The URL can be used to link to this page

FEBRUARY 16, 2010 WORKSHOP MINUTES CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH "COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME" 1N1A = CITY COUNCIL � .-r MAYOR WILLIAM D.SESSOMS,JR.,At-Large VICE MAYOR LOUIS R.JONES,Bayside-District 4r GLENN R.DAVIS,Rose Hall-District 3 ss. "-" 1 WILLIAM R.DeSTEPH,Al-Large "4, a � HARRY E.DIEZEL,Kempsville-District 2 00, ,a" ROBERT M DYER„Centerville-District I BARBARA M.HENLEY,Princess Anne--District 7 JOHN E. UHRIN,Beach-District 6 ROSEMARY WILSON,At-Large JAMES L. WOOD,Lynnhaven-District 5 CITY HALL BUILDING 2401 COURTHOUSE DRIVE CITY COUNCIL APPOINTEES VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456-8005 CITY MANAGER-JAMES K.SPORE PHONE.(757)385-4303 CITY A7TORNEY- MARK D.STILES FAX(757)385-5669 CITY ASSESSOR- JERALD BANAGAN E-MAIL:clycncl@vbgov.com CITY AUDITOR- LYNDON S.REMIAS CITY CLERK- RUTH HODGES ERASER,MMC CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA 16 FEBRUARY 2010 I. CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS -Conference Room - 4:00 PM A. HRT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY (DEIS) Steve Herbert, Deputy City Manager Jack Whitney, Director—Planning B. ELECTRONIC DISPLAY SIGN (LED) REGULATIONS Jack Whitney, Director—Planning C. PLANNING ITEMS —MARCH 2010 Jack Whitney, Director—Planning 1 rl�hp 8 1 `V ,5) �4eM^wy!.; :,,i,,), " ms vi,.:'"'';:--t4 '.ea4 .:- ttY;li' MINUTES VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Virginia Beach, Virginia February 16, 2010 Mayor William D. Sessoms called to order the CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP in the City Council Conference Room, re the HRT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY (DEIS) on Tuesday, February 16, 2010, at 4:00 P.M. Council Members Present. Glenn R. Davis, William R. "Bill"DeSteph, Robert M. "Bob" Dyer, Louis R. Jones, Barbara M. Henley, William D. Sessoms, Jr., John E. Uhrin, Rosemary Wilson and James L. Wood Council Members Absent: Harry E. Diezel February 16, 2010 2 CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS HRT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY(DEIS) 4:01 P.M. Mayor Sessoms announced that Steve Herbert's Mother-in-Law had passed away and Jack Whitney, Director -Planning, will be giving the presentation on the Impact Study. A copy of the Verbatim Transcript and the presentation are hereby attached and made a part of this record. February 16, 2010 2/16/2010 Virginia Beach Transit Extension Study Alternative Analysis and Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Project Update and Briefing Virginia Beach City Council Briefing February 16,2010 ■ Agenda • Background • HDR Contract with HRT • City Team and Committees • Public Involvement • City Land-Use Planning Efforts • East-West Trail Capability • Schedule and Next Steps • Regional Interest and Support • Examples in Other Cities 1 2/16/2010 ac State Mandated Study • Virginia General Assembly passes House Bill 6028 directing HRT to study expansion of The Tide: July 2008 • Requires HRTDC and VDRPT to initiate study of the project in order to advance project for solicitation of proposals under FTA's New Starts process and the 1995 PPTA • VBTES planning and environmental analysis(AA/SDEIS)initiated May 2009 A v �• C \� 3 Project Work Underway • Purpose and Need Statement (NEPA Requirement) • Description of Alternatives • BRT • LRT • Expanded Bus 49 Traffic Data Collection • Grade Crossing Analysis 40 Capital Cost Estimating Methodology +. East End alignment Alternatives *Trail Compatibility analysis 4 2 2/16/2010 Project Work To Be Completed • Traffic Analysis • Operations Planning and Costing • Prelim. Financial and Funding Strategy • Ridership Forecasting • Conceptual Engineering • Land Use, Socio-Economic, and Environmental Impact Assessment • Contingency for Additional Work that may be required by FTA 5 Schedule and Next Steps Feb.-Dec. April-May June-July August-December 2010 2011 2011 2011 Complete Public Hearings Project Completion of Draft Completion Cityof VBA royal Definition: Approval AA/SDEIS for of Draft of Locally Preferred •PreliminaryCity AA/SDEIS (LPA)* HRT and Alternative LPA Ridership of Virginia based on •Conceptual Beach FTA Review HRTPO includes LPA and Engineering Review in Long Range comment Transportation Plan •Preliminary (LRTP) Capital Costs 6 3 2/16/2010 Future Tasks « Final EIS • Preliminary Engineering �► New Starts Submittal process * Refined Cost Estimates, Ridership, and Financial Planning 7 Schedule and Next Steps Winter 2011-Spring 2012 Summer-Fall Fall—Winter 2014 2014 Record of Decision Submittal of Preliminary Engineering Complete (PE)/New Starts Application to FTA: Initiation FEIS/PE Application to FTA to of detailed FTA review begin Final Design* Draft Financial Plan Preparation of Application to Commitment of Non- Approval from FTA to enter PE phase of FTA for Final Federal funds required project* Design Negotiations begin with Initiate PE Activities FTA for Full Funding Final Environmental Impact Statement Grant Agreement 8 4 2/16/2010 i y Team an • • ees Mgmt. Committee Technical Committee • Jim Wood • Planning, • John Uhrin Environmental, • Jim Spore Traffic, Public Works, • Mark Stiles Economic • Steve Herbert Development, • Planning, Economic Utilities Development, SGA, Media and • Dominion Power Communication • Corps of Engineers • DEQ • HRSD • TPO 9 sk P u • Completed , 7 • Initial Project Kick Off-September • Station Area Workshops-December • Community Advisory Committee-October,} • Stakeholder Interviews-July , • Still to Come • 3 Community Advisory Committee Mtgs • Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) Public Meeting • 2 SDEIS Public Hearings • City Council Updates • HDR Contractual • • HRT/City Staff on routine basis 10 5 2/16/2010 1ationship With Planning Efforts • Comprehensive Plan "Development of alternative(transportation) modes is a key component to the future of transportation in Virginia Beach and Hampton Roads." Action Item—"Incorporate public transit into the development of SGA plans especially those that are on or near the east-west railway corridor." Ff___:1.:________?_,,,,,,C. - • Strategic Growth Areas • Resort Area(Dec 2008) l • Burton Station(Jan 2009) • Pembroke(Nov 2009) • Newtown(Spring 2010) +IR _ . • On Corridor-To Be Completed b Aim • Rosemont • Lynnhaven • Hilltop 11 . . ationship With a n n 1 n g Efforts Pembroke Oceanfront Y a t . p�. ; .� ! i .4,P / '7+:). ., 112'2,5 Al, 1 lb l "l t , $.7 p• A!Ti Newtown 4F ,. G- ._ ' 12 6 2/16/2010 • • / 1 • _ ! _ • • HDR Typical Section within ROW (Underground Drainage) 4 • Increased Cost not covered by New Starts • Additional City Property/ROW near corridor '¢ • Preliminary Trail Design Spring 2012 ,41 s . �� S. I� - AAAA } 13 - -deal ROW Sec fort i rail we TRACK QEsTR.GK rd,MNl xy INNTI STN ... 77 urrvt,K E r _. _ BARKER WT CUM m� acs RUE M DR �yT cr owe, s13 "' I 0 EMBANOAENI E%6TNG GROUND BAL_A.R! WENN UST OCT POLE POTENTIALM LAT RAOUNO.ON DRIWIAGE STCA S �, SCEPOWN 14 7 2/16/2010 Regional Interest and Support "We don't have any real chance if we want to move people down that corridor unless we look at rail." Brad Face,president,Future of Hampton Roads,1996 "Light rail can significantly stimulate development. It's an economic development tool as well as a transportation tool." Consultant James L.Prost to Hampton Roads real estate professionals,1998 6o%of Hampton Roads residents say poor transportation is"the principle issue detracting from the area's quality of life." Hampton Roads Partnership,2004 15 Regional Interest and Support "It's a readiness issue for us." Rear Admiral Mark S. Boensel,Commanding Officer,USN Region Mid-Atlantic,Dec.16,2009 "Virginia Beach Vision remains a strong proponent for the inclusion of a light rail system as an integral component of Hampton Roads' transportation network and believes resources must be found to continue the EIS uninterrupted." Michael J.Barrett,President,Virginia Beach Vision,February 15,2010 'The money,while not insubstantial, is a small investment in a deeper understanding of the transportation and development options the city will face as it maps its future." Virginian Pilot Editorial, February 15,2010. 16 8 2/16/2010 • • BRT LRT • Phoenix • Boston • Santa Clara • San Francisco • Los Angeles • LA • Hartford • Portland • Miami • Philadelphia • Honolulu • San Diego • Chicago • Dallas • Louisville • Denver • Boston • St.Louis • Charlotte • Sacramento • Las Vegas • Salt Lake City • Albany • Baltimore • Cleveland • Phoenix • Eugene • San Jose • Pittsburgh • Minneapolis • Houston • Pittsburgh • Charlotte 17 • ide Competition 2011 New Starts Funding • Arizona • Michigan • AZ,Tucson,Modern Streetcar • Ml,Grand Rapids,Division Avenue BRT • California • Minnesota • CA,Oakland,East Bay BRT • MN,St.Paul-Minneapolis,Central Corridor LRT • CA,Oakland,Oakland Airport Connector • New Jersey • CA,Riverside,Perris Valley line • NJ,Northern New e • CA,Sacramento,South Corridor Phases Jersey,Access to the Region's Core • CA,San Bernardino,E Street Corridor sbX BRT • New York • CA,San Francisco,Central Subway LRT • NY,New York,Long Island Rail Road Fast Side Access • CA,San Francisco,Van Ness Avenue BRT • NY,New York,Nostrand Avenue BRT • • CA.San Jose.Silicon Valley Berryessa Extension NY,New York,Second Avenue Subway Phase I • Colorado • North Carolina • CO,Denver,East Corridor LRT • NC.Charlotte,Northeast Corridor Light Rail Project • CO,Denver,Gold Line • Oregon • CO,Denver,West Corridor LRT • OR,Portland,Milwaukee LRT • CO,Fort Collins,Mason Corridor BRT • Rhode Island • CO,Roaring Fork Valley,BRT Project • RI,Providence.South County Commuter Rail • Connecticut • Texas • CT,Hartford,New Britain-Hartford Busway • TX.Austin,Metro Rapid BRT • CT,Stamford,Urban Transitway Phase II • TX.Dallas,Northwest/Southeast LRT MOS • Delaware • TX,Houston,North Corridor LRT • DE,Wilmington,Wilmington to Newark Commuter Rail Improvements • TX,Houston,Southeast Corridor LRT • Florida • TX,Houston,University Corridor LRT • FL,Miami,Orange line Phase z:North Corridor Metrorail Extension • Utah • FL,Orlando,Central Florida Commuter Rail Transit-Initial Operating • UT,Salt Lake City,Mid-Jordan LRT Segment • UT,Salt Lake City,Weber County to Salt Lake City Commuter Rail • Hawaii • UT.Salt Lake City,Draper LRT • HI,Honolulu High Capacity Transit Corridor Project • Virginia • Massachusetts • VA,Northern Virginia,Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project-Extension to Wiehle 18 • MA,Boston,Assembly Square Station • Washington Source Annual Repon on Funding • MA,Boston,Silver Line Phase III • WA,Seattle,University link LRT Extension •„,sere smml • WA,King County,West Seattle BRT sine.•aa r•r,t,r.e•us'e 9 2/16/2010 . Examples lilt t 7:t:':1:::•;!1: 'tit, '-' ;, . '', .4-:-k. ;ii' ' - ,, ,„ ii T A. ... ... +4. . „,,,,r... h 4 'by #n • 1 '4 r w .._ _ Portland Street Car Denver BRT Phoenix LRT Minnea.olis LRT I --t. ' tt A ¢ ♦ .4. : , ko,:') V 1 Lai •. illi'mi . IA IVIiii C r �f • _.,,,,„_ __ --- ___ .•,, i . ' . 19 • " 1" Neter T ' ..P a , p� r • , I H rl- -x.4.1r. = ti --,,,,,I.,,,,„. '. 2•)..... i F i G, s.. rs:_ pini j Pu Salt Lake City LRT Houston LRT Charlotte LRT Dallas LRT I ,,,. 1 1' rt: �, . _ is rt_et„..: � La .1,` 20 10 2/16/2010 - C harlOtte- • 9.6 Mile Starter Line-Nov 2007 - • Planning for ii mile extension started in - 2000. Target opening 2016 -_ �-- W • Expansions include _`i "`' ._;__= Commuter Rail, . .r° .c, Streetcar, LRT, and = -7"-_ -. BRT - V. __ SIE - 21 mom�- • 12 Miles-Opened June , _ F... 2004 YF V i • Expanding stations to �. accommodate 3-car im � trains • 11-mile Central '''' Corridor expansion Transit may begin this year Park & Ride • LRT expansion, BRT, Express Bus, and - , Commuter Rail ,+ planned s .s.Y,YY 22 11 2/16/2010 • • .tS' +caa. «ry 44k t I S. b +1•I'. M► m' ,, l _ _j # r l+Y - s �_vio 11 n Rpt" .. _...+M wR.�F 5'.*.. it ^�4.R ` i�.` _., ....-int,...,,. 24 12 1 VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL February 16, 2010 4 : 00 p .m. WORKSHOP SESSION CITY MANAGER ' S BRIEFING HRT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY (DEIS) VERBATIM CITY COUNCIL William D. Sessoms , Jr . , Mayor At-Large Louis R. Jones, Vice-Mayor Bayside - District 4 William R. DeSteph At-Large Harry E . Diezel Kempsville - District 2 Robert M. Dyer Centerville - District 1 Barbara M. Henley Princess Anne - District 7 Glenn R. Davis Rose Hall - District 3 John E . Uhrin Beach - District 6 (Vacant) At-Large Rosemary Wilson At-Large James L. Wood Lynnhaven - District 5 CITY MANAGER: James K. Spore CITY ATTORNEY: Mark D . Stiles CITY ASSESSOR: Jerald Banagan CITY AUDITOR: Lyndon S . Remias CITY CLERK: Ruth Hodges Fraser, MMC SARAH DEAL JENKINS, CMC DEPUTY CITY CLERK, II 2 MAYOR SESSOMS: The first thing we ' re going to do is we ' re going to have a briefing on the HRT Draft Environmental Impact Study. Barbara Henley was kind enough to give me a call and suggest that we be brought up by our City staff with some information on it , in that City money has the potential of going in it in the next week. So, Steve Herbert, if y ' all don ' t know, his father-in-law passed away, and he ' s at the funeral as we speak. And Jack Whitney is going to run with the whole ball , and, Jack, we thank you for coming over . Jim, do you want to elaborate? CITY MANAGER: I know he ' s going to do a great job. JACK WHITNEY: Mayor, Members of Council, pleasure to be with you this afternoon. As you know all too well, next week on your agenda will be an Appropriations Ordinance to transfer $244 , 000 , approximately, towards a match of a million two of appropriated Federal money to continue and complete the Draft Environmental Study for the Virginia Beach Transit Extension effort . A lot of the content you ' re about to see was part of Phil Shucet ' s presentation to you a week ago . The balance of it really is our attempt to give you a little bit more of a local perspective on the conduct of the study to reassure you that we are, the City staff and stakeholders in our community, are fully engaged in this effort . It ' s not a pure HRT effort process, but they as our partner, together with the State and Federal government, are working together and have for almost a year on this particular piece of the very complicated and longer-term overall effort which will provide us , City Council, staff, our community, and our region, with a very extensive suite of data upon which policy decisions can be made regarding various transit programs and development in Virginia Beach and in the region. Your action next week will simply provide matching money to help get the answers to these questions so that you can base your decision upon that . It in no way, shape, or form obligates the City to any particular transit alternative or any at all . It doesn ' t mean that we ' re supporting Light Rail or BRT or anything else. It simply means that we are going to match the Federal money that ' s required to balance out the contract with HDR, the consultants working with us and HRT, to finish the Federally mandated Environmental Impact Statement, NEPA-driven process . The money that you are considering appropriating next week 3 will provide the necessary funds to complete the work. That work will be completed in Draft form about a year from now. And in about December 2011 time frame is where the first real decision and commitment will be made, and that would be the selection of a Locally Preferred Alternative . Nothing you ' re going to do next week commits you in any way, shape, or form to any of those outcomes . So, what we wanted to do today is just sort of briefly go through some of these issues with you, again, let you know how we ' ve been involved to date and will continue to be involved as we move forward. We believe this is one of the most strategic activities that the City has ever embarked upon. We take it very seriously. We ' re fully engaged and we ' re excited about the possibility of moving forward. The agenda here, the background, a little bit about the HRT, or HDR contract with HRT, there will be some acronyms , and I think I know what most of them stand for, and then we ' ll try to get through some of that . Who the City team is, public involvement, we pride ourselves over the past several years as being very supportive and encouraging of public involvement in all of the Planning activities that we ' re doing, whether it ' s the Comprehensive Plan, the various SGA ' s efforts, and this is no difference . We have found that that is the right thing to do . It has resulted in a great deal of public support for these endeavors, and certainly it ' s one of the hallmarks of the FEIS over and beyond what ' s normally required in the NEPA process . So, we ' re very happy about how that is all detailed out, and that ' s included in the scope of work in the contract with HRT and HDR. A little bit about the relationship between this effort and what we ' ve been up to over the past couple of years, with respect to the Comprehensive Plan, our SGA work, and the support we ' ve gotten for all of those activities , the vision, and the relationship with mass transit through that very same corridor that links all of them except for Burton Station, Burton Station is a bit to the north, but the Resort Area, Pembroke, and the Newtown SGA work which is currently underway, are strung along this corridor that we ' re talking about and going to be exploring in great detail in the upcoming months and years . Trail capability, I know some of you are real interested in the opportunities that this may afford for bikeways and trails . The Norfolk-Southern corridor is 66-feet wide, which is sufficient for double trackage, if the Light Rail alternative is selected, infrastructure, drainage, so forth, and trails . We have a wealth of right-of-way to work within 4 to accomplish multiple transportation activities . As I ' ve said to you before, I believe, and in other venues, we have an embarrassment of riches in Virginia Beach with respect to this Norfolk-Southern corridor . An 11-mile, straight-as-an-arrow, fully-intact, rail corridor right through the heart of Virginia Beach, right through the heart of our redevelopment, our Strategic Growth Areas . If you could have asked for a better place, I don ' t know where it would have been to find such a right-of-way and such an opportunity, so we ' re very blessed with that and very well positioned, in my opinion, to engage in a Federal competitive grant process along with other major cities in this country to develop these kinds of systems . I think our Planning efforts are really positioning us favorably, and we ' ll know a little bit more about that as this process matures in the ensuing years . Part of the background to where we are goes back to Delegate Tata ' s bill in the General Assembly a couple of years ago, known as HB6028 , which directed Hampton Roads Transit and the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transit to initiate a study, which is this study, to advance the project for solicitations of proposals under the Federal Government ' s New Starts process . That ' s what we ' re about today. We ' re honoring the State mandated activity that was authorized by the bill and other initiatives that we 've had. We began, we ' ve been working on this process with the consultants . We were on the selection panel to choose the consultant for this process . We were on the policy and technical advisory committees that see the effort proceed. We have input every step of the way, and we ' ll continue to do so as part of the process . The graphic there is just a highlight showing this straight-as-an-arrow 11-mile corridor right through the heart of our city from Newtown Road all the way to the Resort Area . A lot of work to be done . So far, since May of last year, work has been proceeding along the purpose and need for the project, the description of alternatives, and those would be BRT, LRT, or Light Rail, and Expanded Bus services . It ' s typical for what is required under a NEPA process and Environmental Impact Statement . Traffic Data Collection, Grade Crossing Analysis , we don ' t know yet how many at-grade or elevated crossings in Virginia Beach will be necessary. That work will be undertaken as part of this effort, as will Capital Cost Estimating. It ' s way premature to estimate at this point what the engineering capital and operating costs for such a system might be . It t I 5 4 depends on a number of things from environmental to engineering to the number of stations and so forth. All of that will develop as part of the work that continues . The East End Alignment Alternatives , as we deviate approximately off the right-of-way at Birdneck Road, generally speaking, we have a couple of different alignment options to get us up to 19th Street . Those would be explored. That ' s what ' s meant by the East End Alignment bullet . Trail Compatibility Analysis , we really are interested in exploring that . As I mentioned, the right-of-way is sufficient to accommodate it . So, we 've engaged all of our community interests who have been working with us in the SGA' s and the Comprehensive Plan on the issue of Bikeways and Trails , and they' re already involved in this effort , as well . This is a list of additional work to be completed, as part of this effort . As you can see, it ' s very extensive and that speaks to the duration and the schedule of this project as it moves forward. Again, this is information that was taken from Mr . Shucet ' s briefing to you. This talks about the schedule and the next steps . The important highlights here are roughly December of this year we should have a pretty ready, almost completed, Draft of the EIS in the spring, and our review and the other stakeholders ' review. We then submit it in April/May of next year to the FTA. They will take whatever time they need to give it a thorough review, just like they do in all of the similar projects throughout the country, and as was the case in Norfolk, as well . That takes time . Public Hearings and, again, as I mentioned to you at the beginning of my remarks, the selection of a Locally Preferred Alternative, or LPA, as they know in the trade, will occur on or around December of 2011 . That ' s where we as a City and as a community make our first real policy decision with respect to the alternative we want to advance in the process . So, again, you ' d look forward to that if we continue with this effort, long about fall or winter of 2011 . After that, then we get into the Final Environmental Impact Statement . That ' s after the Federal reviews and so forth. That gets started in the Preliminary Engineering, if all of the work done to date at that time passes muster with the FTA and the other funding partners . And we get into refining some of the tasks and data that was developed as part of the work up until then . The next steps, again, here the important piece is fall/winter 2014 , where we get our Record of Decision. That ' s sort of the no go/go signal with respect to proceeding into the Final Design stage and a real serious work of funding, designing, and constructing whatever the 6 alternative happens to be . To assure you that we ' re fully engaged, these are two of the Committees that I mentioned earlier with the local representatives . Obviously, Mr . Wood, Mr . Uhrin, Mr . Spore, Mr. Styles, Mr. Herbert, and then many departments that have a stake in this are all onboard right now. We have been meeting. We have had a series of meetings, to date . That would be your Management Committee . We 've had two of those meetings already. We will meet regularly during the course of the project . Concurrent with that is a Technical Committee . You see there the various departments and agencies that are the primary actors that will be working on the technical aspects of the project . Public Involvement, we 've had a number of meetings, to date, involving our public . You ' ll see some of the photographs there of the meetings we 've had. We ' ve had a number of Station Area Workshops , for example; many more to come . Those have been very, very, interesting. The process is a process very similar to the one we have been utilizing with the Comp Plan and with the SGA work; very hands on, very intimate with the public . And we have found a great deal of support and satisfaction for the way our public involvement piece is rolling out . Obviously, this is more than simply a transportation project . It relates intimately with our land-use visions, our Economic Development strategies, and I believe is pivotal to the success of the Comprehensive Plan with its redevelopment orientation and our SGA' s with their redevelopment orientation, as well . It ' s very fortuitous . The plans are aligned. We ' re really excited about where we are, in terms of the Comprehensive Plan, the SGA work, and this EIS process really couldn ' t have been better . There, you see some quotes from the Comprehensive Plan that relate . As you know, we have finished three SGA plans, to date. We are nearing completion in a couple of months of the Newtown one . Newtown is the first SGA that a Light Rail or BRT system will go through as it enters Virginia Beach and it goes right through the heart of that particular part of our city. Beyond that , we ' re looking at Rosemont, Lynnhaven, and Hilltop, also strung along the corridor as we proceed through our regiment of Strategic Growth Area development . Here are just some images that have come out of those efforts, what things might look like with transit designed into our streetscape, our density, and our land use in these areas . Here in a moment, in the next slide you will see the typical 7 section, as we call such things, which will demonstrate the fact that within the 66 feet of right-of-way that we ' re looking to purchase from Norfolk-Southern we can accommodate dual tracking utilities and a trail within that same corridor . These are some quotes that we 've pulled out of publications relevant to the regional interest in the project, and we offer those to you for your consideration as you move forward. We ' re getting a lot of phone calls and e-mails from numerous interests and individuals who are interested and want to be involved in the outcome of this effort . These are up-and-running systems . To the left, those cities are already up and running with the BRT-type alternative . The ones on the right are already up and running with Light Rail systems . We ' ve been to many of those, watched them work. The results are very encouraging, in terms of ridership, and especially in terms of economic development and land-use redevelopment . Here ' s our competition. As I mentioned to you earlier, we ' re not the only one out there interested in Federal money to develop such projects . These projects are several years ahead of us in the effort, committed to doing exactly what we ' re on the brink of committing to . There ' s not enough money to fund all of them. So, those which will be successful will be those that are committed, that have done their homework, that are prepared to move forward. That ' s just a list of the New Starts funding in 2011 and the competition in the league that we ' re in right now. Again, these are just some graphic examples of similar systems that are up and running in urban environments around the country. They fit in nicely with the texture of the urban streetscape and environment that we ' re trying to achieve . They should look a lot to you like those illustrations, those graphic illustrations that I showed you a few slides earlier . It really does end up looking like the artist ' s concept and the planner ' s concept . There ' s a little bit of detail on a few of them. Again, next week' s appropriation will be adequate to see us through the completion of the EIS process . We will not be back to you for additional funds to accomplish that . Work is already underway to position us to get the necessary follow on a hundred percent Federal money to take us to the next step, if we choose to do it . MAYOR SESSOMS: Bob, then Bill? COUNCILMAN DYER: Thank you. Jack, good presentation. Let ' s not kid ourselves . This is a 8 very important thing. It ' s not my intention to throw a wet blanket on it, but I think we 've got to discuss certain things here as a deliberative body to make sure that we ' re doing the right thing for the right reason. And I guess my concern comes with the process and the timing over everything here . First of all, the cost of the study, $6 million, seems astronomical . And if we ' re in the process of renegotiating other contracts downward, especially in this economy, I think we should make a better effort . We were just blindsided on this, and here we are getting ready to get up for the vote on that, and I think we have to show our citizens some due deliberation. The question is, why the rush? I understand that there ' s some timelines in here, but just a couple of things to think about . First of all , given the chaos and credibility problems with HRT and the upcoming investigation, once again, I think we 've got to show from Virginia Beach ' s point of view that we ' re credible and we ' re going to do things in the right and deliberative way and not just rush into things . The other question I have is with the validity and reliability of the study given the unpredictability of our economy. This study will be done around 2011 . Where is the economy going to take us? Is it going to change our Strategic Plan at all? We don ' t know that yet . Once again, we ' re not even sure if the funding may be available for the Right-of-Way Acquisition. There ' s a lot of unknowns that we have out there, and I 'm afraid that if we move too quickly and there ' s too many changes, the report may be obsolete . We might have this $6 million report that may not be able to hold water or be sustainable over the long term. If we look at what ' s going on with the Military, we may be losing a carrier group or two in this region. The entire mission of the Navy may be changing, and that ' s 45% of our gross national product out there . What ' s going to happen with the long-term debt nationally and a lot of things with the banking crisis? If we go ahead, are we going to be able to get the bank loans and everything to do this? We don ' t know that yet . And the other thing is, too, absent the fact that we really don ' t have a comprehensive regional transportation plan, this is only a part and parcel thing . I think it ' s go to be part of the whole big-picture scenario . I guess, in summary, I just want to say that until we get a handle on what ' s going on in our own budget, what ' s coming down, what other gifts we have coming from Richmond, some of the unpredictability there, I 'm just going to be reluctant to commit right now to spend a lot of our tax money on something 9 that maybe I just think we may be rushing into . MAYOR SESSOMS : Thank you. Bill? COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Did you get your questions answered? I know you had two questions in there . COUNCILMAN DYER: No, that ' s okay. Just, I 'm more, I guess, I want to -- COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Philosophical? COUNCILMAN DYER: Yes . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: In the first three slides, you threw out a bunch of acronyms I ' ve just never heard before, so I 'm going to ask you to define those, and then I ' ll ask you a couple of questions on top of that . I 've got BRT, got LRT. "FEIS" , is that Feasibility and Environmental Impact Study? JACK WHITNEY: Federal Environmental Impact -- Final Environmental Impact Study. COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Final? JACK WHITNEY: Final . DEIS is the Draft Environmental Impact Study. Those are NEPA terms . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Okay. What ' s NEPA? JACK WHITNEY: National Environmental Policy Act . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: National Environmental Policy Act . I know what HRT is, but what is HRTDC, Slide 3 , I believe it was? JACK WHITNEY: Hampton Roads Transit District Commission. COUNCILMAN WOOD: It ' s backwards, though. It ' s TDCHR. JACK WHITNEY: And anticipating your next one, VDRPT? COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: VDRPT? JACK WHITNEY: Virginia Department of Rail and 10 Public Transit, a State agency. COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: And PPTA? JACK WHITNEY: Public Private Transportation Act . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: VBTES, again, all in the first 4 slides? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: That ' s Virginia Beach Transit Extension Study. JACK WHITNEY: That ' s this study we ' re talking about . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Okay. That ' s this study. Okay. Now, I ' d like to say I really understand it all now, but I still don' t, but I 've got four questions that kind of build on each other . One is , what happens if we don ' t put the money in? Will HRT fund this? Will Norfolk fund this? So, I guess , that ' s kind of the first question . JACK WHITNEY: Here ' s what I think will happen. If we don ' t match the Federal money, that money -- the work will stop, the consultant ' s work will stop. The money could be redirected to other projects that might be willing to step forward with the same match; Norfolk, maybe, or the Naval Base phase, Chesapeake, perhaps , or somebody else . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: So, in a $6 . 6 million study, if we don ' t put $244 , 500 , everything stops? JACK WHITNEY: Yes . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Is there something in writing somewhere, specific language that says the City of Virginia Beach must match these Federal dollars, or does it say -- JACK WHITNEY: That ' s part of the grant -- COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: -- HRTDC has to do it, or does it say -- JACK WHITNEY: It ' s a local project . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Okay. But does it specifically say? 11 JACK WHITNEY: We are the local sponsor . We will match. We will match. COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: So, it says in this, specifically, we will match? JACK WHITNEY: In the grant application agreement with FTA that the match will come from the local sponsor . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Okay. Being, Virginia Beach? Being, HR -- JACK WHITNEY: Being, Virginia Beach. COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Okay. So, specifically, it says in writing that Virginia Beach has to match these dollars . Okay. That ' s my question. MAYOR SESSOMS: Thank you. Glenn, then Barbara, then Jim? COUNCILMAN DAVIS: You know, this is obviously a very tough decision. I think, if HRT had come to us a year ago and said "you know, guys, we have a $6 million study, it ' s going to take $240, 000 of matching dollars to get the $6 million study done" , it would have passed pretty close to unanimously. Unfortunately, we were misled or lied to, pick whatever term you want, and we were told we didn ' t have to put any money up. Now, we ' re in the eleventh hour on this thing, we started it, and we ' re faced with the situation where we ' re all upset . We ' re all frustrated. The citizens are angry. The citizens are frustrated, but I think some of it is a little misdirected. They' re angry and frustrated at a situation in leadership that no longer exists . I think that the leadership that has been put in place has a lot of credibility. A lot of the State leaders have looked to the new CEO in times past with regards to VDOT, and I think those experiences have spoken for themselves . My thought is, in an economic time such as we ' re facing, and Bob is right , times are tough, there ' s one thing we all know for certain, that Virginia Beach will be here next year, and it will be here five years from now and it will be here ten years from now. And we have to plan for the future regardless of how tight things are today, and in these economic times we 've got a Governor who has said we won ' t raise taxes . We have to be careful of peoples ' wallets, but we have to make sure we plan for rail, and he ' s working on High Speed Rail, which is how much he believes in it , and I think that that ' s the same 12 mentality we need to take at the City level that we have to realize some things, even though times are tough, we ' re going to be here in five years, and it ' s the planning today that solves the problems of tomorrow. The Navy issue, I agree, we might be losing a carrier, but one of the slides up there just spoke about how, and I didn ' t see it quick enough to get the Admiral ' s name, but the Admiral is quoted as "this is a readiness issue" . So, if we ' re scared of losing one carrier, I don ' t know how many we lose if we don ' t start solving the transportation issues . The Navy has been talking to us for quite some time now. So, I ' d hate to see us forgo $240, 000, which is citizens ' money. We obviously have an obligation to watch over that money, to spend it wisely, but this is being spent wisely. And if we don ' t fund it, there ' s a mentality going around that someone else will step up and fund it . And there ' s that business mentality of sometimes it ' s proper to play chicken and let ' s see who blinks first . I don ' t know if this is the right time to go play chicken and lose $6 million in funding, stop the study completely, risk losing the additional funding on the back side, and put this in the vault for a year or two years . And I knew it was competitive for money; I didn ' t realize it was that competitive for money out there on rail . I don ' t think this is going to sit there and wait for us in the future . MAYOR SESSOMS : Barbara? COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: Well, this has been an issue that we are facing that we didn' t know we were going to face . MAYOR SESSOMS: We didn ' t create this one . COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: And I didn ' t know until last Tuesday morning that this was going to be an issue, and a lady called me and was telling me all about it, and I hadn ' t seen the newspaper . So, I told her that I didn ' t know anything, and I know I sounded really dumb and I had to apologize to her . The way this came to us certainly wasn' t an ideal fashion, and ever since I read that newspaper article last Tuesday morning I 've been debating this issue. I think it would be a great issue to debate, the pros and the cons, because there ' s certainly some on each side . One of the things , kind of coincidently, we got our final copy of the Comprehensive Plan in our Agenda Package Friday, and I have been rereading a lot of that and it is so heavy on 13 transit-oriented development . And we all voted for this in December, and if we didn ' t believe in transit and transit-oriented development, we never should have adopted this Comprehensive Plan. All of our SGA' s -- not all of them, but most of our SGA' s are built on the concept . We 've already completed and accepted the Pembroke and the Oceanfront SGA and are almost ready to do and accept the Newtown; all very heavy on transit-oriented development . Then when we get to the transportation part of the Master Plan, there ' s a whole section that says that we will develop a strategy to implement the findings of the Virginia Beach Transit Extension Alternatives Analysis and Draft Environmental Impact Statement scheduled for completion in 2010 . So, we have an error there. And then all the things that we would do when this study is complete, I mean, it ' s just throughout this whole document . So, it ' s almost that if we are going to abandon the idea of transit, a transit corridor that ' s a backbone-type system, we really have to start over with our Comprehensive Plan because all of the things that then come about, the stability of our neighborhoods, the ability to direct development into areas where we have the infrastructure, it just really weakens and in some cases goes away. Now, with the Comprehensive Plan, we certainly had heavy involvement . We had, what, seventeen meetings around the city when we were developing the Comprehensive Plan . I didn ' t certainly go to all of them. I know I went to three in my district, but I was really amazed at the people that I heard talking about the need for transit . And then, of course, when we had the final meetings we also had meetings around the city, so we had heavy involvement . And I didn ' t hear anybody come down when we were getting ready to adopt this Comprehensive Plan and say we shouldn ' t have this reliance on transit; I just didn ' t hear it, and we just have adopted it . Now, I know, and you mentioned, Jack, several times the Trail idea . Being one of the liaisons to the Bikes and Trails Committee, the Bikes and Trails Committee met just last Monday, and they spent a good bit of time talking about those potential trails . As a matter of fact, some of them had walked the trail with staff in January and were real excited about what was going to happen, and I really feel bad that I couldn ' t tell them that this was coming up because last Monday I didn ' t know about it . But I think if we ' re going to pull the plug on this whole thing, we really need to have some opportunity for comment from all of these folks that are working on it before we were to do such a thing. 14 I agree, this is the worst timing it could possibly be . We 've got the budget facing us . We don ' t know what ' s coming. We know it ' s not going to be good. We know that the public confidence in HRT is badly shaken because of all that ' s been going on there . So, the timing is horrible, so we can really debate it from that issue, as well . When we look at that corridor, we know that the -- so many people in the city, as the e-mails I 've been getting and I 'm sure what you all have been getting and the letters that we see to the editor, it seems to all be focused on Light Rail , and of course the study is looking at Light Rail but also looking at some other alternatives . So, this decision to do one or the other or nothing won ' t be coming until we have the information that would be generated by this study. And it ' s important that people understand that we ' re not, I mean, for example, the right-of-way requiring not only for Light Rail but it ' s a transportation corridor, it ' s our opportunity for transportation. And I think the message that we send with the way we handle this particular issue is so critical, because I think if we back off we are going to be sending the message to the State and to the Federal and to the Federal and to the region that we are not going to be following through, and, therefore, what commitments they might have given us are not commitment they have to keep, as well, and I think that would be disastrous . So, we have just so many aspects of all of this that we have to weigh. And I know, Bob, you ' re constantly saying that we 've got to be concerned just with the core services at this time when we have difficulty financially, and you ' re right, but I think transportation is a core service . And we ' re in a pickle, because the General Assembly really hasn ' t been doing what they need to do . And if we fail to do what we need to do, I don ' t know what the future of our city would be . I carry around in this other packet , this thing, and I know y ' all are familiar with it, this listing of these transportation projects that we have out there, and there ' s not one below the Green Line . And there ' s so many, and we can ' t build these roads , either . We talk about, and folks who are anti- particularly talk about, the amount of cost of Light Rail or BRT or whatever it might be, and the fact that it won ' t recover the cost , that we don ' t recover the cost of building these roads, either, and we can ' t build these roads . We can build precious few of them. And the funny thing, this project that ' s getting ready to start here in the Princess Anne District, Princess Anne Road is going to bid in March, is over $50 million for a couple of miles . And to acquire the right-of-way to expand that road in 15 a relatively undeveloped area, the right-of-way cost us $19 million. We can ' t acquire right-of-way in this corridor that we ' re looking at . It ' s just totally beyond any feasible idea . So, it ' s important that we keep the right-of-way that ' s already there . I ' ve heard so many times over the years, why don ' t we use that southern right-of-way to that railroad that used to go down to Munden Point to do whatever? Well, the reason we can ' t is because it was sold to individuals when the Railroad stopped using it, and that ' s just not an option that I think we can think about for this particular right-of-way. So, the more I think about it, the more angles that are out there . They' re just forever . You can talk about them forever . But I think what we have to do is we have to make sure that if we go forward with this that we do it in a fashion that we know that our interests and the interests of our citizens are protected, whether we have continuous interim reports, some analysis of the expenditures . I think one of you fellows who talked about the cost of the study, maybe it ' s too high; well, I don ' t know that that ' s the cost of the study or if it ' s just the amount of the grant that we ' ve applied for, but I would certainly hope that we ' d make certain. And I think in some of the news articles this weekend, we see the new director over there certainly going toward looking at consultant studies and so forth and making sure they' re what they ' re supposed to be . I think we need to determine what it is we would need to do in order to make sure our interests and the interests of our citizens are protected if we go forward with this study. I know one of you mentioned that we don ' t know what the economy is going to be . We don ' t know what ' s going to happen with the Military. We don ' t know those things . But I can tell you one thing, if we stop this study we do know the answer, and that is we ' re not going to get anything . So, all around the issue, those are some of the thoughts that I ' ve been having over the past week and I know it ' s a tough issue . MAYOR SESSOMS : Thank you. Jim? COUNCILMAN WOOD: I agree with, frankly, a lot of what everybody has said here. HRT is justifiably taking some hits, justifiably so . I don ' t think that -- anybody who has been involved with that organization, particularly John and I, know that there have been some serious issues there . And I think the Commission has taken the right steps with the new leadership, new very strong leadership, and the investigation that somebody referenced, I 16 think, Bobby, you referenced it, keep in mind that was at the request of the new CEO . COUNCILMAN DYER: That ' s correct . COUNCILMAN WOOD: He ' s come in, and I was at a meeting with him on Saturday morning in Norfolk, and he announced to this group, he ' d already sent an e-mail out to all the Commissioners, but he announced to this group, he said, "look, I 'm calling on the Department of Transportation ' s Inspector General ' s office to take a look at the way HRT has done business in every aspect" . Now, he ' s got a little bit more clout, because he basically told them when he wanted the investigation to start and when he wanted it to stop and move it along quickly, which is a very good thing . Bob, you talked about the Navy carriers and the issue with the Navy. And, Glenn, you said, it was one of those slides, Slide 16 , if you want to flip in there, and it ' s from the current Commander Navy Region Mid-Atlantic , which is Admiral Boensel . There are at least four previous Commander Navy Region Mid-Atlantic, Commanders Navy Region Mid-Atlantic, I guess, who have written similar letters . I have copies of all those letters, if anybody would like to see them, where they have expressed their support for this . The Navy really, really, really wants a connection between Oceana and the Naval Station; that is their ultimate goal . They see this extension as the first part of it and that ' s why it is . From my perspective, and I watched something online today where a group of folks were talking about what the major issues were facing the region, and they talked about the carrier, whether or not we lose a carrier and another one gets decommissioned or what have you, so this Council has tried to be as Navy friendly as possible . And I think this is something when the Navy says this is a readiness issue for us , I think we need to take heed to it . When he says it ' s a readiness issue, he is specifically talking about Light Rail . Whether or not Light Rail is the ultimate Locally Preferred Alternative, LPA, which is another acronym, Bill, in there, is another issue . Going to Bill ' s comment about what ' s going to happen if we don ' t right now spend this money, it ' s a simple business cash flow analysis . They need cash at certain points along the line, and this $1 . 2 million gets us to the next part where this next grant kicks in, and the next grant kicks in and it goes on from there . So, that ' s the way it is on that . So, hopefully, that answers the one question. And when you said, talking about the local sponsor, Jack was talking about that, 17 whether the local sponsor is HRT or the City of Virginia Beach it doesn' t really matter . Ultimately, HRT is funded by the localities and by State and Federal money. We could have as many buses on the road as we wanted if we put more money in HRT. They would put a bus on every street if we wanted to fund it . That ' s not an issue . But it ' s a balancing of priorities , and, as Barbara said, Transportation is a core service and it ' s just a question of how much we want to fund transit . I ' ve had conversations with the Secretary of Transportation, Sean Connaughton, who has local government experience, as many of you all know, and was also the Maritime Administrator for President Bush, and also with Former Congresswoman Thelma Drake, who was the head of that agency, Department of Rail and Public Transit . The State feels very strongly in support of moving forward with these studies for the simple fact that this is a strategic decision for us . This is , as Glenn said, which I thought was a really good statement, we don ' t know what ' s going to happen with the economy in six months or a year, but we know Virginia Beach is still going to be here . And we also know, looking at these slides, that no matter what, nothing is going to get built on here for several years . But if we don ' t move forward and if we don ' t study this, we ' re not going to know anything, and other people are going to grab our money. It ' s pretty clear out there, there ' s a lot of competition, and I didn ' t realize there was that many. I heard a lot less . I see New York and California going against us . They've got some pretty strong lobbyists, so it ' s going to be tough. But I think, ultimately, if we boil it down to the core factor, it ' s a study, yes , we don ' t want to spend the money, but we have to look at the alternative . If we don ' t spend the money, this isn ' t going to be any cheaper for us if we delay it a year; probably cost us more money. Somebody else is going to get this grant, and it makes us so we ' re not really thinking long term, strategically. So, that ' s my comment . MAYOR SESSOMS : Thank you, Jim. Bill? COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Is this $6 . 6 million contract a firm fixed price one, because we were told last year the $5 . 7 million, which was the cost they brought to us last year, was a firm fixed price contract? JACK WHITNEY: The 5 . 7 is . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Is a firm fixed? 18 JACK WHITNEY: The additional funds have to do with other costs , legal costs, surveying, anticipated requirements coming out of the FTA review for additional work, whatever it might be, but the 5 . 7 is a fixed contract . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: So, the next piece of it, the $900, 000, we ' re not sure if that ' s going to be fixed? JACK WHITNEY: That ' s the 80% Federal contribution to our 20% match that goes into the funding of that 5 . 7 fixed contract . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: So, last year the study was 5 . 7 . This year it ' s 6 . 6 . Hopefully, next year it ' s not going to increase . JACK WHITNEY: Contract is 5 . 7 , unless we add stuff that we want to it and expand the scope . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Okay. The 6 . 6 , then, is what? JACK WHITNEY: The 6 . 6 is the HDR contract, plus the additional funds which will be necessary to support the administrative costs, potential legal costs during the course of the effort, and anticipate what FTA may ask for in terms of additional studies or documentation. MAYOR SESSOMS: Bob? COUNCILMAN DYER: Thank you. I think this is a healthy discussion . MAYOR SESSOMS: This is a great discussion. COUNCILMAN DYER: This is what the Workshops do, exchanges ideas and opens some eyes and is very helpful . I do want to address something that I just feel strong about, that, first of all, Mrs . Henley, the most congested road on that list right there is right in my District, and I ' d like to see a Comprehensive Plan. Maybe this will flesh out in a study. I don ' t know. But I think we really need a full regional Comprehensive Transportation Plan to really give meaning to what we ' re trying to do here and justify. For instance, if we were able to get High Speed Rail , that would be helpful because that would spur the economic development for the Strategic Growth 19 Areas and things of that nature. Once again, what I 'm talking about necessarily, delay, I know sometimes in politics that ' s a bad word, but putting things on the back burner sometimes is not a bad idea . I think our friends in Norfolk are doing that now with the Courthouse . That ' s a hot political issue for them right now, but they don ' t have the money, and so they ' re risking a lawsuit and everything else . The point I 'm trying to make is that by being slow and deliberate, I think a lot of people have a problem when we get blindsided, all the unexpected costs come up . I think that happened in Norfolk and they don ' t want to see it here . And my fear is that if we ' re not at least deliberate about this that we have to set the tone that we ' re going to be deliberate about things and have some checks and balance systems on this . That ' s fundamentally what I 'm saying, so I don ' t think necessarily delay is inappropriate at this time . And then, once again, until we really get a handle on what our true budget is going to be, I just think it would be helpful to be stewards of the folks ' money. Glenn, you ' re right . We have to look forward to economic development and build a future, but right now we ' re not sure where that future is going to lie. It could be, hey listen, I hope I 'm wrong. I truly hope that I 'm wrong, but I don ' t see this economy turning around any time soon. We may be looking at a commercial bubble next and everything that could skew this whole thing. And while we should approach the Strategic Growth Areas and approach the vision, we have to realize that the economy may change the time lines on this . And Jim is right, we ' re not going to see HRT anytime soon. Probably, if we approved it today, it would probably take seven years or so to get up and running. And if I recall at the State of the Region, I do believe Dr . Koch said that before Light Rail is viable, it ' s going to be a couple of decades before it really gets up and running. So, the point is , as we go forward we 've got to remember all along the way somebody is going to have to pay for all of this stuff, whether it be the study, whether it be the implementation of any plan that we 've got to do . One of the things that we highlighted in the Blue Ribbon Task Force is that we just make sure that we do things based on our folks ' ability to pay, is all I 'm basically saying . MAYOR SESSOMS: John? Thank you, Bob. COUNCILMAN UHRIN: Thank you. Well, first off, there is a Comprehensive Regional Transportation Plan that was participated in by all of the * 20 cities on the south side and on the Peninsula . Mr . Mayor, I ' d like to request that we have a briefing on that here probably in the next month or so . Mark, you can probably help facilitate that, but I think it would be beneficial for all of us and the public, as well . MAYOR SESSOMS : Have you got that noted, Mr . Spore? Thank you, sir. I saw you noting it . COUNCILMAN UHRIN: We 've been talking for several years about the importance of the data points we would get from this EIS, and with Phil Shucet at the helm I 'm very confident at the end of the day that we ' re going to have reliable meaningful data that comes out of the study. He gave assurances to this Council and I 'm very confident that he meant it and he ' ll deliver, that he ' s not going to be coming to this Council to help fund any more of the study, that this is the only time he ' s coming to the well . But I think it ' s important to note that if we do vote to approve the funding, the data points are not even going to be available for another year. And we cannot compete for any Federal funding for any transit study in that corridor, whether it ' s BRT or whether it ' s a bike trail or whether it happens to be Light Rail without those data points . So, if we delay it then we know that there is yet another year that we ' re not even going to be at the table to try and come up with real transit alternatives and start to build that . And for that reason, I 'm not happy about it, I am very annoyed that we even have to consider this, but I certainly do not want to have a situation where we are a year, two years, three years from now and we do not -- it limits our opportunities to do something that really needs to happen at a point in time because we didn ' t fund the study today. MAYOR SESSOMS : Questions or comments? I ' ll conclude, then, if that ' s all right? First off, Jack, thank you for doing this . As you said this , has been great . I don ' t think I could sit here and disagree with any of the comments made . I respect every comment that was made . I also want Jack to know that he didn ' t create -- the City of Virginia Beach didn' t create this . You 've done a great job trying to bring us up to date on good information. The key thing that stays in my mind if we don ' t move forward is getting the funding for the purchase of the right-of-way. I don ' t have the answer for you, as I raise this to you, but I would sit back and say to you that I think they would at least expect us to move forward with the completion of the EIS if we 21 were to get $20 million from the State, as has been promised. I think they were expecting us to move forward with a study that was already in place and we expect to be completed. For the fighting of funds at the State level for these types of projects, I sure don ' t want to give them excuses not to fund that $20 million. I don ' t think anyone at this table disagrees with the importance of us acquiring that right-of-way. I know that I don ' t want to even give an inkling of a reason for them not to complete what they ' ve promised to us . The Military issue that Jim Wood just brought up, referring to Admiral Boensel ' s letter in black and white stating how important Light Rail was in dealing with readiness, I just had lunch with the Commanding Officer at Oceana, I guess, a week ago Friday. I 'm going to try to do that quarterly just to make sure we have open communication, we don ' t have things to blow up on us or surprises . The first thing on his agenda was "we want to be tied to Light Rail" ; Oceana Commanding Officer, "we need to be tied into Light Rail" . Again, knowing how important we are about the Navy and maintaining the Navy in Virginia Beach, in Norfolk, in our region, I cannot overstate, these are comments that have come to me when I was up at the Pentagon and also when I had Admiral Harvey in front of Governor McDonnell, Governor Elect at the time, it was a few days before he got sworn in, guess what was on his poster board that he was making his presentation to the Governor about? Transportation. And I 'm so delighted, this isn ' t just about Light Rail , this study. This is about the Bike Path. This is about other types of paths . I am so sorry that we ' re in this situation, and I think that ' s why we ' re questioning this so hard, as we should. We were told we didn ' t have to fund it, and, yes, now we ' re being told that we need to if we want to move forward, $245 , 000 on a total investment in excess of $6 million. And as Bob has stated so clearly, the timing could not be worse . But at the same time, I ' ll conclude this way. I do think there is a need for a bit of a breather here, but I think the breather occurs while the study goes on . This study is going to take a good while . The information they' re showing, it ' s going to be the end of 2010, early 2011 , before we get information. I think that allows us to be getting information prepared to be brought to us . It allows HRT to be able to prove they can move forward with Light Rail in an organized fashion and a proper fashion and in an efficient manner . And I would hope during that time frame, I 'm going to be hoping for the best , and I think everyone at this table is going to 22 be hoping for the best . Finally, I think, we can ' t forget two things . We 've got two individuals that serve on HRT, one of them is the Chairman. I think everyone at this table respects their representation, and in particular, speaking about Jim Wood, he has taken a tremendous hit through that process showing tremendous leadership, in my opinion, and I think in everyone ' s opinion at this table . And I think every now and then we really have to step up and support our leadership because we respect each other . And sometimes we really don' t want to do something, and there ' s some good reasons not to do it because we were told we didn ' t have to, but I think when it ' s all said and done, I think we ' ve got two fine people doing a good job and I hope I can help them next week in moving this project forward. Thank you for your presentation. JACK WHITNEY: Quite welcome, Sir . MAYOR SESSOMS : And, Mr. Spore? CITY MANAGER: I ' d just like to add one piece of information that might help a little bit . It ' s awful easy to disparage HRT, and I just want to put in a good word for them in terms of why we are where we are right now. They in good faith, I think, when they were out here a year ago represented that in fact there would be no cost to the City and they were going to fund the study, and they, in fact , applied for the grant for the full, I believe, it was $6 . 9 million at that time -- no, $5 . 9 million, excuse me, at that time . Without getting into all the alphabet soup, the agency and the funds that they applied for made those grant awards , and because of the competition they weren ' t given the full amount that they had requested; that ' s why there ' s this shortage right now, the $1 . 2 million. To their credit, they said there ' s another pot of money we can go after and they were able to get that grant, but that ' s a different pot from a different source and it requires a local match. Because HRT does not have an independent funding source, they have to rely on the cost participation agreement, sharing agreement, that we signed back in the ' 90s and ask us for the money. So, I just want to kind of put some perspective on this . That we were misled and that they did that intentionally, I don ' t believe that is the case . They, in fact, did try to get the full grant amount and because of the competition for those funds they did not get those . So, that ' s why there ' s this 23 gap . To their credit, they did hustle around and find another grant source, and it unfortunately requires a local match and they don ' t have it . MAYOR SESSOMS: Thank you for your comments . (Whereupon, the discussion of this matter was concluded. ) 3 CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS ELECTRONIC DISPLAY SIGN(LED) REGULATIONS 5:01 P.M. Mr. Whitney, Director —Planning, along with Bill Macali — City Attorney's Office, provided the attached presentation. A copy of the Verbatim Transcript is also attached and made a part of this record. February 16, 2010 e- (:-.)(] O (N LC) c--I N ...i'•:.:I.i.....i:P":•1';.:IIi:i],:iii:i';',:iii:i;'•.;i:'::;i::•••:•ii::!:•:••••-• ' \I.V14•4111 ig '''':. L 0 w o C 4) >O O >' Nr *. "T . L L ��k \W ti i 'r �( ti w i 03 ♦V 1 1 p J c) 03 o _J Cif O .-C3 C O1 i.A• �'11•ff ^ trrm ' _C O O CC ! ItII •ci)i_ N c c, �r • moo � � � � r m 0 z ¢ o «1 a' o ter •- _ • CD N ti U ti O L fr l . . .. � CJO cOO -0C 00 (U ._ CA E •2 O7 C 0 0) 1_ > 1_ riN O O O c 7 -F {k r y: O o_ L ..,..... 4 • f^ "c ( ...,:...1,. 'or .� fn• Z :, — d• L_ . N E " oi:/+QU ....• W .I 41-'x'4''": 0. LLJ �:. a �.,k r a' �� V C CD 0 N lD e-I N ;ii• • .�i,.••.•,1:..- , y e En f f4 ... -7-1.cam !� k f I 'r , Y s !�if f , �3 q • .. 'Y• • Cr 69 y F 0.. C }j•',pnl :�.. I 7 r • I!4j' ..1 Ile).:N i i 7 L , .... .... , 1... ,•_ i iffa-V.it •.... r t, ..i:4 :'ikil 1 5 ..'r''''',11:4-.._.7-'+'"--. . . �� { yr . .. ... ‘ A. L,,,,,,.., „...(..,,..................., ..„..ri,! ii::....i'ii if kg...4-e, ,• ? , , -Ai _. ,..!,, L iti, ,\, a , . , - t Ili : t CO 0OL- rn � � uC) t ;1 � '• :t -Ci C° C O II) 0- N > o >_ Q (6 C 7 m .hv 4 x } i ` `', O •fn C C w. ,.. N O) O t ''-'-'4,11,40,-, $tr :,q'/ l'ti+ii r } . o' (� N (d -0 f� -C (p CC 3 Sir"' pp 4a aa .( m L QC � O '0) � NC OO) S"F.2 , it. 1 • • t AAki';i t U° ' O LN NO�p o u) .2 � O .C � m" (i3 �, C O �+ a • :.« m O N N C -p 5 (3 O C O .114'` —•;-1111114•t '•�� .1'''; `� >:HI ^�' c a��i coo I° c`�i v Z o I cr 0 0 N LO a-1 N 0 U t 0 . T ... ur N C O O V 4t:v E v w w c :i(§ ----- . .. art n� o s I- C V a) •• . .. Y O m Q Q N N L • .. .. O O C to (� CD `n mr . °(t (y (n Ea) E « w cal 7,3„ 2- a NL E ' i:i• • � � -6.2- � CO NI DD-O OC : • : - Q) c .. ...CU .--6: E � �.� � > U m cmoe _ , w .. ,. E c-2.05n p Oc O FO $ „ m ° „ o g N O CN 'cO F mVrrnmU • - EM LOE C0 E1 O c � o U Oc K c j rn� c d Qc3O � mC y C p �-om r . . • U. Q E QO 0 c_ ac cO y my 2 U a m a � Ua) C I E n `I N >, 0 (n p ,0 CI g .• cy � aGC 0 pE 2 ZOO E 2.0 CQ m N m o D � 0 CD ON cc 0 °- coo U cri0W^ a).°—, ° Ua) a) MC N C.2 C cn °, c (Ki a-,E..--, CO •�.Eroo aCDEc •E.) E co r.o C ac n.E ° c= c ° S ., 12 - U )Q � UP Qn- > cEW ° • " p o 0 0 0 3 - ::. `w E `go +1), CL) E a r 'E d ono . Eo E m va ° (nC mNNVyU £ N ^, n CU ci " N O dC N C u m a < QEv m v� 0O � OO ,^ P, D 60 Z d ` _ CI c C a) c O v a) � -� U) t E • -' C C) = CB .0) —. z A :. E c a ` a. s O O o o 2 • 0 p 'c O V . Co "J s Oa) v •U a) s T CQ U .c m a i- E ms � o o m L w „ . Q - O C -'-• Cn a) oo • T[ as _� .c) 0 0" U w - 0 E N V L- .E 2 o = (Q c O U O O C W II. (r) ar C) 0 o O n Q I`' . Z In ® 0 U N � 15 � If I) Z � o � I c3 O c-I O N lD I--I N .. O C LU LU ' (..) :: .,,.. ,. , 'g '23 U— _FOa z a d w O 'l C E E .N N iCCN o:N � w U _nQ .uCv A v " E t Cc 2 mO `cO E w • 9NpUEV U pSO n ~ 0 EE , UWJ O / Jc o 0 ° „ Z U 41 O m n U 0 Q O J > E E W D ;.::i::•• O x U m w CN D N C 1 O o 5 � $ c � c Ri r � i c j o c g , ..... :. L. g p Y g lit ''i •/-'''' i irler:o'l P :. ,, .z.,.. , 1,041e!..ii pp N O L lFIy i i3e p o Ll -.:11:,,,,.'0 !.4`fix kd, I)i. d m P N g z Pi'i •+t.9 6xr :. 1' ,36 a 4*N a r g 8 <u;1 ' 4, fi 'f1. E q W N n 2 ¢ ';.i.;..: , N T �, S •i co Qr„q uh I 1 R 't:.:14,1,-.1i..';'.1,:::-,, W 33C -Yi , � of k �S U V i.j y � p �0 r$Y4t ) I C 0 N CV .. .,1 Q,: j • • Myi ' J • rr.•rtwrsY / , t f r •,;.;•"-s:—.M S } • k In.,,i/ 'r1ksu 'fli .,,,'4'x.:,i �`�•J' itc ".:. A, F --.,;•:.•• J .. I 6 ,•e~j .,;p.` a\5. �,ly I k jiyr,�� 2r 5 t • ,,, i, o • 441 L.Z ` " ` r:e .., , i',..?: n t '-'-'7;41-,, \ a;,,,,'I f: F.. V _.. i± . • : t,. i ri • r 3 rr � ii • • r , J ., i c 1 '�S . A• .. 1;47�y t: r,. �' \ • r, , " � j L r• k1s• 3 y p 4r111‘.: ,¢• 777,, }t C'. •1• t. ry V•.; `�` , • • ' . j.:, •14....,''• `; d, ,SS • t. *µ{'Vi 3 FIY u_ .�. i `"+ - k. 5!�S tr•i iii� `?' :ti• — � • 11 kr 0 -i 0 N --,_ LD ,_. N ::::::::If.::::::::::•*::::,;:::::::::::,:.:,:::.:.:.:::.:,..,....,....:::...,,,,....:.:::.,...,:::....,.....„,,..:•......„:„:••4:..,..;:i:.:,.:..,i:...,., :•••••.::•:',K.::....:.:,:.:,....,:.::.:•:•::.:::•:.:,.:...,....„•••• .. • iii.:::iiii::iii.:.:i.:•:ii.i'.iiig,444,k:i?..". i . i.',,-.1,--;-•-i :,:':',Zi;::::,,r.::i!:?!!::::.:.... ',1Z1';:',. I . LE .',. '.,:,•,.. 0 •,.,-,:i -'N' -; i4n.,.,•.;..., . . . ' ..... .., ,:i.,.••••::.::::::...:1:i::,:::::..... .,..,',...„.:•:—.4.,,,,,,::- i\ c,,, :' 1,'It. • 0..": ' i:': I '.,, ii,...!....i:r„::::..... .p.,..:-.,....,-* : ,,. 5 , •.'., f 4 ,,.; I'','..!, r, ,, "i../ , '' 44:'.:''''•''' i',"V. c ' ' 'h ' ... i:'::':: C •••';.‘r4 -• -- is ,!,.. I::;,,.....1.,i , ii-•.•• a) 4. ,..„.:,..,..,?.,,.:,.,,,,.,.... •,.:.:,,,,,..- -.... ,.: ..,...:: 1.0007 t N ..:. .. ki fate...', t••• ' . :F: ,4,,, , ,j: . 1...... ., ::.. 1/4...i . 1 ,ift,,44.,,Ilmktiffi tx.0 , ,..1 ... 120 ;Limi,,,,NstIlt,,,,fif,,..f,•,".....[,•...-_';•;•.j. ,•,•• : •::•:: • ,.N.,. ", 0, ..in . . .. • ••• ca iii..„, ,....T.(7,,.,..„?........,,,,k-• , f..,,...t...!,::: •-- ,•-•i4,1,.•••.0•-y.1,, ,••,,,••••••,,i,,.. •••• •• ...... .,,„,,,,•••;7•,:;;;7p.•-,e4,-ql,',,..-.P,••.•,- 11' •-• . ,.."... -- •- -'Nr100•N‘1! -•.,,i 0 •> vor.:i.' :',..ii '.,,,,,,, ',. ..•• .,,,tt'',',.j.-.:;..' .._ .4,i'.4 ;liel,I.:i--.5Z ',..'--.. i! CI..S.4.4.''',.1f.V f;):;i ..;& - ', • , :i'. ,,,,,,yfpfi•..,.,.......,..,t,.. .1i• littliiiiitsi 1 1 . ,•,,i:,: ,,c,,,,t,..',.qs•k.. “-..i•-•0 a -f. t.,', - . ' , ,-- :E u): "'.;;i,t.''''..;(,.,i-it.,',:',,;-:.,1,4',,i' • '" .'4;.!1.• '.- ''''-' ".'is.'"* V4Av.,,,,:-._if,i.::'.'••:.1:-• ; ...0 Nva"...-- .'ii,.:f••4:1",'4.1,,, ;•,',3-41 i,;:s.1.•• iri., .• i ' :':: ..1__/ ;.,'74-: fl'4ii-tij-P1'"'''-'''''''1.:, t +a ,.r...'1,,'',.,':.':• At-,.-A 0 Ex • •••, i: •— •- Nails N-1:-..'., i A-4117,r3Wi.i:; Nti`1,7, _:.J...... •0.1111731.•''....;;:teei:'," ,-.-.'41'.:''' l'. " r ' .:lit :,:i i L . .4.:..7y,.).1;'.:.'r;r*••';;' .1:I.i;.1 i•••ti,'!,''.',.:.ti!,,':.i.,'l 4. , .... (13 T".Pil ,';')..I.V.:,,,,,i,...':, .. . . r . •.• % • ... 0 71";‘....,*IP t 1.,':''.':.: , ••• ,, 'e• , •,''r''''':•\',,,:j...,.,..'. • •••• • . .. '. • •I:; •••• VR;i44,,It I . '. ' ,... i 1 :::: ILI) A'';',.....i'.'j: .'''44,Nriai 7 i:. • .'; i ' .. ':E :: • I 1 17 f ' • • ' 0 ;dr*!Mk..7. . , . ... . . . [ ,' ;:•i •' . ei',i,'"..•T'-','.-, ;---,-t---r-...— • ' ''. .'‘ i'• ." -4;':'")••';% ' i' ' , 4—, .'• 1-.•-•:il''i '','"..'..1''. -'• is' . ; ' ' . VI , , ..i: .—.'.. ..‘,,L 14,,106i, ,, ,-, . (1) .., I.. . n i','.. . i.:.... D 18..'01,,Ilt:':Z.,,,,,,''... ''''''. C L,.;'..f,, 7."‘:.: ..,..___..... ., IA! . . - ..4 4 : •': 0 - '. ‘...'...-.• . 1 ..!. ...• ..•• :.:: .. .i.i•! "." ..• :,:i..,:i:...*i..:,i:.:..,.::...i..i:i:i:.:...i:..i:...:...:i...,.i:i....,:,i,.i:iii:iiii:ii:::::•••.:i.:i..i,.i...,:::i:.i:,..J:v.i.iii::::.i....::::i.:....: .:... ...„..„•„,•.••......................... ..................•.....„.„............... „......,0,..,.....,,,,,,,,,......,,, .....•,.,.•... ..,.,,,,,,e.y.,,.............,."...„,,.. .“,..............“....., ......... .‘,..... ...... .,....,.,. :::11::::::i::::•?.:;:T.,•'::::D...':."';''..........''''..'.....''..1777.'r :'.1 ' I '1 ' ".' .........:.:i?:.: :.:',:•.: .' '' , ' ' J'''..':. ' ;ie.rki LP.1. :.! 1 ...,...,.................., • •::':i:1•,:.,:.,:,:',.:•.;.i.:::: ' .,,,: ., ,' ,,‘. 1 5 ." , .,. ,,, ; ,; i '!',11,q, '..:"..,'i. ::,:N'.:';!1;!•::'i..i. ..:'....., 0 i..•... .' • ' ., . ,,,- ..._, - . :.. . ,.1, 4;11104.',# i.:11 ''.1:' ....,..... .i..Dij'..:V...'": ,,.!.,..,;±:,',;•"•:,i'.1..:."•:IPWri.%W.Iii • ' I k, )'‘,:'''.• i'''''' ,.,'• -•,.10.-4'• "4-',7*/- 1.41,!:02 i rte ,i:::i,4, ,,iiii:IV,•-•';(!.::2,5:46.t.418::"...• ,lilt,''''". . :. , . .„..• • .... . . .. „ • . ... .,.... . • . _ , •• i,,,,,;',7!7::iffi.•117,viii7:4r41 .k .,.T.:7,- -,.,f1, - •:. • AA.,14.10fittW44-..,01-1,:.-ilfik .it. fl,' , - :, .7 --!,,,,,,‘.L,,..4.,.:4•4:.i...., •.i!.4'"IP" ", '. '...' ..!:, "03W0414.• •,.'."''''.'4‘'...',.'.4i'...P.';'.-.•''.,-, d tb, 6 . • I U) '%.:4'.,jf'k'....i!:,,"!"...),,,,,', it fy; .• 0 : .:' ..',,. ;.,.'1,. qi.'..;''',.!... . ,....:',;41.k:...r.t.11ikl--t,.;,' .'. ',,..!; 10441. 4t .. ci) Fif,j,L1::1 = -•.:,,,,. :.,. ,. ,..,..1.:., ,- ,.. '-. - 1 i i:ii tt.0 14:it.,47,,,k.-4i ,t.i' •,',. 1 , ;:‘ .. •' ,:.: 0 . , ....'le:I.N'• 1;3 -.1J '..S :* ',.?-:... ../. ' .,,r...,. • • "'''. I.;',..::::: .•... . '1:,'''i' '.1," • ' :. !:Y414;;Allf•' ,••'il.;!:;: E-! •:r....1'-• •••.1••• _C -!irli.:,,i, 2 I , I ... • 2 t• i,,,-,,,i4 ei 1 k 114,,'''. •. .11 'IP. ' -1:. ° •.4 fie ';;I:;:;, ' 1:2 ..,_ ' , ;''.111117P,r.t.);;; Li•': :'..)';,:...1 C)r— t;'.1.,...;;;41:1 IT ii,.i t . 144kir 4:01; . *.- i••• f. ,.. ...,•,' ' ... •Is.ti,... r;I.;:...: 0 V . ,..4 _.,.._ •,,,,i,r,„,,f it • ti•`;;:::77:,,.pr...'•::;• .:-!,:. Z ..::•.",i':. 41 _ ',''Mil ••,lit'',..:., '!..j.ii:i.i .4.72 F.:i'.21 7 o • • ' •;.6-' ' . ' " :. 111•••,:i,..;',4';, , Mititt---'BIt''. • ':",":':: '.., '',,,I,r4..1.0 ! i ' I ,4',_i':.1.,t te.,A ' •' .' •i' ,':I,:.!•',.. .,.. Ilk, ',,'It, '' • :. '',0'' ''. -• :•'• • " ''',:•4'ti.'s:''. • t, r , . " :...,,' .. .. ...,,:;_rti'..2 ',..,...,•,•;', A-, , or .,....,• • r--•:, i;:, . .. :•,• . - ... • 0 ••*,'{.••'P'`.• '7,,,'''''';:t:g;?A' — ".•-ii10,,,ii,...?'-fi•'441i,... •! :: 1.',g•'cil ..-1 • ' 14 11;1'.. i!. ' ii: 0 ','''''0; v: vfk431-4:`'.,-— I (il 1441.44tir' 0 ';',:.141:L ' u.:.'':(' '4ii,1,.4.::1::.' '' . ': ri--.1.le! ;' ''''' " '` ../ 4:‘,EN- - • .., ,.-,,.f 0 ...tk: . .... . .::.,: !',!".:. ,,,,..,t„..,,,,.....4„...„ r• C ,„1.:,. ,.„ , , • ' ' • - • I';:• C W.:,.,..r ,i-: ic-..-.‘i.i.'-',.;..:•'f. , , ' .tv..,-!:!: 0 ?::• .'-...,:,,...4,.':t-..... -- 1 i '•...'...4:' 0 .g','. '' •'. :',•-•• .; .1' -, 1•,,,,_ 1,"•:,.tit,,.; .1: ':*r .... .. .. .. 0 0 N LD • F- w 2 2 O U Z O I- OS 75 w Qc � o .... N � >, o � 5 . :.... ,. ... o ca tar) o � va) cn n � o oEo Eca �a ' .. :.: c L a) c w (n to . 0 .(7). a a) _ a) ac c cc0 Wo — O N o cQ W a) co .2 o U + Q) C8JN .. U a) v O 0 U ` o� a) > y a) .c L U O O C6 O NO _U w 4) c U V W a .0 a) c O a) C S U a) i;i. (I) O p) a) N V• O N p 'O a) . @ U a) .Q cc c a. cv U a) 0) o •E Cl. Zoo W E c0O �' W N OE 3 ii• 0 O OO ® 0 OO 2/16/2010 Virginia Beach Transit Extension Study Alternative Analysis and Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Project Update and Briefing Virginia Beach City Council Briefing February 16,2010 ■ Agenda • Background • HDR Contract with HRT • City Team and Committees • Public Involvement • City Land-Use Planning Efforts • East-West Trail Capability • Schedule and Next Steps • Regional Interest and Support • Examples in Other Cities 2 1 2/16/2010 :ac � : •-• - : State Mandated Study • Virginia General Assembly passes House Bill 6028 directing HRT to study expansion of The Tide: July 2008 • Requires HRTDC and VDRPT to initiate study of the project in order to advance project for solicitation of proposals under FTA's New Starts process and the 1995 PPTA • VBTES planning and environmental analysis(AA/SDEIS)initiated May 2009 N __, 4 g-1 - S ✓ MMIb 11r�1 r 1 e".' 3 Project Work Underway • Purpose and Need Statement (NEPA Requirement) • Description of Alternatives • BRT • LRT • Expanded Bus •Traffic Data Collection • Grade Crossing Analysis • Capital Cost Estimating Methodology • East End alignment Alternatives • Trail Compatibility analysis 4 2 is 2/16/2010 Project Work To Be Completed • Traffic Analysis • Operations Planning and Costing • Prelim. Financial and Funding Strategy • Ridership Forecasting • Conceptual Engineering • Land Use, Socio-Economic, and Environmental Impact Assessment • Contingency for Additional Work that may be required by FTA 5 Schedule and Next Steps Feb.-Dec. April-May June-July August-December 2010 2011 2011 2011 Complete Public Hearings Project Completion Completion Definition: of Draft City of VB Approval AA/SDEIS for of Draft of Locally Preferred •Preliminary HRT and City based oln Alternative(LPA)* Ridership S of Virginia •Conceptual Beach FTA Review HRTPO includes LPA and Engineering Review in Long Range comment Transportation Plan •Preliminary (LRTP) Capital Costs 6 3 2/16/2010 Future Tasks • Final EIS • Preliminary Engineering • New Starts Submittal process • Refined Cost Estimates, Ridership, and Financial Planning 7 Schedule and Next Steps Winter 2011-Spring 2012 Summer-Fall Fall—Winter 2014 2014 Record of Decision Submittal of Preliminary Engineering Complete (PE)/New Starts Application to FTA: Initiation FEIS/PE Application to FTA to of detailed FTA review begin Final Design* Draft Financial Plan Preparation of Application to Commitment of Non- Approval from FTA to enter PE phase of FTA for Final Federal funds required project` Design Negotiations begin with Initiate PE Activities FTA for Full Funding Final Environmental Impact Statement Grant Agreement 8 4 II 2/16/2010 Yom, _,..---CiTeam an ees Mgmt. Committee Technical Committee • Jim Wood • Planning, • John Uhrin Environmental, • Jim Spore Traffic, Public Works, • Mark Stiles Economic • Steve Herbert Development, • Planning, Economic Utilities Development, SGA, • Dominion Power Media and Communication • Corps of Engineers • DEQ • HRSD • TPO 9 r--,ll- 1.1t5 �4fib.,-,� - V -IIIIIIIPIIIIIIIPII , art: . :: 6 • Completed ,*° T • Initial Project Kick Off-September • Station Area Workshops-December I i • Community Advisory Committee-October fi I • Stakeholder Interviews-July '' : • Still to Come . • 3 Community Advisory Committee Mtgs • Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) Public Meeting ` • 2 SDEIS Public Hearings 4• • City Council Updates .44, • HDR Contractual -_ 'I • HRT/City Staff on routine basis '?y # '*`' !i• i ., IIT H l0 5 2/16/2010 -- -''` ' ------------- ationship With PlafiFsihg Efforts • Comprehensive Plan "Development of alternative(transportation) modes is a key component to the future of transportation in Virginia Beach and Hampton Roads" Action Item—"Incorporate public transit into the development of SGA plans especially those that are on or near the east-west railway corridor." • Strategic Growth Areas , - P , • Resort Area(Dec 2008) • Burton Station(Jan 2009) !•. • Pembroke(Nov 2009) • Newtown(Spring zoio) _. • On Corridor-To Be Completed • Rosemont - at • Lynnhaven • Hilltop tu _.-----ng ------ ---- -- aonship With armiEfforts Pembroke Oceanfront .. — vib, • - ..•.„ 1 7.71‘,14,.. ,r' '',.• • 1 . . • e,.: .t - ' • . i 11 4: c''- : *..•.*.7..,''.v..,. - i: b• i ' I g,* - in,.k ,.,.. .., • el' : ' , i:i 4 ' 7- 1';3: , 4 --...-:- . , ..... .1. .-, •. 4' : .' "' :._ -.."" Newtown 4 r .4 ' ti, IA -• 111441.4'' :14 14 Pi ,:t * "*" . •,„..-^':';yree; . ,--,'i . . . i -i_....-I I 1,041 ,' 16 11 • 6'; ; • • •••• ii — 12 6 2/16/2010 • HDR Typical Section within • ROW (Underground Drainage) • Increased Cost not covered by , t; New StartsL'' • Additional City Property/ROW near corridor • Preliminary Trail Design Spring N. 2012 ,�,, I - ii 1 Itihip ' 11 , • ar k-' :c>-,�._ 1 - __ . -_ 13 ical ROW Sec i w rail 0.01101.1111... 'r.ra gonwa rlMq unm✓ttE SW w s ... r it ►t... .... UP VOW ra wn I i r Iml J.I . — mine eMno� 1i1:i' e • _-_>�T n_ a 0 .1 crnwoExr ounr,waw .utaVI LAS, mr.. PMENMSi OW .wovw WNW* UR W.rrn'l u•DESCe... 14 7 2/16/2010 Regional Interest and Support "We don't have any real chance if we want to move people down that corridor unless we look at rail." Brad Face,president,Future of Hampton Roads,1996 "Light rail can significantly stimulate development. It's an economic development tool as well as a transportation tool." Consultant James L.Prost to Hampton Roads real estate professionals,1998 6o%of Hampton Roads residents say poor transportation is"the principle issue detracting from the area's quality of life." Hampton Roads Partnership,2004 15 Regional Interest and Support "It's a readiness issue for us." Rear Admiral Mark S. Boensel, Commanding Officer, USN Region Mid-Atlantic, Dec.16,2009 "Virginia Beach Vision remains a strong proponent for the inclusion of a light rail system as an integral component of Hampton Roads' transportation network and believes resources must be found to continue the EIS uninterrupted." Michael J. Barrett, President,Virginia Beach Vision,February 15,2010 "The money,while not insubstantial,is a small investment in a deeper understanding of the transportation and development options the city will face as it maps its future." Virginian Pilot Editorial, February 15,2010. 16 8 2/16/2010 y-trot • • .M • • BRT LRT • Phoenix • Boston • Santa Clara • San Francisco • Los Angeles • LA • Hartford • Portland • Miami • Philadelphia • Honolulu • San Diego • Chicago • Dallas • Louisville • Denver • Boston • St.Louis • Charlotte • Sacramento • Las Vegas • Salt Lake City • Albany • Baltimore • Cleveland • Phoenix • Eugene • San Jose • Pittsburgh • Minneapolis • Houston • Pittsburgh • Charlotte 17 Natiid a Competition 2011 New Starts Funding • Arizona • Michigan • AZ,Tut son,Modern Streetcar • MI,Grand Rapids,Division Avenue BRT • California • Minnesota • CA,Oakland,Fast Bay BRT • MN.Sr.PauI-Minneapolis.Central Corridor LRT • CA.Oakland,Oakland Airport Connector • New Jersey • CA,Riverside.Perris Va lley Line • NJ.Northern New Jersey,Access to the Regions Core • CA,Sacramento.South Corridor Phase a • New York • U,San Bernardino,E Street Corridor abX BRT • NY.New York.Long Islami Rail Road Fast Side Access • CA,San Francisco,Central Subway LRT • NY,New York,Nostnnd Avenue BRT • CA.San Frariciuo.Van Neu Avenue BRT • NY.New York Second Avenue Subway Phase • G.San Jose,Silicon Valley Berryessa Extension • Colorado • North Carolina • NC.Charlotte,Northeast Corridor Light Rail Project • CO.Denver,fan Corridor LRT • CO.Denver.Gold Lane • Oregon • CO.Denver,Wen Corridor LRT • OR,Portland,Milwaukee LRT • CO.FOR Collina,Mason Corridor BRT • Rhode Island • CO.Roaring Fork Valley,BRT Project • RI,Providence,South County Commuter Rail • Connecticut • Texas • CT,Hartford.New Britain-Hartford Busway • TX.Austin,Metro Rapid BRT • CT.Stamford,Urban Transit way Phase 11 • TX.Dallas.Northwest/Southeast LRT MOS • Delaware • TX.Houston,North Corridor LRT • DE.Wilmington.Wilmington to Newark Commuter Rail Improvements • TX,Houston,Southeast Corridor LRT • Florida • TX.Houston,University Corridor LRT • FL,Miami.Orange Line Phase,North Co r ridor Metrorail Extension • Utah • FL,Orlando,Central Florida Commuter Rail Transit-Initial Operating • UT,Salt lake Ciry.Mid-Jordan LRT Segment • UT,Salt take Ciry,Weber County to Salt Lake Ciry Commuter Rail • Hawaii • UT,Salt Lake City,Draper LRT • HI,Honolulu High Capacity Transit Corridor Project • Virginia • Massachusetts • VA,Northern Virginia,Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project-Extension to Wiehle Ig • MA.Bouon,Assembly Square Station • Washingtonsvaie.r. ..�•.••a ao„,a.a • MA,Borten,Silver line Phase Ill • WA,Seattle,University Link ERE Eitension I nw Anw.swu new • WA,King County.Wen Seattle BRT I$Yb....a.P.m 9 2/16/2010 . _ ., Examples i —el . ":,, 'ft ''' • ' .' •••. •:. 6.t • • . Ve •• ."4-.00•••' . k. &a s .1- * 6!. •'•• /:, • b$Vs .1 ' 4 , - ."•••1.x.,t.,„k , , ',6i • ' '''' . , t 14/, ; . I ".' . • •... t 114b;‘ ........ •— . , •. - • ••• . " ". 1 ^..;7:•-:' • —..;— :..... ••• .• ..." . Portland Street Car Denver BRT Phoenix LRT Minnea olis LRT . r• • / .,..-..r.:::. s i , 1 .27....:: S.- r'11''''' .- :71;\..1.•/'% ' 0*ing,:.. i 1 , , 1 , ,. ....., 7,17, .I.. IMAM. ' I- a -7 0 -... .. 1- 19 _ ..."".'..7 ______ -------_-_-__----- – • . — 4 •• .,. "V.2'.,.... !..:.,..k....z.Tt.,... --.... ,...ta.,.. ...,„ .•„. ••.. k' I ....,•••••.el 1' , - i,'''' ' . 6...c . ''' _ -..f...1...I 1 I, p 6 ..` . 4., ' :II I .i,. :.,. li Ili pc, - ......,, ;, ...._-- . • ' II -- ' ."......- ..... Salt Lake City LRT Houston LRT Charlotte LRT _— ..- -• --• • Dallas LRT •' -,711.. -...k. . .",. 7 ' i • ....( ..!-11-1-1 A .i •-• , *'17,, -;''."; ; . . . iL .... ....... ..„ ,. ;4 ,‘ k .s--:,- -.....---7••••.::::::: . . 20 10 II 2/16/2010 • 9.6 Mile Starter ' Line-Nov 2007 k"-: ol- • Planning for ii mile l-- :_ extension started in , 2000. Target ,. opening 2016 , ' _. q _ • Expansions include ;r-�-:` Commuter Rail, ;: ,:..;,J., . 0 ,- Streetcar, LRT, and -' -i°'�� BRT - •\J ="` -= 21 �._ _ m . 4 • IMIl • 12 Miles-Opened June ' ... 2004 .-.I ,:. N • Expanding stations to accommodate 3-car trains •ii-mile Central Corridor expansion T may begin this year • LRT expansion, BRT, - ,a Express Bus, and .•,,, „ • t Commuter Rail , planned " AN. 22 11 2/16/2010 • • • I -7- .. 111 • 1,04 . ••••• • .tr . ; **." • 'I • • • 41114--••, glio 010 -.. Awbow.os.s.4, 23• • • a A 0 . • 24 12 1 II 2/16/2010 " :"""w`"""""`"'i'"r"'' March 9 Items • Y • Roadway Guide Signs Amendment --. • R-5R Swimming Pools Amendment • Cape Henry Station(Use Permit) *ow. ,:f" Evaluation and Recommendation City of Va Beach • Planning Staff recommended approval AnOrdinance a,o,ds.ouo,.111,2++.«drata • Planning Commission recommends the Gly Zoning ord nanCs and to add a anw Mellon 211.1,*fining the tem"Rued.w•Golds%lie4Ml approval (10-0) i abwhiaa regdnrrcnta for etlawWq etch Gln too public orey • There was no opposition. • Consent agenda Evaluation and Recommendation City of Va Beach • Planning Staff recommended approval M*drones wamend the City Zoning Ordrelno.krr • Planning Commission recommends reducing whack requirements for -ground • approval(7-3) b..otus of the Atlantic ocean in tha R-6R Residential District. 1 2/16/2010 ^7 . ca,e Henn•Station�.,ILEX' • f 'I". � •;Z- .s` aa. ,e' Ill /i p U' it \ A36 -\74-; Nao...7111001 _ . ill lag o•^ • t YNNHAVEN DISTRICT Relevant Information • The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow the installation of a roof- mounted wind energy conversion system (wind turbine). • Electricity generated from the system will be used on the site.Excess will be sold to Virginia Power. • Proposed turbine meets the standards . provided in the Zoning Ordinance for this use. \ ,404:.1:7417*-'" ,- ° _ Evaluation and ` " Va .41'.4' Recommendation • Planning Staff recommended approval i • Planning Commission recommends approval(10-0) .. -II . .� I-f Mil ollro • There was no opposition. ra' � ,, • �ti; . • Consent agenda 2 II 2/16/2010 March 23 Items z3,!!. Robert Ramsa • Robert Ramsey(Use Permit) Mr/ AG+ _I AG2 aki _` AG1 rS .� i 7 AOI �' ;1,/ PRINCESS ANNE DISTRICT 10 Relevant Information • The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit for firewood preparation. • Planning Commission deferred the application for two months to allow the i aftelleliailap- +----- .. applicant to'clean up'the site. ``Q��' • Logs for the firewood are brought to the _._ site from the applicant's tree removal 44:--0% service jobs. .. `..... • • The splitting of logs occurs behind a detached garage on the site. r Site prior to'clean upSIte YRar dean 4 14€{,E is' q.. q • l ' '7-&:• 4.� jukiisr 1 3 2/16/2010 Evaluation and Recommendation • Planning Staff recommended approval with conditions and a one-year time limit • Planning Commission recommends denial(10-0) • There was no opposition. 4 1 VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL February 16, 2010 5 : 00 p .m. WORKSHOP SESSION CITY MANAGER ' S BRIEFING ELECTRONIC DISPLAY (LED) SIGN REGULATIONS VERBATIM CITY COUNCIL William D. Sessoms , Jr . , Mayor At-Large Louis R. Jones, Vice-Mayor Bayside - District 4 William R. DeSteph At-Large Harry E . Diezel Kempsville - District 2 Robert M. Dyer Centerville - District 1 Barbara M. Henley Princess Anne - District 7 Glenn R. Davis Rose Hall - District 3 John E . Uhrin Beach - District 6 (Vacant) At-Large Rosemary Wilson At-Large James L. Wood Lynnhaven - District 5 CITY MANAGER: James K. Spore CITY ATTORNEY: Mark D. Stiles CITY ASSESSOR: Jerald Banagan CITY AUDITOR: Lyndon S . Remias CITY CLERK: Ruth Hodges Fraser, MMC SARAH DEAL JENKINS, CMC DEPUTY CITY CLERK, II 2 MAYOR SESSOMS: Mr . Spore? CITY MANAGER: Last week, we talked about the LED Sign Regulations in the Planning Commission and the staff and Ron Villanueva when he was on Council worked very hard with the City Attorney' s office and the Planning staff to put together some regulations to cover the new technology of the LED signs . Last week when we talked about that, Council said we need some time to be able to think about this and talk about it together in a workshop environment and asked us to schedule that . So, we asked Bill and Jack and Stephen and Karen to put together just an overview presentation to show some examples , in terms of what are the two ordinances that are on your plate right now, how did we get here, and what are the regulations that are proposed. Bill , are you doing this, or Jack? Are you going to kick it off? JACK WHITNEY: I ' ll kick it off . The heavy lifting will be done by Mr . Macali . This one is a very illuminating briefing. One of your favorite subjects , what you ' re about to hear, we ' ve been at this about a year now, since Mr . Villanueva initiated a process which led to a Draft Ordinance regulating what up until now has not been regulated in our community; that, being, LED-type signs . What you ' re getting ready to hear is a description of the ordinance, called Referred Ordinance, commonly known as the Villanueva Ordinance, which you referred to the Planning Commission. They, in turn, appointed a subcommittee, went through a number of workshops and hearings , and developed what you will see next to the Referred Ordinance as the Alternate Ordinance, which contains many of the same features but some that are different . You will also see a comparison of where those differences are . You will then see some options that you may wish to consider that aren ' t really contained or addressed in either of those two ordinances in order to move forward. You ' re going to also see some really impressive and interesting imagery, videos, and static photographs , which I think really are illustrative of what is going on in the sign community today. And Bill Macali and Stephen and Karen and Kevin Hershberger have worked very hard over the past year, working with the industry, with the community, with the Planning Comission, and with you to get us where we are today. So, with that, let me ask Bill to take it over . 3 br WILLIAM MACALI : I ' d just like to start off with a little bit of history to refresh the recollection of those who participated in that history and maybe bring the newer Members of Council up to date on what ' s been happening. Virginia Beach has been a leader in sign regulation for some time, at least in Virginia. Prior to 1986 , we didn ' t have much of a sign ordinance . There were a lot of signs all around. They were high. They were big. They were kind of ugly. In 1986 , we adopted what is an ordinance that is pretty much like our current ordinance. We limited the size of signs, the number of them, the height of them. We did some other things, like controlling nonconforming signs better than we had. The year after that, probably it ' s hard to forget this if you were involved in this effort, we prohibited new billboards in Virginia Beach. There were sixty-some at that time, approximately, I guess . Not one single other new billboard has been built since then. We adopted some very strict regulations governing existing nonconforming billboards . The result has been there ' s only about thirty or thirty-five or something like that now. About that same time, we were involved in the Atlantic Avenue Improvement Project, which included among other things the undergrounding of the utilities, elimination of signs overhanging the right-of-way, and, if we could, I ' d like to just turn the lights for a second and just show you what ' s been the result? MAYOR SESSOMS: Help yourself . WILLIAM MACALI : That ' s what it was before 1987 . That ' s approximately what it is now. That is taken from the corner of Great Neck Road, the northwest corner of Great Neck looking west . If you could see that "Lawn Mower, Exterminators, Aldridge Chambers" sign, must be thirty (30) feet high, "Mercury-Lincoln" sign, you can' t see a single one of those signs, really, when you ' re driving down the street because they' re all shouting . And what happened was Virginia Beach Boulevard was widened, the nonconforming sign regulations kicked in, and this is what it looks like looking the opposite direction. So, Virginia Beach does have a pretty proud history of sign regulation. And our sign regulation has served us well since it was adopted, but right now there ' s a need for an update, 4 basically because of new technologies . Our ordinance was developed before the new technologies were invented, and like a lot of things involving law and technology, technology comes faster and the law has to catch up . Unlike this sign, you can see the message board there which has to be changed by hand, now you can do it just quickly and remotely with a computer and a connection to the sign. This is a picture of a sign that is a pretty nice looking one that uses the old technology, nothing electronic about that , but that ' s not the case with all of them. For a number of reasons, LED and other Electronic Display Technologies, LED is what probably if your TV is not a Plasma it ' s probably an LED TV, we call them Electronic Display Signs because there ' s a lot of different technologies, and the key is that they' re capable of being changed remotely. The reason that they ' re popular is, one, because you can show a whole lot more information with those kinds of signs , and, two, as technology is wont to do, price starts out high, comes down low, and everybody adopts it . So, now there ' s a need to update the ordinance to address the new technologies . So, what happened was in August you referred to the Planning Commission Amendments to regulate these types of signs , and that ' s what, as Jack said, we call the Referred Version. In September through November, the Planning Commission held some public workshops and meetings on the amendments and concluded that a more restrictive approach was needed. And so, the Planning Commission recommended an Alternative Ordinance, which is considerably, although not in every single respect, but on balance considerably more restrictive than the ordinance which was referred to the City Council . So, now I ' ll just take you through the comparison. Both ordinances , they have to be a monument sign. You can ' t have a sign on top of a pole . We ' re developing, we have in this ordinance, regulations as to what constitutes a monument sign; it ' s a sign with a base that ' s roughly the same size as the sign face, and without getting into that too much, it ' s a much, much, nicer looking sign, in general . Under both ordinances , LED signs have to be monument style, and there ' s an eight (8 ) foot maximum, as opposed to twelve (12 ) foot maximum for our other free-standing signs . Monument signs are, by definition, free-standing signs, so all of these signs, with one exception I ' ll get to, have to be not only free standing but monument signs and no higher than eight (8 ) feet high. Under the original version, there was a thirty-two (32 ) square 5 foot maximum size . That was because a lot of our signage, the free-standing signage, the maximum size per face is thirty-two (32 ) square feet . MAYOR SESSOMS : Excuse me . I 'm sorry. Rosemary had a quick question. COUNCIL LADY WILSON: With these monument signs no higher than eight ( 8 ) feet, does that mean for all new signs , or does that mean if you 've got an existing sign? WILLIAM MACALI : They all have a vested right to remain. COUNCIL LADY WILSON: But they can change? WILLIAM MACALI : They can. COUNCIL LADY WILSON: They can change into an LED sign? WILLIAM MACALI : Well, no . We ' ll get to that . The bottom line is, if you make the structural alterations necessary for an LED sign to replace your other sign, our Code says, one of the ordinances we passed back in 1986 , that it has to conform to current regulations . So, you can ' t just slap on an LED sign face on a twenty (20) foot high sign or something like that . But any existing LED signs have a vested right to continue until they' re replaced, moved, structurally altered, enlarged, but if they stay the same -- COUNCIL LADY WILSON: So, if it ' s a twelve (12 ) foot sign and it ' s stationary, by hand you put in all of the letters or whatever, you can ' t change it to an LED sign? CITY ATTORNEY: Without making it conform. You have to make it conform to these regulations . If you changed it that way, yes . WILLIAM MACALI : Right . In any event, thirty-two (32 ) square foot maximum is in the Original Ordinance . Under the Planning Commission ' s Alternative Ordinance, thirty-two (32 ) square feet is the same maximum, but under no circumstances can the LED portion of a sign exceed fifty (50) percent of the total sign face . So, if you have a sign that ' s thirty-two (32 ) square feet, part of it is like the identification of a business in non-LED, the other, the maximum LED portion can only be sixteen (16) square 6 feet because that ' s fifty (50) percent . It ' s thirty-two (32 ) square feet or fifty ( 50) percent of the total sign area, whichever is less . In each case, you can only have one (1 ) per lot . That ' s no different , because now you can only really have one (1 ) free-standing sign per lot . One difference in which the Original Ordinance is probably more restrictive for a reason is that you could not have an LED sign within a hundred fifty ( 150) feet of any Residential or Apartment District . Under the Planning Commission ' s Alternative Ordinance, because of what I 'm going to talk about in the next slide, which is what kind of displays are allowed, there is no need to regulate the not letting one be within a hundred fifty ( 150) feet of a neighborhood. The reason is because under the old ordinance you could have a lot more on the sign, a lot more visuals, changing more rapidly. It was a lot more intrusive visually. Under the proposed Planning Commission version, that ' s not the case, and there ' s really no real reason to regulate, to prohibit them within a hundred fifty (150) feet of a Residential or Apartment District . Now, the Zoning Districts allowed are the same, and most Business Districts , not all, B-1 , which is the neighborhood business, LED signs aren ' t allowed, and in the B-4K, which is the Historic Kempsville District , we felt that the historic nature of the district would preclude having a brand new type of technology. That ' s the same in any Zoning District . Schools and Public uses in any Zoning District are allowed to have an LED sign under our new ordinance; again, subject to eight (8 ) feet high, thirty-two (32 ) square feet, etcetera . In Town Center and in the B-4C, you can have either a free-standing sign with the approval of City Council or one (1) sign on the building as opposed to a free-standing LED sign; that ' s the one exception to the monument sign rule . In the Town Center and B-4C, it ' s more of an urban area and it ' s a little bit more appropriate to allow a sign to be an LED sign on the building . If you put it on the building, you can ' t have a free-standing sign. In any event, you would need the approval of City Council for other kinds of sign. Public Parks can have an LED sign, again, with Council approval . We didn ' t feel like it would be appropriate just to allow them By Right . Council approval for Public Parks is something we thought was appropriate . In both, really, Religious Uses can have signs with a Conditional Use Permit in Residential and Apartment Districts . The language of the Original Version is Assembly Uses . Assembly Uses includes Religious Uses , but it really doesn ' t matter . The bottom line is Religious Uses can have such signs in a Residential or Apartment District with a Use Permit; that ' s just consistent with the way the current 7 Code reads anyway, so that ' s nothing new. The other aspect in which the Planning Comission ' s version may be less restrictive is that the Original Ordinance did not allow any LED signs in the RT-1 . The new one, the Planning Commission version, allows them in conjunction with hotel in the RT-1 District , and that ' s because the display will be a lot less visually striking, intrusive, etcetera . It really isn ' t likely to be too terribly out of place there . In neither area can you have an LED sign which literally is modern in a Historic Cultural District where the purpose is something really different . Of course, there ' s always the possibility that a particular use could ask to be rezoned out of the Historic District . If it remains in a Historic District, no, you can' t have an LED sign. This is , probably, these are the major differences . Under the old ordinance -- I shouldn' t say "old" -- under the Original Ordinance, full color is allowed, graphics , in other words , symbols, logos, we ' ll show you some of those, but no video, no full motion. Whereas, the Alternative Ordinance allows just one color without any background illumination, no pictures , no graphics , nothing but text . So, you will have a black background with one (1) color of text; that ' s all you can have . That ' s the big difference . Neither one can advertise goods or services not located on the lot . That would really make them a billboard and that ' s totally out . The other big difference is under the Referred Ordinance the display can change every five (5 ) seconds . Under the Planning Commission ' s Alternative Ordinance, it cannot change more often than every minute, and the change has to be instantaneous . It can ' t blink out slowly or part of it blink out and part of it come on. It all has to be instantaneous, message off, message on, and only text . One exemption, video/audio not allowed in either, that ' s pretty obvious . Brightness, that ' s the same . Sunrise to sunset, five thousand ( 5 , 000) candelas per square meter at the sign face, sunset to sunrise, five hundred (500) candelas per square meter . Candelas is a pretty difficult thing to talk about , but basically those are pretty much the lowest luminous brightness measures that we found in other ordinances, so that shouldn ' t be any kind of an issue . Both ordinances require automatic dimming, the capability to automatically dim based on ambient light levels . And both have exemptions for time and temperature, which displays just time and temperature, I guess , every five (5 ) seconds . Another is gasoline prices, which just show the gas prices are not considered LED signs, and we ' ll show you an example of that . Right there, all of 8 those four things, they' re not LED signs or anything like that . They can stay as long as they stay continuously. Only the gas price is advertised. Keep in mind that that is a non-conforming sign, because, I don ' t know, is that twelve ( 12 ) feet, or is that higher than twelve (12 ) feet? KEVIN HERSHBERGER: Fifteen (15 ) . WILLIAM MACALI : Twelve ( 12 ) feet is the maximum for any free-standing sign, other than an LED sign, so any new sign would be lower and smaller than that and would have some landscaping around it . But that is something which we really didn ' t feel that appropriate to call that four (4) different LED signs or anything like that . So, let ' s give some examples . The flickering, that ' s just an artifact of taking a picture of a picture, but this is in real time . These are how fast they change . Again, these are in real time, so the messages are changing pretty quickly. Then the next one, neither of these, by the way, would be permitted under the Planning Commission version. As a matter of fact, this one is probably a little bit too big, but the basic message under the Referred Version would be all right . Under the other one, it wouldn ' t be because there ' s a lot of motion in there . But if they got rid of the motion, that probably would have been permitted, in terms of what the display looked like, not the size or anything like that . This is one up at Lynnhaven Parkway and Princess Anne Road. This wouldn ' t be permitted under either version, the display, because of the motion involved. I think it ' s evident that the purpose of these displays is to attract attention of people driving by, and there ' s really no getting around that . I don ' t see how anybody can claim otherwise . Nice picture of somebody laying some cash on you . COUNCIL LADY WILSON: That just doesn ' t fit . WILLIAM MACALI : That ' s time and temperature . That ' s okay. COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: This jewelry store sells everything, don ' t they? COUNCIL LADY WILSON: You had to stop the car and just sit and wait . COUNCILMAN DYER: It reminds me of the old drive-in movies . 9 WILLIAM MACALI : Well, that ' s essentially what one of the reasons for this ordinance is . MAYOR SESSOMS : There ' s Jim Spore ' s favorite . WILLIAM MACALI : This is another one . That does not flash on and off . That really is, again, an artifact of taking a picture of a picture . It ' s all steady display there . MAYOR SESSOMS: Barbara? COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: That sign is much too high. WILLIAM MACALI : Yes . COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: So, that ' s a nonconforming sign. WILLIAM MACALI : Absolutely. COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: Well, how were they able to make any change in a nonconforming sign without conforming? WILLIAM MACALI : They won ' t be able to . COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: But they didn ' t do that . WILLIAM MACALI : But the reason is that we have no regulations pertaining to the LED aspects or the electronic aspects for signs . So long as they meet the requirements of the Sign Ordinance in effect when the sign went up -- KAREN LASLEY: That one is twelve ( 12 ) feet . It conforms to today ' s regulations . WILLIAM MACALI : -- okay. So, that ' s twelve (12 ) feet . But see, that ' s the thing, we had an ordinance for twenty-three (23 ) years that covered it until this new technology came . There ' s nothing in the ordinance which prohibits LED signs, and that ' s why the staff and Mr . Villanueva agreed that something needed to be done . Now, this said one color of moving graphics . It is one color if you look at the computer, but the projector kind of changes colors a little bit and it makes it look red and amber, but it ' s really pretty much orange and amber, different shades of it . Now, that sign is too high and too large, but the LED portion is what would be, if all else, conforming, one color, 10 text only, on a dark background. Now, this issue, multi-tenant shopping centers is an issue. Right now, a shopping center with more than five (5 ) tenants and greater than approximately one ( 1) acre can have these tenant identification signs as part of their free-standing sign. Typically, these signs can be larger than the maximum free-standing signs in other types of free-standing signs and they can display tenants . That was something that was done, I think, pretty much in connection when we passed the Retail Design Guidelines . That is kind of a special problem, because that sign is pretty busy as it is , and what happens if someone wants to put an LED sign in addition to that? They could do that under either ordinance, but we are going to present some options that City Council may want to consider . If that ' s not a problem, then so be it . But one of the options is for these signs you can ' t have an electronic display. That ' s not so bad, because an electronic display sign can only be thirty-two (32 ) square feet maximum, the electronic section of it, if the sign is even big enough for that, and they could be considerably larger than that if they don' t have any LED elements . So, we don' t think that would be too awful to say that you can ' t have electronic display signs for tenant signs in these shopping centers, but that ' s up to Council . We do recommend that existing signs which are converted into electronic display signs have to meet all landscaping requirements . They already do have to meet all requirements of the Electronic Display Sign Ordinance . We just put that in there, but the landscaping requirements are considerably better than they used to be . So, instead of grass, you have to have shrubbery, things like that . Another option City Council may want to consider is to either reduce or increase the dwell time; the dwell time, being the amount of time that a message has to stay on the board. On the Original Version, five (5 ) seconds, under the Planning Commission ' s Version, one ( 1) minute . There ' s no magic to that . One (1 ) minute, I know what you ' re all thinking; you ' re all thinking whether there ' s been any studies on this . There really haven ' t been a whole lot of studies on LED signs . They' re generally on billboards . To the extent there have been, there ' s nothing authoritative. You can' t point to one study and say this blows away all the others . In any event, while five ( 5) seconds may be unduly distracting to drivers , one ( 1 ) minute, there ' s not going to be a study which says that an LED sign that has a dwell time of one ( 1) 11 minute or more is unduly distracting. Sure, signs do distract drivers, and that ' s their nature . The signs are up there to say "Here ' s where Joe ' s Barber is . Here ' s where Walgreen' s is" ; but one (1) minute is considerably less distracting, of course, than five (5 ) seconds . And if Council wants, one of the things you can consider is reduce or increase the Zoning Districts in which these are allowed. One candidate is possibly Industrial Districts . Under the Planning Commission ' s Version, the signage of such, you know, the plain old text on a dark background and the size and all and the fact that these can ' t change more in one (1) minute isn ' t going to mess up Industrial Districts, but, again, that is entirely up to City Council . The last option is, you really don ' t have to allow these at all, but if you do say no LED signs we think you have to include public electronic display signs, as well as private signs . The second issue is, you have to re-refer this issue back to the Planning Commission, which couldn ' t, absent of having a special meeting, couldn ' t hear the matter until April . We already have gone past the March deadline, so there would be some people out there who would be filing applications . In the meantime, we really don ' t have an ordinance which covers the LED aspects . So, anyway, again, about the option of not doing them at all , again, that is something you can do . But to allow the public signs to be there because they are somehow different qualitatively or quantitatively, or nicer or something than private signs, is just not going to hold water in Court . MAYOR SESSOMS : Bill, we 've got some questions for you. Starting with Bill? COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: I 've got some quick ones, Bill . Is there a State Law Statute on this at all? WILLIAM MACALI : Not that applies to us . We have control of our own roadways . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: So, we ' re consistent with State Law? WILLIAM MACALI : Right . State Law has never attempted to -- VDOT has never attempted to interfere with our sign regulations . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Has there been or is there any increase in the number of accidents 12 on, like, Virginia Beach Boulevard in front of Thalia Baptist Church where they have theirs? WILLIAM MACALI : I have no idea, absolutely no idea . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: I think it would be, I mean, it ' s been there long enough, we should be able to look at a sixty (60) day or ninety (90) day snapshot and say, "Hey, ninety (90) days this year, here ' s how many accidents . Ninety (90) days last year, here ' s how many accidents" . STEPHEN WHITE: We were asked that question during the Planning Commission process, contacted the Police Department and the answer is no. COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: No increase? COUNCILMAN DAVIS : I 've got a study from Rosemont Road. WILLIAM MACALI : But keep in mind, the studies that have been done look at a whole lot more than one location, one sign for sixty ( 60) or ninety (90) days . They' re way, way, more involved than that, and I just don' t think you can draw any kind of conclusions from a statistical sample as extremely narrow as that . But the answer is, no, there have been none . MAYOR SESSOMS: Barbara? COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: On the signs for Schools, who ' s paying for those? WILLIAM MACALI : Schools, I guess . COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: These are pretty expensive signs . I can see every school having to have one . WILLIAM MACALI : Well, a lot of them want them, I wouldn ' t doubt it, but I don ' t know who pays for them. I guess , sometimes the PTA ' s do it, sometimes the football boosters, but I just don' t know how many are paid for by the Schools budget, how many are paid by private contributions . We just don' t know that . COUNCILMAN WOOD: To answer that, I know the sign, itself, at PA was paid for by the Class of ' 75 and then refurbished by the Class of ' 88 , because they've got a little tag under there . I don ' t know who paid 13 for the LED portion of it , but I remember that was a gift at one of the reunions . MAYOR SESSOMS: Louis? VICE-MAYOR JONES : Two questions . Bill, do you know are there any other shopping centers that currently have these Electronic Display Signs for the tenants? WILLIAM MACALI : Kevin Hershberger, who is a sign inspector who does all of these, says no, and you can take that to the bank. VICE-MAYOR JONES : And go over, again, the point about the hundred fifty (150 ) foot from Residential? WILLIAM MACALI : Right . Under the Planning Commission ' s Version, there was something that said you cannot have an LED sign within a hundred fifty ( 150) feet of any Residential or Apartment District . KAREN LASLEY: That was the Original Version. WILLIAM MACALI : I 'm sorry. I said Planning. That was the Original Version. I 'm sorry. The reason that was in there, you saw the signs, like the Pawn Shop sign, that would be pretty darn distracting. However, if you just have, as in the Planning Commission Version, a black background with one color text only that changes only once a minute, that ' s not nearly as visually intrusive as the other kind of signs . And so, really, it was thought that probably on balance there was no real need to have that distance limitation, that an LED sign with just text, small, sixteen ( 16 ) square feet is the maximum, is the typical size, and only going on and off once per minute is a lot less intrusive than the other kind of signs . So, on balance, there was really no need for that, because that would eliminate a lot of potential LED signs . VICE-MAYOR JONES : And in the Original Version, churches could have the signs? WILLIAM MACALI : With a Conditional Use Permit under either version. VICE-MAYOR JONES : Under either version? WILLIAM MACALI : Yes . That ' s because we already have 14 a Code Section which says the signage of Churches and Residential Districts can be determined by Conditional Use Permit; that ' s essentially why the City Council heard the Wave Church Application several months ago . But in either case under both ordinances, a Use Permit is necessary for a church or any religious use in a Residential or Apartment District, yes , Sir . VICE-MAYOR JONES : So, a sign could be, what, ten ( 10 ) foot off a property line next to a residence? WILLIAM MACALI : In a church, the City Council really gets to decide that . VICE-MAYOR JONES : I 'm not referring to a church. I 'm just referring to any sign. A sign could be ten (10) foot off the property line next to a residential home? WILLIAM MACALI : If it ' s Zoned B-1 , B-2 , B-3 , there probably isn ' t a whole lot of opportunity for that, but if that situation exists the answer is, yes, it could, potentially, yes, Sir . MAYOR SESSOMS : Rosemary? COUNCIL LADY WILSON: The problem is not as much what ' s here today, because there ' s not that many, but ten ( 10) years from now when everybody has converted their signs, you ' re going to go down the road and everything is going to be moving and blinking and changing, and all the hard work that ' s been done to clean up the landscape -- WILLIAM MACALI : Unless you pass a version that doesn ' t allow the moving and blinking . COUNCIL LADY WILSON: Right , exactly. Has any thought been given to only kind of getting away from the advertising to more of public service announcements, that sort of thing, just to only allow maybe non-profits, churches , schools, and they have to have a Conditional Use Permit? I mean, we don ' t want to be riding down the road and seeing that Coke is $1 . 99 , then hoses are $3 . 00 . WILLIAM MACALI : That ' s going to be a difficult issue . To say that LED signs are okay for certain uses and not for others because of the message is probably what would amount to a content-based restriction, 15 which are disfavored strongly by the Courts . So, I think the answer to that is, no, we didn ' t consider it because it would be difficult to sustain, legally. At the same time, we do have an ordinance which says "any non-commercial copy can be displayed in lieu of a commercial copy" ; that ' s to get away from any other kind of Constitutional issues . But when you say you can only have non-profits, places like that, with these signs , that would be difficult to defend, I think, very difficult . COUNCIL LADY WILSON: You could do commercial and non-commercial definitions . CITY ATTORNEY: Any time you get into a content-based analysis, any time you ' re talking about what is shown on the sign versus where the sign can be located, the size of the sign, the nature of the display, things of that nature, to get into an analysis that takes you down the road makes it much more difficult to sustain the regulation. COUNCIL LADY WILSON: So, according to what Bill was saying, commercial versus non-commercial, can you make a distinction there? WILLIAM MACALI : Yes, because -- CITY ATTORNEY: Go ahead. WILLIAM MACALI : When we adopted our Original Sign Ordinance, and we did the Billboards , too, there were many cases out there, and there still are, saying you cannot treat commercial signs better than non-commercial signs . So, we said if you have the right to a commercial sign then you can display a non-commercial message, if you want, but that ' s at the option of the property owner; whereas, your question is at our option. We can ' t make them limit the displays to non-commercial messages because of the content-based restriction line of cases, and I think Mark is understating the case. It is really very difficult . It ' s a road we really don ' t want to go down, to say that only non-profits and non-commercial messages can be out there . MAYOR SESSOMS : I don ' t want to cut you off . COUNCIL LADY WILSON: Well, I mean, was there just any thought of just making anyone that wants an LED sign, make them all come for a Conditional Use Permit? 16 WILLIAM MACALI : No, ma ' am, because there would be dozens of these . I don' t know how many. Karen has the -- KAREN LASLEY: We estimate at least ten (10) max, ten (10) to twenty (20 ) ; you ' d have ten (10) to twenty (20) a month. WILLIAM MACALI : And you still need to have standards for granting a Use Permit or not granting a Use Permit, because if there aren ' t any standards it ' s really kind of hit or miss, and you ' re open to all sorts of things, like disparate treatment, things like that . So, it really would not help the situation to make them all be allowable only by Conditional Use Permit . We do an awful lot of things by By-Right development, and the idea is if you have the right regulations it should be okay if somebody can do something, as a matter of right, rather than having to go to City Council . We ' re trying to get this right, and, of course, City Council ' s suggestions are obviously more than welcome, but having a Use Permit process would just slow down people ' s ability to get these . Use Permits cost $800 . It would not really be good for the small businessman. To reduce the fee for Conditional Use Permits would actually cost the City money; $800 is about the least it costs for the City to process Use Permits . There have to be four (4) advertisements in the newspaper, for one thing, and then staff time, things like that, letters to adjacent property owners . We did think about it , but we really don ' t recommend that version, Mrs . Wilson. COUNCIL LADY WILSON: If I could ask one more question? MAYOR SESSOMS: Sure. COUNCIL LADY WILSON: The signs that are currently in place that have lots of activity, if we pass this where you could only have dark background, one color, all those restrictions, the signs that are already in place, would they have to conform to the new regulations? WILLIAM MACALI : No, ma ' am. COUNCIL LADY WILSON: So, they ' re grandfathered in to the time they put theirs up? WILLIAM MACALI : Right . Grandfathering isn ' t the exact -- grandfathering is when an ordinance specifically says they can say. If you don ' t say 17 anything, then it ' s a vested right, and it ' s really the same thing. COUNCIL LADY WILSON: Right . WILLIAM MACALI : We really can ' t make them. COUNCIL LADY WILSON: We can ' t make them change . WILLIAM MACALI : Right , unfortunately, unless the State Law were to change . At one point, we tried to do that years and years ago and just got nowhere and don ' t expect we 'd be able to get anywhere now. MAYOR SESSOMS: Bob? COUNCILMAN DYER: Thank you. I think what we have here is a big dilemma. You have the folks on the Beautification Commission, advocates like Rosemary, Reba, who have lobbied for, and Barbara, decades to make sure the city is beautiful and everything . But here we have a new technology that we really don ' t quite know how to deal with. The opposite side of the dilemma is the business community, and do we have an obligation to at least find a method that they have a right to go out there and advertise that their businesses are there . Now, Jack, remember that Town Hall Meeting we had at Woods Corner, where we got the people and the shop owners together? JACK WHITNEY: I do . COUNCILMAN DYER: And one of the complaints was a lot of the strip malls and stuff, folks don ' t, you know, passersby don ' t know what businesses are in there, and that was an identified problem they had. I know I have one lady who has a consignment shop at University Shops right across from CBN, and the angle that she is at nobody can see where she is from Indian River Road. So, the point is , how do we properly identify that these businesses are existing in these strip malls? I know there ' s quite a few places like the shops at Rose Hall and a few other places that businesses can ' t be properly identified so people know they ' re there . So, I think that as we move forward here, we have to take into consideration some of the needs of the small business community that allow them to properly identify what they ' re doing and let people know they ' re there . We have to give them a fair shake, because I 'm sure we all agree that over the next couple of years we ' re going to need the small business 18 community to thrive and prosper. MAYOR SESSOMS : Glenn? COUNCILMAN DAVIS : Mr . Mayor, I think Bob is exactly right . We 've got a couple different sides to this equation. There ' s a third part . You have the business, you have the Beautification Committee, and you have the community leaders . I just talked to Chandler Scarborough on my way over, and he wants to make sure that whatever we do here does not prevent them from putting up the new beautiful Green Run signs that they are getting ready to send in with an LED on the back side so people can know when their meetings are, when their events are in their communities . You know, I saw the most gorgeous LED sign I think I 've ever seen, including the ones in Vegas, today at Town Center . If you hated those, you ' re probably going to hate that one, but I thought it was wonderful . The thing is , it was perfectly placed in an area that it was reasonable to have it . Obviously, it doesn' t fit in Pungo . It doesn ' t fit in Kempsville . It may fit on the Oceanfront, but not very many other places . And so, I 'm concerned that although staff has done a tremendous job, and Planning, putting together two (2 ) ordinances in front of us , like I said last time, it ' s not very often that Rosemary and I don ' t agree . But it ' s kind of funny that there ' s typically two sides to the equation, and right now neither one of us are happy with what we have in front of us . I think it ' s because we might be trying to put a round peg in a square hole and say we know Kempsville is not Pungo . We know Town Center is not Green Run. Is there a way to draft something that allows us to find the middle of the road? And I really think as much work that ' s in what ' s facing us right now, if it ' s feasible for us to take even just a week, maybe take two weeks, but maybe just a week, and have a small subcommittee, a group of us that may be interested that can get together that are on, I guess , more the diverse ends of the spectrum, can get together and say what are the important issues here that we ' re trying to protect and what is important that we allow these signs still to do and come up with some of the points that we can then turn to staff and see if they can draft into a middle-of-the-road solution here . I still like Rosemary ' s idea of a Conditional Use Permit . I understand we have to have some set of restrictions going in, or else it looks almost like an arbitrary decision, but I think if we can just put a group of us around the table that really are kind of passionate about this issue, we can 19 probably nail something down that I think makes just about all of us happy. MAYOR SESSOMS : Great . Jim? You ' re done? Barbara? COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: Well, just to comment on what Bob had to say before I have my question, you said these businesses need a sign to let people know that they' re there . Well , that ' s one thing; that ' s a location. But what you ' re taking it to is another level, to be able to advertise the product, and that ' s what I think is the stickler here, that we ' re increasing the purpose of the sign with this . Just how far are we going to go? I go back to this distraction, and this article that was in the newspaper a couple of weeks ago, front page, this is one of the best places to have a crash, and the second highest reason for crashes was distracted drivers . Now, if all of our signs are going to be changing, the whole purpose, as I think Bill said, was to get the people to read the signs, if we ' re going to be changing, and it ' s not just one here and there, we have to think with everybody who ' s got to compete, if businesses are going to have them, then all businesses are going to have to have them. Then the drivers are going to be distracted so much, you ' re riding down the road trying to read all these signs and get all these different messages, and you sure aren ' t paying attention to that other car, but that ' s another topic . It ' s going to be, I think, businesses have to have a level playing field, and that ' s the thing that ' s really necessary. So, what we set as a standard, then other businesses are just going to have to get there to have that level playing field. I don ' t know what kind of can of worms are we opening . But my question, Schools or other public uses can get an LED sign in any zoning district just by going out and putting it up, except for a public park, and they' ve got to have approval of City Council? And goodness knows , I hope we don ' t get LED signs in public parks . So, Schools and other public uses in any zoning district, just go do it . But now Religious Uses in a Residential or Apartment District have to have a Conditional Use Permit . What if they are in other Districts? WILLIAM MACALI : If they are in one of the districts that allows Electronic Display Signs, B-lA through B-4 , they can have one By Right; otherwise, they can ' t . COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: Anything in an Office, a Church in an 20 Office District can' t have one, period. A school could have one anywhere . It seems like it ' s not the use that we ' re objecting to; it ' s the sign. And I 'm just having trouble determining why one can do and the other one can ' t, because it ' s the sign that ' s the issue . So, Schools can have them anyplace with no requirement of a Conditional Use Permit . WILLIAM MACALI : Well, without the Conditional Use Permit . The Planning Commission Version is based on a sign being, typically, Schools ' freestanding signs can be how large? KEVIN HERSHBERGER: Twenty-four (24 ) square feet, twelve (12 ) foot overall height . WILLIAM MACALI : Right . So, your LED portion of that is four (4 ) by three (3 ) , or six ( 6 ) by two (2 ) . KEVIN HERSHBERGER: Under the new Code, it would be dropped down to the eight ( 8 ) foot . WILLIAM MACALI : So, that ' s not a big sign. And I have a feeling that there are those who are going to complain that we ' re being too strict . But given the strict size limitations and the display limitations, Schools, almost all of them are on main roads . They may be Zoned Residential or something like that, but they ' re on a main road. And having an eight ( 8 ) foot high LED sign that is maybe six ( 6 ) by two (2 ) or something like that just doesn ' t seem that intrusive, to be very honest . That was the Planning Commission and the staff ' s thinking on that . Public Uses are, of course, up to the City, and the City can, there ' s no reason to suspect that the City is going to overdo it; Council has complete control over that . COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: A lot of Schools are in, especially Elementary Schools are in, neighborhoods . WILLIAM MACALI : Again, that ' s a small sign we ' re talking about . MAYOR SESSOMS: Bob? COUNCILMAN DYER: Thank you. Coming from the People ' s Republic in New Jersey, our billboards had billboards on them. We just had a proliferation of signs . And I agree; too many, not good. By 21 the same token, I think we can ' t be too hypocritical . We got a nice sign for the Sandler Theater and we also got one for the Convention Center right on the road, which is a pretty good-sized one . And I think if we look not only at the LED but at the Sign Ordinances, in general, I had the privilege of being Saturday night in Mrs . Henley' s District at that function at the Aviation Museum out there, and I drove right past the place because there wasn' t a real good sign there; and the point is, also, signs throughout the city about how to get to this place . Now, this museum is a real potential attraction. COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: You couldn ' t see that thing? COUNCILMAN DYER: Well, I saw it, but I missed the road to get into it . It was dark and at night . And once again, we have an amenity that a lot of out-of-town people that come during the summer that can go there, a perfect rainy-day place, to get there, once again, how do people get there? So, I think, if we ' re going to take a look at it, to be fair to our businesses, especially the ones that we want to thrive and especially if it can bring some cash to the city, not only to look at the LED Ordinances but, once again, a lot of people in my district, I 've got a lot of stores closing in my strip malls . They can' t compete and folks don ' t know they ' re there . So, I think we 've got to take a look. MAYOR SESSOMS : Bill? COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: To kind of summarize, I mean, I agree with a little bit on both sides, but I think we need to spend a little more time working on this . Glenn had a good recommendation. Maybe we have him and Rosemary or him and Barbara get together and sit down with the City Attorney and some folks and see if they can hammer out a copy. COUNCIL LADY WILSON: I think that ' s a good idea. MAYOR SESSOMS: I have a note down there to do that . COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Okay. MAYOR SESSOMS : Glenn? COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: I ' ll be quiet, if you want, Mayor . MAYOR SESSOMS : I 've got that . I thought it was a pretty good idea. 22 COUNCILMAN DAVIS : I just want to make one last comment, because Barbara did bring up a good point with regards to the safety. You know, whatever we decide to come up with, whatever the reasons are we come up with it, I want to make sure that we enforce it based on those decisions . Obviously, we all know the reason for any sign, whether it ' s at the Sandler Center or whether it ' s in front of a business or whether it ' s in front of a school, is so people driving by can see it . And I think there ' s a lot of good reason to have that type of sign, that type of publicity, in many cases; however, I personally don ' t think it ' s a safety issue . And, obviously, you can look at studies, and one thing we all know is statistics can be made to say anything. However, if we do decide to go and drastically change and bunker down on signs , we want to make sure that if we do so we also, City, Schools , also, obey whatever it is that we pass going forward. So, I think if we look at things on a case by case and try to allow a little bit of flexibility for different reasons, different parts of the city, it may give us the best outcome going forward. We talked about dwell time, and Bill hit on it and I 'm sure speed has a lot to do, speed of change of the sign has a lot to do with the safety issue, but I 'm sure that is correlated with the speed of the vehicle, as well . If you ' re changing once every five (5 ) seconds in a twenty-five (25 ) mile per hour zone, obviously, it ' s kind of dangerous . You ' re going to see five (5 ) or six ( 6 ) signs before you get by it . If you ' re going forty-five (45) miles an hour and it changes every ten ( 10) seconds , you ' re probably only see one ( 1) or two (2 ) swaps anyway, which is essentially what you see on a one-minute swap . So, I think that there ' s a lot of opportunity that we can do, just kind of look into things a little bit more and come up with a great middle ground that hopefully would resolve all the issues we ' re looking at here today. COUNCIL LADY WILSON: Good idea . MAYOR SESSOMS : Mark? CITY ATTORNEY: The only thing that I ' d like to add to this conversation is the recognition that as of right now you have no ordinance prohibiting changeable copy signs . MAYOR SESSOMS : I think, if there ' s something I 23 picked up on at our last meeting, it ' s clear we 've got to get some direction. We ' ve got to come up with some guidelines to be followed that could be changed down the road, also. I think we need to acknowledge that . We 've got things backed up. Mark, jump in here, unless I 'm mistaken, that are on hold, and we ' ve got to act . I would have no problem with, I guess, a two-week type of thing to see if two people from here would volunteer to work on this . Mark, we ' re hearing I 've got to act . And if there is a way to bring things together from both or something new, it ' s worth one shot , but we ' re going to have to act on something very quickly. Do I have any volunteers that would be willing to take this one up? I am not raising my hand. I 'm seeing Barbara -- excuse me . I 'm seeing Rosemary and Glenn, if y ' all would be kind enough? COUNCIL LADY WILSON: Perhaps get a couple from the Planning Commission? MAYOR SESSOMS: That ' s your call . If they get two from Planning, does that have to -- I want to make sure we do this thing legally. CITY ATTORNEY: I don ' t think that would be . That would not be a public meeting . MAYOR SESSOMS: Okay. We ' ll let you get the two from Planning and let ' s see what we can come up with. I don ' t think there ' s going to be a perfect answer . I can already tell we ' ll have to adjust whatever we come up with. I thank y ' all for taking this on. Let ' s be back in two weeks with a recommendation. Thank you all very much for doing that . WILLIAM MACALI : Mayor, were you meaning to have this not on for a vote in two weeks? MAYOR SESSOMS : No . We have another one of these in two weeks . WILLIAM MACALI : I 'm just worried about the advertising, to be quite honest . MAYOR SESSOMS : And we ' ll act the following week. We ' re going not next Tuesday but two Tuesdays . CITY ATTORNEY: If there are substantial changes , you ' ll have to send it back to 24 Planning, which means you ' re not going to have a new ordinance until late April or May; that was my concern. MAYOR SESSOMS : And make sure you have someone from the City Attorney telling you what we 've got to do . We ' re hearing the message we need something, and you might be able to tell us what we can do now in the interim. Thank y ' all very much for that . (Whereupon, the discussion of this matter was concluded. ) 4 CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS PLANNING ITEMS PENDING 5:56 P.M. Jack Whitney, Director- Planning, detailed the Planning Items to be heard by the City Council in March 2010. Detailed items are hereby made a part of these proceedings. MARCH 9, 2010 Roadway Guide Signs Amendment R-5R Swimming Pools Amendment Cape Henry Station MARCH 23, 2010 Robert Ramsey February 16, 2010 2/16/2010 Princess Anne Note,and Boardvna(year unknown) March 9 Items • Roadway Guide Signs Amendment • R-5R Swimming Pools Amendment • Cape Henry Station(Use Permit) A "'.*.- ... 8103#4410116L; 7:t4 44 PLANNING ITEMS TO BE HEARD IN MARCH,2010 Evaluation and Recommendation City of Va Beach • Planning Staff recommended approval An Ordinance to amend Sections 111,211,and 212 of • Planning Commission recommends the City Zoning Ordinance and to add a new section 211.1,defining the term"Roadside Guide Sign"and approval (10-0) establishing requirements for allowing such signs in the public right-of-way. • There was no opposition. • Consent agenda Evaluation and Recommendation City of Va Beach • Planning Staff recommended approval An Ordinance to amend the City Zoning Ordinance by • Planning Commission recommends reducing setback requirements for In-ground swimming pools located on lots adjacent to the approval (7-3) beaches of the Atlantic Ocean in the R-5R Residential District. 1 2/16/2010 ('ape!lent')Station,LLC' • }° r m as- 84 1 ' '\''/ ////4 \-2-.---"3\II d.,r,o,' ,. ,,, Ili g A36 • l R7.6 .. 2 I A18 y. - cuv.w,ae ur r �,ri 1.J., 6 • LYNNHAVEN DISTRICT ' Relevant Information • The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow the installation of a roof- mounted wind energy conversion system .,. (wind turbine). • Electricity generated from the system will be used on the site.Excess will be sold to Virginia Power. • Proposed turbine meets the standards , provided in the Zoning Ordinance for this use. '. Evaluation and Recommendation - k..,w . • Planning Staff recommended approval r • Planning Commission recommends -. approval(10-0) -_ ;• i I • There was no opposition. ` 4114 • Consent agenda \say 1 2 2/16/2010 March 23 Items Robert Ranlsi • Robert Ramsey(Use Permit) pt 1 R30 AG, AGt ,::::re, / `nom ,\.0,4,,,, -.' ' AG2 3t r ill PRINCESS ANNE DISTRICT ® Relevant Information • The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit for firewood preparation. • Planning Commission deferred the application for two months to allow the . -641*' -'--•--- applicant to`clean up'the site. ate. _ ' 4= • Logs for the firewood are brought to the ,..-.7...„............—, ,t0 site from the applicant's tree removal 444service jobs. • The splitting of logs occurs behind a . � detached garage on the site. Site prior to'clean up' Site after'clean up' <i' — i -on 3 2/16/2010 Evaluation and Recommendation • Planning Staff recommended approval with conditions and a one-year time limit • Planning Commission recommends denial (10-0) • There was no opposition. 4 5 Mayor Sessoms, Jr. DECLARED the City Council meeting ADJOURNED at 6:00 P.M )&411-c:c ,J. �. a „ Gloria S. Winkler,MMC Sr. Deputy City Clerk uth Hodges Fraser,MMC City Clerk