Page 7 Public Agency Comments Public Works Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Creeds Elementary 309 501 Existing Land Use 2 Princess Anne Middle Less than 7,400 ADT -10 1 Stowe Road 500 ADT 1990 1 1 Proposed Land Use - 80 Hverage uany i nps as defined by agricultural use a as defined by eight single-family homes Public Utilities Water: I There is no Ci water service available in this area Sewer: There is no City sewer service available in this area. The proposed subdivision must be reviewed and approved by the Public Health Department for septic and well. Public Schools School Current Enrollment Capacity Generation ' Change 2 Creeds Elementary 309 501 2 2 Princess Anne Middle 1511 1658 1 1 Kellam Senior High 2276 1990 1 1 -generation- represents the numoer of stuaents tnat the aeveiopment wm aaa to the scnooi 2 "change" represents the difference between generated students under the existing zoning and under the proposed zoning The number can be positive (additional students) or negative (fewer students) Public Safety Police: The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention PUNGO INVESTORS, -LLC Agenda Items 3,,& 4 Page 9 Through Environmental Design (OPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Fire and Rescue: I Cul-de-sac diameter should be 95 feet PUNGO INVESTORS, LLC Agenda Items 3 & 4 Page 10 Exhibit B Proposed Site Layout wl : lb b a PUNGO INVESTORS, LLC y Agenda Items 3 & 4 Page -12 PAlr,>tit, i � "& o"" mr i tw: aNLMa i w%ftw i00, twi � � Exhibit C Proposed Site Layout (Detail) X a Cocoa WO - 0?% MM t- TIMI �'rEti TART � 1RZIAJC SIE wr m6 111 Ilii aw Am Tali TWT IMT fffm an SM M0� Mm no no A"M�'p Ml+f 111 11= us POOMM r RAIL a M>m -MOTWNWA NAM GM 4W AX KLam M Cl -ft PUNGO INVESTORS, -LLC = - Agenda Items 3 & 4 r Page 13 DIS OSURE STATEMENT Exhibit D Disclosure Statement APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) RmiRn InyegrnrG L I,,., A Virginia limit -ed liahilify compan„v Herbert A. Culpepper, Member Robert A. Wadsworth II, Member If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. If the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the property Owner Disclosure section below. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below. (Attach list if necessary) A*r+v Jones If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) ❑ Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate 1 understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing 6 according to the instructions in this package. Applicant's Signature Print Name /117'1� jA--'Limo�� AMLA Property rner's siiorju-djrferent than applicant) Print Nam Ccndittonal Use Permit Apphcahon Page 10 of 10 Revised 711i=03 PUNGO INVESTORS, LLC Agenda Items 3 & 4 Page 14 -r -- F=M4 WQ P�4 t; Z C=) FMM4 Q z 0 V DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) PunQo Investors. L.L.C.: Herbert A. Culpepper, Member, Robert A. Wadsworth, III, Member 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) ® Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. & See next page for footnotes Conditional Use Permit Application Page 10 of 11 Revised 10/1/2003 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) SYKES BOURDON AHERN & LEVY, P.C. MIDGETTE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 1 "Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. Pungo Investors, .C. B Robert A. Wadsworth, III, Ap licant's Signature Print Name Member Property Owner's Signature (if different than applicant) Print Name Conditional Use Permit Application Page 11 of 11 Revised 10/1/2003 =i� WQ 1= Q O V DISCLOSURE STATEMENT I APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) Pungo Investors, L.L.C.: Herbert A. Culpepper, Member Robert A. Wadsworth, III, Member 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) ® Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. & See next page for footnotes Subdivision Vanance Application Page 11 of 12 Revised 10/1/2003 9 PQ V DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) SYKES BOURDON AHERN & LEVY, P.C. MIDGETTE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 1 "Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. Pungo Inv to By: Robert A. Wadsworth, III, Applicant's Signature Print Name Member Property Owner's Signature (if different than applicant) Subdivision Variance Application Page 12 of 12 Revised 10/1/2003 Print Name 7-- Items #3 & 4 Pungo Investors, L.L.C. Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in regard to Certain elements of the Subdivision Ordinance Conditional Use Permit Southwest of Stowe Road and South Stowe Road District 7 Princess Anne November 12, 2003 REGULAR Robert Miller: The next item is Items #3 & 4, Pungo Investors, L.L.C. Eddie Bourdon: Good afternoon Mr. Chairman, before I start I wanted to take just a second if I could and no opportunity to comment but I wanted to thank Mr. Scott and Mr. Bernick and Mr. Scarper. The Bay Act amendments that you all approved earlier represent a continuation of I think the best program that the Commonwealth of Virginia has to protecting water quality in Chesapeake Bay and its watersheds. I think the improvements that were incorporated in the ordinance changes are ones that will continue that program and I think take away some of the sniping that was taking place unnecessarily from Richmond. I really think that's a great thing that you have done, on to this application, again, for the record, a Virginia Beach attorney. I'm here representing the applicant Pungo Investors and Mr. Culpepper and Mr. Wadsworth are present. First of all, I've got petitions and I don't have copies for everyone but I will provide you all signed by 13 property owners in the area of the subject property who own over 677 acres of land, again in the area of the subject property. I apologize for not having copies for everyone. Secondly, I want to let the Commission know that we have the rendering elevation of the entrance feature, which unfortunately we've just received. It's not something that is in your package. If, it's the Commission's determination at the end of the hearing to recommend approval of this application we certainly would have no objection to putting a condition that the entrance feature as depicted on this rendering would be a condition of any approval of the Use Permit. I'll be happy to pass it around if anyone has any desire to see this very attractive feature. Ronald Ripley: Has staff looked at that? Do they think it's appropriate size and everything? They've never seen it. Eddie Bourdon: It will be located on an easement at the entrance to the property in this area. While we got the pinpoint showing the proposed subdivision up here, the property is located on Kilgro Road, which is dust a little stub street off of Stowe Road. This is Stowe Road north and Stowe Road. It is this little stub -street that serves as the access to the subject property, which is shown here. The property is dust over 179 acres of land and the rural services area, the southern part of the City of Virginia Beach. The proposal is to extend a cul-de-sac, which is dust an extension of Kilgro Road in the property to serve the proposed eight -lot subdivision home that's 179 acres plus of property. The Items #3 & 4 Pungo Investors, L.L.C. Page 2 applicant has submitted a set of deed restrictions that will ensure that like the other awarding winning development that he has developed which is Pungo Ridge Commons and the future award winning development that is underway on Mansfield Farm property that these will be extremely valuable, large brick estate homes that will increase our tax base and not provide any need for additional services even the ability of our infrastructure as part of the City to support a small amount of rural compatible development. That is what we believe this to be. The property is not on Princess Anne Road. It is well back, if you have to be looking for it to find it. It is not property that has any visibility or any significance from any mayor thoroughfare in the southern part of the City of Virginia Beach, similar to the Mansfield Farm property in the Pungo Ridge Commons property that are not property that has a great deal of visibility and it would not effect anyone's vista when driving through the southern part of the City of Virginia Beach on any of the significant roadways. The lots that are proposed are lots that vary in size. The first six lots are of the 5-7 acre size. The two lots at the end of the cul-de-sac are very large in size, close to 50 acres and close to 70 acres for those two large parcels. The majority of which are wooded on those two pieces of property. In fact, there's well over 130 acres of wooded area, much of it in the flood plain on the west side of these properties. In addition to the petitions that I've given you copy of I want to also point out that the property to the north of this, owned by Mr. Aygarn, is in the ARP. This property is also in the same family and the property was the subject of an ARP offer based on eight lots, the soil type supports eight lots. Mr. Aygarn's letter, which was given to you all this morning and I thought I heard it represented he was somehow in opposition but if you read the letter clearly he's not in opposition to the application. This section of the property the family deemed it to their better interest not to put the property in the ARP but to have it developed in a manner that is consistent with the zoning ordinance for the Use Permit for eight lots, which is being approved for. All of those lots are on the best drained soils. There is an area in this section that would not be suitable for a septic tank on one acre so that's why this lot is a little bit larger because the area of soils is up towards the north of the property as you come into the property. The one thing that is really easy to take into account and I don't think is under the Comprehensive Plan is the quality of the development as proposed here. I'm not going to suggest here to you that these high-end homes are necessarily consistent with all the homes that you see along Princess Anne Road but this property is not located on Princess Anne Road. They would be more valuable and that should be taken into account. The issue when I boil it down, I think I got my hands around it but the staff has some concerns about the open space area of property. You see they drew up a plan that uses the same area that we have for the lots because it is only 40 plus acres that are under cultivation. The vast majority is wooded. Their plan is slightly a different arrangement but they still use that property as the open space, all the 130-140 acres of wooded area. This area is going to remain open space. This development with only eight houses is almost going to be open space. There is only eight houses on it. The issue boils down is that open space must be owned by a Homeowners Association, which doesn't exist to any degree in this rural services area. You got the vast majority of the open space in the rural area is privately owned, cultivated fields, privately owned forested land. Not land that's owned by Homeowners Association. There is some land that is owned by the government and some that is Items #3 & 4 Pungo Investors, L.L.C. Page 3 owned by the nature conservancy. Again, the majority is still owned by private property owners. It is still open space. So, this open space here isn't going to change in character. Nothing is going to be built on it. It will be owned by the individuals who will be family members of the applicant who intend to build homes, barns, and horses on the property, so, it's still agriculture use and it's still open space. Agriculture is a use that encompasses not dust cultivating fields but also equestrian interests and silvaculture. Again, that is not the intent here to get into a logging operation on the open space at all. We believe that this consistent development that does not minimize open space when in fact it maintains the open space that exists there today with the exception of the area of cultivated field that will disappear, which is about 40 acres of land. That doesn't mean there won't be some limited amount of gardening that takes place on these lots. Another agriculturally consistent use such as horses that we anticipate will take place on some of these lots. If the Commission is inclined to support and recommend approval of the application, the conditions as recommended in the staff evaluation, if the application is recommended for approval, all of those conditions with the exception of Condition #5 are acceptable. Number #5, is dealing with the name of the road. I've never seen that in an application and I'm not going to lose a lot of sleep over it. It seems to me that the name of the road is something that needs to be determined in the future. Obviously, the house on Kilgro Road that is there now, they need to be consulted in terms of having the name changed. I dust don't know if that's an appropriate condition in a Use Permit. We understand that the road may not be named as we had shown it on our plans but I still don't know if that is something that the Planning Commission gets into as far as naming the roads. I will be happy to accept a condition with regard to the entrance feature being mandated as we had shown today. I see that my red light is blinking. Mr. Fuller and his friends have to make a plane so I'll sit down and be quiet. Ronald Ripley: Are there any questions of Mr. Bourdon? Donald Horsley: I have a question. Ronald Ripley: Yes. Don. Donald Horsley: Mr. Bourdon, when your client put together this plan did he sit down and go by the rural guidelines or did he dust draw this plan hoping that it would fit? Eddie Bourdon: He looked at the Rural Guidelines. He's familiar with the Rural Guidelines. His belief is that by putting the lots on the best soil and staff has indicated a number of the mayor issues they have address and now it is consistent with the reading of the plan that he was being consistent. When we looked at Mansfield Farm application and the Pungo Ridge Commons application he was attempting to do something that is of a different feel for instance than the application that you all approved on consent for Mr. Rollins today. It's a different type of piece of property than the property right out on Princess Anne Road. All the major roads around it and its already in the cultivation. The majority of this piece of property is not under cultivation. It is in the back, so to speak. It's not out where there's any visibility similar to Pungo Ridge Commons, which was Items #3 & 4 Pungo Investors, L.L.C. Page 4 wooded and Mansfield Farm, which is isolated. He felt that this was a better location for the type of higher end, half a million dollars and up home sites that are based on a equestrian use which is what they are seeing a significant amount of increased interest in. That is what my client is involved in and that is selling property in the southern rural area. This is an ideal location for that type of a land use. His belief is that it is not one size fits all. I intend to agree with him in that. I think agriculture means different things. Not a wide variety but its not just cultivated fields. That is why he believes it does comply with the major requirements. He is not comfortable with the realignment of the road that the staff would prefer or with the idea of giving the 130-140 acres of forested area to a major conservancy or having a Homeowners Association own it. He dust doesn't feel that's the only way to do or necessarily the best way to do it. Donald Horsley: How about the lot size? Have you given any consideration to get the lot size down a little bit so that the back two parcels can have more open land? Eddie Bourdon: They felt like to create the value that they're looking to create overall and given the fact there really wasn't an ability to preserve any significant amount of cultivated field. You got both here. You got some 40 acres, roughly cultivated land and 130-140 acres of forested land that given the cultivated component really wasn't going to be able to be preserved to any degree that's going to amount to something beneficial. You would be better off having lots of similar size in terms of their area for building improvements such as houses and barns. The pieces at the end are as large or large in terms of their usable area outside the wood line. Basically, they're a comfortable size to the rest of the lots. But then you got the wooded area in addition to that versus damming the lots into a smaller configuration towards the road and having the back piece be somewhat larger. He felt because he is trying to create something of an equestrian nature as opposed to cultivation type of situation. That's the better way to develop it for those purposes. Donald Horsley: So you feel like you've met the agriculture preservation guidelines by the two large parcels in the rear? Is that what you're saying? Eddie Bourdon: That is correct. By making it an equestrian type community we are dealing with an aspect of agricultural land use that is not identical. It's not same as cultivated for crops and because there was a significant horse population than is in cultivation for crops, they felt like they're transforming this area and its nice isolated. Now, there is some area to the north that is under cultivation and is in the ARP. The majority of the property to the north that is in the ARP program is also wooded. There is some that is under cultivation but mostly is wooded as well. They're trying to preserve the wooded section but it is under private ownership versus a Homeowners Association. I don't want to speak for staff but the plan that they drew, I think also recognizes that this is a huge amount of cultivated land on this piece of property that we can really gain a lot by preserving. I'm not saying that it couldn't be tried but it is not what the applicant is trying to do with this particular piece of property unlike Mr. Rollins' piece on Princess Anne Road with complete visibility and the property is under cultivation entirely. Items #3 & 4 Pungo Investors, L.L.C. Page 5 Donald Horsley: The woods in the rear, I don't know if I'm in favor of giving it to the nature conservancy. I don't think I agree with that. Is there any type of deed restriction going to be put on that? Eddie Bourdon: That's another balancing. You put a deed restriction and I'm not suggesting that we would be opposed to that would not allow it to timbered. I don't think there's a problem with that. But there is a desire to be able to put nding trails in that portion of the area that is wooded for horses that can be utilized for that purpose. A significant amount of the west can't because it's too low. The area to the west that is too low is also area that is under a patch of regulatory controls, federal and state as well as local at this point and you really couldn't utilize for any developmental purposes anyway. The question is do you put an easement that says it won't be timbered but there can be some selective clearing for making trails. That is not a problem. The vista, in terms of what you see to limited degree of visibility of this property because it is very limited in its visibility. You could have that remain as it has been. Donald Horsley: Thank you. Eddie Bourdon: There is a question as to whether that is consistent with an agricultural use but that is the intent to have the property changed. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other questions at this point? Is there anybody else to speak in favor? Is there opposition? Robert Miller: Geraldine Gilbert. Geraldine Gilbert: Good afternoon. My name is Geraldine Gilbert. I am a property owner on Stowe Road. I am in opposition of this project. The reason why I'm in opposition of this project is because the condition of Stowe Road itself. North Stowe, Stowe and South Stowe are basically a horseshoe type road. They begin and end on Princess Anne. It is extremely narrow, winding dangerous road. When two vehicles meet you have to go over to the shoulder so that one of the vehicles can get by. If a piece of farm equipment comes down it you really don't have any place to go. You have to back up into somebody's driveway. So, additional vehicular use of this road would really be a problem that way it is now. Also, just really simply, my husband and I bought in the area because we liked the agricultural aspect of it. We like the fact that there isn't much traffic. Again, it's a horseshoe road. It doesn't get any other traffic except for the residents that are currently on the road. If you were to expand the number of residents on that road by this project I really believe it would be a burden to the area, to the road and to the residents who live on that road. Also, I wanted to show that Kilgro Road that access the subdivision. That doesn't exist. I dust had one quick question. Have any of you driven down this road yet? I would like for you to defer this until one of you at least drives down Stowe Road and sees what I am talking about. That road that he is talking about that would go into the subdivision. There is no road there. It is a piece of agriculture. There is no such thing as that road. So, I would at least like to defer this and Items #3 & 4 Pungo Investors, L.L.C. Page 6 an environmental impact study on that area as proposed as going to the North Landing River and see whether it can sustain all those septic systems. Thank you. Any questions? Ronald Ripley: Yes. Ms. Gilbert. Would you please take that little pointer in front of you and show us where you live? Geraldine Gilbert: Yes. I live right here. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Geraldine Gilbert: Okay. Stowe Road comes this way. It comes right back into Princess Anne, right off the edge of the map. I live right here in the corner. It is a 90 -degree turn. The sign says 15 MPH to make the turn. You need to go 6 to make the turn or you will wind up in my front yard. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Geraldine Gilbert: I just really believe that it would be quite a burden to add that much more traffic. Ronald Ripley: Are there any questions? Barry. Barry Knight: Ms. Gilbert, I live less than a mile from there. I'm very familiar with the property and Kilgro Road and Stowe Road. In fact, I drive down it once a great while. You're very correct. You never pass a car on that road. If you do, people live down there. They recognize the fact that this the country, this is a country road and you do need to back in the driveway if a piece of farm equipment comes and you pass on the road. But if you turn in to South Stowe Road and go towards this property when you get into the narrow section of road down there it's probably something you may want to talk to Public Works about. The road does appear to be very narrow there. One reason is because there is 18 inches of grass growing up through the road on both sides of the road there. So, you're right. There is no traffic on that road and it is narrow. The shoulders are a little bit wider than sometimes they perceive to be but you can see right through here. There is grass. I drove through it this morning before I came to Planning Commission. There is 18 inches of grass growing up through the asphalt encroaching from the side of the road. Geraldine Gilbert: So, this is where they say Kilgro Road is? Barry Knight: Right. Geraldine Gilbert: There is no road there. Barry Knight: You're right. It's platted on paper. There is no road there. Of course, the developer would have to put the road in there but it's provisioned on the plat for the road to go through there. It was done that way because when they subdivided this property the Items #3 & 4 Pungo Investors, L.L.C. Page 7 two different cousins owning it, Mr. Aygam, Wilmer Aygarn, he decided to keep his side and on this side they had to have access to their side. So, when he subdivided it, he put a Kilgro Road in there. Geraldine Gilbert: Okay. Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Thank you for coming down. That is it for the speakers. Mr. Bourdon. Eddie Bourdon: Some brief comments. One, the soil work has in fact been done. The City is well aware of that. There is very significant separation and soils are good rich soils, standard septic tanks easily fit on the property. All the lots and there is no land management involved. These are the best drained soils, exactly what your Comprehensive Plan seeks in terms of where to place residential development in the rural services area where there is a limited amount of residential development to take place. I would also note that there is already 15 homes on Stowe Road and South Stowe Road that vary in size from 1 acre to 17 acres with the majority of the lots being between 3 & 6 acres in size that are there today. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Okay. Does anybody have anything they wish to say this point? Let's open it up for discussion. Yes. Mr. Miller. Robert Miller: I don't know how Barry or Don feel about it but I think they offered to perhaps put the easement on it for no timber. Sounds like that would be a very positive move that might handle some of the issues that staff has brought up. I certainly don't have a problem with it. Barry Knight: If the owners don't have a problem with it, I certainly don't have one. Ronald Ripley: Adding the entrance feature also. Discussion? Charlie and then Barry. Charlie Salle': I dust have a question for Kay. Is that something that could done as a condition to this application? Kay Wilson: Do one as they will put on. I'm sure that Planning will rewrite for us all. I think they will put on the reservation that there will be no timber and two that they proffer the entrance feature and that would be substantially in conformance with the entrance feature. Eddie Bourdon: We may do some selective removal but then again but we have southern watershed to deal with there to Ronald Ripley: Barry. Barry Knight: I'm very familiar with this project. I know that these lots are configured. One of the first thing that a developer does is he goes and looks at the soil type because Items #3 & 4 Pungo Investors, L.L.C. Page 8 you can put it on a piece of paper anyway you want to but if it doesn't meet the soil type you won't get septic tank approval. That is why some of these lots are configured the way they are. As far as the cul-de-sac going in the middle as opposed going on the north side of the property, I've talked to the farmer that actually farms the whole parcel and will be continuing to farm Mr. Wilmer Aygarn's side, which is the north portion. He said he personally is going to continue to farm. He doesn't have a problem with whether the 50 -foot buffer of shrubs and trees and grass are adjacent to a road or adjacent someone's backyard. I've checked that out. These are large lots. They are five acres. I don't think there's probably any need for a little piece of open space down here. If anyone knows how much five acres, it's more than enough open space. This is exactly what I think we have down here. We have a choice. We had a farm with 80 something acres of high open land. It was divided between two heirs. One heir decided that he wanted to live on the property and put the remainder in ARP and have a little seclusion, a little isolation and that is what he did with his share of property. He owns that share of property. He even sent us a letter today stating that he didn't believe, even as the adjacent property owner a right to tell his cousin what she could and could not do with her property. She doesn't live in close proximately. I believe she lives in Chesapeake. She has a couple of options. She could keep the farmland, she could put it in ARP or she could sell it for the best use, which she views as the most valuable use. That's what she decided to do. So, here we have two areas where one wanted one thing with their property, one wanted to do other things to their property. I think it serves both of these heirs well. I know the largest majority of the neighbors down here. It was all farmland at one time. It all got subdivided. The neighbors that are down there are absolutely wonderful. I mean they're involved in the PTA. They're involved in civic affairs and everything. I honestly believe that I know some of the people that showed interest in buying some of these lots. I think they'll enjoy the neighbors when they come in there and they will be glad they moved in. I think they will be an asset to the community also. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other comments? Eugene Crabtree: Ron. Ronald Ripley: I'm sorry. Gene. Eugene Crabtree: Just very simple when they talked about horses. That sold me. I'm for anything that we do for equestrian throughout the City and I think they ought to have more of it. Therefore, I'm going to support it. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other comments? Donald Horsley: I'll make a comment. My main concern with the project is to make sure that in the Comprehensive Plan we said that we don't want to change. I've been on the Planning Commission off and on for the last 20 something years. That was one of the main things that I hear from the people down there. This year we're doing this and four years we do this, see sawing back and forth. This year we did the Comprehensive Plan. Items #3 & 4 Pungo Investors, L.L.C. Page 9 The majority of the people of the ones that spoke up said they wanted to keep things as they were. That's my goal. We go by the guidelines that we have when we have rural development. People have the right to do what they want to. We got a rural residential set of guidelines. The soil dictates how many lots this piece of property can have. So, the eight lots are what the soil dictates so the property owner has a right to develop it that way. The only thing that that we ask is that these guidelines be met. The staff seems to think that maybe the guidelines are not met to the manner in which they should be. As we look at it, the large track of land in the back the wooded land, get the deed easement on it. Maybe that's fine. I don't know if I agree if I want an easement that says I couldn't timber my property, if owned, it but sometimes you have diseased to get timberland and it needs to be thinned out. I'm not sure you'll be able to do that with that deed restriction. I think in good faith maybe we should go ahead and approve this project. I guess that's the way I'm going to lean. I have mixed feelings approving large lots and I consider anything in Pungo Ridge, everybody knows that anything is going to drain on Pungo Ridge and this is what this is on. These homes could easily be put on a whole less acreage. If it was larger farm that would be more meaningful to the industry of agriculture, I'd probably be more pushed to do that but by being a small acreage as it is, with as much wooded land that he has in the back, I guess we can wrestle it and try to defeat it. The point it is that they can have eight lots. If we try to get them to come back and redo the lots and they do one or two lots and give us a couple of extra acres. I don't know if that helps things. I think we need to emphasize that as development occurs down here and it's going to happen. It's been happening for a while. We try to be very consistent by sticking to these guidelines and developers need to be cognizant of the fact that we do need live up to the guidelines. They've been in effect now for several years and we tried to stick to that. That's been one of the main stays to stick to these guidelines and we reiterated that this year in the Comprehensive Plan. Though I probably go in support this project I just wanted the message to get out that when these things occur and this is probably a unique piece of property too. It's a large piece of property its' just got a small amount of cultivated land on it that would be worthwhile to preserve, what we know is agriculture. Horse farming and equine farming is a little bit different. So, I'm hoping this is going to materialize like that. So, with that said, I'm planning to support it. I just wanted those comments on the record. Ronald Ripley: Jan, did you have a comment? Janice Anderson: Just real quickly. I think Don hit most of it. It's mainly when it's adhered to with what staff is saying that doesn't go along with the guidelines on what they propose. I actually like the proposal but other than the guidelines rather than cluster them all on one side. I think you still have the open space in the back that's preserved there and it is preserving the agriculture where in the deed it says you can do agriculture. You can do horses. These are going to be large homes. That's even in the deed. I think that what facilitate the larger lots. They're going to be a minimum of 3000 square foot homes. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other comments? Yes, Charlie. Items #3 & 4 Pungo Investors, L.L.C. Page 10 Charlie Salle': I agree with Don. My idea of rural preservation and farm preservation, as I've said before was not five -acre farmettes but I didn't think that preserved much of anything in the way of the type of agricultural business that we are trying to preserve. I'm persuaded by Barry and Don, who know this area and they know the people that live in this particular instance. To require the lots be smaller and plus whatever was not preserving any significant agriculture business opportunity and based on that I'll be willing to support the application. Ronald Ripley: Could we get a motion Barry? Barry Knight: I'd make a motion to approve this application subject to the first four conditions. I'd like to omit Condition #5. I believe that can be taken care of administratively. Condition #6 is to add the sign as depicted in the elevation and Condition #7 that no massive timbering, be done on the wooded track. Ronald Ripley: You heard the motion, do I have a second? Robert Miller: Second. Ronald Ripley: Seconded by Bob Miller. Is there any further discussion? Donald Horsley: I dust got a question. Bob, can that number five be done administratively? Robert Scott: I'm okay with it. I think that I prefer to have it taken out. I've dust wanted it noted. I heard Mr. Bourdon's comment that we dust need to make them aware that we have a minor issue with that street name and we'll take care of it. Donald Horsley: The only other comment that I would like to make is that we keep referring to open space. In the southern end of the City the guide is to try to help maintain agriculture not dust preserve open space. We're doing an excellent fob of preserving open space up in the Transition Area now but we want to do more than dust open space. We want to preserve more than dust the marshes and swamp land down there. If you're going to have an agriculture industry, the City said 10-15 years ago that they wanted to make that their main viable image to set. What we're trying to preserve more than dust open space. Ronald Ripley: Alright. I think we're ready to vote. AYE 11 NAY 0 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE ABS 0 ABSENT 0 Items #3 & 4 Pungo Investors, L.L.C. Page 11 KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD AYE Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 11-0, the motion carnes. MICHAEL CARR / # 36 November 12, 2003 General Information: APPLICATION NUMBER: B09 -211 -CUP -2003 REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for an Indoor Recreational Facilities (skate park and arcade), an Outdoor Recreational Facility (skate park) and a Church (Christian convocation center). ADDRESS: 5405 Indian River Road Map Michael ichael Carr Map Not too Scale K LAKE JAMES GPIN: 1465285585000 LF) 0 CUP - Indoor Recreation Faczltty Planning Commission Agenda ° z November 12, 2003 =;= MICHAEL CARR / # 36 Page 1 J= k�y4 y` CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Michael Carr — Conditional Use Permit (recreational facility of an indoor nature — skate park) MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: An Ordinance upon Application of Michael Carr for a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational facility of an indoor nature (skate park), recreational facility of an outdoor nature (skate park) and church on property located at 5405 Indian River Road (GPIN 1465285585). DISTRICT 1 — CENTERVILLE After the Planning Commission hearing, the applicant contacted Staff and indicated that he desires to withdraw this request. The applicant intends to use the property for one of the permitted uses in the B-2 Business District. ■ Considerations: The site plan depicts the following: (1) a 5,300 square foot indoor skate center with 400 square feet of retail space in the front; (2) another 2,500 square feet of retail, within a separate but attached unit on the east side of the building; and (3) a 2,950 square foot outdoor skating area to the west of the structure. The exterior of the existing building is in extreme disrepair. The applicant proposes to add vinyl siding, storefront windows, decorative fabric awnings, a cupola, and an outdoor deck with canopy seating. Access to the skating center will be via an existing drive aisle present along the western property line. Sixty-eight (68) parking spaces on depicted on the site plan with some interior landscaping. Staff recommended approval of the request. There was opposition to the request. ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to deny this request. The applicant desires to withdraw this application. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement(s) Planning Commission Minutes Recommended Action: Allow withdrawal of the application. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: �y'L cornico MICHAEL CARR Virginia WiBeach, Lane Virgirna Beach, Virginia 23464 December 2, 2003 Virginia Beach Planning Commission Council Chambers of the City Hall Building Princess Anne Courthouse Virginia Beach, Virginia Ladies and Gentlemen. Please consider this as official notification of the withdrawal of my application for a condtortal use permit for an indoor recreational facility (skate park and arcade) at 5404 Indian River Road The item is #1306 -211 -CUP -2003 and GPIN #1465-28-5585. Respectfully, Michael Carr ELECTION DISTRICT: 2 — KEMPSVILLE SITE SIZE: 1.15 acres STAFF PLANNER: Carolyn A.K. Smith PURPOSE: To rehabilitate an existing deteriorated structure for the purpose of operating both an outdoor and indoor skate park with retail area, a video arcade with concessions, and a Christian convocation center. APPLICATION This request was deferred at the September hearing due to HISTORY: improper posting of the public notice sign on the property. The request was deferred at the October hearing at the request of the applicant. Since the October hearing, the applicant has met with the adjoining community and has secured the services of an attorney to act as the applicant's representative. The applicant's representative submitted a letter, dated October 29, to staff requesting a deferral of this matter. The letter notes, "If we are unable to resolve most of the resident's legitimate concerns on or before the December Planning Commission meeting, I will recommend that my clients withdraw their application and look for another location." Staff is agreeable to the requested deferral. Major Issues: • Degree to which the proposal is compatible with the surrounding area, particularly the residential properties to the south. • The applicant's ability to upgrade the deteriorated structure to standards necessary for compliance with federal, state and local building and zoning codes. Planning Commission Agenda November 12, 2003 MICHAEL CARR / # 36 Page 2 Land Use, Zoning, and Site Characteristics: Existing Land Use and Zoning This site, zoned B-2 Community Business, currently has a dry cleaning retail operation at the north end of the site, adjacent to Indian River Road. The proposed improvements will be located in a deteriorating building located on the southern part of the site. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning North: • Indian River Road, retail / B-2 Community Business District South: Single-family dwellings / R-10 Residential District with Open Space Promotion East: Restaurant; mini -storage / B-2 Community Business District West: Restaurant; office / B-2 Community Business District, 0-2 Office District Zoning History Much of the zoning activity in the vicinity of this request has been auto related. Several rezonings have been considered over the last 20 years near this site for primarily changing from Residential to Business or Office districts. Several rezoning requests during this time frame were denied or withdrawn as they were determined to be inappropriate adjacent to Residential districts. Two (2) rezoning requests were granted, both along Indian River Road. Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Planning Commission Agenda November 12, 2003 MICHAEL CARR / # 36 Page 3 Public Facilities and Services Water and Sewer There is a four (4) -inch and a 16 -inch water main and an eight (8) -inch gravity sanitary sewer line in Indian River Road. The proposed use must connect to both City water and sewer. Transportation Master Transportation Plan (MTP) / Capital Improvement Program (CIP): Indian River Road in the vicinity of this site is a six (6) -lane divided urban arterial. It is designated on the MTP as a 150 foot wide divided right-of-way with controlled access. There are no current projects identified in the CIP to upgrade this roadway. Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Present Generated Traffic Volume Capacity Existing Land Use - 353 Indian River Road 64,000 ADT' 26,300 ADT' Proposed Land Use 3 -333 Average Daily Trips 2 as defined by typical B-2 retail business 3 as defined by a recreational facility and small church Public Safety Police: In an effort to reduce opportunity for crime, the applicant should review and incorporate safety by design concepts and (design) strategies contained in the Planning Department's, "Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design - General Guidelines for Designing Safer Communities" booklet. A copy of this booklet can be obtained by contacting either the Planning Department or the Police Department's Crime Prevention Unit. A Lighting Plan should be submitted for review to ensure that all fixtures will direct light downward at the ground and not toward the adjacent homes on Lake James Drive. Planning Commission Agenda November 12, 2003 MICHAEL CARR / # 36 Page 4 Uri Fire and All fire code permits, including fire lanes, fire hydrants, etc., will Rescue: be required prior to occupancy. As this will be a place of "assembly" (church on second floor), additional building code requirements must be met in regards to fire protection, tenant separation and means of egress. There is concern that the existing construction of the building will not permit a church on the second floor. The applicant has provided a cross section of the proposed interior walls; however, this does not satisfy all of the Building Official's concerns. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan Map identifies this site for retail, service, office and other compatible uses serving surrounding neighborhoods. Summary of Proposal Proposal • The applicant wishes to revitalize a deteriorated structure for the purpose of operating both an outdoor and indoor skate park with retail area, and a video arcade with concessions on the ground floor and a Christian convocation center on the second floor. Site Design • There is an existing dry cleaning business operating on the front of the site, immediately adjacent to Indian River Road. Access to the skating center will be via an existing drive aisle present along the western property line. • The site plan depicts the following: (1) a 5,300 square foot indoor skate center with 400 square feet of retail space in the front; (2) another 2,500 square feet of retail, within a separate but attached unit on the east side of the building; and (3) a 2,950 square foot outdoor skating area to the west of the structure. • Sixty-eight (68) parking spaces on depicted on the site plan with some interior landscaping. Planning Commission Agenda November 12, 2003 MICHAEL CARR / # 36 Page 5 • The existing stormwater management facility is shown at the southwest corner of the property. Vehicular and Pedestrian Access • Ingress and egress is provided along the western property line utilizing a shared drive aisle with the dry cleaner business to the north. Vehicular parking is proposed in the front and to the west of the building. • Access to the restaurant and its parking lot is provided via existing curb cuts. • Pedestrian access is adequate. Architectural Design • The exterior of the existing building is in extreme disrepair. The applicant proposes to add vinyl siding, storefront windows, decorative fabric awnings, a cupola, and an outdoor deck with canopy seating. • The front fagade of the 2,500 square foot retail area on the east will be covered with beige vinyl siding. The elevation depicts storefront windows on the first floor and on the second floor what appear to be double -hung windows with decorative teal awnings. A brick water table is depicted as well. • The front of the skating center portion of the building will also be vinyl siding. A cupola is proposed on this portion of the roof. The side elevation depicts storefront windows, awnings and siding to match that of the retail area on the east side of the parcel. Access to the outdoor skating area is proposed along the western side of the building. • Roofing materials include asphalt shingles, indicated as gray for the retail area to the east, teal for the main entrance into the skate center, and dark beige for the remainder of the building. Landscape and Open Space • Interior parking lot landscaping and foundation landscaping is depicted on the plan. • An existing hedge of Leyland cypress exists along much of the southern property line, adjacent to the single-family residential units, within a 10 -foot wide buffer. Section 903 of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that this Planning Commission Agenda November 12, 2003 MICHAEL CARR / # 36 Page 6 landscape screen must be within a buffer with a minimum width of 15 feet with Category IV vegetation. • An additional 10 foot wide landscape screen is proposed along the western property line, adjacent to the 0-2 Office District property. Plant material proposed within this buffer is not identified on the plan. • All proposed landscaping will be further scrutinized during final site plan review. Evaluation of Request Staff supports the request of the applicant but as clarified below and as conditioned. The applicant is proposing to rehabilitate what many consider to be an existing "eye sore" and has presented a plan that significantly improves the appearance of the building. The applicant wishes to revitalize a deteriorated structure for the purpose of operating both an outdoor and indoor skate park with retail area, a video arcade with concessions (all on the ground floor) and a Christian convocation center on the second floor. As this will be a place of "assembly," additional building code requirements must be met in regards to fire protection, tenant separation and means of egress. There is concern that the existing construction of the building will not permit a church on the second floor. The applicant has provided a cross section of the proposed interior walls; however, this does not satisfy all of the Building Official's concerns. Additional bathrooms may be necessary and compliance with all Americans with Disabilities Act requirements must be met. The applicant is currently working with the Building Official to address these outstanding concerns. Even with an approval from City Council, occupancy would not be permitted unless all federal, state and local code requirements are met. Staff cannot support the proposed 2,950 square foot outdoor skating area. Staff is concerned that the noise generated by the outdoor stake area could negatively impact the adjacent residential homes to the south, even with buffering. The conditions below reflect this position. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of the request with the following conditions. Conditions 1. The site shall be developed and landscaped in substantial conformance with the site plan entitled, "Concept Plan, Thee Ark Skating Center, for Thee Ark Group, Planning Commission Agenda November 12, 2003 MICHAEL CARR / # 36 Page 7 L.L.C.," prepared by Porterfield Design Center, dated July 14, 2003, except that the 2,950 square foot `outdoor skating area' shown on the site plan on the western side of the building shall not be constructed or permitted. 2. The building and deck area shall be constructed in substantial conformance with the elevation entitled "Concept Plan, Thee Ark Skating Center, for Thee Ark Group, L.L.C.," prepared by Porterfield Design Center, dated July 23, 2003, including exterior colors and building materials. 3. In addition to the final building elevations, the details of the awnings, including but not limited to building material and color, shall be included on the final elevations that are to be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 4. Category IV buffering shall be installed along the entire southern property line. In areas where sufficient landscape material exists, said plants may serve as meeting this requirement and shall be depicted on the final site plan (landscape plan). 5. At a minimum, a 10 foot wide landscape screen with a Category I landscape buffer shall be installed along the western property line, adjacent to the 0-2 Office District property. 6. A Lighting Plan and/or a Photometric Diagram Plan shall be submitted during final site plan review. Said plan shall include the location of all pole mounted and building mounted lighting fixtures, direction of light, and the listing of lamp type, wattage, and type of fixture. Where lighting fixtures are installed along streets, in parking areas, or on the building for illumination purposes, all fixtures shall be of appropriate height and design to prevent any direct reflection and/or glare toward adjacent uses and city streets. Lighting shall be directed down at the ground, and not out horizontally or up in the air. Any lighting located on the back of the building(s) must use appropriate shielding/screening in order to direct light downward at the ground and not toward the adjacent homes on Lake James Drive. 7. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained from the Building Official prior to occupancy. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable Citv Ordinances. The site plan Planning Commission Agenda November 12, 2003 MICHAEL CARR / # 36 Page 8 submitted with this conditional use permit may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. Conditional use permits must be activated within 12 months of City Council approval. See Section 220(8) of the City Zoning Ordinance for further information. Ste,,•'"'' e��y Planning Commission Agenda November 12, 2003 MICHAEL CARR 1 # 36 Page 9 t Planning Commission Agenda November 12, 2003 MICHAEL CARR / # 36 Page 10 0 A L k B&4c"S. Planning Commission Agenda November 12, 2003 'N: MICHAEL CARR / # 36 Page 11 _..�IABP, -, Planning *fot}P�rLip Commission Agenda November 12, 2003: t MICHAEL CARR / # 36 Page 12 Planninn rnmmiScinn Aaend vemper 1c, cl 4EL CARR / A o.._- 41 IY r �� ♦'... t, '. { ` • � 1. E r• i `' '� � � I f `�~`~`�low I t 1�."�I jyi GyFte 1y � /�I 'i L�r• f'� T '?�• �..� j sem, y�. ,� � '�� 4 .. � « � - t •,� . •r t � M1 � f � t �Y k Ursa _ �,' .. �� .r ..,� CC .�-�' �x .,,,�• Ap �. � �`t -', a� _vim �,, �.ow A t� LLL••' 1 -aianning Lommission Agena November 12, 20C MICHAEL CARR / #2 n..-- 4 DIS LOSURE STATEMENf] APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below- (Attach list if necessary) CAa, Phe A i !A1, C bc, a AA F-� &A it A -- If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization tf the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Property owner Disclosure section below: PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary � � 7--; If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) ❑ Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing accor i g th stru tions in this package f � plicant's SignaturelPrint Name , Property Owner's Signature (if different than applicant) Print Name Conditional Use Pe`mit Apolication Page 10 of 10 Revised 7:12003 Planning Commission Agenda November 12, 2003 MICHAEL CARR / # 36 Page 15 DAVID S. HAY A TTORNEY AND CO U1ITSELL OR AT LAW 3720 HOLLAND ROAD, SUITE 103 Holland -Taft Professional Building Fax: (757) 486-0263 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23452 Ph: (737) 428- 8488 October 29, 2003 Mr. Ronald C. Ripley Chairman, Planning Commission of Virginia Beach Department of Planning Operations Building Virginia Beach, VA 23456 Re: Michael Carr — Item #B06 -211 -CUP -2003 — Application for a Conditional Use Permit for an indoor recreational facility (skate park and arcade), GPIN # 1465-28-5585 Item #28 of October 8, 2003 meeting. Dear Chairman Ripley. I was recently retained to represent Michael and Measha Carr and Ron and Donna Fuhrmann for the conditional use permit called Thee Ark Skate Park as referenced above. My clients and I met with the Lake James Civic League at its Monday evening meeting on October 27. I believe that my clients need to research and obtain additional information to attempt to resolve some of the complaints and concerns of the residents of Lake James in order for this matter to be better received by you. Because this is the first zoning and conditional use permit application of which my clients have been involved and they are not experienced or knowledgeable about the Planning Commission process, we will not be as prepared as we should be to attempt to obtain your approval in the next two weeks. The Lake James Civic League graciously allowed us to come before them and more fully explain the project. However, in my opinion they also raised several legitimate concerns that we need to - address more fully and with greater expertise in order to gain your approval. We announced at the civic league meeting that I would send in a written request for the deferral of this matter At the time several of the residents were not in favor of having this matter deferred. Nevertheless, I personally told them and their civic league president, Larry Stampe, and Councilmember Margaret Eure that I would be making this request because I feel that more preparation needs to be done. If we are unable to resolve most of the residents' legitimate concerns on or before the December Planning Commission meeting, I will recommend that my clients withdraw their application and look for another location. We respectfully request a deferral with the understanding that the item will be placed back on the Commission's agenda in December. Thank you for your cooperation and attention to this matter. With kind regards, I remain Very truly yours, David S Hav �N1A BZ4 Planning Commission Agenda November 12, 2003 MICHAEL CARR / # 36 Page 16 Cc: Mr. and Mrs. Michael Carr Mr. and Mrs. Ronald Fuhrmann Mr. Larry Stampe Councilmember Margaret Eure Ms. Carolyn A.K. Smith, Planning Department Planning Commission Agenda November 12, 2003 MICHAEL CARR 1 # 36 Page 17 Item #36 Michael Carr Conditional Use Permit 5405 Indian River Road District 1 Centerville November 12, 2003 REGULAR Robert Miller: The next item is Item #36, Michael Carr. We have a large number of speakers. David Hay: Mr. Chairman and members of the Planning Commission, my name is David Hay. I'm a local attorney and I represent Michael and Meashah Carr and I represent Ron and Donna Fuhrmann who are the applicants of the indoor skate park. I know that you all got a packet that says something about an outdoor skate park and possibly a church or something to that effect. It's only an indoor skate park. Wherever they got an outdoor skate park on the plans or anywhere else, my understanding is that my client was required to revise that application. He did that. It's only for an indoor skate park. Last month, you all graciously deferred the matter. I've read over the minutes of last month's meeting. We've met with the civic league. They hired me a couple of weeks ago. We have an expert on noise that will talk in a few minutes. Larry Stampe, who is President of the Lake James Civic League was nice enough to invite us to the civic league and have us go through and talk to them and answer any questions that we could that they had. They had some concerns, as indicated in our letter and I requested a deferral in my letter. I've got Mr. Stampe's letter and I think I told you why I didn't ask for another deferral. They've been through enough deferrals. That is why I'm here today. Their concerns are traffic, parking, noise, security of the skate park. The outside look at the building is not one of their concerns but I believe it's one of your concerns. What I think are non legitimate concerns are in this letter that you have gotten from a Paul and Peggy Sansone that indicate that apparently there is a problem in the Lake James area regarding drinking alcohol, sexual and drug activity that they claim is prevalent in their neighborhood. Our application doesn't have anything to do with what's going on in their neighborhood if that is in fact going on in one of their parks. Our applicant is in B-2 zoned property and it's for an inside activity that's going to not only provide entertainment to keep kids or young people off the streets so they can skateboard, inline skate indoors and they will be supervised. That's what we have. They've got legitimate concerns and we have some concerns that you're going to hear about "not in my backyard" and you're going to hear a lot of this that's in this letter regarding the noise, fights, loitering, crime and things that supposedly skate parks' develops. Well, the skate parks that they have on the internet everyone of them seems to be an outdoor skate park. The City of Virginia Beach has the largest outdoor skate park that I know of and that's at Mount Trashmore. This is an indoor skate park on a B-2 zoned piece of property. It's indoors. It's very similar to an auditorium that is allowed by right in a B-2 zoned area. Now, let me talk about the security. Security, and my clients have agreed to several things to secure this place. Number #1 is the landscaping and everything else that Planning Staff requests per conditions. The lighting, landscaping, all of that they've agreed to put in. They've agreed to more. Number #1, security will be that they will have a full time security including to but not limited to off duty police officers. They are not going to have a police officer all the time every afternoon because the police officers at the 4th Precinct unfortunately can not get employed to be there everyday during the week. They plan to open only from 2:45-5:45. Why is there a 15 minute differential? It is so the people can get from their cars to the place, 15 minutes to get inside the place. You got security of the parking lot. You got security inside the place. They will always have security from the 6:00-9:00 p.m. slot, which will be the next slot. So instead of until 11:00 p.m., they've agreed to limit it until 9:00 p.m. Let me talk a little bit about noise. They plan to move the entranceway, if I could. You see the entranceway is now on the west. If you turn around... Robert Miller: Use the pointer Dave. David Hay: Okay. It's on the right hand side. So, if you flip that over the entranceway is over on this side over here. They plan to move the entranceway to here in the front that way at night most of the parking will be in this area, which is the front area and not be over this area because they are going to ask people to park in the front area here at night to cut down on some of the Lake James neighborhood's complaints about noise, nuisance, whatever about people being in the parking lot, which they would be anyway if it was an auditorium or an office. The other thing they plan to do is they plan to hinder the noise by adding extra insulation inside the facility. They have hired a noise expert called SPL Integrated Solutions. They did the noise and audio and visual system. They are the largest audio and visual company in the nation. SPL did the sound solutions for the new Chicago, New England and Philadelphia stadiums. Of course, we're now talking about a stadium but that is what the bigger projects that they have. They've done churches, convocation centers, and auditoriums. I'll have Raymond Ringer to tell you about that. I've got 280 signatures from citizens asking that you approve this. I'll hand that to you in a minute. Through the suggestions of the sound company what they also plan to do is in the wall next to the Lake James community, they're going to build an interior wall if it's approved. They will put a wall inside the wall, put insulation in between that wall and then they will put sheet rock on the outside inside the building of that wall to insulate it further. We'll also have vinyl siding on the exterior of the wall and that is shown on the diagram that they've got. I've got a better picture rendering of that you can all pass around. This shows what the place will look like instead of what it looks like if you drove by there today. Ronald Ripley: Pass that around. David Hay: Yes sir. You'll notice that Carolyn from the Planning staff and also your Planning staff is recommending approval subject to the conditions. I mentioned that we agree to every single one of those conditions plus all these security and noise matters. The vinyl siding, she subscribed. I'm not going to go over that to save time. But she subscribed the vinyl siding, the window look and also what this place is supposed to look like, if you can make that rendering a condition of your recommended approval. Parking. I've indicated that from 6:00-9:00 p.m. they are going to ask that the parking be in that front area. They will also, prior to the City Council meeting, and because of the time frame involved they will ask that Permits and Inspections look at the interior of the building and look at the structure integrity and report on that. So, you will have two purely objective viewpoints. Council will want from the Planning staff, which they already have recommending approval and also one from, hopefully from the Permits and Inspection staff. That's all that I've got. Basically, what they want to do is have an indoor facility. If they're kids in there, they will be supervised. If they are young adults they will be supervised inside that inside facility. They're going to take those inline skateboards and inline skaters and skateboarders and take them off the streets. They are going to put them inside and they're going to have them supervised. That's what they plan to do. It's a good project. I know you're going to hear some comments opposing it from the neighborhood. It really is a good project. If I could, have Mr. Ringer come here and just briefly talk to you about the sound. Ronald Ripley: We've got a couple of questions. Dorothy Wood: Mr. Hay, the 290 signatures are they from Lake James? All of them? David Hay: They are not from Lake James. Dorothy Wood: Where are they from? David Hay: All over the city. A few of them are from Chesapeake. How many do you have from Lake James? Kathy Salonia: They are mostly minors. Ronald Ripley: Hey. Will you all please? David Hay: I didn't have these signatures done. Donna, can you come up here? Donna Fuhrmann is one of the applicants. I did not have these signatures done. I can't represent who they're from. Donna Fuhrmann: These petitions were put into the businesses in the Kempsville area. So, while these people may not be in Lake James, they frequent the Kempsville area businesses. Some of these were also signatures for instance the Chesapeake one. I'll be honest. We had by invitation only an open house to show some of the children and their parents what we were proposing. And, so some of these signatures are from that open house. So therefore, there's a couple of Chesapeake. I live in Chesapeake as a matter of fact and they skateboard there too. Some of these signatures are from right down Indian River, dust into the Chesapeake line. They just happen to frequent one of the businesses, heard about us and came over to see what was going on. Dorothy Wood: Excuse me. My question was how many of those are from the Lake James area? Donna Fuhrmann: To be honest. I hesitate to say this but I think I will. We had several come in to our open house and said they supported us but they couldn't do it publicly. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Donna Fuhrmann: I believe that you might even have a letter that's an anonymous letter from somebody in Lake James and it was anonymous because of fear. Ronald Ripley: Mr. Hay, I have a question of you. Your time and I wasn't sure that I understood your time. It's going to open at 2:45 p.m.? David Hay: 2:45 p.m. and close. Donna Fuhrmann: At 9:00. 2:45 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. and then from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Ronald Ripley: Okay. So, it won't be in the morning? David Hay: No sir. Ronald Ripley: It will be in the afternoon. David Hay: Yeah. Ronald Ripley: When I look at this application it talks about outdoor/indoor skating park with retail area, video arcade with concessions all on the ground with a Christian Convocation Center. That's what the evaluation of the request says. David Hay: Right. Ronald Ripley: You're saying that its now an indoor skate park? Donna Fuhrmann: Yes sir. Early on we had made the concession not to do an outdoor skate park for obvious reasons. Then we decided after we had heard some of the complaints and legitimate to make the concession on the convocation center. I don't know why it's still a church. I have no idea why it's still written in there as a church. That application was changed a long time ago. We decided not to make what we were thinking about in the upstairs was making it like a humor club, a place where kids could come. There are a lot of kids out there that have bands. A place where they could come and try their material out and we decided to concede on that as well for obvious reasons, the sound of the bass from live bands. We did not think that we could properly sound proof that room to keep the bass from going through so we conceded that as well. We decided to go ahead and make the whole thing an indoor skateboarding park, dust like the roller skating center, skateboard and inline with the concession area and a pro shop, so they would have a place to come to buy the different parts for their skateboarding, somebody that could build it for them, that type of thing. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Fine. Are there any other questions at this point? Dorothy Wood: Just one more. Ronald Ripley: Yes Dot. Dorothy Wood: Has this gone from a church with a skateboard to a business that's doing skateboard? Donna Fuhrmann: Actually, I think there was confusion from the very beginning. don't think it was ever really was a church with a skateboarding. Dorothy Wood: The application says. Donna Fuhrmann: Michael might have to clear that up. He had been conversing with Carolyn Smith on this and she explained why it had to be written in as a church. Honestly, that was confusion on our part as well. Do you want to explain that? Michael Carr: I'm Michael Carr. The application in the very beginning was that we wanted to put a church there. Before the skate park even came about. They suggested that we couldn't a church there because of the way the building was structured. So, I then resubmitted the application. It's not a church. It was just a skate park. The other thing was it was an outdoor skate park. We decided against that because of the concerns of the neighborhood. We also have decided against the convocation center for upstairs. It's dust a skate park. It's dust a pro shop and there's a small upstairs section that we're going to use for the smaller kids just to teach them how to skate as well. That's it. Dorothy Wood: So, this is not a non-profit that we thought a church type thing? Michael Carr: No ma'am. The church was a separate application in the very beginning. That application was changed by request of Carolyn Smith. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Thank you. Kay Wilson: I think when they talked to Ms. Smith about the Christian Convocation Center that the only category that we had was it would be a church. That's why it's on the application. Ronald Ripley: Okay. David Hay: Can I dust briefly have my noise man? Ronald Ripley: Oh sure. Ray Ringer: How are you all doing today? Hi, I'm Ray Ringer from SPL Integrated Solutions. I hate to be called the noise man. I don't make noise. As you will see when these folders come around there's a page in there, a separate sheet not attached. On October 25`h, when the skateboarders came out there on that open house, I was asked by Michael Carr to come out there to do some db readings. Decibel readings are how we figure out what noise is. If you're wondering what my background is in audio, I've been doing audio for the past 12 years. Actually, I was an electrician for the past 25 years. I did audio for free. Worked for a church. I'm a sound engineer for a 4000 -member church in the area. I've done sound at the Amphitheater for Easter services. I've done sound at Chrysler Hall for a living Christmas tree. So, I've done some rather large venues. Getting tied in to SPL was a logical solution for me because it was like David has said they're the largest audio-visual company in the country. They offered me a position and I took it. We have 84 engineers on staff. Like he said we do stadiums. We've done National Cathedral in DC. We've done superior courthouse in DC. Our expertise goes into everything. Video teleconferencing. I really like the setup you guys got going on in here. If you look at these readings, 60dbs basically is. David Hay: Tell them where Lake James is. Ray Ringer: Okay. Let me get the little pointer here. Okay. Lake James is back here. If you look at this map, do you see the angle right here? That basically follows the angle that we got going on here So, these three readings on the back line, which were taken back here, are between the building and the fence behind whosever house that is. These readings were taken about 2:00 p.m. in the afternoon with I would say there was about 20 skateboarders in there, two speakers. If you look at this, I went in and set up a temporary sound system with two speakers up in the front, nothing in the back. These other speakers drawn in are for proposal purposes for later on down the road. I am not on contract at this point with these guys. I've given them a proposal and my drawing here is based on a proposal. With 95 decibels in front of the speakers, which is your average Sunday morning service in a church. I was reading 62, 57 across the back. Like I said, 60dbs is you and I talking. Now, I notice that when I was reading 62dbs, I looked over to the McDonald's next door and saw a truck pulling in. So, that caused that one to go up. Basically with people skating and everything else. You know the noise wasn't no where near bad. Ronald Ripley: Mr. Ringer, you're out of time. You need to summarize in one sentence or two. Ray Ringer: Basically, all I'm here for is to show you the findings that I found. If you have any questions? Robert Miller: Just one. Ronald Ripley: Go ahead. Robert Miller: 62, 57, 61 decibels are talking level? Is that what you're talking about? Ray Ringer: Yes. Robert Miller: So, the inside there were only two of these speakers at 95d6s but there is a proposal to put as many as seven? Ray Ringer: Well, what you do Mr. Miller is when you put that many speakers in you can actually lower the level. The reason you have the two on the Lake James resident side facing back is because you won't get the residents through the wall that way. Robert Miller: Since we're doing analytical questions, would that change the reading over the 62, 57, 61 decibels? Ray Ringer: On the back? No, it will not. Robert Miller: Okay. Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other questions? Barry. Barry Knight: You have these speakers down here single source. When you double the source. Ray Ringer: That is just what Mr. Miller asked. Barry Knight: I understand. Doesn't that increase the decibel rating by three decibels, which to you and I would be like doubling the sound that's in here. Ray Ringer: Well, it's all how you set it up. If you have these speakers facing each other, I mean this room is I think 90 feet across. If you have it set that far apart you can set and program these especially with a delay to where you won't get any higher decibel level. With the suggestions that I've made for them to extend this wall, I also, back in my electrical days wired Future Records on Virginia Beach Boulevard. I don't know if your familiar with that. That's Teddy Riley's studio. He does like Madonna and stuff like that. What they've done there instead of just having a single wall is that you do a four inch studded wall with insulation, sheet rock. You do the six-inch gap, build a wall on the floor, sheet rock it, stand it up, insulate it and sheet rock the other side. Then you use some kind of carpet or barrier on the outside of it to deaden the sound. Yes sir. Eugene Crabtree: They told us that they were going to add an additional wall. Ray Ringer: That is what he was talking about. Eugene Crabtree: When they do that how much is this going to lower your projections? Ray Ringer: Well, like I said, these projections out here right now. What you see inside is mostly projections. The outside ones were the readings that I took that day. What it will do and everything that I picked up on the outside that day was street noise. You will not be able to hear the skaters. I mean I heard the skaters. I was standing right next to the building and I could hear the skaters. But, like I said it was no more noise than you and I talking. But, even with more people in there and even with more noise in there with that barrier in there it will cut it down immensely. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Are there any other questions? Joseph Strange: How many skaters did you have in there? Ray Ringer: I think there were about 20 in there that day. Joseph Strange: 20? Ray Ringer: Yeah. Joseph Strange: And they were skating. Ray Ringer: Is that right? Michael Carr: There were about 30 kids skating. Ray Ringer: You figure probably 10 guys skating at once. The rest of them were standing around waiting for the next one to stop. Joseph Strange: You there were about ten people. Ray Ringer: Back in my younger days I skated to. Unfortunately, they took those big ramps down on Lynnhaven and Trashmore. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other questions? Thank you very much. Robert Miller: We have quite a few speakers. Donna Fuhrmann, do you want to say anything else? You have applied to be a speaker in support of the application. Donna Fuhrmann: I guess the only ting that I have to say is that I have three kids myself, 135 16 & 19 and they don't skateboard. One reason why they don't skateboard especially my 19 -year old is because I wouldn't let him out on the street. I fear for him being out on the street. So, now here I am in my mid 40s looking to get into skateboarding. But, I believe in this. I dust totally believe in this. I do believe that we can satisfy every one of those concerns with my whole heart. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Ronald Ripley: Meashah Carr. Meashah Carr: I decline to speak. Robert Miller: Thank you. Rick Kowalewitch Rick Kowalewitch: How are you guys doing today? Are you guys a little tired? I'll talk quickly because I know I got three minutes. Rick Kowalewitch, RK Surf shop, 22 -years. My view on skateboards? Mike Carr approached me a year or so ago and said, Rick, would you be interested in doing something like this? I said, Mike I don't have the time. I'm building a storage. Recently, he approached me again about a week ago. Rick, I've got some problems out here. I want to do this deal but the citizens are concerned. Would you come by and take a look at it? I'm having an open forum on Saturday. So, this past Saturday I went out there. My family has been in the construction business for 50 years so I know construction well. So, I went out to his place and I saw a lot of concerns. I looked at and I saw the plans. I was quite impressed. There were 30-40 skaters in there when I was in there. I was looking at what was going on to see how it was it affecting. I asked questions like was it zoned properly and it was. Then I went to the back of the building. Mind you, there's a door that was 5 or 6 foot that was open. The back side had broken glass in it. I stood out there with the City Inspector, two feet away from the building while 30 or 40 skaters. I counted the skaters before I went back there to see what kind of noise was out there and literally you could barely hear it. You could hear the sound coming from the Chic -Filet drive-thru more than you can hear the skateboarders. I'm here in support of this and I'm going to tell you a couple of reasons why. It fits the mode. These people are trying to do something good for society. There are no parks out there. There are no recreation facilities out there. Those kids were looking up to Mike and the people that were in there. They were listening. They're doing what they were supposed to do. This is good. There were no public funds involved in this. It's all private money. It fits the mode. These people are trying to do something good for the community. I do understand the concerns of the people with getting kids together and they are there going to be problems and whatever. But that's life. That happens everywhere you go. It happens in a parking lot of a mall. You can't change that. These people are willing to step up and do a good thing for the community and help the children, lead them in the right direction. This becomes a no-brainer. This should be approved. This is good. Make them fall within the mode and make them do the sound barriers. This is good for the City. It's good for the citizens. It's good for the neighborhood. I think the citizens will see as it gets developed. I understand their concerns but this is good. I appreciate you letting me talk to you guys. I hope you do the right thing here and not the political thing. These people should have the right to do business like everybody else does. Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. William Din: I got a question. Rick Kowalewitch: Yes sir. William Din: How is this any difference from the skating rink that's dust over a couple of lots? From a noise standpoint? Rick Kowalewitch: I've never been to that skating rink. It's been a year since I've been to a skating rink. I haven't been there. I would say no difference. My opinion would be no difference. It's dust a different kind of skating. It's on a skateboard or roller blade or inline skate. It's actually won't be as loud because it won't be so many people doing it at one time. With that skating type of park you can only have a few people at a time skating. You can't have a 100 people skating at one time because of the way they do it. So the noise levels they think it may be is not going to be that way. I will tell you this and I didn't want to bring this up. But it's probably a 1000 times less loud than the Amphitheater amongst l 00s and 100s of homes. So, you're talking about an arena that's not that loud. I'm dust giving you relative because I've been to the Amphitheater. I've been to skating parks and obviously the City just built this great big skating park at Trashmore. If they thought it was so bad amongst a bunch of houses I don't think they would have done it either. That's an outdoor rink much less an indoor rink which is a lot quieter. I will tell you this that this building and without doing any sound proofing to it right now as it sits, if you go out there and you should go out there and listen to what is going on with the skaters. I think you'll be impressed but it also brings fobs. It brings the structure, which looks run down right now back to the tax structure. So it does something positive to the community as well. It's zoned that way. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Robert Miller: We got a whole bunch of speakers. We're trying to be polite and listen to everybody but if you got the same thing to say over and over again and you can just "ditto" to what they said, that would be really helpful. Sherry Owens. Sherry Owens: Hi, I'm Sherry Owens. I have a 17 year old that skates. I am very much in support of this skate park. I'm really nervous up here so excuse me. The kids need a place to skate. They're not allowed to skate in the neighborhoods. They're not allowed to skate except for Mount Trashmore. A lot of the kids can't get to Mount Trashmore so you'll find them skating out on the outside. If there's a skate park they can get to inside they could skate there. It's safer. It's supervised. The people that would be running it are very good role models for these kids. There would be rules that are enforced. If the kids wouldn't follow the rules they would be asked to leave. That would be understandable. I've gone to both the open houses that they've had. I witnessed kids sharing with each other, taking turns. I haven't seen any of the kids arguing with each other, running into each other while they were there. They were all very cooperative with anything that was asked of them. My husband wasn't able to be here today but he's an engineer and we talked about one of the things and that was sound problem. He walked around the building and he didn't notice that there was a sound problem at all. You really can't hear once you're on the outside. You can't hear the skaters on the inside. I appreciate your time. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Robert Miller: Mark Salonia? Mark Solorua: We're going to start speaking with Mr. Stampe, our President of our association. Robert Miller: Well come on up whoever you are because I don't know which one you are. Larry Stampe: There's a card in there. Robert Miller: I'll find it when you tell me who you are sir. Larry Stampe: Larry Stampe. Robert Miller: Okay. Thank you. Are you speaking for all the rest of these people? Larry Stampe: I'm speaking for a significant number. Robert Miller: That would be one. Larry Stampe: I won't be speaking for every one of them. Ronald Ripley: Please repeat your name again. Larry Stampe: Yes. My name is Larry Stampe and I live at 1269 Belvoir Lane and that is in Lake James. I'm the President of the Lake James Homes Association. We have met twice in the last two months with this issue and once with the applicant. We have made the arrangements for the applicant to come and speak to us. He didn't contact us. We contacted him. The overall majority of the community is that we oppose this skate park venture. I know you have a staff report that gives a favorable report for that but I would like to address some things that the staff did not talk about. The quality of life that would be affected, the loud noise and the loud music that not only comes from the site inside but from the parking lot, the security problems and the possibility of other venues for this. You're going to hear from a lot of people today. You're going to hear from people who are actually experiencing a problem, experiencing problems with an indoor skate park. The family skating center that is right behind Lake James. It abuts the community just like this venue wants to touch. We're not talking in theory. We are talking in actuality about people who have to live with that problem. When I talk about the quality of life you all at the end of a long day like this where you want to go home and rest and be quiet and have a little piece, your own homes. We have residents now that don't have it. They have been denied that now because of the family skating center because of the noise that not only comes from the building from the music and the skates but it comes from the parking lot from parents coming to picking up and honking horns or boyfriends or girlfriends coming by, cars with the loud sounds coming from the cars. Raise your hand if you never heard down the street one of these young people coming along with their loud car going. You know it happens. We have people, teenagers dumping over fences over backyards of neighbors to get to these venues. We're not opposed to skateboarding at all. Everybody knows that every child can't be the football star or the basketball center. Children need a place to go. This business is not compatible right next to a residence, ten feet away from homes. They can talk all they want about sound attenuation but we know it's not going to work because we are experiencing it now. If you do approve and we hope that you don't, but one of the Conditional Use Permits ought to be for one year so the applicant can demonstrate that he can be a good neighbor. We're not confident that he can. We've had two meetings. We're not confident at all. Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Robert Miller: Do you have an order for these speakers? Larry Stampe: Yes, we do. They know what the order is. Robert Miller: Come on down and tell me who you are. Let's get this thing moving. Everybody get in line. You're gaining points by doing that. Douglas Sandwell: I'm Douglas Sandwell and I live at 1312 Lake James Drive. I can't orient myself to quickly. There we are. This thing is in my way. Anyways, suffice it to say that we're located ten feet behind the building in question. The facility is too close and the proposed activities are too loud to be compatible with the residential area. Permitting the proposed Use in our backyard would result in disturbing the peace. I have worked as a sound technician in churches and other facilities including Chrysler Hall and have experience for 20 years in the music and recording industry. Not only do I live in that home right there, so I know what I am talking about with sound. I have a degree in engineering. I played bass so I'm familiar with all of these things. I have concerns with noise sources. First would be the skateboarding on the ramps. Second would be the music played through a sound system and the third would be the parking lot noise. Interesting thing about parking lot noise is once people have been exposed to a loud environment even for dust an hour their conversations will rise up to some of the levels that were mentioned here, four times louder than previous. So, the conversations in the parking lot will be quite loud. Normal conversational level is actually quite a bit less than some of the numbers that were mentioned before. Due to poor building construction and close proximately there is inadequate attenuation of the sound. The construction is really more than a shed, a large shed. It has a slab floor which would transmit the vibrations into our yard and the foundation of our home. There is no interior sound absorbing materials essentially. All of the sound waves, the energy from the sound waves is transmitted. They are very thin walls. It's open framing and only a deteriorating wood exterior. Open ceiling rafters, which are almost invisible to the powerful sound waves. The biggest problem is the loud frequencies. You have all heard the booming of the bass from cars and I'm sure that is good example of that. The close proximately is too close to the property line for the sound waves to fade out. Sound waves would naturally fade out over time. There are formulas for all the physics. This is too close. It's even too close for the required 15 -foot vegetation buffer, which alone would be inadequate anyways. The thin fence is shorter than the walls of the building so that is also inadequate. The Fuhrmann's didn't have an idea. They admitted they didn't have an idea of what to do about sound or how much it might cost to address this noise. Ronald Ripley: Mr. Sandwell, you've run out of time. You need to wrap up. Douglas Sandwell: Okay. I found out about the testing that they were doing from within my home. The windows in my home were rattling. So, the sound was carrying through. I might say although they did get a friend to come and do this testing and he does work for a company, I'm not sure he has got those results collaborated with the 84 engineers that do work for his company. I would like to say it's an invalid test. The skate facility was not at full capacity. They were not using the full sound system that would be used and the results that he provided you and I haven't seen but they're probably weighted the mid frequencies, which our ears hear most. The biggest problem I think is the bass frequencies, which would cut through that. Even if they were to put a wall inside the other wall, to really attenuate those bass frequencies you need a room within a room not just the one wall. We believe the facility in question will present a continual disturbance of the peace and we respectfully ask you to deny the application for its Conditional Use. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Robert Miller: Who's next? Joseph Strange: Can I ask a question? Ronald Ripley: Yeah, sure. Mr. Sandwell, I'm sorry. We had a question. Joseph Strange: Have you been over to the skating rink that's there now? Have you ever been inside there? Douglas Sandwell: The skating rink down the street? Joseph Strange: The one that's two doors down. Douglas Sandwell: I've never been to that skating facility. Joseph Strange: You've never been inside there at all? Douglas Sandwell: No. I've been inside other skating facilities. Joseph Strange: Have you ever heard any noise coming from that particular facility? Douglas Sandwell: I hear noise from the parking lot because it's a few houses down. Joseph Strange: Okay. Douglas Sandwell: But I haven't heard something from that facility. It's too far away. Joseph Strange: And, you've never been in there. Douglas Sandwell: I haven't been in that one. No. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Robert Miller: Who's next? Phil Martinez: Hello. My name is Phil Martinez. There are quite a few other people here who are with Lake James. Everybody that is opposed to this thing can you stand up? These are folks are opposed to this construction. I live at 1313 Lake James Drive. I have lived there for about 2 '/2 years. I live right about there. I think that's my house right there. I'm across the street and maybe 50 feet to the fence line. My biggest concern will be the parking lot noise. I think and I must say that Mr. Carr has done a great fob of trying to appease and to make changes. I am really impressed. I'm impressed with the desire to help kids and give them a place to play. The only thing is that it is right in my front yard. I come home and I know that the kids are going to be there in the parking lot. They're going to be making noise and as my neighbor just pointed out when you get done listening to people or listening to loud music for several hours you're ears are not going to be the same. You're going to want to shout and you're not necessarily going home at 9:00 o'clock. Where are they going to hang out? It's going to be in my front yard. It's an extension of my front yard. That's my biggest concern. I think it's a great project. I think it would better suited though in a place other than my front yard. That's what I have to say. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Mark Salonia: Good afternoon. I'm Mark Salonia. I live at 1304 Lake James Drive. I'm right on the western edge of where Mr. Can wants to have this site. I have a lot of things to tell you but I'm just going to say a few things right now. First of all the noise is a big concern for me. The day that they had an open house my son called me and said dad, I was trying to take a nap but I could hear these people out there making all kinds of noise. So, my wife and I drove from Oceana. Sure enough, I'm up on my second level of my home and we open up the window and looking out there. Of course, I come into my driveway I heard the noise right away. I did videotape what was going on. There were a lot of cars out there. I saw a lot of the kids hanging outside of the building. They weren't all inside doing their skateboarding. So, they were outside. This is a problem. We don't even know what the capacity is or how many skateboards can be in there. You're going to have some of them hanging outside making their noise. I can just imagine what is going to be like at 9:00 o'clock at night. I've also had problems where kids dump over the fence a lot. I had my tool shed broken into last year. We've caught kids out there smoking pot. We've called the cops on them. All kinds of things have happened there. All I can see happening if this thing gets approved it's going to get worse. It's not going to get any better. I'm having problems now. I have nothing against the skateboarders but I see this being the wrong place for this. I'll dust leave you with that and I'll ask that you please deny this request. Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Mr. Miller has a question. Robert Miller: What was there before? What was in that building? Mark Salonia: It used to be the Big Green House. Robert Miller: The whole building? Mark Salonia: The whole building and the whole area behind. Let me see if I can get this thing to work here. My home is right there. That's my lot right there. This whole building was the Big Green House. Now of course, you got Chick-fil-A right there. We can hear them sometimes. Over here is Zoots Cleaners. We don't have a problem with another business going in there. A professional building, doctors, lawyers even a beauty saloon as Mr. Carr mentioned that he thought he was going to build there at first. A skateboard place like this is not that place where it should be at all. Robert Miller: Thank you. Mark Salonia: Thank you. Robert Miller: Who's next? Joseph Strange: I got a question for you? Ronald Ripley: Mr. Salonia. Mark Salonia: I'm sorry. Joseph Strange: I've got a couple of questions. Question number #1, is there already a problem with the skating rink that is there now? Mark Salonia: Yes. I can hear them. I can hear that skating rink right where I am. Joseph Strange: And my next question is have you ever been inside that skating rink? Mark Salonia: Oh yes, many times. My son used to skate there many years ago. Joseph Strange: How do you compare the noise of those skaters in there compared to the skateboard? Mark Salonia: They're probably a lot less. I mean they're not as noisy. But, I will tell you that the noise that bothers me the most is the helicopters that fly dust about every night over that place where the skating rink is. I can dust see the helicopters being directly over my house. You know where I'm coming from. Robert Miller: Now we have to get the Police and the Navy straight. Who's next? Donald Hawker: My house is right there. My name is Donald Hawker, 1325 Lake James Drive. My comments will directly address the Kemspville Family Skating Center. First, I would like to talk about what I call acting in good faith. I do not like being accused of intimidating my neighbors. I take that very personally. We encourage everyone to express their opinions and those who support it who didn't want to support us we accepted that. Now, last month I was here and I opposed the deferral but it was granted. Sir, you instructed them to meet with us in an attempt to resolve our concerns. If they could not do that considering the level of support they should consider withdrawing their petition. I believe that's an exact quote. After that, they ignored us for two weeks. They used those two weeks to finish preparing their facility and opening it to the public. They got people in there to use the facility to start encouraging their customers to support them, to recruit parents to come here and represent them. They put out petitions. None of these acts were intended to resolve my concerns. They used the time you gave them to prepare tactically to come here and fight against me, now maybe because I was in the Army. I was an officer. I know what it means to have authority and responsibility. So, I respect people who have that. And, if you had told me to do something sir before I left this room, I would have been prepared to do it and do it quickly so I could come here and tell you that I had complied. They did not do so. Now, they did come to a meeting that we called. We called. They ignored us for two full weeks. In the third week, they came to our meeting and their answers were, "I don't know." Mr. Carr acted like all the questions were a surprise and his justification for his deferral were the 40 letters that we wrote, which contained our concerns. He should have been prepared to answer after ignoring us for two weeks. He was not. Now, I think past performance is the best indicator of future performance. They have asked us to trust them and they have not earned that trust. They have violated that trust at every possible opportunity. And, now I have been accused of intimidating my neighbors. That is an outrage. Ronald Ripley: Wait a minute Mr. Hawker. Let's dust stay with the subject of rezoning. Please. Donald Hawker: Very well. I will address the Kempsville Family Skating Center. I have been in there. It is loud on the inside and the outside. The noise comes right through. It goes through their walls and not the skaters themselves but the noise from the music. It comes through our homes. The Yipp family has had to sound proof one room inside their home so their child would have a place to study and a place to sleep. That is not reasonable. Now, we're reasonable people. We support this land being developed. This is worse case scenario stuff for us. This is going to be much worse. Those people who said they couldn't hear the skaters they must be stoned deaf because Doug called me at his house and I stood in his backyard and you could hear swish bang, swish bang. There was no question that there were people skating. So I see no reason to trust them. Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Are there any questions of Mr. Hawker? Kathy Salonia: Hello. I'm Kathy Salonia. I live at 1304 Lake James Drive. I retired this past June as a teacher after 31 years looking forward to some peace and quiet. With this skateboard park it will not be happening. The noise from the open house was much, much louder than I even anticipated or feared. Skateboarding in it self is just an extremely noisy event. During the open house participants were outside, I personally witnessed boys throwing objects at the building repeatedly. They were skateboarding outside. There was no supervision. So, I would certainly like you to deny this request. Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Kathy Salonia: Are there any questions? Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Robert Miller: Next? Rene Gabriel: Good evening. My name is Rene Gabriel. I live at 1320 Lake James Drive. Somewhere behind the child care area. I own a two-story house. I've been there for 20 years. I can tell you this from experience whatever they said about children going across the fence it makes no difference what you have to put on your fence because those kids, teenagers. I have two dogs in the backyard. I see them dump the fence dust to get into McDonald's. Some of them are coming from roller-skating, which is on the side of our house. Not only that from the back of my house, I can see children waiting there before the skating rink opens. Some of them migrate to the childcare area because they have a playground to play. If you allow this establish, this skate park to open my problem is with those children going there and making a lot of noise. It is not going to go away. It's dust going to double up. Mr. Yipp is not here today because he was out of town. I have been in his house because we are his next-door neighbors. You can hear the sound of that music from the room. That's the reason why the other gentleman said that he had somebody put some insulation to stop the noise from coming into the house. I don't think that's proper. I know I'm out of time but if you approve the request the traffic, the noise and the kids, we will not stop them but somewhere, somehow you need to put a barrier around there because you can't stop it. Instead of having more problems coming you can lessen it or just keep it on the minimum. That's all that I have. Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Michelle Sandwell: My name is Michelle Sandwell. I live at 1312 Lake James Drive. That's located directly behind the building in question. In fact, it is 10 feet away from my property line. My children have a tree house that we spent several hundred dollars putting up for their enjoyment that is as close as you are to me Mr. Ripley to me right now. That's how close my children's tree house is. My house, the deck where we have our backyard cookouts, where we enjoy time as a family together is approximately the distance from this lady to this gentleman. About that far apart is how far my deck is from the building in question. For them to say that they don't believe that is going to create enough noise to interfere with my family's peace and tranquility of our home is ludicrous. The test that they performed out there on the afternoon they had these skaters coming out there. Who knows what the proportion is to their trial run with what would actually be showing up, the windows were rattling in my home. I've got a four-month old baby that's at the back of this room right now. Her nursery is located 30 feet away from this facility. I can tell you that I've put my hand on my daughter's chest before when I've had cars going by from the McDonald's with their bass lines bumping and my daughter's chest is rattling. I can keep time to music by my daughter's nb cage. That's ludicrous to have that invading my home and putting my children at risk. For the hours that they propose for these concessions that they've made is not going to make much difference in my home. I have children. A 9 year old and a 7 year old who come home, they have homework to do. They have to get a good night's rest for school the next day. They start getting ready for bed at 7:00 o'clock. They are going to be open until 9:00 o'clock. What are my children suppose to be doing while they're out there making that noise and the windows are rattling? For the tests that this gentleman said that he ran where he got those decibel levels, I can't believe that those are the results that he got with our windows rattling in our house and for him to say that's going to be adequate. It is absolutely will not be. I'll consider it a grievous intrusion into the peacefulness and the privacy of my home and I respectfully ask you to consider that in denying this application. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Robert Miller: Is there anybody else? Come on down. Margaret Preble-Sansone: Good evening. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak. My name is Peggy Preble-Sansone. I live at 1305 Lake James Drive. I also live adjacent and I face the particular property in question and if I could use the pointer here? I'm sorry. Right here. First of all, I would like to address the importance of - and we're not anti kids - everyone agrees that children need a safe venue to play and congregate. We have a son. He skates at the Kempsville Skate Center. My child goes to laser tag. He goes to the rock climbing facility. We are cub -scout leaders. I am the neighborhood block watch captain. I'm a Fairfield PTA parent. My husband and I are strong supporters of the church so we love kids. We have kids at our house all the time. I actively support any particular activity that is for kids. I would happily send my kid to any skate park facility indoor or out. The issue here is compatibility with the location. It is dust the inherent nature of normal healthy children to make noise. Even if you have containment inside of a building, the natural nature of children is to come out of buildings and to shout and to greet one another. There's very little you can do to control it. In one of the packets that I did deliver to you today approximately at 11:20 a.m. this morning, did have some attachments regarding some of the research of skateboard parks throughout the United States. Issues are noise. Skating but also issues of noise having to do with noise in the parking lot. The noise that the children are loitering, congregating and we would dust appreciate it if you would address the concerns. I live in this commuruty. This is my reality. Gentlemen and ladies, my reality is that we do have vandalism currently right now. I have had teenage loiterers in my gated backyard. Last summer at 8:30 in the morning I noticed that my sailboat masts were swinging wildly. I went out in to the backyard to investigate as it was not a windy day and found three teenagers attempting to untie my 18 -foot sailboat. For what purpose, I couldn't imagine. This is the reality that we all deal with. So, we would hope that you consider the location is inappropriate. Skate parks and kid things are great. It's the location. The quality of our life is already in question and this will only acerbate the problem. Thank you very much. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Robert Miller: I'm going to guess that this is Mr. Johnson because were out of cards. Bernard Johnson: My name is Bernard Johnson. I'm retired with 41 years of the Federal government, military sales adjacent to the Pentagon. I agree primarily with everything that everybody had to say here. I don't want to be redundant. The place is not conducive to the neighborhood. I'll speak in terms of a senior citizen, which I am. I think I'm older than most of you anyway. I would hate to wake up down the street, not wake up but dust lay there, all over the ground and not be at 1308 Lake James Drive in the morning because the noise factor. I haven't heard anybody here saying that they're supposed to be engineers. They did it with the government. Different times and day and night they are supposed to take sound effects. Everybody said they did it at 9:00 o'clock, 7:00 o'clock. So, if you guys could strongly recommend that this project not be approved for the senior citizens. They are changing constantly out in Lake James. The value of property if is going down if the seniors now move out because of noise factors the next person that is coming in is going to try to buy that property at a less value to type standard. I don't want to move. Forty-one years of working, I need peace and quiet and not be down the street at Holloman and Brown. Thank you. Robert Miller: That's it. Ronald Ripley: That's it. Okay. Mr. Hay, would you like to come back up? David Hay: Very quick. Mr. Stampe mentioned that the Family Skating Center located adjacent to the neighborhood. I think you are all well aware that Lake James was built after the skating center was there as well it was built after this area was zoned B-2. You got homes abutting up to B-2 property and you're hearing complaints about that and some complaints really don't have much to do with teen vandalism, trespassing and things like that have to do with indoor skate park that's going to be supervised with off duty police officers. But, we're going to close at 9:00 p.m., Chick-fil-A closes at 10:00 p.m. The skating rink presently closes at 12:00 a.m. on weekend. They have done things to make it as compatible as we can. I think we've addressed the legitimate concerns. I know some of the residents may not feel that way but I feel based on the time frame that I've been involved in this, we've tried and attempted to address what I consider the legitimate concerns. That's all that I have to say. I'm quite sure of approval. Ronald Ripley: Thank you Mr. Hay. David Hay: Sure. Ronald Ripley: Will, do you to comment? William Din: Sure, I can start. First of all, we've listened to everybody here. I'd like to thank everybody that's come down today and endured this long day with us. Thank you again from the previous time that you showed up. I think we've all listened to your concerns. I think we've read all your letters. We've seen those packages come through. I know I empathize with a lot of the concerns that I've heard today. I think there is a need for this type of facility someplace. I think people on this Commission realize that. I think people in the City realize that. An indoor facility does do a lot for the residents. It does do a lot for the kids. It helps to keep those kids off the street. We've had trouble putting in Conditional Uses for skateboard ramps in other parts of the City and these are outdoor facilities. I think in this situation this may not be the right place for this indoor facility even though it is an indoor facility. I know that the Family Skate Center is a problem for this area. I know there's a lot of noise that comes from there. I have personally heard that noise myself. I think there is a lot of concern that it's not dust the noise in the facility it's the atmosphere that it creates. It gives the kids an opportunity while they're wanting to go in an opportunity to make more noise that is not contained within the building itself. So, I think it's not dust the internal noise, but the external noise that it's generating. There is a large neighborhood opposition and their concern is legitimate, I believe, as is the need. I don't think I can support the Use in this location because of that. I think there were a lot of opportunities to resolve this and I don't think it's going to work out at this location. So, I don't think I'm going to be supporting. Ronald Ripley: Barry. Barry Knight: I have three little ones and they're not quite little anymore but they're probably still pretty young boys. I know how much noise three boys can make and I would sure love for them to have a skateboard park of I lived in the City to go to but I don't think this is the right location. I can sure sympathize with the lady who has the young baby because when my little boys were babies it wouldn't take much noise to wake them up and then you have to work for another 20-30 minutes to try to get them to sleep again That kind of sold it for me. I won't be in support of the skating rink because I think the people knew that they were moving next to a business area but I think they find a business to go there that would be less intrusive towards their lives. So, I won't be in support of it. Ronald Ripley: Jan. Janice Anderson: I think the applicant, since it was deferred, have made great concessions. They limited the time and they limited the views. But, I think the bottom line is the noise. My problem with it is that I know we had someone talk here today about the noise and what the noise was but I don't think it was thorough. I don't feel real comfortable with that. It should have been taken a little bit further to ensure that it wouldn't be that type of noise that we're hearing different from the neighbors. No windows are rattling rather than having noise that's at a speaking level. So, with that difference, I can't support it. Ronald Ripley: Gene. Eugene Crabtree: I think it's a no win situation. I think we've given time to come to a meeting of the minds between the applicant and the neighborhood and this hasn't occurred. I'm sure when the people moved into their homes there the big greenhouse didn't scream at night and play loud music and consequently, they weren't involved in this type of noise. I dust think it's a no win situation and because of that I can't support the application. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Does anybody else want to speak? Robert Miller: I think we sat around, and the skateboarders seem to be getting the worse part of the deal every time we turn around. We can't put them in the backyard and we can't put them in the streets. We can't put them outdoors and we can't put them indoors. I'm very disappointed about that and I think we continue to struggle not to provide a solution to that. And, candidly for the neighborhood I think what this does leave as a situation is you're leaving skateboarders on the streets. That is not a good situation for the skateboarders nor for you. I don't really thoroughly agree with the noise issue even though I'm much more respectful of the fact that the issue is not as much the noise in the facility. I think that it perhaps can be controlled through good engineering and some other good thoughts. I think the problem extends into the parking lot. I would dust tell the neighborhood with a B-2 zoning it's very likely you're going to see another B-2 Use in there. It will have a parking lot and it won't be a greenhouse perhaps, it would be something else. You may face the noise there. I don't exactly know how this piece ended up being shaped like this and stuck back in that corner. It almost feels like if I was the neighborhood and had the resources I go ahead and try to obtain it myself and make it into a community facility. I really feel for the skateboarders. I think we continue to turn a deaf ear to them and these young people are out there and they enjoy that activity. I dust think we dust keep pushing them off to somewhere else and we never tell them exactly where that is. I wish we could find a balance but I don't believe this is going to be the place. Ronald Ripley: Joe. Joseph Strange: I can say this. I followed this application quite closely. I've been over there. I've met with the applicant. I've been over the Family Skating Center to see what kind of noise was generated over there relative to the amount of noise that was generated here. I didn't participate but I attended the meeting there. I'll tell you that it's dust an application that I think is in the wrong place. I think there are so many issues with this application for that particular area. It's dust no way that it's going to fit in that community. There's issues that haven't been brought up and that is the traffic issues there with Indian River Road. This hasn't even been brought up. I'm telling you I see kids trying to attend this facility trying to go across that six -lane highway on these skateboards and I think there are a lot more problems with this application that has even been mentioned here today. So, I know it's late and you want to go home but I dust wanted to add that into it. This is in my opinion an application that is not good for that area. Ronald Ripley: Would you like to make a motion? Joseph Strange: I'm going to make a motion at this time to deny this application. Ronald Ripley: A motion to deny by Joe Strange. Do I have a second? Eugene Crabtree: I'll second it. Ronald Ripley: Seconded by Gene Crabtree. Is there any other discussion? Hearing none, we'll call for the question. AYE 10 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 10-0, the motion carnes. ABSENT Supplemental Information Zoning History Mj Map o O!F3t SCaze REQUEST Ashville Park LLG Conditional Use Permit (Borrow Pit) AG -2- 91 8-27-86 -,, Approved Agricultural) 2-12-73 Conditional Use Permit (Small Bore Rifle and Pistol Approved Range) /AG-2 AG - Rezoning (AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural to Conditional R- Approved 20 Residential and Conditional P-1 Preservation) and a i AG -1 • .••■ b. Approved AG- 41 P 41 AG -2 AG -2 r - ! G-2 A4= f ■ A:.. r r 2 AG -I AG -1 Con& ReZonsng # I DATE REQUEST ACTION 1 12-10- Conditional Use Permit (Borrow Pit) Denied 91 8-27-86 Rezoning ((R-3 Residential to AG -1 and AG -2 Approved Agricultural) 2-12-73 Conditional Use Permit (Small Bore Rifle and Pistol Approved Range) 2 8-12-03 Rezoning (AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural to Conditional R- Approved 20 Residential and Conditional P-1 Preservation) and a Conditional Use Permit (Open Space Promotion) 3 12-11- Conditional Use Permit (Rental) Approved 89 ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 20 rIA 8e1 but �Y* CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Ashville Park, L.L.C. — Street Closure (portion of Flanagan's Lane) MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: An Ordinance upon Application of Ashville Park, L.L.C. for the discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Flanagan's Lane located 5350.2 feet east of Princess Anne Road, running in a northeasterly direction a distance of 3133.16 feet. DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE This request is part of a proposal to develop a 474 -acre site with 490 single family dwellings. ■ Considerations: A major part of the zoning change requests related to the Ashville Park residential development is a street closure for a portion of Flanagan's Lane. The applicant will construct and dedicate a new street that will connect Princess Anne Road to the remaining section of Flanagan's Lane near the Sandbridge Road intersection. The applicant will also construct cul-de-sacs to terminate the two remaining sections of Flanagan's Lane. One of the cul-de-sacs will be located at the end of Flanagan's Lane adjacent to the Coast Guard property; the other will be located just to the west of "Village D." The new road will begin from a point on Princess Anne Road approximately 1,000 feet north of Flanagan's Lane to a point on Flanagan's Lane approximately 800 feet west of its intersection with Sandbridge Road. The new proposed alignment for Sandbridge Road is not affected by this application. The new road winds through the property's open space with the exception of one area in which it runs through a village (Village D). In this area, the road splits off into two roads leading around a large central open space for this village. The Viewers met on July 23, September 22, and October 30, 2003 and determined that the request to close a portion of Flanagan's Lane will not be detrimental to the public if the conditions recommended below are met. Staff recommended approval. There was opposition to the request. Ashville Park Page 2 of 10 ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-0 with 2 abstentions to approve this request with the following conditions: 1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. No purchase price shall be charged in this street closure, however, because the applicant shall dedicate a new street to replace the closed portion of Flanagan's Lane. The closure and the new street shall be considered an "even trade." 2. The applicant is required to resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining parcels. The plat shall be submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval. 3. The applicant shall verify that no private utilities exist within the right-of- way proposed for closure. If private utilities do exist, easements satisfactory to the utility company, shall be provided. 4. Construction plans for the new street to replace the section of Flanagan Is Lane proposed for closure shall be submitted to the Development Services Center for review. The new street proposed by the applicant shall be dedicated, constructed, and approved by Civil Inspections before the requested section of Flanagan's Lane can be closed. This condition is to ensure that a means of public ingress and egress shall be provided between Sandbridge Road and Princess Anne Road at all times. 5. Cul-de-sacs terminating the two remaining sections of Flanagan's Lane shall be constructed by the applicant on the subject property of Ashville Park. Construction plans for the cul-de-sacs shall be submitted to the Development Services Center. 6. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within four (4) years of approval by City Council. If the conditions noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved within four (4) years of the City Council vote to close the right-of- way, this approval shall be considered null and void. ■ Attachments: Disclosure Statement(s) Ordinance Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval Planning Commission recommends approval. Ashville Park Page 3 of 10 Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager:- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ORDINANCE NO. IN THE MATTER OF CLOSING, VACATING AND DISCONTINUING A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN STREET KNOWN AS A PORTION OF FLANAGANS LANE AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN PLAT ENTITLED "PLAT SHOWING STREET CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF FLANAGANS LANE RIGHT-OF-WAY (MB 13, PG 14) AUGUST 28, 2003, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA" WHEREAS, Ashville, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, applied to the 19 Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, to have the hereinafter described street 20 discontinued, closed, and vacated; and 21 WHEREAS, it is the judgment of the Council that said street be discontinued, 22 closed, and vacated, subject to certain conditions having been met on or before four (4) years 23 from City Council's adoption of this Ordinance; 24 25 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Virginia 26 Beach, Virginia: 27 28 SECTION I 29 30 That the hereinafter described street be discontinued, closed and vacated, subject 31 to certain conditions being met on or before four (4) years from City Council's adoption of this 32 ordinance: 33 34 GPIN: 2413-57-0702, 2413-56-6613, 2413-46-4337, 2413-36-3862 35 1 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 All that certain piece or parcel of land situate, lying and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, designated and described as "PORTION OF FLANAGANS LANE HEREBY CLOSED, AREA = 101.063 SF OR 2.320 AC." shown as the cross -hatched area on that certain plat entitled: "PLAT SHOWING STREET CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF FLANAGANS LANE RIGHT- OF-WAY (MB 13, PG 14) AUGUST 28, 2003, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA" Scale: 1" = 200', dated August 28, 20035 prepared by MSA, P.C., a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Cr7!''TTnXT TT The following conditions must be met on or before four (4) years from City Council's adoption of this ordinance: 1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. No purchase price shall be charged in this street closure, however, because the applicant shall dedicate a new street to replace the closed portion of Flanagan's Lane. The closure and the new street shall be considered an even trade. 2. The applicant is required to resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining parcels. The resubdivision plat shall be submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval. 3. The applicant shall verify that no private utilities exist within the right-of- way proposed for closure. If private utilities do exist, the applicant shall provide easements satisfactory to the utility companies. 4. Construction plans for the new street to replace the section of Flanagan's Lane proposed for closure shall be submitted to the Development Services Center for review. The new street proposed by the applicant shall be dedicated, constructed, and approved by Civil 2 65 Inspections before the requested section of Flanagan's Lane can be closed. This condition is to 66 ensure that a means of public ingress and egress shall be provided between Sandbridge Road and 67 Princess Anne Road at all times. 68 5. Cul-de-sacs terminating the two remaining sections of Flanagan's Lane 69 shall be constructed by the applicant on the subject property of Ashville Park. Construction 70 plans for the cul-de-sacs shall be submitted to the Development Services Center. 71 6. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the 72 above stated conditions within four (4) years of approval by City Council. If all conditions noted 73 above are not in compliance and the final plat is not approved within four (4) years of the City 74 Council vote to close the street, this approval will be considered null and void. 75 76 SECTION III 77 78 1. If the preceding conditions are not fulfilled on or before December 8, 79 2008, this Ordinance will be deemed null and void without further action by the City Council. 80 2. If all conditions are met on or before December 8, 2008, the date of final 81 closure is the date the street closure ordinance is recorded by the City Attorney. 82 3. In the event the City of Virginia Beach has any interest in the underlying 83 fee, the City Manager or his designee is authorized to execute whatever documents, if any, that 84 may be requested to convey such interest, provided said documents are approved by the City 85 Attorney's Office. 86 SECTION IV 87 A certified copy of this Ordinance shall be filed in the Clerk's Office of the 88 Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and indexed in the name of the CITY OF 89 VIRGINIA BEACH as "Grantor" and Ashville, Park, LLC as "Grantee." 3 90 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this day 91 of 72003. 92 93 94 CA -8914 95 Date 96 F \Dat,\AMFo m,\Street C1osure\W0RK1NG\ca8914 ORD dm 97 98 APP O D IkS TO CONTENT: 99 100 1Z•Z-d3 101 Pi g Department 102 103 104 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL 105 SUFFICIENCY: 106 107 108 City Attorney 109 4 REV I REVISE MATCHLWE DESCRIPTIONS EXHIBIT A ®DENOTES A PORTION OF FLANAGANS LANE HEREBY CLOSED. AREA = 101,063 SF OR 2.320 AC. �j FRANK T. ML/AMS 2413-57-0702 (DB 2726, PG 1085) (OB 723, PG 401) S 65'10'21" E 1917.94' 12/03/03 I I I SM -PEN R. & VD/;rH A. J BERMAN 2413-56-6613 (MB 117, PG 49) (OB 2432, PG 1578) N 65'10'21 " W 1917.94' C5 RA#ACMS LANE (JL? RA) CLAUDE PAUL BROW, TRUSTEE (M8 258, PG 59) 2413-55-5252 < (OB 2757, PG 148) (DB 1144, PG 657) WW OMER, JR. ESTATE' 2413-36-3862 (WB 107, PG 1967) (MB 1.' PG 14) S 65-10'21 " E ®DENOTES A PORTION OF FLANAGANS LANE HEREBY CLOSED. AREA = 101,063 SF OR 2.320 AC. r- to r - ui 0 0 WW OL/SER, JR. ESTATE 241.3—.36—,862 w 3 (WB 107, PG 1967) t (MB 13, PG 14) M M C14 ZI Im l 1 1917.94' N 65' 10'21" W 1917.94' RMAGANS LANE (M?* RA) (MB 258, PG 59) 1 1 BETTY B. SOUROON 2413-46-4.337 (OB 2757, PG 148) (DB 1144, PG 643) /4;9 - PLAT SHOWING fir' iff STREET CLOSURE MATCH LNC SEE SHEET 2 OF A PORTION OF 23 FLANAGANS LANE \2- 3_e RIGHT—OF—WAY lq (MB 13, PG 14) N� St AUGUST 28, 2003 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 41 1AP1��P•CsZSA3 Landscape Architecture - Planning Surveying - Engineering Environmental Sciences 5033 ROUSE DRIVE, VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23462-3708 PHONE (757) 490-9264 • FAX (757) 490.0634 J JOB# 98110 1 DATE: 08/28/03 1 SCALE: 1"=200' 1 DWN BY: MAS I SHEET 1 OF 3 �y W. W OL/PER, JR. v ESTATE W. W. OL/WR, JR. ESTA TE 241,3-36-3862 2413-36-3862 �(MB 107, PG 1967) (MB 107, PG 1967) � (MB 13, PG 14) (MB 13, PG 14) L=93.04 L=79.29' U40M Q� L7 v l � ®DENOTES A PORTION OF FLANAGANS LANE HEREBY CLOSED. AREA = 101.063 SF OR 2.320 AC. M � o � " N UN/TED STA TES COAST GUARD W 2413-23-2098 218 005 ACRES (MB 1., PG 14) x O. 2306 N 3- �3 00 0 O ANO sufR0 y� N N h Q Z N ^� Z JW A WC R1*W AS PD? (A& 1.1 PIG 14) l �000 Epp, 8 12403 ClrY OF GP/N.• 24IJ-15--8299 AIR 6.>p5p63p 0 668 PG 1604 P�N�0413,1 6.>6 63 59) (OB 2 ) Pp .,. MENT 258, ' ' ; •' . ,?p �A� PLAT SHOWING ,• 2p E R STREET CLOSURE • ; 3,111. NO OF A PORTION OF RIN0E55 FLANAGANS RIGHT-OF-WAY S P (MB 13, PG 14) AUGUST 28, 2003 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA ` SA$ P.C. Landscape Architecture • Planning Surveying • Engineering Environmental Sciences 5033 ROUSE DRIVE, VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23462-3708 PHO.IVE (757) 490-9264 - FAX (757) 490-0634 JOB# 98110 DATE: 08/28/03 1 SCALE: 10-200' t DVM BY: MAS t SHEET 2 OF 3 ' z V 0. 2306 �qHO SUR4�y�� PLAT SHOWING . STREET CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF FLANAGANS LANE RIGHT-OF-WAY (MB 13, PG 14) AUGUST 28, 2003 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA MSA0 P.C. Landscape Architecture • Planning Surveying - Engineering Environmental Sciences a 9111 5033 ROUSE DRIVE, VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23462-3708 [MIN PHONE (757) 490-9264 • FAX (757) 490-0634 JOB# 98110 DATE: 08/28/03 SCALE: 1 "=200' DM BY: MAS SHEET 3 OF 3 CURVE TABLE CURVE RADIUS LENGTH TANGENT CHORD BEARING DELTA C1 202.92 172.18 91.66 167.06 S46'46'59"W 48437'00" C2 200.73 161.97 85.68 157.61 N47'58'31 "E 46'13'55" C3 149.62 234.94 149.54 211.54 S69050'36"W 89'58'05" C4 120.71 166.61 99.65 153.70 N75'17'09"E 79'04'59" C5 150.71 66.14 33.61 65.61 S77'44'41 "E 25'08'39" C6 119.62 187.83 119.55 169.12 S69'50'36"W 89058'05" C7 230.73 186.18 98.49 181.17 N47'5 UNE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING L1 100.64 N71005'29"E L2 116.21 S35'44'40"W L3 32.49 N64'13'15"W L4 27.21 S79'37'00"W L5 7.14 N68'10'48"W L6 100.64 S71'05'29"w L7 30.00 N45'10'45"W 8'31"E 46'13'55" C8 172.92 146.73 78.11 142.36 S46'46'59"W 48'37'00" z V 0. 2306 �qHO SUR4�y�� PLAT SHOWING . STREET CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF FLANAGANS LANE RIGHT-OF-WAY (MB 13, PG 14) AUGUST 28, 2003 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA MSA0 P.C. Landscape Architecture • Planning Surveying - Engineering Environmental Sciences a 9111 5033 ROUSE DRIVE, VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23462-3708 [MIN PHONE (757) 490-9264 • FAX (757) 490-0634 JOB# 98110 DATE: 08/28/03 SCALE: 1 "=200' DM BY: MAS SHEET 3 OF 3 CURVE TABLE CURVE RADIUS LENGTH TANGENT CHORD BEARING DELTA C1 202.92 172.18 91.66 167.06 S46'46'59"W 48437'00" C2 200.73 161.97 85.68 157.61 N47'58'31 "E 46'13'55" C3 149.62 234.94 149.54 211.54 S69050'36"W 89'58'05" C4 120.71 166.61 99.65 153.70 N75'17'09"E 79'04'59" C5 150.71 66.14 33.61 65.61 S77'44'41 "E 25'08'39" C6 119.62 187.83 119.55 169.12 S69'50'36"W 89058'05" C7 230.73 186.18 98.49 181.17 N47'5 UNE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING L1 100.64 N71005'29"E L2 116.21 S35'44'40"W L3 32.49 N64'13'15"W L4 27.21 S79'37'00"W L5 7.14 N68'10'48"W L6 100.64 S71'05'29"w L7 30.00 N45'10'45"W K13-210-CRZ-2003 K13 -210 -STC -2003 K13 -210 -SVR -2003 ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 November 12, 2003 Public Hearing Staff Planners: Ashby Moss and Faith Christie The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. Location and General Information REQUESTS: 28. Change of Zoning District Classification from AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional PD -1-12 Planned Unit Development District (R-30 Residential and P-1 Preservation); 29. Street Closure for Flanagan's Lane (Portion of Flanagan's Lane 5,350 feet east of Princess Anne Road, running in a northeasterly direction a distance of 3,133 feet); 30. Subdivision Variance to Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet all the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance (minimum pavement width) LOCATION: Items 28 & 30 -- Property on the east side of Princess Anne Road, abutting the north and south sides of Flanagan's Lane to its intersection with Sandbridge Road; Item 29 -- Right-of-way located 5,350.2 feet east of Princess Anne Road, running in a northeast direction a distance of 3,133.16 feet. ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 1 Mop IC131 Lia Map Not -.o Scale -2K7 YAG r //',;�'/ �.NJ AG -2 G-2 F -AMA i H P- o AG- AG -1 G- / AG -2 AG -1 1 �.Igj - zi- r 1m, OEM Cond Rezowng GPINS: 24130719600000;24130662590000;24131678130000; 24133638620000;24134643370000;24135707020000; 24135552520000;24137544010000 COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 7 - PRINCESS ANNE SITE SIZE: 474 acres (2.32 acres for Street Closure) EXISTING Currently, the site is under cultivation, with the remaining portion LAND USE AND wooded. The site is zoned AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural Districts. The ZONING: City's Agriculture Department reports that the development of the site as proposed will result in the reduction of approximately 410 acres of cropland. SURROUNDING North: Cultivated fields and single-family dwellings / AG -1 LAND USE AND and AG -2 Agricultural and Conditional R-20 ZONING: Residential and Conditional P-1 Preservation (recently approved Heritage Park) South: . Untied States Coast Guard facility and an abandoned airfield / AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 2 • Single-family dwellings, wooded areas and East: cultivated fields / AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural • Princess Anne Road • Across Princess Anne Road are cultivated fields and single-family dwellings / AG -1 and AG -2 West: Agricultural NATURAL The site is almost completely under cultivation. The areas not under RESOURCE cultivation are wooded. The site drains either to the north toward AND Scopus Marsh and eastward to Ashville Bridge Creek and Back Bay. CULTURAL There are areas of non -tidal wetlands as defined by the U.S. Corps of FEATURES: Engineers (but not by the City) that will be preserved. On the eastern side of the site, approximately 4 acres, a portion of the proposed Village "F" is considered "floodplain subject to special restrictions" as regulated under the Site Plan Ordinance. The applicant proffers that a Letter of Map Amendment ("LOMA") must be approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) before any development may proceed within any area currently restricted by the Site Plan Ordinance. Should the LOMA be obtained, this issue will be moot. If the LOMA is not obtained, the applicant will be unable to develop the restricted area without obtaining a Floodplain Variance from City Council. From a cultural perspective, it appears that the City's most infamous character, the "witch of Pungo" Grace Sherwood, owned a portion of the site during her lifetime. According to City records John White, Grace's father, received a land patent of 195 acres at Ashville Creek at the east end of Muddy Creek in 1674. At his death, the property conveyed to James and Grace Sherwood. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn and 65 to 70dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. The United States Navy has commented that "The Navy's Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Program (AICUZ) views residential development as not compatible and discourages this use in the 65-70 dB Ldn. The Navy acknowledges the landowners desire to develop their property, but ask you to seriously consider the additional population that would be exposed to aircraft operations from NAS Oceana. We would view residential development at this site as an encroachment upon operations at NAS Oceana." ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 3 Major Issues The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this request. Staff's evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these issues are adequately addressed. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan policies and the Transition Area Design Guidelines Impact on City systems (transportation, utilities, schools). Compatibility with the surrounding area in terms of land use. Comprehensive Plan 14 The Comprehensive Plan Map depicts this area of the city as the Transition Area, planned for appropriate growth opportunities consistent with the economic vitality policies of the City of Virginia Beach. This area serves as a land use buffer between the urban northern portion of the city and the rural southern portion of the city. Land uses and densities within this area should not be a continuation of either form but a transition from one to the other. Staff evaluated the proposed development using the latest Comprehensive Plan Policies for the Transition Area, including the Transition Area Matrix and the Design Guidelines. Staff concludes that the development satisfies the recommendations of the plan in regard to design and that the dwelling unit density proposed falls within the guidelines regarding maximum allowable density in the Transition Area (a copy of the matrix is included at the end of this report). Summary of Proposal* The applicant proposes to develop the 474 -acre site with 490 single-family dwellings. The dwellings are divided into five "villages." Two of the villages are age -restricted for ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.0 Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 4 residents 55 and over. The total number of dwellings in the age -restricted villages equals 160, leaving 330 dwellings in the other three villages. The resulting overall density is 1.03 units per acre. A mayor part of this request includes a street closure for a portion of Flanagan's Lane. The applicant will construct and dedicate a new street that will connect Princess Anne Road to the remaining section of Flanagan's Lane near the Sandbridge Road intersection. The applicant will also construct cul-de-sacs to terminate the two remaining sections of Flanagan's Lane. One of the cul-de-sacs will be located at the end of the Lane adjacent to the Coast Guard property; the other will be located dust past the southwest corner of the Berman property. The new road will begin from a point on Princess Anne Road approximately 1,000 feet north of Flanagan's Lane to a point on Flanagan's Lane approximately 800 feet west of its intersection with Sandbridge Road. The new proposed alignment for Sandbridge Road is not affected by this application. The new road winds through the property's open space with the exception of one area in which it runs through a village (Village D). In this area, the road splits off into two roads leading around a large central open space for this village. Each of the villages incorporates some degree of internal open space. A recurring feature in all of the villages is the "pocket park." These are open space areas typically shown along curves or corners of the interior streets. A second "pocket park street" defines the border of the open space and provides access to the dwellings across from the pocket parks. These pocket park streets are narrow lanes (22 -feet wide) that loop to the interior street and serve only a few houses each. Another unique feature of the subdivision design is the "linear park." These areas line segments of the internal streets and are intended to create the appearance of more open space. The linear parks are created by setting the sidewalk back a considerable distance from the street. As a result, the dwellings are set very close to the sidewalks (the specific distance has not been specified in the plans). The green space between the street and the sidewalk is the linear park. The width of the linear parks varies but appears to average at 50 feet. The linear parks are actually privately owned but will be subject to an easement allowing public access through the area. They will be maintained by the Homeowners Association. Villages A and C will have the largest lots at 20,000 square feet. Villages D and F will have minimum lot sizes of 12,000 square feet. The age -restricted Villages B and E will have minimum lot sizes of 7,500 square feet. Other dimensional requirements are listed in proffers 33 and 34 (see next section). ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 5 Fifty -foot buffers separating the rear of the proposed lots from the adjacent (off-site) properties are shown throughout the development. In addition, the applicant has proffered a landscaped berm north of Village D and east of Village C to screen the new dwellings from the existing property owners on Flanagan's Lane. A 150 -foot buffer will be provided along Princess Anne Road as measured from the ultimate right-of-way. Two recreational activity centers are proposed. One is intended for residents of the age -restricted villages and includes a clubhouse and pool. The second is for the other residents and includes a clubhouse, pool, tennis courts, playing fields, and tot lots. Both of these activity areas are located within the open space between the villages. Proffers The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to "offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable," (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. PROFFER # 1 The Property shall be developed substantially as shown on the "Master Plan of Ashville Park Virginia Beach, VA" dated 8/29/03 and designed by Stephen Fuller Places, LLC in conjunction with MSA, P.C., a copy of which has been exhibited to City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Planning Department (hereinafter, the "Master Plan"). PROFFER # 2 The principal entranceway to the Property shall be from Princess Anne Road which shall be substantially similar in design and quality to the exhibit entitled "Community Entrance Princess Anne Road" a copy of which is contained within Section V of the development manual entitled "Ashville Park" prepared by Stephen Fuller Places, LLC, a copy of which has been exhibited to the City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Planning Department (hereinafter the "Manual"). ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 6 PROFFER # 3 A second entranceway to the Property is located at Flanagans Lane near the intersection of Flanagans Lane and Sandbridge Road and shall be substantially similar in design and quality to the exhibit entitled "Community Entrance Flanagans Lane" prepared by Stephen Fuller Places, LLC, a copy of which is contained within Section V of the Manual. PROFFER # 4 Prior to the issuance of the first residential building permit within Village C and upon completion of at least two lanes of the public right-of-way running through Ashville Park from Princess Anne Road to the second entranceway of the Property at Flanagans Lane as referenced in proffer number 3, Grantor shall cul-de-sac Flanagans Lane within the confines of Ashville Park at two locations where depicted on the Master Plan. In addition to this improvement, when developing Village D, Grantor shall maintain a 50' buffer area along the northern perimeter of Village D which buffer shall be measured from the top of bank from the ditch currently existing along this portion of the Property or as it may be modified during the course of the site plan review. These improvements, together with an undulating berm along the northern limits of Village D, shall be developed substantially as shown on the Exhibit entitled Conceptual Site Layout Plan of Ashville Park, Berm Plan, Virginia Beach, Virginia, dated September 17, 2003, prepared by MSA, P.C., which plan shall have been exhibited to City Council and on file in the Planning Department of the City of Virginia Beach (hereinafter "Berm Plan"). STREET SCAPE PROFFER # 5 The Grantor shall dedicate to the City of Virginia Beach sufficient land along the portions of the Property adjacent to Princess Anne Road of 55' in width as measured from the centerline of the right-of-way, to accommodate an ultimate 110' right-of-way. In addition to said dedication, Grantor agrees to dedicate to the City an additional 150' wide buffer as measured from the ultimate right-of-way dedication. The dedicated buffer shall be for public ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 7 purposes including open space, buffers, landscaping, utilities, roadways and trail purposes. Said buffer shall not restrict the development of the "Community Entrance Prospective" within Section V within the Manual. PROFFER # 6 The Grantor agrees that during the detailed site plan review to conduct a Traffic Impact Study of the impacts of Ashville Park. The Grantor agrees to substantially complete or bond the required improvements on Princess Anne Road at the entrance to Ashville Park that are called for in the Traffic Impact Study. Said improvements shall be substantially completed or bonded prior to the issuance of the first permanent occupancy permit for residents within Ashville Park. PROFFER # 7 The internal streets within Ashville Park shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the exhibit entitled "Typical Street Sections Plan of Ashville Park Princess Anne Road, Virginia Beach, Virginia", prepared by MSA, P.C., which exhibit has been displayed to the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach and is on file in the Virginia Beach Planning Department (hereinafter "Street Section Plan"). PROFFER # 8 All rolled curbs, drop inlets and sidewalks depicted on the Street Section Plan shall have an exposed aggregate finish. PROFFER # 9 All street lighting installed on the Property shall be a decorative style fixture and the height and separation of streetlights shall be determined during the detailed site plan review. PROFFER # 10 The trees planted within and adjacent to the public right-of- ways on the Property shall be double the total tree canopy requirements for public right-of-ways as set forth in the Department of Public Works Landscape Manual of the City of Virginia Beach. PROFFER # 11 Subject to confirmation by the City of the necessary 50' wide right-of-way widths and receipt by the City of all environmental permits from the Army Corp of Engineers and Department of Environmental Quality, Grantor shall ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 8 substantially improve or bond the costs of right-of-way improvements to Flanagans Lane beginning from the eastern -most entranceway to the Property from Flanagans Lane, continuing in an easterly direction to the intersection of Flanagans Lane and Sandbridge Road. Said improvements shall be substantially completed or bonded prior to the issuance of final occupancy permit for the first residence in Village D, E or F as depicted on the Master Pian. Said improvements shall be the widening of the existing lane with and the piping of the adjacent ditches, together with the portion of the future right-of-way traffic simulation generated by Ashville Park as determined during the detailed site plan review and the Traffic Impact Study performed by Grantor. These improvements shall be consistent with CIP Project No. 2.021.000 for rural road improvements in the City of Virginia Beach's Capital Improvement Program. THE VILLAGES OF ASHVILLE PARK PROFFER # 12 The Grantor shall record a Master Deed of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("Restrictions") governing the Property. All landowners within the PD -H2 District shall be members of a Home Owners Association responsible for maintaining collectively all common areas on the Property. The Restrictions shall be enforced by one or more Home Owners Association, which Restrictions, shall among other things, restrict the use of the open space areas for any purpose, but recreation and open space use. Such covenants shall run with the land and be in full force and effect for a period of at least fifty- (50) years. These covenants shall become part of the deed of each lot or parcel within the development. Such covenants shall be approved by the City Attorney and recorded before the first building permit in the project is issued. The Restrictions shall among other things require that every residential unit within Villages B and E as shown on the Master Plan will be occupied, on a full-time basis, by at least one (1) adult resident of fifty-five (55) years of age or older. The Restrictions shall also prohibit persons under eighteen (18) years of age from residing in any residential unit within Villages B or E for more than one hundred ASHVILLE PARK, L.L C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 9 twenty (120) days in any calendar year. PROFFER # 13 The total number of units developed in Village B shall not exceed 104 and the total number of units developed in Village E shall not exceed 58 56. All such units within Village B shall be single-family detached dwellings. The minimum lot size, internal open space area, buffers and acreages for each Village shall be as set forth in the Master Plan. PROFFER # 14 Villages A, C, D and F shall be developed substantially as depicted on the Master Plan. The total number of units developed in Village A shall not exceed 135 units. The total number of units developed in Village C shall not exceed 94 units. The total number of units developed in Village D shall not exceed 55 45. The total number of units developed in Village F shall not exceed 56. All units shall be single-family detached dwellings within these Villages. The minimum lot size, internal open space area, buffers and acreages for each Village shall be as set forth in the Master Plan. PROFFER # 15 The linear parks depicted within Villages A, C, D and F shall be maintained by the Home Owners Association and no structure shall be allowed within the linear parks other than uniform fencing, or other uniform decorative features, and mailboxes. The Pocket Parks depicted on the Master Plan shall be developed and constructed substantially as depicted on the Master Plan. The Pocket Parks shall be owned and maintained by the Home Owners Association. All sidewalks and trails located outside of the public rights- of-way shall be maintained by the Home Owners Association. PROFFER # 16 A Letter of Map Amendment ("LOMA") must be approved by FEMA before any development may proceed within any Special Flood Hazard Area. PROFFER # 17 The residential lot tree canopy for each residential lot on the Property shall be double the total canopy cover specified in the City of Virginia Beach's "Residential Tree Request Table" in effect as of September 1, 2003. ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 10 PROFFER # 18 A minimum 50' buffer shall be established on the perimeters of the Property as shown on the Master Plan. No structures shall be allowed within the buffer area and the buffer area shall be maintained by the Home Owners Association. No community wide or other activity other than maintenance shall occur within the Buffer area. RECREATIONAL AND OPEN SPACE AREAS PROFFER # 19 Two Recreational Activity Areas shall be designed, constructed and built on the Property substantially where indicated on the Master Plan. Both facilities shall provide indoor amenities, meeting rooms and active outdoor recreational amenities. No outside recreational fields or sporting areas shall be lighted to permit sporting events at night. This restriction shall not prohibit lighted outdoor swimming pools or lighted outdoor tennis courts provided that any such lighted tennis courts must be setback a minimum of 150' from a residential property line. Outdoor lighting installed for the swimming pools or outdoors tennis courts shall be directed downward toward the swimming pool or tennis courts play area. PROFFER # 20 The recreational facilities shall be substantially similar in quality, design and character to the exhibits entitled "Community Amenities" as contained in Section VI in the Manual. It is recognized that with a development of this size, detailed building plans may change as the development of Ashville Park progresses. The intent of the renderings is to demonstrate the architectural style and building quality of these facilities. Final elevations for these structures shall be submitted to the Planning Director to assure compliance with this proffer. PROFFER # 21 In addition to the buffer areas, linear parks, pocket parks and Village Greens within Villages A, B, C, D, E and F, Grantor shall set aside as open space the areas shown on the Master Plan. Said areas shall be for the benefit of the owners of property within Ashville Park. These areas shall be set aside for passive enjoyment and recreation for uses such as Lakes, Meadows, Forested Areas and Landscaped Vistas. These areas shall be maintained by ASHVILLE PARK, L.L C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 11 the Home Owners Association. PROFFER # 22 No portion of the Property that has been designated as a jurisdictional wetland by the U.S Army Corps of Engineers shall be disturbed. PROFFER # 23 The combined areas set aside for recreation and open space on the Property should not be below fifty-four percent (54%) of the current gross acreage of the Property. The different types and acreages of open spaces provided within Ashville Park shall be substantially as specified on the Master Plan. PROFFER # 24 Grantor shall donate $1,000.00 for each residential lot developed on the Property to the City of Virginia Beach Department of Parks and Recreation into the Open Space Site Acquisition program more specifically referred to as CIP Project No. 4.004.000. Grantor's per lot donation should be paid to the City at the time of the issuance of each building permit for each residential lot within Ashville Park. If all or a portion of said donated funds have not been used by the City of Virginia Beach within twenty (20) years for the purpose for which they were dedicated, then they may be used by the City of Virginia Beach for other municipal purposes, as the City shall in its sole discretion deem appropriate. OPEN SPACE; PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE TRAILS PROFFER # 25 Grantor shall construct a series of sidewalks and trails that are designed to provide pedestrian accessibility within each Village, and pedestrian and bike connections between each Village and to adjacent properties substantially as shown on the Exhibit entitled "Connectivity Plan" prepared by Stephen Fuller Places, LLC, which plan is part of the Manual. The sidewalk system adjacent to right-of-ways and residences shall be constructed of concrete with an exposed aggregate finish. The path system within the Village Greens, the Pocket Parks and other open space areas shall be finished in hard surfaces such as asphalt or compacted clay. Such trails shall be designed substantially in accordance with the quality levels ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 12 and design features as depicted on the exhibit entitled "Open Space" prepared by Stephen Fuller Places, LLC, which exhibit is part of the Manual. While not all portions of the trail system within Ashville Park will be open to the public, Grantor shall provide a continuous trail system from Princess Anne Road to Flanagans Lane that will be open to the public either through easements over some of the trails on the Home Owners Association property, or the provision of sidewalks and trails within the public right-of- way section between Princess Anne Road and Flanagans Lane. THE RESIDENCES AT ASHVILLE PARK PROFFER # 26 Grantor shall include within the Restrictions governing the Property, a requirement that the design and building materials for all fences, homes and accessory structures must be reviewed and approved by an Architectural Review Committee of the HOA to insure design and quality compatibility. Said restrictions shall run with the land as allowed under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. PROFFER # 27 All residential dwellings constructed on the Property shall have visible exterior surfaces, excluding roofs, porches, windows, doors, trim and soffits, consisting entirely of all or any combination of brick, stone, hardy plank, stucco, cedar shake or similar quality materials. PROFFER # 28 All residential dwellings constructed on the Property shall be constructed with a minimum of a two (2) -car garage. PROFFER # 29 All residential dwellings constructed within Villages A, C, D and F shall contain no less than 2,400 square feet of enclosed living area, excluding garage area, for any one- story dwelling and no less than 2,600 square feet of enclosed living area, excluding garage area, for any two- story dwelling. PROFFER # 30 All residential dwellings constructed within Villages B and E shall contain no less than 1,800 square feet of enclosed living area, excluding garage area, for any one-story dwelling and shall contain no less than 2,400 square feet of enclosed living area, excluding garage area, for any two-story dwelling. ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 13 PROFFER # 31 Grantor shall utilize low impact development techniques where possible on the Property to encourage storm water treatment and ground water recharge and discourage storm water runoff and erosion. PROFFER # 32 Ail residential dwellings constructed on the Property shall be constructed in accordance with the construction criteria applicable to homes located within the 70 to 75 dB Ldn/STC ratings of not less than 44 for roof/ceiling/exterior walls and 33 for windows/doors, even though no portion of the Property is located within this noise zone. DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS PROFFER # 33 The dimensional requirements applicable to development of all portions of the Property except Villages B and E shall be as follows: Minimum Lot Area in Square Feet: 12,000 (Villages D and F); 20,000 (Villages A and C) Minimum Lot Width in Feet: 100 Minimum Front Yard Setback in Feet: 50' for 20,000 square foot lots and 30' for lots from between 12,000 square feet up to 20,000 square feet Minimum Side Yard Setback in Feet: 10 Minimum Side Yard Setback Adjacent to a Street: 30 Minimum Rear Yard Setback in Feet: 20 Accessory structures of no more than 150 square feet — 5' rear and side yard setbacks Maximum Lot Coverage: 30% for lots 20,000 square feet and greater and 35% for lots less than 20,000 square feet Minimum Setback from Sidewalk for lots containing linear parks: 15' from edge of sidewalk Maximum Height 42 feet in Villages A and C and 38 feet in ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 14 Villages D and F PROFFER # 34 The dimensional requirements applicable to development within Villages B and E on the Property shall be as follows: Minimum Lot Area in Square Feet: 7,500 Minimum Lot Width in Feet* 75 Minimum Front Yard Setback in Feet: 30 Minimum Side Yard Setback in Feet: 5 & 10 Minimum Side Yard Setback Adjacent to a Street: 20 Minimum Rear Yard in Feet: 20 Accessory structures no more than 150 square feet: 5' rear and side yard setbacks Maximum Lot Coverage: 35% Maximum Height in Feet: 35 (not to exceed two stories) PROFFER # 35 Further conditions mandated by applicable development ordinances may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan and/or subdivision review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. Staff Evaluation of The proffers adequately address most of the concerns Proffers; presented by the development proposal. Any outstanding concerns are addressed in the recommended conditions of the Street Closure or Subdivision Variance or can be further addressed during the detailed plan review process. City Attorney's The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer Office: agreement dated September 5, 2003 and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. Staff Evaluation ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 15 CHANGE OF ZONING REQUEST: Staff recommends approval of this request. Staffs evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials and the proffers, adequately addresses each of the `Major Issues' identified at the beginning of this report. The proposal's strengths in addressing the `Major Issues' are (1) The proposal meets the majority of the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and the Transition Area Design Guidelines. The Transition Area "Matrix" was used to evaluate the proposal's consistency with land use and design goals for the Transition Area. The result was a score of 0.943 dwelling units per acre. Although this score translates to a total of 447 units for this 474 -acre site, and the applicant's proposal consists of 490 units, an important consideration is the fact that 160 of the 490 units are age -restricted. The Transition Area Technical Advisory Committee (TATAC) report, adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan, states, "Active adult communities are to be encouraged and should be treated differently." It is generally acknowledged that active adult communities have less impact on City services, particularly more costly services such as schools and transportation. Thus, in the Transition Area, where impact on City services and infrastructure is to be minimized, there is rationale for allowing a slightly greater density of such units than for a standard non -age -restricted single-family dwelling that places a greater demand on City services. The TATAC report recognizes this and encourages the provision of such units. The report, however, does not provide quantifiable criteria regarding how such communities are to be treated, instead allowing such communities to be addressed on an individual basis dependent on how the community meets the overall intent of the Comprehensive Plan for this area. In the case of the current proposal, the density calculated through the Transition Area Matrix allows for 447 units. The applicant's proposal consists of 330 non- age -restricted units and 160 age -restricted units. If the 330 non -age -restricted units are subtracted from the calculated allowable of 447 units, 117 units remain. The proposal calls for 160 age -restricted units, 43 over the calculated allowable number of units. It must be remembered, however, that these 160 units are age - restricted and do not have as great an impact on City services as the other 330 units. Staff believes that the 43 additional age -restricted units represent an acceptable increase beyond the 447 units recommended by the Transition Area Matrix. The total density of the project as proposed with 490 units is 1.03 units per acre. This represents a 0.09 unit per acre increase in density beyond that calculated through the Transition Area Matrix. Staff concludes that consistent with the recommendations contained within the TATAC report regarding active adult communities and noting the many unique design features of this development as recommended in the Transition Area Design Guidelines the 0.09 ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 16 increase in overall density is appropriate. (2) Property values for the homes are estimated to average at or above $400,000 ($225,000 for age -restricted), which is consistent with the recommendations of the TATAC report regarding the fiscal impact of development in the Transition Area. (3) The proposal is compatible with existing land use and future land use in the surrounding area. The entire development includes a minimum 50 -foot buffer around its perimeter, which will mitigate impacts to neighboring farmland or residences. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request. VARIANCE TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REQUEST: Section 9.3 of the Subdivision Ordinance states: No variance shall be authorized by the Council unless it finds that: A. Strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. B. The authorization of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and the character of the neighborhood will not be adversely affected. C. The problem involved is not of so general or recurring a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of general regulations to be adopted as an amendment to the ordinance. D. The hardship is created by the physical character of the property, including dimensions and topography, or by other extraordinary situation or condition of such property, or by the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto. Personal or self-inflicted hardship shall not be considered as grounds for the issuance of a variance. E. The hardship is created by the requirements of the zoning district in which the property is located at the time the variance is authorized whenever such variance pertains to provisions of the Zoning Ordinance incorporated by reference in this ordinance. Staff recommends approval of the applicant's request for reduced pavement width; however, this recommendation comes with a caveat. Staff can support this variance request, but only if the applicant is successful in obtaining a variance from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), allowing the City to receive state maintenance funds for the roadways that will have the reduced pavement width. Without such a variance, the City will not receive maintenance funds from the Commonwealth for these roadways, thus increasing the City's cost of providing services to this development. The condition recommended below ensures if the applicant cannot obtain the variance from ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 17 VDOT, the roadways will be constructed at a width that meets City standards and meets eligibility for maintenance funding from the Commonwealth. Conditions of Subdivision Variance 1. The applicant shall seek a variance from the Virginia Department of Transportation to allow state maintenance funding for the substandard pavement width request. If state maintenance funding is not granted, the Subdivision Approval shall be considered null and void. STREET CLOSURE REQUEST: Staff recommends approval of this request. The Viewers met on July 23, September 22, and October 30, 2003 and determined that the request to close a portion of Flanagan's Lane will not be detrimental to the public if the conditions recommended below are met. The applicant will construct and dedicate a two-lane divided roadway with a multi- purpose trail from Flanagan's Lane to Princess Anne Road. In addition, the applicant will construct cul-de-sacs at the terminus of each side of Flanagan's Lane, adjacent to the north side of the development near Village D and adjacent to the United States Coast Guard property on the south side of the property. During development, however, a means of public ingress and egress will be available at all times between Princess Anne Road and Sandbridge Road. Conditions of Street Closure 1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. No purchase price shall be charged in this street closure, however, because the applicant shall dedicate a new street to replace the closed portion of Flanagan's Lane. The closure and the new street shall be considered an even trade. 2. The applicant is required to resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining parcels. The plat shall be submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval. 3. The applicant shall verify that no private utilities exist within -the right-of-way proposed for closure. If private utilities do exist, easements satisfactory to the utility company, shall be provided. ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 18 4. Construction plans for the new street to replace the section of Flanagan's Lane proposed for closure shall be submitted to the Development Services Center for review. The new street proposed by the applicant shall be dedicated, constructed, and approved by Civil Inspections before the requested section of Flanagan's Lane can be closed. This condition is to ensure that a means of public ingress and egress shall be provided between Sandbridge Road and Princess Anne Road at all times. 5. Cul-de-sacs terminating the two remaining sections of Flanagan's Lane shall be constructed by the applicant on the subject property of Ashville Park. Construction plans for the cul-de-sacs shall be submitted to the Development Services Center. 6. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within four (4) years of approval by City Council. If the conditions noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved within four (4) years of the City Council vote to close the right-of-way, this approval shall be considered null and void. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with applications may require revision during detailed plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 19 4 11-12- Rezoning (B-2 Business to R-15 Residential) Approved 96 9-25-90 Conditional Use Permit (Athletic Club and Outdoor Approved Recreation) 10-10- Conditional Use Permit (Outdoor Recreation) Approved 88 5 6-13-95 Street Closure Approved 6 8-10-93 Conditional Use Permit (Firewood Preparation Facility) Approved Public Agency Comments Public Works Master Transportation Princess Anne Road in front of this project is a rural Plan (MTP): two-lane road. There are no projects listed within the current Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to improve this road. The current Master Transportation Plan (MTP) designates this road as a proposed 100 -foot divided right-of-way. The proposed MTP designates the road as 110 -foot right-of-way. The applicant has addressed proposed right-of-way dedications in the proffer agreement. The applicant's request for a Subdivision Variance to reduced pavement widths is subject to the Virginia Department of Transportation granting a variance. The applicant and the city's Department of Public Works are exploring this issue. Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Princess Anne 8,186 12,000 Existing Land Use Road ADT ' ADT ' —4740 Proposed Land Use 3— 5,550 /Average uauy i rips Z as defined by the existing agricultural use 3 as defined by 490 dwelling units ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.0 Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 21 Public Utilities Water: City water does not front the property, but may be extended for connection purposes provided hydraulic analysis supports the potential demand. Sewer: City sewer is not available to this development as proposed. Plans and bonds are required for construction of a new pump station and sanitary sewers stem. The Department of Public Utilities does not have any facilities within the proposed Flanagan's Lane Street Closure area. Public Schools School Current Enrollment Capacity Generation ' Change 2 Red Mill Elementary 866 910 10 94 Princess Anne Middle 1511 1658 6 49 Kellam High 12276 1 1990 8 64 "generation" represents the number of students that the development will add to the school 2 "change" represents the difference between generated students under the existing zoning and under the proposed zoning The number can be positive (additional students) or negative (fewer students) CIP # 1-090 Elementary School 2005 This project is for construction of an elementary school with a design capacity of 900 students. Necessary classroom space and resource areas should result in a facility of approximately 87,500 square feet on a seventeen acre site at the intersection of Princess Anne Road and Sandbridge Road, which has been acquired. Construction is scheduled to begin in March 2004 for a September 2005 opening. Public Safety Police: The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 22 Fire and Rescue: Fire Department comments will be provided during detailed plan review. Private Utility Comments Hampton Roads Sanitation District J No concerns. Virginia Natural Gas No concerns. Dominion Power An easement for access to an overhead power line may be required in the area adjacent Village D. This will be determined during detailed plan review. ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 23 low x= N .d v Za N COO �a �3 Oct S %A N z vW 2 .._ 9 t Caw Oji60 }r ,C�LF,_s 1 w } •.r T 4 Lu z z d r z 4 W to< d W ~ �4 1 19 Exhibit B Proposed Master Plan ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 25 '41 Ilk - j _ v Y s".�; .. •�� tip`"' Lu z z d r z 4 W to< d W ~ �4 1 19 Exhibit B Proposed Master Plan ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 25 Exhibit B-1 Villages A & B -- Detail 3 cc cc Ic OQ _ v �WE J d ¢d v4j C - i r LU , % oec v Ji ty ■ a x RX a !! lei L> ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 26 X I $ -` 4A. PA�.• � Y wY �4 SOC -- - - Exhibit B-2 Village C -- Detail ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.0 Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 27 8Z 9BBd 0£ V `6Z `8Z swell epua6y '0•"•1 `)Qlbd 9'1-11AHSd Plea - --A T `3 `a saBBIHA £-8 jIgI4x3 W r W ce ti T Exhibit C Proposed Connectivity Plan t ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.0 Agenda Items 28, 291 & 30 Page 29 2 � z Cr cc ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.0 Agenda Items 28, 291 & 30 Page 29 a ��=xhibit D-1 Open Space — Linear Park ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 30 Exhibit D-2 open Space - ,"€ 11 Pocket Park I 17 all( IN VIP -k� 0-4 > Ir .44 Je /1"N 119 1 1 a f .21 T. A I C <; ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.0 Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 31 Z z Exhibit E-1 Open Space Amenities UN ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 34 'j; 'fir}. "q Exhibit E-2 1 Open Space u Amenities J J sn a ��I 1 r A vp �` � s^ •ice• ,r `I f Exhibit E-2 1 Open Space u Amenities J J sn a ��I 1 ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.0 Agenda Items 28, 291 & 30 Page 35 r roti `I ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.0 Agenda Items 28, 291 & 30 Page 35 , Exhibit E-3 Open Space Amenities ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 36 • 4 ,i � a+M - z�4s .GAJ , r•�/'r i -;r 4i , Exhibit E-3 Open Space Amenities ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 36 h G a?, Exhibit E-4 Open Space H Amenities i S ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 37 a� a J y woo 3 > O*M1 CL 8 M E 7 L I..' l . MAM Exhibit E-5 Open Space Amenities ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 38 Exhibit F-1 Street Sections j awl im ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 39 to 990 CO Lil ..j J Oi iY 3i 9I a 0 z Exhibit F-2 Street Sections ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 40 Exhibit G-1 Disclosure Statements C3 L C J f' J r CO ti dRK 3 Z �. 0 a o ami r ? X CO I ! d CIL z I N t W M I j b n RS m a N a; d s o O U n @ 0' I -jVCp O c 2 v to_ .c ° O Z3 i nc° a ° 1 w IL F- o > M m zz �0 a z Z O f- I Q.' O 4 a) t. z Z W jra LU` z y J 3 +. a =dV cW. -.J °, t 00.'0 QE E � oz. ^n c a rra, CO Exhibit G-1 Disclosure Statements L TAT TTTA!iT T TTT A ► TT► TArfrrlT "TT► Tf%T T TrT► T^ 3 �x I v no Z l C3 C Cr i r CO 3 Z c =q' TcJ Iy0 za CO VJr �cs ¢icCe U O. Q '0 I J 9U L Q OO� a o ULn Z W a QCea =dV -.J O=0 Z 13 Of CL L TAT TTTA!iT T TTT A ► TT► TArfrrlT "TT► Tf%T T TrT► T^ 3 �x I v no Z l Co ASHVILLE PARK, L.L C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 41 Cr i ASHVILLE PARK, L.L C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 41 2 W W Q F— F— CO W 0 J CA r!!, w + i o y I � C O 0 2- 0 W r o Oo � � O U z y J m Q 0 8 JO c`c U MM. H a. Q p� m p m 11. Q w p� m ro y t0 C C W � Z '0 cC4 z > V V Q p U si m OL a - Q J -� Exhibit G-29 Disclosure Statements m j❑Z w 1 FW- m i L° ,o o o Q� E r: i 3:Q 09 L a� CUJ 7E5O F: O m C. I i s Z O Q` ` O C a C o U O Uc I i Co O �° o a (zo r U I CL ;;t 'y` Vnl � .� CO LU 1 CU m Z 4 E EP Ca o n. c o I =oC y J m E ccz 0 - ,�� 'O E O tm— o i o� to (D ° N° I° r W L. O C V z o ❑ I V c`, O U Q O C i c O =n 1 e i O PE Q m ° c ` n W ti a) C f= 1 I aero = fXm > p � E �O j=a z C W0. ro a _ m J �c c OQ C L is U O V d' W O Com" p I C_ •� 0 m I �' O O LUa O wU 4 1 mo C U 2 O C _ o p (aE U -C ;` i _ o�- Q CD U_ccCL a c ; o� n- ro -. ro— o io i wN ; �� u. d a� +• ± C c a� t>z � •. � a� � cr x O cro y o =c c 3,' — CMo = j� v U o 0 C + m� O y 13Z O O O d Z O ^� } t. C LL ` (E b o O e C Z �i ' U` 4 O -` I O Z U i� aF 3 R5 Q U 0 Q �1 O U 3 92i Q 40 11 s U U.CL) a �� ro 3f c �° == 1 �� G II w� a w oO Exhibit G-29 Disclosure Statements ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 42 i 3:Q L a� C F: O yi .� O Q` ` C 3 p �LU" o o I CL ;;t 'y` 1 0 m c C o ,�� 'O to o a o m d'4 I G W a m I z o Y c`, O U O� fn V m Ww O Z C i ro Q ° we C = Zrn + m f= 1 I aero a p V E o U 70 Z �° p ca a _ m J �c = a 100 C tD -pZ is U to w V + C tai 1 U O p O C_ •� 0 m I �' O O v i -j 4 1 i C U 2 O C 6 o p C U No ; o� 0 o wN ; �� u. �T ` > o O 1 C �-Ca ! Z j� v U o Zy _fro _ } J Q Q LL ` (E b o O e O j" 111 r� + y fir o ►- d Z aF �<D �, 3 wa 1 a Q Q Lr- w p C a c = a w Ir E >. O I LU I z a° ro C `� v j CL E I E CoC - �I z J E U' ir CL CL If'n �o' o Q �N I ay �,.�1 — y E ro m O= ml yz mm = 3a 3Z ca ».0 c Vic; .. i C I w L. =i =o "M = ° � Op =o z ai ?,�I d; i0 rCs rO y c o TCO U j cC +0 VS a— ( :1Z v c o o 1 Q n — r� � CL Z T v ._ Q + I LU M Q .1 "'0 Ji J C t: -Q = = O � 1 © O V IC�� in ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 42 z LLJ2 LLJf- F-` W D 0 J U) z W W W O J U�nn VJ 0 C 0 2 0 Q. U WE w � o O� J U V� U) O L � V 2 Z _y 5 V V Z Y c 710 CL a. Q d m y O CL Q O� U E = C y Z�O c=a C: %-0 N � � V •. Q < Q. CU V Q p a 4 wa Q a = Exhibit G-3 Disclosure Statements ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 43 I � a I -r_ O i O ,4 o3 3 o I Q E r Q WO n p O O 3 �3 1 �� a o 0� b U Oc o U Uc i a� C m , r C Iwn o W" = N M a 113 m Zcca Za O .Q m DN 'ZM O v V dZ E o c� M 0. _ oo °i QL L c v C? O O of v i Q O wc I Q 1i L C U Q � O �— y C L I 0 a i � o Ln o CL M Q a p� � N L ! to a, c a� z� _ n o o c ZZ L. d a Crf 1 F,, G p y. > o O N Cn aa co y O = cU z .r 0 Z i =� a 0 ` OLU ai v M U Z _ L G 4 :)w0 CJ Wc E V ° aa.. E ° � a �o Cr. m Q CU o Z V I d E a Q)o ` �— o c a� „ a- m-, N N N T N Q) ; D o Q• a N C = C, o m C V t�1 V N_ C J ( n z c C 3 � 1 3 Z y� '= o z Gi O t y Q C� 00 w R�+S 8. M Cllr Vd a tJ to CL CL N v ,� Q h ya 4 � a N m mac $ L � �? m i Q Q Ny to UV �9) I ; moo 0 CC tr c � nL.r � � � J .r caa) �o _� J LL. c m ❑ �� =` =O! 1 ; L]z v rn Exhibit G-3 Disclosure Statements ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 43 I � a I -r_ O i o3 I Iwn o ° o a o � O .Q g o Q ni a 1X `a, -G � O c Q � O Q C o CL ; IL m a a� z� o O N Cn aa co c U1 w Z i =� a ;a C w m ' Aa Z _ L G 4 :)w0 CJ m L V E tli Z �o Z to �a°) o a 0 Q� I 0 ; D o o �� ( low t _�Q 50 I �c 0 R�+S 8. ai 0 ' LOw C L CL N LL y a J a QN LL. c OH Na N 'Q r (3 Z a: ° EO a �- Ix O ;, y `c 2UJ r. aQ N .- +. — 2m c Z m c ; t- 0 W� z Fn o a ° a� I F c ° 4� E ; ,, w m W O tLl U W 2 E y c G O O 0 Q d n- E C a 0 N OL �s= C13 I o ca I 0-1O d_0 C V CD ti- .•c CO Vl ycOi CS 0� mZ E� ��,,, n' �0 v = a 30 3Z =o s z I Z c 3 w ._. 0 m Caf'-.ca 0 = 0 0 00 E- �� O iOm. CD- =� C VCat: `a. Gy QN tU MQQ)o d Y O I v O O N aQz V O , V V i cmi ccct m U to 4 Q J tL r II C m U C m w ti C ; U E W� C� Q =¢ I �O �J .I ❑ 7 ;� �� .0 ❑ c U Exhibit G-3 Disclosure Statements ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 43 Z LLI2 LUF— LU 0 J Exhibit G-4 O O yr o � y V I � I X_ a ' o ZZ 0 � ° 3 0 Q� aci c f N L i LU O N CD m M r Q � i s Q — a c o O Q o U c •.► m z 7 V O Co V c c (13 .� ui «- Z N M O +.. �.: r- Z M ° M °� i = 0 n C O L p 0 C U) Cal i V V O ° L 0 O C U c d y i V Cn O _. ac° y - ^\1 J 'D ` 4 °' f Z 0 i t W C) Q Z Z ° U ( O N i L LU f Z \ � d w LL :u O c O F- to C O d' O Y .S O CL n. c U �� _ - Z m w Wd Z C13 R }� Q� R E c� y Z= .- f z c: ti n cn � O = ��- v at cs z �^ w •-• Q — Q Or U=M. to i a, O 3 b to Co N u n m O u U_ c c c�2E v a�= �� o cy _m M ; Q 0 , �_y y i c ° a 0Z0- cn �_ I oot 2 c. C c 0 t> a y I aN c3 �2 - _ w CO U I M Q b O I L C CL CL d) Cl ti I g� m (' Q: E 3 LLJ z U c m 3 Cii O (' U i3 � 4)OZ O ' q= U- t : o►- 49Cw a 1 n _vz 0 1Mn �! fO z '' O f I Luy z� .^.,�� c _o cO 0U a i , yc _ _ i = ` _ v stn r- yi Z ^' O c G _� 3: c Z i = tJ Z c CJ G c 0 G T I y v >, 0 0 — �, O '- s. _ i vd L y J= U v, ^� ^ E c r t Q Z tai, ` d ,Y u i C ,_ Z vii U. O �. Q cs i U R j Q cu o O �' o U `� 3 ^ =- I (� pVj a O O yr o � y V O m D U m y a O � 0 � ° 3 0 Q� aci c {� E E p 0 3 d °o CD m M r Q � y C r Q a a g a o O Q o U c Z m z 7 V O Co V c c (13 .� ui «- Z N M O +.. �.: r- Z M ° M ti .�► _- n C O L p 0 C U) ? O^ m L ` V V O ° L U O C U c d y i V Cn O _. p ^\1 J 'D ` M _ ` m Q O �` CL O — LL �-CIDt 0 W C) Q Z Z U > Z� �a>cc� �0 = M J Q V Z LL :u O c O F- to C O d' O Y .S O CL n. c U �� _ - Z m w Wd Z C13 R }� Q� R E c� y 0 3' m ° (Lw Ct E E O 'ZE m 0o �U Cd. L = Q 3 w •-• Q — Q Or U=M. n- O 3 b to Co N u n m O m COto m= c c�2E v a�= �� o cy _m M ; Q 0 , (Ln ZrJ Z0 m i c ° a 0Z0- LOQ Vir cCr 2z �}.. ��45 �a z= 2 C c 0 t> a y I aN c3 �2 Y O � O n aN ti V Q o 0 CO U I M Q b O I L C CL CL d) C1 a. L a yah O L I m (' Q: E 3 1 U c m 3 Cii O (' U i3 � 4)OZ L! L O yr i O y m y a � � C O E E is Z L O Q r Q � y C v a CS 10 Z (13 O - c +.. �.: r- M .�► _- m = O Y U y'„ 1_ L fl UCG ^\1 J 'D ` M _ ❑ S U �` y Disclosurc Statements ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda items 28, 29, & 30 Page 44 4) m i -Ca `m � r Hy °L H O I 0 3 O `� O O Q i o 0 0 .� O� L iii oc V C � O L i� I G mRD •� o ( a c 1- o D o a O �+ z O CL Q _o o a a Z wti�a o Q ° Oti a m w= ZN o I y O Uj i - i? M O Z i4 o o ID N N 9 m w .. a ca � O Z Q 0 v c sp VV O N 'c 0I m o w- Q i ►.� = i 'c ^� R C Jcoi a wsm_ c ? m .L r Go gc I y'rO, eo u CO ? rte, ° 0 U. o F. o ce- L �ti > c O� v _o '� L c U zN F -to � �y L @ =a �-- c O Q ! U) •� V 00 I I O� I O� Z a w 0 Z N OUI O C U Y J o Q F. Q + I I ! .. � CO I C J a m ¢ 9 CO � E c ( ' Z C I a` c n. CO C rL w E O i LL' �: O. Ea. Z" >o. a� Z Z � �0 n" o O Z ,O d y try C i to H oIS d : (D IM CD ��' Y p c a�� -C `^ O 2 „ _ O C i �, Z 'jGO L = 0 Z y O yr ° Z —. �a � Q o d yvz C O � s LA M V c a- N cB o I QZ h �1 O _2 Y c 4! a 2 1 0. N ct v CL e 2 `� 2 Z z cO CL COr ZJ ca o n a n � w n CL � - t1 i w y o° Cn w0 0 a E 0O o ' N OZ'Q a. m� _ oU aod t d t3 (U I ; CL -- oc Lo ; Ly I cuff .,c Ca . v � ' CO_ ;` ZO a?G, �o c c �� 3 , o �= I 3z °p yM �° �. * . Z c 3 m w cc ° c _ my Lai N r y �,- o� L o _ ~ �` �`� Ca � Yo � tl.fn 1 QN c� L O YL° v VEL aC I aN(a roQaa) CL 2 22 �Qm �'o Qi` cac� CD U o N Lo UC =U 00 U UC CEL Rs a flfd� .c.ta t0'.Gco of `n► r.�� W Exhibit G-5 Disclosure Statements a of CZ 0. ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 45 4) m i -Ca `m � r Hy °L H 0 3 O `� 1 W m o 0 0 w cu oc m a n. G mRD o ( a o a O a= o y o a Z wti�a O ° Oti m w= ZN ° ,w m Uj i - i? M O Z i4 ID N N 9 m w .. O O m V ca � O I o Q 0 v c L _ �' z 0I m c J I ° O O V m •- a. Jcoi ac .L r Go gc I y'rO, eo a U. o F. ce- L �ti > o m zz I a 30 O Z U zN i n- @ =a �-- c O Q ! U) •� D CL jE C Z a w 0 Z N zm C Y J o Q F. Q + I I ! .. � `� c W a I- .0 w c cc a m ¢ 9 CO � E c ( ' Z c c n. CO >1 •r c 0 E O O i LL' �: O. Ea. V O a� d y try C i to H a_N C w N d (D IM CD ��' Y p c a�� -C `^ i or C N o to3 M Z . O C _ O C i �, Z 'jGO L = 0 Z y O yr Z —. �a � Q +O, s L m (D�. LA M V c a- N cB o I QZ h �1 Y c 4! a 2 1 0. N ct v CL e 2 `� 2 Z �c O U V v� CL COr I ca.Qoo+ 01 `t TO 1 oo ti a� j =Qo Q u`. co a Ej 0 U ' r UjQ C► IOO O J J ❑ t- IS OQ I ❑ O 0 O Cn ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 45 0 CL 0 U Oy J L) c_Un o U c Z N U Z J o _0 CL � a ~ m 3 a0 a > 1JJ � ^ cr O 2' V CO CD c0 N E = cc V Z Y E- CL U °' v dCL CO U v ti CL tea` �= O m c 0 0 _a - O U W � o O V U cA O O m J Z y "1 c t Z a JO M m CL ~ a� �, cn O CL> QI 0 N U a 0 m A C C y m Z m =A U Q ti N d 0 m CO CL u ci Q d D5 Q, i OE a o ! O not Zcco i Z m O i c < i o i g = c i .0 r M o LU .a Z G i cc IL CO — c w Z O c C— I--- M Q M Q m C mOc�< to V �0 a _o Oo .L` Z o Z M N c m� r rn O O `o .roc � E = n `o Z i Z� C CL � — I 00 CN h aQ � =0 Exhibit G-6 ---- Disclosure Statements u O v C ° 3 0 ° E � o ? V � C � a a d E LU Z O EL O '�, �/ = •L m O U) CL 1r O O o o y U .� w 3 o a w ami o �. o a N a o t— o c z ti Q W L L 2+O o t4 i O F - w'c p i❑� �< a C X00 cn 3 LU IL M C00 ° CL W Y o W.0 C y Q. N '� C N m = CD M L ya, m E cn v e 3 o +n O QUj 1 cS > C �. v a o� �_ a L 0 c c� ❑ a �� =S— to V �0 a _o Oo .L` Z o Z M N c m� r rn O O `o .roc � E = n `o Z i Z� C CL � — I 00 CN h aQ � =0 Exhibit G-6 ---- Disclosure Statements ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 46 c � a 0) V ` C c b O m m IM Cr. o ,S d E v � W Z O EL O '�, �/ = •L � a 1r O Z .0 y m w 3 o a w ami o �. o a CL rn v -. N = o = 0 { Q W L L OO t4 {{ U C w'c p i❑� )Cw L a ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 46 L P I I W o f O 3 �. ~ m° CD a i c. o LL W N = o a o v ON fn i w Z_° C mm U z o m = �� L ya, c o E cn v Za m C C) ` �o cS Z U o `0-C �_ a L 0 c c� g a C*— p c a +-co O N 1 6 O d C C O �= LL 2 > Ix2 I = 0 Z '►. cc c cc Z:O� �a M O 0 n m F- 1 W N G z v toc � E C � �' r c c .. W 0. a }' E t +. LU CO M to Z 2 cn - vo o : O O �U Q O aE y o ar. r-� E�ti ate^ o— om ; Qc N V N fA CC Q C ,r r a= « �- cc c N I= O N ` !� m c=o. O7 Z c O 30 0 _' ° GC Q C " H _ C vto 0> _+4) U Q �` U L O H GNcO Co oZIto ,�o m0 a to o Q CO a= 3 m"v CL (D 'a= sOmE _ yds tt�m c C W ai ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 46 Exhibit G-7 Disclosure Statements ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.0 Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 47 Q C e d o I fi Y C. 0 '• i CMu ACL v U iSr Uj � v = y v � LUL t± C .- ? to r C: y = t= f r C i .: c .► 0 O p C • cn + ° � v v `� � o ° c Q) 0 o y o 51 LL ZZ LU ti UJ Hy y O ZE ro L saw p Cj: 42!' ��• Q 0 cr QQ n -' Cry a) Cz C 0)1 Cj ti' 4 N 4M U 90 Z d 3 c y1 c0 i v = a^ y 0 p H `� _c7 UQ C G d � Q `I x u Q. a CL CO �- M d Q) O; v_5 vl r 0 v 2t Q c i o �a m= n,w U, U� Q CL v� 0'%- J1 = ❑ > ;a �` =O ! ❑ U ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.0 Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 47 Item 428, 29 & 30 Ashville Park. L.L.C. Change of Zoning District Classification Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in Regard to certain elements of Subdivision Ordinance Discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Flanagan's Lane East side of Princess Anne Road District 7 Princess Anne November 12, 2003 REGULAR Robert Miller: The next item is the item we moved up is Item #28, 29 & 30, Ashville Park, L.L.C. R.J. Nutter: Mr. Chairman, before I start the clock, I just want to bring a few people up to minimize the impact on our time. For the record, my name is R.J. Nutter and I'm an attorney. I represent the applicant in this case Ashville Park, L.L.C. With me today, in addition to my client, is one of the principal land planners for this entire project. We were actually very proud to have here today from Atlanta is Stephen Fuller. With Stephen, I understand he has brought Doug Bork, Julie and Kate, all of them whom have spent a considerable amount of time on this project for the last six months making it what it is today. But they will be addressing you shortly and I'm going to do everything I can to stay within my ten-minute limit and have a few minutes from Mr. Fuller to make some remarks about the application. First, I'd like to comment that this is not dust about the application. This piece of property and I don't want to forget this and it's easy to with an applicant this wonderful. The property owners who are the underlying property owners have owned this property for longer than the city has been in existence. They are amongst the City's oldest residents and property owners. Names from the Stalwarts of this area have owned properties here. These are not people who have come here. These are people who have owned this property for an extended period of time, the Culliphers, the Atkinsons, the Coopers, the Malbons, the Williams and I'm proud to say the Bourdon's, as well, are part of this application. All those families are names you all know. Mr. Horsley, I know you and Mr. Knight are going to recognize them as your friend and neighbors for many, many years. I don't want you to lose sight of the fact that these people have owned this property for a awful long time and paid taxes for an awful long time and have waited to see how the Transition Area rules were developed to make sure that whoever came forward their property would do so in accordance with those regulations. Second point that I would like to make to you is that this property falls within the Transition Area, which is an area that some may say is heavily encumbered. Mr. Knight, as you have mentioned that gentleman who sent a letter to you that said "heavily encumbered by regulation" that some people may not like to acknowledge. The benefit of that is that this area is amongst the most studied and regulated area in the City. It is resulted in Comprehensive Plan amendments. The last two Comprehensive Plans at Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 2 least. A special committee appointed by Council, the TATAC Committee, which reported their findings to strengthen the Comprehensive Plan recommendations. The benefit of that to someone like myself and the developers of this property is that it set forth the rules and guidelines upon which the City has set forth as its goals for this area. Because I only have limited amount of time I have to rely on the fact that there's a 52 page staff report that goes into it in enormous detail how it complies with the Comprehensive Plan, the TATAC regulations and all of the criteria that the City has set forth for this area. I brush over that entire part of it based on staff s analysis. I'd like to focus my comments on just a few highlights of this application before I introduce Mr. Fuller. These are really three separate applications. I want you to understand that we have to address all of them. The first is a rezoning application changing the zoning from Agricultural to PD -H2 R-30 Underlying District and P-1 Open Space District. The second is a street closure application on Flanagan's lane. The third is a subdivision variance. Each of them is important. Each of them is significant. I want to spend a few moments on each one. First is the rezoning application. As staff has indicated this is 474 acres of property. I agree with many of your comments this morning in the earlier session. This is the accumulation of property and really allows for a much better development. A more organized and uniformed system of development as opposed to a series of 50-60 acre parcels or tracks of land at the time. That gave us a great ability to address a lot of different features in one uniform fashion. The nice thing about this property is the development has provided 54 percent overall open space through out this development. I'd like to point a few things for you. What we've done and the Comprehensive Plan is very specific about this plus the TATAC and that is try not just to have an area on the property that is set aside for open space near the front of the property and develop the back into lots. The purpose is really to incorporate the open space into the development and have it form an integral part of it. That is actually what has occurred here. This is really a series of six different village neighborhoods quite frankly, centered around a large amount of open space in one and around and including open space for each one. Because of the scale of this is so large, I'd like to take a few minutes to point out some features. First of all, we've set aside a 154 -foot area all along the frontage of the property on Princess Anne Road. TATAC asked that we come away with a "boulevard" type capable area for all of Princess Anne Road. What you will have along this portion of Princess Anne Road is a 110 -foot right-of-way. You will have on either side of the 150 feet, so you will have a 300 -foot buffer adjacent a 110 -foot right-of-way all down Princess Anne Road. That is one of the smaller parts of the open area. The entrance to the property and agreed with staff to a single entrance on Princess Anne Road. It is a divided once you enter the property which staff has asked us to do. Interesting enough, as you meander through this property you are going to be passing through several hundred acres of open space in traversing the property from Princess Anne Road to Flanagan's Lane. At various points, you'll be driving along the corridor where the closest point, which is dust about here, is about 100 foot to the closest platted lot. Many of the distances between the road system here is going to be in excess of 200- 300 feet from closest lots. That will be the case throughout the entire length of that roadway except when you enter this Village B, based upon some recent changes, which were requested by the adjacent property owners on Flanagan's Lane. But I point out to Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 3 you that you have 256 acres of open space in this development. The bulk of that open space is along through the central areas to build it in. We've maintained all the forested areas and wetland areas here. The only forested areas that we're impacting at all are for roadways and that is right through here. That is so we can use that area an entrance of the site to really create a beautiful wooded entrance to that feature. The other fact is that regrettably all of our frontage along where the access was possible is fully wooded so we had no choice. Barring that, which you will have a beautiful wooded entrance into the property. The other feature is that inside each of the villages and there are six villages, four of them "A", "C", "D" and "F", are non -age restricted. They are all clustered together. They range in size from 20,000 square foot lots to 12,000 square foot lots. Two of the villages, `B" and "E" are age restricted, active adult community, with head of household is 55 years of age or older and it's further restricted just like West Neck so that no one under the age of 18 may reside on the property for periods of 120 days at a time. Those are the two significant features. They follow almost the identical proffers that you saw in West Neck, which received such rave reviews by the City. The other important features are the connectivity plan, if I could Stephen. There we go. We have over eight miles of trail systems within Ashville Park. The connectivity plan was designed to do three things. First is to provide complete inner connectivity or pedestrian walkways and trails inside each village. Secondly, every one of the six villages is also connected. Those are the areas in green that you might be able to make out here. Finally, we've provided through the red area here, here, here, here and here interconnected here which is the Flanagan's Lane exits access some sort of connectivity to the adjacent properties. Our problem with some of these is that these properties are not yet developed. We're not quite sure where that connectivity might tie in. The one I'm pointing to now and Heritage Park and this one at Heritage Park both a line with existing connectivity with path systems and road systems inside the adjacent subdivision. Ronald Ripley: R.J. you're running out of time. R.J. Nutter: I can tell. Let me just do two comments then on street closure and subdivision and I'll introduce Mr. Fuller if I could. Ronald Ripley Make it brief please. R.J. Nutter: I sure will. The street closure application and if I could go back to the previous plan Stephen, the master plan perhaps. Thank you. Flanagan's Lane comes up in this fashion is going to be closed from here which it currently exists in this fashion just about a 90 degree angle and connects in here to another 90 degree angle and continues out like this. This portion of Flanagan's Lane will be closed. The conditions proposed by staff are acceptable. We've worked very hard and we appreciate his help. It does require that the cul-de-sac inside Ashville Park at both of these intersections. I point this out because we made a point to do so along the residents of Flanagan's Lane, which result in this portion of Flanagan's Lane almost becoming a private road for the residents along Flanagan's Lane. There will be no vehicular access through this part of the property at all. Finally, is the subdivision variance and the sole reason for the subdivision Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 4 variance is largely a result of the TATAC Committee recommendations that we reduce the amount of impervious area within the transition zone and build a smaller street width. This is an area that I want to focus on for one minute and because there is some unfinished business left with the TATAC Commission and what the Comprehensive Plan should call for. Everyone likes the idea of going with a smaller size street, which we proposed. These are beautiful streets. You'll find all of the sidewalks and all of the road curves are exposed aggregate. The point here is that right now unless the City can get the ability to have maintenance funds for those road systems then we jeopardize the ability to install those road systems. We understand staff's comments that they want to have maintenance funds for those roads but VDOT has to acknowledge that. In my mind, this is unfinished business we need to attend to because quite frankly, we're requesting a variance and the conditions are fine. I wanted to let you know that I think we have to focus more on working with VDOT to allow maintenance funds for road systems that are built to state standards but have a slightly smaller road width. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. R.J. Nutter: Thank you. And, I would like to introduce Mr. Fuller, who has come up today from Atlanta. Stephen, I'd like to introduce you and for you to say a few words. Stephen Fuller: Thank you. I'll keep it brief. Flash me if you need to. I'm Stephen Fuller and our firm is located at Atlanta. We've been in business for right at 20 years. I started right out of Georgia Tech. The heart of our firm is our architects, residential designers designing homes. But over the 20 year career that we've had we became very frustrated that most of our homes, no matter how well designed were always more than likely put into very typical suburban environments driven by really nothing but lot yield and streets, and houses and private backyards. You tend never see kind of quality open spaces that you would see in the classic 20-30 neighborhoods that are really found in almost every American city. So the last ten years inspired by a lot of great planning started to see. The architectural world single-family wise really began to study classic old neighborhoods. We have great ones in Atlanta. Druid Hills and Meyers Park in Charlotte and even historical places like Savannah and Charleston. From that have really tried to revive what makes a classic American neighborhood work from a land planning and a landscaping architectural level. The combination of classic really wonderful beautiful architecture combined with great upfront planning makes for fabulous places to live both architecturally and in the green space area. So, when we got here and started to foresee this project we were really interested. First of all, there had been so much concern and planning up front on your part in terms of the TATAC documents in the transition area and the concerns that you had so this plan has a lot of detail in it in terms of the land planning and I won't go through all of it but various types of green spaces and natural spaces. They break down from gigantic large spaces down to very beautiful little independent park spaces that may not have more than three or four homes placed on that unique space. It's very comprehensive but even at the level that you see it at its really only 20 percent of our work. The bulk of our 40 men company, are really architects concerned with the homes themselves. We'll work every builder at the bulk of Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 5 landscaping level and the architectural over the next 5 years or however long it takes to make sure that this project is truly a new classic neighborhood. Ronald Ripley: Mr. Fuller, you've run out of time. Stephen Fuller: Oh, I'm sorry. Ronald Ripley: We will have some questions we would like to ask you. Stephen Fuller: Okay. Creat. Ronald Ripley: I'd like to give you an opportunity. Stephen Fuller: Do you want me to stay up? Ronald Ripley: Yes. Stay up if you will. I'd like to start off with a question. Can you explain the differences in the matter that you lay your subdivisions out versus your traditional subdivision? It seems quite unique, if you don't mind. Stephen Fuller: The first thing we do and real quickly is look at the raw land. We look at what's there that's worth preserving such as trees and natural components. Just like you would design a house on a specific lot and if there's 200 year old Oak trees that becomes a key feature that you're going to work with not ignore. We did that. There were several patches of mature trees. In some cases, they were very straight edge because it had been farmed. We'd like to go back and sculpt that a little bit to re -naturalize that. Then on the inside of that we looked at how the circulation needs to work and start to break down the scale of the place. So the green spaces not only break down in scale. Ronald Ripley: There's a pointer there by the way. Do you see that black one? Stephen Fuller: I've got one. I just forgot that I had it in my hand. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Stephen Fuller: The different scales of the places and unfortunately you could really zoom in on almost anyone of these little tiny spaces and they are already starting to show some of the features that will eventually will end up at the fine detail level whether it be fountains or edge conditions, fence roses, hedge rows, alleys of trees. We dust begin to work that whole piece of property almost like you're laying out a floor plan of a house. Again, just like residential architectural, we like our street systems to be very fluent. No dead ends. Just like you don't want to walk into a dead end room of a house. When you go into a neighborhood you want to have a lot of flow and a lot of connectivity is what you guys call it, not dust internally but for the next great place that's going to happen down stream or up stream. So, I didn't really know how to describe that but it's a whole realistic approach. When we lay out these roads and these lots and these parks, again Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 6 keep in mind, every lot in here shows a house plan already. We're already thinking in terms of garages, front orientations, porches, so when the architecture starts to fall in and it's not by accident. There are already pads and orientations hierarchy of lot sizes, styles of architectures, these neighborhoods will independently become wonderful places. We can even sort of dial architectural changes into these various neighborhoods based on the land plans and price points and lot sizes. So, we can introduce Georgian styles, little country styles, front row house on parks and open spaces could be mandated to have porches, interior lots with more emphasis on rear elevations. So, there's a lot to what we eventually will bring to the table in terms of design. Ronald Ripley: Will you be doing the design of the various homes in there or will you be approving those designs? Stephen Fuller: We'll be doing a combination of both. When we're dealing typically with larger builders and some of these sections in here may involve a building company that's larger in terms of the volume, we'll deal directly with them and they'll become our client. We'll pass from the developer to that builder. In other cases where we're dealing with smaller builders a lot of times we may not deal directly with them. What we'll do is what we call "home libraries" we'll prototype houses that basically those builders will use to work with their local in house designers. We write guidelines that talk about how to do everything from frame dormers to bay windows and porches. So either by continuing again, the guidelines and the process that you guys have put into place we become that independent architectural level in the community, either by completely designing the houses or writing the guidelines that they will have to adhere to. Ronald Ripley: What if the builder says he's not going to do something will you try to reach an agreement on what's acceptable? Stephen Fuller: Documents and some things that we'll produce will become part of the covenant and they'll have to agree to abide by those before they can buy lots in there legally. If they don't they obviously it falls on the developer to buy back their lots to not let that particular builder continue to build in there. Ronald Ripley: Dot, did you have a question? Dorothy Wood: You covered my question. I'm just a little excited about it. It's a beautiful quality. Thank you. Stephen Fuller: Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other questions of Mr. Fuller? Eugene Crabtree: I've like what they've done. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 7 Stephen Fuller: I appreciate you moving me up on the agenda. My five-month pregnant wife will appreciate me making it home for dinner. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Robert Miller: Gene Hanson. Gene Hanson: Chairman Ripley, ladies and gentlemen of Planning Commission. My name is Gene Hanson. I'm an equestrian farm owner in Pungo so I like hearing nice things about horse farms. I'm here to talk in favor of Ashville Park development. Even though that might hinder assessment valuation in my neck of the woods. I'm here not so much to talk about the quality of the project that I watch you develop. I think it's going to be second to none, so, my apologies to some of my friends who are developers in Virginia Beach. I'm here to talk about something that I think is really important for this area and the Transition Area. I was on the Transition Area Committee so what goes on in the Transition Area is very important to me. I'm here to talk about the quality of the people involved here. The gentleman who was not introduced is Lewis McMurran, who is really the primary developer here. I've known Lewis for many years. I've ridden horses with his wife. He has stayed at my house before. I have broken bread with him. I have verbally been at elbow with him on more than once or twice and I have spent time with his family in his in Carrolton as well. I think there's not a more honorable person with whom you can invite to become the new pillar of the community in Virginia Beach. I would be tickled pink to see not only unanimously that the Commission accept this new proposal but welcome Lewis and the people that he is bringing here to really help the Transition Area become what we all have as far as vision. That's it. Any questions? Ronald Ripley: I've got a question Gene. Gene Hanson: Sure. Ronald Ripley: Having served on that committee, do you think he meets the intent of the guidelines to the extent that you were all looking for? Gene Hanson: I will tell you there's a practical hint that I gave to Dick Browner and that is they are obviously not farmers because they don't know that a practical mower depth is eight feet. Why? So, I looked at the size of the trails initially and now I've been talking to them about horse trails so they will expand just slightly so they can make one pass with a large mower depth to be more efficient. The trails are multipurpose trails are wonderful. As was pointed out there's a lot of connectivity. Even they made available places to connect to other developments that don't even exist yet. That's a plus. It isn't dust one spot coming into our area. It's throughout. From somebody who ndes horses down thin narrow streets in the Pungo area, I can tell you that it will be real nice to be on this trails and connect through the rest of the Transition Area. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Yes. Don. Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 8 Donald Horsley: So these trails will be multipurpose so you can use horses? We were told this morning that they would not be horse trails. Gene Hanson: I don't know who you told you that but if Lewis McMurran is going to try and keep me off these trails he's got another thought coming. Donald Horsley: I think there must be some confusion there. Ronald Ripley: We'll have Mr. R.J. Nutter address that when he comes back up. R.J. Nutter: I'll try to address that. Ronald Ripley: Do you want to that when you rebuttal? Make a note of that R.J. Gene Hanson: I'd be trespassing otherwise. Donald Horsley: I'm impressed that there will be horse riding especially when I asked this morning. I thought that what we were talking about all along. Gene Hanson: Absolutely. Donald Horsley: Any connectivity with the trails to the Equi -kids site? Gene Hanson: Yes. That's the two from this diagram that he pointed to that looks to the north. Yes, there will be. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other questions? Thank you very much. Gene Hanson: Thank you. Robert Miller: I believe the name is Herb Jones. I'm not sure if I got the name. Herb Jones: Things are kind of in the eye of the beholder as I listen to other speakers. But I speak with some reservations and some questions. I'd like to be begin, for instance by saying that on Page 144 of the Comprehensive Plan, "direct access from Princess Anne Road or Nimmo Parkway to new development sites adjacent to these roads are discouraged." The Ashville Park proffer two says, "the principle entranceway to the property shall be from Princess Anne Road." That's an inconsistency. It says "access from this internal circulation system to surrounding residential neighborhoods should be provided." That means that a road from one to another. The only connectivity that I see from neighborhood to neighborhood is arrows depicting pedestrian paths. I see no distinction of a road going from Ashville Park to Heritage Park or to the area in Flanagan's Lane. So, then I have some questions. What would be the developer's proffer for the new intersection at Flanagan's Lane and Sandbridge Road? Isn't Linear Park the same as a street with trees? What is a pocket park? And who will be allowed to Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 9 use pocket parks? Will the recreational activity amenities be accessible to all in Virginia Beach or just the residents of Ashville Park? Was a yield study done? I think I heard the designer say that a yield study was done to determine, you know, what's there before we begin to say what developable acres within the 474 acres. We're putting 490 homes on the 474 acres. Is clustering that is called for on the Comprehensive Plan the same as building on smaller lots with limited use? And there are a lot of those lots that don't see anything but the lot next door if you look at the plan. Who will pay for the connective linkages between the developments that were depicted but not described? Is the City going to pay for those or will the developers? I think we need an explanation on how they figure 56 percent open space. Oh by the way, I'm working from a September draft of the proposal and not the most recent one. It talks about the City will does not stand to fund public infrastructure necessary to support new workman level grills in the Transition Area. As of October 2003, I went to Kellam High School and Princess Anne Middle School and talked with the principal to find that one was 500 over capacity right now and the other was 200 over capacity. Those are not the same numbers I see in today's draft of their proposal. I think the Comprehensive Plan talks about regional storm water plans. Maybe there should have been some effort to make regional storm water plans with these two large developments with Heritage Park and Ashville Park. It's not to have their little BMP. Of course, this is going to impact the Back Bay and what's there. I have other comments to make. My time is up. I'll answer questions. I had a lot of questions about the plan. I hope that someone will answer them. Thank you very much. Ronald Ripley: Are there any questions of Mr. Jones? Donald Horsley: I just like getting Mr. Scott to clarify the first statement you made about the Comprehensive Plan and the access to Princess Anne Road. Herb Jones. The actual size was page 144 of the Comprehensive Plan. Donald Horsley: He is going to comment on it. Robert Scott: I don't think policy like is intended to prohibit a 400-500 acre track that has frontage on Princess Anne Road having any access to it. I think we were considered about individual lot have frontage or access onto Princess Anne Road which of course this plan avoids. I am not able to see how one access point onto Princess Anne Road would attract that big is a violation of the concepts. Herb Jones: I guess my question was when I read through the proposal was any effort made to make the major entrance off of Flanagan's Lane rather than off of Princess Anne Road? It would seem to me to be less confusing then to put it off of Princess Anne Road. I realize that they offered another five feet now of roadway so they make it a 110 foot roadway rather a hundred in the proposal that I read. But it seems to me that it would be less confusing and less of a pattern to be placed of Princess Anne Road because we don't know what's going to happen to Princess Anne Road down the road. Excuse me for the redundancy. I did want to make one other comment. There is nothing in the proposal Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 10 that talks about horse trails. There's no word "horse" or "equestrian" in there because I looked very carefully. Donald Horsley: I think we're going to get that explanation momentarily. Herb Jones: Are there any other questions? Ronald Ripley: Yes. Barry. Barry Knight: Mr. Jones, I think the developer will probably answer your questions shortly. I believe they had, like you stated two options, Princess Anne Road or Flanagan's Lane. I believe the residents on Flanagan's Lane actually wanted it closed so there wouldn't be any traffic on Flanagan's Lane. Herb Jones: That's the east end of Flanagan. I'm talking about putting it on the west end of Flanagan as opposed to Princess Anne Road. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Herb Jones: Thank you. Robert Miller: William Bailey. No William Bailey? Two people got up but nobody came forward. Okay. Steven Berman. Steven Berman: I'll get up. Robert Miller: You can be William Bailey. Steven Berman: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. My name is Steve Berman and I live at 1685 Flanagan's Lane here in Virginia Beach. My family and I have lived in Virginia Beach for about 30 years now. For the past 18 years, we've lived on Flanagan's Lane. We dearly love the place. As a matter of fact, we moved there to primarily get away from Kempsville. We saw all the congestion. We love Kempsville but we saw the growth and development occurring so we decided as well as so many other people on Flanagan's Lane to move to the country, to some open spaces. Recently, I had a good opportunity to meet with the residents of Flanagan's Lane. We've met at my home on a couple of occasions. We've met with Jim Reeves who is a Council member and we've also met with Dick Browner, who is one of the planners for this project of Ashville Park to at least discuss some of the concerns involving this new development. We sent each of you as Commissioners and each of the City Council members a letter including a signed petition signed by all eight residents of Flanagan's Lane requesting that Flanagan's Lane, on the west end be either cul-de-sac'd or dead ended at the Berman property which is my property. We had an opportunity to talk with many people from Back Bay from the civic leagues and most of our concern has been along the lines of all the development that's occurring and all of you are very aware of the development that's occurring starting with Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 11 Heritage Park. We knew that once that was approved it was going to be "me too" everybody stepping up to the plate and saying we want to get our property now developed now that Heritage Park had been approved. I would like to make a comment that I am a co-owner of a founder of a company here in Virginia Beach that does a lot of training that deals with public involvement, training courses with the Army Corps of Engineers down Huntsville, Alabama. It's a delightful course that we provide to some of the people in the Army Corps of Engineers. But one of the things that really was pointed out to me and one of the people that I would at least like to give some kudos to in and appreciate is Dick Browner. Dick has come forth to at least let us know as residents what in fact he was calling for and what he was looking at least in terms of being proposed. I do appreciate Dick coming to our meetings and sharing information so that it's not after the fact but working with us as residents so I do appreciate that. All of us know that there has been massive development going on and perhaps this particular development is one of the most massive one that has occurred in the last twenty years which really affects the open space. I know there have been a lot of changes to the Comprehensive Plan to the green line to the Transition line and so forth but we are very much concerned in terms of this development that's occurring. Ronald Ripley: Mr. Berman, you're running out of time. Steven Berman: Okay. Ronald Ripley: Maybe you can summarize? Steven Berman: I'd like to summarize by saying that there are a number of proffers that have been asked for by the Flanagan's Lane residents. Very quickly, these are just five or six proffers if I may. One was to cul-de-sac Flanagan's Lane as a dead end, to open the new road from Princess Anne to the end of Flanagan's Lane. We found out this morning that is to be done within four years as opposed to two years now. That Flanagan's Lane not be used for Ashville Park construction or village residence until the new road is completed or the project is completed. Developer provided undulating berms, which include shrubberies and trees and appropriate fencing. Modify the plan entrance on Flanagan's Lane. There has been a lot of discussion about where Flanagan's Lane would be. Our recommendation and request that it be moved closer to Sandbridge Road and the last thing, if possible to look at the developer providing the actual water and sewer hookup ties that will be close to where our development is so that all the people in Flanagan's Lane can tie up. Again, we do not really object to the development we just like to make sure that the proffers are provided and I really appreciate Mr. Strange stepping out and making his vote earlier. 1997 was not that long ago in terms of the proffers being established. It's important that if you establish proffers now that at least some how we enforce those proffers whenever they may be. Thank you. Any questions? Ronald Ripley: Questions? Thank you very much. Steven Berman: Thank you very much. Items #28,,29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 12 Ronald Ripley: That is all the speakers. Mr. Nutter, do you wish to address? R.J. Nutter: Thank you. First, a couple of items and Mr. Berman, I'm happy he could be here today. Dick and many of us on this team have met at his residence on a number of occasions. In dust about every incidence we have already modified the proffers to provide in fact the things that he had requested. I would like to go over those for a second. As you know, originally we did have a road that connected into Flanagan's Lane near his property. We did modify at their request. When I spoke with Mr. Berman earlier he indicated that he just wants to make sure that these proffers of record and I wanted to assure him that they are. I want to assure that these are deed restrictions. As you said, Ms. Wood, to modify a proffer, sometimes that is necessary. It requires notice, a new public hearing before the Planning Commission and City Council. We don't anticipate that. We have designed this development around the things he has requested. The other issues, the berming, we have a specific plan called the berm plan. It's not in the booklet I've given but it's part of the proffers that addresses the berming, the location of the ditch, the location of where the buffer area will be measured from, all that was a specific request to the residents of Flanagan's Lane. So, that's another advantage point from the developer's point of view in meeting these residents in advance so we could address those. If I could, I'd like to also address some of the issues raised by Mr. Jones. I didn't bring page 144 of the Comprehensive Plan with me but I do think and my sense is that what we're referring to designing developments so they do not have direct access for each lot along a mayor arterial. We've done that in every other place in the City. We've done it here. In fact, we originally proposed given the size of this and in fact that we had several thousand footage of frontage on Princess Anne Road to the west two access ways. Staff asked us to reduce it to one. So, I think we're more than compliance with that. You will also note that we don't have any individual lots on Princess Anne Road fronting at all. So, I think we comply there. I think and I'm trying to go to the page regarding the issue of parks. Who owns them and who maintains them? The parks are in large measure private. They will be maintained by a Homeowners Association. We have linear parks. We have pocket parks. We have village greens. All those are inside the development, inside each village. Then we have large open space areas. Those are maintained by the HOA, by the residents in that area. So it will not be a drain on the public. Most of the trail systems are in fact private. It goes to provide for connectivity we do know that we have to provide key trails that are available to the public and we will be doing that where we indicated except we need to modify them based upon the new development that is not yet defined on property adjacent to us. But the majority of the system is in fact private for the benefit of the residents. The nice part about it is if this was a golf course that may be more open to the public for a fee but ironically it's not open to the main residents. It's reasonably restricted to the residents. They can't wander on to a golf course. There are liability questions. The golfers don't like it. So, in many ways, this open space is far more accessible to the residents of this community than is a typical golf course. So, I hope that answer some of this questions. You also asked about equestrian. It's been an issue. Let me try to address that for you. Mr. McMurran, his wife as you know is a quite an equestrian herself. So, we have recognized the desire of the community and the TATAC community to start looking at access for those facilities. Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 13 We also recognize that there is a certain amount of incompatability for a person on a horse and a person on a bicycle or jogger. I'm afraid that's the nature of living with those beautiful animals. They are skittish and they are all unique. They are very big and powerful and can do a great deal of damage. As a result, what we have done is work with Mr. Hanson and exactly Mr. McMurran has about looking at an independent trail for horses that does not coincide with those trails but at the same time provides access through the development. We have not yet identified it. We asked that it be located not behind homes but away through the wooded areas where adjacent properties. We're still working on that design but I can tell you that we are planning on providing that. The eight miles of trails that I dust mentioned are independent of this system I've dust talked about. Ronald Ripley: Where do you think these trails would run? R.J. Nutter: Generally speaking, we've looked through here. We've looked at some portion. This is one scenario that is behind homes so we're not too crazy about that one. We are looking predominately in this area. We have the U.S. Fish and Wildlife facility here. We could provide some access on this side. We have an area through here that can provide access out through this side. So, we are looking at doing that but I hope you'll understand. Ronald Ripley: I would think on the right-of-way for sure. Would you not? R.J. Nutter: The right-of-way. Ronald Ripley: The main right-of-way R.J. Nutter: The main right-of-way is separated quite a bit, no one horse is being scared by a passerby Ronald Ripley: That would seem to be part of the guidelines that came out. That was the idea. I'm talking about Princess Anne Road. R.J. Nutter: Sure. Along Princess Anne Road we have not. A meeting with Dean Block we've asked him to come up with a plan for where he wants to put the trail system. For instance, one of the questions was we did not show and I can't give you a line down here because we weren't sure if the City wanted the trail system to a sidewalk, an eight foot wide paved concrete facility or an eight foot wide part through facility. We weren't sure if they wanted it to be meandering through the woods or adjacent to the right-of-way. Ronald Ripley: Would the developer be putting that in? R.J. Nutter: We're putting that in. Ronald Ripley: Once the City identifies what they want. Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 14 R.J. Nutter: Yes sir. We asked Dean to let us know and Dean has been wonderful about acknowledging they haven't focused much on that yet. We are working very closely with Dean's office. That's a good example of trying to provide that connectivity but at the same time have a natural separation for certain type of uses. They might be in conflict with one another. This William Bailey who did appear there was one gentleman here from the fire department. Robert Miller: That is who that was? R.J. Nutter: Is that who it was? I didn't recognize his name. The first department owns a piece of property I believe is roughly right in here. They are in the process of proposing to build a small softball field, a two -acre softball field and they wanted to make sure that it would not be next to this property and there wouldn't be any interference and after we located it on the map he decided to leave and indicate to me that I could indicate that he was here and had no objections at all. I did want to close with that but I hope that answers your questions. We have pocket park demonstrations. You name it. You may be tired of this by now but I do want to let you know that we came fully prepared before you today. Ronald Ripley: I think Dot has a question. Dorothy Wood: R.J., I'm sure that you'll be willing to meet with Mr. Jones between now and Council and go over his concerns. Would you not? R.J. Nutter: Certainly. I have no problem with that whatsoever. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. R.J. Nutter: Yes ma'am. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other questions of R.J.? Barry. Barry Knight: R.J. You were right. I do recognize all the families that own that land in this neck of the woods. Some of them are very good friends of mine and I know they've had reservations of selling their land for years and years. I really believe that some of them, and the only reason they are willing to sell their land, is because it is an assemblage of land that's going to be a quality development. There are two things about this that first strike you and that is the quality of it and also it is fairly massive when you look at it. I know that's exactly what TATAC wanted was to assemble a lot of tracks so you could have a plan for one large parcel of property. Would you tell us if you can roughly where your going to start building and roughly where you're going to end up and roughly what time frame we're talking about because I know it's not all going to happen in six months. R.J. Nutter: That's very true. I'm happy to do that. These are not well defined phase levels, but we have discussed this at great length so I can give you the benefit for all that Items #28,29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 15 thought. Phase I is basically going to be the development of Villages "A" and `B" through here and the start of the recreational facility right through here. This process we anticipate occurring somewhere between 2006 & 2009. We anticipate approximately a year or less to get through site plan, subdivision review, construction plan review and approvals. We anticipate approximately that it will be about 2004. We anticipate approximately a year of infrastructure improvements about 2005 and therein probably start up some the hard construction of homes somewhere in late 2005 — 2006 some of the models. We think these areas will go probably, we anticipating in about three years. Phase II is really the continuation of Flanagan's throughout to here and the construction of Village "C" and Village "E", which is the second of the two age restricted. That's anticipated some place in 2009 & 2012. And the final phases, which may well overlapped in some degree particularly Village "D" will be Villages "D" and "F" and they are considered to be brought on line by 2012 — 2015. So, even though it is large, it is a long build out, Barry I think is your point. The other and to give you an example for the next just about through 2009 you're looking at basically, I think is 135 non age restricted lots coming online and 104 age restricted lots coming online. So, between now and 2009 is a slower process. You won't see 490 units on day one. That's a pretty good estimate what we've been able to look at and talking with Mr. Fuller and the engineers and Mr. McMurran the developer. I hope that's a help to you Mr. Knight. Ronald Ripley: Charlie, you had a question. Charlie Salle': R.J., I think you indicated a number of connected areas where the trails would connect to other properties. Could you point out where they connect? How these connections lead to public trails that traverse this project? R.J. Nutter: Yes sir. I'll be happy to. This connection here is tied to a 50 -foot tie in Heritage Park that could either be vehicular or pedestrian in nature. It's 50 -foot wide on both sides. We've indicated in design not to have vehicular connectivity. Charlie Salle': Let me ask you this. That provides a way to get from this project to that one but can they get to that project to this one? R.J. Nutter: Yes. What I'm saying exactly is this point here, and this point here, are lined with the Heritage Park development at that location where they have provided access themselves. Charlie Salle': Once they enter this project what trail are they limited to? R.J. Nutter: Once they enter this project there will be public trail system. In reality, quite frankly, unless this becomes a burden the public can go on any trails to be perfectly honest with you but there will be trails that will be specifically earmarked for them but they are designed so that anyone from the properties here and Heritage Park or the adjacent developments that might occur in the future here can bisect this property through the trail system and get to the other side. Some will come here and be able to go in this Items #28,29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 16 direction. Some will come out here and be able to come down in this direction. We have not provided paths in here yet because we're not sure where that's going to be but we do have a series of trails that are traversed these areas as well. We want to make sure that everyone knows that you will be able to get through this property. And you will be get through east and west. We have not tied in here. We do have a Coast Guard facility here and the existing Flanagan's Lane runs here so we have the opportunity to connect to here to come out to Princess Anne Road and go down in that fashion. There are multiple options as you can see. Charlie Salle': Will those trails dust be pedestrian? R.J. Nutter: Those are pedestrian trails. Yes sir. Somewhere there looks like an equestrian trail through here somewhere but the majority of these are meant to be bike and walking and jogging paths. Ronald Ripley: I think that's it. R.J. Nutter: Thank you very much Mr. Ripley. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. I think Gene Hanson wanted to readdress us if it's new information? Gene Hanson: I don't want to take Mr. Nutter's, I guess podium that way but one thing that I did not say when I was up here is that I sit on the Virginia Horse Council. I'm also on the Virginia Horse Council Trails Committee. So, I'd like for education purposes to let you know a little bit about horse trails. It will only take me a second to get it out. There are many municipal parks now in the Commonwealth that encourage multipurpose trails. The largest municipal park east of the Mississippi is Newport News City Park that abuts Yorktown Federal Battlefield Park. In both places, horses and all non -motorized vehicles joggers, pedestrians are allowed to use those trails indiscriminately. In fact, horses are encouraged to even have a place where people can bring in several different spots to park your trailers where an individual in a car you may have to pay to go in but if you bring in horses to go on the trails you do not. That's part of the Federal Battlefield Park. To the best of my knowledge and I ride those trails often and again, since I sit on the Trails Committee, there has not been any problem between this so call skittishness of horses. A horse is no different than any other pet. If you keep it under control you can ride it very well. If any of you have seen me I ride right down right side of the road in Pungo, right across the street without any problems. There are not enough trails here and I provided to Clay Bernick, who is in charge of trails for the City of Virginia Beach virtually every study that comes about regarding horseback riding trails throughout the United States and the cleanliness and the safety of having horse trails. I appreciate the concerns but it really isn't a red flag that I think needs to be raised. Thank you very much for having me to clarify that. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Okay. Discussion. Oh, a silent group today. Items #28,,29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 17 Donald Horsley: I'll start. I've seen sketches of the preliminary drawings on this project several months ago. It has really grown on me. I'm very impressed. I think this is something that when we look at the Transition Area, we didn't know what it was going to look like but I applaud the landowners for holding out. I know we've had golf courses talked about and other different amenities in that area but they were by individual landowners but this is a coordinated effort by a large group and a large tract of land and I think they kind of go along with the TATAC recommendations and I'm in favor of the project and whenever you're ready for a motion, I'm prepared to make one. Ronald Ripley: Charlie and Gene. Eugene Crabtree: I was just going to say that I think that we have accomplished things pretty well. I'm sorry Charlie. I'm for it. Charlie Salle': Okay. I'm going to support this project too. I think it's a wonderful design. I think in the past we've sort of seen the kind of design where you come in and go with houses on half of the property and you have the other half reserved for timber or open space or whatever and it wasn't a whole lot of thought in design and originality to it. It was just half undeveloped. I like the concept of incorporating the open space within the communities and making it a part of the community. It's almost like where you had a 100 acres or 50 acres left vacant for the people who live on the 50 acres that are developed, they hardly ever know that the open space is over there. The community they lived in was really not opened where this incorporates the open space in the community and makes it part of their community. I hope this will be the guideline for future development in the area. Ronald Ripley: Will. William Din: Frankly, I think this is a beautiful project. I think it provides a lot of the design aspects that we have been asking a lot of the developers to look at from a very large tract of property and I think that's one of the attributes of what we've been seeking to develop area like this comprehensively that you can see how it is going to build out to some degree. A lot of the parks provide the open space without clustering so to speak too much into smaller lots. This provides vistas from all these different areas and they are looking into parks. They are looking into open space areas that we seek and have tried to get other developers to provide in smaller developments but have been unable to because of the size of those developments. I think 50 percent open space area for this entire development is an attribute to the developer and I applaud Mr. Fuller for this. Seeing some of the development down in Atlanta, I think it's a lot of quality is going in this and I think the controls on the architectural styles and things is a great aspect of it. I too will possibly be supporting this. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Gene, did you want to add anything? Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 18 Eugene Crabtree: I'm sorry. I apologize to Charlie. I was listening but I wasn't listening. Ronald Ripley: I know. I do that all the time. Eugene Crabtree: I think this is, as Will said, I think this encompasses the thing that we have learned before to where that sort of and we had a couple of things before development by design and I think this fits that picture of development by design where they've gone in and looked at the land and the lay of the land and has actually developed and designed it around that. As Will said, I think this is actually what we're trying to accomplish here in the City. Ronald Ripley: Don. ' Donald Horsley: Mr. Chairman, I prepared to make a motion in that we approve the application of Ashville Park with the 35 proffers. I don't think I've ever seen an application that had 3 5 proffers. We're pretty well protected and I make a motion that we approve the application as proffered. Dorothy Wood: It's a pleasure to second your motion Mr. Horsley. Ronald Ripley: We have a motion by Don Horsley and a second by Dot Wood to approve it. Mr. Miller. Robert Miller: I need to abstain. My firm is working on the project. Donald Horsley: If we can get a quick vote we might be able to get home by the same time Mr. Fuller does tonight. Ronald Ripley: The only comment that I want to make is that I think that Mr. Hanson. Janice Anderson: I need to abstain also. My firm is working with one of the applicants on this project. Ronald Ripley: I think the discussion of the equestrian being folded to the path system and I'm hearing from the developer that is something they are going to do. I think it's important. I've received phone calls from citizens in the area who live down in the Transition Area and the rural area and they are looking for that and I think you heard it very strongly from Mr. Hanson. He's a very much a dominate part in that area. I think that's critical for you to address. We'll look for that to be done. I think that the quality of this is just exceptional. I have not seen entranceways and other connective techniques used in anything in this City like this. This is going to be something that I think will be an excellent icon for the Transition zone. So, with that, any other comments, we'll call for the question. Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 19 AYE 9 ANDERSON CR.ABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD AYE NAY 0 ABS 2 ABSENT 0 ABS ABS Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 9-0 with two abstentions, the motion carries. 1, NJ "M I,, ,, , — - I I it Supplemental Information Zoning History Conal ReZon:ng # I DATE J REQUEST ACTION 1 12-10- Conditional Use Permit (Borrow Pit) Denied 91 8-27-86 Rezoning ((R-3 Residential to AG -1 and AG -2 Approved Agricultural) 2-12-73 Conditional Use Permit (Small Bore Rifle and Pistol Approved Range) 2 8-12-03 Rezoning (AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural to Conditional R- Approved 20 Residential and Conditional P-1 Preservation) and a Conditional Use Permit (Open Space Promotion) 3 12-11- Conditional Use Permit (Rental) Approved 89 ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 20 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Ashville Park, L.L.C. — (a) Change of Zoning District Classification (AG -1 & AG -2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional PD -H2 Planned Unit Development District (R-30 & P-1) and (b) Subdivision Variance (Sec. 4.4(b) — minimum pavement width) MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: (a) An Ordinance upon Application of Ashville Park, L.L.C. for a Change of Zoning District Classification from AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional PD -1-12 Planned Unit Development District (R-30 & P-1). The Comprehensive Plan recommends use of this property for appropriate growth opportunities consistent with the economic vitality policies of the City of Virginia Beach. DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE (b) Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in regard to certain elements of the Subdivision Ordinance, Subdivision for Ashville Park, L.L.C. Property is located on the east side of Princess Anne Road, abutting the north and south sides of Flanagans Lane to its intersection with Sandbridge Road. (GPINS 2413071960;2413066259;2413167813;2413363862;2413464337; 2413570702; 2413555252; 2413754401). DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE ■ Considerations: The applicant proposes to develop the 474 -acre site with 490 single-family dwellings. The dwellings are divided into five "villages." Two of the villages are age -restricted for residents 55 and over. The total number of dwellings in the age -restricted villages equals 160, leaving 330 dwellings in the other three villages The resulting overall density is 1.03 units per acre. Each of the villages incorporates some degree of internal open space. A recurring feature in all of the villages is the "pocket park." These are open space areas typically shown along curves or corners of the interior streets. A second "pocket park street" defines the border of the open space and provides access to the dwellings across from the pocket parks. These pocket park streets are narrow lanes (22 -feet wide) that loop to the interior street and serve only a few houses each. Another unique feature of the subdivision design is the "linear park." These areas line segments of the internal streets and are intended to create the Ashville Park Page 2 of 2 appearance of more open space. The linear parks are created by setting the sidewalk back a considerable distance from the street. As a result, the dwellings are set very close to the sidewalks (the specific distance has not been specified in the pians). The green space between the street and the sidewalk is the linear park. The width of the linear parks varies but appears to average at 50 feet. The linear parks are actually privately owned but will be subject to an easement allowing public access through the area. They will be maintained by the Homeowners Association. Villages A and C will have the largest lots at 20,000 square feet. Villages D and F will have minimum lot sizes of 12,000 square feet. The age -restricted Villages B and E will have minimum lot sizes of 7,500 square feet. Specific details regarding the project are provided in the attached staff report under the section listing the proffers that will govern the development. Staff recommended approval of these requests. There was opposition to the requests. ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-0 with 2 abstentions to approve the requests as proffered and with the following condition attached to the Subdivision Variance: The applicant shall seek a variance from the Virginia Department of Transportation to allow state maintenance funding for the substandard pavement width request. If state maintenance funding is not granted, the Subdivision Approval shall be considered null and void. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statements Planning Commission Minutes Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/A ency: Planning Department *44*4 City Manager: K13-210-CRZ-2003 K13 -210 -STC -2003 K13 -210 -SVR -2003 ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 November 12, 2003 Public Hearing Staff Planners: Ashby Moss and Faith Christie The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. Location and General Information REQUESTS: 28. Change of Zoning District Classification from AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional PD -1-12 Planned Unit Development District (R-30 Residential and P-1 Preservation); 29. Street Closure for Flanagan's Lane (Portion of Flanagan's Lane 5,350 feet east of Princess Anne Road, running in a northeasterly direction a distance of 3,133 feet); 30. Subdivision Variance to Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet all the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance (minimum pavement width) LOCATION: Items 28 & 30 -- Property on the east side of Princess Anne Road, abutting the north and south sides of Flanagan's Lane to its intersection with Sandbridge Road; Item 29 -- Right-of-way located 5,350.2 feet east of Princess Anne Road, running in a northeast direction a distance of 3,133.16 feet. ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 1 `"`p "","'Ashville M4 Not to Scole Park LL(: AG -2 AG - AG -1 - ---- . • ■ ,. �. OIF AG- ' � � AG -2 �i f ' • la + , AG -2 G-2 A�, '2 G-2 I iA1 1 A� AG -I AG -1 o � i AGA 1 i , Cond ReZomng GPINS: 24130719600000;24130662590000;24131678130000; 24133638620000;24134643370000;24135707020000; 24135552520000;24137544010000 COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 7 - PRINCESS ANNE SITE SIZE: 474 acres (2.32 acres for Street Closure) EXISTING Currently, the site is under cultivation, with the remaining portion LAND USE AND wooded. The site is zoned AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural Districts. The ZONING: City's Agriculture Department reports that the development of the site as proposed will result in the reduction of approximately 410 acres of cropland. SURROUNDING North: • Cultivated fields and single-family dwellings / AG -1 LAND USE AND and AG -2 Agricultural and Conditional R-20 ZONING: Residential and Conditional P-1 Preservation (recently approved Heritage Park) South: . Untied States Coast Guard facility and an abandoned airfield / AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 2 • Single-family dwellings, wooded areas and East: cultivated fields / AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural • Princess Anne Road • Across Princess Anne Road are cultivated fields and single-family dwellings / AG -1 and AG -2 West: Agricultural NATURAL The site is almost completely under cultivation. The areas not under RESOURCE cultivation are wooded. The site drains either to the north toward AND Scopus Marsh and eastward to Ashville Bridge Creek and Back Bay. CULTURAL There are areas of non -tidal wetlands as defined by the U.S. Corps of FEATURES: Engineers (but not by the City) that will be preserved. On the eastern side of the site, approximately 4 acres, a portion of the proposed Village "F" is considered "floodplain subject to special restrictions" as regulated under the Site Plan Ordinance. The applicant proffers that a Letter of Map Amendment ("LOMA") must be approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) before any development may proceed within any area currently restricted by the Site Plan Ordinance. Should the LOMA be obtained, this issue will be moot. If the LOMA is not obtained, the applicant will be unable to develop the restricted area without obtaining a Floodplain Variance from City Council. From a cultural perspective, it appears that the City's most infamous character, the "witch of Pungo" Grace Sherwood, owned a portion of the site during her lifetime. According to City records John White, Grace's father, received a land patent of 195 acres at Ashville Creek at the east end of Muddy Creek in 1674. At his death, the property conveyed to James and Grace Sherwood. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn and 65 to 70dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. The United States Navy has commented that "The Navy's Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Program (AICUZ) views residential development as not compatible and discourages this use in the 65-70 dB Ldn. The Navy acknowledges the landowners desire to develop their property, but ask you to seriously consider the additional population that would be exposed to aircraft operations from NAS Oceana. We would view residential development at this site as an encroachment upon operations at NAS Oceana." ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 3 Major Issues The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this request. Staff's evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these issues are adequately addressed. • Consistency with Comprehensive Plan policies and the Transition Area Design Guidelines • Impact on City systems (transportation, utilities, schools). • Compatibility with the surrounding area in terms of land use. Comprehensive Pian The Comprehensive Plan Map depicts this area of the city as the Transition Area, planned for appropriate growth opportunities consistent with the economic vitality policies of the City of Virginia Beach. This area serves as a land use buffer between the urban northern portion of the city and the rural southern portion of the city. Land uses and densities within this area should not be a continuation of either form but a transition from one to the other. Staff evaluated the proposed development using the latest Comprehensive Plan Policies for the Transition Area, including the Transition Area Matrix and the Design Guidelines. Staff concludes that the development satisfies the recommendations of the plan in regard to design and that the dwelling unit density proposed falls within the guidelines regarding maximum allowable density in the Transition Area (a copy of the matrix is included at the end of this report). f Summary of Proposa The applicant proposes to develop the 474 -acre site with 490 single-family dwellings. The dwellings are divided into five "villages." Two of the villages are age -restricted for ASHVILLE. PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 4 residents 55 and over. The total number of dwellings in the age -restricted villages equals 160, leaving 330 dwellings in the other three villages. The resulting overall density is 1.03 units per acre. A major part of this request includes a street closure for a portion of Flanagan's Lane. The applicant will construct and dedicate a new street that will connect Princess Anne Road to the remaining section of Flanagan's Lane near the Sandbridge Road intersection. The applicant will also construct cul-de-sacs to terminate the two remaining sections of Flanagan's Lane. One of the cul-de-sacs will be located at the end of the Lane adjacent to the Coast Guard property; the other will be located just past the southwest corner of the Berman property. The new road will begin from a point on Princess Anne Road approximately 1,000 feet north of Flanagan's Lane to a point on Flanagan's Lane approximately 800 feet west of its intersection with Sandbridge Road. The new proposed alignment for Sandbridge Road is not affected by this application. The new road winds through the property's open space with the exception of one area in which it runs through a village (Village D). In this area, the road splits off into two roads leading around a large central open space for this village. Each of the villages incorporates some degree of internal open space. A recurring feature in all of the villages is the "pocket park." These are open space areas typically shown along curves or corners of the interior streets. A second "pocket park street" defines the border of the open space and provides access to the dwellings across from the pocket parks. These pocket park streets are narrow lanes (22 -feet wide) that loop to the interior street and serve only a few houses each. Another unique feature of the subdivision design is the "linear park." These areas line segments of the internal streets and are intended to create the appearance of more open space. The linear parks are created by setting the sidewalk back a considerable distance from the street. As a result, the dwellings are set very close to the sidewalks (the specific distance has not been specified in the plans). The green space between the street and the sidewalk is the linear park. The width of the linear parks varies but appears to average at 50 feet. The linear parks are actually privately owned but will be subject to an easement allowing public access through the area. They will be maintained by the Homeowners Association. Villages A and C will have the largest lots at 20,000 square feet Villages D and F will have minimum lot sizes of 12,000 square feet. The age -restricted Villages B and E will have minimum lot sizes of 7,500 square feet. Other dimensional requirements are listed in proffers 33 and 34 (see next section). ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 5 Fifty -foot buffers separating the rear of the proposed lots from the adjacent (off-site) properties are shown throughout the development. In addition, the applicant has proffered a landscaped berm north of Village D and east of Village C to screen the new dwellings from the existing property owners on Flanagan 9s Lane. A 150 -foot buffer will be provided along Princess Anne Road as measured from the ultimate right-of-way. Two recreational activity centers are proposed. One is intended for residents of the age -restricted villages and includes a clubhouse and pool. The second is for the other residents and includes a clubhouse, pool, tennis courts, playing fields, and tot lots. Both of these activity areas are located within the open space between the villages. Proffers "N The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to "offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable," (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. PROFFER # 1 The Property shall be developed substantially as shown on the "Master Plan of Ashville Park Virginia Beach, VA" dated 8/29/03 and designed by Stephen Fuller Places, LLC in conjunction with MSA, P.C., a copy of which has been exhibited to City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Planning Department (hereinafter, the "Master Plan"). PROFFER # 2 The principal entranceway to the Property shall be from Princess Anne Road which shall be substantially similar in design and quality to the exhibit entitled "Community Entrance Princess Anne Road" a copy of which is contained within Section V of the development manual entitled "Ashville Park" prepared by Stephen Fuller Places, LLC, a copy of which has been exhibited to the City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Planning Department (hereinafter the "Manual"). ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 6 PROFFER # 3 A second entranceway to the Property is located at Flanagans Lane near the intersection of Flanagans Lane and Sandbridge Road and shall be substantially similar in design and quality to the exhibit entitled "Community Entrance Flanagans Lane" prepared by Stephen Fuller Places, LLC, a copy of which is contained within Section V of the Manual. PROFFER # 4 Prior to the issuance of the first residential building permit within Village C and upon completion of at least two lanes of the public right-of-way running through Ashville Park from Princess Anne Road to the second entranceway of the Property at Flanagans Lane as referenced in proffer number 3, Grantor shall cul-de-sac Flanagans Lane within the confines of Ashville Park at two locations where depicted on the Master Plan. In addition to this improvement, when developing Village D, Grantor shall maintain a 50' buffer area along the northern perimeter of Village D which buffer shall be measured from the top of bank from the ditch currently existing along this portion of the Property or as it may be modified during the course of the site plan review. These improvements, together with an undulating berm along the northern limits of Village D, shall be developed substantially as shown on the Exhibit entitled Conceptual Site Layout Plan of Ashville Park, Berm Plan, Virginia Beach, Virginia, dated September 17, 2003, prepared by MSA, P.C., which plan shall have been exhibited to City Council and on file in the Planning Department of the City of Virginia Beach (hereinafter "Berm Plan") STREET SCAPE PROFFER # 5 The Grantor shall dedicate to the City of Virginia Beach sufficient land along the portions of the Property adjacent to Princess Anne Road of 55' in width as measured from the centerline of the right-of-way, to accommodate an ultimate 110' right-of-way. In addition to said dedication, Grantor agrees to dedicate to the City an additional 150' wide buffer as measured from the ultimate right-of-way dedication. The dedicated buffer shall be for public ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 7 purposes including open space, buffers, landscaping, utilities, roadways and trail purposes. Said buffer shall not restrict the development of the "Community Entrance Prospective" within Section V within the Manual. PROFFER # 6 The Grantor agrees that during the detailed site plan review to conduct a Traffic Impact Study of the impacts of Ashville Park. The Grantor agrees to substantially complete or bond the required improvements on Princess Anne Road at the entrance to Ashville Park that are called for in the Traffic Impact Study. Said improvements shall be substantially completed or bonded prior to the issuance of the first permanent occupancy permit for residents within Ashville Park. PROFFER # 7 The internal streets within Ashville Park shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the exhibit entitled "Typical Street Sections Plan of Ashville Park Princess Anne Road, Virginia Beach, Virginia", prepared by MSA, P.C., which exhibit has been displayed to the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach and is on file in the Virginia Beach Planning Department (hereinafter "Street Section Plan"). PROFFER # 8 All rolled curbs, drop inlets and sidewalks depicted on the Street Section Plan shall have an exposed aggregate finish. PROFFER # 9 All street lighting installed on the Property shall be a decorative style fixture and the height and separation of streetlights shall be determined during the detailed site plan review. PROFFER # 10 The trees planted within and adjacent to the public right-of- ways on the Property shall be double the total tree canopy requirements for public right-of-ways as set forth in the Department of Public Works Landscape Manual of the City of Virginia Beach. PROFFER # 11 Subject to confirmation by the City of the necessary 50' wide right-of-way widths and receipt by the City of all environmental permits from the Army Corp of Engineers and Department of Environmental Quality, Grantor shall ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 8 substantially improve or bond the costs of right-of-way improvements to Flanagans Lane beginning from the eastern -most entranceway to the Property from Flanagans Lane, continuing in an easterly direction to the intersection of Flanagans Lane and Sandbridge Road. Said improvements shall be substantially completed or bonded prior to the issuance of final occupancy permit for the first residence in Village D, E or F as depicted on the Master Plan. Said improvements shall be the widening of the existing lane with and the piping of the adjacent ditches, together with the portion of the future right-of-way traffic simulation generated by Ashville Park as determined during the detailed site plan review and the Traffic Impact Study performed by Grantor. These improvements shall be consistent with CIP Project No. 2.021.000 for rural road improvements in the City of Virginia Beach's Capital Improvement Program. THE VILLAGES OF ASHVILLE PARK PROFFER # 12 The Grantor shall record a Master Deed of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("Restrictions") governing the Property. All landowners within the PD -H2 District shall be members of a Home Owners Association responsible for maintaining collectively all common areas on the Property. The Restrictions shall be enforced by one or more Home Owners Association, which Restrictions, shall among other things, restrict the use of the open space areas for any purpose, but recreation and open space use. Such covenants shall run with the land and be in full force and effect for a period of at least fifty- (50) years. These covenants shall become part of the deed of each lot or parcel within the development. Such covenants shall be approved by the City Attorney and recorded before the first building permit in the project is issued. The Restrictions shall among other things require that every residential unit within Villages B and E as shown on the Master Plan will be occupied, on a full-time basis, by at least one (1) adult resident of fifty-five (55) years of age or older. The Restrictions shall also prohibit persons under eighteen (18) years of age from residing in any residential unit within Villages B or E for more than one hundred ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 9 twenty (120) days in any calendar year. PROFFER # 13 The total number of units developed in Village B shall not exceed 104 and the total number of units developed in Village E shall not exceed 5$ 56. All such units within Village B shall be single-family detached dwellings. The minimum lot size, internal open space area, buffers and acreages for each Village shall be as set forth in the Master Plan. PROFFER # 14 Villages A, C, D and F shall be developed substantially as depicted on the Master Plan. The total number of units developed in Village A shall not exceed 135 units. The total number of units developed in Village C shall not exceed 94 units. The total number of units developed in Village D shall not exceed 55 45. The total number of units developed in Village F shall not exceed 56. All units shall be single-family detached dwellings within these Villages. The minimum lot size, internal open space area, buffers and acreages for each Village shall be as set forth in the Master Plan. PROFFER # 15 The linear parks depicted within Villages A, C, D and F shall be maintained by the Home Owners Association and no structure shall be allowed within the linear parks other than uniform fencing, or other uniform decorative features, and mailboxes. The Pocket Parks depicted on the Master Plan shall be developed and constructed substantially as depicted on the Master Plan. The Pocket Parks shall be owned and maintained by the Home Owners Association. All sidewalks and trails located outside of the public rights- of-way shall be maintained by the Home Owners Association. PROFFER # 16 A Letter of Map Amendment ("LOMA") must be approved by FEMA before any development may proceed within any Special Flood Hazard Area. PROFFER # 17 The residential lot tree canopy for each residential lot on the Property shall be double the total canopy cover specified in the City of Virginia Beach's "Residential Tree Request Table" in effect as of September 1, 2003. ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 10 PROFFER # 18 A minimum 50' buffer shall be established on the perimeters of the Property as shown on the Master Plan. No structures shall be allowed within the buffer area and the buffer area shall be maintained by the Home Owners Association. No community wide or other activity other than maintenance shall occur within the Buffer area. RECREATIONAL AND OPEN SPACE AREAS PROFFER # 19 Two Recreational Activity Areas shall be designed, constructed and built on the Property substantially where indicated on the Master Plan. Both facilities shall provide indoor amenities, meeting rooms and active outdoor recreational amenities. No outside recreational fields or sporting areas shall be lighted to permit sporting events at night. This restriction shall not prohibit lighted outdoor swimming pools or lighted outdoor tennis courts provided that any such lighted tennis courts must be setback a minimum of 150' from a residential property line. Outdoor lighting installed for the swimming pools or outdoors tennis courts shall be directed downward toward the swimming pool or tennis courts play area. PROFFER # 20 The recreational facilities shall be substantially similar in quality, design and character to the exhibits entitled "Community Amenities" as contained in Section VI in the Manual. It is recognized that with a development of this size, detailed building plans may change as the development of Ashville Park progresses. The intent of the renderings is to demonstrate the architectural style and building quality of these facilities. Final elevations for these structures shall be submitted to the Planning Director to assure compliance with this proffer. PROFFER # 21 In addition to the buffer areas, linear parks, pocket parks and Village Greens within Villages A, B, C, D, E and F, Grantor shall set aside as open space the areas shown on the Master Plan. Said areas shall be for the benefit of the owners of property within Ashville Park. These areas shall be set aside for passive enjoyment and recreation for uses such as Lakes, Meadows, Forested Areas and Landscaped Vistas. These areas shall be maintained by ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 11 the Home Owners Association. PROFFER # 22 No portion of the Property that has been designated as a jurisdictional wetland by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers shall be disturbed. PROFFER # 23 The combined areas set aside for recreation and open space on the Property should not be below fifty-four percent (54%) of the current gross acreage of the Property. The different types and acreages of open spaces provided within Ashville Park shall be substantially as specified on the Master Plan. PROFFER # 24 Grantor shall donate $1,000.00 for each residential lot developed on the Property to the City of Virginia Beach Department of Parks and Recreation into the Open Space Site Acquisition program more specifically referred to as CIP Project No. 4.004.000. Grantor's per lot donation should be paid to the City at the time of the issuance of each building permit for each residential lot within Ashville Park. If all or a portion of said donated funds have not been used by the City of Virginia Beach within twenty (20) years for the purpose for which they were dedicated, then they may be used by the City of Virginia Beach for other municipal purposes, as the City shall in its sole discretion deem appropriate. OPEN SPACE; PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE TRAILS PROFFER # 25 Grantor shall construct a series of sidewalks and trails that are designed to provide pedestrian accessibility within each Village, and pedestrian and bike connections between each Village and to adjacent properties substantially as shown on the Exhibit entitled "Connectivity Plan" prepared by Stephen Fuller Places, LLC, which plan is part of the Manual. The sidewalk system adjacent to right-of-ways and residences shall be constructed of concrete with an exposed aggregate finish. The path system within the Village Greens, the Pocket Parks and other open space areas shall be finished in hard surfaces such as asphalt or compacted clay. Such trails shall be designed substantially in accordance with the quality levels ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 12 and design features as depicted on the exhibit entitled "Open Space" prepared by Stephen Fuller Places, LLC, which exhibit is part of the Manual. While not all portions of the trail system within Ashville Park will be open to the public, Grantor shall provide a continuous trail system from Princess Anne Road to Flanagans Lane that will be open to the public either through easements over some of the trails on the Home Owners Association property, or the provision of sidewalks and trails within the public right-of- way section between Princess Anne Road and Flanagans Lane. THE RESIDENCES AT ASHVILLE PARK PROFFER # 26 Grantor shall include within the Restrictions governing the Property, a requirement that the design and building materials for all fences, homes and accessory structures must be reviewed and approved by an Architectural Review Committee of the HOA to insure design and quality compatibility. Said restrictions shall run with the land as allowed under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. PROFFER # 27 All residential dwellings constructed on the Property shall have visible exterior surfaces, excluding roofs, porches, windows, doors, trim and soffits, consisting entirely of all or any combination of brick, stone, hardy plank, stucco, cedar shake or similar quality materials. PROFFER # 28 All residential dwellings constructed on the Property shall be constructed with a minimum of a two (2) -car garage. PROFFER # 29 All residential dwellings constructed within Villages A, C, D and F shall contain no less than 2,400 square feet of enclosed living area, excluding garage area, for any one- story dwelling and no less than 2,600 square feet of enclosed living area, excluding garage area, for any two- story dwelling. PROFFER # 30 All residential dwellings constructed within Villages B and E shall contain no less than 1,800 square feet of enclosed living area, excluding garage area, for any one-story dwelling and shall contain no less than 2,400 square feet of enclosed living area, excluding garage area, for any two-story dwelling. ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 13 PROFFER # 31 Grantor shall utilize low impact development techniques where possible on the Property to encourage storm water treatment and ground water recharge and discourage storm water runoff and erosion. PROFFER # 32 All residential dwellings constructed on the Property shall be constructed in accordance with the construction criteria applicable to homes located within the 70 to 75 dB Ldn/STC ratings of not less than 44 for roof/ceiling/exterior walls and 33 for windows/doors, even though no portion of the Property is located within this noise zone. DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS PROFFER # 33 The dimensional requirements applicable to development of all portions of the Property except Villages B and E shall be as follows: Minimum Lot Area in Square Feet: 12,000 (Villages D and F); 20,000 (Villages A and C) Minimum Lot Width in Feet: 100 Minimum Front Yard Setback in Feet: 50' for 20,000 square foot lots and 30' for lots from between 12,000 square feet up to 20,000 square feet Minimum Side Yard Setback in Feet: 10 Minimum Side Yard Setback Adjacent to a Street: 30 Minimum Rear Yard Setback in Feet: 20 Accessory structures of no more than 150 square feet — 5' rear and side yard setbacks Maximum Lot Coverage: 30% for lots 20,000 square feet and greater and 35% for lots less than 20,000 square feet Minimum Setback from Sidewalk for lots containing linear parks: 15' from edge of sidewalk Maximum Height 42 feet in Villages A and C and 38 feet in ASHVILLE. PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 14 Villages D and F PROFFER # 34 The dimensional requirements applicable to development within Villages B and E on the Property shall be as follows: Minimum Lot Area in Square Feet: 7,500 Minimum Lot Width in Feet: 75 Minimum Front Yard Setback in Feet: 30 Minimum Side Yard Setback in Feet: 5 & 10 Minimum Side Yard Setback Adjacent to a Street: 20 Minimum Rear Yard in Feet: 20 Accessory structures no more than 150 square feet: 5' rear and side yard setbacks Maximum Lot Coverage: 35% Maximum Height in Feet: 35 (not to exceed two stories) PROFFER # 35 Further conditions mandated by applicable development ordinances may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan and/or subdivision review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. Staff Evaluation of The proffers adequately address most of the concerns Proffers: presented by the development proposal. Any outstanding concerns are addressed in the recommended conditions of the Street Closure or Subdivision Variance or can be further addressed dung the detailed plan review process. City Attorney's The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer Office: agreement dated September 5, 2003 and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. Staff Evaluation ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 15 CHANGE OF ZONING REQUEST: Staff recommends approval of this request Staff's evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials and the proffers, adequately addresses each of the `Major Issues' identified at the beginning of this report. The proposal's strengths in addressing the `Major Issues' are (1) The proposal meets the majority of the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and the Transition Area Design Guidelines. The Transition Area "Matrix" was used to evaluate the proposal's consistency with land use and design goals for the Transition Area. The result was a score of 0.943 dwelling units per acre. Although this score translates to a total of 447 units for this 474 -acre site, and the applicant's proposal consists of 490 units, an important consideration is the fact that 160 of the 490 units are age -restricted. The Transition Area Technical Advisory Committee (TATAC) report, adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan, states, "Active adult communities are to be encouraged and should be treated differently." It is generally acknowledged that active adult communities have less impact on City services, particularly more costly services such as schools and transportation. Thus, in the Transition Area, where impact on City services and infrastructure is to be minimized, there is rationale for allowing a slightly greater density of such units than for a standard non -age -restricted single-family dwelling that places a greater demand on City services. The TATAC report recognizes this and encourages the provision of such units. The report, however, does not provide quantifiable criteria regarding how such communities are to be treated, instead allowing such communities to be addressed on an individual basis dependent on how the community meets the overall intent of the Comprehensive Plan for this area. In the case of the current proposal, the density calculated through the Transition Area Matrix allows for 447 units. The applicant's proposal consists of 330 non- age -restricted units and 160 age -restricted units. If the 330 non -age -restricted units are subtracted from the calculated allowable of 447 units, 117 units remain. The proposal calls for 160 age -restricted units, 43 over the calculated allowable number of units. It must be remembered, however, that these 160 units are age - restricted and do not have as great an impact on City services as the other 330 units. Staff believes that the 43 additional age -restricted units represent an acceptable increase beyond the 447 units recommended by the Transition Area Matrix. The total density of the project as proposed with 490 units is 1.03 units per acre. This represents a 0.09 unit per acre increase in density beyond that calculated through the Transition Area Matrix. Staff concludes that consistent with the recommendations contained within the TATAC report regarding active adult communities and noting the many unique design features of this development as recommended in the Transition Area Design Guidelines the 0.09 ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 16 increase in overall density is appropriate. (2) Property values for the homes are estimated to average at or above $400,000 ($225,000 for age -restricted), which is consistent with the recommendations of the TATAC report regarding the fiscal impact of development in the Transition Area. (3) The proposal is compatible with existing land use and future land use in the surrounding area. The entire development includes a minimum 50 -foot buffer around its perimeter, which will mitigate impacts to neighboring farmland or residences Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request. VARIANCE TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REQUEST: Section 9.3 of the Subdivision Ordinance states: No variance shall be authorized by the Council unless it finds that: A. Strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. B. The authorization of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and the character of the neighborhood will not be adversely affected. C. The problem involved is not of so general or recurring a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of general regulations to be adopted as an amendment to the ordinance. D. The hardship is created by the physical character of the property, including dimensions and topography, or by other extraordinary situation or condition of such property, or by the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto. Personal or self-inflicted hardship shall not be considered as grounds for the issuance of a variance. E. The hardship is created by the requirements of the zoning district in which the property is located at the time the variance is authorized whenever such variance pertains to provisions of the Zoning Ordinance incorporated by reference in this ordinance. Staff recommends approval of the applicant's request for reduced pavement width; however, this recommendation comes with a caveat. Staff can support this variance request, but only if the applicant is successful in obtaining a variance from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), allowing the City to receive state maintenance funds for the roadways that will have the reduced pavement width. Without such a variance, the City will not receive maintenance funds from the Commonwealth for these roadways, thus increasing the City's cost of providing services to this development. The condition recommended below ensures if the applicant cannot obtain the variance from ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 17 VDOT, the roadways will be constructed at a width that meets City standards and meets eligibility for maintenance funding from the Commonwealth. Conditions of Subdivision Variance 1. The applicant shall seek a variance from the Virginia Department of Transportation to allow state maintenance funding for the substandard pavement width request. If state maintenance funding is not granted, the Subdivision Approval shall be considered null and void. STREET CLOSURE REQUEST: Staff recommends approval of this request. The Viewers met on July 23, September 22, and October 30, 2003 and determined that the request to close a portion of Flanagan's Lane will not be detrimental to the public if the conditions recommended below are met. The applicant will construct and dedicate a two-lane divided roadway with a multi- purpose trail from Flanagan's Lane to Princess Anne Road. In addition, the applicant will construct cul-de-sacs at the terminus of each side of Flanagan's Lane, adjacent to the north side of the development near Village D and adjacent to the United States Coast Guard property on the south side of the property. During development, however, a means of public ingress and egress will be available at all times between Princess Anne Road and Sandbridge Road. Conditions of Street Closure 1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. No purchase price shall be charged in this street closure, however, because the applicant shall dedicate a new street to replace the closed portion of Flanagan's Lane. The closure and the new street shall be considered an even trade. 2. The applicant is required to resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining parcels. The plat shall be submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval. 3. The applicant shall verify that no private utilities exist within the right-of-way proposed for closure. If private utilities do exist, easements satisfactory to the utility company, shall be provided. ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 18 4. Construction plans for the new street to replace the section of Flanagan's Lane proposed for closure shall be submitted to the Development Services Center for review. The new street proposed by the applicant shall be dedicated, constructed, and approved by Civil Inspections before the requested section of Flanagan's Lane can be closed. This condition is to ensure that a means of public ingress and egress shall be provided between Sandbridge Road and Princess Anne Road at all times. 5. Cul-de-sacs terminating the two remaining sections of Flanagan's Lane shall be constructed by the applicant on the subject property of Ashville Park. Construction plans for the cul-de-sacs shall be submitted to the Development Services Center. 6. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within four (4) years of approval by City Council. If the conditions noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved within four (4) years of the City Council vote to close the right-of-way, this approval shall be considered null and void. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with applications may require revision during detailed 121an review to meet all applicable City Codes. ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 19 4 11-12- Rezoning (B-2 Business to R-15 Residential) 96 Present Capacity 9-25-90 Conditional Use Permit (Athletic Club and Outdoor 8,186 Recreation) 10-10- Conditional Use Permit (Outdoor Recreation) 88 ADT ' 5 6-13-95 Street Closure 6 8-10-93 Conditional Use Permit (Firewood Preparation Facility) Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Public Agency Comments Public Works Master Transportation Princess Anne Road in front of this project is a rural Plan (MTP): two-lane road. There are no projects listed within the current Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to improve this road. The current Master Transportation Plan (MTP) designates this road as a proposed 100 -foot divided right-of-way. The proposed MTP designates the road as 110 -foot right-of-way. The applicant has addressed proposed right-of-way dedications in the proffer agreement. The applicant's request for a Subdivision Variance to reduced pavement widths is subject to the Virginia Department of Transportation granting a variance. The applicant and the city's Department of Public Works are exploring this issue. Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Princess Anne 8,186 12,000 Existing Land Use Road ADT ' ADT ' —4.740 Proposed Land Use 3— 5,550 Average uany i nps 2 as defined by the existing agricultural use 3 as defined by 490 dwelling units ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 21 Public Utilities Water: City water does not front the property, but may be extended for connection purposes provided hydraulic analysis supports the potential demand. Sewer: City sewer is not available to this development as proposed. Plans and bonds are required for construction of a new pump station and sanitary sewers stem. The Department of Public Utilities does not have any facilities within the proposed Flanagan's Lane Street Closure area. Public Schools School Current Capacity Generation ' Change 2 Enrollment Red Mill Elementary 866 910 104 10 Princess Anne 1511 1658 55 49 Middle Kellam High 12276 1990 71 64 "generation" represents the number of students that the development will add to the school under the proposed zoning 2 "change" represents the difference between generated students under the existing zoning and under the proposed zoning The number can be positive (additional students) or negative (fewer students) CIP # 1-090 Elementary School 2005 This project is for construction of an elementary school with a design capacity of 900 students. Necessary classroom space and resource areas should result in a facility of approximately 87,500 square feet on a seventeen acre site at the intersection of Princess Anne Road and Sandbridge Road, which has been acquired. Construction is scheduled to begin in March 2004 for a September 2005 opening. Public Safety Police: The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (OPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. ASHVILLE_PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 22 Fire and Rescue: Fire Department comments will be provided during detailed plan review. Private Utility Comments Ham ton Roads Sanitation District I No concerns. Virginia Natural Gas No concerns. Dominion Power An easement for access to an overhead power line may be required in the area adjacent Village D. This will be determined during detailed plan review. ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.0 Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 23 V 'N - WAW . -`` tai v 74 4C* lm4 A, Vnm 44 4A a� r � u •L. \� a s ■.. .. z � �-.i 4 pa;t.C.SS +ua►.f t� Q C � Exhibit B F Proposed Master i Plan J Q t � I a ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 25 Tti F WY a 6 d 11 ti , 21 a` C Y Zg4 W ,j Yw as J Exhibit B-2 Village C -- Detail ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 27 LQ r tube Exhibit B-3 Villages D, E, & F- - Detail ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 34 Page 28 Y� a. m t I = = y ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 34 Page 28 Y� a. m t Q u W sem, �" Exhibit C Proposed Connectivity Plan wj =cc ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 29 Exhibit D-1 Open Space — Linear Park ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 30 Exhibit D-2 Open Space — Pocket Park ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 31 ji �j Him i=f II S �, " a t Lf 1r ala r► � A f+ .1� �. r 74 Am�aw, fry I" =on r z" 4w Ii 4r,— y _ IZ All IX j J H ry4r•k� 'tr�si• j��a-+�n�� rruar'Gj` InExhibit E -2 = Open Space `1 Amenities y N ' W F jA ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 35 r - 4 'a�• �+i.�ae s �r i Exhibit E-3 Open Space Amenities � 4 �r 1 ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 36 Exhibit F-1 Street Sections 3:l Z' 0 U W U) ASHVILLE-PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 39 0 G'3 W .j 0 0:1 Z ` 0 W Cn w w +N � F:' 91 Exhibit F-2 Street Sections ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 40 0 m RC C m m0 V i CL �� Q J Exhibit G-1 Disclosure Statements IL TTTAWNV T TTY A ► TTl TAr?r"T rTtT► Tt%T T TfT► Tf% 3 11 I ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 41 0 3 � s � U m O V O ` m a -0 WEf O H O= g C ¢ a ° " O Uo N p a� m CL ° o m 0 Z. UN = N C Z& o 9- 2 C _ M %XE N L g j o o c CD o c o` m O o L � O 0 C o a �_ 2 O W o LL F- O c L � Cts > a z 3: O a� = 0 v.. Z C u. a. R F- c O Q N CL o m ay 0 =m — C z �� U ; LULU a w0 Zm _ _ �- 3 ep w c -- ° 0..1z E { 4- a 4- LU m o wV a i mo rte' O Q U t1 fl c0 �, n fl. N N = N Ca i O Q = m CO y w d !nZE C CD.. C to C �c0i C 32 ~` =0 2Cs O © .0 C�cO —QNQ �Q 0 L• m i° 0 O 0 + +I�Cm �t � Qq Zm a °�= ' c Q Ny Ofn Q QVVo."2 f L O Q V Uc C -Q m O f Uc w�� so.�cE .O =� 3 ❑ = j 0 =a �� t ��c .O = ❑ o U R Exhibit G-1 Disclosure Statements IL TTTAWNV T TTY A ► TTl TAr?r"T rTtT► Tt%T T TfT► Tf% 3 11 I ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 41 w a D Exhibit G-2 Disclosure Statements c 3 ' o IIts j = os r u o •c Uj o 3 i Q L m C (D L W w t). p Q i t o •� O p C 0 O 0 E LU LU © O O Q O F'oo € o ao QC1 ac svm d0 c0 C1 � U ,c a o 0 a Z p OM O CL 4` d Zgo °> V O d)U 00 to O N Cn v= « t!! w: Z N y Ceo pN Z N fl m O Z c9 O i c Z� � � m (_� N I p C � r o Z o o po L a 4 0 o tc a m Q. E Ov 0oi0 0 0 o o m .� fi OA O a) ) -C o m� `' c V U O o W- fj 0 0 0= o CD 05 . p Z3 .. W' J v 0 G v 0� m 0 G W 0 25 m C C 0 R to O O N c0 `O C O C m h tD t0 p Ca g _ = a z z LD U3 U C Z Z LLC a Q 40- U z� �a a > 3 g 0. CO 2- �O S =CL Z J V Z O CO a; O 0 � yO: � C O 1-- I CL O L 1z o Ce O �- •� -� a ci c m c m 1 �' LU I Z O ZL v_, 3 0 W C) H� w o Ca ao I oC E c-0 o CL c aW- w E .� m m 0 Wm f zE m cac 00 v_o t 0:0 oo 40) Qm dC 'Cc mo w O Q as 0 = N m � �+ a n� u -� = to ca. N Q M V �` UJ a� a a• S2 C _ca C 0 a �, m t0 v: i 4S N C H — `mN m� m O E c u O m v_.Z E ca �'z m w21 . a c 3 v 0 = o o 3z 3Z o .. c 3 m ZE6 C C O m- c— t0�^1 CJ m� a'M i A ��1 00 �•— w 115 W 'NVs C N m C L �e 4) .. CD Q �` o vj a N tL C QZ yoo ' a) a Y Q aZm Y O C� C� �+- ma< a ca caQU CcsQaio 3 o C_C a�io cc Uc Qm �ttitSoQD0 o O Z O�J J = ❑tQ� , m (U ❑i Od D Exhibit G-2 Disclosure Statements ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 42 o O .3' i Q (D L W w t). p Q O O p 0 LU © c F'oo o ao a d c0 C1 ,c a o 0 a Z p m c m Y 4` d O d)U I O N Cn v= w: Z N y Ceo pN a Q o W= c Z� m (_� N I g Vca m Mo I po L a m Q. E Ov 0oi0 v az O� m� `' fj 0 0 0= o CD °tz w U 0� m 0 25 m C O J IA O i ((i `O O C m c0 �- m O = LD U3 U C Z Z LLC 0 U z a > 0. CO 2- �O S Z J Q- J V Z CO a; O C O 1-- I CL O L 1z o to Qy .0 Y Y d Q i- i - 2m c c Z O ZL v_, 3 0 3 d Q 4� I oC E c-0 c aW- w E EE oo 40) ^ I i0 0_ a n� u -� = c. o c0 C . a Q M V �` UJ a• S2 C _ca C m t0 v: i 4S N C H — C V m c= y ' ca �'z m 0 = o o 3z w = o z ami mO (Lw t0�^1 CJ ��1 Gi y U w 115 W C N m C L �e 4) .. CD Q �` o vj a N tL C U C Q �r ' Q Y Q aZm Y O C� C� �+- m u—o. v t CcsQaio 3 a�io cc Uc avid �a c ' CL CL Q �a.o LOmE =� ro t��c = ., m = c t ❑ F �� i ; CSG w = w =Q .O ; E ❑ v y ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 42 Z LU2 LLJF- W OfD 0 J U) Z W W U) LU D O J CO Exhibit G-3 Disclosure Statements ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 43 Zi 03 i -:t mit t v o 0 m © t G v 0 O o 21 - cUC aCD Ui LU W o ,vJ 3- t G¢ o o o I QQ �o m c o 0 D m` � `o cci �, O ° dQ o E E o. .Q L tU o ' E Q. o. a m c. a U t o O M o a °- ° ' ( O ° a m L L Z o O O r .� O °'° m Q CC O N N U a a m H z a C 'a sc G w LV m M N C: c .zm. W Z N a v EUo . wmc zcc 0 �i m mti E o O v H ` ,0 I �O �. CD N0 a E OU p0 CL r. co �Q CDZ v% `J mt M 0 nW , gc C U VO O ) ° Q vtUaaOo. id. J p U. :i C Z Ui Z O p -G O `C�•- o ct W� i I LL m M D =o m ZZ QO ea V Z a ow - 0 zz m � a O f- p Z = M > Y 3Q zzN LU o aO Q� W� E c O a 40) v vz c �O °� r a :° aU Cr Z E ca a 0 Z ° W` a E a g " a~Oeo COC 'n w a W Z t- n` �v o O Ua0i a Q.Cts . d y = E O m m cu �_ m h y CL 00ZU o� V mO y V C •r` ymC o ca O yE w C . o 3 0 ::Z ° C 3 Z °O o a+ a c m �O m O m mF m Q' Z' O U- tQ^ Q N o a cv Q Q U a nM a u — — O H Q m o m L y C � C CO r- Z Q d caw m ym N_ Z CO ca d yZ 2 lB U CD CO Q' a L 0 y t O = 3 �Z y =O x i M c m ..O m Q o� ° m °O — °-o o ce �� mo ca- _ C3 to --�� ► W r� D mO U CLZ O0 CL O— Y V° CL CD m►c. c° a. a oQ�m �s0 OD LN) ov O. co O o f 3 aC -Q- = � 13 ois ❑ M v mQL Disclosure Statements ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 43 Zi 3 = s v o 0 O cUC aCD Ui G¢ c �o o 0 bo O E CL dQ o. .Q L tU m o O M o a a° °' »- o ° a m L L Z o r .� O U CC O N N U • O is Nm = sc G w LV m M C: c c EUo . DO I ° OU o Zz� H ` Lm m CD N0 OL CL r. v oc U M 0 nW , gc a O> U. Z Ui Z p -G O `C�•- c UJ I LL m C13L �� O =o ZZ QO ea V Z U f- p Z Y =° 40 - c O LU o aO Q� W� E c m c LU IL a� M E °� r a Z E ca a o U a E a g y U _2 N fj y �. HM 0,N R1 O Ua0i Q.Cts . d y = C O m m cu �_ m h y m y y V C •r` d ca y E«. c N U ca O yE w C . o 3 0 ::Z ° C 3 Z °O o a+ a c m �O m O m mF 5 m-0 4 0 m tQ^ acv p a cv -�U Q Z' a nM n m H Q m r R V Q y — CO r- Z Q y m q n N_ Z CO Y p 1.) G lB U CD CO Q' a t y Q m w�0E y ,� O R (� Uc vo ma Q m L O F -- Uc mac' m Q ce �� _ C3 to Disclosure Statements ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 43 Z LU2 LIJ F-- W D O J CI) Z LLJ2 UiF- F- CD W U? Exhibit G-4 Disclosure Statements ...moi „n �� ° , Z V O ; U O •w i N J O W H ( ° W m m O U O v L a W 4s O v? o o w Uc D 3 0Uj Q> DO a g m z s c c C.o 0 N Ui ..- + = N CL o3 d. .w U c = Zco O v o 0:D D� I L c m� G o O Z�' a o cm y �y n OU �°1 pp U �° ° 12 a J o V o `off n0 0 v w >� o c a m - O Ca c c m p L o� c O U 0 CL S2 a O N f17 V c c g = Ie � > z M O o a zZI = O o. S M O v. z .0 m a = Don v�o F- o W H z� c _ o -- 0 a� Q Ov o w Wm � Z m �_ oo R0 m w Q� M W 1- E a� ° CL ti a v -� ct.-N m N cs - N� L O °� o ;-- 0 �N Q 0. Ln= 1 s L JOS Ca 7 wZ3v w O = = 3Z L _O Z w o m ° , o _ °` y C o D N W c6 2 o O C G. N� tC L o U u7 �Z� d; v C O vo a `a= 02 � OQm U Q 3)0 vC7��>I �m s J� °o �`�Ov O W. Uc w =O�J Ji r ❑M -.0=Q cr c I=O� LU ❑0 UO Exhibit G-4 Disclosure Statements ...moi „n �� ° 0 3 -_ . - - ----•- - s O i V m m O U O v L W 4s O v? D 3 0Uj aci c o 'fl ° , 0 CL o3 ? 2 12 a 0 n0 0 v c a m Z o c m p 2 O U O N f17 V c c W .1 v • Ix D z M O t8 ~ m m ' z o = Don Lcs = E �0 DO o Q Ov 0o ° ca �Z Lm O c °u -i` V D Q N� L O °� O C to JOS p v t,C Q w N_ O °` y C O 4 H O L U. tC F fC L O C z Z �m O W. U > zse , a'0 > 3:O 0 �_- y a z y J C' F- `0 O O ..t 0 pL N v `- C N z m 1- IXW c Wa us � _ ,n, o`a IIL o m CL X M o ID cEo LU E v o � �V a E (CDL N 3 OZ <t° U a = a a aN " (n �M =cc oN 'C c�N aN - a m� CD L� CL E +. C M N mZ E w O c 3 U 3z O z 3 L w m Z0 v m -a :+ D a� °O acv a' 2 Z �a z�cc m: ma z 0- C a c fj > M - QO a aN`° "� Q �c� a� L c o. ; nNCO 2Z'0 yp m y n V1 ear �Z a�� t� a acc, °-dv CD sD r- 1 m JCL Jai s� t� E 3; v = � U w as ASHVILLE. PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 44 z 2 N F- COw z 2 LLJF- w O J o m m � � O 3 ca �° O ' O ° it O a Q m L - 3:0o cc 03 o a o a m CL o mm E m t � = 00 .0 a 0 c ° U 0 c c m CD p Q o_ m a n. m z 4 _ E ` .r CO z Z M o ca p m O N L w N Q mU1 M Z M o m O m m p O U)s (Mv j o �° 4M w o a e d o o E C L c v C3 0 } `p ° O 0 s p O N= 1 EL a. J� oc U m CM gc tQ O cii O p � CU G Ce � � cv 0 O w C F- � w? z Z 0 `�- U m F" �_ M > @ �O = a z J u a ca `o O Q y H m 0 a° o o m �� w m w E �o = z �o i z O_— cc °' f- m M m �' o w e ►- o ea a.a �� CL W. � s c m O 0 Z E CO 2 CO g ? �V a E m o _> a _ f- _ E r - CL _CO Q m A 0 ,Q � U_ CCL aw m c0[�- Qb� )M a� 0mN mCa U \ .... • L t4 W tC C3 .L+ p CCO{ C E �,c v_,v 0 E =o = 3v 1 3Z O N v► O ID 00 z w Z m3 �c C- mg 7.c �_ mC pc �� t mom, (D Q. va n o� QN_to o v �o m ; Q— QZ U) Q o a r QZ N LL V� tv Qd` t°v toavcg m �� cn., av a� t0 t4 CL no? t� ��cE m Uc �m m ©C9� Uc a J O ='� =O ;-j � 0 Z art =Q =O'� ❑ o V Exhibit G-5 Disclosure Statements 0 dm' aw C I" JCL ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 45 t 0 3 ( � `m z i-: C U m C! V O w I!� I O y I 3 g -'s G� w 3 0 o o E m LD 9�. o CL 9ce-Q CL C CO 4) O c m : U a t V o c m o a Q m z_ r 0 0 LU d LU z cc OO m � to CX O a, CO O m E .- z W O m c� Q O a Z i G O N o m ` Cm 8 V Ot .. aC C wm M O 0 o O v O = t Om CL tiiO c OvLO T CD - O a �y O. O w= N. m O � C:2 m z 3v 0 Q = QM ?Z � ~.O Z O O 1 — O mo W v c w i a a.� o y 3 wa o !z-� o t a a a� m co w� cco N w, �c 00 Qm -tC 0 -dallQ z E U o C3 a E a� o i«. -' CL u c CL N M V cis, - (C N a� r- O m C - mcg C (D w ED O C L tll �_ _ M 0 ;i 4] O h 0 0 00 �. ^ m 0 i CU U = % =M ~+ Z CD 4U wi N Z ca q 0 ' Nc O z 'coo(D 0 CL C1 a 0 .m00 . ' a c E U � d _ I y z- W C -o �� ❑ ;� _Q �o _ ❑ c� ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 45 Z LLJ2 F- COF- W D COO J Exhibit G-6 Disclosure Statements C O V O m o C O L1J m � ~ V m m V 3 = m Q s i = .. e W O m .O C) m o O g d Q Z cc h E o 3 a E IX N W L- c o o c � � z a F O C m € n Q. o � m .E O cr CL o m c C= a a O .n V o c O W �0 m w 0 ?- UJ 40 £ J 0 O ry CO V C z N U1 m ° Z CON o cc Q E C CO 0 m C U3 n o W N ° m as U E o o 00 a 00 o O �ir a > y v `' a3 ° .. J c Uz Y o V V rte. C v -J O o i m °� 04C O a O$ �c $ nci 4. ,; �� CL CO a d a� w ❑ U N $ CO om � © 0)O o a ��' EL �w S2 CD C� -� CO �c CLQ� c ZZ $ c 0 O U c ZN �a > LL CD ca E Ncoi ca��. O =w z a Q I .. CL o Of- 0 � a w mri ° d� _ c c � Z 3 CeO Z m CD 3 M 0 -to a. Q� E c � c ° a� I— � E C cc b CD Ca z m �VN d 0 tto Q' Od `oem �uo COc -E t0 ioo o Ns CO w Q3 m ac m as Dft O C CO CD C W Ca E +-_ �o c; m CA E .,.. O o t .o = 3$ O 0 3Z o O = o CDC D �0�c c V� ate' aN(dE C'� .c E m+. Yo n.u� ma aNcII L c� eco v a. ca s cQ Q v$ t v m c o- <$ a wa = tw E '- L 3 UE o s yOm ._ $ Uc Q o mo a� ❑ c m .. 13 Exhibit G-6 Disclosure Statements C O V O m 3 C O L1J m � ~ 0 Q o = m i s m c a e o C ` H 30 E m .O O �` O o a m � Z cc h r a m o c"ry `oa a N W � 4 2 � � z o m a ' o F O C a t m c U a U cr 0= c c a) y OG o d � � Za1 o z °i CO O C M� ca a Oct �0 m w ° ` UJ 40 £ J U) O ... v z UO o 00 = J o o c E r BE CO 0 O W c 216 t U3 n o W N D m as U E C 00 o a ZZ U ZN �ir a > y v co ��• �O J c Uz Y o V V rte. d ° 04C O� ' J O S CL = N _C to � nci 4. z 0 3 W c. CL CO a d a� w ❑ U N z E C UJ a. Ce. 00 © 0)O 0 m S2 CD C� > o �-- �- o CLQ� a ca CLI OZ, U0tf) aco C) d CO - m m n`> CD ca E Ncoi co - (1)Ca wZ E c w 2 o C ,«=o 3 ..c Z O 0 — a o 2 m c c c cc g � QZ y U a c o 0 a ca s U as o o Q N °' o $ L Q N d w C cc U m a J =Q =0`_J J ❑ 5 �a = Exhibit G-6 Disclosure Statements C O V O m ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 46 C O L1J m � ~ O y Q = m 1 'C O 0.0 U c m .O z Z cc h .� d wCa N W -6-0 ' � � z F O C G 1C C ,. a L c U a � as cr c CL cz O �0 m w UJ 40 C O t4 E" z aom o E M- y 216 t U3 O N c m as U E m 00 o n *- m tz F= -. a y v N a Y o V V rte. U 04C L Q H� Wim"` 4. .0 w ❑ U N ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 46 Exhibit G-7 Disclosure Statements ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 47 0 0 L tm u! 0 o ° 0 a d m 0 ' —n L 0 ,._ m I 0° �. a ° ON U a` 4) ? ° r c U U a V c G c ttt `=N c 2 C O,. m Zp i La C13 3: to0il M ° O _p 0o _O ?0 C a O� d z fL3 I L Ci �7 c� c p o u� __ U. m � a. G ti c _ o a z z n: C O +� U! Z N 3 r ti LL CO v Z: '3` = G Z to -j 0 Z a 0 0 0 O W y _! O N Z - O CL c tow C13c; 0. a q `�� ' � � c w. ° � CL rc o c O W0 sa Za.� c m CaC 0 0 o 00 W L} Qm tL E s 0 W --- = 0 n' n is N n- I — �' 0 to N r O 4 Z O Q V i c. L S/` y S c c ( 9 a y2 E0 c Zrn 0 3 3Z z 0 Z sa �+ C c 3 a) I y O a) m� 0 0, 0 cam,., w O c4 to �+ CO u_ a M UQ M L a a N M Cc Y m C u U i c. Q C Ca CL"' �I CU Q m LO y o 0 a Z sir �- Q U ,: r M V © 3 s Q0 car, C mt7Q� `� t Uc 'o V ff Ta U� Hto ��m CL sea 10 � -j -i ❑ M z - � I I = 0 ! ❑ U R cn Q J -C .Q ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 47 Dec 01 03 04:08p DEC 01 2003 15:33 FR TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP57 687 7510 TO 9,17578730651 :ZM; O c� DISCLOSURE STATEMENT p.3 P. 02/'03 AJOPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below; (Aftach list if necessary) Ashville Park, LLC' Managing Member: LewiB A. McMurrau, III 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list If necessary) Lamco Managemeut Company, Xnc. , a Virginia corporation President Secretax Lawis A. McMurran, III 0 Check here if the applicant is NOTa corporation, partnership. firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this sedtlon only if property owner Is different from applicant tf the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entityz relationship with the applicant: (attach list if necessary) Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. &2 See naxt page for footnotes ConibOonzl Rezoning Appncalion Purge 12 of 13 Rovlsed 1011/2W3 Dec 01 03 04:08p r„T� t_"r'r otsr /tD10 TO 9, 17578730651 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) Stephen Fuller Places, LLC (Aclanta, Georgia) MSA., P.C. (Virginia Beach, Virginia) Princess Anne Land Company,LLL,C (Virginia Beach, Virginia) Troutmaa Sanders LLP (Virginia Beach,yirgsnfa) ' 'Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." Sea State and Local Govemment Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship- means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va, Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and acmurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing ar�iingt nstructions int h I s package. l..E - A-. Ik�nrs Signature Print Name Property Owner's Ssgnature (A different than applicant) Print Name Conditional R0=WQ Applleadon Page 13 Of 13 Revised 10t1=3 P. i P.03/03 ** TOTAL PAGF.03 ** N V" 1� �t 7 1 r F! Exhibit H-1 AICUZ ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.0 Agenda Items 28, 29, & 30 Page 48 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL AIR STATION OCEANA 1'750 TOMCAT BOULEVARD VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23460-2191 Ms. Ashby Moss Municipal Center Department of Planning 2405 Courthouse Drive Building 2, Room 100 Virginia Beach, VA 23456 Dear Ms. Moss: IN REPLY REFER TO 5726 Ser 32/0426 November 5, 2003 This letter is in reference to the proposed Ashville Park, L.L.C. project, a rezoning request and proposed residential development. The site is located in the 65-70 decibel (dB) day - night average (Ldn) noise zone. The Navy's Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Program (AICUZ) views residential development as not compatible and discourages this use in the 65-70 dB Ldn. The Navy acknowledges the landowners desire to develop their property, but ask you to seriously consider the additional population that would be exposed to aircraft operations from NAS Oceana. We would view residential development at this site as an encroachment upon operations at NAS Oceana. If you have any questions, please contact my Community Planning Liaison Officer, Mr. Ray Firenze at (757) 433-3158. Sincerely and very respectfully, T. KE E Ca ai U.S Navy Comma ing fficer Item #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park. L.L.C. Change of Zoning District Classification Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in Regard to certain elements of Subdivision Ordinance Discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Flanagan's Lane East side of Princess Anne Road District 7 Princess Anne November 12, 2003 REGULAR Robert Miller: The next item is the item we moved up is Item #28, 29 & 30, Ashville Park, L.L.C. R.J. Nutter: Mr. Chairman, before I start the clock, I just want to bring a few people up to minimize the impact on our time. For the record, my name is R.J. Nutter and I'm an attorney. I represent the applicant in this case Ashville Park, L.L.C. With me today, in addition to my client, is one of the principal land planners for this entire project. We were actually very proud to have here today from Atlanta is Stephen Fuller. With Stephen, I understand he has brought Doug Bork, Julie and Kate, all of them whom have spent a considerable amount of time on this project for the last six months making it what it is today. But they will be addressing you shortly and I'm going to do everything I can to stay within my ten-minute limit and have a few minutes from Mr. Fuller to make some remarks about the application. First, I'd like to comment that this is not just about the application. This piece of property and I don't want to forget this and it's easy to with an applicant this wonderful. The property owners who are the underlying property owners have owned this property for longer than the city has been in existence. They are amongst the City's oldest residents and property owners. Names from the Stalwarts of this area have owned properties here. These are not people who have come here. These are people who have owned this property for an extended period of time, the Culliphers, the Atkinsons, the Coopers, the Malbons, the Williams and I'm proud to say the Bourdon's, as well, are part of this application. All those families are names you all know. Mr. Horsley, I know you and Mr. Knight are going to recognize them as your friend and neighbors for many, many years. I don't want you to lose sight of the fact that these people have owned this property for a awful long time and paid taxes for an awful long time and have waited to see how the Transition Area rules were developed to make sure that whoever came forward their property would do so in accordance with those regulations. Second point that I would like to make to you is that this property falls within the Transition Area, which is an area that some may say is heavily encumbered. Mr. Knight, as you have mentioned that gentleman who sent a letter to you that said "heavily encumbered by regulation" that some people may not like to acknowledge. The benefit of that is that this area is amongst the most studied and regulated area in the City. It is resulted in Comprehensive Plan amendments. The last two Comprehensive Plans at least. A special committee appointed by Council, the TATAC Committee, which reported their findings to strengthen the Comprehensive Plan recommendations. The Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 2 benefit of that to someone like myself and the developers of this property is that it set forth the rules and guidelines upon which the City has set forth as its goals for this area. Because I only have limited amount of time I have to rely on the fact that there's a 52 page staff report that goes into it in enormous detail how it complies with the Comprehensive Plan, the TATAC regulations and all of the criteria that the City has set forth for this area. I brush over that entire part of it based on staff's analysis. I'd like to focus my comments on dust a few highlights of this application before I introduce Mr. Fuller. These are really three separate applications. I want you to understand that we have to address all of them. The first is a rezoning application changing the zoning from Agricultural to PD -H2 R-30 Underlying District and P-1 Open Space District. The second is a street closure application on Flanagan's lane. The third is a subdivision variance. Each of them is important. Each of them is significant. I want to spend a few moments on each one. First is the rezoning application. As staff has indicated this is 474 acres of property. I agree with many of your comments this morning in the earlier session. This is the accumulation of property and really allows for a much better development. A more organized and uniformed system of development as opposed to a series of 50-60 acre parcels or tracks of land at the time. That gave us a great ability to address a lot of different features in one uniform fashion. The nice thing about this property is the development has provided 54 percent overall open space through out this development. I'd like to point a few things for you. What we've done and the Comprehensive Plan is very specific about this plus the TATAC and that is try not dust to have an area on the property that is set aside for open space near the front of the property and develop the back into lots. The purpose is really to incorporate the open space into the development and have it form an integral part of it. That is actually what has occurred here. This is really a series of six different village neighborhoods quite frankly, centered around a large amount of open space in one and around and including open space for each one. Because of the scale of this is so large, I'd like to take a few minutes to point out some features. First of all, we've set aside a 154 -foot area all along the frontage of the property on Princess Anne Road. TATAC asked that we come away with a "boulevard" type capable area for all of Princess Anne Road. What you will have along this portion of Princess Anne Road is a 110 -foot right-of-way. You will have on either side of the 150 feet, so you will have a 300 -foot buffer adjacent a 110 -foot right-of-way all down Princess Anne Road. That is one of the smaller parts of the open area. The entrance to the property and agreed with staff to a single entrance on Princess Anne Road. It is a divided once you enter the property which staff has asked us to do. Interesting enough, as you meander through this property you are going to be passing through several hundred acres of open space in traversing the property from Princess Anne Road to Flanagan's Lane. At various points, you'll be driving along xhe corridor where the closest point, which is just about here, is about 100 foot to the closest platted lot. Many of the distances between the road system here is going to be in excess of 200- 300 feet from closest lots. That will be the case throughout the entire length of that roadway except when you enter this Village B, based upon some recent changes, which were requested by the adjacent property owners on Flanagan's Lane. But I point out to you that you have 256 acres of open space in this development. The bulk of that open space is along through the central areas to build it in. We've maintained all the forested areas and wetland areas here. The only forested areas that we're impacting at all are for Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 3 roadways and that is right through here. That is so we can use that area an entrance of the site to really create a beautiful wooded entrance to that feature. The other fact is that regrettably all of our frontage along where the access was possible is fully wooded so we had no choice. Barring that, which you will have a beautiful wooded entrance into the property. The other feature is that inside each of the villages and there are six villages, four of them "A", "C", "D" and "F", are non -age restricted. They are all clustered together. They range in size from 20,000 square foot lots to 12,000 square foot lots. Two of the villages, "B" and "E" are age restricted, active adult community, with head of household is 55 years of age or older and it's further restricted just like West Neck so that no one under the age of 18 may reside on the property for periods of 120 days at a time. Those are the two significant features. They follow almost the identical proffers that you saw in West Neck, which received such rave reviews by the City. The other important features are the connectivity plan, if I could Stephen. There we go. We have over eight miles of trail systems within Ashville Park. The connectivity plan was designed to do three things. First is to provide complete inner connectivity or pedestrian walkways and trails inside each village. Secondly, every one of the six villages is also connected. Those are the areas in green that you might be able to make out here. Finally, we've provided through the red area here, here, here, here and here interconnected here which is the Flanagan"s Lane exits access some sort of connectivity to the adjacent properties. Our problem with some of these is that these properties are not yet developed. We're not quite sure where that connectivity might tie in. The one I'm pointing to now and Heritage Park and this one at Heritage Park both a line with existing connectivity with path systems and road systems inside the adjacent subdivision. Ronald Ripley: R.J. you're running out of time. R.J. Nutter: I can tell. Let me just do two comments then on street closure and subdivision and I'll introduce Mr. Fuller if I could. Ronald Ripley: Make it brief please. R.J. Nutter: I sure will. The street closure application and if I could go back to the previous plan Stephen, the master plan perhaps. Thank you. Flanagan's Lane comes up in this fashion is going to be closed from here which it currently exists in this fashion just about a 90 degree angle and connects in here to another 90 degree angle and continues out like this. This portion of Flanagan's Lane will be closed. The conditions proposed by staff are acceptable. We've worked very hard and we appreciate his help. It does require that the cul-de-sac inside Ashville Park at both of these intersections. I point this out because we made a point to do so along the residents of Flanagan's Lane, which result in this portion of Flanagan's Lane almost becoming a private road for the residents along Flanagan's Lane. There will be no vehicular access through this part of the property at all. Finally, is the subdivision variance and the sole reason for the subdivision variance is largely a result of the TATAC Committee recommendations that we reduce the amount of impervious area within the transition zone and build a smaller street width. This is an area that I want to focus on for one minute and because there is some unfinished business left with the TATAC Commission and what the Comprehensive Plan Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 4 should call for. Everyone likes the idea of going with a smaller size street, which we proposed. These are beautiful streets. You'll find all of the sidewalks and all of the road curves are exposed aggregate. The point here is that right now unless the City can get the ability to have maintenance funds for those road systems then we jeopardize the ability to install those road systems. We understand staff s comments that they want to have maintenance funds for those roads but VDOT has to acknowledge that. In my mind, this is unfinished business we need to attend to because quite frankly, we're requesting a variance and the conditions are fine. I wanted to let you know that I think we have to focus more on working with VDOT to allow maintenance funds for road systems that are built to state standards but have a slightly smaller road width. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. R.J. Nutter: Thank you. And, I would like to introduce Mr. Fuller, who has come up today from Atlanta. Stephen, I'd like to introduce you and for you to say a few words. Stephen Fuller: Thank you. I'll keep it brief. Flash me if you need to. I'm Stephen Fuller and our firm is located at Atlanta. We've been in business for right at 20 years. I started right out of Georgia Tech. The heart of our firm is our architects, residential designers designing homes. But over the 20 year career that we've had we became very frustrated that most of our homes, no matter how well designed were always more than likely put into very typical suburban environments driven by really nothing but lot yield and streets, and houses and private backyards. You tend never see kind of quality open spaces that you would see in the classic 20-30 neighborhoods that are really found in almost every American city. So the last ten years inspired by a lot of great planning started to see. The architectural world single-family wise really began to study classic old neighborhoods. We have great ones in Atlanta. Druid Hills and Meyers Park in Charlotte and even historical places like Savannah and Charleston. From that have really tried to revive what makes a classic American neighborhood work from a land planning and a landscaping architectural level. The combination of classic really wonderful beautiful architecture combined with great upfront planning makes for fabulous places to live both architecturally and in the green space area. So, when we got here and started to foresee this project we were really interested. First of all, there had been so much concern and planning up front on your part in terms of the TATAC documents in the transition area and the concerns that you had so this plan has a lot of detail in it in terms of the land planning and I won't go through all of it but various types of green spaces and natural spaces. They break down from gigantic large spaces down to very beautiful little independent park spaces that may not have more than three or four homes placed on that unique space. It's very comprehensive but even at the level that you see it at its really only 20 percent of our work. The bulk of our 40 men company, are really architects concerned with the homes themselves. We'll work every builder at the bulk of landscaping level and the architectural over the next 5 years or however long it takes to make sure that this project is truly a new classic neighborhood. Ronald Ripley: Mr. Fuller, you've run out of time. Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 5 Stephen Fuller: Oh, I'm sorry. Ronald Ripley: We will have some questions we would like to ask you. Stephen Fuller: Okay. Great. Ronald Ripley: I'd like to give you an opportunity. Stephen Fuller: Do you want me to stay up? Ronald Ripley: Yes. Stay up if you will. I'd like to start off with a question. Can you explain the differences in the matter that you lay your subdivisions out versus your traditional subdivision? It seems quite unique, if you don't mind. Stephen Fuller: The first thing we do and real quickly is look at the raw land. We look at what's there that's worth preserving such as trees and natural components. Just like you would design a house on a specific lot and if there's 200 year old Oak trees that becomes a key feature that you're going to work with not ignore. We did that. There were several patches of mature trees. In some cases, they were very straight edge because it had been farmed. We'd like to go back and sculpt that a little bit to re -naturalize that. Then on the inside of that we looked at how the circulation needs to work and start to break down the scale of the place. So the green spaces not only break down in scale. Ronald Ripley: There's a pointer there by the way. Do you see that black one? Stephen Fuller: I've got one. I just forgot that I had it in my hand. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Stephen Fuller: The different scales of the places and unfortunately you could really zoom in on almost anyone of these little tiny spaces and they are already starting to show some of the features that will eventually will end up at the fine detail level whether it be fountains or edge conditions, fence roses, hedge rows, alleys of trees. We just begin to work that whole piece of property almost like you're laying out a floor plan of a house. Again, just like residential architectural, we like our street systems to be very fluent. No dead ends. Just like you don't want to walk into a dead end room of a house. When you go into a neighborhood you want to have a lot of flow and a lot of connectivity is what you guys call it, not just internally but for the next great place that's going to happen down stream or up stream. So, I didn't really know how to describe that but it's a whole realistic approach. When we lay out these roads and these lots and these parks, again keep in mind, every lot in here shows a house plan already. We're already thinking in terms of garages, front orientations, porches, so when the architecture starts to fall in and it's not by accident. There are already pads and orientations hierarchy of lot sizes, styles of architectures, these neighborhoods will independently become wonderful places. We can even sort of dial architectural changes into these various neighborhoods based on the land plans and price points and lot sizes. So, we can introduce Georgian styles, little Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 6 country styles, front row house on parks and open spaces could be mandated to have porches, interior lots with more emphasis on rear elevations. So, there's a lot to what we eventually will bring to the table in terms of design. Ronald Ripley: Will you be doing the design of the various homes in there or will you be approving those designs? Stephen Fuller: We'll be doing a combination of both. When we're dealing typically with larger builders and some of these sections in here may involve a building company that's larger in terms of the volume, we'll deal directly with them and they'll become our client. We'll pass from the developer to that builder. In other cases where we're dealing with smaller builders a lot of times we may not deal directly with them. What we'll do'is what we call "home libraries" we'll prototype houses that basically those builders will use to work with their local in house designers. We write guidelines that talk about how to do everything from frame dormers to bay windows and porches. So either by continuing again, the guidelines and the process that you guys have put into place we become that independent architectural level in the community, either by completely designing the houses or writing the guidelines that they will have to adhere to. Ronald Ripley: What if the builder says he's not going to do something will you try to reach an agreement on what's acceptable? Stephen Fuller: Documents and some things that we'll produce will become part of the covenant and they'll have to agree to abide by those before they can buy lots in there legally. If they don't they obviously it falls on the developer to buy back their lots to not let that particular builder continue to build in there. Ronald Ripley: Dot, did you have a question? Dorothy Wood: You covered my question. I'm just a little excited about it. It's a beautiful quality. Thank you. Stephen Fuller: Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other questions of Mr. Fuller? Eugene Crabtree: I've like what they've done. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Stephen Fuller: I appreciate you moving me up on the agenda. My five-month pregnant wife will appreciate me making it home for dinner. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Robert Miller: Gene Hanson. Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 7 Gene Hanson: Chairman Ripley, ladies and gentlemen of Planning Commission. My name is Gene Hanson. I'm an equestrian farm owner in Pungo so I like hearing nice things about horse farms. I'm here to talk in favor of Ashville Park development. Even though that might hinder assessment valuation in my neck of the woods. I'm here not so much to talk about the quality of the project that I watch you develop. I think it's going to be second to none, so, my apologies to some of my friends who are developers in Virginia Beach. I'm here to talk about something that I think is really important for this area and the Transition Area. I was on the Transition Area Committee so what goes on in the Transition Area is very important to me. I'm here to talk about the quality of the people involved here. The gentleman who was not introduced is Lewis McMurran, who is really the primary developer here. I've known Lewis for many years. I've ridden horses with his wife. He has stayed at my house before. I have broken bread with him. I have verbally been at elbow with him on more than once or twice and I have spent time with his family in his in Carrolton as well. I think there's not a more honorable person with whom you can invite to become the new pillar of the community in Virginia Beach. I would be tickled pink to see not only unanimously that the Commission accept this new proposal but welcome Lewis and the people that he is bringing here to really help the Transition Area become what we all have as far as vision. That's it. Any questions? Ronald Ripley: I've got a question Gene. Gene Hanson: Sure. Ronald Ripley: Having served on that committee, do you think he meets the intent of the guidelines to the extent that you were all looking for? Gene Hanson: I will tell you there's a practical hint that I gave to Dick Browner and that is they are obviously not farmers because they don't know that a practical mower depth is eight feet. Why? So, I looked at the size of the trails initially and now I've been talking to them about horse trails so they will expand dust slightly so they can make one pass with a large mower depth to be more efficient. The trails are multipurpose trails are wonderful. As was pointed out there's a lot of connectivity. Even they made available places to connect to other developments that don't even exist yet. That's a plus. It isn't dust one spot coming into our area. It's throughout. From somebody who rides horses down thin narrow streets in the Pungo area, I can tell you that it will be real nice to be on this trails and connect through the rest of the Transition Area. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Yes. Don. Donald Horsley: So these trails will be multipurpose so you can use horses? We were told this morning that they would not be horse trails. Gene Hanson: I don't know who you told you that but if Lewis McMurran is going to try and keep me off these trails he's got another thought coming. Donald Horsley: I think there must be some confusion there. Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 8 Ronald Ripley: We'll have Mr. R.J. Nutter address that when he comes back up. R.J. Nutter: I'll try to address that. Ronald Ripley: Do you want to that when you rebuttal? Make a note of that R.J. Gene Hanson: I'd be trespassing otherwise. Donald Horsley: I'm impressed that there will be horse riding especially when I asked this morning. I thought that what we were talking about all along. Gene Hanson: Absolutely. Donald Horsley: Any connectivity with the trails to the Equi -kids site? Gene Hanson: Yes. That's the two from this diagram that he pointed to that looks to the north. Yes, there will be. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other questions? Thank you very much. Gene Hanson: Thank you. Robert Miller: I believe the name is Herb Jones. I'm not sure if I got the name. Herb Jones: Things are kind of in the eye of the beholder as I listen to other speakers. But I speak with some reservations and some questions. I'd like to be begin, for instance by saying that on Page 144 of the Comprehensive Plan, "direct access from Princess Anne Road or Nimmo Parkway to new development sites adjacent to these roads are discouraged." The Ashville Park proffer two says, "the principle entranceway to the property shall be from Princess Anne Road." That's an inconsistency. It says "access from this internal circulation system to surrounding residential neighborhoods should be provided." That means that a road from one to another. The only connectivity that I see from neighborhood to neighborhood is arrows depicting pedestrian paths. I see no distinction of a road going from Ashville Park to Heritage Park or to the area in Flanagan's Lane. So, then I have some questions. What would be the developer's proffer for the new intersection at Flanagan "s Lane and Sandbndge Road? Isn't Linear Park the same as a street with trees? What is a pocket park? And who will be allowed to use pocket parks? Will the recreational activity amenities be accessible to all in Virginia Beach or just the residents of Ashville Park? Was a yield study done? I think I heard the designer say that a yield study was done to determine, you know, what's there before we begin to say what developable acres within the 474 acres. We're putting 490 homes on the 474 acres. Is clustering that is called for on the Comprehensive Plan the same as building on smaller lots with limited use? And there are a lot of those lots that don't see anything but the lot next door if you look at the plan. Who will pay for the connective linkages between the developments that were depicted but not described? Is the City going to pay for those or will the developers? I think we need an explanation on how Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 9 they figure 56 percent open space. Oh by the way, I'm working from a September draft of the proposal and not the most recent one. It talks about the City will does not stand to fund public infrastructure necessary to support new workman level grills in the Transition Area. As of October 2003, I went to Kellam High School and Princess Anne Middle School and talked with the principal to find that one was 500 over capacity right now and the other was 200 over capacity. Those are not the same numbers I see in today's draft of their proposal. I think the Comprehensive Plan talks about regional storm water plans. Maybe there should have been some effort to make regional storm water plans with these two large developments with Heritage Park and Ashville Park. It's not to have their little BMP. Of course, this is going to impact the Back Bay and what's there. I have other comments to make. My time is up. I'll answer questions. I had a lot of questions about the plan. I hope that someone will answer them. Thank you very much. Ronald Ripley: Are there any questions of Mr. Jones? Donald Horsley: I just like getting Mr. Scott to clarify the first statement you made about the Comprehensive Plan and the access to Princess Anne Road. Herb Jones: The actual size was page 144 of the Comprehensive Plan. Donald Horsley: He is going to comment on it. Robert Scott: I don't think policy like is intended to prohibit a 400-500 acre track that has frontage on Princess Anne Road having any access to it. I think we were considered about individual lot have frontage or access onto Princess Anne Road which of course this plan avoids. I am not able to see how one access point onto Princess Anne Road would attract that big is a violation of the concepts. Herb Jones: I guess my question was when I read through the proposal was any effort made to make the major entrance off of Flanagan's Lane rather than off of Princess Anne Road? It would seem to me to be less confusing then to put it off of Princess Anne Road. I realize that they offered another five feet now of roadway so they make it a 110 foot roadway rather a hundred in the proposal that I read. But it seems to me that it would be less confusing and less of a pattern to be placed of Princess Anne Road because we don't know what's going to happen to Princess Anne Road down the road. Excuse me for the redundancy. I did want to make one other comment. There is nothing in the proposal that talks about horse trails. There's no word "horse" or "equestrian" in there because I looked very carefully. Donald Horsley: I think we're going to get that explanation momentarily. Herb Jones: Are there any other questions? Ronald Ripley: Yes. Barry. Barry Knight: Mr. Jones, I think the developer will probably answer your questions Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 10 shortly. I believe they had, like you stated two options, Princess Anne Road or Flanagan's Lane. I believe the residents on Flanagan's Lane actually wanted it closed so there wouldn't be any traffic on Flanagan's Lane. Herb Jones: That's the east end of Flanagan. I'm talking about putting it on the west end of Flanagan as opposed to Princess Anne Road. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Herb Jones: Thank you. Robert Miller: William Bailey. No William Bailey? Two people got up but nobody came forward. Okay. Steven Berman. Steven Berman: I'll get up. Robert Miller: You can be William Bailey. Steven Berman: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. My name is Steve Berman and I live at 1685 Flanagan's Lane here in Virginia Beach. My family and I have lived in Virginia Beach for about 30 years now. For the past 18 years, we've lived on Flanagan's Lane. We dearly love the place. As a matter of fact, we moved there to primarily get away from Kempsville. We saw all the congestion. We love Kempsville but we saw the growth and development occurring so we decided as well as so many other people on Flanagan's Lane to move to the country, to some open spaces. Recently, I had a good opportunity to meet with the residents of Flanagan's Lane. We've met at my home on a couple of occasions. We've met with Jim Reeves who is a Council member and we've also met with Dick Browner, who is one of the planners for this project of Ashville Park to at least discuss some of the concerns involving this new development. We sent each of you as Commissioners and each of the City Council members a letter including a signed petition signed by all eight residents of Flanagan's Lane requesting that Flanagan's Lane, on the west end be either cul-de-sac'd or dead ended at the Berman property which is my property. We had an opportunity to talk with many people from Back Bay from the civic leagues and most of our concern has been along the lines of all the development that's occurring and all of you are very aware of the development that's occurring starting with Heritage Park. We knew that once that was approved it was going to be "me too" everybody stepping up to the plate and saying we want to get our property now developed now that Heritage Park had been approved. I would like to make a comment that I am a co-owner of a founder of a company here in Virginia Beach that does a lot of training that deals with public involvement, training courses with the Army Corps of Engineers down Huntsville, Alabama. It's a delightful course that we provide to some of the people in the Army Corps of Engineers. But one of the things that really was pointed out to me and one of the people that I would at least like to give some kudos to in and appreciate is Dick Browner. Dick has come forth to at least let us know as residents what in fact he was calling for and what he was looking at least in terms of being proposed. I do appreciate Dick coming to our meetings and sharing information so that it's not after Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 11 the fact but working with us as residents so I do appreciate that. All of us know that there has been massive development going on and perhaps this particular development is one of the most massive one that has occurred in the last twenty years which really affects the open space. I know there have been a lot of changes to the Comprehensive Plan to the green line to the Transition line and so forth but we are very much concerned in terms of this development that's occurring. Ronald Ripley: Mr. Berman, you're running out of time. Steven Berman: Okay. Ronald Ripley: Maybe you can summarize? Steven Berman: I'd like to summarize by saying that there are a number of proffers that have been asked for by the Flanagan's Lane residents. Very quickly, these are lust five or six proffers if I may. One was to cul-de-sac Flanagan's Lane as a dead end, to open the new road from Princess Anne to the end of Flanagan's Lane. We found out this morning that is to be done within four years as opposed to two years now. That Flanagan's Lane not be used for Ashville Park construction or village residence until the new road is completed or the project is completed. Developer provided undulating berms, which include shrubbenes and trees and appropriate fencing. Modify the plan entrance on Flanagan's Lane. There has been a lot of discussion about where Flanagan's Lane would be. Our recommendation and request that it be moved closer to Sandbridge Road and the last thing, if possible to look at the developer providing the actual water and sewer hookup ties that will be close to where our development is so that all the people in Flanagan's Lane can tie up. Again, we do not really object to the development we just like to make sure that the proffers are provided and I really appreciate Mr. Strange stepping out and making his vote earlier. 1997 was not that long ago in terms of the proffers being established. It's important that if you establish proffers now that at least some how we enforce those proffers whenever they may be. Thank you. Any questions? Ronald Ripley: Questions? Thank you very much. Steven Berman: Thank you very much. Ronald Ripley: That is all the speakers. Mr. Nutter, do you wish to address? R.J. Nutter: Thank you. First, a couple of items and Mr. Berman, I'm happy he could be here today. Dick and many of us on this team have met at his residence on a number of occasions. In dust about every incidence we have already modified the proffers to provide in fact the things that he had requested. I would like to go over those for a second. As you know, originally we did have a road that connected into Flanagan's Lane near his property. We did modify at their request. When I spoke with Mr. Berman earlier he indicated that he dust wants to make sure that these proffers of record and I wanted to assure him that they are. I want to assure that these are deed restrictions. As you said, Ms. Wood, to modify a proffer, sometimes that is necessary. It requires notice, a new public hearing before the Planning Commission and City Council. We don't Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 12 anticipate that. We have designed this development around the things he has requested. The other issues, the berming, we have a specific plan called the berm plan. It's not in the booklet I've given but it's part of the proffers that addresses the berming, the location of the ditch, the location of where the buffer area will be measured from, all that was a specific request to the residents of Flanagan's Lane. So, that's another advantage point from the developer's point of view in meeting these residents in advance so we could address those. If I could, I'd like to also address some of the issues raised by Mr. Jones. I didn't bring page 144 of the Comprehensive Plan with me but I do think and my sense is that what we're referring to designing developments so they do not have direct access for each lot along a mayor arterial. We've done that in every other place in the City. We've done it here. In fact, we originally proposed given the size of this and in fact that we had several thousand footage of frontage on Princess Anne Road to the west two access ways. Staff asked us to reduce it to one. So, I think we're more than compliance with that. You will also note that we don't have any individual lots on Princess Anne Road fronting at all. So, I think we comply there. I think and I'm trying to go to the page regarding the issue of parks. Who owns them and who maintains them? The parks are in large measure private. They will be maintained by a Homeowners Association. We have linear parks. We have pocket parks. We have village greens. All those are inside the development, inside each village. Then we have large open space areas. Those are maintained by the HOA, by the residents in that area. So it will not be a drain on the public. Most of the trail systems are in fact private. It goes to provide for connectivity we do know that we have to provide key trails that are available to the public and we will be doing that where we indicated except we need to modify them based upon the new development that is not yet defined on property adjacent to us. But the majority of the system is in fact private for the benefit of the residents. The nice part about it is if this was a golf course that may be more open to the public for a fee but ironically it's not open to the main residents. It's reasonably restricted to the residents. They can't wander on to a golf course. There are liability questions. The golfers don't like it. So, in many ways, this open space is far more accessible to the residents of this community than is a typical golf course. So, I hope that answer some of this questions. You also asked about equestrian. It's been an issue. Let me try to address that for you. Mr. McMurran, his wife as you know is a quite an equestrian herself. So, we have recognized the desire of the community and the TATAC community to start looking at access for those facilities. We also recognize that there is a certain amount of incompatability for a person on a horse and a person on a bicycle or logger. I'm afraid that's the nature of living with those beautiful animals. They are skittish and they are all unique. They are very big and powerful and can do a great deal of damage. As a result, what we have done is work with Mr. Hanson and exactly Mr. McMurran has about looking at an independent trail for horses that does not coincide with those trails but at the same time provides access through the development. We have not yet identified it. We asked that it be located not behind homes but away through the wooded areas where adjacent properties. We're still working on that design but I can tell you that we are planning on providing that. The eight miles of trails that I dust mentioned are independent of this system I've dust talked about. Ronald Ripley: Where do you think these trails would run? Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 13 R.J. Nutter: Generally speaking, we've looked through here. We've looked at some portion. This is one scenario that is behind homes so we're not too crazy about that one. We are looking predominately in this area. We have the U.S. Fish and Wildlife facility here. We could provide some access on this side. We have an area through here that can provide access out through this side. So, we are looking at doing that but I hope you'll understand. Ronald Ripley: I would think on the right-of-way for sure. Would you not? R.J. Nutter: The nght-of-way. Ronald Ripley: The main right-of-way. R.J. Nutter: The main right-of-way is separated quite a bit, no one horse is being scared by a passerby Ronald Ripley: That would seem to be part of the guidelines that came out. That was the idea. I'm talking about Princess Anne Road. R.J. Nutter: Sure. Along Princess Anne Road we have not. A meeting with Dean Block we've asked him to come up with a plan for where he wants to put the trail system. For instance, one of the questions was we did not show and I can't give you a line down here because we weren't sure if the City wanted the trail system to a sidewalk, an eight foot wide paved concrete facility or an eight foot wide part through facility. We weren't sure if they wanted it to be meandering through the woods or adjacent to the right-of-way. Ronald Ripley: Would the developer be putting that in? R.J. Nutter: We're putting that in. Ronald Ripley: Once the City identifies what they want. R.J. Nutter: Yes sir. We asked Dean to let us know and Dean has been wonderful about acknowledging they haven't focused much on that yet. We are working very closely with Dean's office. That's a good example of trying to provide that connectivity but at the same time have a natural separation for certain type of uses. They might be in conflict with one another. This William Bailey who did appear there was one gentleman here from the fire department. Robert Miller: That is who that was? R.J. Nutter: Is that who it was? I didn't recognize his name. The first department owns a piece of property I believe is roughly right in here. They are in the process of proposing to build a small softball field, a two -acre softball field and they wanted to make sure that it would not be next to this property and there wouldn't be any interference and after we located it on the map he decided to leave and indicate to me that I could indicate that he was here and had no objections at all. I did want to close with Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 14 that but I hope that answers your questions. We have pocket park demonstrations. You name it. You may be tired of this by now but I do want to let you know that we came fully prepared before you today. Ronald Ripley: I think Dot has a question. Dorothy Wood: R.J., I'm sure that you'll be willing to meet with Mr. Jones between now and Council and go over his concerns. Would you not? R.J. Nutter: Certainly. I have no problem with that whatsoever. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. R.J. Nutter: Yes ma'am. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other questions of R.J.? Barry. Barry Knight: R.J. You were right. I do recognize all the families that own that land in this neck of the woods. Some of them are very good friends of mine and I know they've had reservations of selling their land for years and years. I really believe that some of them, and the only reason they are willing to sell their land, is because it is an assemblage of land that's going to be a quality development. There are two things about this that first strike you and that is the quality of it and also it is fairly massive when you look at it. I know that's exactly what TATAC wanted was to assemble a lot of tracks so you could have a plan for one large parcel of property. Would you tell us if you can roughly where your going to start building and roughly where you're going to end up and roughly what time frame we're talking about because I know it's not all going to happen in six months. R.J. Nutter: That's very true. I'm happy to do that. These are not well defined phase levels, but we have discussed this at great length so I can give you the benefit for all that thought. Phase I is basically going to be the development of Villages "A" and "B" through here and the start of the recreational facility right through here. This process we anticipate occurring somewhere between 2006 & 2009. We anticipate approximately a year or less to get through site plan, subdivision review, construction plan review and approvals. We anticipate approximately that it will be about 2004. We anticipate approximately a year of infrastructure improvements about 2005 and therein probably start up some the hard construction of homes somewhere in late 2005 — 2006 some of the models. We think these areas will go probably, we anticipating in about thxee years. Phase II is really the continuation of Flanagan's throughout to here and the construction of Village "C" and Village "E", which is the second of the two age restricted. That's anticipated some place in 2009 & 2012. And the final phases, which may well overlapped in some degree particularly Village "D" will be Villages "D" and "F" and they are considered to be brought on line by 2012 — 2015. So, even though it is large, it is a long build out, Barry I think is your point. The other and to give you an example for the next just about through 2009 you're looking at basically, I think is 135 non age restricted lots coming online and 104 age restricted lots coming online. So, between now Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 15 and 2009 is a slower process. You won't see 490 units on day one. That's a pretty good estimate what we've been able to look at and talking with Mr. Fuller and the engineers and Mr. McMurran the developer. I hope that's a help to you Mr. Knight. Ronald Ripley: Charlie, you had a question. Charlie Salle': R.J., I think you indicated a number of connected areas where the trails would connect to other properties. Could you point out where they connect? How these connections lead to public trails that traverse this project? R.J. Nutter: Yes sir. I'll be happy to. This connection here is tied to a 50 -foot tie in Heritage Park that could either be vehicular or pedestrian in nature. It's 50 -foot wide on both sides. We've indicated in design not to have vehicular connectivity. Charlie Salle': Let me ask you this. That provides a way to get from this project to that one but can they get to that project to this one? R.J. Nutter: Yes. What I'm saying exactly is this point here, and this point here, are lined with the Heritage Park development at that location where they have provided access themselves. Charlie Salle': Once they enter this project what trail are they limited to? R.J. Nutter: Once they enter this project there will be public trail system. In reality, quite frankly, unless this becomes a burden the public can go on any trails to be perfectly honest with you but there will be trails that will be specifically earmarked for them but they are designed so that anyone from the properties here and Heritage Park or the adjacent developments that might occur in the future here can bisect this property through the trail system and get to the other side. Some will come here and be able to go in this direction. Some will come out here and be able to come down in this direction. We have not provided paths in here yet because we're not sure where that's going to be but we do have a series of trails that are traversed these areas as well. We want to make sure that everyone knows that you will be able to get through this property. And you will be get through east and west. We have not tied in here. We do have a Coast Guard facility here and the existing Flanagan's Lane runs here so we have the opportunity to connect to here to come out to Princess Anne Road and go down in that fashion. There are multiple options as you can see. Charlie Salle': Will those trails just be pedestrian? R.J. Nutter: Those are pedestrian trails. Yes sir. Somewhere there looks like an equestrian trail through here somewhere but the majority of these are meant to be bike and walking and jogging paths. Ronald Ripley: I think that's it. Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 16 R.J. Nutter: Thank you very much Mr. Ripley. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. I think Gene Hanson wanted to readdress us if it's new information? Gene Hanson: I don't want to take Mr. Nutter's, I guess podium that way but one thing that I did not say when I was up here is that I sit on the Virginia Horse Council. I'm also on the Virginia Horse Council Trails Committee. So, I'd like for education purposes to let you know a little bit about horse trails. It will only take me a second to get it out. There are many municipal parks now in the Commonwealth that encourage multipurpose trails. The largest municipal park east of the Mississippi is Newport News City Park that abuts Yorktown Federal Battlefield Park. In both places, horses and all non -motorized vehicles doggers, pedestrians are allowed to use those trails indiscriminately. In fact, horses are encouraged to even have a place where people can bring in several different spots to park your trailers where an individual in a car you may have to pay to go in but if you bring in horses to go on the trails you do not. That's part of the Federal Battlefield Park. To the best of my knowledge and I ride those trails often and again, since I sit on the Trails Committee, there has not been any problem between this so call skittishness of horses. A horse is no different than any other pet. If you keep it under control you can ride it very well. If any of you have seen me I ride right down right side of the road in Pungo, right across the street without any problems. There are not enough trails here and I provided to Clay Bernick, who is in charge of trails for the City of Virginia Beach virtually every study that comes about regarding horseback riding trails throughout the United States and the cleanliness and the safety of having horse trails. I appreciate the concerns but it really isn't a red flag that I think needs to be raised. Thank you very much for having me to clarify that. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Okay. Discussion. Oh, a silent group today. Donald Horsley: I'll start. I've seen sketches of the preliminary drawings on this project several months ago. It has really grown on me I'm very impressed. I think this is something that when we look at the Transition Area, we didn't know what it was going to look like but I applaud the landowners for holding out. I know we've had golf courses talked about and other different amenities in that area but they were by individual landowners but this is a coordinated effort by a large group and a large tract of land and I think they kind of go along with the TATAC recommendations and I'm in favor of the project and whenever you're ready for a motion, I'm prepared to make one. Ronald Ripley: Charlie and Gene. Eugene Crabtree: I was dust going to say that I think that we have accomplished things pretty well. I'm sorry Charlie. I'm for it. Charlie Salle': Okay. I'm going to support this project too. I think it's a wonderful design. I think in the past we've sort of seen the kind of design where you come in and go with houses on half of the property and you have the other half reserved for timber or open space or whatever and it wasn't a whole lot of thought in design and originality to it. Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 17 It was just half undeveloped. I like the concept of incorporating the open space within the communities and making it a part of the community. It's almost like where you had a 100 acres or 50 acres left vacant for the people who live on the 50 acres that are developed, they hardly ever know that the open space is over there. The community they lived in was really not opened where this incorporates the open space in the community and makes it part of their community. I hope this will be the guideline for future development in the area. Ronald Ripley: Will. William Din: Frankly, I think this is a beautiful project. I think it provides a lot of the design aspects that we have been asking a lot of the developers to look at from a very large tract of property and I think that's one of the attributes of what we've been seeking to develop area like this comprehensively that you can see how it is going to build out to some degree. A lot of the parks provide the open space without clustering so to speak too much into smaller lots. This provides vistas from all these different areas and they are looking into parks. They are looking into open space areas that we seek and have tried to get other developers to provide in smaller developments but have been unable to because of the size of those developments. I think 50 percent open space area for this entire development is an attribute to the developer and I applaud Mr. Fuller for this. Seeing some of the development down in Atlanta, I think it's a lot of quality is going in this and I think the controls on the architectural styles and things is a great aspect of it. I too will possibly be supporting this. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Gene, did you want to add anything? Eugene Crabtree: I'm sorry. I apologize to Charlie. I was listening but I wasn't listening. Ronald Ripley: I know. I do that all the time. Eugene Crabtree: I think this is, as Will said, I think this encompasses the thing that we have learned before to where that sort of and we had a couple of things before development by design and I think this fits that picture of development by design where they've gone in and looked at the land and the lay of the land and has actually developed and designed it around that. As Will said, I think this is actually what we're trying to accomplish here in the City. Ronald Ripley: Don. Donald Horsley: Mr. Chairman, I prepared to make a motion in that we approve the application of Ashville Park with the 35 proffers. I don't think I've ever seen an application that had 35 proffers. We're pretty well protected and I make a motion that we approve the application as proffered. Dorothy Wood: It's a pleasure to second your motion Mr. Horsley. Items #28, 29 & 30 Ashville Park, L.L.C. Page 18 Ronald Ripley: We have a motion by Don Horsley and a second by Dot Wood to approve it. Mr. Miller. Robert Miller: I need to abstain. My firm is working on the project. Donald Horsley: If we can get a quick vote we might be able to get home by the same time Mr. Fuller does tonight. Ronald Ripley: The only comment that I want to make is that I think that Mr. Hanson. Janice Anderson: I need to abstain also. My firm is working with one of the applicants on this project. Ronald Ripley: I think the discussion of the equestrian being folded to the path system and I'm hearing from the developer that is something they are going to do. I think it's important. I've received phone calls from citizens in the area who live down in the Transition Area and the rural area and they are looking for that and I think you heard it very strongly from Mr. Hanson. He's a very much a dominate part in that area. I think that's critical for you to address. We'll look for that to be done. I think that the quality of this is just exceptional. I have not seen entranceways and other connective techniques used in anything in this City like this. This is going to be something that I think will be an excellent icon for the Transition zone. So, with that, any other comments, we'll call for the question. Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 9-0 with two abstentions, the motion carnes. AYE 9 NAY 0 ABS 2 ABSENT 0 ANDERSON ABS CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER ABS RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD AYE Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 9-0 with two abstentions, the motion carnes. FORM NO P S 1B IA B�Ac� 0 v 2 ) Z ? OF OUR NA'"O'4S City Of Virggirxia Beacl-i In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF -5797 TO: Leslie L. Lilley FROM: B. Kay Wilson INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE RE: Conditional Zoning Application Ashville Park, L.L.C., et als DATE: November 28, 2003 DEPT: City Attorney DEPT: City Attorney The above -referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on December 9, 2003. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated September 5, 2003, and have determined it to be legally sufficient and in proper legal form. A copy of the agreement is attached. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further. BKW Enclosure Document Prepared By Troutman Sanders LLP 222 Central Park Avenue Suite 2000 Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462 (757) 687-7500 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made this 5th day of September, 2003 by and between ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company (hereinafter referred to as "Grantor"), the contract purchaser of certain parcels of property generally located in the Princess Anne Road Election district of Virginia Beach, Virginia, which property is more fully described on Exhibit A attached hereto (hereinafter the "Property"); EDDIE LEE COOPER and LINDA C. COOPER, now known as LINDA C. ACKISS; REBECCA ANN CULLIPHER and ROGER ELLIOTT MALBON; WILLIAM W. OLIVER and LYNN O. ADAMS, TRUSTEES UNDER A TRUST AGREEMENT UNDER WILL OF W.W. OLIVER, JR.; BETTY B. BOURDON; R. EDWARD BOURDON, JR. and PAUL S. BOURDON; FRANK T. WILLIAMS and NORWOOD C. LAND (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Grantor"), the current owners of the Property; and the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantor has initiated an amendment to the Zoning Map of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, by petition addressed to the Grantee, so as to change the classification from AG -1 and AG -2 to R-30 and P-1 with a PDH -2 overlay on certain property which contains GPIN NOS.: 2413-07-1960-0000 2413-06-6259-0000 2413-16-7813-0000 2413-57-0702-0000 2413-36-3862-0000 2413-46-4337-0000 2413-55-5252-0000 2413-75-4401-0000 approximately 474 acres, more or less, located in the Princess Anne Election District of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, which property is more particularly described in the attached Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the Grantee's policy is to provide only for the orderly development of land for various purposes, including mixed use purposes, through zoning and other land development legislation; and WHEREAS, the Grantor acknowledges that the competing and sometimes incompatible uses conflict, and that in order to permit differing uses on and in the area of the subject Property and at the same time to recognize the effects of the change and the need for various types of uses, certain reasonable conditions governing the use of the Property for the protection of the community that are not generally applicable to land similarly zoned R-30 and P-1 with PDH -2 overlay are needed to cope with the situation to which the Grantor's rezoning application gives rise; and WHEREAS, the Grantor has voluntarily proffered in writing in advance of and prior to the public hearing before the Grantee, as part of the proposed conditional amendment to the Zoning Map, in addition to the regulations provided for in the existing R-30 and P-1 with a PDH - 2 overlay zoning district by the existing City's Zoning Ordinance (CZO), the following reasonable conditions related to the physical development, operation and use of the Property to be adopted as a part of said amendment to the new Zoning Map relative to the Property, all of which have a reasonable relation to the rezoning and the need for which is generated by the rezoning; and WHEREAS, said conditions having been proffered by the Grantor and allowed and accepted by the Grantee as part of the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, such conditions shall continue in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes the zoning on the Property covered by such conditions; provided, however, that such conditions shall continue despite a subsequent amendment if the subsequent amendment is part of the comprehensive N implementation of a new or substantially revised zoning ordinance, unless, notwithstanding the foregoing, these conditions are amended or vaned by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and executed by the record owner of the subject Property at the time of recordation of such instrument; provided, further, that said instrument is consented to by the Grantee in writing as evidenced by a certified copy of ordinance or resolution adopted by the governing body of the Grantee, after a public hearing before the Grantee advertised pursuant to the provisions of the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2- 2204, which said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with said instrument as conclusive evidence of such consent. NOW THEREFORE, the Grantor, for itself, it's successors, assigns, grantees, and other successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement by or exaction from the Grantee or its governing body and without any element of compulsion of quid pro quo for zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit or subdivision approval, hereby make the following declaration of conditions and restrictions which shall restrict and govern the physical development, operation and use of the Property and hereby covenant and agree that these proffers (collectively, the "Proffers") shall constitute covenants running with the said Property, which shall be binding upon the Property and upon all parties and persons claiming under or through the Grantor, it's heirs, personal representatives, assigns, grantees and other successors in interest or title, namely: 1. The Property shall be developed substantially as shown on the "Master Plan of Ashville Park Virginia Beach, VA" dated 8/29/03 and designed by Stephen Fuller Places, LLC in conjunction with MSA, P.C., a copy of which has been exhibited to City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Planning Department (hereinafter, the "Master Plan"). 2. The principal entranceway to the Property shall be from Princess Anne Road which shall be substantially similar in design and quality to the exhibit entitled "Community Entrance Princess Anne Road" a copy of which is contained within Section V of the development manual entitled "Ashville Park" prepared by Stephen Fuller Places, LLC, a copy of which has 9 been exhibited to the City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Planning Department (hereinafter the "Manual"). 3. A second entranceway to the Property is located at Flanagans Lane near the intersection of Flanagans Lane and Sandbndge Road and shall be substantially similar in design and quality to the exhibit entitled "Community Entrance Flanagans Lane" prepared by Stephen Fuller Places, LLC, a copy of which is contained within Section V of the Manual. 4. Prior to the issuance of the first residential building permit within Village C and upon completion of at least two lanes of the public right-of-way running through Ashville Park from Princess Anne Road to the second entranceway of the Property at Flanagans Lane as referenced in proffer number 3, Grantor shall cul-de-sac Flanagans Lane within the confines of Ashville Park at two locations where depicted on the Master Plan. In addition to this improvement, when developing Village D, Grantor shall maintain a 100' buffer area along the northern perimeter of Village D which buffer shall be measured from the northern most property line of Ashville Park adjacent to Village D. Within this 100' buffer area, Grantor shall install an undulating berm and solid 6' high fence, substantially as shown on the Exhibit entitled Conceptual Site Layout Plan of Ashville Park, Berm Plan, Virginia Beach, VA., dated 9/17/03, prepared by MSA, P.C., which plan shall have been exhibited to City Council and on file in the Planning Department of the City of Virginia Beach (hereinafter "Berm Plan"). Any multi- purpose equestrian trails or pedestrian paths located adjacent to the berms shown on the Berm Plan, shall be located on the side of the berm facing Ashville Park. STREET SCAPE 5. The Grantor shall dedicate to the City of Virginia Beach sufficient land along the portions of the Property adjacent to Princess Anne Road of 55' in width as measured from the centerline of the right-of-way, to accommodate an ultimate 110' right-of-way. In addition to said dedication, Grantor agrees to dedicate to the City an additional 150' wide buffer as measured from the ultimate right-of-way dedication The dedicated buffer shall be for public purposes .19 including open space, buffers, landscaping, utilities, roadways and trail purposes. Said buffer shall not restrict the development of the "Community Entrance Prospective" within Section V within the Manual. . 6. The Grantor agrees that during the detailed site plan review to conduct a Traffic Impact Study of the impacts of Ashville Park. The Grantor agrees to substantially complete or bond the required improvements on Princess Anne Road at the entrance to Ashville Park that are called for in the Traffic Impact Study. Said improvements shall be substantially completed or bonded prior to the issuance of the first permanent occupancy permit for residents within Ashville Park. 7. The internal streets within Ashville Park shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the exhibit entitled "Typical Street Sections Plan of Ashville Park Princess Anne Road, Virginia Beach, Virginia", prepared by MSA, P.C., which exhibit has been displayed to the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach and is on file in the Virginia Beach Planning Department (hereinafter "Street Section Plan"). 8. All rolled curbs, drop inlets and sidewalks depicted on the Street Section Plan shall have an exposed aggregate finish. 9. All street lighting installed on the Property shall be a decorative style fixture and the height and separation of street lights shall be determined during the detailed site plan review. 10. The trees planted within and adjacent to the public right-of-ways on the Property shall be double the total tree canopy requirements for public right-of-ways as set forth in the Department of Public Works Landscape Manual of the City of Virginia Beach. 11. Subject to confirmation by the City of the necessary 50' wide nght-of-way widths and receipt by the City of all environmental permits from the Army Corp of Engineers and Department of Environmental Quality, Grantor shall substantially improve or bond the costs of right-of-way improvements to Flanagans Lane beginning from the eastern -most entranceway to 5 the Property from Flanagans Lane, continuing in an easterly direction to the intersection of Flanagans Lane and Sandbndge Road Said improvements shall be substantially completed or bonded prior to the issuance of final occupancy permit for the first residence in Village D, E or F as depicted on the Master Plan. Said improvements shall be the widening of the existing lane with and the piping of the adjacent ditches, together with the portion of the future right-of-way traffic simulation generated by Ashville Park as determined during the detailed site plan review and the Traffic Impact Study performed by Grantor. These improvements shall be consistent with CIP Project No. 2.021.000 for rural road improvements in the City of Virginia Beach's Capital Improvement Program. THE VILLAGES OF ASHVILLE PARK 12. The Grantor shall record a Master Deed of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("Restrictions") governing the Property. All land owners within the PD -H2 District shall be members of a Home Owners Association responsible for maintaining collectively all common areas on the Property. The Restrictions shall be enforced by one or more Home Owners Association, which Restrictions, shall among other things, restrict the use of the open space areas for any purpose, but recreation and open space use. Such covenants shall run with the land and be in full force and effect for a period of at least fifty (50) years. These covenants shall become part of the deed of each lot or parcel within the development. Such covenants shall be approved by the City Attorney and recorded before the first building permit in the project is issued. The Restrictions shall among other things require that every residential unit within Villages B and E as shown on the Master Plan will be occupied, on a full-time basis, by at least one (1) adult resident of fifty-five (55) years of age or older. The Restrictions shall also prohibit persons under eighteen (18) years of age from residing in any residential unit within Villages B or E for more than one hundred twenty (120) days in any calendar year. 13. The total number of units developed in Village B shall not exceed 104 and the total number of units developed in Village E shall not exceed 56. All such units within Village B no shall be single-family detached dwellings. The minimum lot size, internal open space area, buffers and acreages for each Village shall be as set forth in the Master Plan. 14. Villages A, C, D and F shall be developed substantially as depicted on the Master Plan. The total number of units developed in Village A shall not exceed 135 units. The total number of units developed in Villlage C shall not exceed 94 units. The total number of units developed in Village D shall not exceed 45. The total number of units developed in Village F shall not exceed 56. All units shall be single-family detached dwellings within these Villages. The minimum lot size, internal open space area, buffers and acreages for each Village shall be as set forth in the Master Plan. 15. The linear parks depicted within Villages A, C, D and F shall be maintained by the Home Owners Association and no structure shall be allowed within the linear parks other than uniform fencing, or other uniform decorative features, and mailboxes. The Pocket Parks depicted on the Master Plan shall be developed and constructed substantially as depicted on the Master Plan. The Pocket Parks shall be owned and maintained by the Home Owners Association. All sidewalks and trails located outside of the public rights-of-way shall be maintained by the Home Owners Association. 16. A Letter of Map Amendment ("LOMA") must be approved by FEMA before any development may proceed within any Special Flood Hazard Area. 17. The residential lot tree canopy for each residential lot on the Property shall be double the total canopy cover specified in the City of Virginia Beach's "Residential Tree Request Table" in effect as of September 1, 2003. 18. A minimum 50' buffer shall be established on the perimeters of the Property as shown on the Master Plan. No structures shall be allowed within the buffer area and the buffer area shall be maintained by the Home Owners Association. No community wide or other activity other than maintenance shall occur within the Buffer area. 7 RECREATIONAL AND OPEN SPACE AREAS 19. Two Recreational Activity Areas shall be designed, constructed and built on the Property substantially where indicated on the Master Plan. Both facilities shall provide indoor amenities, meeting rooms and active outdoor recreational amenities. No outside recreational fields or sporting areas shall be lighted to permit sporting events at night. This restriction shall not prohibit lighted outdoor swimming pools or lighted outdoor tennis courts provided that any such lighted tennis courts must be setback a minimum of 150' from a residential property line. Outdoor lighting installed for the swimming pools or outdoors tennis courts shall be directed downward toward the swimming pool or tennis courts play area. 20. The recreational facilities shall be substantially similar in quality, design and character to the exhibits entitled "Community Amenities" as contained in Section VI in the Manual. It is recognized that with a development of this size, detailed building plans may change as the development of Ashville Park progresses. The intent of the renderings is to demonstrate the architectural style and building quality of these facilities. Final elevations for these structures shall be submitted to the Planning Director to assure compliance with this proffer. 21. In addition to the buffer areas, linear parks, pocket parks and Village Greens within Villages A, B, C, D, E and F, Grantor shall set aside as open space the areas shown on the Master Plan. Said areas shall be for the benefit of the owners of property within Ashville Park. These areas shall be set aside for passive enjoyment and recreation for uses such as Lakes, Meadows, Forested Areas and Landscaped Vistas. These areas shall be maintained by the Home Owners Association. 22. No portion of the Property that has been designated as a jurisdictional wetland by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers shall be disturbed. 23. The combined areas set aside for recreation and open space on the Property should not be below fifty-four percent (54%) of the current gross acreage of the Property. The different types and acreages of open spaces provided within Ashville Park shall be substantially as specified on the Master Plan. 24. Grantor shall donate $1,000.00 for each residential lot developed on the Property to the City of Virginia Beach Department of Parks and Recreation into the Open Space Site Acquisition program more specifically referred to as CIP Project No. 4.004.000. Grantor's per lot donation should be paid to the City at the time of the issuance of each building permit for each residential lot within Ashville Park. If all or a portion of said donated funds have not been used by the City of Virginia Beach within twenty (20) years for the purpose for which they were dedicated, then they may be used by the City of Virginia Beach for other municipal purposes, as the City shall in its sole discretion deem appropriate. OPEN SPACE; PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE TRAILS 25. Grantor shall construct a series of sidewalks and trails that are designed to provide pedestrian accessibility within each Village, and pedestrian and bike connections between each Village and to adjacent properties substantially as shown on the Exhibit entitled "Connectivity Plan" prepared by Stephen Fuller Places, LLC, which plan is part of the Manual. The sidewalk system adjacent to right-of-ways and residences shall be constructed of concrete with an exposed aggregate finish. The path system within the Village Greens, the Pocket Parks and other open space areas shall be finished in hard surfaces such as asphalt or compacted clay. Such trails shall be designed substantially in accordance with the quality levels and design features as depicted on the exhibit entitled "Open Space" prepared by Stephen Fuller Places, LLC, which exhibit is part of the Manual. While not all portions of the trail system within Ashville Park will be open to the public, Grantor shall provide a continuous trail system from Princess Anne Road to Flanagans Lane that will be open to the public either through easements over some of the trails on the Home Owners Association property, or the provision of sidewalks and trails within the public nght-of- way section between Princess Anne Road and Flanagans Lane. 26. Grantor shall construct a Multi-Purpose/Equestnan Trail substantially where indicated on the exhibit entitled "Connectivity Plan w/Multi-Purpose/Equestnan Trail" prepared by MSA, LLC in conjunction with Stephen Fuller Places, LLC, which exhibit has been displayed to City Council and is on file in the Planning Department of the City of Virginia Beach (hereinafter "Equestrian Trail Plan") The Multi-Purpose/Equestrian Trail shall be approximately 8' in width, constructed of compacted earthen material, compacted clays or similar compacted material substantially as depicted on the "Trail Section" shown on the Equestrian Trail Plan The Multi-Purpose/Equestrian Trail shall be open to the public. THE RESIDENCES AT ASHVT( .T .F PARK 27. Grantor shall include within the Restrictions governing the Property, a requirement that the design and building materials for all fences, homes and accessory structures must be reviewed and approved by an Architectural Review Committee of the HOA to insure design and quality compatibility. Said restrictions shall run with the land as allowed under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. 28. All residential dwellings constructed on the Property shall have visible exterior surfaces, excluding roofs, porches, windows, doors, trim and sofets, consisting entirely of all or any combination of brick, stone, hardy plank, stucco, cedar shake or similar quality materials. 29. All residential dwellings constructed on the Property shall be constructed with a minimum of a two (2) car garage 30. All residential dwellings constructed within Villages A, C, D and F shall contain no less than 2,400 square feet of enclosed living area, excluding garage area, for any one-story dwelling and no less than 2,600 square feet of enclosed living area, excluding garage area, for any two-story dwelling. 31. All residential dwellings constructed within Villages B and E shall contain no less than 1,800 square feet of enclosed living area, excluding garage area, for any one-story dwelling 10 and shall contain no less than 2,400 square feet of enclosed living area, excluding garage area, for any two-story dwelling. 32. Grantor shall utilize low impact development techniques where possible on the Property to encourage storm water treatment and ground water recharge and discourage storm water runoff and erosion. 33. All residential dwellings constructed on the Property shall be constructed in accordance with the construction criteria applicable to homes located within the 70 to 75 dB Ldn/STC ratings of not less than 44 for roof/ceiling/extenor walls and 33 for windows/doors, even though no portion of the Property is located within this noise zone. DEVELOPMENT REOUIREMENTS 34. The dimensional requirements applicable to development of all portions of the Property except Villages B and E shall be as follows: Minimum Lot Area in Square Feet: 12,000 (Villages D and F) 20,000 (Villages A and C) Minimum Lot Width in Feet: 100 Minimum Front Yard Setback in Feet: 50' for 20,000 square foot lots and 30' for lots less than 20,000 square feet Minimum Side Yard Setback in Feet: 10 Minimum Side Yard Setback Adjacent to a Street in Feet: 30 Minimum Rear Yard Setback in Feet: 20 Accessory structures of no more than 150 square feet: 5' rear and side yard setbacks Maximum Lot Coverage: 30% for lots 20,000 square feet and greater and 35% for lots less than 20,000 square feet 11 Minimum Setback from Sidewalk for lots containing linear parks: 15' from edge of sidewalk Maximum Height 42 feet in Villages A and C and 38 feet in Villages D and F 35. The dimensional requirements applicable to development within Villages B and E on the Property shall be as follows: Minimum Lot Area in Square Feet: 7,500 Minimum Lot Width in Feet- 75 Minimum Front Yard Setback in Feet: 30 Minimum Side Yard Setback in Feet: 5 & 10 Minimum Side Yard Setback Adjacent to a Street in Feet: 20 Minimum Rear Yard Setback in Feet- 20 Accessory structures of no more than 150 square feet: 5' rear and side yard setbacks Maximum Lot Coverage: 35% Maximum Height in Feet: 35 (not to exceed two stones) 36. Further conditions mandated by applicable development ordinances may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan and/or subdivision review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. All references hereinabove to zoning districts and to regulations applicable thereto, refer to the City Zoning Ordinance of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in force as of the date the conditional zoning amendment is approved by the Grantee. 12 The Grantor covenant and agree that (1) the Zoning Administrator of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia shall be vested with all necessary authority on behalf of the governing body of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia to administer and enforce the foregoing conditions, including (1) the ordering in writing of the remedying of any noncompliance with such conditions, and (u) the bringing of legal action or suit to ensure compliance with such conditions, including mandatory or prohibitory inunction, abatement, damages or other appropriate action, suit or proceedings; (2) the failure to meet all conditions shall constitute cause to deny the issuance of any of the required building or occupancy permits as may be appropriate; (3) if aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Administrator made pursuant to the provisions of the City Code, the CZO or this Agreement, the Grantor shall petition the governing body for the review thereof prior to instituting proceedings in court; and (4) the Zoning Map shall show by an appropriate symbol on the map the existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the subject Property on the map and that the ordinance and the conditions may be made readily available and accessible for public inspection in the office of the Zoning Administrator and in the Planning Department and that they shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and indexed in the name of the Grantor and Grantee. [Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank] 13 GRANTOR: ASHVILLE PARK, L.L.C. A Virginia limited liability company B6Z i -- e: .dlc.A STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF 4WA , to -wit. ,4d The fore goin instrument was acknowledged before me this A3 day of 2003, by , personally known to me to be the Ashville Park, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, on behalf of the Company. me %zw;� ,a 'a -4 4 elt;4L-0 ) V � �WI - 44V. 64V�� UNoMry Public My Commission Expires: 3 b 14 Signature Page of Eddie Lee Cooper To Proffer Agreement Dated`_; �, e ,Jj , 2003 Eddie Lee Cooper STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF �',f f' i s �'� ,t , to -wit: 7 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this r' day of 2003 b Eddie Lee Cooper, who is personally known to me or who has presented as identification.. �;� `vr--�.. fi�,� ✓ - �/�-.% 'fi''`r--� Notary Public My Commission Expires:�- 15 was originally commissioned as Pamela T. Stillman, Notary Public Signature Page of Linda C. Ackiss To Proffer Agreewent Dated G i �,' I � , 2003 Linda C. Ackiss (formerly Linda C. Cooper) STATE OF VIRGINIA � f 1 CITY OF(ItK4; �%'- .r,1,�� . , to -wit The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this Eday of 2003, by Linda C. Ackiss (formerly Linda C. Cooper) who is personally known to me or has presented ��Sc`J � ':' f�'J', z='��as identification. �� '� l�` �.�v" �'�}�>/-�-,� , Ae Notary Public My Commission Expires: .K`y ��✓ was originally commissioned as Pamela T. Stillman, Notary Public 16 Signature Page of Rebecca Ann Cullipf'er To Proffer Agreement Dated S - S , 2003 RebeccaRim, IV-)'- , "o, n PA wj STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OFy� to -wit. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thisD3gday of g g �ece�be , 2003, by Rebecca Ann Cullipher, who is personally known to me or who has presented as identification. Notary PublicCY My Commission Expires: Co 3 0- OS 17 Signature Page of Roger Elliott Malbon To Proffer Agreement Dated I. 5 92003 Roger lliott Malbon STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF \j x",S , to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this a.3.day of , 2003, by Roger Elliott Malbon, who is personally known to me or who has presented as identification. Notary Public 01 My Commission Expires: —QS 18 F-Urjo 1b:11 FR TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP57 687 7510 TO 9,6 242631 r.1� SigAstare Page of IN"Illiam W. Oliver, V, Trustee To 1'rof[er Apreesnent D.4ted_ •1 � S' ,200,3 illif W, Oliver. V, 'Trustee inmia C ust Agreement Undcr Will of W.W (diver, Jr. STATE OP VIRCrMA CITY OF Au d dZ ��, — —. to -wit: The foregoing insaumrvr was ucknowledrd before me thiyL day of��•=1�� 2003, by William W. Oliver, V, Trustce under a Trmt Agreement Under Will of W.W (?livor. Jr, who is pe-r%oiially known to n,c or who has presmitcdl�1J� �� u` as identification My Commission Exp; res: l r _ rotary Public 19 SEP 17 2003 16:11 FR TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP57 687 7510 TO 9,6242631 P.ew Signature Page of Lym O. Adam, Tnixtee TO Psof€erA mart Dated •4 Le L _ 2083 L.. n . Ads=, Trustm tinder a Trust A reement Under Will of WN, Olivor, Jr. STATE OI' VIRUINIA CITY (fir 00 !'z% /L--- to-wir L Tlie foregoing inshuvmt was acknowledged before me thisP-44A&y of •) �� -c• 2003, b Lyon Cf. Adams. 'Trustee under a Trust AV=niQnt Under Will of W.W. Oliver, Jr.. who is personally lutown to me or who has presented i1 ` y .f� as identification. 00 L� 3� , D Notary Public My t:ommiseion Exru�y, 20 Signature Page of Betty B. Bourdon To Proffer Agreement Dated Sof 5 , 2003 STATE OF VIRGMA C'TTV OF L.AAAA." to -wit: 2003 �2 - & Betty B. Bourdon f ,Ad The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thi)3 daYof , .VBetty B. Bourdon, who is personally known to me vS e , 0-�� 1 r 1Notary Public My Commission Expires: 6Ur of 21 Signature Page of R. Edward Bourdon, Jr. To Proffer Agreement Dated _"'�e S , 2003 R. Edward Bourdon, Jr. STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OFy i RLU iIAJA E to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thinzy4ay of 5gk4c&Jaf , 2003, by R. Edward Bourdon, Jr., who is personally known to me or who has presented as identification. Notary Public My Commission Expires: l4v- 3 0 ZUDS 22 Signature Page of Paul S. Bourdon To Proffer Agreement Dated Se -. s_- .12003 Paul S. Bourdon STATE OF VIRQINIA CITY OF &&Xh9to-wit: sc- `n j`4 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thus A day of4*44Y�, 2003, by Paul S. Bourdon, who is personally known to me Qr-4.4.0-e—leas.presenud �f mow WN R k� tary Public My Commission Expires: 23 Signature Page of Frank T. Williams To Proffer Agreement DatedS-cS , 2003 A r Frank T. Williams STATE OF VIRGR41A CITY OF to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2003, by Frank T. Williams, who is personally known to me or who has presented as identification. jr7 A cl,,� z,4 Notary Public My Commission Expires: kp- 3 Q�— O S 24 Signature Page of Norwood C. Land To Proffer Agreement Dated g • 512 NorwoodC. Land STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this a$LAt day of ,Q-pQ,� , 200311 by Norwood C Land, who is personally known to me or who has presented as identification. A —IZ-0 V fa.,&,walla 4Vz-, Notary Public My Commission Expires: -10 — O S 25 EXHIBIT A Legal Description PARCEL ONE (GPIN No 2413-07-1960-0000) ALL THAT certain tract, piece or parcel of land, with the improvements thereon and the appurtenances thereunto belonging, situate, lying and being in Seaboard Magisterial District, City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, fronting on the Pungo Road, bounded by the property of Cameron Munden, formerly William H. James, by the property of the united States, the woodland formerly of William H. James, now White and others, and the Pungo Road, containing 39 acres, more or less, excepting the parcel of one acre, more of less, conveyed to Melvin D Cooper by deed of Mitzie Cooper and other, dated April 9, 1951 and duly of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia in Deed Book 285, at page 177. LESS AND EXCEPT that portion of the property taken by the City of Virginia Beach in Deed Book 3020, at page 976 IT BEING the same property conveyed to Melvin D Cooper and Mary E. Cooper, husband and wife, tenants by the entirety by deed of Melvin D Cooper and Mary E. Cooper, husband and wife, dated September 20, 1979 and recorded in Deed Book 1969, at page 187. The said Melvin D Cooper died testate (WB 69, P 1860) and the property vested in Mary E Cooper by operation of law. The said Mary E. Cooper died testate April 6, 2000 and pursuant to the terms of her Will recorded in Will Book 103, at page 1675 devised the property to her children, Eddie Lee Cooper and Linda Ann Cooper (now known as Linda C. Ackiss). PARCEL TWO (GPIN No 2413-06-6259-0000) ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land with the buildings and improvements thereon, lying, situate and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, being more particularly bounded and described as follows Beginning at a point in the center line of the Pungo-Nimmo Road, which point is opposite the point of intersection of the property hereby conveyed, the property of O.S. Chaplain and the edge of the right of way of said road, and from said point of beginning running along the center line of said road North 15°15' West 66 feet to a point, thence still along the center line of said road North 21030' 26 West 50 feet to a point, thence still along the center line of said of said road North 36°45' West 465 feet to a point, thence still along the center line of said road North 35° West 100 feet to a point, thence still along the center line of said road North 25°30' West 100 feet to a point, thence still along the center line of said road North 22°15' West 300 feet to a point, thence turning and running at an angle across the Easterly side of road South 63°30' East 41 feet to a blazed pine; thence South 63°30' East 170 feet to a holly; thence turning and running North 23°30' East 361' feet to a gum, thence North 7015' East 396 feet to an iron pin, thence turning and running North 79° East 30 feet to an oak, thence North 79° East 90 feet to a point, thence along the center line of a ditch North 73° East 200 feet to a point; thence North 75° East 129 feet to a point, thence turning and running along a line 5 feet from the center line of a ditch South 4°30' West 400 feet to a point, thence still continuing 5 feet from the center line of said ditch South 7°0' East 400 feet to a point; thence South 12° East 177 feet to a point, thence South 0°30' West 230 feet to a point; thence South 17°30' West 340 feet to an iron pin; thence turning and running North 71°30' West 130 feet to a pine scrag, thence North 73°30' West 73 feet to a point in the center of said Pungo-Nimmo Road to the point of beginning; said tract of land containing 20.5 acres as shown by said plat LESS AND EXCEPT those portions of the property conveyed to the City of Virginia Beach in Deed Book 3050, at page 2023, and in Deed Book 3494. at page 11. IT BEING the same property conveyed by Kenneth Malbon by deed from Willard L White and Evelyn C. White, his wife, dated March 31, 1944 and recorded October 6, 1944 in Deed Book 224, at page 581 The said Kenneth Malbon died testate August 19, 1962, and pursuant to the terms of his Will recorded in Will Book 24, at page 194, devised the property to Ida Mae Malbon. The said Ida Mae Malbon died testate June 29, 2001, and pursuant to the terms of her Will recorded in Will Book 107, at page 2463, devised the property to her children, Rebecca Ann Culliper and Roger Elliott Malbon. 27 PARCEL THREE (GPIN No 2413-16-7813-0000) ALL THAT certain piece or parcel of land with the buildings and improvements thereon, lying, situate and being in the city of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and being identified as GPIN 2413-16-7813-0000 IT BEING a part of the same property conveyed to W.W. Oliver, Jr. a/k/a William W. Oliver, IV by deed dated August 26, 1960 from the United States of America recorded in Deed Book 647, at page 212. The said W.W Oliver, Jr died testate May 21, 2001 and pursuant to the terms of his Will recorded in Will Book 107, at page 1967, devised the property to William W Oliver, V, Elizabeth S Oliver and Lynn O. Adams, as Trustees under a Trust Agreement described in said Will The said Elizabeth S Oliver died on October 18, 2000, leaving William W. Oliver, V and Lynn O Adams as the surviving Trustees PARCEL FOUR (GPIN No 2413-57-0702-0000) ALL THAT certain tract, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon, situated near Tabernacle Church in Seaboard Magistenal District, City of Virginia Beach (formerly Princess Anne County), Virginia, bounded on the North by the lands of Russell and Oscar Hill; on the East by lands formerly of the Shaw Land and Timber Company; on the South by the lands of Earley W Eaton, and on the West by the lands of Abner Malbone and Oscar Hlll, containing as shown on the assessment books as seventy-three (73) acres LESS AND EXCEPT property conveyed to the County of Princess Anne for road purposes recorded in Deed Book 178, at page 372. LESS AND EXCEPT property conveyed dedicated to the City of Virginia Beach recorded in Deed Book 2726, at page 1085. IT BEING a portion of the same property conveyed to Frank T. Williams by deed from Laura E Flanagan, widow and not remamed, dated March 21, 1962 and recorded March 23, 1962 in Deed Book 723, at page 401 PARCEL FIVE (GPIN No 2413-36-3862-0000) ALL THAT certain piece or parcel of land with the buildings and improvements thereon, lying, situate and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and being identified as GPINI 2413-36-3862-0000 28 IT BEING a part of the same property conveyed to W W Oliver, Jr. a/k/a William W Oliver, IV by deed dated August 26, 1960 from the United States of America recorded in Deed Book 647, at page 212 The said W. W Oliver, Jr died testate May 21, 2001 and pursuant to the terms of his Will recorded in Will Book 107, at page 1967, devised the property to William W Oliver, V, Elizabeth S. Oliver and Lynn O. Adams, as Trustees under a Trust Agreement described in said Will. The said Elizabeth S. Oliver died on October 18, 2000, leaving William W Oliver, V and Lynn O. Adams as the surviving Trustees. PARCEL SIX (GPIN No 2413-46-4337-0000) ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land with the buildings and improvements thereon, lying, situate and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and being known, numbered and designated as 56 5464 Acres as shown on that certain plat entitled "SURVEY OF PROPERTY OF BETTY B BOURDON DB 1144, P 643 AND CLAUDE PAUL BROWN TRUSTEE OF THE ESTATE OF STEPHEN PAUL BROWN DB 1144, P 657, PRINCESS ANNE BOROUGH, VIRGINIA BEACH, VA," which said plat is duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 2757, at page 148 IT BEING the same property conveyed to Betty B. Bourdon by deed from Lillian Eaton Brown, widow, Claude Paul Brown and Lillian Eaton Brown, Executors and Trustees of the Last Will and Testament of Stephen Paul Brown, deceased, dated December 29, 1969 in Deed Book 1144, at page 643 PARCEL SEVEN (GPIN No 2413-55-5252-0000) ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land with the buildings and improvements thereon, lying, situate and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and being known, numbered and designated as 60.0411 Acres as shown on that certain plat entitled "SURVEY OF PROPERTY OF BETTY B. BOURDON DB 1144, P 643 AND CLAUDE PAUL BROWN TRUSTEE OF THE ESTATE OF STEPHEN PAUL BROWN DB 1144, P 657, PRINCESS ANNE BOROUGH, VIRGINIA BEACH, VA," which said plat is duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 2757, at page 148 IT BEING the same property conveyed to Claude Paul Brown, Trustee under Will of Stephen Paul Brown, deceased, by deed from Lillian Eaton Brown, widow, dated December 29, 1969 and recorded December 31, 1969 in Deed Book 1144, at page 657 29 PARCEL EIGHT (GPIN No 2413-75-4401-0000) 236727v4 ALL THAT certain tract of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon, and the appurtenances thereunto belonging, in Princess Anne Borough, City of Virginia Beach, State of Virginia (formerly in Seaboard Magistenal District, Princess Anne County, Virginia), of which J.O Land died, seized and possessed, and known as the "HOME FARM" lying in Seaside Neck in said City, adjoining the lands now or formerly belonging to Moses and Henry Eaton, S B. McKenney and David Simmons and containing 69 acres, more or less. EXCEPTING THEREFROM, HOWEVER, two (2) parcels of land as follows - Parcel I: A parcel of land conveyed to Agnes et ux, et als, dated June 3, 1968, and recorded in Deed Book 1059, at page 521, in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia; reference to said deed being hereby made for a more particular description and location of said parcel. Parcel II: A parcel of land conveyed to Agnes W. Cole by deed of Oscar W. Land, et ux, et als, dated June 3, 1968, and recorded in Deed Book 1059, at page 523, in the Clerk's Office aforesaid; reference to said deed being hereby made for a more particular description and location of said parcel. IT BEING the same property conveyed to Oscar W. Land (1/3 Interest), Simon H. Land (1/3 Interest) and Frank T. Williams (1/3 Interest) by the Last Will and Testament of Laura E Flanagan who died testate April 4, 1967 recorded in Will Book 30, at page 580 The said Oscar W. Land and 011ie B. Land, his wife, conveyed their 1/3 interest to Frank T Williams by deed dated March 28, 1973, and recorded April 5, 1973 in Deed Book 1339, at page 22 The said Simon H. Land and 011ie B Land, his wife, conveyed their 1/3 interest to Norwood C Land and Etta Mae Land, husband and wife, tenants by the entirety, by deed dated February 20, 1969 and recorded February 27, 1969 in Deed Book 1100, at page 94 The said Etta Mae Land died intestate August 2, 1986 and by operation of law, her interest in the property is vested in -Norwood C. Land 30 Map I-11 A T.('A R_ T.T.r' ��'��111tr:J'��.��i�111111�- :'moi►�� : ;��■�s�-�� Yan oil ul".111111M Irm Irs W, W_ m � ��i Wit. � ♦ � �♦ .�► � rrrrrrr � maw pow— Ott loll r r .A 1j - ■ �"r'��#��! �� ♦ r fir: i��' '.t' �. Cpm 2404-57-3796 - 5&4943 ZONING HISTORY 1. 9/26/00 - REZONING — from AG-1/AG-2 Agricultural District to R-10 Residential District and CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT for Open Space Promotion — Denied 2. 8/10/99 — REZONING — from AG -1 /AG -2 Agricultural District to R-10 Residential District and CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT for Open Space Promotion — Granted 3. 3/19/84 — REZONING — from AG -1 Agricultural District to R-5 Residential District — Granted 4. 3/19/84 — REZONING — from AG -1 Agricultural District to R-8 Residential District — Granted 5. 5/28/83 — REZONING — from AG -1 Agricultural District to R-8 Residential District — Granted 6. 4/25/88 — REZONING — from R-10(Open Space) Residential District to PDH2 Planned Development —Withdrawn 7. 1/28/97 — REZONING — from AG-1/AG-2 Agricultural District to R-7.5 Residential District - Granted �N�1+ -`e.P CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: ALCAR, L.L.C. — Change of Zoning District Classification (AG -1 & AG -2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional R-10 Residential District) Conditional Use Permit (Open Space Promotion) MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 ■ Background: (a) An Ordinance upon Application of ALCAR, L.L C. for a Change of Zoning District Classification from AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional R-10 Residential District on the north side of Nimmo Parkway (unimproved), approximately 910 feet west of Rockingchair Lane (GPIN 2404573796, 2404564943, 2404371633) DISTRICT 7 PRINCESS ANNE (b) An Ordinance upon Application of ALCAR, L.L.C. for a Conditional Use Permit for Open Space Promotion on the north side of Nimmo Parkway (unimproved), approximately 910 feet west of Rockingchair Lane (GPIN 2404573796, 2404564943, 2404371633) DISTRICT 7 —PRINCESS ANNE The purpose of the requests is to develop a neighborhood of 132 single-family homes on 7,500 square foot lots utilizing the Open Space Promotion option. These requests were deferred by the City Council on October 28, 2003 ■ Considerations: The property is currently vacant. Extensive areas of floodplain and wetlands are interspersed throughout the site More than half of the site, or 62.2 acres, is below the elevation of the 100 -year flood level of 6.25 feet There are three general categories of wetlands present on this site The first is tidal wetlands as defined in the City Zoning Ordinance. These wetlands are immediately adjacent to the floodway of West Neck Creek. The second category is nontidal wetlands as defined by the Southern Watersheds Management Ordinance and the City Zoning Ordinance. These wetlands are present on the site for a distance of approximately 800 feet eastward of the floodway of West Neck Creek and also along the edge of the stream that traverses through the southeast portion of the site The third category is nontidal wetlands under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers and identified as "Isolated/Headwater Wetlands" (I/H wetlands). Most of these areas are at the edge of the floodplain and on the higher ground proposed for home lots ALCAR Page 2 of 3 The subject site has a total area of 112.3 acres. This total area can be broken up into three categories. Conservation Area- The Conservation Area consists of 39 5 acres All land within this area is below the 100 -year floodplain level of 6 25 feet with the exception of a small knoll where the proposed entrance to the subdivision is located. There are some tidal and nontidal wetlands present in this area This area is to be dedicated to the City for inclusion in the West Neck Creek linear park Open Space Area — The Open Space Area consists of 22.7 acres. The majority of the land within this area is below the 100 -year floodplain level of 6.25 feet and contains some areas of nontidal wetlands under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers. The Open Space Area contains four identified park sites, the largest being 37,500 square feet and the smallest being 15,000 square feet. Housing Area — The Housing Area consists of approximately 50 acres. This includes the streets and home lots shown on the conceptual plan Most of this area is above the 100 year floodplain level of 6.25 feet There are some pockets of I/H wetlands that will be impacted by home construction This area can best be described as three islands of high ground connected by roadways that traverse the lower floodplain and wetland areas. The density for this project is calculated on the combined areas of the Open Space and Housing, which is a total of 72 7 acres 132 units divided by 72.7 acres equals 1.8 units to the acre. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this area for residential use at a density of 3.5 units to the acre or less The applicant has coordinated access to and from the site with the adjacent Capital Improvement Program (CIP) roadway project (Nimmo Parkway), proffering to construct two lanes of that roadway from its current terminus at the Princess Anne Recreation Center to the subject site The applicant has also limited the proposed floodplain fill to the roadways and edges of the lots. In sum, the applicant has proffered a plan that minimally meets the intent of the various development ordinances of the City It must be stressed, however, that this site is identified in the Comprehensive Plan as a Natural Resource/Conservation Area overlay The Comprehensive Plan indicates that such areas are more suited for a low intensity use such as a plant nursery or wetlands bank. The significant land disturbance associated with a conventional single-family subdivision will no doubt impact these areas even with the best measures employed in an attempt not to It is likely the applicant will encounter significant issues during review of site plans regarding stormwater drainage. The proffered plan may need adjustment and the number of lots may decrease in order to provide an adequate stormwater ALCAR Page 3 of 3 system that not only serves this site but also integrates well with surrounding sites. The applicant is aware of this possibility Staff recommended approval There was opposition to the proposal. ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to approve this request as proffered ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval Planning Commission recommends approval Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: • I::- __ - ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 September 10, 2003 General Information: APPLICATION J 11-210-CRZ-2002 NUMBER: J11 -210 -CUP -2003 REQUEST: 19)Change of Zoning District Classification from AG-1/AG-2 Agricultural District to Conditional R-10 Residential District 20)Conditional Use Permit for Open Space Promotion ADDRESS: North side of proposed Nimmo Parkway, 910 feet west of Rockingchair Lane Map I -ll A T.CA R_ LLC Map N6 --t -to Scale AN ■�. ass ' r �MEOW jimm irnr �iui nnn��ri • �,� �� 1� ► ttitllttt iia L%7 NMI �/�)� �` � � �. �tdrt ,■ _ate ti. �� Gptn 2404-57-3796 - 56-4943 J-1.1 Bucy L� Planning Commission Agenda , ; September 10 2003:-. ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 °••-• °'' Page 1 GPIN: 24043371630000 24045737960000 24045649430000 ELECTION DISTRICT: 7 - PRINCESS ANNE SITE SIZE: 112.3 acres PURPOSE: To rezone the property in order to develop a neighborhood of 132 single- family homes on 7,500 square foot lots utilizing the Open Space Promotion option. APPLICATION These requests were deferred at the August 13, 2003 Planning HISTORY: Commission hearing at the request of the applicant. Major Issues: • More than half of the land on the site, or 62.2 acres, is below the elevation of the 100 year floodplain level of 6.25 feet. Land disturbance and fill are restricted in this area by the City's development ordinances. • Consistency of the proposal with the land use recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. There are two roadway projects planned for roads adjacent to this site, Nimmo Parkway Phase V-A (CIP 2-121) and Seaboard Road (CIP 2-107). Coordination and impacts on the roadway projects are concerns. Land Use, Zoning, and Site Characteristics: Existing Land Use and Zoning The property is currently vacant and is zoned AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural District. Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 2 Extensive areas of floodplain and wetlands are interspersed throughout the site. More than half of the site, or 62.2 acres, is below the elevation of the 100 -year flood level of 6.25 feet. There are three general categories of wetlands present on this site. The first is tidal wetlands as defined in the City Zoning Ordinance. These wetlands are immediately adjacent to the floodway of West Neck Creek. The second category is nontidal wetlands as defined by the Southern Watersheds Management Ordinance and the City Zoning Ordinance. These wetlands are present on the site for a distance of approximately 800 feet eastward of the floodway of West Neck Creek and also along the edge of the stream that traverses through the southeast portion of the site. The third category is nontidal wetlands under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers and identified as "Isolated/Headwater Wetlands" (I/H wetlands). Most of these areas are at the edge of the floodplain and on the higher ground proposed for home lots. The site was recently logged in 2000/2001. The mature trees were removed from the majority of the site. Some mature trees were left remaining in the I/H wetland areas, areas bordering West Neck Creek and a forty to fifty foot area of trees bordering the neighborhoods of Castleton and Pine Ridge, along the northern boundary of the site. The native vegetation that is currently growing on the site has an average height of 4 to 5 feet at this time. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning North: . Single-family homes / R-10 (OP) Residential District South: . Proposed Nimmo Parkway right-of-way East: . Single-family homes / R -5D Residential District West: West Neck Creek / AG -1 Agricultural District Zig and Land Use Statistics With Existing Uses consistent with the underlying agricultural zoning Zoning: on this site, such as a plant nursery or wetlands bank. With Approximately 132 single-family homes as shown on Proposed the proffered conceptual subdivision plan associated Zoning: with this request. The number of homes is approximate and may be less than 132 when the subdivision plan is reviewed in detail for stormwater management, utility services, etc. Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 3 UO"�s Zoning History The neighborhoods to the west of this site, Pine Ridge and Hunt Club Forest, were zoned and developed for residential use during the 1970s and 1980s The neighborhood of Castleton north of the site was developed for residential use more recently during the 1990s. The most recent residential rezoning in this area occurred south of the site, on the west side of Seaboard Road in 1999. This neighborhood is known as Princess Anne Woods. On the subject site, a rezoning from AG -1 and AG -2 to R-10 Residential District and a Conditional Use Permit for Open Space Promotion for 255 single family homes was denied by City Council on September 26, 2000. The subject request is similar to the 2000 request, except that the number of home sites has been reduced to 132 and there is far less fill and disturbance of the floodplain on the present plan. Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) The northern portion of the subject site is in an AICUZ of 70 to 75dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. The southern portion of the site is in an AICUZ of 65 to 70 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. The Navy has reviewed this proposal and does not support the requested rezoning. A copy of a letter noting the Navy's position on this rezoning is provided at the end of this report. Public Facilities and Services Water and Sewer There is a 30 -inch force main in the Nimmo Parkway right-of-way fronting the southeast portion of the property. There is a 16 -inch water main in the Nimmo Parkway right-of- way fronting the southeast portion of the property. This subdivision must connect to City water. Hydraulic analysis, fire demand requirements, and plans and bonds are required for the construction of the water system. City gravity sewer is not available to this development. Plans and bonds are required for the construction of a new pump station (off-site) and sewer system. Transportation Master Transportation Plan (MTP) / Capital Improvement Program (CIP): The subject site does not have access to an improved public right-of-way at this time. Proposed Nimmo Parkway borders the site on the south and the applicant has proffered to construct two lanes of this roadway from its current terminus near the Fire Station/Library/Recreation Center complex to the east and ending at the new Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 4 - r - subdivision entrance. Public Works has reviewed the Traffic Impact Study regarding this proposal and concurs that this is the most prudent way for this subdivision to gain access to surrounding roadways. There are two roadway projects in the vicinity of this subdivision as noted below. NIMMO PARKWAY PHASE V-A CIP 2-121 — This project is for construction of a four -lane divided roadway on a six -lane right-of- way, with a bikepath, from Holland Road at Kellam High School to that part of Nimmo Parkway Phase V previously constructed to provide access to the Princess Anne Community Recreation Center from General Booth Boulevard. The estimated start of construction is July 2006 and estimated completion date is July 2008. SEABOARD ROAD CIP 2-107 - This project is for the construction of a three -lane undivided highway from Princess Anne Road to Nimmo Parkway, a distance of approximately 3,200 feet. This project will also include an upgrade of the intersection of Princess Anne Road and Seaboard Road to include a new traffic signal. Additional funding was added for the interim cost participation project to realign the intersection at Princess Anne Road. The estimated start of construction is July 2006 and the completion date is November 2007. Traffic Calculations: This development is expected to generate 1,366 vehicle trips per day. Schools The chart below indicates that Kellam High School is currently over capacity. The information provided below does not take into account the potential impacts of other proposals pending or under construction that could affect the same schools. School Current Capacity Generation' Change 2 Enrollment Strawbridge 860 895 46 46 Elementary Princess Anne 1511 1658 24 24 Middle School Kellam Senior High 2276 1990 32 32 School 1 "generation" represents the number of students that the development will add to the school Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC 1 # 19 & 20 Page 5 "change" represents the difference between generated students under the existing zoning and under the proposed zoning The number can be positive (additional students) or negative (fewer students) Public Safetv Police: The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Fire and No comments at this time. Fire requirements will be reviewed Rescue: during detailed subdivision construction plan review. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan Map indicates that this property falls under the following two Planned Land Use Categories. One category is suburban low density that states that this area should be planned for residential uses below 3.5 dwelling units per acre. The other category is Natural Resource/Conservation that states that the land disturbance in the area consisting of tidal and nontidal wetlands, sensitive soils, and other natural features should be avoided, mitigated, or under certain circumstances prohibited. Summary of Proposal Proposal • The subject site has a total area of 112.3 acres. This total area can be broken up into three categories. • Conservation Area- The Conservation Area consists of 39.5 acres. All land within this area is below the 100 -year floodplain level of 6.25 feet with the exception of a small knoll where the proposed entrance to the subdivision is located. There are some tidal and nontidal wetlands present in this area. This area is to be dedicated to the City for inclusion in the West Neck Creek linear park. • Open Space Area — The Open Space Area consists of 22.7 acres. The majority of the land within this area is below the 100 -year floodplain level of 6.25 feet and Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 6 contains some areas of nontidal wetlands under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers. The Open Space Area contains four identified park sites, the largest being 37,500 square feet and the smallest being 15,000 square feet. • Housing Area — The Housing Area consists of approximately 50 acres. This includes the streets and home lots shown on the conceptual plan. Most of this area is above the 100 year floodplain level of 6.25 feet. There are some pockets of I/H wetlands that will be impacted by home construction. This area can best be described as three islands of high ground connected by roadways that traverse the lower floodplain and wetland areas. • The density for this project is calculated on the combined areas of the Open Space and Housing, which is a total of 72.7 acres. 132 units _ 72.7 acres = 1.8 units to the acre. Site Design • The conceptual subdivision plan shows one main entrance to the subdivision from Nimmo Parkway. The roadway extends northward, crosses a stream, enters the Housing Area and then comes to an intersection, where the road splits to the east and northwest. • The southeast portion of the site, where the stream is located, is designated as a Conservation Area. The roadway travels through this Conservation Area for a PAM J f f f FLAMM" Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 7 r sw�a w�c os a� distance of 900 feet before it reaches the Housing Area. • The roadway crosses the floodplain/wetland areas in four locations. At each of these locations, the construction of the roadway will require fill within the floodplain. • There is also some fill proposed within the floodplain along the edges of some of the home lots. • The applicant has submitted a conceptual floodplain fill plan to the Development Services Center (DSC). It has been determined by the DSC that this project falls under the criteria for administrative review of fill. A conceptual floodplain mitigation plan was also submitted and reviewed in accordance with the same criteria. The final approval for fill within the floodplain will depend on detailed engineering design. New information and facts may alter the expectations of the developer and may ultimately reduce the number of home sites allowed. • The minimum size for the home lots is shown as 7,500 square feet. Most of the lots on the plan are uniform, there is not a lot of variation from this minimum lot size. • Most of the home lots back up to the Open Space Area or stormwater management ponds, except for those along the northern boundary of the site. These home lots are directly adjacent to existing home lots in Castleton and Pine Ridge. Vehicular and Pedestrian Access • Currently, the subject site has no direct access to an improved public right-of-way. There is a dirt road on the south side of proposed Nimmo Parkway that connects to Seaboard Road and travels through this site. • A traffic impact study was submitted by the applicant and reviewed by Public Works. The Department of Public Works concurs with the study's recommendation that access to the subdivision be provided by Nimmo Parkway. The applicant is proffering to construct two lanes of Nimmo Parkway within the existing public right- of-way for a distance of approximately 2,500 feet. The roadway would be built from the subdivision entrance east to the current terminus of the roadway near the Princess Anne Recreation Center. • The section of Nimmo Parkway to be built by the developer would not connect to Seaboard Road. The Department of Public Works does not recommend subdivision access to Seaboard Road until the planned roadway improvements are constructed along Seaboard Road to Princess Anne Road with CIP 2-107 (described earlier in Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 8 this report). • When the two lanes of Nimmo Parkway are built, there will be a new intersection created at Rockingchair Lane, approximately 910 feet to the east of the new subdivision's entrance. Improvements and traffic movement control will be required for this intersection. Residents of Southgate and Hunt Club Forest will have access to the new two-lane section of Nimmo Parkway in addition to the residents of the proposed subdivision. • The proposed subdivision roadway connection to existing Nimmo Parkway will impact the traffic signal operation and timings at the intersection of Nimmo Parkway and General Booth Boulevard, and the developer will be responsible for working out new traffic signal timings. • A temporary emergency fire station traffic signal may be required in front of the General Booth Fire Station on Nimmo Parkway. The developer will be responsible for working with the City regarding design, construction and costs associated with the installation of this signal. • The subdivision entrance road has been located to accommodate the preliminary designs for Seaboard Road and Nimmo Parkway. Additional coordination with these two CIP projects will be necessary during the detailed engineering phases of the projects. • It should be noted that the proposed subdivision will have only one access point and will not have any connections to neighboring properties. Architectural Design • A mixture of one-story and two-story dwellings is planned. The applicant has proffered four architectural styles and a minimum square footage for the homes. In addition, it has been proffered that all homes will have a two car garage. Landscape and Open Space • The conceptual subdivision plan shows a 39.5 acre Conservation Area to be dedicated to the City as part of the West Neck Creek linear park. The subdivision entrance road traverses this Conservation Area in the southeastern portion of the site. It should also be noted that preliminary design plans for the Seaboard Road and Nimmo Parkway CIP projects show drainage outfalls at the stream located in the southeastern portion of the Conservation Area. It is likely that the proposed subdivision will also have drainage outfalls in this area, although no detailed engineering for stormwater management for the proposed subdivision has been Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 9 conducted. • The conceptual subdivision plan shows the Open Space Area to be dedicated and maintained by the Homeowner's Association. This area is below the 100 -year floodplain elevation of 6.25 feet and contains pockets of nontidal wetlands regulated by the Army Corps of Engineers. • The applicant has submitted an application for a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers for the impacted I/H wetlands associated with this project. This application is currently under review by the Army Corps of Engineers. The permit application shows that there will be some on-site mitigation to create new nontidal wetland areas for those being impacted by the roadway and home construction. These areas of new wetlands are identified as "wetland mitigation" on the conceptual subdivision plan. • The Open Space Area contains four designated park sites totaling 2.4 acres. Three of the four park sites can be accessed from the main roadway. The fourth park site, adjacent to the northern boundary of the property in the western portion of the site is not accessible as shown on the conceptual plan due to the fact that it is surrounded by I/H wetlands that are designated to remain. Proffers PROFFER # 1 When development takes place upon that portion of the Property which is to be developed, it shall be as a single family residential community substantially in conformance with the Exhibit entitled "CONCEPTUAL SUBDIVISION PLAN OF NIMMOS QUAY, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA dated December 12, 2002, prepared by Clark-Nexsen, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning ("Concept Plan"). Staff Evaluation: This proffer is acceptable. The Concept Plan shows a conventional single-family subdivision. This type of development, with long winding collector streets and numerous cul-de-sacs, will, however, result in substantial land disturbance and alteration of the land within an area designated as Natural Resource/Conservation by the Comprehensive Plan. The plan does little above the Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 10 minimum required to protect and preserve the highly vulnerable natural resources on this site. The Concept Plan does though technically meet the minimum requirements for development. It should be noted that one particularly valuable aesthetic natural resource that is being eliminated with the current proposal is the existing forty -fifty foot wooded buffer along the northern boundary of the site, adjacent to the neighborhoods of Castleton and Pine Ridge. PROFFER # 2 When the Property is developed, approximately 22.7 acres of parklands, lakes and recreation areas designated "Open Space" on the Concept Plan shall be dedicated to and maintained by the Property Owners Association. When the Property is developed, playground equipment and neighborhood park improvements meeting the City's Department of Parks and Recreation Standards shall be installed in the four (4) areas designated "PARK" on the Concept Plan. Staff Evaluation: This proffer is acceptable with the following caveats. Although the Open Space Area contains more acreage than required, there are some concerns with the area. The Open Space Area shown on the Concept Plan is below the 100 -year floodplain elevation of 6.25 feet and contains several areas of nontidal wetlands regulated by the Army Corps of Engineers. This area was logged two years ago and there is only scattered mature vegetation remaining. The average height of the remaining vegetation is four to five feet and there is not much aesthetic value to this area. The absence of mature vegetation makes the condition of this open space less than ideal. In addition, the conceptual subdivision plan shows that there will be areas of nontidal wetlands to remain and new areas of nontidal wetlands to be created directly adjacent to and/or between home lots to mitigate for the impacts on existing wetlands on the site. If a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers is issued for this project as proposed, the ultimate conditions that will be placed on the permit for the remaining and new wetland areas may preclude certain maintenance options for the homeowners association. Typically, homeowners Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC I # 19 & 20 Page 11 associations are not versed in wetlands regulations. The four park sites within the Open Space Area possess some limitations as proffered by the applicant. Two of the four park sites are below the 100 year floodplain elevation. The other two park sites do contain some higher ground, but the applicant has shown that these higher park areas will be used for floodplain mitigation purposes, actually lowering the ground elevation on these sites. Although the subdivision ordinance allows recreation sites to be dedicated within floodplain areas, those sites are best suited for passive recreation. The Parks and Recreation Department recommends that active play areas be on high, dry ground that can be well drained. PROFFER # 3 When the Property is developed, approximately 39.5 acres of land designated as "Conservation Area" on the Concept Plan shall be dedicated to the City of Virginia Beach for inclusion in the West Neck Creek Linear Park. Staff Evaluation: This proffer is acceptable. The dedication of this area is consistent with the land dedications along West Neck Creek that have occurred as part of the development of other subdivisions to the north, west and south of this site. PROFFER # 4 When the Property is subdivided, it shall be subject to a recorded Declaration of Protective Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("Deed Restrictions") administered by a Homeowners Association, which shall, among other things, maintain the Open Space areas. Staff Evaluation: This proffer is acceptable. It clearly defines the entity responsible for maintenance of the open space. However, there are concerns that the condition of the open space is not ideal and may cause maintenance problems for the homeowners association over the long run. PROFFER # 5 All residential dwellings constructed on the Property shall incorporate architectural features, design elements and high quality building materials substantially similar in quality to those depicted on the four (4) photographs labeled "Typical Home Elevations at NIMMOS QUAY" Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 12 dated December 12, 2002 which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. Any one story dwelling shall contain no less than 2500 square feet of enclosed living area excluding garage area and any two- story dwelling shall contain no less than 2600 square feet of enclosed living area excluding garage area. The front yards of all homes shall be sodded. The Deed Restrictions shall require each dwelling to have, at a minimum, at two (2) car garage. Staff Evaluation: This proffer is acceptable. It ensures that the quality of homes is comparable to those in surrounding neighborhoods. PROFFER # 6 When the Property is developed, the party of the First Part shall construct a two lane section of Nimmo Parkway Phase V-A CIP 2-121 in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation's engineering standards for the roadway, within the existing Nimmo parkway public right-of-way extending east approximately 2,560 feet from the entrance to the subdivision to connect with the existing improved Nimmo Parkway section. Staff Evaluation: This proffer is acceptable. The property does not currently have access to an improved public right-of-way. The Nimmo Parkway Phase V-A CIP project is currently in the design phase and the applicant will need to build the two lanes proffered using the current VDOT plans for the CIP project. This scenario assumes that the subdivision will be ready for occupancy pnor to the CIP project for Nimmo Parkway Phase V-A being completed. There is an alternate scenario that is conceivable given that the construction completion date for Nimmo Parkway Phase V-A and the subdivision build -out date are both within the next five years (2008). If the completion of the CIP project for Nimmo Parkway and occupancy of the subdivision occur concurrently, it is not clear with this proffer whether the applicant would share in any of the roadway cost. Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC I # 19 & 20 Page 13 PROFFER # 7 When the Property is developed, the party of the first part shall extend public utilities, to serve the subdivision, including the possible construction of an off-site sewage pump station. Staff Evaluation: This proffer is acceptable. It should be noted that an off- site pump station is a major expense and that the developer will be required to find and purchase a suitable property for the pump station and also pay to construct the station solely at his expense. PROFFER # 8 Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site plan and/or Subdivision review and administration of applicable City codes by all cognizant city agencies and departments to meet all applicable City code requirements. Any references hereinabove to the R-10 Zoning District and to the requirements and regulations applicable thereto refer to the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in force as of the date of approval of this Agreement by City Council, which are by this reference incorporated herein. Staff Evaluation: This proffer is a standard condition and is acceptable. In this particular case, this proffer may mean that the number of lots shown on the conceptual plan may have to be reduced in order to comply with requirements associated with floodplain fill/mitigation, stormwater management and sanitary sewer design. City Attorney's The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer Office: agreement dated December 12, 2002, and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. Evaluation of Request The request for a rezoning from AG -1 and AG -2 Agricultural District to Conditional R-10 Residential District and a Conditional Use Permit for Open Space Promotion is Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 14 acceptable, but with a caveat. Staff notes that Comprehensive Plan identifies this area for residential use at a density of 3.5 units to the acre or less and that applicant has coordinated the access plan with the adjacent roadway projects and has limited the proposed floodplain fill to the roadways and edges of the lots. In sum, the applicant has proffered a plan that minimally meets the intent of the various development ordinances of the City. It must be stressed, however, that this site is identified in the Comprehensive Plan as a Natural Resource/Conservation Area overlay; the Pian indicates that such areas are more -suited for a low intensity use such as a plant nursery or wetlands bank. More than half of the site is below the 100 -year floodplain elevation of 6.25 feet and there are extensive areas of nontidal wetlands on the site. The significant land disturbance associated with a conventional single-family subdivision will impact these areas even with the best measures employed in an attempt not to. Staff can support this request; however, the low elevation of the overall site combined with its natural resource characteristics, as described above, are pause for concern, particularly regarding the subject of stormwater drainage. The applicant will, no doubt, encounter significant issues during review of plans for stormwater drainage. It is likely that the proffered plan may need adjustment and the number of lots may decrease in order to provide an adequate stormwater system that not only serves this site but also integrates well with surrounding sites. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable Ci Codes. Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 15 04 �� a �r t\ 1 off ON' a j K � �s s s s a Planning Commission Agenda yrs September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 r Page 16 i Planning Commission Agenda September 10 2003Y ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 17 g � ZLi��iJi iM0 n Er e £ Planning Commission Agenda September 10 2003Y ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 17 Typical Home Elevaton at Nimmo's Quay 12/12/02 Typical Home Elevabon at Nimmo's Quay 1211W02 Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 18 a 171,i Mrd a,. �., w -.•Si ..� "x�'at"�r ;R� DIA.•.M�MM r-.,w.w..��.r� a .IMM•ITMEMMt• DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL AIR sTAnON OCEANA ii5UTOMCAT eoul.EvMD uARGMA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23464-2 LY REFM TO: 57A j$01ft 3 2 / 0222 une 5, 2003 Ms. Barbara Duke i Planning Department City of Virginia Beach Building 2, Room 100 2405 Courthouse Drive Virginia Beach, VA 23456 Dear Ms. Duke: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the rezoning request by ALCAR LLC, for the proposed construction of 138 homes. The site is located in the 55-70 decibel (dB) day -night average (Ldn) noise zone. The Navy's ,Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Program states that residential Land use is incompatible in this zone. The Navy acknowledges the landowner's desire to develop their property, but I urge you to deny their request. We would view residential development at this site as an encroachment upon operations at Naval Air Station Oceana . If you have any questions, please contact my Community Planning Liaison Officer, Mr. Ray Firenze at (757) 433-3158. Sincerely and very respectfully, T. KE Ca ' , U Navy Comm din. officer Copy to: COMNAVREG MI DLANT Mayor Meyera Oberndorf Virginia Beach. City Council Virginia Beach Planning CocmmiL-sslon Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 20 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's Name: ALCAR, L.L.C. List All Current Property Owners: _False Cape Associates, L.P. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) Cameron Munden, Gerald Shulman and Douglas Talbot 0 Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. If the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Applicant Disclosure section below: APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) Alan S. Resh , Member Carmen Pasapia, Member 0 Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and curate. -- ALC L. . B r_ Alan S. Resh ,_ Member Signature Print Name Conditional Rezoning Application Page 10 of 14 Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 21 Z Z Z DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Il- ,,, i iii i ALCAR ~ L.L.C. Applicant's Name: ..... List All Current Property Owners: False Cape Associates, L.P. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organizabon below. (Attach list if necessary) Came r o n _M_u_n_d_e_n~_ _(;_e~a 1 d _~~ ~3J:l~i_ D o otlgias_ ~ ............. I-I Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization If the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Applicant Disclosure section below: APPLICANT DISCLOSURE if the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach Ils! if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organizat,on below' (Attach list if necessary) Carmen Fasa~_~a~ M__e_m_b_e_r E] Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and ~c~'~urate. Fals C~'pe Assoc ate . Signature // Print Name Conditional Rezoning Application Page 10 of 14 Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 22 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's Name _ ^__L_C_A_~_~ L.L.C. List Ail Current Property Owners_ W__ayne Most~ler, Trustee and Barbara C_.__M_o_sti_le_r_,__T.r.~s PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organizabon below: (Attach list if necessary) [] Check here if the property owner Is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other o unincorporated organization. ff the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Applicant Disclosure secHon below: APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach hst if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the orgamzahon below: (Attach list if necessary) Alan S. Res_h~__~e_mber Carmen Pasap~l__a,_LMember E] Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. ' ~ L/~'g'-'~ ~'t L___ __~a..y.~e ~.,z.__ 'z_.:_/.' -:~: Signature Print Name Conditional Rezoning Apphcation Page 10 of 14 ee Planning Commission Agenda September 10, 2003 ALCAR LLC / # 19 & 20 Page 23 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT i i i I ii APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) ALCAR, L.L.C.: Alan S. Resh, Member Carmine Plsapia, Member 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent-subsidiary~ or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) !-i Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) False Cape Associates, L.P.: Cameron Munden, Gerald Shulman & Douglas Talbot 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent-subsidiary~ or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) I-I Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. See next page for footnotes Conditional Rezomng Application Page 12 of 13 Revised 10/1/2003 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT !1 ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) Sykes, Bourdon, Ahern& Levy, P.C. Clark-Nexsen ~ "Parent-subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent-subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing accordirj~j-I~ the ins~tJ:t~-ie~ in this package. ALCAy.~ZL_. 'C' ~ ~"/ _, ~ By*~~~-~~~ ~-~-~/ Car~m~ne P~-sap~-a., Member Applicant's Signature ,, - Print Name Property Owner's Signature 0f d~fferent than appl,cant) Print Name Z Cond,t~onal Rezon,ng Apphcat~on Page 13 of 13 Rewsed 10/1/2003 APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) ALCAR, L.L.C.: Alan S. Resh, Member Carmine Pisapia, Member 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent-subsidiaryI or affiliated business entity~ relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) I-! Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) False Cape Assocmates, L.P.: Cameron Munden, Gerald Shulman & Douslas Talbot 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent-subsidiaryI or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) I-1 Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. I & 2 See next page for footnotes Cond~bonal Use Permit Appl,cal~on Page 10 of 11 Rewsed 10/1/2003 D,SC'OSU E S A - ENT II ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) Sykes, Bourdon, Ahern& Levy, P.C. Clark-Nexsen 1 "Parent-subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Govemment Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent-subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATION: ! certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing accordip:~ to the i_.Qstm~ons in this package. By. ~ ~Z~'"--W'[ Carmine P~.sap~.a, Member Apphcant's Signature ',~ , Print Name Property Owner's S~gnature 0f different than apphcant) Print Name Conditional Use Permit Appllcal~on Page 11 of 11 Revised 10/1/2003 Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Change of Zomng District Classfficataon Conchtlonal Use Permit North side of Nimmo Parkway Dastnct 7 Princess Anne September 10, 2003 REGULAR Robert Miller: The next item as Item #19 & 20, Alcar, L.L.C. Eddie Bourdon: Sorry to block your views. Ronald Rapley: We get sagnals from staff. I'm just kaddlng. Eddie Bourdon: Thas one as gmng to be flipped over. For the record, my name as Eddae Bourdon and it is my pleasure to come before you this afternoon representing the apphcataon of Nammos Quay. Mr. Resh as here as well as Joe Bushey, from Clark Nexsen who are the engineers working on this project. Mr. Resh and I have been working on this project now for about a year. My history with this partacular property goes back to 1997, which I'll get anto in a few minutes. We've had a very posatlve process that we've gone through wath staff. I want to thank Barbara Duke who I understand as sack. I think someone gave her some bad food on her birthday but she worked very hard wath us as w~th the rest of the staff including the folks in Traffic Engineenng. This is a proposal on a 112-acre parcel of which approximately 73 acres are developable acres. To create a very high end subdivision of 132 lots, probably a few less than that. These houses, we proffered the type of houses that will be built. They wall be very attractive homes that will be priced between $350,000 and up. I think the quality is very clear and very evident. The property ~s located south of Castleton and south of a sectaon of Pine Ridge and west of Hunt Club and west of the section of South Gate. We're surrounded both on the north and on east by residential development. To our south as the, I guess Nimmo Parkway Phase V, I beheve. I may be wrong on the phase number. And below Nlmmo Parkway is the Prmcess Anne Woods subdivision. The property, because of the way Castleton developed, and I guess the best place to look is up here on the pmpoant. The property was supposed to be accessed wa this roadway here through Castleton but for reasons I won't discuss, and there are a lot of reasons, and that's not goang to happen and that can't happen and as a consequence, the property must be accessed by Nammo Parkway and one of the things that we've done with this appllcataon ~s we've done a Traffic Impact Study, presented to the City, and this apphcant wall be constructing two lanes on Nlmmo Parkway to meet the standards for Nlmmo Parkway at a cost of approxamately $900,000, and that will be extended from the fire statmn to the property. The property ~tself is a series of clustered lot configurations that are for the most part surrounded by open space. We are w~th this proposal only utlllz~ng 26 percent of the land for roads and houses. Of the developable land, we're using less than 40 percent for roads and houses. In other words, 74 percent of the site is goang to remain as open space. Over 60 percent of the developable land will be open space. And over 100 homes will be backing up to open space And, ladles and gentlemen, this ~s not in the Transatlon Area. It sure as heck looks hke ~t ~s a plan an the Transition Area. Now, Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 2 the reason that I put tins map up here ~s to show you that there is a little bit of Instory beinnd this p~ece of property. Back m 1997, Taylor Farm Assomates had most of the property under contract as shown over here and they brought forth a plan to develop 230 lots on this piece of property. The property that I'm talking about ~s the property here. Not every bit of what I'm talkang about ~n tins apphcat~on. That application was recommended for approval by the staff consistent by the Comprehensive Plan's recommendation of 3.5 umts per acre. The rezonmg was R-10 open space and it was recommended unammously by the Planning Commission for approval. The Courthouse Coaht~on of C~wc Leagues was supporting the apphcat~on, as was the P~ne Ridge Ciwc League, which I met w~th on a number of occasions at that t~me. And, between Planmng Commission and C~ty Council, the apphcant deferred the applicatmn. He was working with the Corps of Engnneers and was developing Castleton at the t~me wanted to get all tins wetlands permits from the Corps of Engineers, which he in fact did receive and the property ~s the subject of an approved wetlands d~sturbance permit from the Corps of Engineers. But dunng that process some contractual issues arose and other tinngs occurred really having nothing to do with the prospects of the application being approved at that t~me but the contracts fell through and so the deal at that point died. It never went to C~ty Council, but ~t was recommended for approval, by the staff and by the Planmng Commission unanimously for 230 lots. At that t~me the floodplmn ordinance ~s not what ~t ~s today. The floodplmn ordinance that exists in the northern part of the c~ty today applied to all the c~ty at that point and that development plan would have impacted about 30 percent of the floodplmn on this s~te That's flood fnnge. We can talk about floodplain ffyou all want but floodplmn ~s not wet area. It's just area that stores a httle b~t of'water at a 100 year storm event, but it's not wetlands. It's not swamp. It's just Ingh land that's not Ingh enough that ~s outside the floodplain. It gets wet when there's a 100-year storm event. Anyway, later ~n the year 2000, tins property was assembled by Clark Winteinll, and they brought forward an apphcat~on for 255 umts on tins p~ece of property, and that's what shown here. And what tins ~s also to show ~s that all the ground here are residential lots that surround tins property, developed residential subthv~sions that surround this property. And, what you see here ~s the plan that was submitted ~n 2000. And, their timing was certainly not good. That's when we were deahng w~th the flooding ~ssue that existed in Castleton or were trumped up in Castleton and mmnly they were because of construction problems and blockage ~n hnes but ~t was an issue at that ttme. They had some major storm events. We also had the Lotus Creek s~tuation going and so floodplmns were a hot button ~tem. Tins 255-umt subd~ws~on, was recommended for approval by the Planmng Commission. Staff did not recommend approval. They thought ~t was too great an ~mpact on floodplmns and on wetlands and ~t was more s~gnificant ~n terms of development than the prewous apphcat~on of Taylor Farm Associates. So that apphcat~on was actually demed. Now we have an apphcat~on where tins apphcant has done everytinng that he was asked to do. He went ~n and smd okay, I'm not going to ask for a floodplain variance to ~mpact the floodplmn more than ~s permitted. There ~s a small amount that ~s permitted under our new floodplaxn ordinance that only apphes to tins part of the c~ty and I'm going to go and have gone to the Corps of Enguneers to modify the emst~ng penmts on tins property to reduce the ~mpact to ~solated non-t~dal upland wetlands by 40 percent over what ~s already permitted on tins property by the Corps permit w~th tins application. And, thus we have an apphcatmn before you for a plan that ~nstead of looking like tins plan, ~t looks hke the one you see there, winch Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 3 when you put that to everything around it, you see a few lots surrounded by a lot of green space up agmnst residential development all around. There are 65 lots in the adjacent neighborhoods that abut tins piece of property. Our development plan has a total of 18 lots that abut some of those lots. As a matter of fact, they abut 16 of those lots. And, what we have done when this property was logged, and It was logged a few years ago, we retmned on the site, because knowing eventually it would be developed residentially, believing that would be the case because that is what our Comprehensive Plan recommends, we left a wooded buffer on the back of the property. Some of that wooded buffer is also on the 65 lots that adjoin our piece of property. There's a 30-foot easement between our property and that would remmn. And, we intend to keep on our property those trees that are an that buffer. Now, there may be a tree or two towards the southern part of the property that we have to take out for drainage purposes but that's why those trees were left. It as our intent to keep those trees on the property. I see that light blinking and I don't know whether you all want me to. I have a lot of things to talk about on this, but ff you want to ask some questions. Ronald Pdpley: Can we handle those an questions and answers? Edche Bourdon: I'll try to. I'm happy to do that. Ronald Ripley: I'm sure there are a lot of questions about tins application. Eddie Bourdon: I just don't know ff you want me to do at that way or address them as I go forward. Ronald Ripley: Technically, I think that would be the appropriate way of handling it. Eddie Bourdon: You all want to ask me some questions, I'm happy. Ronald Rapley: Are there any questions of Mr. Bourdon? Eddie Bourdon: No questions. That's good. Ronald Ripley: No, we got questions. Mr. Miller. Robert Miller: Obviously, I'm very familiar with tins piece of land and have walked lt. Having had at timbered, it does bnng some issues with regard to perhaps how that open space is going to be handled, the part that hasn't been timbered. I don't know af that is part of the parcel. I assume that the t~mbenngjust wasn't an these lots because at as hard to tell exactly where at was but an that open space area as where the nmbenng occurred. How as that handled? Also the other tinng that I would lake to have addressed is the extension of the road, two lanes of that road. I heard how expensive ~t as. I also looked at Seaboard Road and wondered if that was a point of d~scussaon as the extension too. Eddie Bourdon: I'll start with the last question first. It certmnly was a point of discussion, the extension of Seaboard Road. That as a project that as actually under design and will be done by the City. The Nammo Parkway proposal, that road is a VDOT Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 4 project. And, the Traffic Impact Study, and frankly everyone, and I don't tinnk there is any disagreement at all it is that the best way to access this property, is to build two lanes of N~mmo Parkway, winch ~s far more expensive then extending Seaboard Road. And the time frame of this development will be two years before these lots will be sold. The extension of this roadway made more sense than dumping the traffic on Seaboard Road to come into this section of Pnncess Anne Road that currently is under some stress, winch will go away with N~mmo Parkway or be significantly alleviated with N~mmo Parkway, winch has been held up for quite some time. But ~s now going forward and will be going forward in 2008, winch is the date that it's ~ntended to be open. So, putting the traffic onto Nimmo conung out to General Booth was clearly the best way to deal with the subdivision. But what will happen ~s there will be an intersection at Seaboard Road when Seaboard Road ~s punched through to it, which will be happemng also by the course'of the next five years. But that project ~s actually in the works but it will not happen overnight. The open space areas when the property was logged those areas that were accessible. There is obviously open space area almost 40-acres being given to the City on West Neck Creek, part of what the Comprehensive Plan requires, asks for, not reqmres ~n that area that is truly low area was not logged. The other area there is some vegetation that ~s growing on trees but those open space areas will generally be passive open space areas but there are pans that are designated and those parts are all on areas that are either outside the floodplains and some are in it but again, floodplmn does not mean that ~t is swamp or wet. There ~s a problem with perception and it's even in tins write up. There's one place where it kind of talks hke these are little islands ofingh land around low land. Folks, everytinng you see around this, all these houses, all these lots, those are houses and lots that were built ~n the same floodplmn. Same floodplain was mitigated, and ~n this case there's mlmmal ~mpact at all in any floodplain. We stayed essentially out of the floodplain except for the roadway sections that we're mitigating 100 percent. On this case, we're talking about a total of 2.1 acres of floodplain that isn't ~mpacted at all, and we're m~t~gating with 5.1 acres of m~tigat~on and again, with previous plans, the one Clark Whlteinll had, 36 percent impact and the one that was before that was over 30 percent impact. So, we're totally staying out of any impacts on floodplains even though floodplains are developable land and floodplain is land that is frankly ideal for recreation. Down at Munden Point Park most of that park is ~n floodplain. Sigmficant amount of parks, Red Wing Park, is in floodplain. There are lots of parks ~n the mty that have area within the floodplain. It's not the flood way. It's not water flying through there, it's just that what you have ~s dunng a major storm event there m~ght be an inch or two of water that's there for a period of a few hours while they drain. That's what a floodfnnge and floodplain are. Our recreational areas will generally be passive with some trmls but there isn't an intention to put equipment into the park sites for people who live ~n the community. And, that is not a problem. It's not going to float away when there's a 100-year storm event and you have an ~nch or two of water around playground equipment. That's my answer. Ronald Rapley: Charhe Salle'. Charhe Salle': Eddie, I think you alluded to it and there is some comment in the staff report about the storm water drainage for the area and the need to address it both here and in the surrounding area. Can you tell us how you have done that? Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 5 Eddie Bourdon: We understand completely what the challenges are and that's why tbas development will meet those challenges. But, frankly, there are problems that are very long ago. Lake Placad had some problems, as did Pine Ridge because they used the wrong flood elevation. So, you got some historical ~ssues there. The C~ty's done a study many years ago that recommends that there be a BMP ~n this area, a large one to handle. There ~sn't anything at Oceana at all. All of the water flows south but the water that flows south sheet flows through the ditches to the south. So we got a s~tuation here where there have been historically some problems in both Pine Ridge and Lake Plamd because back before of what our standards are today. And those are problems that with this Castleton development and again, the b~ggest problem with Castleton really was debris in the hnes, because I would suggest it was well engineered, but w~th Castleton there were some problems. I believe they have been totally solved. We had a very rmny period this summer, and they haven't experienced flooding problems ~n Castleton. Our stormwater does not go ~n that chrection number one. Number two, it will all be handled on s~te and then will be released using the BMPs that are now required using today's standards. We will actually be helping the process is our opinion. And frankly back in 1997, when this was held up when the onganal apphcat~on for Taylor Farm Associates was going through the process, I got a number of calls dunng the hold up period wanting to know why we weren't gmng forward because they viewed ~t, the people who were ~n charge of the c~vic league at Pine Ridge, they viewed ~t as being a positive. It was going to help drmnage. Clearly things that have happened s~nce then have been done to clear the hnes, to clear the canals and the drainage has been helped and so I'm not going to suggest that th~s is going to be a panacea but it ~s clearly going to help drainage and not going to hurt drmnage and we're using everyone. My chent, our engineers, City, their engineers, Mr. Block and everyone else are well aware of the situation that exists out there and I think everyone ~s working towards solving it. I think ~t's been solved frankly, but we're going to be under a m~croscope and we know that. We are also well aware that there may be a few less lots than th~s ~n the end, but at this point and th~s is not a s~tuat~on that's been approved for a "X" number of lots. I had put ~n the proffers originally a maximum of 132 lots. They asked me to take "maximum" out and I said fine because I know we're not going up, we're only going down. If we go down, and I'm not sayang that we're going to, but I think that's a possibility. We recogmze that. We are fully aware of the challenges that this site presents, but ~n the rig p~cture, and I don't want th~s to be overstated, the challenges are that we're not developing like everything around us on s~m~lar properties have developed ~n the past. We met and we beheve totally exceeded the requirements that the challenges that are presented to us. Ad ~n the end, you also went up to a h~gher end product because of all the open space that you have behand the lots. You don't have lots that back up to each other. Ronald Pdpley: Mr. Bourdon, you're not asking for any variance to create any more bulldable land. Eddie Bourdon: That's correct. Ronald Pdpley: You're staying on the high land that exists that's receiving water now running into the floodplmn and of course you have retention that's controlhng some of that. Is that correct? Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 6 Eddie Bourdon: That's absolute. Our BMP's are on high land. You can't put a BMP ~n the floodplmns. So all of our storm water retention is on high land. None of our homes are built on anytinng but Ingh land. There is a total of about 10,000 square feet of area of floodplmn on tins entire project that w~ll be filled a few inches on the comers of some lots. That is lt. No houses are built anywhere m the floodplmn. And, the City's floodplain ordinance in this part of the c~ty allows up to five percent impact and we're about half of that, and of that, ~t's almost off of roads in the subdivision. I'll also tell you on N~mmo Parkway, the amount of floodplain ~mpact there ~s more than 10 times the floodplmn impact that we have and ours is m~mmal. Ronald Pdpley: The number that you used for n'nproving N~mmo, is that also ~nclude the pump station? Edche Bourdon: No. That's the cost of the road. Ronald Ripley: So you have a road and a pump station? Eddie Bourdon: The pump station will likely be on s~te too. We put it ~n the proffers agmn just because we just wanted. Staff smd they want to be aware. It might be offsite. We're confident that ~t will be ons~te, but that's ~n addition to the pump station. Ronald Pdpley: Will that reheve any sewage ~ssues ~n the area or ~s ~t just for tins property and future properties? Eddie Bourdon: I'm not aware of any sewage problem or any capacity problems. I tinnk ~t's just a servme this property. There really isn't anything else out there that's developable. Ronald P~pley: Yes. Barry Knight. Barry Kmght: I have a couple of observations. You talk about the 100-year floodplmn. That 100-year floodplmn could happen back to back, but the average occurrence of tins happening ~s going to be once every 100 years. The floodplmn elevation ~n that area ~s 6.3 feet. So, ff you have 6.2 feet you're ~n the floodplmn ~nches. If you have 6.4 ~nches, a d~fference of 2 ~nches, you're out of lt. So, I understand from where I hve, and farming all of our land down here ~s a whole lower than tins but ~t ~s a floodplmn but a floodplain ~s not wet area. It's area that could wet ~n tins 100-year storm event. I land of want to help you clarify that. And on the number of houses, you have 132 homes. You're asking for a permit for 132 homes, but ~t's possible that when you go ~n for site review and stormwater management, you could possibly end up w~th less than 132 homes. Would you think that 132 homes ~sn't set m stone. That it could possibly be less than that, because of those, but maybe ~s there any thought you may consolidate some of these lots? Ed&e Bourdon: That's a poss~bd~ty. As tins process goes forward, and because of the m~croscope that tins site ~s under because of the ~ssues we talked about, we recognize that there may be both to make sure that we more than adequately deal w~th these stormwater ~ssues and agmn, that's correcting other problems. We have considered that there may be Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 7 some consohdation of some of the lots. So, there's no question in our mind that 132 represents the maximum, and the likelihood is that at will be somewhat less than that before it's over with. And, your point about the floodplain is 6.25 feet but at' s absolutely correct. So, all we're tallong about is a couple of inches of storage capacity. Not swamp land. There are some isolated non-tidal wetlands, that are already penmtted to be impacted and were reducing that by 40 percent over that winch is already permitted to be impacted. Ronald Ripley: Well, the biggest issue that I heard in the first application that came through here, and the biggest concern that I thank that everybody had was the drainage that was coming out of Castleton and the adjoining neighborhoods. And, we're going to hear from some folks out there and I'm sure that they'll testify some way or the other about what has happened here. It is my understanding that's been greatly improved with some retention and the system being cleaned out and some of the tinngs you've said. That's a real important point because it was a real big point then, if I recall, and it may still be a big point. I'm not crossing over this. But we do have some other people to speak. Eddie Bourdon: In conclusion, half the density essentially of what the Comprehensive Plan recommends for this area. Thank you very much for your time. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Mr. Miller. Robert Miller: Other speakers that have signed up. Irene Duffy. Irene Duffy: Good afternoon. I'm going to pass around two pictures to look at while I speak. Just to clarify tins is the area in question. Ronald Rapley: Ms. Duffy? Irene Duffy: What? Ronald Pupley: You need to speak at the podium. Irene Duffy: Oh, sorry. This is the area in question nght here. This would be where a part of Nlmmo Quay would be to the south of Buckingham and Castleton. And tins is one of our retention ponds; our only retention pond m Buckingham. There are others in Castleton. This IS Buckingham. Ronald Rlpley: Thank you. Irene Duffy: As I said, my name 1s Irene Duffy, and I'm on the Board of Directors for Buckingham of Castleton and President of Castleton. I'm here representing Buckingham today, which is a village adjacent to the proposed Nimmo Quay. Thank you for this opportunity to speak this afternoon. The Village of Buckingham is opposed to the development of this kind on the attractive land in question for the same reason you've opposed to ~t approximately two half years ago. At that time, City Council heard and Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 8 understood our concems regarding drmnage and flooding, and mined down the requested proposal. In additmn, ~n a former case, the Planmng StaWs recommendation to the Commission was to deny the request. We find ourselves in the same position today. Last month, when tins application for rezomng was deferred, the Planmng staWs recommendation was for the request to be denied. We wholeheartedly agree w~th that decision for the following reasons. The neighborhood we lave m borders West Neck Creek and that as our storm draanage outlet. The proposed development, Nimmo Quay, will be directing their storm drainage water into the same creek. We are a very wet neighborhood. In fact, caty engineers, to their credit, are still trying to workout the kinks for the dry BMP that was proposed and dug to alleviate drmnage problems that had been overlooked by the developer. The BMP was created this past w~nter. The attention was to have a dry BMP that filled up only during large events such as tropmal storms or humcanes or otherwxse. It was to be mamtmned by the City m the fasinon of a meadow were rescue would grow, and it would be mowed and maintaaned by the C~ty. Since ~ts creation, it has not been mowed once for good reason. If a lawn mower were to go m there ~t would never come out. It would sink into three feet of water that currently stands where the tall wetland weeds have established themselves. It is turmng into a wetland. One might argue, well tins has been a really wet year and this will never happen agmn. To this person I would say we had a real wet year not more than two to three years ago and that's 50 percent of the time that I have hved here. If we were to have a serious storm or humcane now, as it stands, we would have some serious floochng problems. One might argue well, tins developer is different. They would do ~t differently. They really know how to mmgate their rmnwater. They won't make any mistakes because they have smarter engineers. To this person, I would say all the prior engineers were reputable and confident. None of them started out saying we really aren't able to do th~s but let's do ~t anyway, knowing that things would go wrong. Otherwise, they would have designed the drainage differently or not built here at all. It ~s foolhardy to ignore what other professionals have experienced. All that we are asking is that the Comm~ssaon pay very close attention to where they are proposing to build and how much fill would be brought m and where they ~ntend the water to go. The property can be built on can be encompassed as wetlands and floodplain. There is a huge amount of standing water on that land. There is not two to three inches, and I anvlte you to go back there and look. There are two to three feet of standing water at any g~ven tame back there in that area where they want to bmld. If the water was redirected or d~splaced it m~ght flood an already ex~stmg, saturated commumty. Can we be certain that more development directly abutting and adjacent to our home will not ~ncrease our propensity to flood dunng a minor or major rainfall. I would hke to read a quote that I found on the webslte belongmg to the V~rgania Beach Planning Department under the heading of Flood Control. "Wetlands provide flood control by actang as a grant sponge absorbing and holding water during storms. Fast moving water ~s slowed by vegetation and temporarily stored an wetlands. The gradual release of water released creates erosaon potential and possible property damage. When wetlands are filled, areas designed by nature to control floodwaters from Nor'easter extreme h~gh udes, etc, are lost." We beheve ~t is the C~ty's responsibility to put the safety and welfare of ~ts citizens above the ~nterest of private enterprises seeking personal profit and gmn. We are aslong that the Commission g~ve strong cons~deranon to the recommendation g~ven by the City's Planning staff last month, which bnngs me to a quemon that I need to ask. What change was made in the Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 9 application request that would warrant the change in the staff's recommendation? Since the deferral last month, there has been a change in the recommendation made by the Planmng staff; so, I'm wondering if the development plans were redesigned or adjusted to avoid disturbance in this environmentally sensitive area. Tlus land is marginal at best and builchng here not only threatens existing homes but is irresponsible business practice regarding the new home owners of NImmo Quay. And to Mr. Bourdon, I would say, please tell my sump pump under the house that the water in the cinder block voids are mnuped up drainage problems. I thank you very much. Ronald Rapley: Thank you very much. Are there any questions of Ms. Duffy? William Din: I got a question. Ronald Pdpley: Yes. Wilham Din: The two pictures that you passed around shows a dry BMP. Obviously a dry BMP as only dry m dry weather but is intended to collect water. Irene Duffy: Well, the dry BMP intention was to be wet dunng large events. It was not supposed to be a retention pond and it was not supposed to be a retention lake. We have one of those already. Wllham Din: What is your intention, and I don't understand why you're showing us a picture of a dry BMP with water in at when at as supposed to collect water. Irene Duffy: Well, ars supposed to be dry most of the tame I would assume, if it's a dry BMP, but at has not been dry since it was done. My point is that the purpose of the dry BMP was to retain water that was supposed to go m to the permanent retention pond. It was supposed to be an over fill and It was supposed to happen only dunng large events such as humcanes. My point was that it is wet all the time. We have not had a hurricane as of yet, and it already has wetland plants growing an it and it has not been mmntamed by the city, because we can't grow grass. It doesn't survive because It's too wet. What I'm saying as that if a hurricane was to happen now, or we were to have a large storm, it would flood because that is the last action for us, that dry BMP. William Din: And the retention pond as suppose to have water an it? Poght? Irene Duffy: Exactly. Wllham Dan: And you're showing us that at does have water Irene Duffy: I'm showing you that it is full and that it 1S at the top of the drainpipe and that is how it sits most of the tame because West Neck Creek is where the outfall is for our retention pond so when it doesn't flow it ends up backing up. William Dan: Are you having flooding in your area on the streets? Irene Duffy: No. It's much better now. It's much better now, than it was in the Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 10 beginmng. We had a lot of flooding due to, as was mentioned, the BMP system and we haven't had a large event eather so I tinnk we're maxed out. Wilham Dm: We've had some rain events here but dunng the rainy events what lond of flooding do you encounter there? Irene Dully: We don't have floochng in the streets anymore. Not since they've fixed the drmnage. We do have water in our yards and in my crawl space. I use a sump pump to get the water out of the cinder block voids that are there penochcally. Wilham Din: Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Robert Miller: JoAnn Massey. JoAnn Massey: Good afternoon. I am here to present a petition from the Chartwell of Castleton and Buckangham of Castleton homeowners in opposition of the rezomng. We oppose this rezomng based on our neighborhoods flooding problems and remeches by the City of Virginia Beach that Ms. Duffy spoke to about earlier. Castleton as a whole has always been lndated w~th drainage and flooding ~ssues. We do not thank ~t would be prudent for the Commission to approve tins rezomng and ultimate subdivision development of the above referenced property on Items #19 & 20. The flooding and drainage issues of Castleton, we feel would escalate as a new development in that location would penmt considerably more drainage into our already overburdened and troublesome dry BMP and drmnage system. I do have adchtlonal photos of the dry BMP, whach has never been dry ever. It's right behand my house. I've got pictures from the very beginmng up until a couple of weeks ago. It has never been dry. Here's the petition. Ronald Rapley: Is that a copy of the petition? JoAnn Massey: It 1s original signatures. Ronald Pdpley: Do you have a copy of that? JoAnn Massey: No, I don't. Ronald Rlpley: Okay. You may want to get a copy from staff later if you would hke to have a copy. JoAnn Massey: Okay. Yes, I would. Thank you Ronald Pdpley: Are there any questions of Ms. Massey? Thank you very much. Will, has a question. I'm sorry. Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 11 William Din: It's the same question and you're quoting that there's flooding problems and dralmng problems in your neighborhood. JoAnn Massey: Drainage problems now. Flooding problems before. The drainage problems being that the BMP and the retention pond flowing into the West Neck Creek wtuch this subdivision would be draining its into West Neck Creek. West Neck Creek backs up, the retention ponds back up, the dry BMP backs up and the dry BMP has never been dry. William Din: Has the dry BMP every overflowed into the neighborhood? JoAnn Massey: The pipe is a very large drainage pipe. It's gotten to be this close to the top of the pipe. My house is right on the edge of that pipe and the water comes right up to my backyard. And, no it has never flooded my backyard but ff we were to ever have a humcane it may. Ronald Rapley: Thank you very much. JoAnn Massey: Thank you. Robert Miller: Christine Capozzohi. Forgive me af I mispronounced your last name. Christine Capozzohi: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. I'm Christine Capozzohl. I live at 2408 Windy Pines Bend. My husband and I bought our house and property in October 1987. Next month, at will be 16 years. We love the neighborhood. The first thing that we noticed as we pulled into the entrance, this is a beautiful bird sanctuary. We have signs there. We love being close enough to the ocean and yet still living in the country with all the birds abutting our backyard. We used to have deer come up. In the backyard, we throw out crumbs and whatever and other animals come up. We had no problem. Tlus was just absolutely beautiful. Now that I have brain surgery in 1997, I'm a shut-in. I have vision problems. I have no peripheral vision whatsoever. I can't drive. The only thing that I have dmly is to look at the backyard or maybe once ~n a while be able to cross the street ffthere's no traffic coming to walk one of my three dogs. When this proposal first came out two years ago, you were tilling about them building houses an the woods. But before that we had drmnage problems. I'm guessing about five years ago the City came in to help with the drmnage problems. There is about a 10 foot buffer in the back of the property, which comes from the end of Windy Pines Bend to the other. I guess I'm talking about maybe 15-18 houses and a brand new drainage system, which helped us so much. I thank Castleton. First of all, while they were bufldl, ng Castleton and they came an and they logged all the woods behind us. They left us a few little skinny trees. Ronald Rapley: Ms. Capozzohl, you're starting to mn out of time. Christine Capozzohl: I'm sorry. I just want to say that my property IS not of any use to me if they're going to go an there and build and put more houses an. If this as passed by this board, I would like the owner of that property, or the builder to come and buy my Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 12 property from me and they can do whatever they want with that as long as I get a good decent price for my house. I thank you all very much. Ronald Ripley: Thank you all very much. Robert M~ller: Angela Snyder. Angela Snyder: Hello. My name is Angela Snyder. I am a resident of Pine Pddge. Tins application was deferred from the August 13th agenda, and I have the same questxon that the first lady had and that I understand that from this morning staff's meeting that the Commission now supports th~s apphcation. But, what has changed since the recommendation was for demal at the August 13th agenda? I am an adjacent property owner and I would like to show you where my house is because it does effect tins development. We are right about here and the back of our house will be right beinnd the new development. We have temble flooding problems. Our backyard looks hke a lake just when it rains. We're not talking about a s~gmficant event, just normal rainfall. So, I can ~mag~ne that the new houses will have that problem as well. The Comprehensive Plan does identify this area as a Conservation Area. It does contmn tidal and non-t~dal wetlands. There will be no buffered trees for noise reduction and w~ldhfe retention. There w~ll be a definite negative impact on schools and roads. It was noted in the recommendation of the staff, that Kellam High is currently over capacity by 286 students and that does not take into account other developments that have already been approved and are under construction. That's a real concern. The wetlands will be negatively affected. I heard the lady mentmn what I was going to quote from your webslte, but I believe she has already done that about the wetlands being a sponge. I just wanted to stress about the flooding being an issue. The stormwater drmnage ~s very poor. The U.S. Navy also opposed tins request. They feel that it's an encroachment on their operations. I have letters of opposition I think have been filed. We do have a petition, winch has already been submitted to you. There are 62 names on that. I do have a question of Mr. Bourdon, and I'll be able to ask that? Ronald Rapley: You can state it and we can ask him. Angela Snyder: The question is I heard him say and point to this map which I could not see from my location but there was going to be a row of buffered trees that I wondered where that was going to be? We ask that you deny this request. Ronald Rapley: Okay. Thank you. Angela Snyder: Thank you. Robert Miller: John Snyder. John Snyder: Hello. My name is John Snyder: I've lived on Windy Pines Bend for probably since December. Just moved there. Pdght there would be my house. According to your plans, these new lots would abut to my back property hne. Behind my property line there is a drainage system that the City had installed and I'm not sure when because I , i Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 13 just moved there. I have a constant problem with water nmning off the back of these lands onto my yard because my water as trytng to go towards that property to go away from my house and my house as flooded. The way I see it with these property lanes connecting or abutting to each other as they are m tins drawing, af they properly grade the yards of these new homes, the backyard of that house is going to be flowing right towards the back of mine and therefore, I'm going to have more problems. All that I wanted to say about tins drmn that is back there as the drmn sits so far high out of the ground because the ground as so low that when the water does gather around towards the drain, it doesn't get ingh enough to go into the drain. I've had several people come out from the City, from Public Works, and they tell me they can't access lt. So, how are they going to access this when they have these property lanes connecting to mane and not only is that drain back there that should be absorbmg some of the water and I've been trymg for months to try to get my water to go towards these drains so it would be out of my yard and away from my house and at just doesn't do lt. It just stands there and goes nowhere. Also behind my fence line is the electrical box and everything else, and I just don't know how with these property lines lake this, if anytinng happens, how are they going to access any of these pubhc utilities. Those are a few of my concerns. Like I smd, I'm just a new homeowner trying to keep my yard dry and at least get at runmng off my property and its just nmmng right back to my property from where it as now. Ronald Rapley: Mr. Snyder, as there a chtch beinnd your property or as at a drainage pipe that has a drop in? John Snyder: A very large City drmn with very big grates in lt. I mean a small animal can go through there. I've told my son not to mess around and get his foot caught in at or sometinng. Ronald Rlpley: Is it a grading issue you tinnk to get the water to the pipe? John Snyder: Yes. See, that is what I told the people who came out. If you all would grade the land around there a httle better, maybe it would flow into that dram. Also an my backyard we have mature trees, very large mature trees. Earlier concept plans in past years from looking through papers, City work, they left a nice buffer with those mature trees between the neighborhoods and with the property lanes connecting like that and the utilities there and everything, I don't know how they're going to do that. It kind of doesn't make any sense to me why they would want to connect the property lines. I would think you would leave at zoned between there so you could access the pubhc utflmes. I don't know whether they are planning on moving these public utilities. Ronald Rapley: Typically, what you'll find is that there wall be a City easement. You have a City easement across the back of your property for winch the City should be maintaining that swale. It's their easement. This development will also have to dedicate their City easements for the same reason. We'll have Mr. Bourdon address this. John Snyder: I was just concerned on how they were going to access pubhc utihtaes that are behind my house and that's going to go between these two. I would also like to say that we moved an there, my fourteen year old son was really looking forward to runmng Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 14 around through the woods back there and being a boy. He hadn't been able to go back there. It's too muddy. He'll sink up to bas knees. They ask me ff I would allow them to access that area through my yard. I said bring a tow truck because any heavy equipment your takdng through my yard is going to sink. My yard hasn't been dry since I've been there. I have trouble just trytng to mow the grass. Those are a few of my concerns. Thank you very much for heanng them. Ronald Rlpley: Thank you for coming up. Robert Miller: Jack Reich. Jack Reich: How you doing? My name is Jack Reich. I live at Hunt Club Forest. My property borders the proposed thing. When we get armn and not even a heavy ram, water comes up four feet. I had that creek and I guess it connects to West Neck Creek at the edge of my backyard. It comes up four feet up from that creek into my yard. I have an embankment. It comes up that embanlanent four feet. With just the rmns that we've had, I mean we haven't had, God forbid we have. It's a lot worse now since they knocked all those trees down back there. I mean in the past, when I guess water would be held in the woods back there. I chdn't have that much of a problem other than in a humcane, of course you would expect it to come up. Now, with just heavy rams like we've had. I mean I'm not exaggerating and we're talking four feet up on my property, up the embankment. I cannot get flood insurance because the comer of my property is in a flood zone. I won't have a house left. I have an above ground pool in my backyard. If that water comes up any higher, it wall end up taking my pool out. I mean this is just absolutely nuts. And, they're going to drain into West Neck. It can't handle what's there now. I just can't understand any of this and I don't want to see my property destroyed. I probably lost, and anybody can come out and look, I probably lost two feet of my property in the last two years at the edge. The C~ty doesn't mmntain anytbang. I maintain it. I do my best to keep it up. I keep the grass cut. I keep everything back there. Clean up the garbage that flows from other people's houses down. Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Mr. Mailer, has a question. Robert Miller: When you bought the house. When do you buy your house? Jack Reich: 1987. Robert Miller: Wasn't there a drainage easement on your property then .and that canal was there at that tame? Jack Reich: Yes sir. Robert Miller: Okay. Since you've live there, you're telling me that Pubhc Works have never been out there to maintain that canal? Jack Reich: No. Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 15 Robert Miller: That's sometlung we defimtely have to have our staff ~nvestigate. Jack Reich: I take care of Robert Miller: No. Jack Reich: I have never called up and complmned. Robert M~ller: I believe what you're saying, and I thank that could be part of the issue if your having water rase four feet, perhaps it's blocked up somewhere and at's not properly drmning and at's something that Public Works can get out there and do something about lt. Jack Reach: Just s~nce they've cleared those trees. Robert Mdler: I hear you. Thank you. Jack Reach: You're welcome. Ronald Rapley: Thank you very much. Jack Reich: Thank you. Ronald Pupley: Do we have anybody else? Robert Mdler: Jeff Trenton. Jeff Trenton: I've got a couple of points. The first one is goes to the cred~blhty of the proposal. We've talked about thas buffer area. On page 11, the Planning staff says, "it should be noted that one partmular valuable aesthetac natural resource is beang ehmanated with the current proposal ~s the exast~ng 40 to 50 foot wooded buffer along the northern boundary of the sate adjacent to the neighborhoods of Castleton and Pine Radge." It kand of contradicts what Mr. Bourdon says. I would assume the Planning Commission is objective on thas because ~t goes to the cred~bihty of the proposal. The major issue I'd hke to address as has everybody seen the newspaper today? You see the newspaper today, massive headhnes "Super Hornets Comang to V~rgima Beach." We got the squadrons. Massive headhne ~s going to be a lot louder. Headhne basically today is "Super Hornets coming to the Beach." It's b~g, the b~ggest story in this town for quite a whde. Let me suggest what tomorrow's headhne can be if you make a mastake on ti'ns. "City Council Approves Additional Residential Development Despite Navy ObJections." Navy says new development will encroach on mr operataons. That's your headhne. I've heard that sort of debate when I was on the Castleton Oceana L~mson Commattee. The Navy would always marvel that the mty would contanue to bmld even when the Navy was saying that there are senous noise level ~ssues and other ~ssues concermng flight operations. And they would marvel that the c~ty could continue to do that. Now especially today when they say we're going to get the Super Hornets. When they say they're goang to be much louder. When they say they're going to have trmmng Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 16 operatxons wath new aircraft, to have additional builchng to approve the next day, additaonal residential constmctmn when the Navy tells you that you shouldn't be dmng it, you're gmng agmnst what the Navy says, and were saying that we're a Navy town and were pamotic. However, we're going to go for the buck and do the buildang. That as what at seems to me. I guess that is all that I'm goang to say. Robert Miller: Where do you live Jeff?. Jeff Trenton: I lave nght there an Castleton. Robert Miller: Can you point to it? There's a pmnter nght there on the table. Ronald Pupley: The httle black tlung. Jeff Trenton: I'm right here. Robert Miller: Okay. How's your quality ofhfe there? Jeff Trenton: It's race to have the woods behind. Robert Mailer: A race neighborhood? Jeff Trenton: It's a nme neaghborhood. The noase as an assue. Robert Miller: Really. Jeff Trenton: Espemally the question of when the Super Hornets being louder. Because we know Navy guys who fly and say yeah, the Super Hornets are going to be a lot louder. Robert Miller: Every tame you see one of those Navy guys making all that nmse, why don't you thank turn for the freedoms you have. Thank you. Jeff Trenton: The Navy ~s the one who's saying your encroaching on their operations. Not me. Robert Miller: Thank you. Jeff Trenton: Thank you. Ronald Pupley: Is there anybody else? Robert Mailer: No sar. Ronald P~pley: Okay. Mr. Bourdon. Eddae Bourdon: Where do I begtn. I thank you already p~cked up on the fact that the BMP that as holdang water ~s a BMP that as workang g~ven the fact that we had a record summer for rmnfall and the first young lady who spoke on ~t, I'll be happy and be candad Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 17 and say that the flooding problems are corrected. They're not flooding. Frankly, depending upon the saze of a humcane, ~f we have a hurricane, there are a lot of places in the C~ty of Vxrgnma Beach, a whole lot of places that are goxng to have flooding on a temporary basas and for the flat area coastal plato that we hve ~n, that's an inevatabflity. There's notinng anybody can do about that ~f we have a humcane. You can't desagn a storm drainage system for a mty based on a humcane event. And, we haven't nor have any other coastal cities that I'm aware of but we certainly in tins case, being that we are downstream of Castleton, we're not going to be putting water upstream. What we also will be dmng is as you all know, and as we've talked about, ~s our BMPs all have to be in upland areas. They have to be desagned and engineered so that we are ~n not any way shape, or form increasing the rate of flow anto that drainage system m a storm event. And, again, Castleton ~s the latest development that had experienced some problems. They developed, and a s~gmficant amount of their lots are an the floodplmn. None of these lots are an the floodplmn. The other development, Pane Pddge specifically and Lake Placid up the upstream, they have houses, many, many of them which were built ~n the floodplmn but the flood elevation used to calculate their height was too low, which ~s the ~ssue w~th the runoff. All of tins is being addressed and has been addressed and we will be addressing ~t so that we will not be adding ~n anyway to anybody's water problem and that's what this plan represents, because it xs such a manimal amount of development wath all of the sponge left ummpacted. With regard to Ms. Snyder, she brought up a number of different things. The buffer beinnd here, first off all, beinnd their houses there is a 30- foot easement between our lots and their lots that would be maintained. We also maintain wooded area along the entarety property line with the neighboring properties and of that entirety, there are 65 lots that adjoin us, this ~s one section. Ronald Rapley: Mr. Bourdon, you're over your time. But you're answering our questions. Eddie Bourdon: I knew you were going to ask that question. Ronald Ripley: So consider your questions and answers. Eddie Bourdon: Okay. I'll consider mine questaons and answers. We got this section here where there ~s a wooded buffer because it's the wooded buffer that we mmntaan. There are trees on the back of these lots. If you notice, these lots are larger lots than those ~n the neighborhood. There are a number of trees on these lots. There are trees on our property all the way around. Most of our boundary w~th the neighbonng subdlws~ons, all of these lots go directly to our property hne. We have left a wooded buffer and that buffer will remain. What the staff was commenting about ~s that ~n the 255 lot plan, our lots were not to the property hne but we're still going to mmnta~n on the back of these lots. Not 50 feet although ~n the case of these seven lots here to the east, there's already 30 foot buffer that will remain and that is an underground drmnage easement and we wall be able to add another 15 to 20 feet to that. So basically, about a 40 to 50 foot buffer that will occur here. Tins area here the buffer wall be less but these lots that we adjoin here. We have 10 lots that adjoin a total of eight above us. We'll be probably able to leave about 20 to 30 feet of trees on our property ~n addition to roughly Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 18 the same amount of trees that exist on the back of those lots. Elsewhere, there 1s no impact at all in terms that trees remain adjacent to the rest of the propemes. Ronald Rapley: Whale you're on that subject Mr. Scott, it wouldn't be appropriate for this apphcant to stze the drmnage pipe along those adjacent property lanes to service water coming off of Castleton for example but it would be appropriate for the c~ty, when they're in there doing the development to get their grades right if the grades have gotten filled ~n or what not so that we get two drainage systems that are getting the water out of there. Would that be appropriate to say? Robert Scott: Really, you have to leave that up to the design engineer and what concept they're going to use to drain it. It wouldn't be inappropriate to do. Ronald Pdpley: Would it be ~nappropnate to oversize ~t to take other water? Robert Scott: It's not a question so much ofoversizlng as it IS of grades. The problem is the land is very low and very fiat. The grading issues are most of the problems I beheve. I certainly don't want to rule anything out like that, but at some point, someone is going to have to figure out how to drain tins land and their concept m~ght possibly include that. Ronald R~pley: Okay. Eddie Bourdon: You'll also notice and It'S obvious to everyone, and I'm going to show you, that there are lots all along here, lots all along here that come to our property line and had our property line were a floodplain, what does that tell you? These lots were all built in the floodplain. And, that's a reality. The houses of a lot of these people that adjoin us were in the floodplain and that's not happemng on our property. We're not doing anytinng as far as building houses an the floodplain that exists around us. That's the key to tins whole situation is that we're not going to be creating any problems for anybody else and our stormwater off of our Impervious surfaces go into BMPs that we're creating on our property to hold that water on our ingh land not in the floodplain. So we're not affecting the flood storage capacity or the rate of flow in any way an the floodplmn. Eugene Crabtree: I tinnk you just answered my question. Your three stormwater management facilities should actually improve the wetlands that is now dralmng to people's property by holding it on your own property. What they say is nmmng form the woods now and having problems with that when you put these in that should correct some of their problems because then it will not run there but will be held in your stormwater management. Eddie Bourdon: We fully believe and understand and appreciate the fact and it is a reality g~ven the history of these other developments that we are going to be looked upon to not only make sure that we have no impact but to probably help to alleviate some of the existing ~mpacts and we are well aware of that and prepared to address that challenge. Eugene Crabtree: That's what I was asking. Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 19 Ronald Ripley: Jan Anderson. Jamce Anderson: On the wooded buffer that you said you would leave there, that is a drainage easement also, is there any problem with keeping it wooded? You said that you might have to take a tree or two but it's not going to be clearer. Eddie Bourdon: Those mature trees are the ones the owner left and didn't log when the rest of the property was logged because they provide that buffer. The answer is I don't believe, we hope there aren't any trees that have to be taken out. It is our desire to leave that buffer, but maybe some that do, but they will be the ones farthest away from the shared property line. They won't be on the shared property line. Again, unless for some reason that we're not aware of deahng with the existing drainage improvements or the City drainage improvements that would have to necessitate some removal. We're not anticipating that will be the case. Janice Anderson: Is there anywhere the proffers that you can make just say mmntain the wooded buffer. It wouldn't be specific. Eddie Bourdon: We could between now and City Council we could put on the plans a note about the wooded buffer that exxsts. That can certainly be done. In terms of the proffers themselves, I'm not sure from what other developments such as wording that anyone is really going to be comfortable with. Barbara is not here. Barbara Duke and I have had discussion a lot lately. I think that she and I'll just quote her for the staff, I thank they're more comfortable with some type of a note on the plan itself as opposed to trying to come up with words in a proffer to deal w~th that. I think that ~s an issue that we could address by puttmg a note ~n to the proffer that trees in this area are to remain. Janice Anderson: The wording in your proffers. Eddie Bourdon: You're referring to the plan. Jamce Anderson: To the plan. Ronald Pdpley: Are there any other questions? Charhe Salle' and then Gene. Eugene Crabtree: Mr. Bourdon, ~n reference to the gentleman that was complaining about the aircraft, if I understand the position of this property, this property ~s not ~n the actual major flight plan of take off or landing and the crash zone is just the noise zone. So from a safety standpoint of v~ew we don't have it In direct hne of any of the major runways and therefore the noise level ~s the only question? Am I correct? Eddie Bourdon: That ~s correct. Ronald Rapley: Charhe. Eddie Bourdon: We left plenty of room for a jet to crash with all the open space on 74 percent of the property. I hope none ever do. Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 20 Eugene Crabtree: I just want to make sure that you're not an that darect crash zone. Eddie Bourdon: No, were not even near a crash zone. We surrounded by residential development at three half umts per acre. Eugene Crabtree: Just clarifying ~t that's all. Charlie Salle': My experience w~th crash zones as when an airplane flaes over your head you're an a crash zone. Eddie Bourdon: With all th~s conservataon area we're setting aside, there is plenty of room and God forbad ~f one every came down. We hope they wouldn't come down in any of the neighborhoods that surround us but ~t doesn't exast. Charhe Salle': I had a couple of questaons and Jan explored part of that on the buffer zone, I notmed that the wooded buffed areas is across the actual platted lots and I guess to what extent as the subject lot owner bound to keep that area wooded? Edche Bourdon: There certainly is an aballty to put in an easement on the property. It could be a Homeowners Assocaatlon that's going to own not only all the open space and the vast majority of our property that abuts to 65 lots ~n a neaghborhood would belong to the assoclat~on and so there ~s the abihty to put an easement to allow the assomation to enforce not only on thear own property but on the back of the 18 lots that we have that adjoin other lots. Charhe Salle': That maght be one of the responsabd~taes. Eddie Bourdon: I would agree Mr. Salle', and I don't ttunk you would have any problem with putting ~n a condlt~on. The issue simply would be the depth of the easement on any of the lots. Charlie Salle': And the other question deals wath drmnage. Th~s project is downstream from the areas that we had people had concerns about at. Is the system of drmnage connecting the exastang drmnage that's wall be flowing down to your project? Eddae Bourdon: There are some drmnage ways that come through and at's natural drmnage that clearly comes through here. That's what all the floodplain m these areas that we preserved that ~s chrectly adjacent to thear lots that were created m the floodplmn. That's why ~t ~s amportant and cntmal and that's why we had stayed out of those areas w~th our development, so that we're not ampactang the natural drmnage ways wath regard to the manmade drmnage ways. Yes, they do also traverse our property, and we will be enhancing those to some degree Primarily, we're going to make sure that we have no negative ~mpact on those ~n terms of adding ~n any way to flow ~n those drmnage ways ~n a storm event. We're also provad~ng a BMP for N~mxno Parkway on some of our lmgh land, right out here at the entrance. Pdght here were adding a BMP that will be used for N~mmo Parkway agmn, so there ~sn't any ~mpact on the drmn when that road ~s bmlt. We Item//19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 21 do have dramage that comes across the property. There's natural drmnage that comes across the property that we are not going to impact. Ronald Ripley: Kathy and then Joe. Kathy Kats~as: Mr. Bourdon, are you and the developer ~s willing to reduce the mount of lots depen(hng on the storm water drmnage system. Is there a number that would make tins economically not feasible by the production? Ed(he Bourdon: That whole assue Ms. Katsias ~s going to be dealt as we go through the engineering, which is in this case and that really ~s the answer. I believe. I don't want to speak for staff, but I thank the staff's comfort level with this proposal was enhanced by face to face meetings with our engineers and our chents, and we understand and have bent over backwards already and will continue to do the same to make sure that there ~s no impact on drainage on the property surrounchng us. We walked into tins knowing that the problems that have existed and to some degrees still ex~st, although I thank they have been in a large part been solved, not totally, and we recogmze that we may lose some lots ~n that process. But, that's an expensive process. All that detailed engineering on ~n(hwdual and grades and what have you, it's going to be a process that we're recogmzing ~s gmng to take some t~me. And, I said before, we don't expect any of these houses on these lots to be on line or for sale for two years because we know that process isn't going to be a qmck one. As far as a number, no, there ~s no way we can s~t here and say it w~ll be 120 versus a 132 and we're not an a posit~on to know that at tins point. Ronald Ripley: Joe, chd you have a question? Joseph Strange: Yeah. Some of the opposataon, they expressed concern that even though your sayang that these BMPs are going to be on hagh property that maybe thas isn't going to really work. Who do they go to and get assurances that your plan will work so they could feel comfortable and not feel lake when they walk out of here that this gets passed that they're going to be protected. Eddie Bourdon: I tinnk they can walk out of here and walk out of the Council meeting, because they will be heanng the same thang there, knowing that every engineer and Public Works of the C~ty ~s well aware, and they've been aware for a number of years about the ~ssues that have been brought forth and that these plans are going to be checked, doubled checked, tripled check to make sure that they will ~n fact they will do what in fact what we smd they will do. They wdl not be adding to their burdens, so to speak, that exist. And, the C~ty has stu(hed thas area extensively. We're looking at property that we are only developang on, essentially on the h~gh land, and that's one assurance that I would take out of here. Number two, the fact that everyone ~s going to be scrut~mzmg ~t very carefully to make sure that we alleviate the problem. The problems that have existed, have exxsted an large measure because of prevaous errors that aren't going to be repeated agmn m terms of using incorrect ~nformat~on, m terms of what the floodplmn was back ~n the 60's w~th Lake Plac~d. Our knowledge ~s so much greater now then it was in the 1960s. Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 22 Joseph Strange: If you look under Public Facilities and Services it says, "city water is not available to this development. Plans and bonds are required for the construction of a new pump station off-site of the sewer system." And then if you look at Proffer #7, "when the property is developed, the party of the first part shall extend public utilities, to service the subdivision, Including the possible construction of an off-site sewage pump station." How do these two relate to each other? I don't quite understand it myself. Eddie Bourdon: I believe they say the same thing. There is City water, and City water will be extended to the site at our cost. City sewer same thing, will be extended to our site at our cost. The only question there is whether the pump station will be on tins site or off-site, and we are now confident that it will be on site. Like I said, it will be at our cost. There is no cost to the taxpayer at all. C~ty water and City sewer have to be extended at the developer's cost to the property and they're available to the property. Joseph Strange: So what plans and bonds are required for the construction of the new pump station? Does the C~ty have to do that? Edche Bourdon: Yeah. When this gets to subdiwslon approval. It just lets somebody know, if they're a developer and they're naive, that they're going to have bond what they're going to have put that in. Joseph Strange: So the City doesn't have anything to do w~th that. Eddie Bourdon: No sir. Joseph Strange: I didn't qmte understand myself Ronald Pupley: Okay. Are there any other questions? Mr. Bourdon, thank you very much. Eddie Bourdon: Thank you. Ronald Pdpley: Let's open this up for discussion. Mr. Miller. Robert Miller: Well, since everybody else ~s a drmnage engineer, I guess I can be one. A couple of things that were said today that need to be clarified. Number one is that West Neck Creek ~s a creek that drmns a large part of our city, but it ~s also connected to both, ~romcally, the Chesapeake Bay and to Back Bay and ~t ~s effective ~n both directions. It's very umque ~n that sense. It's a great waterway. It's a longitudinal to the park, as we all know. It's a wonderful place to go and spend some time. There are some ~ssues that come up, and that is trying to maintain it and make sure that it stays clear of debris. Pubhc Works, I think, has done a very good job, but over the years, ~t's difficult to either stop a tree from growing, or ff one fell down, to know that at fell and go out and clean that tree up. I think that's been part of the issues that have dealt with West Neck Creek. The creek, itself, carries a large amount of water during a rainfall event. The drmnage in Castleton, the drainage ~n this subdivision, to some extent, the drainage ~n Lake Placid are being, what I called "detmned" which means it's being slowed down and let lose after Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 23 the storm event has passed. That's the way tinngs are engtneered during computer models, and I can assure you there have been any number of, literally hundreds of models done on this particular creek to make sure that what is being done in tins area ~s going to be done correctly and done with conscience towards not only the development that's going on but the other developments around lt. Just saying that means that the storm drainage systems have presented every confidence that the City engineers are going to make sure and the developer's engineers together with those items that were talked about today from yard drainage to canal system that's not quite working to worrying about how it's going to flow into West Neck Creek. Tins water is already going into West Neck Creek, and the water that wall be drained from this property will not be an excess of what's already going there. So, there's no net gmn. That's pan of the rules of the development that has to occur. One lady mentioned, I think Ms. Duffy that there was water under her house. I just want to make sure, and I think she knows tins, but that as a builder's problem. That's not related to the development. There are duct valves on the Castleton outfall system at the primary outdoor fall for the Buckingham Village. A duct valve actually opens when the water an the creek as lower and stays closed when the water an the creek goes up. That was done supposedly to stop water from coming back into the subdivmaon. If in fact, the water is staying an the subdivision ~n that storm water management facahty too long, then at may be that valve is not working. I would suggest that Public Works get ~nvolved to make sure that they get that straight. The BMP that was supposed to be dry, but remmns wet and the month of May, I tinnk we had 20 days of rain. We've probably had the wettest summer we've had that I could remember. And, even though the events may look like they are not that severe, the continual rmn causes the ground to be saturated and all of us, with any sense to my yard, to your yard to anybody else's yard know that after tins summer. That would also lead to the fact that the BMP was built dry, otherwise it wouldn't have been bmlt. It was built and ~t was dry. So, it was dry at some point. And the last flung is the canal system, I would suggest that as on the eastern part of this property next to the Hunt Club, and at goes across the southern portion of the property. I have walked that canal and I know that canal is heavily encumbered with existing trees and growth and other things. And maintenance probably does need to be mn on that; so, I would ask that Public Works do that. And stating all of that, I flunk the developer has done a very umque job of backing off the previous proposals that we've seen. I believe staffbeheves the same, and the proposed development is one that I personally feel has acineved what all of us were asking for, and that is the hononng of the environmental situation, the hononng of the drmnage situation. I do like the ~dea of putting in the additional condition of an easement for the buffered trees. I thank that assures the people that have been here that are worried about that. Let me tell you that's a "Catch 22" when you talk about the drmnage issues, .because ffwe save the trees you can't change the grade around the trees so that may be a little blt of a drainage issue winch needs to be balanced like Mr. Bourdon indicated I think with good engnneerlng while we're environmentally sensitive to saving these trees. And, the last thing I want to say is I personally very glad that the Navy put the additional F-18As here and I hope they fly over my house everyday and every mght. Thank you. Ronald Rlpley: Are there any other comments? Bob smd it pretty well. I would lake to comment on the plan Itself also because I was on the Cormmsslon when it came through the first time. When you fl~p that board over and you flip it over to tins side, ~t's hke a Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 24 world of difference. Looking at the density, and if you take the developable acres and you divide it to what was proposed you probably get four to the acre. I think the original plan got to three and a half because there was a lot of variances required an order to create more land within the floodplain In order to achieve the number of the density. This case, the developer is not asking for any variance. The variances that we're working with is the land that's there for the most part with the exception of some of the roadways that have to get through there, and I appreciate, quite frankly, this type of extubIt because you get to see the whole floodplain in a much broader sense than some time the way it's presented, winch is very hard to see the whole picture. And this is a very helpful way to view what's going on. I think Bob probably covered most everything that I was interested in talking about probably and then some. I think the fact that the developer has recognized the fact that in working with Mr. Scott, his department, there may be more adjustments. That's very appreciative from the Planning Commission's point of view, because I'm sure there's going to be some naps, picks and tucks, and once you get down on the ground with the engnneers and actually measure the inches you're going to find some differences. You may just find, and hopefully that works out well for the developer, If that's the case. But, when at comes down for a motion, I'm going to support this. I thank it's a good plan. I think It'S very creative, and it as Mr. Miller said "it's environmentally sensitive to this p~ece of land" and tins land is a developable piece of land and you have to recognize that. It's 72 acres. Is that correct? Yes Barry. Barry Kmght: I agree with what Ron and Bob both say. We have a umque waterway in West Neck, and by being in the Southern Watershed Management Area, I would assume that the largest majority of the water as towards Back Bay. And with the trees over West Neck Creek, we're subjected to a wind tide, which means when wind blows out of the north, we get a low tide. When the wind blows out of the south, we get a high tide. And, af you have a south wand, It backs the water up here, and then if you have a rain event, which as usually associated with a south wind, then the water can't get away. So, I know the residents may not have the exact answer that they're looking for but their voice was heard today because Public Works will get a message that they need to go out there and see about these trees that are over West Neck Creek or some of the tributaries of West Neck to try and get them out of here so the water will flow out of flus area a little better. I have a good comfort level with that done that this site wall actually improve the drainage on the surrounding neighborhoods so I'll be supporting this project also. I wouldn't mind putting that in a way of a motion also. Ronald Ripley: Do you want to make that a motion at thts point? Barry Knight: If you have more discussion. Ronald Rapley: Okay. Wllham Din: I'd just like to make a comment also. I thank this development is a environmentally senslnve development, and I know the speakers that came up here in opposition of this may feel that they don't see how this ~s being environmentally safe to their area, but if you look at the map, the Castleton area, the Pine Ridge area is built right up to the property hne If those areas were developed with the same environmental Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 25 concerns of these wetlands, you probably wouldn't have the houses butted right up against this property level. A lot of these houses wouldn't be there, because they are built in the flood areas or the wetlands that tins development ~s trying to avoid. And, that's why those areas are lower. You see the hne. You see the development of Castleton and P~ne Pddge, come right up to that line. Well, wetlands just chdn't stop there. And, so there is a lot of thought to the environment and the concerns and how this development ~s built around the wetland areas and I agree with the comments w~th the drainage. I tinnk ~t will ~mprove the drmnage overall in tins area and I to w~ll be supporting tins. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other comments? Mr. Scott. Robert Scott: I feel compelled to say one thing. You have our staff report. My comment has to do wath tree preservation. Our staff has got a lot of experience ~n recent times by deahng with very d~fficult issues hke this. I must say that I would not encourage anybody to very optimistic about tree preservation on tins property for two reasons. Number one, you have no tree preservation proffer. A note on the plat isn't going to do any good. By the t~me th~s ~s put to record most of the trees will be gone anyway. Number two, even with a tree preservation proffer, tree preservation and drainage are sort of development opposites of one another. There's going to have to be some s~gnificant adjustment to grades m tins area, and to adjust grades, you've got to clear trees. I don't want to labor the point by ~dent~fymg properties for you that you've dealt with and we've dealt with recently where we've had s~grnficant tree preservations proffers on them. They're not that effective ~n preserving trees. The development will sometime necessitate that the trees be cleared out, and tins is a p~ece of property, with the s~ze of the lots that are there and w~th the necessity to put drainage as a top priority, same degree of mampulat~on I suspect ~s going to have to take place. I tinnk that I would not be that optlm~stm about the ability to preserve trees. In the interest of fmmess, I just need to say that. Ronald Rlpley: I tinnk that's a very practical statement. Charhe Salle': I have a comment. Ronald Ripley: Chafl~e. Charhe Salle': Bob, having brought that up, I often observed, that ~t seems to me that's actually what happens. You have to grade lots even where there's not even a particular drainage problem, but you grade them to meet City standards even ffthe drmnage is not an ~ssue, and as a result of that, the trees have to go. And, I often thought that as a property owner that I would rather have the trees on the lot and drainage problems and puddhng on my property then see the trees go, but it seems to me that's just the opposite than most people. We've heard a lot of comments about standing water on people's lots and people just don't tolerate ~t. And, I tinnk that message comes across so loudly for the City that they set the standards so that you have to create these standards to deal w~th the drainage. And, I think probably we're our worst enemy when ~t comes to these ~ssues. Ronald Pupley: I don't d~sagree. Okay, Barry, d~d you want to make a motion here. Item #19 & 20 Alcar, L.L.C. Page 26 Barry Knight: I'll make a motmn on agenda Items #19 & 20, Alcar, LLC, that we approve the apphcatlon as proffered. Ronald Pdpley: We have a motion to approve. Do I have a second? Seconded by Kathy Kats~as. Is there any further dlscussmn? Then, we would hke to vote. AYE 10 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD AYE ABSENT Ronald Pdpley: By a vote of 10-0, the motion cames. FORM NO P S 1 0 _ o,~ OUR NP,'~°~ City o£ Virginia Reach IMTER-OFFZCE COr~RESPOIq'DEIqCE In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF-5676 DATE: November 25, 2003 TO: Leslie L. Lilley ~% DEPT: City Attorney FROM: B. Kay Wilson~~ DEPT: City Attorney Conditional Zoning Application ALCAR, L.L.C., et als The above-referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on December 9, 2003. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated December 12, 2002, and have determined it to be legally sufficient and in proper legal form. A copy of the agreement is attached. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further. BKW Enclosure PREPARED BY SYKES ]}OURDON, A~2N & LEVY. ? C ALCAR, L.L.C., a Virginia limited habzhty company T. WAYNE MOSTILER and BARBARA C. MOSTILER, Trustees FALSE CAPE ASSOCIATES, a Virginia limited partnership TO (PROFFERED COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS) CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia THIS AGREEMENT, made this 12th day of December, 2002, by and between ALCAR, L.L.C., a VLrginia hmited hability company, Grantor, party of the first part; T. WAYNE MOSTILER and BARBARA C MOSTILER, Trustees for the T. Wayne Mostiler, D.D.S., Ltd. Employees Pension Plan and Trustees for the T. Wayne Mostiler, D.D.S., Ltd. Employees Profit-Sharing Plan, Grantor, party of the second part; FALSE CAPE ASSOCIATES, a Virginia limited partnership, Grantor, party of the third part; and THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a munimpal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virgima, Grantee, party of the fourth part. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the party of the second part is the owner of a certain parcel of property located in the Princess Anne District of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgima, containing approximately 48.27 acres and described as "Parcel One" in Exhibit "A' attached hereto and incorporated herren by this reference, which parcel, along with Parcel "Two" and "Three" is hereto referred to as the "Property"; and WHEREAS, the party of the third part is the owner of two (2) certain parcels of property located in the Princess Anne District of the City of Virgmm Beach, Virginia, containing approximately 64.05 acres and described as "Parcel Two" and "Parcel Three" ;n Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated hereto by thxs reference, whxch parcels, along w~th "Parcel One" is herein referred to as the "Property"; and ,GPIN: 2404-37-1633 2404-57-3796 2404-56-4943 PREPARED BY SYEE$, ]~OUt~DON AtttmN & LEVY. WHEREAS, the party of the fLrst part xs the contract purchaser of the Property and has initiated a conditxonal amendment to the Zoning Map of the City of Virginm Beach, Virgmm, by petitxon addressed to the Grantee so as to change the Zoning Clasmficat~ons of the Property from AG-! and AG-2 to Conditional R-10 Residentxal District with a Conditaonal Use Permit for Open Space Promotaon; and WHEREAS, the Grantee's pohcy is to provide only for the orderly development of land for various purposes through zoning and other land development legislataon; and WHEREAS, the Grantor acknowledges that the competing and sometimes incompatible uses confhct and that in order to permxt dfffenng uses on and in the area of the Property and at the same time to recognize the effects of change, and the need for various types of uses, certmn reasonable conditions governing the use of the Property for the protection of the community that are not generally applicable to land sLmilarly zoned are needed to cope with the mtuatxon to which the Grantor's rezonmg application gxves rise; and WHEREAS, the Grantor has voluntarily proffered, in writing, in advance of and prior to the public heanng before the Grantee, as a part of the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map, m additaon to the regulations provided for the R-10 Zomng District by the existing overall Zoning Ordinance, the following reasonable conditions related to the physical development, operation, and use of the Property to be adopted as a part of said amendment to the Zoning Map relative and applicable to the Property, which has a reasonable relataon to the rezoning and the need for whxch is generated by the rezoning NOW, THEREFORE, the Grantor, for xtself, its successors, personal representataves, asmgns, grantees, and other successors in t~tle or interest, voluntarily and wxthout any requzrement by or exaction from the Grantee or its governing body and without any element of compulmon or quid pro quo for zomng, rezoning, site plan, budding permxt, or subdiv;mon approval, hereby makes the following declarataon of conditions and restrictions which shall restrict and govern the physical development, operation, and use of the Property and hereby covenant and agree that this declaration shall constxtute covenants runmng with the Property, whxch shall be binding upon the Property and upon all partxes and persons claiming PREPARED BY §YI~ES. t~OUt~DON. AttEt~N & LEVY PC under or through the Grantor, its successors, personal representatives, assigns, grantee, and other successors zn znterest or title and whzch will not be requxred of the Grantors until the Property is developed: 1. When development takes place upon that portxon of the Property which is to be developed, xt shall be as a single family residential community substantially m conformance with the Exhibit entitled "CONCEPTUAL SUBDIVISION PLAN OF NIMMOS QUAY, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated December 12, 2002, prepared by Clark-Nexsen, which has been exhzbited to the Virg~ma Beach City Council and xs on fLle with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning ("Concept Plan"). · 2. When the Property is developed, approximately 22.7 acres of parklands, lakes and recreation areas designated "Open Space" on the Concept Plan shall be dedicated to and maintained by the Property Owners Assocmt~on. When the Property xs developed, playground equipment and nexghborhood park zmprovements meeting the City's Department of Parks and Recreation Standards shall be znstalled xn the four (4) areas designated "PARK" on the Concept Plan. 3. When the Property is developed, approximately 39.5 acres of land designated as "Conservatxon Area" on the Concept Plan shall be dedicated to the City of Virginia Beach for inclusion in the West Neck Creek Linear Park. 4. When the Property xs subdxv~ded, it shall be subject to a recorded Declaration of Protectxve Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("Deed Restrictions") administered by a Homeowners Association whzch shall, among other things maintain the Open Space areas. 5. Ail resxdent~al dwelhngs constructed on the Property shall incorporate architectural features, design elements and high quality bmlding materials substantially mmilar in quality to those depxcted on the four (4) photographs labeled 'Typxcal Home Elevations AT NIMMOS QUAY" dated December 12, 2002 which have been exhibited to the Vzrginia Beach C~ty CouncLI and are on fLle v~th the %rginm Beach Department of Planning. Any one story dwelhng shall contain no less than 2500 square feet of enclosed living area excluding garage area and any two-story dwelling shall contain no less than 2600 square feet of enclosed hving area excluding garage area. The front yards of all homes shall be sodded. The Deed Restrictxons shall requzre each dwelhng to have, at a mxmmum, a two (2) car garage. PREPARED BY ~11t SY[[§. [tOURDON ~/il~ AnEt~N & k~a/p C 6. When the Property is developed, the party of the First Part shall construct a two lane sectaon of Nimmo Parkway Phase V-A CIP 2-121 in accordance with the V~rgmia Department of Transportation's engineering standards for the roadway, vathin the existing Nimmo Parkway public right of way extending east approximately 2560+ feet from the entrance to the subdivimon to connect with the existing improved Nimmo Parkway road section. 7. When the Property is developed, the party of the first part shall extend public utilittes, to serve the subdivision, including possible construction of an off-site sewage pump station. 8. Further condmons may be reqmred by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan and/or Subdivision review and admin~stratton of applicable City codes by all cognizant C~ty agencies and departments to meet all applicable City code requirements. Any references hereinabove to the R-10 Zoning District and to the requirements and regulattons applicable thereto refer to the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance of the C~ty of Virginia Beach, Virginia, m force as of the date of approval of this Agreement by City Council, which are by this reference incorporated hereto. The above conditions, having been proffered by the Grantor and allowed and accepted by the Grantee as part of the amendment to the Zomng Ordinance, shall continue in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes the zoning of the Property and specifically repeals such conditions. Such conditions shall continue despite a subsequent amendment to the Zoning Ordinance even if the subsequent amendment ~s part of a comprehensive implementation of a new or substantially revised Zoning Ordinance unttl specifically repealed. The conditions, however, may be repealed, amended, or vaned by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circmt Court of the City of Virginia Beach, V~rgmia, and executed by the record owner of the Property at the time of recordation of such ~nstrument, provided that smd xnstrument is consented to by the Grantee in writang as evidenced by a certafied copy of an ordinance or a resolutaon adopted by the governing body of the Grantee, after a public heanng before the Grantee which was adverttsed pursuant to the provimons of Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. Said ordinance or resolutton shall be recorded along with smd PREPARED BY $Y1~[$. ]~OURDON. __ AttERN & LEVY, P C instrument as conclusive evidence of such consent, and if not so recorded, said xnstrument shall be void. The Grantor covenants and agrees that: (1) The Zoning Administrator of the City of Virgima Beach, Virginia, shall be vested with all necessary authority, on behalf of the governing body of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, to administer and enforce the foregoing conditions and restrictions, including the authority (a) to order, in writing, that any noncompliance with such conditions be remedied; and (b) to bring legal action or suit to insure compliance with such conditxons, including mandatory or prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages, or other appropriate action, suit, or proceeding; (2) The failure to meet all conditions and restrictions shall constitute cause to deny the issuance of any of the required building or occupancy permits as may be appropriate; (3) If aggrieved by any decimon of the Zoning Administrator, made pursuant to these provisions, the Grantor shall petition the governing body for the review thereof prior to instituting proceedings in court; and {4) The Zoning Map may show by an appropriate symbol on the map the existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the Property, and the ordinances and the conditions may be made readily available and accessible for public inspection in the office of the Zoning Administrator and in the Planning Department, and they shall be recorded m the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, VLrgima, and indexed in the names of the Grantor and the Grantee PREPARED BY ISYI~:ES, t~0UtlDON Att[RN & lEvY. p C WITNESS the following signature and seal: GRANTOR: ALCAR, L.L.C., a Vxrginia limited hablhty company By: SEAL) an S. Resh, Member STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 12m day of December, 2002, by Alan S. Resh, Member of ALCAR, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company. Notary Pubhc My Commission Expires: August 31, 2006 PREPARED BY Attt~t~N & [.DRY, p ¢ WITNESS the following signature and seal: GRANTOR' ,. (SEAL) v T. Wayn~ Most~ler, Trustee Barbara C Mostiler, Trustee STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-w~t: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 2002, by T. Wayne Mosttler, Trustee. Notary My Commission Expires: ~t~ ~day of STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-w~t: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 2002, by Barbara C. Mostfler, Trustee. ~N~o tary Pubh~) My Commission Expires: ~/(~ ~day of WITNESS the following signature and seal: GRANTOR: FALSE CAPE ASSOCIATES, a %rgm/~m~ted partnership By: ~' ~X~ ~_~~~ ~/~ ~:, Dougla~TEbot, GenerE P~tner (SEAL) STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-w~t: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 20th day of 2002, by Douglas Talbot, General Partner of False Cape Associates, a %rginm limited partnership :l~ . Notary Pubhc My Commtssion Expires: August 31, 2006 PREPARED BY SYI(ES, t~0URDON. AttEt~ & LEVY. P C PREPARED BY l,l~ S~S, [}OURDON, AttEttN & LEVY. PC EXHIBIT "A" PARCEL ONE: That certain tract or parcel of land containing 50.955 acres, more or less, being bounded on the North by the property now or formerly belonging to the Mane E. Bratten Estate and T.C.C. Development Co., on the East by the property now or formerly belonging to Harry L Van Note and Mabel G. Van Note, and being bounded on the South by the property now or formerly belonging to Wilhs Brown and being bounded on the West by the property now or formerly belonging to Maury F. Riganto and Grace T. Paganto, and being further described as follows: BEGINNING at a 2 l-tach cypress located at a common comer between the property now or formerly belonging to the Marie E. Bratten Estate and Maury F. Riganto and Grace T. Rlganto, and running thence North 74 degrees 33 minutes 02 seconds East 293.92 feet to a pipe, North 74 degrees 37 minutes 41 seconds East 199.08 feet to an iron pipe, North 74 degrees 17 minutes 28 seconds East 460.48 feet to an iron pipe, North 74 degrees 17 minutes 40 seconds East 618.23 feet to a pipe, North 75 degrees 32 minutes 21 seconds East 1,900.72 feet to a pipe, and North 74 degrees 06 minutes 46 seconds East 135.60 feet to an iron pipe in the centerlme of a ditch, thence turning and running South 47 degrees 11 minutes 44 seconds East 86.92 feet to an iron pipe In the centerllne of a ditch, thence South 05 degrees 54 minutes 06 seconds East 113.50 feet to an ~ron pipe in the centerline of a ditch, thence South 36 degrees 49 minutes 07 seconds West 131.95 feet, thence South 20 degrees 53 minutes 54 seconds West 91.11 feet to an ~ron pipe in the centerline of a ditch, thence South 48 degrees 29 minutes 10 seconds West 223.72 feet to a point In the Eastern edge of Brown Town Road, thence South 11 degrees 47 minutes 07 seconds West 324.92 feet to an iron pipe in the centerline of a ditch located in the Eastern edge of the Brown Town Road, thence turning and running South 75 degrees 23 minutes 42 seconds West 1,128.71 feet to an iron pipe in the centerline of a ditch, thence South 74 degrees 39 mmutes 03 seconds West 1,250.65 feet to an 18-inch maple, thence turning and running North 59 degrees 18 minutes 31 seconds West 734.65 feet to a 7-1nch cypress, thence North 39 degrees 06 minutes 41 seconds West 37.22 feet to a 12-inch cypress, thence North 67 degrees 54 minutes 01 second West 281.79 feet to a 2 l-tach cypress, the Point of Beginning GPIN: 2404-37-1633 PARCEL TWO: All that certain tract, piece or parcel of land, lying, being and situate in Princess Anne Borough (formerly Seaboard Magisterial District, Princess Anne County) City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and bounded and described as follows Beginning at a pine located at the corner of property now or formerly belonging to Brown, Roper and Wright's heirs and running thence N ! 1 aA degrees W. 2.64 chains PREPARED BY SYEES, [}OURDON, Ati~N & LEVY. P C to a pine stump; thence N 43 degrees W 1.10 chains to a pine; thence N 73 ½ degrees W 2.87 chains to a pine stump; thence N 82 ½ degrees W 2.45 chmns to a pzne stump; thence N 73 degrees W 4.06 chains to a pzne; thence N 62 ½ degrees W 2.81 chains to a p~ne stump hole; thence N 31 ½ degrees W 3.44 chains to a station on the south side of a d~tch at the Browntown Bridge; thence N 56 degrees E 1 44 chains to a station on the south rode of a lead d~tch; thence N 70 % degrees E 1.54 chmns to an unmarked cypress on the south szde of smd lead d~tch; thence N 79 ½ degrees E 2.30 chares to a statson on the south sxde of smd lead ditch; thence N 57 ½ degrees E 4.37 chains to a station on the south s~de of smd lead d~tch; thence N 55 ½ degrees E 1.74 chmns to a station on the south side of smd lead ditch; thence N 81 1/4 degrees E 3.53 chmns to a station on the south s~de of smd lead d~tch, thence N 67 % degrees E 1.50 chmns to a station on the south side of said lead ditch; thence N 57 degrees E 1.16 chains to a station on the south side of smd lead ditch; thence S 72 1/2 degrees E 2.42 chains to a stone at the corner of property now or formerly belonging to Roper's Raft Road and the property of Lamb in the line of property now or formerly belonging to Brown; thence S 14 3/4 degrees W 3.22 chmns to a statson m the line of smd railroad; thence S ¥4 degree W 12.69 chains to a stone ~n the line of said railroad at the corner of property belonging to Lamb; thence S 87 % degrees W .47 chares to a sweet gum; thence S 87 ½ degrees W 1.62 chmns to the point of beginning and containing 16 acres and 37 poles more or less. Excepting from the above is a parcel conveying by deed to the City of Virginia Beach, Virgima from Harry L. Van Note and Mabel G. Van Note, husband and wife, for a roadway, said Deed being recorded m the aforesmd Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of V~rginia Beach, Virginia in Deed Book 1098, at Page 545, containing 2.690 acres, more or less, known and designated as Parcel 008 (Courthouse-Inchan Rzver Road Extended). GPIN: 2404-56-4943 PARCELTHREE. All that certain tract, pzece or parcel of land, lying m "Brown Town" m Pnncess Anne Borough (formerly Seaboard Magisterial District) City of Virginia Beach, Virg~ma, and bexng more particularly described as follows. Beg~nmng at a cypress at Brown Town Bridge, and running North 44 degrees W 2.33 chares to a p~ne; thence N 29 degrees W 2.67 chmns to a post; thence N 10 degrees Vd 1.89 chmns to a p~ne; thence N 9 3/4 degrees W 2.19 chains to a pine stump; thence 6 94 degrees W 4.61 chmns to a p~ne; thence N 1 1/4 degrees E 2.06 chmns to a pine, thence N 34 degrees E 4.46 chmns to a pine; thence N 38 ¥4 degrees E 4.82 chmns to an oak; thence N 58 degrees E 3.18 chains to a beech; thence N 46 ½ degrees E 2.13 chains to a gum stump; thence N 86 3/4 degrees E 18.31 chains to a post; thence S 6 3/4 degrees E 5.81 chains on line ditch; thence S 7 3/4 W 12.17 chmns to a stone on line dztch; thence along smd d~tch S 73 1/4 degrees W 1.43 chmns; thence S 47 degrees W 2.08 chmns; thence N 78 1/2 degrees W 1.33 chmns; thence S 58 x/4 degrees W 1.23 chares; thence N 74 */4 degrees W 2.01 chmns; 10 PREPARED BY §~[S. tlOURDON , At-lEaN & LEVY. P C thence S 60 ¼ degrees W 2.06 chmns; thence S 71 ¼ degrees W .76 chmn; thence S 89 degrees W 3.43 chmns; thence S 55 degrees W 3.86 chares; thence S 63 1/4 degrees W 2.53 chares; thence S 81 degrees W 2.65 chmns; thence S 70 degrees W 2.13 chains; thence S 57 degrees W 1.07 chmns to beginning, contmmng fifty-sm acres and one rod, more or less and bounded by the lands now or formerly belonging to Willis Brown, and Boston Brown and Jno. L. Brown. GPIN: 2404-57-3796 CONDREZONE/ALCAR/PROFFER 11 Map K-L: 5 Mop Not to Scole Cavalier Golf & Yacht Club Btrd Neck Point Lankhorn Bay POll Gpin 2418-24-6584 ZONING HISTORY 1. Street Closure Approved 5-23-00 2. Conditional Use Permit (outdoor recreation - tennis courts and parking lot) Approved 1-28-97 3 Conditional Use Permit (golf course- expansion of clubhouse) Approved 1-23-96 Conditional Use Permit (d~ning facilities) Approved 1-13-69 4. Conditional Use Permit (floating dock) Approved 1-8-91 Conditional Use Permit (marina expansion)Approved 3-14-88 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Cavalier Golf and Yacht Club - Conditional Use Permit MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 · Background: Application of Cavalier Golf & Yacht Club for a Conditional Use Permit for a marina expansion on property located at 1052 Cardinal Road (GPIN 2418246584). DISTRICT 5 - LYNNHAVEN The purpose of this request is to expand the existing marina from 77 slips to 91 slips. This request was indefinitely deferred by request of the applicant at the May 27, 2003 City Council hearing. The applicant needed more time to address concerns of nearby residents. The applicant has since revised the desiqn of the proposed addition on the North Pier; the proposed addition for the East Pier remains the same. The total number of slips has been reduced by one, and the proposed addItional distance into the waterway has decreased from 125 feet to 68 feet. Note the attached report reflects the previously submitted site plan on which the Plann~nq Commission acted in April 2003. The plan attached to this document shows the revised p~er conflqurabon. Considerations: The first Conditional Use Permit for the subject site was obtained in 1969 to allow dining facilities to be added to the already existing golf course and boating facihties. In 1988, a Use Permit to expand the marina from 45 to 63 sl~ps was approved. The parking lot was also approved for expansion to 324 spaces, but all of these spaces were not added at th~s time. In 1991, a Use Permit was approved to construct a floabng dock parallel to the bulkhead behInd the clubhouse. This dock is intended only for short-term use by boaters, largely people arriving by boat to use club facilities. A condition on this Use Permit prohibited use of this dock after 11:00 pm. In 1996, approval was granted to expand the clubhouse, and one year later, approval was granted to expand the tennis courts and parking lot. Most recently, on May 23, 2000, City Councd granted approval to close Cardinal Road north of Oriole Drive. The applicant requests to add 14 boat slips to the existing 77-sl~p marina Additional spaces would be available for temporary moonng, but these are not spaces for lease. Currently, the manna has three large p~ers extending 200 to Cavalier Golf and Yacht Club Page 2 of 4 255 feet perpendicular to the land. The expansion is proposed at the end of two of the three piers: the East Pier (middle) and the North Pier. For officially designated channels, the City, in its review of pier installations through the Planning Department's Waterfront Operations Section, has for more than a decade applied a policy of 25 percent of the d~stance from shore to shore. While not an officially adopted standard or ordinance, this policy has been utilized throughout the city to ensure that all property owners are treated equitably and that navigable portions of the waterways are not encroached upon. The policy is found in the "City of Virginia Beach, Specific Guidelines for Waterfront Construction Application Submittal." The existing piers encroach into the channel beyond the 25 percent-46 percent for the east pier and 29 percent for the north pier. The proposal considered by the Planning Commission increased the encroachment to 58 percent for the east pier and 42 percent for the north pier. The revised proposal keeps the encroachment of the east pier at 58 percent but reduces the encroachment of the north p~er to 32 percent. This is a very difficult land use proposal because while the use is acceptable, the use is located in the public waterway. The question then is how much of the public waterway can be claimed by individual landowners adjacent to the waterway? Staff concludes that the answer to that question may not lie ~n the Conditional Use Permit process, but may I~e instead with the Joint Permit Applicabon process ~nvolving the City's Waterfront Operations Office, the Virginia Marine Resources Commission, and the Corps of Engineers. It should be noted that this Conditional Use Perm,t is only the first in a series of approvals necessary for the proposed marina expansion. The applicant will also need approval on a Joint Permit Application, which involves review by four different regulatory agencies. These agencies will take a much closer look at navigational issues and other impacts to the waterway. A quandary for the applicant, however, is that the review by these other agencies cannot take place until all local permits, including this Conditional Use Permit, have been approved. It is very likely that the applicant will not be able to obtain the needed permits from these other agencies, but the applicant cannot even begin that process unbl City Council grants a Conditional Use Permit. For this reason, Staff recommends that the Use Permit be granted and the applicant be allowed to apply to the other necessary agencies through the Joint Permit Application process. Staff recommended approval. There was opposition to the proposal. · Recommendations: At the Planning Commission, a motion to approve this request lost by a recorded vote of 5-5. The request, therefore, was denied by a tie vote. Staff recommends approval subject to the following condition: Cavalier Golf and Yacht Club Page 3 of 4 1. The apphcant shall adhere to the "City of V~rg~n~a Beach, Specific Guidelines for Waterfront Construction Application Submittal." · Attachments: Staff Review D~sclosure Statement Planning Commission M~nutes Locabon Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Mobon at the Planning Commission hearing to approve th~s request lost due to a be vote. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department~~,~,.~ City Manager:~~'~ '~ Cavalier Golf and Yacht Club Page 4 of 4 NORTH PIER '~-,,,.,.EAST (MIDDLE) PIER CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB /# 19 April 9, 2003 AS REVIWED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION General Information: APPLICATION K05 - 210 - CUP - 2002 NUMBER: REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit (marina expansion) ADDRESS: 1052 Cardinal Road Map K-I.: 5 Cavalier Gol£ & Yacht Club B~rd Neck Po,hr Gpm 2418-24-6584 GPIN: ELECTION DISTRICT: 24182465840000 5 - LYNNHAVEN Planning Commission Agenda April 9, 2003 CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB / # 19 Page 1 SITE SIZE: 22.784 acres STAFF PLANNER: Ashby Moss PURPOSE: To expand the existing marina from 77 sl~ps to 92 slips. APPLICATION HISTORY: This apphcation was deferred at the September 11,2002 Planning Commission hearing so that further research could be conducted regarding potential alternative locations for the marina expansion and potential areas for additional parking. The applicant submitted a revised plan, but the application was deferred again at the January 8, 2003 and February 12, 2003 Planning Commission heanngs to allow more time for review by other agencies and for the applicant to provide Staff additional information regarding the existing and proposed parking on the s~te. The applicant requested the fourth deferral at the March 12, 2003 hearing to revise their plans again. Major Issues: · Degree to which the proposal impacts waterway and neighboring property owners. Land Use, Zoning, and Site Characteristics: Existing Land Use and Zoning The property is developed with a private club, ~ncluding a clubhouse with dining facilities, tennis courts, swimming pool, golf facilities, and a marina. The property is zoned R-40 Res~denbal District. Surrounding Land Use and Planning Commission Agenda April 9, 2003 CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB / # 19 Page 2 Zonin~ North: South' East: West: · Across L~nkhorn Bay, single-family homes / R-40 Residential District · Across Oriole Drive, single-family homes / R-40 Residential District · Across cove, single-family homes on Curlew Drive / R-40 Residential District · Across cove, single-family homes on Bobolink Drive / R-40 Residenbal District Zoning History The first Condibonal Use Permit for the subject site was obtained in 1969 to allow dining facilities to be added to the already existing golf course and boating facilities. In 1988, a Use Permit to expand the marina from 45 to 63 slips was approved. The parking lot was also approved for expansion to 324 spaces, but all of these spaces were not added at this time. In 1991, a Use Permit was approved to construct a floating dock parallel to the bulkhead behind the clubhouse This dock is intended only for short-term use by boaters; people arriving by boat to use club facilities. A condition on this Use Permit prohibited use of this dock after 11:00 pm. In 1996, approval was granted to expand the clubhouse, and one year later, approval was granted to expand the tennis courts and parking lot. Most recently, on May 23, 2000, City Council granted approval to close Cardinal Road north of Oriole Drive. 5-23-00 - STREET CLOSURE - APPROVED 1-28-97 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (outdoor recreation - tennis courts and parking lot) APPROVED 1-23-96 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (golf course - expansion of clubhouse) APPROVED 1-13-69 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (dining facilibes) APPROVED 1-8-91 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (floating dock) APPROVED 3-14-88 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (marina expansion) APPROVED Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) The site is ~n an AICUZ of 65-70dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Natural Resource and Physical Characteristics . The subject site is located within the Chesapeake Bay Resource Protecbon Area. However, no variances from the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Board are required for the requested marina expansion. The apphcant wdl be required to obtain a Joint Planning Commission Agenda April 9, 2003 CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB / # 19 Page 3 Permit Applicabon (JPA), which includes review from the Virginia Marine Resources Commission, the Army Corps of Engineers, the V~rginia Institute of Marine Science, and the Virginia Beach Waterfront Operations Division. The JPA is currently under review, but a final decision is not anticipated for several months. Public Facilities and Services Water and Sewer Water: Sewer: There is a six-inch water line in Cardinal Drive and an eight-inch line ~n Oriole Drive fronting the property. There is an eight-inch water main in Bobolink Drive fronting a porbon of the west side of the property. This site has an existing water meter that may be used. There is a four-inch sanitary sewer force main in Bobolink Drive fronting a portion of the west side of the property. There is an eight-inch sanitary sewer main extending onto the property from Bobolink Drive. There is an eight-inch sanitary sewer main ~n Oriole Drive fronting the property. There is a four-inch sanitary sewer force main in Oriole Drive fronting the property. This s~te is already connected to City sewer. Transportation Master Transportation Plan (MTP) I Capital Improvement Program (CIP): Cardinal Road ~n the vicinIty of this application is a two-lane local street. This street is not identified on the MTP, and there are no plans to improve this street in the current adopted CIP. Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Present Generated Traffic Volume Capacity Ex~sbng Land Use z_ 240 ADT Cardinal Road 2,600 ADT ~ 6,200 ADT ~ Proposed Land Use 3_ 284 ADT Average Dady Trips 2 as defined by 77-sl~p manna Planning Commission Agenda April 9, 2003 CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB / # 19 Page 4 3 as defined by 92-shp manna Public Safety Police: Fire and Rescue: Adequate- no further comments. Adequate- no further comments. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan designates this area of the City for Iow density suburban residential land use at or below 3.5 dwelling units per acre. Summary of Proposal Proposal The applicant requests to add 15 boat shps to the existing 77-slip marina. Additional spaces would be available for temporary mooring, but these are not spaces for lease. Site Design. · Currently, the marina has three large piers extending 200 to 255 feet perpendicular to the land. The expansion is proposed at the end of two of the three piers: the East Pier (center) and the North Pier. On the East Pier, the plan shows a floating structure comprised of four 38-foot sections and two 72-foot sections extending from the southern half of the ex~sting "T-bar". Another 19-foot extension is proposed on the eastern end of the T-bar. The East Pier expansion could accommodate nine more boats. The North Pier shows another floating structure attached to the existing pier. In this case, the center pier is continued another 125 feet into the water to the north. Three 80-foot lengths extend east, creating four new slips. The west side of the T-bar is also lengthened by 40 feet, creating two more slips. In total, the North P~er expansion includes six additional slips. Planning Commission Agenda April 9, 2003 CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB I # 19 Page 5 Overall, the proposed floating piers would increase the extension of the structure into the waterway from approximately 170 feet to 215 feet on the East P~er and from approximately 220 feet to 320 feet on the North Pier. The d~stance from shore to shore in the area of the East Pier is 370 feet, while the same figure in the area of the North Pier is 760 feet. Therefore, if the expansion request were approved, the applicant's East Pier would encroach 58 percent and North Pier would encroach 42 percent into the public waterway. The table below provides a summary of figures presented above: East Pier North Pier Total Distance from shore to shore at 370 feet 760 feet closest point Current Distance into waterway 170 feet 220 feet Current percentage into waterway 46% 29% Proposed Distance into waterway 215 feet 320 feet Proposed percentage into waterway 58% 42% Vehicular and Pedestrian Access The marina ~s accessed on land v~a the applicant's main entrance at the end of Cardinal Road in B~rdneck Point. Vanous parking areas are located near the different facilities for the club. The clubhouse, golf pro shop, and marina are all concentrated at the northeast end of the property. Although most of the parking is located in this wcinity, this parking is also most ~n demand. The site plan shows a total of 292 existing parking spaces for the entire club. An additional 29 spaces were previously approved but never constructed. Since the private club was orig,nally developed before the City Zoning Ordinance was adopted, the entire facility ~s not required to meet today's parking requ,rements. However, as expansions and additions have occurred over the years, additional spaces have been required to meet Ordinance requirements. Currently, the Zoning Ord~nance's parking requirement for marinas is one space per shp. Planning Commission Agenda April 9, 2003 CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB / # 19 Page 6 The applicant has applied for a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) to allow the parking lot to remain as it is. The variance request has been indefinitely deferred untd the Conditional Use Permit is approved. Evaluation of Request The applicant's request for a marina expansion is acceptable; however, staff does have a concern. Although the applicant has demonstrated a legitimate demand for additional boat slips at this location, the impact on the public through the encroachment into the waterway must be addressed. This is a very difficult land use proposal because the use ~s located in the public waterway. How much of the public waterway can be claimed by individual landowners? It should be noted that this Conditional Use Permit is only the first in a series of approvals necessary for the proposed marina expansion. The applicant will also need approval on a Joint Permit Application, which ~nvolves review by four different regulatory agencies. These agencies will take a much closer look at navigational issues and other impacts to the waterway. The completion of their review, however, cannot take place unbl all local permits, including this Conditional Use Permit, have been approved. For officially designated channels, the City, in its review of pier installations through the Planning Department's Waterfront Operations Section, has for more than a decade applied a policy of 25 percent of the d~stance from shore to shore. While not an officially adopted standard or ordinance, this policy has been ublized throughout the city to ensure that all property owners are treated equitably and that navigable portions of the waterways are not encroached upon. The policy is found in the "City of Virginia Beach, Specific Guidelines for Waterfront Construction Application Submittal." As shown in the table above, the existing piers are already well over 25 percent into the waterway. The East P~er expansion would have a particularly large impact, as it is located at the mouth of a small cove. The shore-to-shore distance in th~s area is quite ' small, and the resulting percentage into the waterway for the proposed expansion would be 58 percent. The proposed expansion on the North Pier is significantly smaller due to the greater distance to the opposite shore. However, the 100-foot proposed extension in this area would encroach 42 percent into the public waterway. Additionally, there are legibmate alternative Iocabons for addibonal piers. Since this property has a long length of shoreline, there are other locations where a new pier could be built. Due to the encroachments ~nto the waterway beyond 25 percent and the fact that alternabve locations are available, it is very unlikely that the apphcant will be able to obtain the necessary approvals from the Waterfront Operabons Section of the Planning Department. Planning Commission Agenda April 9, 2003 CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB / # 19 Page 7 In sum, while staff finds that the use in terms of the marina is appropriate and can be recommended for approval, there are s~gnificant issues related to permitting by other agencies that must be overcome. Planning Commission Agenda April 9, 2003 CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB I # 19 Page 8 FAIRWa. Y FuEL TANKS PROP. FLOATING PIERS SEE: ENLARGEMENT SHEg'T 4 LOT · ·. EX, PIERS EX. PIERS J ,~.~.~ MIDDLE DOCK -PROP FLOATING PIERS 3/12/03 REV. Planning Commission Agenda April 9, 2003 CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB I # 19 Page 9 o_Z~ o.~ ! OOW Z . Z ,-'- ~3.. X _x WO 0 OLd n~X Planning Commission Agenda April 9, 2003 CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB I # 19 Page 10 ON~9~¥!S Planning Commission Agenda April 9, 2003 CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB / # 19 Page 11 Planning Commission Agenda April 9, 2003 CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB I # 19 Page 12 Applicant's Nart~: List All Current Property Owners: DISCLOSURE STATEMENT PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE if th~proImW owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach li~t if necessary) If the property owner ~s a PARTNERSI-IIP, FIRM, or ot'lvzr UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, hst all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list Oenecessary) {~ Check her~ if the prol~rty owner is NOT a eorporauon, paxtne~hip, fin'n, or other unincorporated i orgamzation. tIf the applicant is not the current of the complete the Applicant Disclosure ~ection below: property, APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant ia a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (A;tach ltst if necessary) If the applicant is a PARTNERSBIP, FIRM, or other UNINCO~RA~ ORGANIZATION. list all members or partners in the orgamzafion below: (Attach list tfnecessary) Check here tf the applicant is NOT a corporauon, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated orgamzation. CERTIFICATION. I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. Planning Commission Agenda April 9, 2003 CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB / # 19 Page 13 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) Cavalier Golf & Yacht Club: Delbert Corum, President, Ronald Foresta, Vice President Administration, John Napol~tano, V~ce President Operations, Joe Robbins, ~reasurer, Dr. Mmchael Hechtkoff, Secretary 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent-subsidiary1 or affiliated bus~ness entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary,) 1'3 Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) 2. List all businesses that have a that have a parent-subsidiaryI or affiliated business entity2 relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) r-I Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated orgamzation I & 2 See next page for footnotes Conditional Use Permit Apphcal]on Page 10 of 11 Rewsed 10/1/2003 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT II , , .... i i ii 1 III1~ 1 I" i ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) Sykes, Bourdon, Ahern& Levy, P.C. Gallup Surveyors & Engineers, Ltd. ~ "Parent-subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent-subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. i i i i i i .... i ' I i i i i I II i ' I' CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public heanng according to the instructions in this package. Cavaliej~olf & Yacht CClj~ By: '~///..~..//L.~ P. Joseph Andrew, Assistant Apphc~nt,s ~natL~ v - -- Pnnt Name General Manager Property Owner's Signature (if different than applicant) Print Name Condlbonal Use Permit Apphcabon Page 11 of 11 Revtsed 10/1/2003 Ma~ K-L: 5 Mo~ N-o'c ~:o Scale Cavalier Gol£ & Yacht Club Bird Neck Point Ltnkhorn Bay Crpin 2418-24-6584 ZONING HISTORY BIRDN~ R' 4 0 POIA 1. 5-23-00 - STREET CLOSURE - APPROVED 2. 1-28-97 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (outdoor recreation - tennis courts and parking lot) APPROVED 3. 1-23-96 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (golf course - expansion of clubhouse) APPROVED 1-13-69- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (dining facilities)APPROVED 4. 1-8-91 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (floating dock) APPROVED 3-14-88- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (marina expansion)APPROVED Item #19 Cavalier Golf and Yacht Club Conditional Use Permit for a manna expansion 1052 Cardinal Road District 5 Lynnhaven April 9, 2003 REGULAR Robert Miller: The next ~tem ~s Item #19, Cavaher Golf and Yacht Club. Edche Bourdon: Good aftemoon Mr. Chairman and members of the Planning Commission. My name ~s Edche Bourdon, a Virgima Beach attorney. I have the pleasure this afternoon to come before you representxng the Cavalier Golf and Yacht Club on this application for a modification and expansion of their ex~st~ng manna facility. I'll begin by apolognz~ng for the numerous delays of this apphcation and gtve you by way of a brief explanation. I'll take some of the blame for the extent. I don't know if blame ~s the right word for ~t but the process has been one that we probably got a httle off track on because there are so many different agencies that have to review this. Ashby Moss had asked us to go through process of the JPA process w~th the Virgima Manne Resources Commission, the Army Corp of Engineers, federal junsdmt~on. Also, DEQ is involved and then the Waterfront Operations Division of the Planmng Department of the C~ty of Virginia Beach. A lot of t/us we have been going down that road a little ways We also had dialogue and a meeting with some of the adjoimng property owners. And, we've made modifications to the plan along the way but we came to the reahzatmn because we were told point blank by some of the agencies ~nvolved ~n the rewew process that they were not going to engage in any decision making until the C~ty Council had granted the Use Permit for the 15 docks that we are looking for regardless and today we're not telling you and see that ~t's not a condition ~n here that this configuration that shown ~s the final configurat~on. That will be determined by those agenmes ~n that JPA process. We have made some changes that some of the neighbors have asked us to make and we were going to make some others but we were told by the folks at the Corps that m~ght not be what they would want to see and basically we've been told by the other agencies ~nvolved get your Use Permit and then we'll go through our process to determine and they chaloged with each as to where would be the best place to put the 15 adcht~onal shps. We got a tremendous demand for slips at the Cavaher. There are currently 77 shps. These are all "Members Only" private slips. And what we are requesting are floating docks. No piers above the water just anchor p~ers on loading docks. The d~alogue w~th the commumty, the dialogue w~th these agencies w~ll continue from a land use perspective. Obwously, the manna has successfully operated. We meet all the enwronmental requirements. We got sewer pump out faciht~es. It's a very well mn facility. When you have a s~tuat~on where all the docks are ~n control like you have here versus ~nd~v~dual docks behind ~nd~vidual homes, frankly ~t's a lot eas~er to enforce the environmental regulations and see that proper steps are taken and we don't have problems with the waterways. So basically, that's what the request ~s. Parking, I guess ~s an issue that we need to d~scuss briefly. The club has 292 paved parking spaces on the s~te. And, our d~alogue w~th the commumty and everyone has been aware of the Cavaher's existence and presence on the B~rdneck Pemnsula for years, and parking ~s not an ~ssue w~th regard to the commumty. People do not park ~n the nexghborhood to use the facd~ty. Them are a couple of large Item #19 Cavalier Gold and Yacht Club Page 2 events every year that you know in advance and are planned for where the existing parking may not be sufficient and then they park vehicles near the first fmrway but, again, that doesn't have any ~mpact on the commumty at large and that only happens on a couple occasions during the year. So, to simply come ~n and pave more area and put more asphalt that ~s not used 95 percent of the t~me really m our opimon does not make any sense to put down any trees or to add paved servmes for parking that's not necessary given the ability to park vehtcles, when a member guest occurs or on other specml occasions m the areas here. One evening or one day basis doesn't create a problem for anybody. So, I don't anticipate any ~ssue there w~th the Board of Zoning Appeals m terms of, there being any need to come ~n and put more paved parking spaces in. Obwously, that could be done but I don't think anyone beheves that we have a parking problem or a parking ~ssue at the club. I w~ll address a couple of things just so because I'm sure some of you have some questions even though and I recognize that I'm telhng you where these piers w~ll be ~sn't determined today. It won't be determined by City Council. Thank you, ff you could leave it there for just a second? One of the things that I wanted to point out because we really, and I'm trying to put words ~n people's mouths. We really haven't had any significant object~on that I'm aware of to the expansion here on what I'm going to charactenze as the east p~er. You'll note that the measurements that Ms. Moss has put ~nto her calculations are off of a line here that ~s closest to the point on the other side. And, you also hopefully note that the existing piers on the south are already further into the cove than what we were talking about w~th these expansions. This expansion ~f you go in a straight hne goes all the way out across to here. We're not suggesting to put anything out here but m terms of navigation it doesn't create any issue at all when you look at what's out m front of~t. In this cove, there are four houses that Mr. Aspmwall owns here on the point and his dock ~s out there. There are four houses in the cove which three of them have docks. And, there ~s certainly deep water and plenty of abd~ty to get m and out of those three homes w~th docks and again, this could be a fourth at some point ~n the future. Over here we got the same s~tuat~on. The measurements have been done across from here to here. And, the dock is actually in this location. It's ~mportant to note that this ~s all very deep navigational waters and again, if you measure m th~s d~rect~on it's a lot further. Stephen, if you could put the aerial up for me please. Th~s aerial unhke the one m your write up doesn't actually even show all the way to the other s~de of the waterway, which ~s Bay Colony. And, ~t ~s on the back of their write up. But, and thus you really don't get the real pmture w~th what's up versus what's ~n your write up. The reality of this ~s that the manna is really ~n a cove. And, the nawgat~onal area, which ~s very, very w~de, comes m and it's through here. You avoid both of these peninsulas and boat traffic is all out ~n th~s area. And, again, ~t's difficult because you can't see that the land ~s actually up m here w~th the way it's been cropped on the pinpoint. So, ~n terms, th~s ~s not yourjunsdmt~on. I'm really not tryang to get ~nto but I want to make sure there ~s a complete or at least an understanding because I'm sure some of you have some curiosity. And on the other s~de the deep water goes all the way up to the point and again, ~t's ~n Bay Colony. There ~sn't going to be a manna and I don't th~nk in any of our lifetimes ~n Bay Colony. And, where you got deep water you're going to put your private dock behind your ~nd~wdual home. There's no reason to bmld a pier well out into the water. Over here you see a couple ofp~ers that are out ~n the water a fmr amount. That ~s because you can see here it's shallow m th~s area but otherwise. Let's see Mr. Asp~nwall's other p~ers where there's plenty of deep water you bmld your Item//19 Cavalier Gold and Yacht Club Page 3 pier right close to shore. And, that's what always going to be the case across the way on the single-family lots in Bay Colony. We are hundreds of feet away from them and not interfering with the flow of navigation through here, which again, people don't go close to fins point. They stay out in th~s area. So, frankly, the Corps have told us that they don't see a problem but there but we may have to move some th~ngs around a little blt in terms of where these docks actually are located. The City's 25 percent policy, at's not a law but pohcy, apphes regardless whether your dealing with the very narrow channel in a narrow area w~th shoals on either s~de or you're dealing w~th and ttus ~s open water. Tins ~s a totally different situation. And, so we think that when this whole process plays out w~th these agencies, a plan will be approvable for 15 slips on this site. And, I see my red hght bhnking. And, I wasn't here last month and I hesitate to do this but I'm gmng to say my peace. I do flunk that since the C~ty Council has put in place restriction on how loflg people can speak at their meetings. Ronald Pdpley: IS this another speech? Eddie Bourdon: I do thank th~s ~s something and I apologize ~n advance. I feel like I have to say this. I think there, some thought needs to be g~ven to the fact th~s is the body that's suppose to be producing a record for the City Council, and I have some concerns about the hm~ted nature of the times that you all adopted, I th~nk last month for presentations to this body. And, I would just hke and it sounds self-serv~ng. I don't get prod by the word or get paid by the minute. But, I do think cutting people off at a Plarmlng Commission meeting, this isn't necessarily an application that needs a lot of time but some may. And, I do have some concerns because Council ~s being very strict about it. That's fine but if they don't have a record that has all the information that needs to be put on the record, you know, on some controversial apphcations, I don't th~nk that's serving the process properly. Ronald Ripley: I think your point is well taken on that. And, I think thts Commission feels like if there's additional anformat~on that we need to continue to hear, I, as Chmrman, have no problem w~th that. I haven't heard anybody having any problem with that. The idea ~s to make sure that our meeting moves on a httle qmcker and you were out of town. We were able to slap ~t in. Eddie Bourdon: I know you had noting w~th me not being here but I would have smd something and since I wasn't here, again, as long as ~t's done that way and I'm sure that with this body it will be, I felt hke ~t needed to be smd. Ronald Pdpley: I can tell you that we feel that way. Eddie Bourdon: Alnght. Thank you very much. Ronald Ripley: Any questions of Mr. Bourdon? Well, we have opposition? Robert Miller: Yes we do. Dr. John Carlston. Item #19 Cavalier Gold and Yacht Club Page 4 Janet Ogren: I've been asked to read a letter from Dr. John Carlston. I'm his neighbor. I live down the street on Bobolink. My name is Janet Ogren. And, he IS a member of the club as am I. We enjoy the club and have enjoyed the membership there. But, I do want to read some concerns that he has. And, this is his letter. Dr. John and Mrs. Carlston at 1052 Bobolink Drive. It's Dear Mr. Owen, in reply to your letter of March 28th we have some objections to the construction of additional loading docks at the Cavalier Golf and Yacht Club. HISTORY. When the north pier was approved 20 years ago, we were assured that there would be no further expansion. The chrector's of the club are now different than those at that time and the same will be tree 20 years from now when there's another Board of Directors. The facts are that I believe this is a commercial manna under the guise of a private club. It is the only commercial enterprise in all of Broad Bay, Crystal Lake and Three Horns of Linkhom Bay if instead of expanding to 100 slips, they were required to downsize to 50 slips they could double the fees. The Income for the club would be the same and there would be no need to search for new members with the promise of a boat slip in the future. POLLUTION. The voters of the club and the voters on the private property are most always good voting citizens. They are cognizant of and careful of the environment of these bays but the more votes, the more pollution incluchng petroleum products, fleeting products, debris from boats and noise. Some of the boats have extremely loud engines. It would follow that more boats would lead to more noise. TRAFFIC. On summer weekends, Broad Bay and Linkhom Bay are currently very crowded with boats and can be dangerous. Why wait for an accident to occur? FLOODING. And, this is where I also concur IS with the large boats and the deeper drafts would probably necessitate more dredging. We understand the probability has been discussed. The last dredgtng significantly increased tidal flooding dunng storms, which we're seeing today and private properties around the bay deserve protection from this. In conclusion, we have enjoyed our membership at the club. Have used the beautiful pool, dining room and floating dock for many years, however, we are concerned about the long term effects of adding additional slips. Dr. Carlston is an allergist. He could not attend today because he was seeing patients. And, I agreed to bnng his letter forth. But, I must say I don't know if he understood it was just 15 slips that there were adding. But, the club has been good with communications. But sometimes the information and we don't seek at the appropriate time. That's It. Ronald Ripley: Thank you very much. Robert Miller: Christine Bosher. Christine Bosher: I am Clmstlne Bosher. And, I am the widow of R.G. Bosher, and a long tame resident of Birdneck Point and a long time member of the Cavalier Golf and Yacht Club. When we bought our lot on Bobolink Drive, 1044, across from the eighteenth green, this club was owned by the Old Cavalier Hotel. We were assured at that time that no boat pier would be built on the northeast side of the clubhouse In front of our property. Now there IS a large pier built in front of our property, which is ugly and obstructs our view of that section of beautiful Lankhorn Bay to the east. And, you now propose to extend this pier, which would further spoil our view of this beautiful waterway. When we built here 50 years ago, we could fish for crab off our dock and catch enough large crab In an hour to feed slx people at a crab feast. The bay was Item #19 Cavalier Gold and Yacht Club Page 5 sparkhng blue and the water clear. Fish would be jumping out of the water and often t~me we would catch one or two-pound Rockfish and one or two pound Spots off of our dock. We have a natural sandy beach on part of our waterfront, which we have retained. And, I could not tell you how many times we have had to clean the beach from debris, garbage, bottles, cans, fish entrails, and so forth, thrown overboard from the boats docked at the piers. Sadly, the Bay water has lost its pristine beauty. The water is now so polluted that should we catch a few crab, I would not eat them for fear of food poisoning. Over the years, we have seen the Bay deteriorate to the extent that seaweed no longer grows In the water. Seaweed is nature's way of cleansing the water and returning pollutants to the earth. And, now you want to add more pierage for boats and more polluuon. It will obstruct the passageway from other boaters. It will spoil the wew from our property and from others. And, once the pilings are in place, they will be there forever. Ronald Ripley: Ms. Bosher, you're running kind of long on ttrne. Christine Bosher: I plead w~th you and beg you to think of the future and not cause further deterioration of the bay and the v~ew from valuable waterfront property. Bigger is not always better. If you want a better, more prestigious club then hmit the number of boat slips, making the ones you have more desirable and at the same time, less pollution, less detriment to the beautiful waterfront property surrounding L~nkhorn Bay. I have copies of my comment, which I would be happy If anyone would hke to see it. Ronald Pupley: We would like a copy, yes. Ma'am. Christine Bosher: Pardon. Ronald Ripley: Ms. Bosher? Ed, would you get a copy of those for us please. Christine Bosher: Will you give them out? Ed Weeden: I will be glad to do that. Christine Bosher: Thank you. Ronald Rtpley: Thank you very much. Mr. Miller? Robert Miller: John Asp~nwall. John Aspinwall: My name is John Asp~nwall. I live at 1045 Curlew Dnve. I'm the immediate next-door neighbor of the club. Ronald Rapley: Push the button. John Aspinwall: Push the bottom. Okay. I live on this point right here. Ronald Ripley: Alnght. Item #19 Cavalier Gold and Yacht Club Page 6 John Aspinwall: I'm a member of the club. I'm active in the yachting division. I know there's a need for more boat slips over there. I've been past Commodore of the club. I've worked with those fellows. They're my good friends. I'm standing up here tallang against them and they're good friends. But, unfortunately, I believe that this particular design that they've come up with for a pier expansion is not appropriate. The main issue that I'm concerned with is the fact that they're extending their piers almost 50 percent out ~nto the waterway. That's too much. You're setting precedence every time you extend another pier. They are already beyond the one-third area and it's this p~er right here that's causing the most heartburn. The club did lnwte all the neighbors over for a review of the plans and we met over there about a month ago. There were about ten families there. And, we all agreed that we didn't want this project at all but if you had to do it, would you make a few modifications? And, tins little p~er down here, we sort of said well, okay because ~t doesn't really extend out into the waterway and block a lot of stuff. But, this section nght here was not included ~n those d~scussions. That is a revision that was added on after we met with the neighbors. Tins does put this p~er almost 50 percent out there. If you all have counted these boat slips, there are 18. I mean this thing on the end, that's a boat slip. You pull a boat right up to the pier just like there going to do right there. That's a boat slip. There are 18 slips here. These boat slips are made for 80-90 foot boats, not the little mn-a-bout. An e~ghty-foot boat, that's ten people. Not ten people, excuse me five. It's got a captain and about 4-5 people. So, these are sizable things that they're bringing in. But, after all that is smd, I tinnk that the neighborhood, excuse me the neighbors could hve with some sort of expansion. We feel that the club is being selfish. They want to extend out ~nto the waterway here and there when they have all of tins open area right here that they could ~nstall another pier. That would stay within the footpnnt of the existing pier. I hve on this comer and around in here is the cove that has five houses in lt. All of the folks in that cove oppose this except for the one gentleman who lives right next to the club. Rick Haycox says he's not gomg to get involved because they are my neighbors and I don't want to oppose them. Being a member of the club, I would like to see something happen over there. They need more slips. And, it would be nice to have. But, these slips are being used as rental property. Is it right to put rental property out into the pubhc waterway? That's the question. And, we're opposed to doing that. Ronald Ripley: Are they renting to the club members? John Asplnwall: Absolutely. Ronald Pdpley: Are they renting to the outside? John Aspinwall: No. Club members only. Ronald Pdpley: Okay. John Asplnwall: Club members only, yes s~r. It's club members only. We never take any exception to that. The club ~s a good neighbor. They do a lot of active work to keep down pollution. There ~s very little no~se. Three ~s very little pollution. There is very httle fuel spillage. The club is a good neighbor. But, them is always an exception to the Item #19 Cavalier Gold and Yacht Club Page 7 things. Occasionally there's a mistake made by somebody. But, we're not up here arguing that. The mmn th~ng that we're arguing about ~s the access to the cove and the fact that you would be setting precedence by allowing these boats to go almost 50 percent out ~nto the waterway. That's all I have. Ronald Rapley: Any questions of Mr. Asp~nwall? Eugene Crabtree: John, one question. If they were to build a new p~er as you propose, what do you estimate the d~fference of the cost and what they propose here and what they would do by building a new pier? John Aspinwall: I would say that all of thas expansion is equal to about what ~t would cost to do one more out here. If you do one more out here, then you got the people over on this side strongly ~n object~on to it. Most of these people are here speaking against ~t or you have letters. Most of the people ~n the cove are against ~t here or have sent you letters. The folks over here have just now been advised of this situation. The comer lot here belonged to the Grandy's and they're subdividing that ~nto three parcels. It's going to be three new home sites and all of those people are going to want to have p~ers stickang out here. It comes down to can I build 15 boat slips out ~n front of my house? I don't think so. That wouldn't fly. I don't know the economics of it Mr. Crabtree. My educated guess, I mean this project as they were proposed is supposed to fit within their $200 thousand dollar budget for th~s expansion project. And, I would assume they could build 15 or 20 slips over there for about the same price. Move ~t over there ~nstead of moving ~t over here. Ronald Rapley: Okay. Are there any other questions? Thank you very much. John Asp~nwall: Thank you all. Robert Miller: Paul and Pauhne Beshard. Paul Beshard: I'm Paul Beshard, and I'm a neighbor, two homes away from Mr. Aspinwall. I feel that Mr. Asplnwall has expressed the way we feel very adequately. I do have some concern that there might be safety risks ~n this presentation and my positron as a graduate of Massachusetts Maritime Academy, being a merchant officer and being a naval officer. I think possibly my greatest concern, which has no control by the club or us would be the seepage of body waste into our p~ers. Thank you Ronald Rlpley: Thank you. Any questions? Thank you very much. Robert Miller: That's lt. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Mr. Bourdon would you hke to readdress us? Eddie Bourdon: Thank you Mr. Chmrman. Let me just briefly. And, I just to make ~t clear and reiterate th~s is a pnvate club and there ~s a lengthy wmtlng hst of members of the club, ex~st~ng members of the club who would desire to be able to moor their boats ~n Item # 19 Cavalier Gold and Yacht Club Page 8 the 15 docks that were requesting to be approved in terms of that number. And, that's all that we're here today is talk about number. This configuration that is shown here is one that was suggested, again in a more less off the record discussion with the Corps of Engineers. It does not have anything, again, you're staff has and we're certmnly an agreement and I suggest that you add a condition per a specific configuration of boat docks. So, where these shps will ultamately be at this point, we're not certmn. Again, I'll reaterate here this does not create any ~mpedunent to navigataon whatsoever because the existing pier is already further towards the shore here then this would be. Secondly, from this point, just for hypothetical purposes from here over, we're tallang about in the neighborhood of 400-300 some odd feet of all deep navigable waters. Any piers over here are going to right close to shore because it's deep navigable waters and there as no reason to extend the pier out any further because they're single family homes. The Granby property, Mr. Asplnwall, as already three lots. I have the privilege of representing them on the Chesapeake Bay apphcation but the lots have always been three lots. They are not subdavithng. It already ~s. And, again any paers there would be right up on shore because unlike the sltuataon on the other comer, on the other pemnsula these border up all the way to the shore. The Cavalier facility and Mr. Asplnwall was very eloquent in saying that they and I want to add they don't have fish cleaning facilities. They have rules that prohibit any dumping of any waste into the waterway. That as enforced. There would be no pilings wath this facility other than anchonng pilings down in the water so all you will have are the floating piers on top of the water. With that, I think that the Use that is proposed as one that should be recommended for approval. The specffics as to where the piers will be located, is yet to be determined, and that will be done with the JPA. Lastly, I would just point out that there is in this area a peat bog. It is shallow and there would need to be dredging and there would be some potential environmental issues but that as certainly something that in the process that will ensue will be chscussed I'm sure. Ronald Rapley: Okay. Are there any questions of Mr. Bourdon? Mr. Miller has a questaon. Robert Miller: Ed&e, when you talked about the pier configuration, you said that was suggested by the Corps as a matter, not of record I understand, but was there a prevaous one or was there some definition because Mr. Aspanwall amplied there was sometbang else. Eddie Bourdon: We had a configuration that had some finger piers coming out an this darectlon and we had a paer coming off in this direction lake this, lake the httle dogleg. And, we were asked by the commumty to remove the dogleg and shorten the finger paers that were coming off of here. And, so we were agmn, because we were trying to daalogue and hawng to d~alogue to the extent that we can wath everybody, you know, we looked at doing that and we talked to some folks w~th the Corps and actually had someone and take a look at and it was suggested that this would be a better configuration but agmn, off the record. And, the reality of at is we're just a dog chasing our tall at this partacular juncture and that's why I can't say enough about the fact that as what we need nor to move this process forward is the Plarmlng Commission and ultimately we'll be asking Council to acknowledge that the Use and adding some shps in some configurataon is an appropriate Item # 19 Cavalier Gold and Yacht Club Page 9 land use at this site. Having both docks all up and down the waterway, you know the issue of pollution exists. That's not going to go away. But the ablhty to control it in th~s environment versus individual homes is a whole lot more obvious that you can ~nstitute and maintain controls In this situation lot more easily than you can in individual docks and ~ndiwdual homes. Ronald Rapley: You're saying that the configuration of these in all likelihood not look like th~s? Eddie Bourdon: What I'm suggesting to you is that I believe this configuration will likely not change. Although at this point, I don't know. The configuration here is in no way shape or form set in stone. Fact ttus configuration has only been in existence on paper, a matter of maybe three weeks. The answer is we don't know at this point what the configuration will be. Ronald Ripley: Do you know the measurement if you extend that north pier main walkway across to the other side? Eddie Bourdon: It's 800 from here all the way running in a straight hne is somewhere mound 850-875 feet. So, the httle figures that you have in here m the write up, they measure this hne across from here to here as 760 feet. So, and the existing p~er ~s 220 feet, I beheve. It may be pretty close to 800, maybe 790 feet. I may have m~s-spoke on my distance there. It would actually be 820 feet ff you measured it strmght across. I did misspeak. It's 820 if you come in this direction It'S 800 if you go from up in this direction this way. Ronald Rapley: So, it's about 39 percent out ~n the water from that point? Eddie Bourdon: That's nght. This configuration if you do it straight across ~s between 38-39 percent across. That ~s absolutely correct. Ronald Pdpley: Okay. Was there a question down here folks? Will did, I'm sorry. I lost my place. Wllham Din: Thanks. Several of our speakers today have raised some concerns, I don't think you've addressed. One ~s the commercial aspect of the p~ers, whether that is a commermal aspect. Are these boats docked here year round? Orlgnnally, were these p~ers for the VlSltat~on of the club? And, also could you address some of the pollution aspects from the larger ships here? Are there sanitary connections to these discharges? Eddie Bourdon: There certainly are. Absolutely are. Wflham D~n: There were several concerns that I think I'd like to hear some answers to. Eddie Bourdon: It's a private club. Some of the boats are there year round. Some are not. They're members only. There's no renting of boats. There's no commercial aspect to them whatsoever. It's just club members. They do pay rent to the club just like you Item # 19 Cavalier Gold and Yacht Club Page 10 pay dues to play golf at the club. You pay dues to eat at the club, so the characterization of it being commercial manna. I don't think that is what was intended so I'm not going to go down that road. There is nothing ~n a commercial sense that exists other than the members of the club, who have boats there, pay the club for allowing their boats to be there. But there is nothing else that would meet anybody's definition that I know of being commercial. All of the environmental regulations, sewer pump-outs are all there. In fact, DEQ has already given their okay to the expansion because the club does meet all the environmental regulauons and reqmrements. William Din: Now the p~ers on the extension here are intended for larger ships/boats? Eddie Bourdon: Yes sir. The boat s~zes would range from 25 up to 80 feet. But, again, they are private vessels. Wflham Din: Okay. I don't know if you addressed all of the options where these other piers can go out. Are you saying that they built additional finger piers in front of the eighteenth fairway or green, they would require dredging in that area? Is that what you're saying? Eddie Bourdon: That is correct. No one at this point IS ruling anything out. It is the club and I've neglected to mention that the President of the Club as here as well as the General Manager and Mr. Andrew who runs the boat facility for the club members but the club desires to expand by adding slips on to the existing piers as opposed to the entertaimng of the issues that would be incumbent w~th attempting to put up another pier. Wilham Din: Did you say these boats on any of these piers, are they moored there year round? Eddie Bourdon: Some are. Some of the members, you know, the boats are here during the summer and are south of the Mason/Dixon Line and south of here dunng the winter. William Din: Thank you. Ronald Rlpley: Gene. Eugene Crabtree: Eddie. Ronald Rlpley: Gene? Eugene Crabtree: I'm sorry. Dorothy Wood: Mr. Bourdon, I was supporting this until I came to the meeting today. I do have a big problem because I've heard people mention that these are boats are going to be leased. Excuse me, these slips. In the proposal it said they would not be leased. They would be just for temporary mooring. I assume they were for people to come up and have d~nner at the club and then go home. But, our proposal says they would not be leased, ff you look at page 5 under summary proposal? Item #19 Cavaher Gold and Yacht Club Page 11 Ashby Moss: I beheve the report was referring to additional spaces beyond the 15 slips that they identified. But 15 slaps would definitely be leased. Dorothy Wood: It says the apphcant request add 15 boat slips. Additional space would be available for mooring but these spaces are not for lease. I thought none of these spaces were for lease? Ashby Moss: I just meant that the adchtional spaces would not be leased. Dorothy Wood: Where are the additional spaces? Eddie Bourdon: Originally, as I mentioned before we had an intention here, wluch one could t~e up and yes same situation here. If you have an area here where, you know, members come and can t~e up and have dinner at the club and you can count the spaces. And, that is what Mr. Asplnwall was, I think saying that the club could and that ~s clearly not something that we would do and obviously that can be condmoned. But, there are areas adjacent to here to these piers where members coming to utilize the facilmes and moor their boats temporary. Sorry you had that mistaken. I believe, Ms. Wood, the piers are for members only. We have a long wmtmg list of members desmng to have a pier, having a place to moor their boats. Dorothy Wood: But that would be a long-term lease or a yearly lease? It will not be a temporary lease. Correct? Eddie Bourdon: Correct. It's not monthly or anything like that. Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Bourdon. Ronald Rapley: Gene. Eddie Bourdon: Once you get them you hold on to them should you have a boat. Eugene Crabtree: Mr. Bourdon, you keep saying that this north dock is not wntten in stone and that drawing we see is not necessarily what's gmng to happen. Were we to approve this land use and it goes from us, how do we know that if we were not in favor of that extension there, that it just wouldn't stay there? That would be the end of ~t? I'm saying, suppose we agree with some of the people who are agmnst this and this gmng out that far, but were not opposed to the land use having more shps, how do we know that won't stay the way at as right now and not other avenues be researched or be looked at once we approve it? Eddie Bourdon: Okay. I think that is actually what your staffhas already smd an this write up and said this morning and what I'm repeating again today. Is the configuration of the p~ers will be determined by the joint penmt application process, which involves the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the V~rglma Manne Resource Commission, the Department of Environmental Quahty and the Waterfront Operations Division for the City of Vlrglma Beach. The Waterfront Operations Division for the C~ty of Vtrglnla Item #19 Cavalier Gold and Yacht Club Page 12 Beach has already put it on record. I th~nk it's even mentioned ~n the staffwnte up that the City has "25 percent pohcy" that they do not generally support extending docks, piers into waterways more than 25 percent of the width of the waterway. But, you know, the other juns&ct~on, the other bodies don't have that same rule and it's again, just a pohcy. It's not a rule. So the reality of it is, they all have to s~t down and look at navigation. And, that is really the only issue with regard to the p~ers ~s one of nawgation. Land use, the pier and how ~ts configured isn't land use. Eugene Crabtree: I understand that. Ed&e Bourdon: My point ~s simply, you know, I'm not here it won't look like that but I'm here to tell you that approving the land use of expanding the manna will ~n no way cause it to look hke that. Eugene Crabtree: So, I asked, ~n fact then ~s part of the opposition we've heard today premature? Eddie Bourdon: Yes. And, it ~s our position that it's premature. It's our position that we are aware of and we're trying to placate. We're trytng to work through tins process but unfortunately until we can get all the players who will make that determination In the room to, you know, work through it, and there will be a public hearing that the VMRC wall likely have on this. We're not getting anywhere. We have to get and frankly, and I said before, Ashby asked us to go through the process. We med. The other agencies are saying you have to get your Use Perma so that we know that you can put 15 slaps out here before we're going to engage. And so, that's what we're trying to do. And, at the same time and have been and will continue to engage with the neighborhood. We're not going to leave them out of this in any way shape or form. We don't know if we can make everybody happy but the club is certainly making every effort to do that. And, work through the different issues that exist. Ronald Ripley: Barry Klllght has a question. Barry Knight: Eddie, by my calculations you have five additional approval processes you'll have to go through in addition to this one? Eddie Bourdon: All those agencies is actually, there's BZA for the parking vanance and then the rest is the joint permit application process through all those agencies that goes through. Barry Kmght: Okay. And, how many of those are going to have public comment periods addressing each specific that they're involved with? Eddie Bourdon: The Board of Zoning Appeals has a heanng and agmn that's on the parking alone. The others, VMRC has a process for that. The Corps has a pubhc comment. I mean they send out letters and they do their stuff an written form. I'm not aware, m fact DEQ has already signed off. I don't know af they have a public comment because they look at the pollution and the waste disposal issues. Item #19 Cavaher Gold and Yacht Club Page 13 Barry Kmght: So, we're more concemed w~th the land use planning policy here and these other agencies will be ~n some different specffic areas as possibly the encroachment to the waterway and the enwronment? Eddie Bourdon: The encroachment of the waterway, that's where these agencies that I've listed come ~nto play because that is their jurisdiction. And, you can techmcally.., its not the Planning Commission and C~ty Council's jurisdiction but the C~ty Council through the Waterfront Operations Department certainly does have, you know, a stake ~n it and that's how their poslt~ons are put forward. The C~ty's got to issue the permits fbr construction of them so the pubhc, the neighbors that have the concerns, you know, their concerns are going to be heard and you know, I'm confident that in the end everybody has very good ~ntent~ons with tins project and accommodations will be made. But, we can't get there from here without it being acknowledged that the Use itself and adding 15 more shps, you know, on this Cavalier property is somethtng that's an acceptable Use. Ronald Pdpley: Joe Strange. Joseph Strange: You know the opposition brought up the fact that these slips will accommodate boats up 80, 90, 100 feet. Eddie Bourdon: Eighty is the maximum Joseph Strange: Is there a pmnt where a boat becomes a yacht? Eddie Bourdon: I would have to say in my estimation they are already yachts out there. When do yachts become stups? Joseph Strange: I just thought ~n nautical terms there m~ght be a point where a boat became a yacht. Eddie Bourdon: I've been on boats my whole life. My family has pleasure, my direct family, my uncles are on the Vlrg~ma Beach waterway. It was the Waterway Manna before they sold it to Mr. Galloway. So, I've been on boats my whole hfe but you know, I would defimtely say there are already today yachts and that's why it's the Cavalier Golf and Yacht Club that moor that but some people have had 25 foot. If I had a boat ~t be that s~ze. I'd call it a yacht too. It's all that I can afford. But, there are certainly large private pleasure craft that moor at Cavaher and actually at moor behind residences, you know, ~n th~s area of the City. We're blessed to have a very beautiful. Joseph Strange: My next question ~s, you know when you rent a shp you normally pay for a shp based on the s~ze boat that ~t will handle. If you had a slip that would only handle a 25 foot boat, you would pay less for that shp than if you had one that would handle an 80 foot boat, so I guess a fmr question would be when people leased these, are they going to be leasing them and paying fees to handle an 80 foot boat? Eddie Bourdon: I'd have to ask Joe to come up and help me w~th the answer to that one. You're absolutely correct w~th regard to commermal convemence. That's absolutely Item #19 Cavalier Gold and Yacht Club Page 14 nght. With the club, because again ~t's only for club members, I don' t know how they structure their what their members pay for th~s. Joe Andrew: I'm Joe Andrew. I'm the Assistant General Manager Harbor Master of the club. Regards to the boat lengths, they do pay for the length of the boat only, not the slip length. So, if 80 feet long, it's going to be paying for 80-foot boat length slip. Joseph Strange: So, do you see a m~xmre ofchfferent s~ze boats ~n there? Or do you see them being all basically 80-foot boats? Joe Andrew: It will be a total m~xmre. I mean the waiting list comprises of that. I mean there are multiple different sizes from 25 up to 80 feet. So a boat that may be 65 feet in length may get an 80-foot shp. So, we're going to charge them for a 65-foot boat. Joseph Strange: So, how does the waitxng list work? I mean, ~s ~t priontized according to how long they've been on the waiting list or might they be selected according to how much they were wflhng to pay as far as s~ze of the boat? Joe Andrew: It's the length of the wmting hst. Joseph Strange: Okay. Ronald Ripley: Eddie, if the land use were to receive a favorable recommendation and th~s layout ended up being what you end up getting, when you have to go through all these permits that slip on the outside that Mr. Asp~nwall was referring too on the north end, is that ~ntended to be a long term shp on the outside of the dock or a temporary slip for visiting the club? Eddie Bourdon: I'm not aware that's didn't be a slip at all but if it was anything ~t would be, I guess ~f you had v~smng members here, I guess someone could t~e up there temporarily. But, ~t's not a permanent slip. Ronald Pdpley: It is a floating dock so you just tie one s~de off and you're on. Eddie Bourdon: Theoretically, you could have someone t~e up here on a temporary bas~s but you wouldn't do a permanent bas~s because you got no moonng piles or anything structure. What it would really be loolong at is th~s area here as someone could come up in there. Ronald Rapley: Mr. Aspinwall ~s rinsing h~s hand back there. Mr. Miller smd he'll sponsor you as long as it's new information. John Asp~nwall: Thank you folks. I did speak to all of the different agencies that have jurisdiction over this and they are looking to you all as the first step in the approval process. Well, ff the Planmng Commission approves ~t then we'll probably go along w~th lt. What do you all think about that? We have a project here that almost all of the neighbors are opposing to. These slips, the one on the end is nothing different than what Item//19 Cavalier Gold and Yacht Club Page 15 they have right now. They have a p~er coming m and they have boats t~ed up to ~t and they rent those shps out. So, that is a boat slip. It will be. I know the guy wants ~t. So, the mare reason why that I'm standing up here ~s to encourage you all that is a first step ~n the approval process and then you all say ~ts okay to go out 50 percent, I th~nk that goes a long way ~n encouraging them. Edche was drawing a line straight across here. I don't know how you're suppose to measure waterways so staff will have to tell you. But, I'm standing here is basically ~s which way is to the closest land? If you go from here to there that's the thing they've drawn nght there and Ashby's report ~s 45 percent. Forty- five percent comes into play when you go from this pier and you add a 25-foot boat to ~t. Thank you very much. Ronald R~pley: Thank you very much. Paula Beshard: I'm Paula Beshard. Ronald Ripley: Ms. Beshard. Paul Beshard: I hve on Curlew Drive too. Ronald Ripley: Ms. Beshard? If ~t's new ~nformat~on, other than that, do you have new information for us? Paula Beshard: Right here. Ronald Pdpley: Okay. Paula Beshard: I want to submit tins photograph because ~t's taken from the comer of our property. It shows Mr. Asp~nwall's point and what's going on at the club. Ronald Pdpley: That's very good. Thank you. Pass that around please. Okay. I'd hke to open ~t up for d~scusslon at this point. Robert Mdler: I'll go first. Ronald Pdpley: Mr. Miller? Robert Mdler: I'm going to go ahead and talk but I have s~t here and I'm th~nk~ng that what we watched at lunch t~me w~th what's going on ~n Baghdad, ~t makes this, w~thout d~srespect to you all a httle more difficult. I just can't get past that thought that they're young people over there cheing to try to make sure that we can s~t here and argue about a manna. And, I don't mean to be unkind to the manna or to the people who are opposed ~t, but ~t bnngs to m~nd a lot of perspective. The ~ssue that we're deahng w~th ~s, and I think John's point ~s well taken. In a way, we do k~nd of endorse to what's been sent to us. Unfortunately, the process, ~fwe say no and C~ty Council says no perhaps, then the process ends right there. There ~s no JPA process. I did not hear and I don't think John specffically smd that there was no need for additional shps. Certmnly one of the p~ers doesn't seem to be a problem at all. And that process and I've been through ~t before and Item # 19 Cavaher Gold and Yacht Club Page 16 ~t ~s very long process. My Chairman says a lot of attomey hours. A lot of other hours too, engineer hours and I think a lot of people take the best anterest of the waterway into account partacularly the VMRC folks and some of those others that are out there just for that purpose. So, my sight is at's a land use ~ssue of a manna. And, I think them as a need for the manna. I haven't heard agmn anyone say there's no need for tins manna and there's no need for the folks that are on the wmtang list. I think the control mechanisms that I've heard and that were expressed particularly for the private club and that's important to me. That probably means mom to me than a lot of the other techmcal details. I would not want to think of any waste and Mr. Beshard I think your poant of every seeing that in our waterways. Tins waterway is the Lynnhaven Paver that connects ~n some sort of fashion, these two connect and we're trying to get shellfish back in. And, you th~nk of those things to be able to have for future generataons. I certainly want to have that so, I only see tins as a land use issue. And the question of us agreeing that there's a need for a marina or not and I'm waiting to see what other people say. But, I will think all of you remember some young people. It's a pretty good ttnng. Ronald Ripley: Any other comments? Gene. Eugene Crabtree: I am inchned, from our standpoint of wew an land use. I thank at ~s an appropriate land use. However, I have some reservations on the drawings that we saw and the extent that the p~er as going to stick out anto and extend into the waterway past the recommended area. I don't know how we can do it to approve the land use and yet say that we're not m favor of that pamcular structure being jetted out ~nto the waterway that far. As far as the land use stand pmnt ofv~ew and the addmonal 15 slips, I th~nk yes, that is a good thing and I'd like to support that. I just don't know how I can do that and not support the part of how ~t sucks out into the waterway. I'm not sure. Is there anyway that we can do this? Kay Wilson: If you approve the apphcation for the Conditaonal Use Penmt, there are no conditions that would reqmre the applicant to conform to that or to any other configurataon. You're basically hopang that the other agencaes will take care of that. Ronald Papley: Dot Wood has a comment. Dorothy Wood: As you know, I misread the apphcat~on. I thought they were temporary slips and then I d~dn't have a concern as much. But, it is very chfficult situataon but with all of the neighbors opposed to this, I could not support lt. Ronald Papley: Okay. Jan Anderson has a comment. Jamce Anderson: Thank you. This is a land use ~ssue and I agree w~th everybody on that land use ~ssue is the manna. It ~s a manna. It is funct~omng as a manna. I don't thank anyone has a question of that use. But, what they're asking for ~s for us to extend that use and I th~nk it gets to extensive then. I th~nk you're encroaching too much and it's too much of an ~mpact on the neighborhood. Those are the two things that we're supposed to really draw attention to as the ~mpact of the waterway and the ampact to the surrounding neighborhood. Even the facility is not commercmlly based. The leasing of the spaces ~s Item #19 Cavalier Gold and Yacht Club Page 17 a commercial use. I mean they are doing a commercial function of leasing for profit even though this is not a commercial site. So, I think that takes a little different rum. We do have a policy even though ~t's a policy not a plan and you can move on the policies and that's fine. The p~ers they have now are three very large. They extend way out into the water as they are now. And, I think any further extension ~s gmng to be further excessive use and encroach on the neighbors and the neighbonng area. My problem ~s the way it's setup. The applicant's put back in the dishwasher where they can't get out first because it they never get out because somebody's got to go first. But, ffwe approve th~s, there is a possibility that their site would be approved just as they are. And, I ttunk Council as part of the membership here has stated they have a problem w~th and we can't really depend on another agency saying no to that. So, I wouldn't be supportive of the proposal just for those reasons. Ronald Rapley: Yes Will. William D~n: I don't think I'm going to be able to support thxs ~ssue either. From a land use perspective, I do agree that there is a marina there and they are using it as a manna. I think we are looking at ~t from an expansion or otherwise It wouldn't be before us for one. We have to be part of that process to get this ball rolhng so you continue on with the approval process or disapproval process whichever it m~ght be. I agree with Jan that this a quahty of life issue that's not much different from any other facihty overgrowing ~ts use. It has to reach a point where you approve the growth of tbas or disapprove of And, I don't think I can support that. Ronald Pdpley: Mr. Bourdon, can I ask you a question? While he's coming up, I d~dn't hear. Some of the opposition didn't seem to have a problem with the quantity ~t's just the location. And, that is what I thought I heard. And, I don't thank adding these few is an unreasonable amount but there is apparently some objection to the location of them. And, my question is would you consider bnng~ng another plan back that showed at least at the north dock where you would suggest another location for these larger shps? Eddie Bourdon: Ron, you heard actually the same thing that we heard through the process and I'm sorry other people d~dn't hear the same flung. There's a number of shps have generally have been an issue and those other may say 10 versus 15 or whatever. The problem we have and I'll say ~t agmn, we've got to move the process forward to the people who can make the decision on where the slips should go. We can give you three or four different configurations of shps. That's easy. The point ~s none of them mean anything. That's the reahty. Until the Corps of Engineers, VMRC and Waterfront Operations people, you know, get down way ~n and say tbas is where the shp should be. And, ~t may wind up being 12 versus 15. But, the one thing I know is that, you know, we've had concurrence on the middle pier but again, you know, what John says ~s not what the agency smd to us. They tell us, you know, we're not going to just because it's on a Use Permit doesn't mean were approving that pier by any stretch of the imagtnation there or somewhere else. But, you can spin ~t anyway you want to sp~n ~t. Ronald Rlpley: I'm not speaking for the Commission. I'm speaking as to what I see. And ~t looks hke the north pter if that could be reconfigured? It sounds like the m~ddle Item #19 Cavalier Gold and Yacht Club Page 18 pier wasn't really that intrusive and if somehow that north pier can reconfigure or another pier added to the companion pier. Eddie Bourdon: We're not adverse to any of those things. That's my whole point. I don't think I can say anything more. What you see up there, we're not here today telling you to approve a that way. Ronald Rapley: Okay. Thank you. Eddie Bourdon: That northern pier, maybe I wasn't being really clear. We are not asking you to approve that northern pier. We're not even asking you to approve the other pier. We're just asking you to approve that we can attempt to add 15 boat slips to this site arid it won't have a negative impact from a land use perspective. We don't think the use of the pier creates a problem for anybody. We recognize the northern one creates issues and we're not asking you to approve that configuration in any way shape or form. Ronald Pdpley: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Miller. Robert Miller: Well, I'm going to make a motion to approve and I'm sure I'm going to hear something about that and I'm also going to tell you that I'm not approving the configuration of the piers, either one of them, any of them or even the posslbihty that this whole thing will be approved. Only the Use Permit to allow for them to possibly get 15 spaces and they may not get 15 spaces of any length. We do not know. But, I'm not approving the plan. My motion is to approve the Use only. Ronald Ripley: We got a motion by Mr. Miller. Do I have a second? Kathy KatsIas seconded it. Kathy Katslas: I concur with Bob. I'm not approving the plan but I'm approving the fact that the club needs 15 additional slips. Ronald Rapley: Okay. Is there any other discussion? Dorothy Wood: Respectfully Mr. Miller, I can't go along with your motion. Ronald Rapley: Okay. You all ready to vote? Jan, do you have a comment? Jamce Anderson: Just a quick question. I'm going to go with Dot on that if you're approving the addmon of 15 slots they've got to go somewhere and so my opinion ~s this ~s already been expanded ~n 1988. I think it's at ~ts max now to join w~th the neighbors and both of them be good neighbors to each other with the residential property. Ronald Rapley: Thank you. Are there any other comments? Joe? Joseph Strange: Yeah. We keep saying th~s is a land use but it really ~s land use on a public waterway. You know, in some ways and it may sound stupid when I say this but it's almost hke someone expanding their property out into the roadway. I mean if you Item # 19 Cavaher Gold and Yacht Club Page 19 look at ~t ~n that sense and I guess my question is ~f we approve this are we approving 15 shps? Are we sayang put 15 slips somewhere or are just approwng? Ronald Rapley: That's what we're saying. That's the motion. Joseph Strange: If we approve this we are approving 15 slips, I'll have to vote no. Ronald Pdpley: Okay. Alnght, we're ready to vote. AYE 5 NAY 5 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 ANDERSON CRABTREE DIN HORSLEY KATSIAS KNIGHT MILLER RIPLEY SALLE' STRANGE WOOD AYE AYE AYE AYE AYE NAY NAY NAY NAY NAY ABSENT Ronald Rapley: By a vote of 5-5, ~s that what I see up there. The motion t~es. Kay Wilson: The motion does not pass. Eddie Bourdon: Thank you all for your t~me. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Okay, is that the last ~tem? Alnght, we want to thank you for coming today and Mr. Scott, thank you agmn for a good agenda. The meeting is adjourned. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: City of Virginia Beach, Amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance, Site Plan Ordinance, Tree Planting, Preservation, and Replacement Ordinance, and Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 Background: (a) An OrdInance to amend and reordain SectIons 5 10, 6.1 and 6 3 of the Subdivision Ordinance, Appendix B of the City Code, so as to conform references to renumbered Sections of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance. (b) An Ordinance to amend and reorda~n the Site Plan Ordinance, Appendix C of the City Code, so as to conform references to renumbered Sections of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance (c) An Ordinance to amend and reorda~n Section 1 6 of the Tree Planting, Preservation and Replacement Ordinance, Appendix E of the City Code, so as to conform references to renumbered Sections of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance (d) Application of the City of V~rg~nla Beach to amend the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance (Appendix F of the City Code) pertaining to identification and protection of the Resource Protection Area buffers, Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area des~gnabon criteria, land use and development performance critena, and vanances Considerations: The Chesapeake Bay Ordinance was first adopted ~n January, 1991 and has been amended several times to (1) ensure consistency with the Commonwealth's Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act and Regulations, and to (2) improve admln~strabon of the ordInance and requ,rements for facilitation of development and redevelopment in the City's Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area, which comprises the entirety of the City's Chesapeake Bay Watershed The Ordnance ~s administered by the Planning Department, with variances to the Ordinance addressed by the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Board The Commonwealth adopted revised Chesapeake Bay Preservabon Act Regulations in December 2001, which require localities to make amendments to their local Chesapeake Bay Preservat,on Area program and ordinances to comply w~th new requirements C~ty of Virginia Beach -- Amendments for Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Program Page 2 of 2 This package includes amendments to both the City Zoning Ordinance and the Chesapeake Bay Preservabon Area Ordinance intended to meet these new regulatory requirements prior to the mandated adoption date of January 1,2004. The attached amendments ~nclude annotated comments throughout the vanous sections describing the recommended rewsions The amendments will bring the City ~nto comphance with the Commonwealth's Chesapeake Bay Preservabon Act regulabons Staff recommended approval. There was no oppos~bon Recommendations: The Planning Comm,ssion passed a motion by a recorded vote of 11-0 to approve the amendments as part of the consent agenda. Attachments: Ordinances Planning Comm,ss~on M~nutes Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval Planning Commission recommends approval . J ! i - Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department~~.~ City Manager~ 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN SECTIONS 5.10, 6.1 AND 6.3 OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, APPENDIX B OF THE CITY CODE, SO AS TO CONFORM REFERENCES TO RENUMBERED SECTIONS OF THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION AREA ORDINANCE SECTIONS AMENDED' ~ 5.10, 6.1 AND 6.3 OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA' That Sections 5.10, 6.1 and 6.3 of the Subdivision OrdInance are hereby amended and reordained, to read as follows' A~PENDIX B SUBDIVISION REGD-LATIONS Sec. 5.10. Underground utilities. [Required improve~nents] (b) Construction, installation and maintenance of any of the facilities mentioned in this section and located in Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas shall be in accordance with the provisions of section 112 Section 109 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance [Appendix F]. Sec. 6.1. Preliminary plats and data--Generally. [Plats and data] The preliminary plat shall be at a scale of not less than one inch equals one hundred (100) feet and may be of one or more sheets as necessary. The plat shall include or be accompanied by the following- 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 (1) Where Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas lie with!n a subdivision, the preliminary plat shall, unless waived by the planning director, delineate the boundaries of all resource protection areas, resource management areas, intensely developed areas and reserve sewage disposal drainfield sites as required by section I0~ Section 106 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance [Appendix FI. Sec. 6.3. Final plats and data. [Plats and data] The final subdivision plat shall be prepared by a certified civil engineer or land surveyor in ink on an approved durable tracing-medium at a scale of 1" = 100' unless a different scale is approved by general rule for classes of cases or by the planning director in a particular case. Ail original tracings shall be presented between the following sizes- 8 h" X 11" and 18" X 24". Lettering shall be no less than one-tenth inch or 2.54 mm. in height. Lettering and line weight shall be no less than .013 inches or .3302 mm. Letter and line spacing for control pencil drawings shall be no less than .050 inches and for ink drawzngs no less ~han .040 inches. When more than one sheet is requIred, all sheets shall be numbered and of the same size, with match marks to guide preparation if composite maps, and an index map on a sheet of the same size as the sectional maps shall be filed, which shall show, among other things, sectional map numbers, all lot and block 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 numbers, and street names· In addition, a small scale location map showing the property shall be required· The final plat shall show the following data, and shall be completed and processed as indicated: (t) Where Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas lie within a subdivision, the following materials shall also be required', unless waived as unnecessary by the planning director or previously submitted in conjunction with preliminary subdivision review' (1) A survey of environmental features; (2) A landscape plan; (3) A stormwater management plan; (4) An erosion and sediment control plan; and (5) A water quality impact assessment, if required by section I10 Section 107 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance [Appendix F]. The materials set forth in (1) through (5) hereinabove shall contain all of the information required ~ Section 107 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance [Appendix FI. (v) Every final plat of a subdivision containing any land located a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area shall delineate the boundaries of all resource protection 80 81 82 areas, resource management areas, and reserve sewage disposal drainfield sites as required by section 108 Section 106 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Ordinance 83 [Appendix FI. 84 85 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 86 87 88 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That this Ordinance shall become effective as of January 1, 2004, or the date of its adoption, whichever is later. 89 90 91 92 93 COMMENT This amendment will make this portion of the Subdivision Ordinance conform to the renumbered sections of the revised Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance. The amendment would not take effect until the later of January 1, 2004, or the date of its adoption. 94 95 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this day of , 2003. CA-9017 DATA/ORDIN/PROPOSED/subreg5.10etalsord.wpd R2 - October 7, 2003 APPROVED AS TO CONTENTS: Planfli' ~ ~ "e APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: Ci~'y~Attorney~s b:~- ' 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN THE SITE PLAN ORDINANCE, APPENDIX C OF THE CITY CODE, SO AS TO CONFORM REFERENCES TO RENUMBERED SECTIONS OF THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION AREA ORDINANCE SECTIONS AMENDED: ~ 2, 3, 4, 5 & 7 OF THE SITE PLAN ORDINANCE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA' That Sections 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 of the Site Plan Ordinance are hereby amended and reordained, to read as follows' APPENDIX C SITE PLAN ORDINANCE Sec. 2. Uses requiring site plan review. 2.2. The following site uses, including additions, alterations or changes in the following uses, shall require site plan review' (C) Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision A hereof, any development or redevelopment having a construction footprint exceeding two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet in a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area shall be subject to a plan of development process mn accordance with section 110 Section 107 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordmnance [Appendix FI. The terms "development," "redevelopment" and "construction 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 footprint" shall be as defined in section 103 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance. Sec. 3. Procedures. A.2. At the time the site development plan is presented, the following fees shall be due and payable- (d) There shall be no site plan review fee charged for a site plan encompassing only one single-family dwelling unit not located in a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area. For single-family dwellings and additions and other residential structures requiring a plan of development pursuant to Section ~ 107 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance, there shall be a fee in the amount of two hundred eighty dollars ($280.00); provided, however, that if the agent determines that such plan of development may be subject to abbreviated review, there shall be a fee ~n the amount of one hundred thirty-five dollars ($135.00). D.3. For development or redevelopment subject to the plan of development process set forth in section II0 Section 107 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 7O 71 72 73 74 [Appendix F], there shall also be furnished a certified check, bond, irrevocable letter of credit or other surety satisfactory to the city attorney in an amount equal to the estimated cost, including materials, of installation of required landscaping and stormwater management facilities. Cost estimates shall be based upon the approved plan of development and shall be subject to the approval of the director of development services. The terms "development" and "redevelopment" snali De as defined in section 103 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance. Sec. 4. Information required on site development plan· · · · , B. Existing and required site features and ~mprovements' 10. Landscape design and land use buffer plan in accordance with the design standards of the department of planning, as approved by the council of the City of Virginia Beach, shall be required. Where Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas are located on a site, landscaping design and buffer area plans shall be in accordance with section II0 Section 107 of the 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 13. 14. Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance [Appendix FI. For development or redevelopment having a construction footprint exceeding two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet in Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas, there shall, except if waived as unnecessary by the pla'nning director, also be provided all elements of the plan of development as required by ~=ction II~ Section 107 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance [Appendix FI. The terms " " and "development, redevelopment" "construction footprint" shall be as defined in section 103 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance. Where required by o=~=~u~ ~u9 Section 107 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance [Appendix F], there shall also, except if waived as unnecessary by the plannlng director, be provided a water quality ~mpact assessment containing all of the elements required therein. 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 Sec. 5. 5.15. Minimum standards and specifications required. Pumping stations and other sewer collection faczlzties shall be provided by the developer in accordance with the standards of the department of public utilities in areas where central or public sewer systems are available. Construction of sewer collection facilities shall be in accordance with section 112 Section 109 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance. [Appendix FI. · · , . Construction, installation and maintenance of any of the facilities mentioned in this subsection and located in Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas shall be in accordance with the provisions of section 112 Section 109 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance. [Appendix F]. Sec. 7. Variances and appeals. 7.4. Notwithstanding anything in this section to the contrary, variances and appeals arising from provisions of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance [Appendix F] included or incorporated in this ordinance shall be in accordance with~ 114 Section 110 or section 115 Section 111 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance, as the case may be. 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That this Ordinance shall become effective as of January 1, 2004, or the date of its adoption, whichever is later. COMMENT This amendment will make this portion of the Site Plan Ordinance conform to the renumbered sections of the revised Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance. The amendment would not take effect until the later of January 1, 2004, or the date of its adoption. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Virginia, on this day of , 2003. Beach, CA-9028 DATA/ORDIN/PROPOSED/siteplan2etalsord.wpd RI October 7, 2003 APPROVED AS TO CONTENTS' P la~n~ng~epartment APPROVED A.S ~O LEGAL SUFFICIENCY' Cit~ ,Ctorney's~ O~fi6~~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN SECTION 1.6 OF THE TREE PLANTING, PRESERVATION AND REPLACEMENT ORDINANCE, APPENDIX E OF THE CITY CODE SO AS TO CONFORM REFERENCES TO RENUMBERED SECTIONS OF THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION AREA ORDINANCE SECTION AMENDED' § 1.6 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That Section 1.6 of the Tree Planting, Preservation and Replacement Ordinance is hereby amended and reordained to read as follows: APPENDIX E TREE PLANTING, PRESERVATION, AND REPLACEMENT Sec. 1.6. Variances and appeals. D. Notwithstanding anything in this section to the contrary, variances and appeals arising from provisions of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance [Appendix F] included or lncorpcra~ed in this ordinance [appendix] shall be in accordance with ~ 113 Section 110 or section 114 Section 111 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance as the case may be. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That this Ordinance shall become effective as of January 1, 2004, or the date of its adoption, whichever is later. 27 28 29 3O 31 32 COMMENT This amendment will make this portion of the Tree Planting, Preservation and Replacement Ordinance conform to the renumbered sections of the revised Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance. The amendment would not take effect until the later of January 1, 2004, or the date of its adoption. 33 34 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virglnza Beach, Virginia, this day of , 2003. CA9027 Ordin/Proposed/siteplan01-6ord.wpd RI October 7, 2003 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT' P[a~i~ Department APPROVED AS TO LEGAL S UFFICIENCY'//)~. s~~f~~ Ci~y- Attorney' - '- 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION AREA ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH Sections Amended: Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance (City Code Appendix F) Sections 101 through 119 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That Sections 100 through 119 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance are hereby amended and reordained to read as follows: Section 100. Title. This ordinance shall be known as the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance of the City of Virginia Beach. COMMENT Thissectionisunchanged. Section 101. Findings of fact. The Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries constitute one of the most important and productive estuarine systems in the world, providing economic and social benefits to the citizens of the City of Virginia Beach and the Commonwealth of Virginia. The health of the Bay and its tributaries is vital to maintaining the City of Virginia Beach's economy and the welfare of its citizens. The waters of the Chesapeake Bay ~ watershed have been degraded significantly by many sources of pollution, including nonpoint source pollution from land development. ~ These 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 waters are worthy of protection from further degradation. Certain lands that are proximate to shorelines have an intrinsic water quality value due to the ecological and biological processes they perform. With proper management, they offer significant ecological benefits by providing water quality maintenance and pollution control, as well as flood and shoreline erosion control. These lands, designated by the City Council as Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas, shall be developed in such manner as to protect the quality of water in the Bay. COMMENT The amended section re~rs to waters of the entire Chesapeake Bay w~ershed, r~her than merely to the Bay itselL The amendments have no significant substantive effect. Section 102. Purpose and intent. (A) This ordinance is adopted in order to implement the requirements and stated purposes of The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act (~et-~i-o~ Sections 10.1-2100 through 10.1-~-t-1-5 2116 of the Code of Virginia) and the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Designation and Management Regulations (9 VAC 10-20-10 et. seq.) promulgated thereunder. The intent of the city council City Council and the purpose of this ordinance are to: (1) protect existing high quality state waters; (2) prevent any increase in pollution; and (3) restore state waters to a condition or quality that will permit all reasonable public uses and will support the propagation and growth 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 of all aquatic life, including game fish, which might reasonably be expected to inhabit them. The performance standards established by this ordinance provide the means to minimize erosion and sedimentation potential, reduce land application of nutrients and toxins, and maximize rainwater infiltration. Indigenous ground cover, especially woody vegetation, is effective in holding soil in place and preventing site erosion. Existing vegetation filters stormwater runoff. By minimizing impervious cover, rainwater infiltration is enhanced and stormwater runoff is reduced. (B) The designation of any area as a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, the zoning district classification of such area, such that any parcel of land situated within a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area shall also lie in one or more of the zoning districts established pursuant to ~ Section 102 of the city zonin~ ordinance City Zoning Ordinance (Appendix A) and shall be subject to all applicable provisions of this ordinance and the city zonin~ ordinanca City Zoning Ordinance (Appendix A). COMMENT Theamendmentstothissectionares~listicinnatureandhavenosubstantiveeffect. 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 Section 103. Definitions. The following words and terms used in this ordinance shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. Accessory structure. Any structure located on a lot or parcel not identified as a principal structure as defined herein. Agricultural lands. Those lands used for the planting and harvesting of crops or plant growth of any kind in the open, pasture, horticulture, dairy farming, floriculture, or the raising of poultry or livestock. Applicant. Any person submitting any application required or permitted pursuant to any of the provisions of this ordinance, and any person on whose behalf such an application is submitted. Best management practice. A practice, or a combination of practices, determined to be the most effective practical practicable means of preventing or reducing the amount of pollution generated by nonpolnt sources to a level compatible with water quality goals. Board. The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Board. Buffer area. An area of existing or established vegetation managed to protect other components of a resource protection a~ea Resource Protection Area and state waters from significant degradation due to land disturbances. 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 Caliper. The diameter of a tree measured six (6) inches above existing grade. Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area. Any land designated as such on the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Map adopted by the ~ ~ City Council, subject to the determination of the ~ rmaTra~T City Manaqer on a site-specific basis. A Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area shall consist of a ==ou==~= p=u~=~w~ area Resource Protection Area and a resource management area Resource Manaqement Area. ~ Manager. The city manager City Manaqer or such other person or persons as he may designate to perform the duties, or to exercise the authority, of the city manager City Manager pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance. Construction footprint. The area of all impervious surface created by development or redevelopment of land, including, but not limited to, buildings, roads, drives, parking areas and sidewalks, and any other land disturbed for the construction of such improvements. This definition shall not include construction accessways and staging ===~o fo= mznor ~=u3=~o w~=== ou~, accessways and areas do not result in land disturbance. Development. The construction or installation of any improvement upon a parcel of land, or any land disturbance associated therewith. 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 Diameter at breast height. The diameter of a tree measured at a point four and one-half (4L1/2) feet above the existing grade. Dripline. An imaginary perpendicular line extending downward from the outermost tips of the branches of a tree to the ground. Highly erodible soils. Those soils on slopes seaward of the point at which the slope of the ground changes from less than six (6) percent to greater than six (6) percent and the toe of the slope is located w~thin one hundred (100) feet of tidal wetlands, nontidal wetlands or tidal shores, any component of the zesouzce p=v~=~=~on azea. The top of bank shall be the landward limit of highly erodible soils. Impervious cover. A surface composed of any material which significantly impedes or prevents natural infiltration of water into the soil, including, but not limited to, buildings and other structures and the components thereof, concrete, asphalt, or compacted gravel surface· Land disturbance. Any activity upon land which causes, contributes to, or results in the destruction, removal or covering of the vegetation upon such land, including, but not limited to, clearing, dredging, filling, grading or excavating. The term shall not include minor activities such as home gardening, individual home landscaping and home maintenance. ~ ~ ..... , ___2-- M~nor projecto n~l - - · ~,,=,,~= or =Iterations to oting uses ~v~ a constructzon footpzznt of I=oo than or =H==I to two 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 thousand f~l¥= ........ ll~ll~l=~J ..... (2, 500) square ~==~ . For the purposes of ' ' ~- definition shall also include accessory this ordinance, ~o -- -- ~-=: .... ' ity ' (App ~' structures =o ~=~=~ in the~ Zoning Ordinance endix ~ ~=~ = ~otruction footprint of I=oo than two thousand five hundred (~, . = 500~ square ===~ Nonpoint source pollution. Pollution consisting of constituents such as sediment, nutrients, and organic and toxic substances from diffuse sources, such as runoff from agriculture and urban land development and use. Nontidal wetlands. Those wetlands other than tidal wetlands that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions identified or referred to in the City of Virginia Beach Soil Survey by soil names Backbay Mucky Peat; Duckston portion of Corolla-Duckston Fine Sand; Dorovan Mucky Peat; Duckston Fine Sand; Nawney Silt Loam; Pamlico Mucky Peat; Pamlico-Lakehurst Variant Complex; Pocaty Peat; or Rappahannock Mucky Peat, Strongly Saline; and any other lands which under normal conditions are saturated to the ground surface and connected by surface flow and contiguous to tidal wetlands or tributary streams adjacent to waterbodies with perennial flow. Noxious weeds. Plants such as Johnson grass, kudzu, and multiflora rose. 166 167 168 169 Person. An individual, fiduciary, corporation, firm, partnership, association, organization, or any other entity or combination thereof. Principal structure. A structure that encloses or houses any 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 principal use. For the purposes of this ordinance the term principal structure shall not include appurtenances including (i) a required parking area as set forth in Sections 203 (a) and (b) of the City Zoninq Ordinance (Appendix A), (ii) a driveway connecting the required parkinq area to the public ri~ht-of-way, and (iii) a sidewalk connectin~ any outside entrance or exit of the principal structure to the required parkinq area. Public road. A publicly owned road designed and constructed in accordance with water quality protection criteria at least as stringent as requirements applicable to the Virginia Department of Transportation, including requlations promulgated pursuant to (i) the Erosion and Sediment Control Law (Section 10.1-560 et seq. of the Code of Virqinia), and (ii) the Virginia Stormwater Management Act (Section 10.1-603.1 et seq. of the Code of Virginia). This definition includes those roads where the Virginia Department of Transportation exercises direct supervision over the design or construction activities, or bQth, and cases where roads are constructed or maintained, or both, by the City in accordance with the current edition of the City of Virqinia Beach Public Works Standards and Specifications. 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 Redevelopment. The construction, substantial alteration or installation of any improvement upon a lot or parcel of land, that is or has been previously developed, whe== th=g=Aox- no ~== in impervious surface by the proposed construction within a ................... ~ ........ pplyi ' ~=ou~= ~v~=~Aon =~=~. For purposeo v~ a ng th~s ~-==-=~:-- ' ---~ .......... 198~ shall ~=~A,,A~A~,,, any lot ~n =~Ao==,,~= prio~ ~ October I, ~=~on of one or more ofAto ~ - lot ~---. Resource management area Manacement Area. That component of a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area not classified as a ~ protection area Resource Protection Area. Resource management a~r~a~ Management Areas include land types which, if improperly used or developed, have the potential for causing significant water quality degradation or for diminishing the functional value of a resource protection area Resource Protection Area. Resource protection area Protection Area. That component of a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area comprised of lands at or near the shoreline adjacent to waterbodies with perennial flow which have an intrinsic water quality value due to the ecological and biological processes they perform or are sensitive to impacts which may result in significant degradation to the quality of state waters. Silvicultural activities. Forest manaqement activities, includin~ but not limited to the harvestinq of timber, the 214 construction of roads and trails for forest manaqement purposes, 215 216 and the preparation of property for reforestation that are constructed in accordance with the silvicultural best manaqement 217 218 219 practices developed and enforced by the State Forester pursuant to Section 10.1-1105 of the Code of Virqinia and are located on property defined as real estate devoted to forest use under Section 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 58.1-3230 of the Code of Virqinia. Subdivision. The division of any parcel of land into two (2) or more lots or parcels. The term shall include all changes in lot lines, the creation of new lots involving any division of an existing lot or lots and, if a new street is involved in such division, any division of a parcel of land. When appropriate to the context, the term shall also include the process of subdividing and the territory subdivided. Substantial Alteration. The expansion or modification of a buildin~ or development that would result in a disturbance of land 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 exceedinq an area of two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet in the Resource Manaqement Protection Area only... Tidal shore. The area between the mean low water and mean high water levels of tidal waters. Tidal wetlands. Vegetated and nonvegetated wetlands as defined in ~ Section 1401 of the city zonin~ ordinance City Zoninq Ordinance (Appendix A). 10 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 ~._=L ............. i ...... depicted as such on - ' '~ -~ ............ phi th= most~=~=~ U.S. Geological Survey 7-I,~ ~L~= ~v~v~a c Water-dependent facility. A development of land which cannot exist outside of a resource protection area Resource Protection Area and which must be located on the shoreline by reason of the intrinsic nature of its operation. These facilities include, but are not limited to, ports, the intake and outfall structures of power plants, water treatment plants, sewage treatment plants, storm sewers, marinas and other boat docking structures, beaches and other public water-oriented recreation areas, fisheries or other marine resources facilities= and shoreline protection measures as authorized under the provisions of the wetlands zoning ordinance Sections 1400 - 1418 of the City Zoning Ordinance (Appendix A). Waterbodies with perennial flow. Any water body depicted as perennial based upon (i) the most recent U.S. Geological Survey 7- 1/2 minute topographic quadrangle map (scale 1-24,000), or (ii) use of a scientifically valid system of in-field indicators of perennial flow made or confirmed by the City Manager. Wetlands. Tmdal wetlands and nontidal wetlands as defined herein. COMMENT The amendments add definitions of certain terms used in the Ordinance. The new definitions are derived from the revised Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Designation and Management 11 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 Regulations recently promulgated by the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Board. The amendments also delete defmitions of the terms "minor project" and "tributary stream," as those terms are no longer used in the ordinance. The change to the definition of "construction footprint" reflects the fact that minor projects no longer exist under the new Ordinance. The change to the definition of "redevelopment" eliminates the requirement that a project result in no net increase in impervious surface in order to qualify as redevelopment. The remaining changes are essentially stylistic in nature. Section 104. Areas of Applicability. (A) The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance shall apply to all lands which are included in the Chesapeake Bay watershed within the City of Virginia Beach. Such lands are designated as Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area~ on the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Map. (B) Resource p=u==~uion ====o Protection Areas shall include the following components' (1) Tidal wetlands; (2) Nontidal wetlands; (3) Tidal shores; and (4) IIig~hly ezodible soils; and (%~) A variable width buffer area not less than one hundred (100) ~ feet in width, vegetated buffer area located adjacent to and landward of the components listed in (I) through {4) above, and along both sides of any tributary 12 288 The variable width buffer area shall be located: 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 (i) adjacent to and landward of the components listed in (1) through (3) above and (ii) alonq both sides of any water body with perennial flow. The variable width buffer area shall also include hiqhly erodible soils where present and shall extend one hundred (100) feet landward of the landward limit of hiqhly erodible soils. (C) Resource management areas Management Areas shall consist of all lands within Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas which are not designated as resource protection az~as Resource Protection Areas. These lands, if improperly used or developed, have a potential for causing significant water quality deqradation or for diminishing the functional value of the Resource Protection Area. (D) The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Map shall delineate the general locations of resource protection areas Resource Protection Areas and resource management areas Resource Manaqement Areas. The city manager City Manaqer shall have the final authority in cases of uncertainty to determine the extent of Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas by application of the criteria set forth in this section. (E) If the area encompassed by a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area includes a portion of a lot less than or equal to three (3) acres in size, the entire lot shall be subject to the requirements of this ordinance. Any lot subdivided after October 1, 1989 out of 13 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 a lot lying partially within a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area shall also be subject to the requirements of this ordinance. COMMENT The amendments do not effect any change in the extent or location of either Resource Protection Areas or Resource Management Areas. However, the method of calculating the Resource Protection Area has been converted to a variable width buffer. The components of the tidal wetlands, tidal shore and nontidal wetlands stay the same, but the variable component is the area of highly erodible soils. This area shall include landward of the 3 components above, include the highly erodible soils and extend 100 feet landward of the top of the bank of the highly erodible soils. 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 , . _ -- , __ · W~ except for the construction, ~nst=ll=t~ or maxntenance of ...... - , f~l~t S, dependent --~ ~~- redevelopment subject to the zequzzements of this ordinance, and minor projects located in the landward fifty '~n' .... of e buffer ~ ~~ ~..~ ~ Manager ~s an exception pursuant to section 106 of this ordinance. COM~NT The en~re sec~on is repealed and its substantive pro~sions, except for the pro~sions concerning ~nor projects, have been incorporated, with amendments, into new Section 106 ~e~ormance Standards)· 333 334 335 336 (A) The City~=u"-na-er -~-''==~v.,- ' ' ........... =-- ' proj=~o located zn the '--~ ...... o~ ~=~a~ fzfty ( ) of the buffer --=~-~ ly ' ---=~ .... ~ '- - ~~ comp wzth o=~~o ~vo and II0 of thzo ordznance, 14 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 (B) Minor projects lo~===d ..... in the seaward fi=g--==y (~^j~' ~=Z-et of the~=~=--== ........ area ~h=ll ~u~ be permitted, except as otherw'~sc prov in I13 of this ordinance (C) Minor projects located in their entirety within thc resource management area shall not be subject to the requirements of this ordinance. COMMENT The entire section is repealed, as "minor projects" no longer exist as a separate category of development under the proposed Ordinance. Section 107 105. Interpretation of Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area boundaries. The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Map adopted by the ~ ~-~ City Council shall be used as a guide to the general location of Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas. The site-specific boundaries of a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area shall initially be delineated by the applicant, and shall be subject to approval and modification by the city manager City Manager on the basis of the criteria set forth in ~ Section 104 ~ of this ordinance. In making such a determination, the city manager City Manaqer may consider any relevant information and may perform site inspections. When a delineation of a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area, or any component thereof, has been approved or establishe~ by the ~ men~ City Manaqer, the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Map shall be amended by the Board to reflect such delineation. 15 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 COMMENT The changes to this section are stylistic in nature and have no substantive effect. Section ~ 106. Performance standards. The performance standards set forth in this ~ Section are intended to prevent a net increase in nonpoint source pollution from new development and development on previously developed land where the runoff was treated by a water quality protection best management practice, achieve a ten (10) per cent reduction in nonpoint source pollution from redevelopment development on previously developed land where the runoff was not treated by one or more water quality best manaqement practices, and achieve a forty (40) per cent reduction in nonpoint source pollution from agricultural and silvicultural uses. (A) General performance standards for development and redevelopment. Except as otherwise provided herein, the following standards shall apply to all development and redevelopment in both Resource Protection Areas and Resource Manaqement Areas of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area' (1) Land disturbance shall be limited to the area necessary to provide for the ~=~=~ use proposed use or development. The limits of land disturbance, including clearing or grading, shall be strictly defined by the construction footprint 16 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 as shown on the approved plan of development. Clearing shall be allowed only to provide necessary access, site drainage, water quality best management practices, installation of utilities and primary and reserve drainfield sites as detailed on a Virginia Department of Health sewage disposal construction permit. These limits shall be clearly shown on all plans submitted and physically marked on the site. (2) Existing vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent~s-s-i-b-l-epracticable consistent with the use ~ or development permitted proposed and in accordance with the most recent current edition of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook. (a) Where areas to be preserved are considered to be part of the stormwater management plan for that site, existing trees of greater than six (6) inches diameter at breast height shall be preserved outside the construction footprint. ~ diseased trees or trees weakened by age, storm, fire, or other injury may be removed. 17 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 (b) Prior to clearing or grading, suitable protective barriers, such as safety fencing, shall be erected outside of the dripline of any tree or stand of trees to be preserved. These protective barriers shall remain so erected throughout all phases of construction. The storage of equipment, materials, debris, or fill shall not be allowed within the area protected by the barrier. (3) Land development shall minimize impervious cover to promote infiltration of stormwater into the ground consistent with the use or development permitted proposed through the incorporation of structural or nonstructural urban best management practices' (a) As described in the most recent current edition of the Urban Best Virqinia Stormwater Management Practice~ Handbook of the Virginia Water Control Board; or (b) As described in the City of Virginia Beach Stormwater Management Ordinance (Appendix D). ~ (c) During the design phase of development, consideration should be given to the following means of minimizing impervious cover' 18 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 ~-a-~ 1. Placement of parking areas under multiple-family, office or commercial buildings; ~k~ 2. Construction of no more than the minimum number of parking spaces required by the City Zoning Ordinance (Appendix A); ~ 3. Utilization of modular grid pavers on private property and in low-traffic zones; and ~ 4. Cluster development in lieu of conventional development by use of conditional zoning or the open space promotion option as set forth in the City Zoning Ordinance (Appendix A). (4) Notwithstanding any other provision of this ordinance, any land disturbance, as defined in Section 10.1-560 of the Code of VirGinia, exceeding two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet, including, but not limited to, construction of all single-family houses, septic tanks, and drainfields, shall comply with the requirements of ~ Article III of tn~ Chapter 30 of the Code of the City of Virginia Beach (City Code ~ Sections 30-56 through 30-78). 19 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 (5) Ail on-site sewage ~ treatment systems not requiring a Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (V?DES) permit shall be pumped out at least once every five (5) yearsT, provided, however, that: (a) Subject to conditions established by the Virginia Beach Health District of the Virqinia Department of Health, the owners of such systems may, in lieu of pumpinq out such systems every five (5) years, have a plastic filter installed and maintained in the outflow pipe from the septic tank to filter solid material from the effluent while sustaininq adequate flow to the drainfield to permit normal use of the septic system. Such a filter shall satisfy standards established in the Sewage Handlinq and Disposal Requlations (12 VAC 5-610) administered by the Virqinia Department of Health; and (b) In lieu of requirinq proof of septic tank pump out every five (5) years, the City may allow owners of on-site sewaqe treatment systems to submit documentation every five (5) years, certified by a sewaqe handler permitted by the 20 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 Virginia Department of Health, to the effect that the septic system has been inspected and is functioninq properly and that the effluent does not need to be pumped out of the tank. (6) For new construction not served by public sewer or other system requiring a VPDES permit, a reserve sewage disposal dzainfield site with a capacity at least equal to that of the primary sewage disposal dzainfield site shall be provided. This requirement shall not apply to any lot or parcel recorded prior to October 1, 1989, if such lot or parcel is not sufficient in capacity to accommodate ___, , ~ a reserve sewage disposal d~xnfxe~ site, as determined by the Virginia Beach Health District ~ ~- "~---~-~ ........ Depa Buildi g construction of any impervious surface shall be prohibited on the area of all sewage disposal d~ainfield sites, including reserve d~ainfield sewage disposal sites, until the property is served by public sewer or an on-site sewage treatment system operating under a VPDES permit. All sewage disposal site records shall be administered to provide adequate notice and enforcement. As an alternative to the reserve sewage disposal site, 21 503 504 5O5 506 507 508 5O9 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 the owners of such systems may install an alternative drainfield system meetinq the following conditions: (a) Each of the two (2) alternating drainfields in the system shall have, at a minimum, an area not less than~ fifty (50) percent of the area that would otherwise be required if a single primary drainfield were constructed; (b) An area equal to fifty (50) percent of the area that would otherwise be required for the primary drainfield site shall be reserved for subsurface absorption systems that utilize a flow diversion device, in order to provide for future replacement or repair to meet the requirements for a sewage disposal system. Expansion of the primary system shall require an expansion of the reserve system; (c) The two (2) alternatinq drainfields shall be connected by a diversion valve, approved by the Virginia Beach Health District, located in the pipe between the septic tank and the distribution boxes. The diversion valve shall be used to alternate the direction of effluent flow to one (1) drainfield or the other at a 22 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 time. Diversion valves shall not be used for the following types of treatment systems: (1) Sand mounds; (2) Low pressure distribution systems; (3) Repair situations when installation of a valve is not feasible; and (4) Any other approved system for which the use of a valve would adversely affect the design of the system, as determined by the Virginia Beach Health District; (d) The diversion valve shall have three (3) port, two (2) way valve of materials resistant to sewage, leakproof and designed so that the effluent from the tank can be directed to flow into either one (1) of the two (2) distribution boxes; (e) There shall be a conduit from the top of the valve to the ground surface with an appropriate cover to be level with or above the ground surface; and (f) The valve shall not be located in driveways, recreational courts, parking lots, or beneath sheds or other structures. In lieu of a diversion valve, any device that can be 23 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 desiqned and constructed to direct the flow of effluent from the tank into either one (1) of the two (2) distribution boxes may be approved if plans are submitted to the Virqinia Beach Health District and determined to be satisfactory; (h) Owners shall alternate usinq the drainfields every twelve (12) months to permit the yearly restinq of half of the absorption system. (i) The City shall ensure that the owners are notified annually of the requirement to switch the valve to the opposite drainfield. (7) Stormwater manaqement criteria for development shall apply to any redevelopment. Stormwater manaqement criteria consistent with the water quality protection provisions (4 VAC 3-20-71 et. seq.) of the Virginia Stormwater Management Regulations (4 VAC 3-20) shall be satisfied. The followinq stormwater management options shall be deemed to comply with such criteria and requlations: (a) Incorporation on the site of best manaqement practices that meet the water quality protection requirements set forth in this 24 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 subsection. For the purposes of this subsection, the site may include multiple projects or properties that are adjacent to one another or lie within the same drainage area where a single best manaqement practice shall be utilized by those projects to satisfy water quality protection requirements~ (b) Compliance with the stormwater manaqement program adopted by the City, which shall include a VPDES permit issued by the Department of Environmental Quality to the City for its municipally-owned storm sewer system discharqes that has been reviewed and found by the State Water Control Board to achieve water quality protection equivalent to that required by this subsectionl and (c) Compliance with a site-specific VPDES permit issued by the Department of Environmental Ouality, provided that the City specifically determines that the permit requires measures that collectively achieve water quality protection equivalent to that required by this subsection. 25 598 599 60O 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 Any maintenance, alteration, use or improvement to an existinq structure that does not deqrade the quality of the surface water discharge, as determined by the City, shall be exempt from the requirements of this subsection. (%~) For any development or redevelopment, stormwater runoff shall be controlled by the use of best management practices that achieve the following results' (a) For development, the postdevelopment nonpoint source pollution runoff load shall not exceed the predevelopment load based on an average total phosphorus loading (FVA) of 2.72 pounds + per acre + per year and an equivalent impervious cover (IRA) of twenty five (25) percent. (b) For redevelopment, the nonpoint source pollution load shall be reduced by at least ten (10) per cent of the existing load. The city manager City Manaqer may waive or modify this requirement for redevelopment sites that originally incorporated best management practices for stormwater runoff quality control, provided that' 26 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 1. In no case may the postdevelopment nonpoint source pollution runoff load exceed the predevelopment load; and 2. Best management practice facilities shall be in good working order and performing at the design levels of service. The city manager City Manager shall conduct a review of the original structural design and the maintenance plans of such facilities. The execution of a new maintenance agreement may be required to ensure compliance with these requirements. (c) Predevelopment and postdevelopment loadings shall be calculated by the same procedures as outlined by the current Virqinia Stormwater Manaqement Handbook Chesapeake Day Local Aoo~ot~,~= Department in ~to local aso~s~a~= ~Manual. For = redevelopment ~zte more than n~nety (*~j~v per cent of whic~h is covered by impervious ==~=~=o, ~=otorat~on of = m~n~mum of twenty ~v) per cent of the o~= to ~=~=~=~=~ open space shall be deemed the equivalent of a ten 27 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 (~10) pollution load. (~) Calculations involving the percentage of site area under impervious cover shall be based upon the lot area landward of mean low water and wetlands. Impervious cover shall not include the water surface area of a swimming pool. (~) Low maintenance and nonstructural best management practices shall be employed to the maximum extent practicable. Prior to the authorization and initiation of grading or other on-site activities on that portion v= a ,v~ oz p==~=~, all permits required Sections 1400 throuqh 1418 of the City Zoninq Ordinance (Appendix A) t,he Wetlands Zoning Ordinance and ~ Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. ~ Sections 1341 and 1344) shall be obtained and evidence of such submitted by the applicant to the City. Land upon which agricultural activities are conducted shall have a soil and water quality conservation p-~ assessment conducted that evaluates the effectiveness of existinq practices 28 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 (¢-~11 ) ({-~12) pertaininq to soil erosion and sediment control, nutrient manaqement, and manaqement of pesticides and, where necessary, outlines additional practices needed to ensure that water quality protection is accomplished consistent with this ordinance. Such ~ assessment shall be based upon the standards set forth in the January 1999 Field Office Technical Guide of the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Natural Resource Conservation Service or the January 2001 Virqinia Aqricultural BMP Manual of the Virqinia Department of Conservation and Recreation and accomplish water quality protection consistent with this ordinance. Such a plan shall be approved by the Virginia Daze ~ and Water Conservation ~ot~i~ January I, Proposed revegetation of disturbed areas shall provide maximum erosion and sediment control benefits. Access for development requiring permits under ~ Section 6-136 of the City Code or ~ Section 1403 of the wetlands zoning o~dinance City Zoning Ordinance, and for development authorized by ~ Section 1402 of the wetlands zoning 29 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 7O0 701 702 703 704 7O5 706 707 7O8 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 ordinance City Zoninq Ordinance, shall be limited to a single accessway so as to maintain the integrity of the buffer area. Fill for such development ..... r~=d to ~- ' '-' '~' --- ~ subd~v~oion (II) h~ shall be limited to minimize disturbance of existing vegetation and contours so as to effectively maintain the integrity of the buffer area. (13) Disposal sites for dredged material shall be located and stabilized landward of the buffer area. (14) Excavation material from construction, including dredged material, shall be disposed of in a lawful manner. (15) Silvicultural activities within Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas shall be exempt from this ordinance, provided that silvicultural operations adhere to water quality protection procedures prescribed in the January 1997 "Forestry Best Manaqement Practices for Water Quality in Virqinia Technical Guide" of the Virqinia Department of Forestry. (16) All development exceeding two thousand, five hundred (2,500) square feet of land disturbance shall be accomplished throuqh a plan of development 30 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 review process consistent with Section 15.2-2286 (A) (8) of the Code of Virqinia and subdivision 1 (e) of 9 VAC 10-20-231 (Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Desiqnation and Manaqement Regulations). (17) Where the best manaqement practices utilized require reqular or periodic maintenance in order to continue their functions, such maintenance shall be ensured by the City through a maintenance aqreement with the owner or developer or the owner shall certify yearly that maintenance has accomplished. (B) Duf£e£- Ai-ea Requiiements. Resource Protection Areas. been Development criteria for In addition to the general performance standards set forth in this section, the followinq standards shall apply to all use, development and redevelopment in Resource Protection Areas, except as otherwise provided herein: (1) Land development may be allowed in the Resource Protection Area only if such development (i) is water dependent; (ii) constitutes redevelopment; (iii) is a new use established pursuant to Subsection(B) (4) hereof; (iv) is a road or driveway crossing satisfyinq the conditions set forth in subdivision (d) hereof; or (v) is a flood control 31 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 or stormwater manaqement facility satisfying the conditions set forth in subdivision (e) hereof. In addition thereto, the followinq requirements shall apply: (a) A water quality impact assessment in accordance with Section 110 (C) of this ordinance shall be required for any proposed land disturbance. (b) A new or expanded water dependent facility shall be allowed provided that the following criteria are met' 1. Such facility does not conflict with the . comprehensive plan; Such facility complies with the qeneral performance standards set forth in this . Section; Any non-water dependent component of such facility is located outside of the Resource Protection Area; and Access to such facility shall be provided with the minimum land disturbance necessary. Where practicable, a sinqle point of access shall be provided. 32 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 (c) Redevelopment shall be permitted in the Resource Protection Area only if (i) there is no increase in the amount of imperious cover; (ii) no further encroachment within the Resource Protection Area; and (iii) such redevelopment conforms to applicable erosion and sediment control and stormwater management criteria set forth in Section 106 (A) of this ordinance to applicable stormwater manaqement requirements of all state and federal agencies. (d) Roads and driveways not exempt from the provisions of Section 109 (A). (1) of this ordinance may be constructed in or across Resource Protection Areas if each of the followinq conditions is met: 1. The City Manager finds that there are no reasonable alternatives to aliqninq the road or driveway in or across the Resource Protection Area; 2. The alignment and desigD of the road or driveway are optimized, consistent with other requirements, so as to minimize encroachment into the Resource Protection 33 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 8O5 806 807 8O8 8O9 Area and adverse effects on water . . quality; The desiqn and construction of the road or driveway satisfy all applicable criteria of this ordinance, inclDd~ng submission of a water quality impact assessment; and The City Manager reviews the plan for the road or driveway proposed in or across the Resource Protection Area in coordination with City site plan, subdivision and other applicable plan of development reviews. (e) Flood control and stormwater manaqement facilities that drain or treat water from multiple development projects or from a siqnificant portion of a watershed may be allowed in Resource Protection Areas, provided that: 1. the City Manaqer conclusively establishes that the location of the facility within the Resource Protection Area is the optimum locationL 34 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 2. the size of the facility is the minimum necessary to provide necessary flood control or stormwater treatment, or both; 3. the facility is consistent with a stormwater management program approved by the Department of Environmental Ouality as a Phase I modification to the City's proqram; 4. all applicable State and Federal permits are obtained from the appropriate federal and state agencies havinq jurisdiction; 5. approval is received from the City Manager prior.to, construction; and routine maintenance is performed on such facilities to assure that they continue to function as designed. It is not the intent of this subdivision to allow a best management practice that collects and treats runoff from an individual lot or portion thereof to be located within a Resource Protection Area. (2) Exemptions in Resource Protection Areas. The followinq land disturbances in Resource Protection Areas shall be exempt from the criteria of this Section provided that thev comply with the 35 834 835 836 837 838 839 84O 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 85O 851 852 853 854 855 856 applicable standards set forth in Section 110 (B) of this ordinance' ia) water wells; (b) passive recreation facilities such as boardwalks, trails and pathways; and (c) historic preservation and archaeoloqical activities. Buffer area requirements. The buffer area shall be the landward component of the Resource Protection Area. Notwithstanding the existence of permitted uses, encroachments, .and veqetation clearing, as set forth in this Section, the buffer area shall not be deemed to be reduced in width. To minimize the adverse effects of human activities on the other components of the Resource Protection Area, state waters, and aquatic life, a minimum one hundred (100) foot wide buffer area of veqetation that is effective in retardinq runoff, preventing erosion, and filterinq nonpoint source pollution shall be retained if present and established where it does not exist. (a) The one hundred (100) foot wide buffer area shall be deemed to achieve a seventy-five (75) 36 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 percent reduction of sediments and a forty (40) percent reduction of nutrients. (b) Where land uses such as aqriculture or silviculture within the area of the buffer cease and the lands are proposed to be converted to other uses, a minimum one hundred (100) foot wide buffer shall be reestablished. In reestablishinq the buffer, management measures shall be undertaken to provide woody vegetation that assures the buffer functions set forth in this ordinance. (4) Permitted encroachments into the buffer area. (a) When the application of the buffer area would result in the loss of a buildable area on a lot or parcel recorded prior to October 1, 1989, encroachments into the buffer area may be permitted by administrative variance, as set forth in Section 110 (B) of this ordinance and in accordance with the following criteria' 1. Encroachments into the buffer area shall be the minimum necessary to achieve a reasonable buildable area for a principal structure and necessary utilities. 37 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 . Where practicable, a veqetated area that will maximize water quality protection, mitigate the effects of the buffer encroachment, and is equal to the area of encroachment into the buffer area shall be established elsewhere on the lot or parcel. 3.. The encroachment may not extend into the seaward fifty (5.p) feet of the buffer area. (b) When the application of the buffer area would result in the loss of a buildable area on a lot or parcel recorded between October 1, 1989 and January 1, 2004, encroachments into the buffer area may b? permitted by administrative variance, as set forth in Section 110 (B) of this ordinance and in accordance with the following criteria: 1.. The lot or parcel was created as a result of a leqal process conducted in conformity with the Subdivision Ordinance (Appendix B) ~. 38 902 903 904 9O5 906 907 9O8 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 · · Conditions or mitigation measures imposed through a previously approved variance shall be met; If the use of a best management practice (BMP) was previously rqquired, the BMP shall be evaluated to determine if it continues to function effectively and, if necessary, thD BMP ~hall be reestablished or repaired and maintained as required; and 4. The criteria in subdivision 4 (a) of this section shall be met. (C) Encroachments located in the variable width buffer areas as defined in Section 104 (B) if this ordinance may be permitted by administrative variance~ as set forth in Section 110 (B) of this ordinance. (5) Permitted modifications of the buffer area. (a) In order to maintain the functional value of the buffer area, existing vegetation may be removed only pursuant to an administrative variance, as set forth in Section 110 (B) of this ordinance, and only to provide for reasonable siqht lines, access paths, general 39 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 woodlot management, and best management practices, including those that prevent upland erosion and concentrated flows of stormwater, as follows: 1. Trees may be pruned or removed as necessary to provide for sight lines and vistas, provided that where removed, they shall be replaced with other vegetation that is equally effective in retardinq runoff, preventinq erosion, and filtering nonpoint source pollution from runoff. ~.,. Any path shall be constructed and · surfaced so as to effectively control erosion. Dea~, diseased, or dying trees or shrubbery and noxious weeds may be removed and thinning of trees may be . allowed pursuant to sound horticultural practices incorporated into City-adopted standards. For shoreline erosion control projects, trees and woody vegetation may be removed, necessary control techniques emplpyed, and appropriate vegetation 40 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 established to protect or stabilize the shoreline in accordance with the best available technical advice and applicable permit conditions or requirements. (b) On agricultural lands, the .aqricultural buffer area shall be managed to prevent concentrated flows of surface water from breaching the buffer area, and app. ropriate measures may be taken to prevent noxious weeds from invading the buffer area· Aqricultural activities may encroach into the buffer area as follows' · Agricultural activities may encroach into the landward fifty (50) feet of the buffer area if at least one (1) agricultural best manaqement practice is being, i~plemented on the adjacent land and such best management practice, in the opinion of the Virqinia Dare Soil and Water Conservation District board, addresses the predominant water quality issue (either erosion control or nutrient manaqement). In such cases, th? combination of the undisturbed buffer area and the best manaqement practices 41 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 · shall achieve water quality protection,. pollutant r~moval, and water resource conservation at least the equivalent of the minimum one hundred (100) foot buffer area. If nutrient management is identified as the predominant water quality issue, a nutrient management plan, including soil tests, must be developed consistent with the Virginia Nutrient Management Training and Certification Regulations (4 VAC 5-15) administered by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation. Agricultural activities may encroach within the landward seventy-five (75) feet of the buffer area when agricultural best management practices which address erosion control, nutrient management, and pest chemical control, are being implemented on the adjacent land. The erosion control practices must prevent erosion from exceeding the soil loss tolerance level, referred to as "T," as defined in the "National Soil Survey 42 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 . Handbook" of November 1996 in the "Field Office Technical Guide" of the U.S. Department of Aqriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service. A nutrient management plan, including soil tests, must be developed, consistent with the Virqinia Nutrient Management Traininq and Certification Requlations (4 VAC 5- 15) administered by the Virginia ~epartment of Conservation and Recreation. In conjunction with the remaining undisturbed portion of the buffer area, this collection of best management practices shall be presumed to achieve water quality protection at least the equivalent of that provided by the minimum one hundred (100) foot buffer area. The buffer area shall not be required to be designated adjacent to aqricultural drainaqe ditches if at least one (1) best management practice w. hich, in the opinion of the Virginia Dare Soil and Water Conservation District board, addresses 43 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 . the more predominant water quality..issue on the adjacent land (either erosion control or nutrient management) is being implemented on the adjacent land. If specific problems are identified pertaining to agricultural activities that are causing pollution of the nearby waterbody with perennial flow or violate performance standards pertaining to the vegetated buffer area, the Cit.y, in cooperation with Virginia Dare Soil and Water Conservation District, shall recommend a compliance schedule to the landowner and require the problems to be corrected consistent with that schedule. This schedule shall expedite environmental protection while taking into account the seasons and other ~emporal considerations so that the probability for successfully implementing the corrective measures is greatest. In cases where the landowner or his agent or operator has refused assistance from the Virginia Dare Soil and Water 44 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 Conservation District in complyinq with or documenting compliance with the agricultural requirements of this ordinance, the District shall report the noncompliance to the City Manaqer. The City Manager shall require the landowner to correct the problems within a specified period of time not to exceed eighteen (18) months from the initial notification of the deficiencies to the landowner. The City Manaqer, iD cooperation with the District, shall recommend a compliance schedule to the landowner. This schedule shall expedite environmental protection while takinq into account the seasons and other temporal considerations so that the probability for successfully implementinq the corrective measures is greatest. (63 Water quality impact assessment. A water quality impact assessment shall be required for any proposed land disturbance or redevelopment within the Resource Protection Area consistent with this Section and for any other development in Chesapeake 45 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 Bay Preservation Areas that may warrant such assessment because of the unique characteristics of the site or intensity of the proposed use or development. (a). The purpose of the water quality impact assessment is to identify the impacts of proposed development on water quality and lands within Resource Protection Areas consistent with the goals and objectives of the Act and this ordinance, and to determine specific measures for mitigation of those impacts. (b) The water quality impact assessment shall be of sufficient specificity to demonstrate compliance with the criteria of this ordinance. (c~ Water quality, impact assessments shall be undertaken in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 107 (C) of this ordinance. · . . . . .__ ~_ -- To mznzmz~ ~= adverse ef~--~o~ of development activities -- - ....... protection areas, u~ the other component= · - - ' ~:= ........ ~---~ =--~ wide =t-g- waters, a~= and ~quatzc ---- , ' buffer ar=~ of vegetation that zo =ff=~= zn retardmng 46 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 runoff, preventing erosion, and~=:Itering nonpoint source ~f resent and ~,,~ from ~~ o~=~ b~ ~=t=~=d p ~t=bl~h=d where~t = does not=~=t---~-. ~-- b=ff== area o~=~ b= ~=~=d ad3a~=~= to =~ landward ==~ buffer =~== shall be d==~wnated as the landward Th= ~,~=- ~=~===~- ~= buffer a~ea shall b= deemed to =~=~= = s=~=,~=y f=~=--- (75) pe~ ~=~t reduction of sediments and a forty {40) per cent reduction of -"~-:~==~=~. = co~ination of a buffer area not less than fifty {50) feet in width and appropriate best management practices located landward of the buffer area whic~h collectmve~3 =~h~=~= ~===~ qua'~ pzotectmon, pollut=~,= removal, and water resource conservation at least the equivalent of the full one-hundred-=--=~= buffer area may be employed in lieu of the one hundred-foot buffer. (C) Duffer =~== ~==~,,=~ce standards. The buff=z a=ea shall be maintained to meet the following additional __~ _ performance otandazds: {I) In order to maintain the==~,~=~=~---I value of the buffer =~==, no =~oting vegetatmon shall ............... = = .......... ight ==~,,~=~ except to F=o~== for ===oo~=ble 47 1117 1~ ........ gene~=~ woodlot management, ~=o, =~=o~ paths, 1118 and best management pzact~--s~= , as follows- 1119 (a) Trees may be pruned or removed as necessary to 1120 1121 that who== ==~LLvv=~, they o~=~I be repl=~=d 1122 with other vegetation that~=s equally 1123 - = = - -=: --- ' ding 1124 1125 1126 (b) ~---path sha~ ~= n~ constructed and surfaced so 1127 as to ez==ctively control erosion. 1128 1129 may be removed =t th= discretion ~ 1130 landowner. 1131 For proj=~=o requiring permit° under oe~=ion 1132 ~-~u v= ~= ~=~ ~== or =ection 1403 of the 1133 wetlands zoning ordinance, and for projects 1134 authorizedw3 .... section 1402 1135 zoning ordinance, trees and woody vegetation 1136 1137 employed .... appzopziate vegetation 1138 established to prot=~t v~ oc~~ze the 1139 shozeline in accordance with the best 48 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 available techn=--l~= advi~=-- and applicable permit conditions or requirements.' (2) When the application of the buffer azeas would result in the loss of a bui~-'-~~=~= ..... =~=a on a lot oz parcel recorded prior to October I, 1989, the city manager may allow reductions of the widt.h of the buffer area in ~cordan~e with following ---~ ---=- {a) Encroachments upon, or reductions in the width of, the buffer area shall be the minimum ~cessazy to acco~,odate a reasonable ~w~o==~=~u~ fv~pzznt oolely for a print al structure. Once construction is complete, the vacant area within the construction f~otpzint shall be ==otoz== wz=~ vegetatzon; ~ ~=~=~m~ equal ' {b) Where possible, an area of ........ ~-- zn o=ze to the area of the buffe~ reduced or encroached upon shall be established elsewhere on the lot in such manner as to maximize water quality pzotectlon; and {c) In no case shall the reduced portion of the buffer area be less than fifty {50)==== .... in (3) On agricultural lands, the agricultural buffer area -~-II be managed to ...................... ~ ....... = 49 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 ........ ' and noxious weeds s.~===~= water from bzeachzng, from invading, the buffer area. The agricultural buffer area may~=~-- r=~=ced a-~ follows- (a) -To ~ m~n~mum ~==~ of fifty <50) ==== when the bj'-= ~-- = ~- ' pie 'ng - fed .... I or locally funded agzi---~=~====~ best F==~=~=~ program, ~=~u=~ that the coK~ination of the reduced buffer area and the ........... : .... ' .... water .... ~: =-- ' and q==~=3 protection, pollutant removal, ..................... ~2 water ~=o~u~= ~o== ~~ at l==st thc equlval=~= o= =~,= one-hundred-foot buffe~ -- ' by ' ' '- area, ~ detezmzned the Vzrgznz= and Water Conservation District; ..... lity ........... when a sozl and wa~=~ qua ~,~=~ plan, as appzoved by the Virginia Dare Soil Conservation ~ .... ~ -= and Water u~~, i p d -- == .... ~ =--= land Such plan shall be based upon the Field Office Technical of Agr ' cultu[e ~--: ~- -= ==- U S Department ~-:~ Conservation Service and accomplish water ~u=~z pzotectzon consio==~ wzth thio ordinance; 50 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 ........ : ~'~-~ 'f the subj--~ agricultural land has in place best management practices in accordance with a consezvat'on plan approved by the Virginia Dare Soil and Water Conservation Distzict. (D) A new oz expanded water dependent facility shall be allowed, provided that- (l) It does not conflict with the compre~hensive plan; It complies --~,,a~-~ ~ ~h= applicable performance -- _ _ ' ---- --~2 --~ ' standards =~ s=t forth zn ~=~o~ I00 of th~s { 3) Any non-water-dependent component is located landward of resource F~=~~ areas, and ~ 4 ~ =~=o~ will b= provided wz ~ the m~nimum disturbance necessary. Where possible, a single E. Redevelopment ~=~ .............. ~ ~an~= standards. ........... ~ ppli (I)~=~= ..... ~ =~.,,=~ ~ shall~.~ ~.,,---~ ....... ~ ~= a cable stormwate~ management and erosi~ and control pe~~,,~= standards s=~ ~h ~n ~ f th'- d' '~: ..... ~ .... (2) ....... e oo , -~== po--ible the applicant shall establ=sh maintain a vegetated buffer of --- ~-= .... = ==~ to 51 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 F. help --=~ ................ ' ' =~=v= the t=~ ("~j~v p=A~=~= reductzon zn the existing nonpoint source pollution load for redevelopment. ........ = ......... standards. The Av=-llowing dards -~-~ apply =- -~ -~ ............ I ...... ' the landward fzfty ~ A==~ of the buffer area (1) The =..~ro=~..~,,=~ into the ~--= .... asea .......... ~=A~=A shall b= the minimum necessary ~ =fford --- ~- ; .... ~' ~- provided where (2) D=st managementFA=~=o~--- o~=~ source pollution; (3) Erosion and sediment controls shall be provided (4) Excavation mat--~al=A~ from construction shall bc disposed of in a lawful manner; and -- =~ .... = the construct~u~ Auu=Frznt shall b= ~dent~f~=d and protected. "===--=~--~-~=~==~ for trees removed shall be ordinance. COMMENT This section sets forth performance standards for development (including redevelopment) in Resource Protection Areas and Resource Management Areas. The specific performance standards 52 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 are required by the revised Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Designation and Management Regulations promulgated by the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Board (CBLAB). The Performance Standards are intended to (1) prevent a net increase in nonpoint source pollution from new development activity, or development on previously developed land already served by a best management practice, and (2) achieve a 10% reduction in nonpoint source pollution on previously developed land not served by a best management practice. Performance standards are divided into two categories, General Performance Standards and Development Criteria for Resource Protection Areas. The General Performance Standards have been revised in the new regulations in four principal ways. These revisions have, in turn, been incorporated into the amendments to this section of the ordinance. They are as follows: (1) Minor housekeeping amendments to assure consistency with other code and regulatory changes; (2) Revisions which allow for septic system inspection in lieu of pumpout where systems are found to be operating properly, as well as consistency with new Health Department septic system regulations; 0) Revisions which allow for greater flexibility in meeting stormwater management requirements, as well as consistency with new Department of Environmental Quality and Department of Conservation and Recreation stormwater regulations; and (4) Revisions which allow for greater flexibility in meeting soil and water quality conservation goals for agricultural lands, as well as consistency with new Department of Agriculture and Department of Conservation and Recreation agricultural regulations. Similarly, the Development Criteria for Resource Protection Areas have been amended in four principal ways: (1) Minor housekeeping amendments to assure consistency with other code and regulatory changes; (2) Revisions which place more restrictive provisions on maintaining the integrity of the 100 foot buffer area portion of the Resource Protection Area for new development on lots platted after January 1, 2004; (3) Revisions which allow for greater flexibility for development which must encroach into the 100 foot buffer for lots platted before January 1, 2004; and (4) Revisions which allow for greater flexibility in meeting soil and water quality conservation goals for agricultural lands, as well as consistency with new Department of Agriculture and Department of Conservation and Recreation agricultural regulations. 53 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 COMMENT In light of the renumbering of the Ordinance, there is no longer any reason to reserve this section number. Section 110 107. Plan of development process· Any development or redevelopment in the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area shall be accomplished through a plan of development process consistent with Section 15.2-2286 (8) of the Code of Virginia~ Section 15.1-2-220~ (0). Approval shall be rendered for a plan prior to commencement of any land-disturbing activity on site or the issuance of any building permit. Plans and information required under this section may be coordinated or combined as deemed appropriate by the city manager City Manaqer. All information required in this section shall be drawn to ~he same scale as the preliminary site plan or final subdivision plat, and certified as complete and accurate by persons duly licensed by the Commonwealth of Virginia to practice as such. Any applicant, or potential applicant, may confer with such departments and other agencies of the ~ City as may be appropriate concerning a general development or redevelopment proposal before submission of an application. Such conference shall not be construed as an application for approval of such proposal. (A) General plan of development process. Except as otherwise provided herein, the plan of development process for any 54 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 development or redevelopment in a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area, except development or redevelopment requirinq an administrative variance pursuant to Section 110 (B), shall consist of the plans and information identified below: (1) A site plan or a subdivision plat which meets the requirements of the Site Plan Ordinance (Appendix C) or Subdivision Ordinance (Appendix B), as the case may be, and which clearly delineates the following environmental features: (a) Tidal wetlands; (b) Tidal shores; (c) Nontidal wetlands; 55h~ the location and extent of the nontidal wetlands which shall be determined in accordance with the procedures specified in the United States Corps Delineation Manual, of Engineers' Wetland Technical Report Y-87-1, January 1987, Final Report, as restricted by ~ Section 103 of this ordinance~A (d) Highly erodible soils; and (e) A buffer area not less than one hundred (100) feet in widthT and located adjacent to and landward of components (a) through {~j and along both ..... of any tributaryo~=~L~i. 1. any land comprised of highly erodible soils; 55 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 2. any land adjoining tidal wetlands, tidal shores, nontidal wetlands or highly erodible soils; and any land adjoining both sides of any waterbodies with perennial flow. (2) A landscape plan which delineates or complies with the following: (a) The'location, size, and description of existing and proposed plant material. All existing trees on the site of six (6) inches or greater diameter at breast height shall be shown. Where there are groups of trees, stands may be outlined instead. The specific number of such trees to be preserved outside or within the construction footprint shall be indicated on the plan. Trees and plants to be disturbed or removed to create a desired construction footprint shall be clearly delineated. A description of the proposed measures for mitigation shall include (i) a replanting schedule for trees and other vegetation removed for construction, including a list of plants and trees to be used; (ii) a demonstration that the design of the plan will preserve to the greatest extent possible any trees and vegetation on the site and 56 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 will provide maximum erosion control and overland flow benefits from such vegetation; and (iii) a demonstration that existing plants are to be used to the greatest extent possible. If no mitigation or planting is required, existing trees may be delineated on the site plan or subdivision plat. (b) A delineation of any required buffer area and any plant material to be added to establish or supplement the buffer area. (c) Within the buffer area, a designation of the trees to be removed for sight lines, vistas, access paths and best management practices, and any vegetation replacing trees removed from the buffer area. (d) A designation of the trees to be removed for shoreline stabilization projects and any replacement vegetation. (e) A depiction of grade changes or other work adjacent to trees which would adversely affect them. Specifications shall be provided as to how grade, drainage, and aeration would be maintained around trees to be preserved. (f) A description of the limits of clearing of existing vegetation, based on all anticipated improvements, including buildings, drives, and utilities, and 57 1369 1370 1371 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 specifications for the protection of existing trees during clearing, grading, and all phases of construction. (g) All supplementary or replacement plant materials shall be in a healthy condition. Plant materials shall conform to the standards of the most recent edition of the American Standard for Nursery Stock, published by the American Nursery and Landscape Association -~ ............... and shall be installed according to standard planting practices and procedures. (h) Where areas to be preserved are encroached upon, replacement of existing trees and other vegetation shall be achieved at a ratio of three (3) trees planted to one (1) tree greater than six (6) inches diameter at breast height removed, or by such other measures as in the judgment of the city manager City Manaqer will adequately compensate for the removal of such trees and other vegetation. Replacement trees shall be a minimum two (2) to two and one-half (2 -1/2) inches caliper at the time of planting. (3) A stormwater management plan containing maps, charts, graphs, tables, photographs, narrative descriptions, 58 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 explanations, and supporting references. At a minimum, the stormwater management plan shall contain the following- (a) Location and design of all planned stormwater control devices. (b) Procedures for implementing nonstructural stormwater control practices and techniques. (c) A long-term schedule for inspection and maintenance of stormwater management consistent with the Stormwater Management Ordinance (Appendix D). (d) A maintenance agreement as deemed necessary and appropriate by the city manager City Manaqer to ensure proper maintenance of best management practices in order to continue their functions. (e) Predevelopment and postdevelopment nonpoint source pollutant loadings with supporting documentation of all utilized coefficients and calculations as ~n~ ,~ ,7 .... 106 (a) outlined in ~ Section ~v~ ~nj ~,j ~j (7) of this ordinance. (f) For stormwater management facilities, verification of structural soundness, which shall be certified by a professional engineer. All engineering calculations shall be performed in accordance with the current edition of the City of Virginia Beach 59 1417 1418 1419 1420 1421 1422 1423 1424 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 Public Works Standards and Specifications and the current edition of the Virginia Stormwater Manaqement Handbook Local ~--: ...... Manual ( 4 ) An erosion and sediment control plan meeting the requirements of the provisions of a-rt-i-c-{-~ Article III of ~ Chapter 30 of the Code of the City of Virginia Beach (City Code ~ Sections 30-56 through 30-78). (B) Administrative variance ~ plan of development process for -: ....... : ~-- -emidetached and attached dwellings in thc resource management area. A lot whi-~ ~o:- to u= ~=v=~up=~ =o one ~l'j sin e-famil--~ dwelling, semid=tached dwelling or attached ..... ~ ~:- , uo located in its entirety within =~e=~ resource management area shall , ~- _ _. -- , . _ , . ..... z. submi= = oat= plan in lieu of the proviozons outlined puzo==~ to subsection' ~'~' ~'"'~ hereof to eom 3'- wi=~ the Frovisions of oe~=ion = this ordinance, and -= ........ '- the following information log o~ unless deemed unnecessary by the City Manager- Except as otherwise provided herein, the plan of development process for any use, development or redevelopment in a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area requirinq an administrative variance shall consist of a site plan meeting the applicable requirements of the Site Plan Ordinance (Appendix C), unless deemed unnecessary by the City Manaqer, which shall contain the plans and information identified below' 60 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 (1) Limits of land disturbance and all areas of clearing, grading, accessways and staging areas. (2) Location of all approved existing and proposed septic tanks and drainfield areas, including reserve areas and the location of all existing and proposed wells and utilities. (3) Location of all erosion and sediment control devices. (4) A statement that excavation material from construction shall be disposed of in a lawful manner. (5) The total amount of impervious surface proposed for the site. (6) Specifications for the protection of existing trees and vegetation during clearing, grading and all phases of construction. (7) Revegetation schedule. (8) Best management practices. (9) Evidence that all applicable wetlands permits required by law have been obtained prior to authorization of grading or other on-site activities shall be provided. The site plan shall be deemed to constitute a plan of development review process consistent with section 15.2-2206(8) of the Code of Virginia. Additional information shall be requested and reasonable and appropriate conditions shall be imposed by the city manager 61 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 City Manaqer, if necessary, to preserve the purpose and intent of this Ordinance. (I) Landward fifty feet of the buffer. A site plan or land ou~v=3 o=ff~=~t to show with the -- - - - - ~LL~ ~ ~ ~XI~ requi==~,=~o ~ section lOS(F) v= =~= [this] ordinance shall be submitted to the City Manager for any minor .... ~--= located in the landward fifty ~) f==t of the buffer area. Said site plan shall be prepared according · to the ~=ovisions va the City S: - Plan Ordinance ....... ' -- ~' ..................... by ity ~=~ ~/, =~==oo deemed ~=~=oo=~3 the c (2) Seaward fifty (50) feet of the buffer. Plans sufficient ....... pl' --:~ ~- ppl' ' ' ~v °,~v~ eom lance ~=~ =,,= a icable provisioAs of o=~ion 108 of the (this) ordinance o,,=~ ~= submitted to for any minos pro =~t lo~=~=d in the seaward fifty (50) feet of the buffe= ~==. o=~= F~=,~o -~-'' ' =- the provisions of 0~==~ be prepared according =v ____1 ..... ~ .... ' = ..... = riles deemed y ~-- thc City Manager. '~' A==~zonal information o~=~ be requested lo7 th=~:t3 manage=, if necessary, to pzeo==v= the purpose and nt=~.t of this ordinance. 62 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 (~) Water quality impact assessment. The purpose of a water quality impact assessment is to' (i) identify the potentially adverse impacts of proposed development on water quality and lands within Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas; (ii) ensure that, where use, development or redevelopment takes place within Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas, it will be located on those portions of a site and in a manner that will be least disruptive to the natural functions of resource p~otection areas Resource Protection Areas and other sensitive lands; and (iii) specify means to avoid, minimize or mitigate the impacts of development for water quality protection. A water quality impact assessment shall be required (i) for any use, development or redevelopment within a ==source p~u==~=~u~ erre~ Resource Protection Area; (ii) for any buffer area encroachment or reduction; (iii) for any variance provided for in section 113 Section 110 of this ordinance; (iv) for=~-~ minor; or ~ (iv) where a water quality impact assessment is deemed necessary by the city manager City Manager to evaluate the potential impacts of the use, development or redevelopment upon water quality or a resource protection area Resource Protection Area by reason of the unique characteristics of the site or the intensity of the proposed use or development. (1) ~ Administrative variance water quality impact assessment. The water quality impact assessment for any 63 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 1530 1531 1532 1533 minoz project located in the buffer area administrative variance shall include a site drawing to scale which shows the following, unless one (1) or more such elements shall, in the judqment of the City Manaqer, not be reasonably necessary in determininq the impact of the proposed use, development or redevelopment' (a) Location of the components of the mzv~:~w~ azea Resource Protection Area, including the -~Sq~-<~tbuffer area. (b) Location and nature of the proposed development into the buffer area, including' type of having of paving material; areas of clearing or grading; location of any structures, drives or other impervious cover; and sewage disposal systems or reserve drainfield sites. (c) Type and location of proposed best management practices ~- -~: .... the prop --d (2) ;-;a3or water quality i~act assessment. The following elements shall be included in a water quality assessment for all uses, development or redevelopment which do not satisfy the requirements for an administrative variance, unless one (1) or more such elements shall, in the judgment of the -: ..... City Manaqer, ~ manage~ not be 64 1534 1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 reasonably necessary in determining the impact of the proposed development or redevelopment: (a) A delineation of environmental features as set forth in section II0 Section 107(A) (1) of this ordinance; (b) A landscape plan as set forth in section II0 Section 107(A) (2) of this ordinance; (c) A stormwater management plan as set forth in section II0 Section 107(A) (3) of this ordinance; and (d) A narrative that: 1. Describes the existing topography, soil information, including depth to groundwater and infiltration rate where appropriate, surface and groundwater hydrology, wetlands on the site and, if necessary, drainage patterns from adjacent lands; 2. Describes the impacts of the proposed development on topography, soils, surface and groundwater hydrology on the site and adjacent lands; 3. Describes potential adverse 'impacts on wetlands; 65 1557 1558 1559 1560 1561 1562 1563 1564 1565 1566 1567 1568 1569 1570 1571 1572 1573 1574 1575 1576 1577 1578 1579 1580 4. Indicates the source location and description of proposed excavation and fill material; 5. Indicates, for any water-dependent activity, the location of, and potential adverse impacts upon, shellfish beds, submerged aquatic vegetation, and fish spawning and nursery areas; 6. Lists all federal, state and local permits required for the development of the site; and 7. Describes the proposed mitigation measures for the potential adverse hydrogeological impacts of the project. (~D_) Performance and bonding requirements. (1) No approved plans required by this ~s~-o~ Section shall be released until the applicant provides performance bonds or other form of surety acceptable to the c-kt7 e~5~n~ City Attorney, provided, however, that when the occupancy of a structure is desired prior to the completion of the required landscaping, stormwater management facilities, or other specifications of an approved plan, a building permit and certificate of occupancy may be issued if the applicant provides to the City of Virginia Beach a form of surety satisfactory to the city attorney City Attorney in an amount equal to the 66 1581 1582 1583 1584 1585 1586 1587 1588 1589 1590 1591 1592 1593 1594 1595 1596 1597 1598 1599 1600 1601 1602 1603 estimated cost of construction, related materials, and installation costs of the required landscaping or other specifications and maintenance costs for any required stormwater management facilities. (2) All required landscaping shall be installed as approved by the end of the first planting season following issuance of a certificate of occupancy or the surety shall be forfeited to the ~ City. (3) All required stormwater management facilities or other specifications shall be installed and approved within eighteen (18) months of project commencement. Should the applicant fail, after proper notice, to initiate, complete or maintain appropriate actions required by the approved plan, the surety may be forfeited to the t~ City, which may also collect from the applicant the amount by which the reasonable cost of required actions exceeds the amount of the surety held. (4) After all required actions of the approved plan have been completed, the applicant shall submit to the city ~anager City Manager a written request for a final inspection. If the requirements of the approved plan have been completed, such unexpended or unobligated portion of the surety held shall be refunded to the applicant or 67 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609 1610 1611 1612 1613 1614 1615 1616 1617 1618 1619 1620 1621 1622 1623 1624 1625 1626 1627 1628 1629 terminated within sixty (60) days following the receipt of the applicant's request for final inspection. (5) Prior to the issuance of any grading, building or other permit for activities involving site development activities, the applicant shall furnish to the t-i-~ City a reasonable performance bond, cash escrow, letter of credit or other legal surety, or any combination thereof acceptable to the city attorney City Attorney, to ensure that measures may be taken by the ~ City, at the applicant's expense, should he fail, after proper notice, within the time specified, to initiate or maintain appropriate conservation action which may be required of him as a result of his site development. COMMENT The amendments re~se the plan of development process Mr proposed development ~ Resource Protec~on Areas and Resource Management Areas. The amended section dis~nguishes between general plans of development, which apply to development either not needing any variance or needing a variance granted by the Chesapeake Bay Prese~aton Area Board, and adm~tra~ve variance plans ofdev~opment, which apply to development requiring an administr~ive variance. The la~er process allows Mr a gre~er degree of fle~bili~ in the process. Section 111 108. Nonconforming buildings and structures. (A) Any use, building or structure which lawfully existed on the date of adoption of this ordinance and which is not in conformity with any one or more of the provisions of this ordinance, and any use, building or structure which lawfully exists on the date of adoption of any amendment to this ordinance and 68 1630 1631 1632 1633 1634 1635 1636 1637 1638 1639 1640 1641 1642 1643 1644 1645 1646 1647 1648 1649 1650 1651 1652 1653 1654 which is not in conformity with such amendment, shall be deemed nonconforming. '~ ~ ........ -'-- relocation or ~/ ~,v change of use or =~=~o~v~, enlargement, .... stant~ -I ........ ~ ..... forming ...... ~ ~ ~-- structure ~I~ b= allowed unle== autho~z~=d~3-- th= board ~zdance with th~ procedures and standards specified 113 of ~:~=- ordinance or by the City Manager pursuant to subsection (E) herein. (C) Any action of the permitting a change of use, or the =~=~=~, =~lazgement, relocation oz ~Ite~tion of a ~==, building or ~~= ~j=~ to the provisions ~ th~s~=~~ sba null and void twelve (12) months from the date of its adoption (~) Nothing in this ~ Section shall be construed to prohibit the reconstruction or restoration of any nonconforming building or structure which is destroyed or damaged by reason of casualty loss, provided that the area encompassed by such building or structure, as reconstructed or restored, is not extended or enlarged Relocation of a bui~-':-- or - - . ~~ ~tructuze=~I be ~I~=~ ...... ly - - ' -- ' '~ ....... (E) Any application for a change of use or extension, =~==~=~,,=~=, ==location or substanti=l =It===t~ of ~u~=~~-- use, building or o===~== o~=~ be revi=~=d by the city manager. If the city manager determines that the proposed =~=~u~ ~uu~ not increase =~e=~ nonpoznt souza= pollution runoff 69 1655 1656 1657 1658 1659 1660 1661 1662 1663 1664 1665 1666 1667 1668 1669 1670 1671 1672 1673 1674 1675 1676 1677 1678 1679 City -=-' ' ppl' -- =~u~L, ..... the lot, the Manager o~==~ approve the a z~=~,. the City Manages determines that any~=~= ......... ~'- nonpoint source pollution runoff load may be prevented by the use of best management practices or other mitigation techniques, he shall approve the application upon the condition that such practices or techniques, or a coJ~ination thereof, be employed. The city manager may establish suc~h review policies as deemed expedient in effectuating the intent of this section. {.~ Any d=~=lopment or land disturbance ...... ' an ..... of two thousand-~= ..... ~.~-=== ~=,'~ 500} square~==~ = .... o~=~=-'' comply w~th' thc erosion and sediment control performance standards set forth in , ~ ~1~ . _ , sectzon ~uo of thzo ozdznance. (G) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, , where th= =equ~==.~,=.,=o for buffer ==== -eductzons pursuant to · , ~ ...... sectzon ~ -= ' ........ ' .... shall -uu u~ thzs ordir, ance ak= met, ~= ~==~ .-~=~.=~== approve any -~ .... of use or , . ...... ZT .... -' ...... t_.__' ~ -]2 __ -- structure in the ~ ~u~=u fifty ~50} =--= of the buffer COMMENT The specific criteria relating to expansions, etc. of nonconforming structures are deleted from this section, as such criteria are included in the provisions for variances (Section 110). Section ~ ~" 109 Exemptions (A) Exemptions for public facilitmes. (1) Construction, installation, operation and maintenance of electric, natural qas, fiber optic, and telephone 7O 1680 1681 1682 1683 1684 1685 1686 1687 1688 1689 1690 1691 1692 1693 1694 1695 1696 1697 1698 1699 1700 1701 1702 1703 1704 transmission lines, railroads, public roads and their appurtenant structures in accordance with (i) regulations promulgated pursuant to the Erosion and Sediment Control Law (Code of Virginia, ~-~i-~n~ Section 10.1-560 et. seq.) and the Stormwater Management Act (Code of Virginia, Section 10.1-603.1 et. seq.)Ti (ii) an erosion and sediment control plan and a stormwater management plan approved by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation~ or (iii) local water quality criteria at least as stringent as the state requirements will be deemed to constitute compliance with these regulations be exempt from the provisions of this ordinance, provided tgrai-r, such facilities and appurtenant structures comply with all requirements of Article III of Chapter 30 of the Code of the City of Virginia Beach (City Code Sections 30-56 through 30-78), and all stormwater management requirements of this ordinance and the Stormwater Management Ordinance (Appendix D). Exemptions for public roads shall also be subject to the following conditions- (a) The road alignment and design are optimized and consistent with other applicable requirements to prevent or otherwise minimize (i) encroachment~ ~ the resource p~otection a~ea into Resource Protection Areas and (ii) adverse effects on water quality. 71 1705 1706 1707 1708 1709 1710 1711 1712 (b) Such appurtenant structures shall include, but are not limited to, bridges, culverts, guard rails, drainage facilities, lighting and traffic-control devices, fences and berms. (2) Roads or driveways not exempt from the provisions of section 112 Section 109(A) (1)v~-= .... ~o ordinance may be constructed in or across resource ~=uu=~u~u~ ~=as Resource Protection Areas in accordance with Section 106 1713 1714 1715 1716 1717 1718 1719 1720 1721 1722 1723 1724 1725 1726 1727 1728 (B) (1)(d). if each of the following conditions is met- (a) ~ ~' · ,~e ~ty Manager mak=o ~ finding that there are no reas~~e ~I~=~~=o to aligning the road driveway in or across the resource protection area; ~= ~~.,=~ ~ ~=o~ of the road or driveway are optimized, consistent with other requirements, to -~-~--~-- '~' - the -~' ..... and (ii)~=~o= ................. =~=~o on water prote~uzon (c) The design and construction of the road oz driveway , --~'-f-- all applicable ---~ ---' of thzs ordznance including submission of a water quality impact assessment; and (d) The City Manager reviews the plan for the road or griveway proposed in or across the resource protection area in coordination with local site 72 1729 1730 1731 1732 1733 1734 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1742 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1751 1752 1753 .... ~ .... ~ .......... f p plan, o~v~o~w, a,~ F~a,, o develo ment approvals. (3) Construction, installation and maintenance of water, sewer, cable and natural gas lines and storm drains, and their appurtenant facilities, and of pumping ~tations, =~ .............. manhole ........ ~--~ ...... ~ ............. £ac&l±ties owned or permitted by the City, a licensed public utility or a regional service authority, that are an essential but incidental component of public water and sewer projects, shall be exempt from this ordinance provided that- (a) To the degree practicable, the location of such utilities and facilities shall be outside ~ protection areas Resource Protection Areas; (b) No more land shall be disturbed than is necessary to provide for the ~~e~ proposed installation; (c) All construction, installation, and maintenance of such utilities and facilities shall comply with all applicable state and federal requirements and permits and shall be designed and constructed in a manner that protects water quality; and (d) Any land disturbance exceeding an area of two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet complies with all requirements of ~ Article 3 of ~ Chapter 30 of the Code of the City of 73 1754 1755 1756 1757 1758 1759 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1768 1769 1770 1771 1772 1773 1774 1775 1776 1777 1778 Virginia Beach (City Code ~ Sections 30-56 through 30-78). (4) Construction, installation and maintenance of stormwater quality control structures such as pipes, ditches, swales, culverts, detention and retention ponds, energy diss ating devi~=o and dit-~,~ ~ank prv~=~ion whi required oz regulated by city ordinance and whic~h comply with th= requirements of ~ticle ~ v~ ~~=~ ~ of the Code ~- ~= ~3 of Virginia Death ~ty Code 30-56 through 30-70) s~hall be deemed to be in compliance --:~ this ordinance B. Exemptions for Silvicultural Activities. Silvicultural activities shall be exempt from the requirements of this ordinance provided that such activities comply with water quality protection procedures prescribed by the Virqinia department Department of Forestry in : ....... '--- Ilandbook for Forestry ~u° ~=ot Management Pzacti~=o Operations." the January 1997 edition of the "Forestry Best Management Practices for Water Quality in Virginia Technical Guide." ........ ' ' - ........ ' ...... The following use~ of~--~ in resource protection ~e~o o~= be=~=~ thc ...... ~-:-- of this ~~,~,,~= ~ water wello, ~ pasoivc. ......... ~ ..... =~ .... : ...... ~-- but not ~:-~ ......... dwalks trails and pathways; (iii) historic preservation and archaeological · ' (' ) ..... flow activit~ ...... ~ = ..... whz-= do not=~,~~-~t 74 1779 1780 1781 1782 1783 1784 1785 1786 1787 1788 1789 1790 1791 1792 1793 1794 1795 1796 1797 1798 1799 1800 1801 1802 1803 ' = - demono~=t=d to th= -- ~- -- ~-- of =~- -~=-- provided ~h=t~ Lo~ ......... ~=t~of=~t~w~ manager that- ......~ ___ ~ __ , ...... ~ . , (I) ~-" ~ ~ermits, ~ ~~ ~~ those to which ~x~mption specifically applies, shall have been~o~-suedf ~~d~g an f , (2) Any land disturbance ....... ~- area o 2 500 square ~ shall eom ~ wi~ ~II ~quir~~o of ~~I~ -~--~--- ~ -= ~- City ' ' ~=~=~ ~ v~ ~= Code of th~ of Virginia ~City Code oe~ons 30-5~ thzou CO~54ENT The amendments add fiber optic and namr~ gas Hnes to the e~sting exemptions, and refine the conditions under which those exemptions apply. Section ~ 110. Variances. (A) General requirements. Applications for variances from any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be in writing and filed with the city manager City Manaqer. Such applications shall identify the potential impacts of the proposed variance on water quality and on lands within the ~esouzce protection area Resource Protection Area through the performance of a water quality impact assessment which complies with the provisions of this ordinance. (B) Administrative variances. The city manager City Manager shall approve or deny an application requesting ~ an administrative variance for a minor project to locate in the seaward fifty (50) feet of the buffer area after receipt of a complete application. No such application shall be accepted by the City Manaqer unless 75 1804 1805 1806 1807 1808 1809 1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1827 1828 1829 accompanied by a nonrefundable fee in the amount of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00). Administrative variances may be granted only for uses, development or redevelopment described in: (1) Section 106(B) (2) for water wells, passive recreation facilities and historic preservation and archaeological activities; (2) Section 106(B) (4) for lots recorded prior to October 1, 1989 or between October 1, 1989 and January 1, 2004 where application of the buffer requirement would result in the loss of a buildable lot and meet the criteria enumerated[ (3) Section 106(B) (5) for sight lines, access paths, general woodlot management and best management practices[ and (4) Section 108 for additions to nonconforming structures. No administrative variance shall be granted under this subsection unless the city manager City Manager makes all of the findings required in subsection ~ (H) ~ hereof. The City Manager may establish such review policies as he deems expedient in effectuatinq the intent of this ordinance. In approving an application, The City Manager shall, if warranted, include reasonable and appropriate conditions that will prevent the degradation of water quality. The city manager City Manager shall record both the request and his administrative decision in a public access file to be maintained for one (1) calendar year. ~zPre--~ 76 1830 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1837 1838 1839 1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 1845 1846 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 Manage~ may =ot=bl~oh such~=v~=w:--- pol:-:es~ as d==~,,=d expedient ~n effectuating the intent of The plan of development process for review of administrative variance requests shall be as set forth in Section 107 (B) of this ordinance. The applicant shall cause to be posted on the property which is the subject of the application a sign of a size and type similar to those required for Board variances. One (1) such sign shall be posted within ten (10) feet of every public street adjoining the property and within ten (10) feet of any body of water or waterway less than five hundred (500) feet wide adjoining the property. Such sign shall state the nature of the application and shall be posted for not less than fifteen (15) days prior to the time when an application is acted upon. In the event such si~n is removed, obscured, otherwise rendered illegible or if the City Manager determines that the requirements of this section have not been met prior to the hearing, he may deny or defer action on the application. (C) Board variances. The city manager City Manager shall review any other application for a variance and the water quality impact assessment and provide the ~ Board with an evaluation of the potential impacts of the proposed variance and such other information as may aid the board Board in considering the application. No such application shall be accepted by the ~ m~n-ra~3r City Manager unless accompanied by a nonrefundable fee in the amount of one hundred five Two Hundred Ten ~ Dollars 77 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 ($I05.00 $210.00). The city manager City Manager shall transmit the application and supporting information and evaluation to the members of the ~ Board and the applicant no less than five (5) days prior to the scheduled hearing on such application. (D) Not later than sixty (60) days after the receipt of an application, the ~ Board shall hold a public hearing on such application. Notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be published no less than once per week for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to such hearing in a newspaper having a general circulation in the ~ City. The second such notice shall appear not less than five (5) days nor more than twenty-one (21) days prior to the hearing. (D.I) (E) The ~ Board shall notify, by first class mail, all property owners adjacent to the subject property and each waterfront property owner across the waterway from the subject property, if the water body is less than five hundred (500) feet wide, of the public hearing at least five (5) days prior to the hearing. (E-~ (F) In addition to the foregoing requirements, the applicant shall cause to be posted on the property which is the subject of the hearing a sign, of a size and type approved by the b~a"r~ Board. One (1) such sign shall be posted within ten (10) feet of every public street adjoining the property and within ten (10) feet of any body of water or waterway less than five hundred (500) feet wide adjoining the property. Such sign shall be posted not less than fifteen (15) days from the public hearing and shall state the 78 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 nature of the application and date and time of the hearing. Such signs shall be removed no later than five (5) days after the public hearing. In the event such sign is removed, obscured, otherwise rendered illegible or if the ~ Board determines that the requirements of this section have not been met prior to the hearing, the board Board may deny or defer the application. Any application deferred by the ~ Board by reason of noncompliance with the posting requirements of this ~ Section shall not thereafter be heard unless and until an additional fee in the amount of one hundred dollars ($100.00) is paid. ~ (G) The board Board may make, alter and rescind rules for its procedures not inconsistent with the provisions of this ~ Section; provided, however, that a quorum shall be not less than a majority of all of the members of the ~ Board, and provided further, that the concurring vote of a majority of the members of the ~ Board present and voting shall be required to grant any variance. that: No variance shall be granted unless the ~ Board finds (1) Granting the variance will not confer upon the applicant any special privilege~ or convenience not accorded to other owners of property in Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas who are subject to the provisions of this ordinance and are similarly situated; 79 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 (2) The application is not based upon conditions or circumstances that are or have been created or imposed by the applicant or his predecessor in title; (3) The variance is the minimum necessary to afford relief; (4) The variance will be is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, and not injurious to the neighborhood, not of substantial detriment to water quality, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare; ~ (5) There will be is no net increase in nonpoint source pollution load~ ~ ( ) ..... ~ ....... ~ ~- - reasonabl~ 6 No v~~= o~ ~= gzanted unleso Reasonable and appropriate conditions are imposed which will prevent the variance from causing or contributzng to a degradation of water qualityr~and (7) Any development or land disturbance exceedinq an area of two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet shall comply with all applicable erosion and sediment control requirements. COMMENT The amendments re~se the variance process by establishing two types of variances. The first type, Administra~ve Variances, are decided by the City Manager or his designee, and are ~r (1) water we~s, passive recreation ~cilities and historic prese~ation and archaeological activities in Resource Protection Areas; (2) encroachments into the buffer area on lots recorded either be~re October 1, 1989 or between that date and January 1, 2004, where the application of the buffer area 80 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 requirements would result in the loss of a buildable area; and (3) removal of vegetation to provide for reasonable sight lines, access paths, etc. and additions to nonconforming structures. AH other variances (referred to as Board Variances) are be heard by the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Board. The standards for granting or denying applications, however, are the same for both types of variances. Those standards would remain essentially the same in the amended ordinance as they have existed since the original ordinance was adopted. 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 Section 114 111. Appeals. (A) Any order, determination or decision made by the ~ ~ City Manager or any administrative officer in the administration or enforcement of this ordinance, including any decision on an application for an administrative variance, may be appealed by any person aggrieved by the decision to the board Board by application filed with the city manager City Manager within fifteen (15) days from the date of such order, determination or decision. Such application shall state with particularity the grounds of such appeal. Any application failing to do so shall be rejected by the city manage~ City Manager. The filing of an appeal shall not stay any proceedings in furtherance of the action appealed from. (B) The fees and notice requirements for appeals under subsection (A) hereof shall be as set forth in section 113 Section 110. (C) Any party aggrieved of a decision of the board Board may, within thirty (30) days of the date of such decision, petition the circuit court to review such decision. The procedure in such cases shall be as provided in ~ Section 15.2-2314 of the Code of 81 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Virginia, as amended. No party having failed to appear at the hearing before the ~ Board and object to the application at that time shall be deemed to be an aggrieved party; provided, however, that the ~ City, shall have standing to appeal any decision of the ~ Board irrespective of not having appeared before the ~ Board as otherwise required by this ordinance. (D) The circuit court may affirm, reverse or modify any decision of the ~ Board, and may impose any reasonable conditions in its judgment; provided, however, that no decision of the board Board shall be disturbed unless the court shall find: (1) The decision appealed from was based upon the erroneous application of the criteria set forth in subsection (G) of section 113 Section 110 of this ordinance or was based upon grounds other than those set forth therein; (2) There was no substantial evidence upon which the ~ Board could have made all findings required by subsection (G) of section 113 Section 110 of this ordinance; (3) The decision of the ~ Board was plainly wrong; or ( 4 ) The ~ Board failed to impose reasonable and appropriate conditions intended to prevent the variance from causing or contributing to a degradation of water quality. COMMENT The amendments conform section references to the new numbering and are otherwise stylistic in nature. 82 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Section{-1-5 112. Violations; penalties. (A) A violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be a misdemeanor punishable by a fine in an amount not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or confinement in jail for a period not exceeding twelve (12) months, either or both. (B) (1) Without limiting the remedies which may be obtained under this ordinance, any person who violates any provision of this ordinance or who violates, fails, neglects, or refuses to obey any variance or permit condition authorized under this ordinance shall, upon such finding by the circuit court, be assessed a civil penalty not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) for each day of violation. Such penalties may, at the discretion of the court assessing them, be directed to be paid into the treasury of the ~ City for the purpose of abating environmental damage to or restoring Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas within the ~ City, in such a manner as the court may direct by order, except that in the event the ~ City or its agent is the violator, the court shall direct the penalty to be paid into the ~ treasury of the Commonwealth. (2) Without limiting the remedies which may be obtained under this ordinance, and with the consent of any 83 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 person who has violated any provision of this ordinance, or who has violated, failed, neglected, or refused to obey any variance or permit condition authorized under this ordinance, the ~ Board may provide for the issuance of an order against such person for the one-time payment of civil charges for each violation in specific sums, not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) for each violation. Such civil charges shall be paid into the treasury of the ~ City for the purpose of abating environmental damage or restoring Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas in the ~-i-t~ City, except that in the event the ~ City or its agent is the violator, the civil charges shall be paid into the Frte~-e treasury of the Commonwealth. Civil charges shall be in lieu of any appropriate civil penalty that could be imposed under subdivision (1) of this subsection. Civil charges may be in addition to the coss of any restoration required by the ~ Board. (C) In addition to, and not in lieu of, the penalties prescribed in subsections (A) and (B) hereof, the ~ City may apply to the Circuit Court for an injunction against the continuing violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance and may seek any other remedy authorized by law. 84 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 (D) Upon notice from the city manager City Manaqer or his designee that any activity is being conducted in violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance, such activity shall immediately be stopped. An order to stop work shall be in writing and shall state the nature of the violation and the conditions under which the activity may be resumed. No such order shall be effective until it shall have been tendered to the owner of the property upon which the activity is conducted or his agent or to any person conducting such activity. Any person who shall continue an activity ordered to be stopped, except as directed in the stop- work order, shall be guilty of a violation of this ordinance. COMMENT TheamendmentsaresWHsticinna~reandhavenosubstamiveeffect. 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 2056 Section 11~ 113. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed to be severable, and if any of the provisions hereof are adjudged to be invalid or unenforceable, the remaining portions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect and their validity shall remain unimpaired. COMMENT Thissecfionisunamendedexcept~ritsnumbering. Section ''" . ~, 114. Vested Rights 85 2057 2058 2059 2060 The provisions of this ordinance shall not affect the vested rights of any person under existing law. This section is unamended except for its numbering. 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065 2066 2067 2068 2069 2070 Section "" . . ~ 115 Enforcement This ordinance shall be enforced by the city manager City Manaqer or his designee, who shall exercise all authority of police officers in the performance of their duties. Such authority shall include, without limitation, the authority to issue summonses directing the appearance before a court of competent jurisdiction of any person alleged to have violated any of the provisions of this ordinance. COMMENT Theamendmentiss~Hsficinn~ureandhasnosubstantiveeffect. 2071 2072 2073 2074 2075 2076 2077 2078 2079 Section,-l-9 116. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the first day of January, 1991; provided, however, that the amendments to this ordinance made on the tenth day of November, 1992 shall become effective on the first day of January, 1993; and the amendments to this ordinance made on the 9th day of December, 2003 shall become effective on the first day of January, 2004. COMMENT Theamendme~stothissectionprovideth~th~ aretotakeeffectonJanua~ 1,2004. 86 2080 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia 2081 on the day of , 2003. 2082 2083 2084 CA-8384 ordin\proposed\chesbayordin, wpd R-8 December 4, 2003 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT' Planning Department APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUU/~ Ct CY :~ C~t~y Atto-rn~y' ~ 0f]~e 87 Item #23 City of Virginia Beach An Ordinance to amend and reordain Sections 5.10, 6.1 and 6.3 of the Subdivision Ordinance, Appendex B of the City Code, so as to conform references to renumbered Sections of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance November 12, 2003 CONSENT Dorothy Wood: We' 11 go to the next item. Item #23 is the City of Virg~ma Beach ~n its ordinance to amend and reordain Sections for renumbering the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act Ordinance and this would be number 23, 24 & 25. Mr. Clay Bemick is going to explain this to you and why we have lumped them all together. Sorry. Mr. Scott. Robert Scott: I probably won't do as a good job as Mr. Bemick. Dorothy Wood I'm sure you will sir. Robert Scott: What I want to do is emphasize that we are very happy with our current regulations. They've done a really good job. Our Chesapeake Bay Board does a very good job in administering. We are under a directive from the State to make certain amendments. Our goal in going through this is to make those amendments, which minimize the amount of change. We kept it as close to how we currently admimster this important program as best we could. We met with the affected agencies throughout the City. People have worked with this on a daily bas~s and we have a great deal invested in it. I think we've come up with an approach that will do that and that's through folks that sent to you today This approach basically adopts what we call "variable width buffer" rather than a constant 100-foot buffer In that variable width buffer we would adhere to certain variances to the requirements. We do think it's important to include and to continue to include as we have in the past provisions such as the highly erodible sods in our feature section of the ordinance. We have a unique situation in V~rginia Beach. I don't know of any other locality in Virg~ma that's on the Chesapeake Bay that has quite the topography we have. We feel that we have appropriately tailored our ordinance in Virginia Beach to a unique topography that we've got. Accordingly, we want to keep that in the provisions that you have ~n front of you, I think to achieve the desired end. They come recommended to you by the staff and I think they come to you endorsed as well by the affected groups throughout the community. We th~nk we have an excellent Chesapeake Bay program and this ordinance, ~f adopted by Council. will keep us in the right direction ~n accordance with State directives Dorothy Wood: Mr. Ripley, I would move to Items #23for the City of Virginia. Ronald Ripley Okay, we have a motion to approve the consent agenda item as just read. Do I have a second? Charlie Salle': Second. Item #23 City of Virginia Beach Page 2 Ronald Ripley: Seconded by Charlie Salle'. Okay Is there any discussion on the motion? Okay. We'll call for the question? AYE 11 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 0 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD AYE Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 11-0, the motion passes Item #24 City of Virginia Beach An Ordinance to amend and reordain the Site Plan Ordinance, Appendix C of the City Code, so as to conform references to renumbered Sections of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance November 12, 2003 CONSENT Dorothy Wood: We'll go to the next item Number 24 is an ordinance to amend and reordain the site plan ordinance and if you turn over to Number 32, 33, & 34 Mr. Clay Bernick is going to explain this to you and why we have lumped them all together. Sorry Mr. Scott. Robert Scott: I probably won't do as a good job as Mr. Bernick. Dorothy Wood: I'm sure you will sir Robert Scott: What I want to do is emphasize that we are very happy with our current regulations. They've done a really good job Our Chesapeake Bay Board does a very good job in administering. We are under a directive from the State to make certain amendments Our goal ~n going through this is to make those amendments, which mlmmize the amount of change. We kept it as close to how we currently administer this important program as best we could. We met with the affected agencies throughout the City. People have worked w~th this on a daily basis and we have a great deal ~nvested in ~t. I think we've come up with an approach that will do that and that's through folks that sent to you today. This approach basically adopts what we call "variable width buffer" rather than a constant 100-foot buffer In that variable width buffer we would adhere to certain variances to the requirements. We do think it's ~mportant to include and to continue to include as we have in the past prowsions such as the h~ghly erodible soils in our feature section of the ordinance. We have a unique situation in Virgima Beach I don't know of any other locahty ~n Virginia that's on the Chesapeake Bay that has quite the topography we have. We feel that we have appropriately tailored our ordinance ~n Virginia Beach to a umque topography that we've got. Accordingly, we want to keep that in the provisions that you have in front of you, I th~nk to achieve the desired end. They come recommended to you by the staff and I think they come to you endorsed as well by the affected groups throughout the community. We th~nk we have an excellent Chesapeake Bay program and th~s ordinance, if adopted by Council, w~ll keep us in the right direction in accordance with State direcuves. Dorothy Wood. Mr. Ripley, I would move to Item #24 for the City of V~rginia Beach Ronald Ripley. Okay. We have a motion to approve the consent agenda item as just read. Do I have a second? Charlie Salle'. Second. Ronald Pupley' Seconded by Charlie Salle'. Okay motion? Okay. We'll call for the question. Is there any discussion on the Item #24 City of Virginia Beach Page 2 AYE 11 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 0 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD AYE Ronald Ripley' By a vote of 11-0, the motion passes. Item #25 City of Virginia Beach An Ordinance to amend and reordain Section 6.1 of the Tree Planting, Preservation and Replacement Ordinance, Appendix E of the City Code, So as to conform references to renumbered Sections of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Bay Ordinance November 12, 2003 CONSENT Dorothy Wood: We' 11 go to the next item Number 25 is an ordinance to amend the tree planting preservation and replacement ordinance and if you turn over to Number 32, 33, & 34 Mr. Clay Bernick is going to explain this to you and why we have lumped them all together. Sorry. Mr. Scott. Robert Scott: I probably won't do as a good job as Mr Bemick. Dorothy Wood: I'm sure you will sir. Robert Scott: What I want to do is emphasize that we are very happy with our current regulations. They've done a really good job. Our Chesapeake Bay Board does a very good job in administering. We are under a directive from the State to make certain amendments. Our goal in going through this is to make those amendments, which minimize the amount of change. We kept it as close to how we currently administer this important program as best we could. We met with the affected agencies throughout the City. People have worked with this on a daily basis and we have a great deal invested in it. I think we've come up with an approach that will do that and that's through folks that sent to you today. This approach basically adopts what we call "variable width buffer" rather than a constant 100-foot buffer. In that variable width buffer we would adhere to certain variances to the requirements. We do think it's important to include and to continue to include as we have in the past provisions such as the highly erodlble soils in our feature section of the ordinance We have a unique situation in Virginia Beach. I don't know of any other locality in Virginia that's on the Chesapeake Bay that has quite the topography we have. We feel that we have appropriately tailored our ordinance in Virginia Beach to a unique topography that we've got. Accordingly, we want to keep that in the provisions that you have in front of you, I think to achieve the desired end They come recommended to you by the staff and I think they come to you endorsed as well by the affected groups throughout the community We think we have an excellent Chesapeake Bay program and this ordinance, if adopted by Council, will keep us in the right direction in accordance with State directives. ' Dorothy Wood: Mr. Ripley, I would move to Item #25 for the City of Virginia Beach. Ronald Ripley: Okay We have a motion to approve the consent agenda item as just read Do I have a second? Charhe Salle' Second. Item #24 City of Virginia Beach Page 2 Ronald Ripley: Seconded by Charlie Salle'. Okay. Is there any discussion on the motion9 Okay. We'll call for the question. AYE 11 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 0 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD AYE Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 11-0, the motion passes. Item #34 City of Virginia Beach Application of the City of Virginia Beach to amend the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Bay Ordinance (Appendix F of the City Code) pertaining to identification and protection of the Resource Protection Area buffers, Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area designation criteria, land use and development performance cnteria, and variances November 12, 2003 CONSENT Dorothy Wood: Item #34 is the City of Virginia Beach application to amend the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance. Mr. Clay Bemick is going to explain this to you and why we have lumped them all together. Sorry. Mr. Scott. Robert Scott: I probably won't do as a good job as Mr. Bernick. Dorothy Wood. I'm sure you will sir. Robert Scott: What I want to do is emphasize that we are very happy with our current regulations. They've done a really good job. Our Chesapeake Bay Board does a very good job in administenng. We are under a directive from the State to make certain amendments. Our goal in going through this is to make those amendments, which minimize the amount of change. We kept it as close to how we currently administer this important program as best we could. We met with the affected agencies throughout the City. People have worked with this on a daily basis and we have a great deal invested in it. I think we've come up with an approach that will do that and that's through folks that sent to you today. This approach basically adopts what we call "variable width buffer" rather than a constant 100-foot buffer. In that variable width buffer we would adhere to certain variances to the requirements. We do think ~t's important to include and to continue to include as we have in the past provisions such as the highly erodible soils in our feature section of the ordinance. We have a unique situation in Virginia Beach. I don't know of any other locality in Virginia that's on the Chesapeake Bay that has quite the topography we have. We feel that we have appropriately tailored our ordinance in Virginia Beach to a unique topography that we've got. Accordingly, we want to keep that in the provisions that you have in front of you, I think to achieve the desired end. They come recommended to you by the staff and I think they come to you endorsed as well by the affected groups throughout the community We think we have an excellent Chesapeake Bay program and this ordinance, if adopted by Council, will keep us in the right direction in accordance with State directives Dorothy Wood: Mr. Ripley, I would move to approve Item #34 for the City of Virginia Beach. Kay Wilson' Item #34 would be with the revisions that were handed to you this morning. Dorothy Wood: Yes ma'am. Kay Wilson' Thank you Ronald Ripley: Okay. We have a motion to approve the consent agenda item as just read. Do I have a second? Charhe Salle': Second. Ronald Ripley: Seconded by Charlie Salle' Claudia Cotton, d~d you wish to comment? Claudia Cotton: No. Thank you Ronald Ripley: Okay. Is there any discussion on the motion? Okay. We'll call for the question. AYE 11 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 0 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD AYE Ronald Ripley: By a vote of 11-0, the motion passes. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: An Ordinance Establishing Transition Rules for Amendments to the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance (Appendix F) MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 · Background: Major revisions to the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance are on the City Council agenda on December 9, 2003. This Ordinance will allow those projects already in the City review systems to continue under the old ordinance without having to start the review process over under the provisions of the new ordinance. · Considerations: Plats, variances and plans which have not been acted upon can be reviewed in accordance with the standards which existed prior to the adoption of revisions to the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance. If disapproved, the developer will have the ability to resubmit the plans or plat one time, within 30 days from the date of disapproval or within 30 days of January 1,2004 (whichever is later), and the resubmittal will be reviewed under the pre-ordinance standards. If d~sapproved again, the proposed development must conform to the prowsions of the ordinance Public Information: Information to the public w~th the agenda. Alternatives: All plans will be governed by the revisions as of January 1,2004. Recommendations: Approve the ordinance. · Attachments: Ordinance Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Planning 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING TRANSITION RULES FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION AREA ORDINANCE (APPENDIX F) WHEREAS, on December 9, 2003, the City Council adopted an ordinance entitled, "AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION AREA ORDINANCE (APPENDIX F) (hereinafter the 'Ordinance'); WHEREAS, the Ordinance will become effective on January 1, 2004; and WHEREAS, it is the sense of the City Council that transition rules should be adopted to govern cases in which plans for development of establishments subject to the provisions of the Ordinance have been submitted, but not approved, prior to the effective date of the Ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 1. That plans of development, including site plans and subdivision plats, and requests for variances which are subject to the provisions of the Ordinance which were accepted for review, but neither approved nor disapproved, on or before the close of business on the effective date of the Ordinance, shall not be subject to the provisions of the Ordinance, but shall be required to comply with the ordinances and regulations of the City applicable to such developments on the date of their acceptance for review; 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 49 50 51 52 53 2. That any such plan of development or request for variance which was accepted for review on or before the close of business on the effective date of the Ordinance, but which was disapproved, or which is hereinafter disapproved, shall, if resubmitted within thirty (30) days of the date of disapproval, or within thirty (30) days of the effective date of the Ordinance, whichever is later, be subject to the ordinances and regulations of the City applicable to such developments on the date of their acceptance for review; 3. That the provisions of Paragraph 2 hereinabove shall apply only to the first resubmittal o~ a plan of development or request for exception which has been disapproved, such that if disapproved upon resubmittal after the effective date of the Ordinance, all further development of the subject property shall conform to the provisions of the Ordinance, as well as to all other applicable laws, ordinances, regulations and standards; and 4. That nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to deprive or deny any person of any vested rights which existed as of the effective date of the Ordinance. COMMENT The provisions of this ordinance governs cases in which plans of development or requests for variances for properties which are subject to the ordinance have not been approved as of the date of adoption of the Ordinance. Plans and requests which have neither been approved nor disapproved are to be reviewed in accordance with the standards which existed prior to the adoption of the Ordinance. If disapproved, the developer will have the ability to resubmit the plan or request one time, within 30 days from the date of disapproval or the date of adoption of the Ordinance (whichever is later), and the resubmittal will be reviewed under the pre-Ordinance standards. If disapproved again, the proposed development must conform to the provisions of the Ordinance. 54 55 A similar set of transition rules was adopted by the City Council governing development in the Shore Drive Corridor Overlay District, the floodplain amendments, and the R-SR amendments. 56 57 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the day of , 2003. 58 59 60 61 CA-8721 Noncode/transitioncbpa.wpd R3 November 28, 2003 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT' Pl~nnln~ De-~ r tfe n t APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY' City 'Atto~y's Office CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: An Ordinance to Amend and Reordain the City Code Pertaining to Section 2-452.1 of Chapter 2 of the City Code, so as to Conform References to Renumbered Sections of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance MEETING DATE: December 9, 2003 · Background: Major revisions to the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance are on the City Council agenda on December 9, 2003. This Ordinance will renumber section 2-452.1 of the City Code so that it now is consistent with the new numbering of the revised Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance. · Considerations: This Ordinance is necessary so that the references to the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Ordinance in the City Code conform to the renumbered sections ofthe CBPA. Public Information: Information to the public with the agenda. Alternatives: The City Code Secbons need to be internally consistent. Recommendations: Approve the ordinance. · Attachments: Ordinance Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Planmng ~ City Manager: (~/~- 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN THE CITY CODE PERTAINING TO SECTION 2-452.1 OF CHAPTER 2 OF THE CITY CODE, SO AS TO CONFORM REFERENCES TO RENUMBERED SECTIONS OF THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION AREA ORDINANCE SECTION AMENDED: ~ 2-452.1 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That Section 2-452.1 of the City Code is hereby amended and reordained, to read as follows: CHAPTER 2. ADMINISTRATION ARTICLE XXII. BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES Sec. 2-452.1. Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Board. (b) The board shall elect from its membership a chair and vice-chair. The chair shall preside at all meetings of the board, except that the vice-chair shall preside in the absence of the chair. Members of the board shall be required to take an oath of office prior to assuming their positions. The board may make, alter and rescind rules and forms for its procedures, consistent with the ordinances of the city, including, without limitation, Sections i--!~ 110 and 114 111 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance, and the general laws of the commonwealth. 26 27 28 29 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That this Ordinance shall become effective as of January 1, 2004, or the date of its adoption, whichever is later. 30 31 32 33 34 C05{M~ This amendment will make this portion of the City Code conform to the renumbered sections of the revised Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance. The amendment woald not take effect until the later of January 1, 2004, or the date of its adoption. 35 36 37 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this day of , 2003. CA-9016 DATA/ORDIN/PROPOSED/02-452.1ord.wpd RI September 26, 2003 APPROVED AS TO CONTENTS: P l a~n n ~[n g ~Dep a r tme n t APPROVED AS TO LEGAL ci N. APPOINTMENTS BOARD OF BUILDING CODE APPEALS CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION AREA BOARD COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD FRANCIS LAND HOUSE BOARD OF GOVERNORS HAMPTON ROADS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE PLANNING COMMISSION RESORT ADVISORY COMMISSION (RAC) SOUTHEASTERN VIRGINIA AREA-WIDE MODEL PROGRAM (SEVAMP) VIRGINIA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (VBCDC) O. UNFINISHED BUSINESS P. NEW BUSINESS Q. ADJOURNMENT