No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAUGUST 12, 2003 AGENDACITY OF VIRG1NIA BEACH "COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME" CITY COUNCIL MAYOR MEYERA E OBERNDORF, At-Large VICE MAYOR LOUIS R JONES, BaysMe - District 4 HARRY E DIEZEL Kempsvdle - District 2 MARGARET L EURE, Centervtlle - Dtatrtct 1 REBA S McCLANAN, Rose Hall- Dmtrtct 3 RICHARD A MADDOX, Beach - District 6 JIM RI:EVE, Princess Anne - District 7 PETER W SCHMIDT, At-Large RON A V1LLANUEVA, At-Large ROSEMARY WILSON, At-Large JAMES L WOOD, Lynnhaven -District 5 CITY MANAGER - JAMES K SPORE CITY A 7TORNEY - LESLIE L LILLEY CtTY CLERK - RUTH HODGES SMITH, MMC CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 12 August 2003 CITY HALL BUILDING 2401 COURTHOUSE DRIVE VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 234.56-8005 PHONE (757) 427-4303 FAX (757) 426-5669 E- MAIL Ctycncl@vbgov corn I. CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS 1:00 P.M. mo Bo Co CONVENTION CENTER STATUS Dean Block, Director, Department of Public Works TAX CREDIT PROGRAM Steven Thompson, Chief Financial Officer COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Robert J. Scott, Director, Department of Planning II. REVIEW OF AGENDA ITEMS III. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS IV. INFORMAL SESSION 3:30 P.M. mo Bo CALL TO ORDER- Mayor Meyera E. Obemdorf ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL C. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION V. FORMAL SESSION 6:00 P.M. A. CALL TO ORDER- Mayor Meyera E. Obemdorf B. INVOCATION: Reverend Kevin Milcarek, Pastor Back Bay Christian Assembly of God C. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE [TNITED STATES OF AMERICA D. ELECTRONIC ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL E. CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION F. MINUTES 1. INFORMAL AND FORMAL SESSIONS August 5, 2003 G. AGENDA FOR FORMAL SESSION H. PRESENTATION REVENUE SHARING IN LIEU OF TAXES- Back Bay Wildlife Refuge Mackay Island Edward Schrock, United States Congress Jared Brandwein, Refuge Manager, Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge I. MAYOR'S PRESENTATION 1. RESOLUTIONS In Recognition: Eleventh Special Olympics World Summer Games . ACHIEVEMENT for EXCELLENCE in FINANCIAL REPORTING Government Finance Officers Association Patricia A. Phillips, Director- Finance J. CONSENT AGENDA K. PUBLIC HEARING 1. FARMER'S MARKET LEASES ao g. h. i. Bergey's Dairy Farm, Inc. Chapman's Flowers and Gifts Country Butcher, Inc. Creekmore's Place Hare Farms Holland Produce Reflections of the Heart Secret Garden Virginia Garden L. ORDINANCES/RESOLUTIONS o Ordinances to AUTHORIZE the City Manager to enter into LEASES at the Farmer's Market: ao g. h. i. Leonard Bergey t/a Bergey's Dairy Farm, Inc. for space #14 Judy Chapman t/a Chapman's Flowers and Gifts for spaces #3 and 4 Beverly Hardison t/a Country Butcher, Inc. for space # 12 Elsie Creekmore t/a Creekmore's Place for spaces #7 and 8 David Hare t/a Hare Farms for space #13 Mark Holland t/a Holland Produce for spaces #5 and 6 Laurie Moser t/a Reflections of the Heart for space # 10 Laurie Moser t/a Secret Garden for space # 11 Michele Shean t/a Virginia Garden for spaces #23, 24 and 27 2. Ordinance to ABOLISH the Youth Services Coordinating Committee. . Ordinances to AUTHORIZE acquisition of property in fee simple for rights-of-way and easements by agreement or condemnation: a, Water, sanitary sewer, and drainage re repairs to the Stumpy Lake raw water transmission main bo New sanitary sewer pump station site to replace the existing Pembroke Manor South Pump Station//354 in the Central Business District e Ordinance to AUTHORIZE the City Manager to acquire from the GALIOTOS FAMILY, for public purposes, property within Block 6, TOWN CENTER; and, APPROPRIATE with a TRANSFER of $2,250,000 for the Town Center infrastructure. . Ordinance to AUTHORIZE the City Manager to execute an Agreement with Southeastern Public Service Authority (SPSA) for the operation of a "White Goods" recycling facility and a Lease Option for a "Yard Waste" facility at Landfill II. . Ordinance to AUTHORIZE the City Manager to execute of a Working Agreement re Hampton Roads Comprehensive Regional Information Management and Exchange System (CRIMES) with Chesapeake, Hampton, James City County, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Smithfield, Suffolk, York County and Williamsburg . Ordinance to AUTHORIZE a temporary encroachment into portions of the City' s right-of- way by DAVID H. and JEAN H. KLEIN for maintenance of an existing bulkhead and replacement of deteriorated bulkhead with rip-rap and sand in Kempes Lake at 204 Oakengate Turn. (DISTRICT 2- KEMPSVILLE) o Ordinance to establish a Capital Improvement Project (CIP) re Back Bay Waterway Access improvements; ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE a $150,000 federal grant; and AUTHORIZE the City Manager to execute a Cooperative Agreement for an access facility. 9. Ordinances authorizing compensation increases effective on anniversary dates for City Council appointees' a. City Manager b. City Attorney c. City Assessor d. City Clerk 10 Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE a $95,806 Federal grant and $245,342 from other sources in the Department of Community Services for Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Substance Abuse (MH/MR/SA) special revenue to fund enhanced services to their clients. 11 Resolution re issuance of Multi-Family Housing Bonds in an amount not to exceed $5,500,000 and Refunding Bonds, Series 2003, in the amount of $7,500,000 for CP Atlantic, L.P. (Atlantis Apartments Project) 999 Atlantis Drive. 12. Resolution assigning administrative responsibility for Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to the City Attorney's Office. M. PLANNING Ordinance to AMEND Sections 111. 225.1, 601,901 and 1521 of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) to allow Bed and Breakfast Inns as a Conditional Use in certain Apartment, Business and Resort Tourist Districts; and, FURTHER AMEND the specific conditions for Bed and Breakfast Inns. Recommendation: APPROVAL . Application of GREGORY NELSON for a Conditional Use Permtt re a bed and breakfast at 2420 Arctic Avenue. (DISTRICT 6- BEACH) Recommendation: APPROVAL o Application of OCEAN BEACH CLUB, LLC for a Change afZoning from RT-1 Resort Tourist District to Conditional R-T-2 Resort Tourist District for multi-use retail, convention and meeting facilities at Atlantic Avenue and 34th Street. (DISTRICT 6- BEACH) Recommendation: APPROVAL 4. Applications of RIGANTO, L.L.C.: a. Change of Zoning District Classification at Sandbridge Road and Princess Anne Road (1) Parcel 1: from AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural District to Conditional R-20 Residential District, containing 185.2 acres (2) Parcel 2: from AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural District to Conditional P-1 Preservation District, containing 90.8 acres b. Conditional Use Permit (1) for Open Space, containing 185.2 acres (2) for recreational and amusement facilities of an outdoor nature (horse stables and riding rings) DEFFERRED: Recommendation: June 25, 2002 APPROVAL , Application of SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC. for a MODIFICATION of a Conditional Use Permit re an automobile service station (approved February 13, 2001) to remove a requirement for a canopy, remove the automobile storage use, expand approved automottve repair and add a car wash at 3096 South Lynnhaven Road. (DISTRICT 3 - ROSE HALL) Approved by Council: Recommendation: February 13,2001 APPROVAL . Application of FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT, INC. for a Condittonal Use Permtt re multi-family Condominium in the B-4 Shore Drive Corridor Overlay District at Dinwiddie Road and DuPont Circle. (DISTRICT 4- BAYSIDE) Planning Commission Recommendation: Staff Recommendation: APPROVAL DENIAL Application of VICTORY CHAPEL for a Conditional Use Permit re a church at 6644 Indian River Road. (DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE) Recommendation: APPROVAL . Application of GATEWAY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL for a Conditional Use Permit re a private school addition at 5473 Virginia Beach Boulevard. (DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE) Recommendation: APPROVAL . Application of CUSTOM STONE COMPANY for a Conditional Use Permit re a bulk storage yard at 2621 Quality Court. (DISTRICT 6- BEACH) Recommendation: APPROVAL 10. Resolution to REFER to the Planning Commission proposed amendments to Sections 111, 233.1, 1501, 1511 and 1521 of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) re Conditional Use Permits for sale of alcohol in the RT-1, RT-2 and RT-3 Resort Tourist Districts. N APPOINTMENTS BEACHES AND WATERWAYS COMMISSION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FRANCIS LAND HOUSE BOARD OF GOVERNORS HAMPTON ROADS PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION (HRPDC) PARKS and RECREATION COMMISSION PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD REVIEW AND ALLOCATION COMMITTEE- COG SHORE DRIVE ADVISORY COMMITTEE TIDEWATER REGIONAL GROUP HOME COMMISSION O. UNFINISHED BUSINESS P. NEW BUSINESS Q. ADJOURNMENT If you are physically disabled or visually impaired and need assistance at this meeting, please call the CITY CLERK'S OFFICE at 427-4303 Hearing impaired, call' TDD only 427-4305 (TDD - Telephonic Device for the Deaf) WHEREAS, Spectal Olymptcs ts an mternattonal program of sports training and competttton whtch gtves chddren and adults who are mentally challenged an opportumty to develop their phy~ lCal skdls, dtsplay thetr abtltttes and, most tmportantly, fulfill their human potenttal, and, WHEREAS, The Virginia Beach Special Olympics provides nurturing with an opportumty to participate tn tramtng and competition as well as social events, and, WHEREAS, This year, the 11th Special Olympics Worm Summer Games were hem tn Dublin, Ireland from June 21-29 and were the largest international multi-sport event tn the world m 2003, as well as the largest sporting and cultural event ever staged tn Ireland, and. WHEREAS, The Clly of Virginia Beach has special ties to Ireland through tis Sister City, Bangor, Northern Ireland, and, WHEREAS, Team Vtrgtma's sixteen athletes, who joined over 7,000 others front 160 countries worldwide, mcluded three participants from Virginia Beach who excelled tn their events recognizes NOW, THEREFORE, The City Councd of the C#y of Vtrgmta Beach. Vlrgima hereby KRISTEN DOWDY for her excellence tn the POWERLIFTING events by capturing SILVER in the Squat and the Combmatton and BRONZE tn the Deadl~ and Bench Press AND, FUTHER, BE IT RESOLVED: that the City Councd calls upon the citizens of Vtrglnta Beach to recognize the courage, spirit and love of adventure that Kristen has exhibited as she represented the United States of America and the C~ty of Virginia Beach which ts duly proud of her IJar-ry E Dt~el,"'Couc~t-Me~ber M~t ~u~d Member Reeve, Council Member Peter W Schmtdt, Councd Member Ron A Vtllanueva, Councd Member Rosem~I Councd Member Reba S McClanan, Councd Member James L o~, ~ouncd Member Mej~ra E Oberndorf, Mayor WHEREAS, Special Olympics ts an international program of sports traimng and competition which gives children and adults who are mentally challenged an opportunity to develop their physical sk#ls, dtsplto; their abilities and, most importantly, fulfill their human potential, and, WHEREAS, The Vtrgtma Beach Special Olympics provides nurturing with an opportunity to participate in trammg and competition as well as social events, and, WHEREAS, This year, the l lth Special Olympics Worm Summer Games were hem tn Dubhn, Ireland from dune 21-29 and were the largest international multi-sport event tn the world tn 2003, as well as the largest sporting and cultural event ever staged tn Ireland, and, WHEREAS, The City of Virginia Beach has special ties to Ireland through its Sister City, Bangor, Northern Ireland, and, WHEREAS, Team Vtrglma's sixteen athletes, who joined over 7,000 others from 160 countries worldwide, included three participants from Vtrglma Beach who excelled tn their events recognizes NOI4/, THEREFORE, The City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia hereby JA3,1ES THA CKER for his excellence in the A QUA TICS events by capturing GOLD tn the Fifty Meter Backstroke, the F~ftv Meter Freestyle and a sixth place fintsh tn the 4 X 50 Freestyle Relay AND, FUTHER, BE IT RESOLVED: that the City Councd calls upon the ctttzen~ of Virginia Beach to recogmze the courage, spirit and love of adventure that James has exhibited as he represented the United States of America and the City of Virginia Beach which ts duly proud of his ents f ~ Harry E 0~, Coun(~"~er~ber M~dr~q~et L Euro/I. ~o~ncd Member £o;, 3~ or RI ar/fA addox Councd Member eeve, Council Member Peter W Schmtdt, Council Member Ron A Vtllanueva, Council Member Rosem~ Council Member 'Reba S McClanan, Council Member James L ~ ~ounctl Member [ Mey~-a 'E Dbdrndo-~f Mayor / - WHEREAS, Spectal Olymptcs ts an mternattonal program of sports training and competttton whtch gtves chtldren and adults who are mentally challenged an opportumty to develop thetr physical skdls, display thetr abtltttes and, most tmportantly, fulfill thetr human potenttal, and, WHEREAS, The Vtrgmta Beach Special Olymptcs prowdes nurturing wtth an opportumty to parttc~pate m traimng and comt>etitton as well as social events, and, WHEREAS, Thts year, the 11th Special Olymptcs World Summer Games were hem tn Dubhn, Ireland from dune 21-29 and were the largest tnternattonal multi-sport event tn the worm tn 2003, as well as the largest sporttng and cultural event ever staged tn Ireland, and, WHEREAS, The Ctly of Vtrgmta Beach has special ttes to Ireland through lis Sister Ctly, Bangor, Northern Ireland and, WHEREAS, Team Vtrgtma's stxteen athletes, who jotned over 7,000 others from 160 countrtes worldwtde, included three parttctpants from Vtrglma Beach who excelled tn their events recognizes NOW, THEREFORE, The City Counctl of the Ctty of Vtrglma Beach, Vtrglma hereby STEFANIE WARD for her excellence tn the POWERLIFTING events by capturing GOLD tn the Deadhft, SILVER tn the Bench Press and BRONZE tn the Combtnatton as well as placmg Fourth tn the Squat AND, FUTHER, BE IT RESOLVED' that the Ct02 Councd calls upon the ~ mzens of Vtrgmta Beach to recognize the courage, sptrtt and love of adventure that Stefame has exhlbtted as she represented the Umted States of Amemca and the City of Vlrgtma Beach whtch is duly proud of her Harry E Dt~!z~l: Counc~emXber Reeve, Councd Member M~t L~. .u~cd Member~ ~nnPeter W Sch~ldt'~, }/~k/~'COunall Member Lo~qjJ~2~~ Ron A Vtllanueva, Council Member R~2 A~o~ber Reba S McClanan, Council Member Ros~, Councd Member James iQ~oo~, Councd Member ~ [Vley4a E Ob~rndorf, Mayor / CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: An Ordinance Authorizing the C~ty Manager to Renew Leases for Spaces at the V~rginia Beach Farmers Market MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 · Background: The Farmers Market has been serving V~rginia Beach and its cibzens for over two decades A variety of businesses lease space at the Market Considerations: The Code of Virginia requires all leases of City property to be approved by C~ty Council. The proposed lease renewals are for several exisbng tenants at the Farmers Market, some of which have been doing bus~ness at the Market s~nce ~ts ~ncepbon Public Information: A public hearing is required and has been advertised Recommendations: The Farmers Market management team recommends approval of the lease renewals. · Attachments: Ordinance Term Sheet Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Agriculture City Manag~~~l~~ ~~ F \Data~TY~Ord~n~IONCODE~FM lease renewals ARF wpd 1 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY 2 MANAGER TO RENEW LEASES FOR SPACES 3 AT THE VIRGINIA BEACH FARMERS MA3J{ET 4 5 WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach has leased spaces at the 6 Farmers Market since its inception; 7 WHEREAS, the terms of the leases for several spaces at the 8 Farmers Market have expired, and these tenants wish to renew the 9 leases for these spaces; and 10 WHEREAS, a public hearing concerning the proposed lease 11 renewals has been advertised and conducted. 12 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 13 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 14 That the City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized on 15 behalf of the City of Virginia Beach to enter into lease agreements 16 from July 2003 through June 2006 w~th the following businesses for 17 spaces as the Farmers Market: 18 Space #3 and #4 - Judy Chapman t/a Chapman's Flowers & G~fts; 19 Space #5 and #6 - Mark Holland t/a Holland Produce; 20 Space #7 and #8 - Elsie Creekmore t/a Creekmore's Place; 21 Space #10 - Laurie Moser t/a Reflections of the Heart; 22 Space #11 - Laurie Moser t/a Secret Garden; 23 Space #12 - Country Butcher, Inc.; 24 Space #13 - David Hare t/a Hare Farms; 25 Space #14 - Bergey's Dairy Farm, Inc.; and 26 Space #23, #24, and #27 - Mlchele Shean t/a V~rg~n~a Garden 28 29 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 30 Virginia, on the day of , 2003. 31 32 CA-8966 33 ORDIN\NONCODE\FM lease renewals.doc 34 R-3 35 July 31, 2003 36 37 38 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: 4O 41 42 AgricultUre Department~ APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY' Law Department~ SUMMARY OF TERMS LEASES FOR SPACES AT THE VIRGINIA BEACH FARMERS MARKET LESSOR: City of Virginia Beach LESSEES AND RENT: LESSEE MONTHLY ANNUAL Chapman's Flowers $537 $6,444 Holland Produce $446 $5,352 Creekmore's Place $446 $5,352 Reflections of the Heart $537 $6,444 Secret Garden $446 $5,352 Country Butcher $537 $6,444 Hare Farms $446 $5,352 Bergey's Dairy Store $537 $6,444 V~rg~ma Garden $643 $7,7 ! 6 TERM: July 2003 through June 2006 RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF LESSEE: Use leased space for retail enterprise consistent with the purpose of the Farmers Market · Mmntaln leased space, including heating and air cond~tlomng umts · Purchase commercial general liabihty insurance · Keep retail space open dunng hours of Farmers Market operation RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF CITY: Mmntaln common areas of the Farmers Market and structural elements of the leased space · Pay for water, sewer and, in most cases, electrical service TERMINATION: C~ty may terminate by providing Lessee s~xty (60) days notice Data/aty/ord~n/noncode/FM lease renewal SOT doc CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: MEETING DATE: Ordinance to Abolish the Youth Services Coordinating Committee August 12, 2003 Background: The Youth Services Coordinating Committee was established by the City Council on January 10, 1995. Considerations: The City Council has determined that the Youth Services Coordinating Committee should be abolished. Public Information: Public Information will be handled through the normal Council agenda process. Attachments: Ordinance Recommended Action: N/A Submitting Department/Agency: City Council City Manager: F \DataV~,TY~Ord~n\NONCODE~YSCCarf wpd AN ORDINANCE ABOLISHING THE YOUTH SERVICES COORDINATING COMMITTEE 10 WHEREAS, on January 10, 1995, the City Council established the Youth Services Coordinating Committee; and WHEREAS, the Council now wishes to abolish this Committee. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That the Youth Services Coordinating Committee is hereby abolished. 11 12 13 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the day of , 2003. CA-8973 ORDIN \NONCODE\ysccord. wpd R-1 August 7, 2003 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH ~ AGENDA ITEM ~ ITEM: Acquisition of water, sanitary sewer, and drainage easements for Stumpy Lake water line repair and other related maintenance (ClP 5-083) MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 Background: This acquisition is necessary to repair the 30" raw water main (approximately 70 years old) obtained from City of Norfolk in June 2001 The eight-mile raw water main transfers water from Stumpy Lake to Lake Lawson where the Norfolk water treatment plant treats the water for public use The existing raw water main has three exposed areas Manor Drive area, Ovedand Road, and Greenwich Road area At the Greenwich Road area, the easements were ~ncomplete and repairs cannot be made without additional easements There are also storm water and sanitary sewer facility confhcts involved in the repairs, necessitating additional sanitary sewer and drainage easements Considerations: Repairs and rehabilitation for this project are necessary to ensure that the Stumpy Lake raw water facility remains a viable raw water resoume for the City of V~rginia Beach The raw water main must be repaired or it will eventually suffer a catastrophic failure Public Information: A public meeting addressing the raw water ma~n repairs was held in the Kempsville High School Auditorium on April 10, 2003 The purpose of the public meebng was to inform the citizens within the project work areas about the Stumpy Lake facilities and proposed improvements Residents' comments and concerns were solicited and have been incorporated into the design of the raw water ma~n repair construction plans Alternatives: The altemabves are to proceed with the repairs, or not If the decision ~s to proceed, the easements must be obtained If the decision ~s not to proceed, potential structural failures or line breaks will ultimately render the pipeline out of commission Recommendations: The staff recommends that C~ty Council approve the attached easement ordinance, which authorizes the City Manager to acquire the necessary public utility and storm water easements by agreement, or ~f necessary, by condemnation Funding for the easements w~ll be from the following CIP Project - CIP 5-083 - Stumpy Lake Water Reservoir & Pumping Facilities Improvement · Attachments: Ordinance, Location Maps, Exhibits A, B, & C Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Public Utilities City Manager:(~~ ~ .~~ AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY IN FEE SIMPLE FOR RIGHT OF WAY AND/OR TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT WATER, SANITARY SEWER, AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTS, EITHER BY AGREEMENT OR CONDEMNATION, FOR THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FY 2003-2004, CIP 5-083 STUMPY LAKE WATER RESERVOIR & PUMPING FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT WHEREAS, ~n the oplmon of the Councd of the C~ty of V~rglnla Beach, Virginia, a 10 pubhc necessity emsts to repmr the ex~st~ng Stumpy Lake - Lake Lawson raw water p~pehne to 11 ensure that the Stumpy Lake raw water faclhty remains a viable raw water resource to the City of 12 Virg~ma Beach and for other related public purposes, ~nclud~ng the preservation of the safety, 13 health, peace, good order, comfort, and convemence, and for the general welfare of the people ~n 14 the C~ty of V~rg~nla Beach: 15 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 16 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 17 Section 1 That the C~ty Council authorizes the acqms~tlon by purchase or condemnation 18 pursuant to Sections 15 2-1901, et seq, Code of V~rg~ma of 1950, as amended, of all that certmn 19 real property in fee simple, ~nclud~ng temporary and permanent water, sanitary sewer, and 20 drmnage easements of right of way as shown on the plans entitled "REPAIRS TO STUMPY 21 LAKE 30" RAW WATER TRANSMISSION MAIN C.I.P 5-083 006," and more specifically 22 described on the acqms~t~on plats for the project (collectively, the "Plans"), the Plans being on 23 file ~n the Office of the Water Resources Division, Department of Pubhc Utlht~es, C~ty of 24 Vlrglma Beach, V~rg~ma. Such acquisition will be made only after comphance with 25 Admlmstratlve Directive 3.14 for "Pubhc Input for Pubhc Infrastructure ProJects Undertaken in 26 the City" 27 27 Section 2. That the C~ty Manager is hereby authorized to make or cause to be made on 28 behalf of the City of V~rgima Beach, to the extent that funds are available, a reasonable offer to 29 the owners or persons having an interest in smd lands. If refused, the C~ty Attorney is hereby 30 authorized to institute proceedings to condemn smd property. 31 Adopted by the Council of the City of V~rgima Beach, V~rg~nia, on the __ 32 day of ., 2003. APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY AND FORM CITY ATTORNEY ~ I I /,,; ,/',I / / / / / / / //, / I I I I I i i ! /. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH · AGENDA, ITEM ITEM: Acquisition of a new sanitary sawer pump station site for the replacement of the existing Pembroke Manor South Pump Station #354 MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 · Background: This project is needed to construct a new san;tary sewer pump station to replace an existing 40-year old pump station The station has severe capacity and structural dehc~encies Rudolph A. and Ruth A Geisaka own the s~te to be acquired for the new pump stabon · Considerations: The owners were contacted and prefer not to sell the property but they understand the needs of the city. A new pump station needs to be constructed to avoid system failures and to ensure quahty sanitary sewer service to the Pembroke residents and businesses The existing site ~s too small to simultaneously support the operations of the exisbng station and construcbon of the new station Upon completion of the new pump station, the ex;sbng station will be demolished The existing pump station s;te w~ll be combined w~th the new site · Public Information: The pump station project was presented at the Pembroke Manor Associabon's June 9, 2003 meeting. The presentation explained the purpose of the project, location, and schedule. Residents' comments were sohcited and ~ncorporated into the design of the pump stabon [] Alternatives: Instead of acquiring a new pump station site, we would use the existing pump station site The existing pump station could be demolished and the new pump stahon could be built over top of the existing pump station Th;s alternative would require land reclamation from the adjacent wetlands, bypass pumping, and complicated construction techniques Th;s alternative would cost approximately $250,000 00 more than the cost of acqu;nng the new s;te and bu;Idmg a new pump station [] Recommendations: Staff recommends the C;ty Council approve the attached ordinance, which authorizes the City to acqu;re by agreement or condemnabon, all land necessary for the construction of the new sanitary sewer pump station s;te Funding for the pump station s;te acquisition will be from CIP project 6-063 Central Business D~stnct System Upgrade [] Attachments: Ordinance and plat for pump station s~te Recommended Action: Submitting Department/Agen¢iy: City Manager: ~ [~. Approve ordinance Public Utilities AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY IN FEE SIMPLE FOR THE PEMBROKE MANOR SOUTH PUMP STATION SITE, EITHER BY AGREEMENT OR CONDEMNATION, FOR THE FOLLOWING SANITARY SEWER PROJECT, PUMP STATION #354 6-063 Central Business District System Upgrade 10 WHEREAS, in the opinion of the Council of the City of 11 Virginia Beach, Virginia, a public necessity exists for the 12 construction of this important water and sanitary sewer project 13 to provide needed improvements to the City's water and sanitary 14 sewer systems and for other public purposes including the 15 preservation of the safety, health, comfort, and convenience, 16 and for the general welfare of the people in the City of 17 Virginia Beach: 18 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 19 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 20 1. That the City Council finds there is a public 21 necessity for this sanitary sewer project, and authorizes the 22 acquisition by agreement or condemnation pursuant to Sections 23 15.2-1901, et seq., Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, of all 24 that certain real property in fee simple, including temporary 25 and permanent easements and rights-of-way (collectively the 26 "Property") as may be necessary to construct the project and as 27 is shown on the plans for the project, and as is more 28 specifically described on the acquisition plat for the project 29 (collectively the "Plans"), and the Plans are on file in the 30 Engineering Division, Department of Public Utilities, City of 31 Virginia Beach, Virginia. Such acquisition will be made only 32 after compliance with Administrative Directive 3.14 for 'lPublic 33 Input for Public Infrastructure Projects Undertaken in the City." 34 2. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to make or 35 cause to be made on behalf of the City of Virginia Beach, to the 36 extent that funds are available, a reasonable offer to the 37 owners or persons having an interest in the Property. If 38 refused, the City Attorney is hereby authorized to institute and 39 prosecute proceedings to condemn the Property. 40 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 41 Virginia, on the day of , 2003 42 43 APPROVED CONTENTS 4746 ~NATURE ~~~ S 0 DEPARTMENT APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY AND FORM CITY A~TORNEY 51 CA-8913 52 Data/aty/ordin/noncode/CA8913.ORD.doc 53 August 12, 2003 ]iON $35) CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: An Ordinance Approving and Authorizing the Acquisibon from the Gal~otos Family of Property Located Within Block 6 at Town Center for $2,250,000 and Appropriating and Transfernng Funds to Capital Project # 9-016, Town Center infrastructure for Such Purposes MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 Background: The Town Center Project has been a long-term pnonty for the C~ty. The City Council first recognized the importance of the Town Center project ~n the Central Business District of the City when ~t adopted the Comprehensive Plan on November 4, 1997 Since th~s time, the City Councd has continued its ongoing support of the Project and Phase I of the Project, compnsed of a 254,000 square foot offme tower, 107,000 square foot of commercial space, a 176-room hotel, a 17,000 square foot bank headquarters building, a 1,278-car public parking garage, and public streets, sidewalks and ubl~ties, has been substantially completed On June 3, 2003, the C~ty Councd approved the Phase II Project Documents containing the nghts and obligations of the V~rginia Beach Development Authority and the Developer w~th respect to Phase II of the Project. Block 6 of the Project comprised of a total of 2.35 acres, is owned in part by the Gal~otos famdy and in part by the Virginia Beach Development Authority. Control over the Gal~otos family parcel is necessary to complete the land assemblage for Block 6 of the Town Center Project. Considerations: Acquisition of the Galiotos property will complete the land assemblage for Block 6 of the Town Center project and ~s in the best interest of the City and desirable and necessary to achieve the desired public benefit, ~nclud~ng use of the site for the potential public theater and/or for street and other public purposes. Public Information: Public Information for this item will be handled through the normal Council agenda process. Alternatives: Approval of the Galiotos acqu~sibon reflects the City's on-going commitment to the long-term priority of developing Town Center. There are certainly other alternatives to development of the Central Business D~strict; however, few, ~f any, alternabves accomplish the Councd's stated goals for th~s area or provide the level of quality proposed. Recommendations: Approve the acquisition of the Galiotos Property located within Block 6 at Town Center for $2,250,000 and appropnate and transfer funds to Capital Project #9-016. Attachments: Ordinance Recommended Action: Approval of attached ordinance Submitting Department/Agency: Economic Develop,,rn.~) City Manage~W~5'D ,~'' ~~ F \DataV~TY~Ordin\NONCODE\CA8946 arf doc 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES THE ACQUISITION FROM THE GALIOTOS FAMILY OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN BLOCK 6 AT TOWN CENTER FOR $2,250,000 AND APPROPRIATING AND TRANSFERRING FUNDS TO CAPITAL PROJECT # 9-016, TOWN CENTER INFRASTRUCTURE FOR SUCH PURPOSES WHEREAS, Town Center Associates, L.L C (the "Town Center Developer") and the Virginia Beach Development Authority (the "Authority") are developing a Central Business 13 District Project known as "The Town Center of V~rg~nia Beach" (the "Project"), a m~xed-use 14 commercial development utilizing the structure of an economic development park in the B-3A 15 Pembroke Central Business Core District, an area of the City of Vlrglma Beach which is zoned to 16 optimize development potential for a mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented, urban acnwty center with 1'7 m~d- to high-rise structures that contain numerous types of uses, including business, retail. 18 residennal, cultural, educational and other pubhc and private uses, 19 WHEREAS, Phase I of the ProJect, comprised of a 254,000 square foot office 2 0 tower, 107,000 square feet of commercial space, a 176-room hotel, a 17,000 square foot bank headquarters building, a 1,278-car public parking garage, and public streets, s~dewalks and 2 2 unhties, is nearing completion, 23 WHEREAS, an exhibit to the Development Agreement of The Town Center of 2 4 Vlrgima Beach dated as of March 6, 2000, as amended, by and between Town Center Associates, 25 L L.C and City of V~rgm~a Beach Development Authority, related to the development of Phase I 2 6 of the Project, approved by City Council on February 8, 2000, pursuant to Ordinance No. ORD- 2 7 2570Q designated a portion of the real property owned by the Galiotos family in Block 6 of the 2 8 Project as "Condemned Areas". 2 9 WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No 2766-A adopted June 3, 2003, after fin&ng 3 0 that Phase II of the Project will stimulate the City's economy, ~ncrease public revenues, enhance 3 ~_ public amenities, further the City's development objectives for the Central Business District and 32 provide necessary components to further the goals contained in the City's "Guidelines for Evaluation of Investment Partnerships for Economic Development", the City Council approved 34 the documents contmning the rights and obhgat~ons of the Authority and the Developer with 3 5 respect to Phase II of the Project (the "Phase II Project Documents"), 36 WHEREAS, pursuant to ~ts Resolution adopted June 17, 2003, the Authority 3 ? approved the Phase II Project Documents; 38 WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach supports the Authority's financial 3 9 obligations for the Project pursuant to support agreements between the City and the Authority, 4O WHEREAS, Block 6 of the Project, comprised of a total of approximately 2 35 41 acres, ~s owned ~n part by the Galiotos family and in part by the Authority, though the Town 4 2 Center Developer has the option to purchase the Authority's portion of Block 6 pursuant to the 43 Phase II Project Documents, 44 WHEREAS, on behalf of the City and the Authority, the City Manager and City 4 5 staff have engaged in negotiations with representatives of the Galiotos family regarding property 46 owned by ~t in Block 6 of the Project area (the "Galiotos Property"), including development of the 4 ? Galiotos Property by the Galiotos family; the City's requirements for dedication of portions of the 4 8 Gahotos Property for streets and for other public uses ~f developed by the Gahotos family, and the 4 9 acquisition of the Gahotos Property (or parts thereof) by the City for streets and other public uses 50 and the price and terms on which the Gahotos family would sell such property, 51 WHEREAS, ~n the opinion of the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, a 52 pubhc necessity exists for the acqms~non of th~s ~mportant s~te for public purposes for the 53 preservation of the safety, health, peace, good order, comfort, convenience, and for the welfare of 54 the people ~n the City of V~rginia Beach; and 55 WHEREAS, the C~ty Council has determined the acquisition of the Galiotos 56 Property to be in the best interest of the City and desirable and necessary to achieve the desired 5 ? public use 58 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 59 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, 60 1. That the C~ty Council authorizes the acqmsition for pubhc purposes of 61 the Galiotos Property, by purchase, which Property is described and depicted on Exhibit A 62 attached hereto. 2 That the City Manager or h~s designee is authorized to execute on behalf 64 of the City of Virg~ma Beach, an Agreement of Sale for the purchase of the Galiotos property, for 65 the sum of $2,250,000 and in accordance w~th the terms contained in the Summary of Terms attached hereto as Exhibit B. 67 3 That $1,700,000 of the net original issue premium earned by the C~ty in 6 8 connection w~th the ~ssuance of its $50,000,000 General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds, 6 9 Series of 2003A is hereby appropriated to Capital Project # 9-016, Town Center Infrastructure. 70 4 That the remmmng acqms~t~on price of $550,000 ~s hereby transferred 71 from Capital Project # 9-038, Economic Development Infrastructure Projects, to Capnal Project # '72 9-016, Town Center Infrastructure. 73 74 Adopted by the Council of the City of V~rginia Beach, Virginia, on the day of ,2003 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 CA-8946 August 12, 2003 F \Data\ATY\Forms\Commerc~al ProJects\Town Center\Block 6 Performing Arts Ord Draft B2 doc AP~_g_OVED AS TO CONTENT Finance Department APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY. City Attorney EXHIBIT A Property Description PARCEL ONE ALL THOSE certain lots, pieces or parcels of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon, situate, lying and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and being known, numbered and designated as Lots 21, 22, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43 and 44, in block Thirty-one (31), as shown on the plat entitled Sunny Brook, which plat is duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Clrcmt Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia in Map Book 5, at page 201. IT BEING the same property conveyed to Anthony Gahotos and June A. Gahotos, husband and wife, by deed dated April 23, 1981 from Wllham Beasley aka W E. Beasley and Emily V Beasley, husband and wife, and recorded ~n the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia in Deed Book 2114, page 758. Corrected to change name from June A Gahotos to Irene A Gahotos and re-recorded in Deed Book 2117, page 608. PARCEL TWO' ALL THOSE certmn lots of land, with any buildings and improvements thereon, and all appurtenances thereunto belonging, situate In the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, known, numbered and designated as Lots 18, 19, and 20, in Block 31, as shown on that certain plat entitled "PLAT OF A PORTION OF SUNNY BROOK (MB 5, P. 201) FOR EIGEN PROPERTIES, BAYS[DE BOROUGH - VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA" Scale 1" = 100', dated June, 1975, made by Marsh and Basgler, Inc., P C. Engineers-Surveyors-Planners, 101 North Plaza Trml, Vlrgima Beach, Virginia, and duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the C~ty of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Map Book 110, at page 12 IT BEING the same property conveyed to Anthony Gahotos and Irene Galiotos, husband and wife, by Deed of Exchange dated May 30, 1979 from EPCO PEMBROKE ASSOCIATES, a Virginia limited parmershlp, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia in Deed Book 1906 at page 720. PARCEL THREE' ALL THOSE certain lots, pieces or parcels of land, situate, lying and being in the City of Virginia Beach, V~rginla, as shown on the "PLAT OF SUNNYBROOK" duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, In Map Book 5, at page 201, being that portmn of thc southern one-half of "POTOMAC STREET" which lies between thc western right-of-way line of "FOURTH STREET" (now Garrett Drive) and the extension in a northerly direction of the western boundary hne of Lot 16, in Block 31, together with that portion of the northern one-half of "CLEVELAND STREET" which lies between the western right-of- way line of "FOURTH STREET" (now Garrett Drive) and the extension in a southerly direction of the western boundary hne of Lot 35, in Block 31 IT BEING the same property conveyed to Tasos A Gahotos by Deed dated October 3, 2000, and recorded in the Virginia Beach C~rcult Court Clerk's Office in Deed Book 4306, at page 1185. EXHIBIT B SUMMARY OF TERMS AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE GALIOTOS PROPERTY OWNER: BUYER: SALE PRICE: DEPOSIT: STUDY PERIOD: SETTLEMENT DATE: Anthony & Irene Gahotos and Tasos A. Galiotos (Street Parcels- a portion of Potomac Street and a port~on of Cleveland Street). City of V~rginia Beach $2,250,000 00 ($100,000.00 for Street Parcels and $2,150,00.00 for balance of property) $100,000.00 payable to Escrow Agent upon execution of Agreement of Sale by all parties Until August 15, 2003 Five (5) days after the expiration of the Study Period. OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS: City shall bear cost of obtaining the t~tle report and all other closing costs associated with settlement including all recording costs, except grantor's tax, and transfer taxes, and all title insurance premiums and its own attorneys' fees and costs. Seller shall prepare the deed conveying title to the property and shall pay all expenses of preparation of the deed, the grantor's tax and 1ts own attorneys' fees and costs. If settlement is not effected due to default of Seller, the City shall have the right to receive return of its deposit or to seek specific performance. If settlement is not effected due to default of the City, Seller shall have as its sole remedy, the right to retain the deposit as llqmdated damages. F \Users\VValldej\WPXBZA\Gahotos sum wpd CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM:An Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement With SPSA for the Operation of the Appliance ("White Goods") Recycling Facility and a Lease Option for a Compost/Mulch Facility (Yard Waste) at Landfill II MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 Background: The Southeastern Public Service Authority (SPSA) currently operates a yard waste processing facility on 9 acres of land at Landfill II pursuant to a lease with the City SPSA now desires to (i) assume the operation of the appliance ("White Goods") recycling facility at Landfill II, and (ii) acquire an option to lease 48+ acres at Landfill II in order to consolidate its compost/mulch operations at the Regional Landfill into one site. The terms and conditions of the lease option are attached hereto. Since the operation of the White Goods recycling facility is not covered under the current lease with SPSA, an agreement providing for this specific operation is needed. The option to lease the 48+ acres will allow SPSA to finalize its plans for consolidation of its operations. The long-term agreements contemplated herein are expressly authorized by Virginia Code Section 15 2-5148 Considerations: SPSA has agreed to assume operation of the White Goods facility at no cost to the City. If SPSA exercises the proposed option to lease, this project will provide additional savings and long-term benefits to Virginia Beach. The attached Policy Report provides detailed considerations for this project. If SPSA exercises its option to lease, the new lease w~ll not affect the Ash and Residue Agreement or the Use and Support Agreement currently in effect. Public Information: Notification will be through the normal agenda process. If SPSA exercises the option to lease the 48+ acres at Landfill II, as part of the permitting process for this facility, SPSA will follow all requirements for public notification and any public hearings required by the Department of Enwronmental Quality at the appropriate time. The adjacent property owners have no objection to the project Recommendations: Adopt the ordinance to authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement and Option of Lease in accordance with the Summary of Terms attached hereto. Attachments: Ordinance; .Summar~ of Terms; Location Plat, Location Photo~lraph; Policy Report Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency' Public Works/Waste Management City Manager'(~ [~_ ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SOUTHEASTERN PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR THE OPERATION OF THE APPLIANCE ("WHITE GOODS") RECYCLING FACILITY AND A LEASE OPTION FOR A COMPOST/MULCH FACILITY AT LANDFILL I! WHEREAS, the C~ty of Vlrg~ma Beach (the "C~ty") is the owner of that certmn parcel of land located at 1989 Jake Sears Road ~n V~rg~ma Beach, V~rg~ma and known as Landfill 11 II, 12 WHEREAS, pursuant to V~rg~ma Code § 15 2-5148, the C~ty and the Southeastern i3 Pubhc Service Authority ("SPSA") entered ~nto a lease dated September 26, 1990, (the "1990 i4 Lease") of approximately rune acres at Landfill II for use by SPSA for the construction and i 5 operation of a compost/mulch (yard waste) processing facd~ty, WHEREAS, SPSA proposes to consolidate at Landfill II ~ts emst~ng compost/mulch i7 processing facility leased under the 1990 Lease w~th ~ts fac~hty located in the City of Suffolk, i 8 V~rglma; i9 WHEREAS, to effect the proposed consolidation in the future, SPSA desires an 2 0 option to enter ~nto a new lease w~th the City for the consohdated compost/mulch procesmng facility 2 i at Landfill II consisting of approximately 48 acres (the "Property") as shown on Exhibit A attached 2 2 hereto, 23 WHEREAS, SPSA also desires to assume the operation of the "White Goods" 2 4 recychng faclhty at Landfill II at no cost to the C~ty; and 24 WHEREAS, SPSA and City staff worked with the C~ty Attorney to draft an 2 5 agreement and an option to lease which sets forth the responslbd~t~es and obhgat~ons of the parties 26 upon terms and con&tlons mutually agreeable to all parties. 27 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 2 8 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 29 That the C~ty Manager ~s hereby authorized to execute an agreement w~th SPSA for 3 0 the operation of the "White Goods" recychng facdlty at Landfill II and a lease option between SPSA and the City for approximately 48 acres of land at Landfill II ~n accordance with the Summary of 32 Terms attached hereto 33 Adopted by the Councd of the C~ty of V~rg~ma Beach, V~rg~ma, on the __ day of 3 4 ., 2003 CA-8519 F \Users\VValIdej\WP~BZA\SPSA ordl wpd R-5 O7/17/03 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT Department gf Pubhc ~rks Department of Law /? ', 'TALLWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL' I O. 8. 4372 PG. 295 , 1455-71-2439 ..~ ........ 5,~- - - [ I / / / o.,~. ,2,.~s. ~s~/1_-/- ~i~,, / / / 0.~.~s~t Ps. e4~ / // z~ ~ S~SA- CO~ST/MULCH FACIU~ m I / '1 J / r D.B. 2256 PO. G68 / z j D.B. 2258 PG. 668 I / / /', / ' / / / / I N 18 41'56' W 5;I~;~~ NOW OR FORMERLY DRAGAS ASSOCIATES D. 8. 4261 PG. D. B. 453~ PO. 181~ M. B. 3~6 PG. 58 & 1454-59-5748 ~OEND o CO~R (NOT ~HIBIT 'A~ A P~LOF ~D TO BE ~ED TO SO~~~ ~BUC SER~CE AU~O~ OF VIR~NIA (S~ ~E C~ OF ~RGIN~ B~CH VIR~N~ B~, ~RGIN~ ~GINEE~NG DIVISION 5U~ BU~U DEP~M~ OF ~BUC WO~ CI~ OF VIRGIN~ B~CHt VIRGIN~ DA~: SUMMARY OF TERMS AGREEMENT FOR THE OPERATION OF "WHITE GOODS" RECYCLING FACILITY AND LEASE OPTION FOR THE USE OF 48 4- ACRES AT LANDFILL II LESSOR: City of Virginia Beach. LESSEE: Southeastern Public Service Authority (SPSA) PREMISES: Approximately 484- acres of land at Landfill II. TERM: Initial term for the operation of the "White Goods" recycling facility is for two years. IfSPSA exercises the option to lease the property for the compost/ mulch area, the operation of the "White Goods" recycling facility shall continue in accordance with the term of the lease. As to the Lease, the term shall be from the date of SPSA's written not,ce to the City to exercise the lease option until June 30, 2010 with additional renewal terms of up to 5 years each. Any such renewal shall be at the sole discretion and option of the City. RENT: Ten Dollars per year for the initial term and any renewal term thereof RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF SPSA UNDER THE AGREEMENT: Will assume the responsibility for the operation of the white goods (appliances) recycling area at no cost to the City. IF SPSA EXERCISES THE LEASE OPTION: Will use the Premises for the construction and operation of a compost/mulch processing facility (the "Facility") and no other purpose. Additionally, the hours of operation of the Facility shall be set and supervised by the City. Will construct the Facility and obtain all permits required at its sole cost and expense. However all construction plans must be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the initiation of any construction of improvements. All ingress and egress to the Premises shall be by means of Jake Sears Road. Will terminate the current 1990 Lease upon final completion and commencement of operation of the new Facility and shall vacate such premises in accordance with the terms and conditions of the 1990 Lease. Will pay the City the sum of $81,691.00 ~n full and complete settlement and satisfaction of all unpmd amounts previously ~nvomed by the City under the Ash and Residue Agreement between the C~ty and SPSA. This payment shall be made by SPSA concurrently with the execution of th~s lease As a condition of the City's s~te plan approval of the new facihty, SPSA will construct a buffer of trees/shrubbery of at least 50 feet around the perimeter of the facd~ty on all areas that are not adjacent to the landfill operation. Will maintain and perform any and all necessary repairs and replacements to the Premises. Will indenmify the City for any and all claims arising from SPSA's use and occupation of the Premises, including any and all adverse enwronmental conditions caused by SPSA. RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF CITY: Will inspect the Premises for comphance w~th the terms of the Lease and all state, local and federal laws, statutes, ordinances and regulations. TERMINATION: The City is not required to renew either the Agreement or the Lease after ~ts imt~al term. After 2018, the C~ty may terminate at any time for any reason w~th 24 months written notice to SPSA. F \Us~'s\WalIdej'~WI~ZA',SPSAIse sum wpd Policy Report BACKGROUND The Southeastern Pubhc Service Authority (SPSA) ~s the regional sol~d waste d~sposal agency created in the 1980's to handle the sohd waste for Norfolk, Portsmouth, Chesapeake, Suffolk, V~rg~n~a Beach, Frankhn, and the counhes of Isle of W~ght and Southampton On August 8, 1984, V~rg~n~a Beach and the Southeastern Pubhc Service Authority (SPSA) entered ~nto two agreements One was an agreement for "Use and Support," which was executed by all e~ght SPSA member commun~bes It was ~ntended to prowde a bas~s for SPSA to obtain financing to construct the regional waste disposal facihbes, begin processing solid waste, and to assure that adequate quanbbes of waste are available to pay for operabng costs and debt service It expires on January 24, 2018 The second agreement was for "D~sposal of Ash and Residue" Th~s agreement prowdes for SPSA to d~spose of up to 300,000 tons of ash and residue, from the Refuse Derived Fuel Plant ~n Portsmouth, at the Virginia Beach Landf~ll II. The agreement required SPSA to reimburse V~rg~n~a Beach for the purchase of 153 acres of land in the 1980's to be used for disposal of the ash and residue Other significant provisions of the agreement allow for V~rg~n~a Beach to d~spose of 5% of the waste collected by the C~ty and City contractors without charge, and for a predetermined cap on the tipping fees paid each year dunng the term of the agreement The agreement expires December 31, 2015, at which bme the benefits of the capped tipping fee and operabng cost reimbursement will expire The 5% free d~sposal ~s also a prows~on of the Use and Support Agreement, so V~rg~n~a Beach w~ll receive th~s benefit at least through January 24, 2018 In July 1997, SPSA nobfled the C~ty that they would no longer be dehvenng ash and residue to Landfill II They decided to dispose of it in the Regional Landfill However, a provision of the agreement states, "The Authority agrees to make such payments to V~rg~n~a Beach (operabng and capital, costs) ~rrespecbve of whether the Authority makes use of the Landfill " SPSA currently leases 9 acres of property at Landfill II for a yard waste mulching facd~ty for $10 per year The material is processed and delivered to the Regional Landfill to create compost for sale Compost ~s dehvered back to Landfill II for sale to residents and businesses CONSIDERATIONS · Operational/Maintenance: SPSA ~s cons~denng consolidabng the mulch fac~hty at Landfill II and the compost fac~hty at the Regional Landfill ~nto one s~te at Landfill II SPSA has asked for a Lease Opbon for approximately 48 acres it will need at Landfill II It will provide SPSA the opportunity to beg~n planning for an expansion of the Regional Landfill, reduce operating costs, and will eliminate the need to locate and purchase another s~te A photograph showing the area ~s attached SPSA has offered the following cons~derabons SPSA w~ll abandon the ex~sbng 9-acre mulch fac~hty for V~rg~n~a Beach to use as appropriate SPSA w~ll take over operabon of the "VVh~te Goods Program" at no cost to the C~ty It requires that appliances that are delivered to Landfill II by the City and others be recycled All freon ~s extracted from refrigerators and a~r cond~boners to comply w~th the Federal Clean A~r Act SPSA w~ll design the fac~hty to assure adequate buffers w~ll be ~n place for no~se control and aesthetic buffering We will be requ~nng a m~n~mum of a 50' buffer of trees/shrubbery on the perimeter of the s~te that ~s not d~rectly adjacent to the Landfill operabon SPSA uses an enwronmentally safe chemical agent to control odors ~n the compost operabon · Land for future phases cleared by SPSA · Internal roads ~mproved by SPSA The annual trips of SPSA tractor-tra~lers over V~rg~n~a Beach roads w~ll be reduced by 2,691, or 53% Virginia Beach w~ll conbnue to have a d~sposal Iocabon ~n the western part of the C~ty to dehver yard waste · Organizational: The facihty w~ll be located on the proposed Phase 2B and Phase 3 expansion areas that w~ll not be needed by the C~ty unbl after 2018 SPSA will coordinate all wetlands ~ssues w~th the V~rg~nla Department of Environmental Quahty (DEQ) and the appropriate Federal agencies · Wetlands issue for future phases w~ll be resolved · Recogn~bon as regional partner to other SPSA members · Legal: The C~ty Attorney has reviewed the Agreement and prepared the attached ordinance · Budgetary: · SPSA w~ll pay all costs for construcbon and operabon of the fac~hty SPSA will pay $81,691 to the C~ty for past due amounts ~n d~spute. SPSA w~ll take over the operabon of the VVh~te Goods Program at no cost to the C~ty that was prewously contracted $160,000 was reallocated ~n the 2003/2004 Budget as a result of SPSA performing th~s work at no cost to the C~ty · SPSA will pay all costs for construcbon and operabon of the Compost/Mulch Fac~hty PUBLIC INFORMATION Public notification w~ll be through the normal agenda process SPSA w~ll follow all requirements for pubhc notification, ~ncluding any public hearings that may be required by the Department of Enwronmental Quahty This proJect was presented to CBN in a meeting on June 28, 2002, with the Waste Management Administrator, SPSA D~rector of Operabons, and the CBN D~rector of Fac~hbes Management He had on objecbons w~th th~s proJect ALTERNATIVE COURSE OF ACTION Adopt the proposed ordinance to authorize the City Manager to execute an Agreement and Lease Option w~th SPSA for approximately 48 acres at Landfill II for the proposed compost/mulch facihty . Virginia Beach can conbnue under the current Ash and Residue Agreement through 2015 However, SPSA has ~nd~cated that they will be consolidabng the mulch and compost operabons to another s~te somewhere ~n the Region ~f the V~rg~n~a Beach s~te ~s not available RECOMMENDATIONS Adopt the Ordinance to authorize the C~ty Manager to execute the Agreement of Lease w~th SPSA Prepared by' Rewewed by Approved by Date ~~Da~te~) fin CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Working Agreement for the Hampton Roads Comprehensive Regional Information Management and Exchange System (CRIMES). MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 Background: The City of Virginia Beach originally entered into the CRIMES agreement with Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Portsmouth, James City County, and Suffolk on June 24, 1993. The 1993 agreement is still in effect. The updated agreement adds James City County, Poquoson, Smithfield, York County and Williamsburg to the group of participating jurisdictions. Considerations: The revised document will correctly reflect the current Virginia Code section that authorized this type of agreement, the organizational layout, and the voting members of the CRIMES board. Public Information: To be advertised in the same manner as other items on City Council agenda. Recommendations: Approve Resolution · Attachments: Resolution, material terms of agreement, current agreement, proposed revised agreement. Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Pohce Department /~~ F \Data~TY~Ord~n\~ODE\CRIMES ARF wpd A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE WORKING AGREEMENT FOR THE HAMPTON ROADS COMPREHENSIVE REGIONAL INFORMATION MANAGEMENT AND EXCHANGE SYSTEM (CRIMES) BETWEEN THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AND CHESAPEAKE, HAMPTON, JAMES CITY COUNTY, NEWPORT NEWS, NORFOLK, POQUOSON, PORTSMOUTH, SM I TH FI ELD, SUFFOLK, YORK COUNTY, AND WILLIAMSBURG 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREAS, Code of Virginia ~ 15.2-1300 allows local governments to enter into agreements for the joint exercise of powers; WHEREAS, each of the parties hereto desire to maintain a formal communications network among all participating jurisdictions; WHEREAS, it is recognized that developing a regional criminal justice information system utilizing current technology and tools will facilitate in keeping the system functioning at a level that continues to meet the needs of the criminal justice user environment; and WHEREAS, Virginia Beach, and the other participating jurisdictions are cognizant of the benefits which they will derive by way of improved efficiency and effectiveness gained by having access to accurate, dependable and timely information. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That the accompanying Working Agreement for the Hampton Roads Comprehensive Regional Information Management and Exchange System (CRIMES) is hereby approved, and the City Manager is hereby 29 30 31 32 33 34 authorized and directed to execute said agreements on behalf of the City of Virginia Beach. A summary of the material terms for the agreement is attached hereto and a true copy of the agreement is on file with the City Attorney. Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the day of , 2003. CA-8969 ordin/noncode/CRIMES, res R-1 August 1, 2003 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT- ~ol~e~artmen/ APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY' SUMMARY OF TERMS . . e . . . Scope - To operate a regional criminal justice information system. CRIMES - A working agreement for the Hampton Roads Comprehensive Regional Information Management and Exchange System. Definitions - A. Participating Member - Duly appointed representatives of the participating jurisdictions empowered with voting rights. B. Participating Jurisdiction - A city, county, or town that enters into the Agreement for the Comprehensive Regional Information Management and Exchange System (CRIMES). Participating jurisdictions will have voting representatives with voting rights and will fully share in the costs of using, maintaining and upgrading the system. C. Fiscal Year- the twelve-month period beginning July 1 and ending June 30 of the succeeding calendar year. Termination - CRIMES may be dissolved at anytime by agreement of the governing bodies of all the participating members. Participating jurisdictions may withdraw from CRIMES if required funds are not appropriated by the City Council, however, written notifications shall be sent to the CRIMES Board no later than January 1st of the fiscal year in which the participating jurisdiction intends to withdraw. Insurance - The CRIMES Board of Directors shall hold general liability insurance in an amount not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) for the protection of its participating members, officers, employees and the participating jurisdictions, their employees and their officers. Powers of the Board of Directors - A. To oversee and direct the development of CRIMES to include decisions regarding all technical and functional issues and costs as well as the application of resources and funding toward these goals. Bo To promulgate each year a schedule of fixed costs for maintenance of CRIMES, including equipment and basic staff, and of variable costs of operation depending on the number of active participants and any additional developmental costs. Co To determine additional participating jurisdictions and user groups and the terms and conditions applicable to their participation and the expansion of CRIMES. D. To designate one of the participating jurisdictions to serve as fiscal agent. E. To approve contracts to be entered into by its fiscal agent. F. To designate a "ProJect Manager" to serve as the day-to-day project coordinator. This person ill be an employee of one of the participating jurisdictions. , Operating Expenses - The City will be responsible for twenty-five percent (25%) of the total cost divided equally among all partmipating jurisdictions. The remainder of the costs will be diwded by a percentage based on population figures provided by VaStat. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM TEM: Encroachment Request to maintain an exisbng bulkhead and to install rip-rap and sand for David H and Jean H. Kle~n MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 Background: Mr. and Mrs Dawd H. Klein desire to maintain an ex~sting bulkhead and replace deteriorated bulkheading with rip-rap and sand ~n Kempes Lake. Considerations: City staff has reviewed the requested encroachment and has recommended approval of same, subject to certain conditions outhned in the agreement. The Department of Public Works supports the utilization of "hardened slope stabilization" methods including bulkheading, grouted rip-rap and np-rap with filter cloth to minimize and prevent soil loss along bank slopes associated w~th open drainage d~tch, canal and lake systems. These methods are successful ~n areas with soil types classified as h~ghly erodible, specifically dunng major rainfall events which create high velocities and wave action along bank slopes due to h~gh winds There are other properties adjacent to the Kleins' property which also have rip-rap and bulkhead~ng. Public Information: Advertisement of City Council Agenda Alternatives: Approve the encroachment as presented, deny the encroachment or add conditions as desired by Council Recommendations: Approve the request subject to the terms and conditions of the agreement Attachments: Ordinance, Location Map, Agreement, Plat and Pictures Recommended Action: Approval of the Ordinance Submitting Department/Agency: Public Works/Real Estate,S., City Manager: (~~i~ ~._ ~~ ~ Requested by Department of Public Works AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE A TEMPORARY ENCROACHMENT INTO A PORTION OF KEMPES LAKE, BY DAVID H. KLEIN AND JEAN H. KLEIN, THEIR HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESSORS IN TITLE WHEREAS, David H Kle~n and Jean H Klein desire maintain an exisbng bulkhead and install rip-rap and sand within the City's public place located at the rear of 204 Oakengate Turn. WHEREAS, City Council is authorized pursuant to §§ 15 2-2009 and 15.2- 10 2107, Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, to authorize temporary encroachments upon the City's public places subject to such terms and conditions as Council may prescribe. 12 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 14 That pursuant to the authority and to the extent thereof contained in §§ 15.2- 2009 and 15.2-2107, Code of Virg~nia, 1950, as amended, David H. Klein and Jean H. Klein, their he~rs, assigns and successors in title are authorized to construct and maintain a temporary encroachment for maintenance of an existing bulkhead and ~nstallation of rip-rap and sand ~n Kempes Lake as shown on the map entitled' "PLAN VIEW FOR JEAN H. KLEIN 204 OAKENGATE TURN VA. BEACH, VA 23462 EXHIBITA" a copy ofwhich is on file in the 2 0 Department of Public Works and to which reference is made for a more particular descnpbon, 21 and 22 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that the temporary encroachments are expressly 2 3 subject to those terms, condibons and criteria contained ~n the Agreement between the C~ty 24 of Virginia Beach and Dawd H. Klein and Jean H. Klein (the "Agreement"), which is attached 25 hereto and incorporated by reference; and 26 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that the C~ty Manager or his authorized designee 2 7 ~s hereby authorized to execute the Agreement, and 28 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that this Ordinance shall not be in effect until such 2 9 brae as David H Kle~n and Jean H. Klein and the C~ty Manager or his authorized designee execute the Agreement Adopted bythe Council ofthe City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the~day 32 of ,2003. 33 34 35 36 37 ,..~RLVED AS TO CONTENTS t/ S I GNATURE DE P~~NT 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 CA- PREPARED 6/26/03 PDEJESU/DKLEIN/ORD APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY CITY ATTORNEY PREPARED BY VIRGINIA BEACH CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE EXEMPTED FROM RECORDATION TAXES UNDER SECTIONS 58.1-811 (a)(3) AND 58.1-811(c)(4) REIMBURSEMENT AUTHORIZED UNDER SECTION 25-249 THIS AGREEMENT, made this ~*~dayof ,20 ~3 , by and between the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, a municipal corporation, Grantor, "City", and DAVID H. KLEIN AND JEAN H. KLEIN, THEIR HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESSORS IN TITLE, "Grantee", even though more than one. WITNE S SETH: That, WHEREAS, the Grantee is the owner of that certain lot, tract, or parcel of land designated and described as "Lot 50akengate Subdivision, Kempsville District" and being further designated and described as 204 Oakengate Turn, Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462; WHEREAS, it is proposed by the Grantee to construct and maintain an existing bulkhead and proposed rip-rap and sand fill, "Temporary Encroachment", in the City of Virginia Beach; WHEREAS, in constructing and maintaining the Temporary Encroachment, it is necessary that the Grantee encroach into a portion of an existing City property known as Kempes Lake "The Temporary Encroachment Area"; and WHEREAS, the Grantee has requested that the City permit a Temporary Encroachment within The Encroachment Area. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the premises and of the benefits accruing orto accrue to the Grantee and for the further consideration of One Dollar ($1.00), in hand paid to the City, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the City doth grant to the Grantee GPIN 1467-60-4803 permission to use The Encroachment Area for the purpose of constructing and maintaining the Temporary Encroachment. It is expressly understood and agreed that the Temporary Encroachment will be constructed and maintained in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia and the City of Virginia Beach, and in accordance with the City's specifications and approval and is more particularly described as follows, to wit: A Temporary Encroachment into The Encroachment Area as shown on that certain plat entitled: "Plan View for: Jean H. Klein 204 Oakengate Turn Va Beach Va 23462," a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and to which reference is made for a more particular description. It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Temporary Encroachment herein authorized terminates upon notice by the City to the Grantee, and that within thirty (30) days after the notice is given, the Temporary Encroachment must be removed from The Encroachment Area by the Grantee; and that the Grantee will bear all costs and expenses of such removal. It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its agents and employees, from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses including reasonable attorney's fees in case it shall be necessary to file or defend an action arising out of the location or existence of the Temporary Encroachment. It is further expressly understood and agreed that nothing herein contained shall be construed to enlarge the permission and authority to permit the maintenance or construction of any encroachment other than that specified herein and to the limited extent specified herein, nor to permit the maintenance and construction of any encroachment by anyone other than the Grantee. It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee agrees to maintain the Temporary Encroachment so as not to become unsightly or a hazard. It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee must obtain a permit from the Office of Development Services Center/Planning Department prior to commencing any construction within The Encroachment Area. It is further expressly understood and agreed that prior to issuance of a right of way permit, the Grantee must post sureties, in accordance with their engineer's cost estimate, to the Office of Development Services Center/Planning Department, if applicable. It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee must obtain and keep ~ in force all-risk property insurance and general liability or such insurance as is deemed necessary by the City, and all insurance policies must name the City as additional named insured or loss payee, as applicable. The Grantee also agrees to carry comprehensive general liability insurance in an amount not less than $500,000.00, combined single limits of such insurance policy or policies. The Grantee will provide endorsements providing at least thirty (30) days written notice to the City prior to the cancellation or termination of, or material change to, any of the insurance policies. The Grantee assumes all responsibilities and liabilities, vested or contingent, with relation to the Temporary Encroachment. It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee must submit for review and approval, a survey of The Encroachment Area, certified by a registered professional engineer '4 or a licensed land surveyor, and/or "as built" plans of the Temporary Encroachment sealed by a registered professional engineer, if required by either the City Engineer's Office or the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department. It is further expressly understood and agreed that the City, upon revocation of such authority and permission so granted, may remove the Temporary Encroachment and charge the cost thereof to the Grantee, and collect the cost in any manner provided by law for the collection of local or state taxes; may require the Grantee to remove the Temporary Encroachment; and pending such removal, the City may charge the Grantee for the use of The Encroachment Area, the equivalent of what would be the real property tax upon the land so occupied if it were owned by the Grantee; and if such removal shall not be made within the time ordered hereinabove by this Agreement, the City may impose a penalty in the sum of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) per day for each and every day that the Temporary Encroachment is allowed to continue thereafter, and may collect such compensation and penalties in any manner provided by law for the collection of local or state taxes. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, David H. and Jean H. Klein, the said Grantees have caused this Agreement to be executed by their signatures and seal duly affixed. Further, that the City of Virginia Beach has caused this Agreement to be executed in its name and on its behalf by its City Manager and its seal be hereunto affixed and attested by its City Clerk. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH By City Manager/Authorized Designee of the City Manager (SEA ) ATTEST: City Clerk David H. Klein STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,, 20___, by ., CITY MANAGER/AUTHORIZED DESIGNEE OF THE CITY MANAGER. My Commission Expires: Notary Public STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit: 20 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , by RUTH HODGES SMITH, City Clerk for the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH. Notary Public ~ My Commission Expires: CITY/coUN~'OF .~r'~al~ta.-.~~ to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this o?5~day ,200_5, by David H. Klein. Notary Public My Commission Expires: S--//~////tY ~ STATE OF ~/~'a/~/3. CITY/COUNT'iV'OF ~],4/~,~),,~/~ ,~~to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this o,7,~ay of~ __,200__~, by Jean H. Klein. Notary ~ublic ~-/ My Commission Expires: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFIC~Y CITY ATtORNeY ~ ! Rev 07-24-02 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT CITY REAL ESTATE AGENT OHW ,)APo - ii R 2.,~ A PO ,00~ pLA M I I I II CITY OF VR STATE APPLICATION BY (EMPES LAKE LOCATION MAP ENCROACHMENT 204 FOR AT OAKENGATE TURN SCALE' 1" = 200' OAKENGATE DGN M J S PREPARED BY PA/V ENG CADD DEPT JUNE 4, 2003 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: An Ordinance to Establish CIP Project #4-043, Back Bay Waterway Access Improvements, to Accept and Appropriate a $150,000 Federal Grant to This Project, and to Authorize a Cooperative Agreement for an Access Facility. MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 · Background: The Department of Parks and Recreation has been working w~th the U S F~sh and Wildlife Service (USFWS) at the Back Bay W~ldhfe Refuge to develop a comprehensive scenic waterway access system The V~rg~n~a Beach Outdoor Plan 2000 Update ~denbfied two s~tes for future waterway access fac~hbes located at USFWS properbes at Horne Point and Lovitts Landing. USFWS has recently received Federal funding for ~mprovements at the Home Point s~te and has requested the assistance of the C~ty to build the ~mprovements through a cooperabve agreement · Considerations: The ~mprovements include a small access drive and parking lot for the Horne Point s~te (see attached plans) USFWS has agreed to provide $150,000 for the ~n~bal phase of ~mprovements The C~ty would agree to prowde design services as well as contractual services to build the ~mprovements The Summary of Terms attached hereto sets forth the basic terms of the cooperabve agreement C~ty staff has determined that the construcbon of the access ~mprovements at Horne Point w~ll advance the C~ty's goal of developing a comprehensive scenic waterway access system at Back Bay and w~ll greatly benefit the ecosystem and the local community · Public Information: Pubhc Informabon w~ll be handled through the normal agenda process · Alternatives: 1 City Provide Des~.qn and Construction Services for USFWS The C~ty would prowde staff t~me and some ~n k~nd services, however, there ~s no cash contribution cost to the C~ty Th~s partnership w~ll prowde ~mprovements for the Citizens of V~rg~n~a Beach and assist the USFVVS ~n ~mprov~ng Federal fac~hbes 2 USFWS Provide Design & Construction Services: USFWS could contract for services to build the improvements at the Home Point Site. However, the design and construcbon coord~nabon effort for USFWS is coordinated through the regional office in Hadley, Massachusetts Th~s process ~s generally very brae consuming and not responsive to local design and s~te ~ssues In addibon, the t~me constraints may cause the Federal Funding allocabon to be lost to USFWS · Recommendations: Adopt Alternative 1 Establish a $150,000 project in the Parks and Recreabon Improvement Program for U. S. Fish and W~ldlife Services Projects Authonze the C~ty Manager to execute the Cooperabve Agreement with USFWS Attachments: Ordinance Summary of Terms Draft CIP Project Detail Sheet Plan for Improvements at Horne Point Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Parks and Recreation City Manage~ ~-~. ~ t ~13'~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH CIP PROJECT #4-043, BACK BAY WATERWAY ACCESS IMPROVEMENT, TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE A $150,000 FEDERAL GRANT TO THIS PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZE A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR AN ACCESS FACILITY WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach ("City") received a 11 $150,000 federal grant from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service 12 to design and construct a waterway access facility in the Back 13 Bay Wildlife Refuge; and 14 WHEREAS, the Virginia Beach Outdoors Plan 2000 Update 15 identified two properties owned by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife 16 Service, including Horne Point, as potential sites for waterway 17 access. 18 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 19 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA' 20 1. That CIP Project #4-043, Back Bay Waterway Access 21 Improvements, is hereby established. 22 2. That a $150,000 grant is hereby accepted from the U.S. 23 Fish and Wildlife Service and appropriated to CIP Project #4- 24 043, Back Bay Waterway Access Improvements, with estimated 25 federal revenue increased accordingly. 26 3. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute 27 a Cooperative Agreement between the U. S. Fish and Wildlife 28 Service and the City for access improvements at Horne Point. 29 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 30 Virginia on the day of , 2003. 31 32 CA8963 33 Data/aty/ordin/noncode/usfws ORD.doc 34 R-3 35 July 24, 2003 36 37 38 Approved as to Content 39 42 Department of t 43 Services Approved as to Legal Sufficiency Department of ~L~w SUMMARY OF TERMS COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AND THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A WATERWAY ACCESS FACILITY AT HORNE POINT IN BACK BAY PROJECT LOCATION: PROJECT FUNDING: Home Point in the Back Bay Wildlife Refuge $150,000 federal grant to be provided to the City by the USFWS TERM: Five years, but may be extended by mutual consent. The Agreement may also be terminated by either party with 30 days prior written notice. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CITY: Provide and coordinate construction activities, engineering and contract services, and provide in-kind services to be determined on a project-by- project basis. RESPONSIBILITIES OF USFWS: Provide funding for the Project and monitor construction activities to insure consistency with site plans. SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS: If ProJect costs exceed the $150,000 grant, the Agreement will be contingent upon Congress making an appropriation for such additional expenditures. If the City is requested to provide funds to cover such excess costs, the Agreement is conditioned upon City Council appropriating such funds. In the event either appropriation is not made by either party, the part~es release each other from all liability for failure to perform due to failure to make such appropriation. City of Virginia Beach, Virginia Draft Project Project # and Title: 4-043 Back Bay Waterway Access Improvements Responsible Dept.: Undefined I Business Area: Undefined Total Total Budget Upa_a_~ro.D iated Subseouent Years Future Programmed Appropriations Year I Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Funding Funds To Date FY 2003-04 FY 2004-05 FY 2005-06 FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 FY 2008-09 Requirement i 0 150,000i 0 0 0 0 0 0 Th~s project ~s to provide the procurement of design and construcbon serwces for the development or renovation of fac~hbes located on properbes owned by the U S F~sh and W~ldhfe Services (USFWS) primarily related to the Back Bay W~ldhfe Refuge The project ~s supported by Federal Funding and managed through a Cooperative Agreement between USFWS and the C~ty of V~rg~n~a Beach The first phase of ~mprovements to be built by th~s project ~s waterway access ~mprovements (parking and access road) at Horne Point, property owned by USFWS in V~rg~ma Beach The U S F~sh and WiIdhfe Serwce has an extensive amount of properties m the City of V~rg~n~a Beach which prowde w~ldhfe habitats, natural area preservabon, and recreabonal amembes The USFWS and the C~ty have partnered to prowde ~mprovements which have considerable benehts to residents and ws~tors to V~rg~nla Beach This project prowdes the funding source for the improvements which are built by the C~ty of V~rgmla Beach w~th the support of Federal funding Th~s project was new ~n August 2003 Basis for Estimate FY 2003-04 FY 2004-05 FY 2005-06 FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 FY 2008-09 o 0 o 0 o 0 Activity From - To Amount I=undin¢~ Source Amount Construction 09/03-06/04 1.~i3;~3(~f} Total Programmed Financing 0 Total Budgetary Cost Estimate 150,000 Future Fund;ng Requ;rements 150,000 Total Non-Programmed Costs 0 Total Programmed Costs 150,000 F~scal Year 2003-04 Parks and Recreation CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: MEETING DATE: Ordinances Pertaining to the Compensation of the City Manager, City Attorney, City clerk and City Real Estate Assessor August 12, 2003 · Background: Pursuant to § 2-89 of the City Code, the direct appointees of City Council (£e., the City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk, and City Real Estate Assessor) "shall have their salaries and benefits determined annually by action of city council." Section 2- 89 further provides that "[t]he effective date of such salaries and benefits shall be determined by the council." Considerations: The attached four (4) ordinances increase the salaries and certain benefits of the City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk, and City Real Estate Assessor, with the salary increases taking effect on their respective anniversary dates. · Attachments: Ordinances (4) pertaining to the compensation of the City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk, and City Real Estate Assessor. Recommended Action: Submitting Department/Agency: City Manager: F XDataXATY~Ord]nhNONCODE\compensat~onarf wpd 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 AN ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO THE COMPENSATION OF THE CITY MANAGER WHEREAS, City Council has evaluated the performance of the City Manager; and WHEREAS, based upon this evaluation, City Council has determined that an increase in the City Manager's compensation would be appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That effective December 1, 2003, the salary of the City Manager is hereby increased from $173,052.00 annually to $179,368 annually; that, effective July 1, 2003, the City's contribution to the City Manager's deferred compensation plan is hereby increased from $11,000 annually to $14,000 annually; that the caz allowance of the City Manager remains $10,000 annually; and further, that effective September 1, 2003, the City will pay up to $2,684 on behalf of the City Manager in premiums for lonq term care insurance. Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the day of , 2003. 22 23 24 25 CA-8977 ORDIN\NONCODE\salarymanager.wpd August 8, 2003 RI AN ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO THE COMPENSATION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 WHEREAS, City Council has evaluated the performance of the City Attorney; and WHEREAS, based upon this evaluation, City Counci'l has determined that an increase in the City Attorney's compensation would be appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That effective November 1, 2003, the salary of the City Attorney is hereby increased from $156,828 annually to $169,368 annually; that, effective July 1, 2003, the City's contribution to the City Attorney's deferred compensation plan is hereby increased from $11,000 annually to $14,000 annually; and further, that the car allowance of the City Attorney remains $6,000 annually. 17 18 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the day of , 2003. CA-8976 ORDIN\NONCODE\salaryattorney.wpd August 8, 2003 R1 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 AN ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO THE COMPENSATION OF THE CITY REAL ESTATE ASSESSOR WHEREAS, City Council has evaluated the performance of the City Real Estate Assessor; and WHEREAS, based upon this evaluation, City Council has determined that an increase in the City Real Estate Assessor's compensation would be appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That effective March 1, 2004, the salary of the City Real Estate Assessor is hereby increased from $91,285 annually to $97,315 annually. Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the day of , 2003. CA-8978 ORDIN\NONCODE\salaryas sessor, wpd R-1 August 8, 2003 R1 AN ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO THE COMPENSATION OF THE CITY CLERK 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 WHEREAS, City Council has evaluated the performance of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, based upon this evaluation, City Council has determined that an increase in the City Clerk's compensation would be appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That effective November 16, 2003, the salary of the City Clerk is hereby increased from $75,710 annually to $80,710 annually, and the City Clerk's car allowance remains $4,200 annually. Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the day of , 2003. 17 18 19 20 CA-8979 ORDIN\NONCODE\salaryclerk.wpd August 8, 2003 RI CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Appropriation Request for the MHIMR/SA Department MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 · Background: The Mental Health Department has received the following revenues that have not yet been appropriated: o $91,406 in federal grant funds through the State Department of Criminal Justice Services for a Young Juvenile Offender Initiative Grant that includes funding for an additional FTE; o $4,400 in one-time federal Substance Abuse Residential grant funds; o $156,497 additional federal funds for early intervention services; o $5,000 in one-time State general funds; o $79,095 additional State funds for Mental Retardation services; and o $4,750 in donated gift funds. · Considerations: The above-mentioned federal, State and gift funds are not included in the Department's FY 2003-04 Operating Budget and thus have not yet been appropriated. No additional City funds are required. · Public Information: Uses of the additional revenue have been discussed at public meetings and approved by the Community Services Board at its regular meeting on July 31, 2003. All other public information will be handled through the normal Council agenda process. · Alternatives: These additional funds w~ll allow the Department to meet pressing service needs. No funding alternatives are available to meet these needs. · Recommendations: It is recommended that City Council approve the following: o Appropriation of $91,406 in federal grant funds, including funding for one additional FTE, to provide in-home services for multi-problem families referred from Juvenile court with children adjudicated by age 14. o Appropriation of $4,400 in one-time federal grant funds to pay for additional placements into Serenity House, the regional residential substance abuse treatment facility. o Appropriation of $131,217 federal grant one-time award and a $25,280 increase in on-going federal funds for early intervention services for infants age 0-3. Appropriation of $5,000 in one-time State general funds to perform aggressive outreach to chemically dependent postpartum women in the Substance Abuse Project Link grant program. Appropriation of $79,095 in State general funds to provide day support services to ten Special Education graduates at the SkillQuest mental retardation program. Appropriation of $4,750 in community donations to mental health and substance abuse services to help mothers with young children to pay security deposits and other expenses. · Attachments: Ordinance. Federal grant award letters. Recommended Action: Submitting Department/Agency: MHIMR/SA City Manage~~ Data/aty/ordin/noncode/Mental Health AppropARF.doc 10 AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE $95,806 IN FEDERAL GRANT FUNDS AND APPROPRIATE $245,342 FROM OTHER FUNDING SOURCES IN THE MH/MR~SAS SPECIAL REVENUE FUND TO THE FY 2003-04 OPERATING BUDGET OF THE MH/MR/SAS DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE INCREASED SERVICES TO CLIE~S WHEREAS, the Virginia Beach Department of Mental Health, Mental RetardaUon, and 11 12 Substance Abuse Services ("MH/M1USAS") has $341,148 in funding available that may be appropriated by the City Council to provide enhanced services to clients 13 14 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 15 1 That $91,406 in federal grant funding is accepted and appropriated to the FY 16 2003-04 Operating Budget of the MH/MR/SAS Department to provide in-home services for 17 families referred from the Juvenile and Domestic Relations court 18 2 That $4,400 in federal grant funding is accepted and appropriated to the FY 2003- 19 04 Operating Budget of the MH/MR/SAS Department for the purchase of substance abuse 20 services 21 3 That $4,750 in donations is hereby accepted and appropriated to the FY 2003-04 22 Operating Budget of the MH/MR/SAS Department to provide increased services to clients 23 24 4 That $240,592 in additional revenue is hereby appropriated to the FY 2003-04 Operating Budget of the MHJMR/SAS Department to provide increased services to clients, with 25 the sources of this appropriation to be as follows 26 (a) $156,497 in additional federal revenue, 27 (b) $84,095 in additional state revenue 28 29 5 That the number of positions an the MI-I/MR/SAS Department is hereby increased 30 by 1 00 for a full-tame climcian position, however, this grant-funded posit~on may be ellmanated 31 after the funding has been expended 32 6 That, in the FY 2003-04 operating budget, estimated revenue is hereby increased 33 as follows 34 (a) federal grant revenue by $95,806, 35 (b) other federal revenue by $156,497, 36 (c) state revenue by $84,095, and 37 (d) revenue from donations by $4,750 38 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the day of 39 2003 , 40 CA8967 41 DataYaty/ordin/noncode/Mental Health Approp ORD doc 42 July 31, 2003 43 R-2 44 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT 48 Management Services APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY City Attorney's ~ ' Terry S. Jenkins, Ph.D., Executive Dizector Virginia Beach Department of MH/MR/SAS 297 Independence Boulevard- Suite 208 Virginia Beach, VA 23462-2891 Dear Dr. Jenkins: Telei~a~e ({04) 756-3921 V,,i, acruD ($oa) ~?t The Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Services is pleased to inform you that an additional $4,400 m Substance Abuse Residential Purchase of Services (SAR.POS) funds is being made available to the Virginia Beach Department of MH/MR/SAS on a one-time basis. These additional funds will not increase the allocation to your board for the next fiscal year. The amount should bc included on Form 5, One-time Grants in the Revised Performance Contract and Report. These funds must be expended by September 30, 2003. These funds will be sent on payment #23. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Janice Jordan at (804) 371- 0742. /ltb Ken Batten Janice E. Jordan Rosanna Roberts Nancy Ford William Russell Sincerely, James S. R¢inhard, M.D. // Leonard G Cooke Director COMMONWEALTH o[ VIRI INIA Department of Cr~minal Justice Services June 26, 2003 805 East Broad Street, Tenth Floor Richmond, Vwgmia 23219 (804) 786-4000 FAX (804) 371-8981 TDD (804) 386-8732 Mr /ames K. Spore City Manager City of Virginia Beach Municipal Center Building 1 Virginia Beach, Virginia 23456 Title: Young Juvenile Offender Initiative Dear Mr. Spore: I am pleased to advise you that grant number 04-A4273JJ03 for the above-referenced grant program has been approved for a total award in the amount of $91,406 in Federal Funds. Enclosed you will fred a Statement of(3rant Award and a Statement of Grant Award Special Conditmns. To indicate your acceptance of the award and conditions, please sign the award acceptance and letum it to Janice Waddy, Grants Administrator, at the Department of Crtminal Justice Services (DCJS) Please review the conditions carefully; as some require action on your part before we will disburse grant funds When we receive documentation showing that you have complied w~th the conditions, you will be eligible to request funds awarded under this grant. A REQUEST FOR FUNDS form is also included with this letter and should be used for this purpose. You may request funds at the same time you submit the documentation of compliance with the grant conditions or at any time thereafter However, we cannot process your request until we have received and approved all required information We appreciate your interest m this grant program and will be happy to assist you in any way we can to assure your project's success. If you have any questions, please call Nancy Bacot at (804) 786-4862. Yours very truly, Leonard G. Cooke Enclosures cc Mr. Wflham R. Butler, Clinical Services Coordinator Ms Patricia A Phillips, Finance Dtrector Nancy Bacot, DCJS Cnmma! Jus~ce Set. ce Board - CommA'tee on Tra~r~ng · Juver~le Just~..e acd Dehr~uencv Preve~on Ad~sory Comm~tee Ad~.~:~y Comm~lee to Court Apl:orated Spec,al Advccate and Ch,idren s Jusbce Act Pm)grams Pnvale Securm/Ser~ces Adv~s0~¥ Board * Cnmlnal Jus~c-~ IrY/ormalK)n Symems Commrtlee CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Resolubon Approving the Issuance of Multi-Famdy Hous,ng Bonds (CP Atlantic, L.P. - Atlantis Apartments ProJect) MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 · Background: · The C~ty of V~rg~n~a Beach Development Authonty has considered the request of CP Atlanbc, L P, a Cal~forma I~m~ted partnership (the "Borrower"), for the ~ssuance of the Authonty's Mulb-Fam~ly Res~denbal Housing Bonds ~n an amount not to exceed $5,500,000 (the "Add~bonal Bonds") and has agreed to assist the Borrower ~n refunding $7,500,000 pnnc~pal amount of ~ts tax- exempt Mulb-Famdy Housing Revenue Bonds (Atlanbs Apartments Project) Senes 2003 (the "Ong~nal Bonds" and, together w~th the Additional Bonds, the "Add~bonal Bonds"), all to assist ~n financing of the Borrower's acqu~s~bon, renovation and equipping of a 208 umt mulb-famdy housing project (all ~mprovements and land being collectwely referred to as the "ProJect") located at 999 Atlanbs Drive, V~rg~ma Beach, V~rgm~a · Considerations: · The matter comes before Council for ~ts approval pursuant to Secbon 15 2-4906 which requires the mun;c~pal;ty on behalf of whmh the bonds of an authonty are ~ssued to e~ther approve or d~sapprove any financing recommended by such authonty w~th~n s;xty (60) days of the date of the authonty's pubhc heanng · Public Information: · The request was duly advertised for a pubhc heanng on June 17, 2003 before the Authonty ~n accordance w~th the requirements of Secbon 15 2-4906 of the State Code · Alternatives: · Not Approve Recommendations: Approval · Attachments: IDP Submission to Councd Nobce of Public Hearing Record of Public Hearing Development Author~ty's Resolubon D~sclosure Statement Author~ty's Statement F~scal Impact Statement Summary Sheet Letter from Department of Economic Development dated June 16, 2003 Resolubon for C~ty of V~rg~n~a Beach Locabon Map APPROVAL ~ Submitting Department/Agency: Deve~~pm'ent Authority Gary L. Fentress~of Counsel City Manager: ~ ~._,~~ F \Data~,TY~Forms\DEVAUTH\BOND\WORK\ca8935 agd RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING BONDS WHEREAS, the C~ty of V~rg~ma Beach Development Authority (the "Authority"), has considered the apphcat~on of CP Atlantic, L P, a Cahforma hm~ted parmersh~p (the "Borrower") for the ~ssuance of the Authonty's mult~famdy housing revenue bonds ~n an amount not to exceed $5,500,000 (the "Additional Bonds") and has agreed to assist the Borrower, by ~ssmng bonds (the "Refunding Bonds" and, together w~th the Additional Bonds, the "Bonds"), ~n refunding $7,500,000 pnnc~pal amount of ~ts tax-exempt Mult~famflv Housing Revenue Bonds (Atlantis Apartments ProJect) Series 2003 (the "Original Bonds"), all to assist ~n the financing of the Borrower's acqms~t~on, renovation and eqmpp~ng of a 208-umt mult~famdy housing project (all ~mprovements and land bmng collectively referred to as the "ProJect") located at 999 Atlantis Drive, V~rg~ma Beach, V~rg~ma, and held a pubhc heanng on June 17, 2003, and WHEREAS, the Authority has requested the C~ty Councd (the "Councd") of V~rgnma Beach, Vlrg~ma (the "C~ty"), to approve the ~ssuance of the Bonds to comply with Section 147(0 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Internal Revenue Code"), Section 15 2-4906 of the Code of Vlrg~ma of 1950, as amended (the "V~rg~ma Code"), and other apphcable laws of the Commonwealth of V~rg~ma (the "Commonwealth"), and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 15 2-4906, Code of V~rg~ma, 1950, as amended, a copy of the Author~ty's resolution approwng the issuance of the Additional Bonds and the refunding of the Original Bonds, subject to terms to be agreed upon, and a ~easonably detailed summary of the comments expressed at the pubhc heanng, ~f any, have been filed xv~th the C~ty Counml of the C~ty of V~rg~ma Beach, V~rg~ma, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 1 The Council of the C~ty of V~rg~ma Beach, V~rg~ma, approves the issuance of the Bonds by the C~ty of V~rg~ma Beach Development Authority, m a pnnc~pal amount not to exceed $13,000,000, all for financing the acqms~t~on, renovation and eqmpp~ng of the Project for the benefit of the Borrower, to the extent reqmred by Section 147(0 of the Internal Revenue Code, Section 15 2-4906 of the V~rg~nxa Code and other apphcable laws of the Commonwealth, to permit the Authority to assist ~n the financing of the ProJect. 2 The approval of the ~ssuance of the Additional Bonds, as reqmred by the Internal Revenue Code and the V~rg~ma Code, does not constitute an endorsement of the Bonds or the credltwortinness of the Borrower, but, pursuant to Chapter 643, V~rg~ma Acts of Assembly of 1964, as amended, the Bonds shall prowde that neither the City nor the Authority shall be obhgated to pay the Bond or the ~nterest thereon or other costs ~nc~dent thereto except from the revenues and moneys pledged therefore, and neither the faith or credit nor the taxing power of the Commonwealth, the C~ty or the Authority shall be pledged thereto 3 In approwng the Resolution, the C~ty of V~rglma Beach, ~nclud~ng ~ts elected representatives, officers, employees and agents, shall not be hable and hereby &sclmms all habfl~ty for any damages to any person, d~rect or consequentml, resulting from (1)the Authonty's failure to issue bonds for the Project for any reason, ~nclud~ng but not hrmted to any decm~on by the Authority ~n ~ts sole discretion to allocate ~ts allowable private activity bond hm~t to one or more other projects, or (2)the Authonty's failure for any reason after the ~ssuance of the Addmonal Bonds for the ProJect to allocate any further port~on of ~ts allowable private act~wty bond hm~t to the Project ff the l~suance of tax-exempt bonds by the Authority ~s restricted by any State or Federal statute now or hereafter enacted 2 of 3 4 Th~s Resolution shall take effect lmmed~ately upon ~ts adoption Adopted by a majority of a quorum of the Council of the City of V~rg~ma Beach, V~rg~ma, on August 12, 2003 I certify the foregoing to be a true and correct copy of a resolution adopted by the,' C~ty Councd of the C~ty of V~rglma Beach, V~rg~ma, at a regular meeting held on August 12, 2003 Clerk APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY 3 of 3 ATLANTIS APARTMENTS Virginia Beach, Virginia ~? VIRGINIA BEACH ?)e~/elopment/~,t thol 222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 1000 Vlrgmm Beach, VA 23462 (757) 437-6464 FAX (757) 499-9894 Web,rte www vbgov corn June 17, 2003 The Honorable Meyera E. Oberndorf, Mayor Members of City Council Municipal Center Virginia Beach, VA 23456 Re: Atlantis Apartments Project Revenue Bonds Series 2003 Dear Mayor Oberndorf and Members of City Council: We submit the following in connection with project Atlantis Apartments Project located at 999 Atlantis Drive, Virginia Beach, Virginia. (1) Evidence of publication of the notice of hearing IS attached as Exhibit A, and a summary of the statements made at the public hearing is attached as Exhibit B. The City of V~rglnla Beach Development Authority's (the "Authority") resolution recommending Council's approval is attached as Exhibit C. (2) The Disclosure Statement is attached as Exhibit D. (3) The statement of the Authority's reasons for ItS approval as a benefit for the City of V~rglnia Beach and its recommendation that City Council approve the modification of the bonds described above ~s attached as Exhibit E. (4) The Fiscal Impact Statement is attached as Exhibit F. The Honorable Meyera E. Oberndorf, Mayor Members of C~ty Council June 17, 2003 Page 2 (5) Attached as Exhibit G is a summary sheet setting forth the type of issue, and identifying the ProJect and the principals. (6) Attached as Exhibit H is a letter from the appropriate C~ty department commenting on the Project. Very truly yours, RGJ/GLF/rab Enclosures EXHIBIT A THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT NORFOLK, VIRGINIA AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION The Virginian-Pilot EICHNER & NORRIS PLLC 1225 19TH STREET, N W , 7 WASHINGTON DC 20036 REFERENCE' 10228144 10375019 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEA State of Virginia City of Norfolk This day, D. Johnson personally appeared before me and after being duly sworn, made oath that- 1) She is affidavit clerk of The Virginian-Pilot, a newspaper published by Landmark Communications Inc., in the cities of Norfolk, Portsmouth, Chesapeake, Suffolk, and Virginia Beach, Common- wealth of Virginia and in the state of North Carolina 2)That the advertisement hereto annexed has been published in said newspaper on the date stated PUBLISHED ON' 06/02 06/09 TOTAL COST: 515.28 AD SPACE 76 LINE FILED ON: 06/13ZO3 . , ~ !~ant ..... I~J~ 3 .~ !9~7~_ + , Sub~r~bed and s~o~n to b~fc~r~-wae in my city and state on the day and year afore<aye this _h y Not~~~~~~~mmission expires January 31, 2004 NOTICE OF PUBUC HEARING ON PROPOSED MULTIFAMILY HOUSING BOND FINANCING OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , Nobce ;s hereby g~ven that the City of V~rgmm Beach Development :Authonty (the 'JAuthonty") Wdl hold a pubhc heanng on the application 'of CP Atlantic, L P (the "Borrower") the address of wh ch s CP Arian- bc, L P, c/o Atlantis-Mmhaels, LLC, 1 East Stow Road, Madton, NJ :08053 for the Authonty to issue, pursuant to Chapter 643 of the Wr g~ma Acts of Assembly of 1964, as amended (the 'Act"), up to ,$5,500 000 of its tax-exempt and/or taxable mulbfam~ly housmi[ rev enue bonds and to reissue ~ts Mult~fam y Housing Revenue Bonds i(Atlant~s Apartments ProJect) Seres 2003 in the aggregate pnnclpal iamount of $7,500,000 (collectively, the "Bonds") to assist the Bor !rower ~n the acqu~s t on, rehabilitation and equ ppmg of a 20~-umt mul !bfamlly housing project located at 999 Atlantis Drive m V ri[ n a Beach, Wg ma (the ' ProJect } The pubhc heanng, which may be conbnued or adjourned wdl be held at 8 30 a m on June 17 2003, before the ,Authonty, at the Authonty s offide, 222 Central Park Avenue, Wri[m~a ~ Beach, V~rg~ma As reqmred by the Act, the Bonds w~ll not pledi[e the ~cred~t or the taxing power of the City of V~rglma Beach V~r~ma or the i Authonty, but w~ll be payable solely from revenues denved from the Borrower and pledi[es thereof Any person interested ~n the Issuance of the Bonds or tile location or nat.are of the proposed project may appear and be heard A copy of the Borrower's apphcat~on ~s on file and ~s open for inspection at the Autlmnty s office at 222 Central Park Avenue, Wrglnla Beach, V~rglma, during business hours The pubhc heanng ~s being held pur,,uant to the requ rements of Sec hon 147(0 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as amended regard- mg the pubhc approval pre-requmlte to the excus on from ros income for federal income taxation purposes of ~nterest on the Bg~nd: and Section 15 2-4906 of the V~rg~ma Code of 1950 as amended Any persen interested in the issuance of the Bonds or the Project may appear and be heard VP June 2 and June 9, 2003 10375019 My Commission Expires January 31, 2004 EXHIBIT A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED MULTIFAMILY HOUSING BOND FINANCING OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Notice is hereby given that the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority (the "Authority") w~ll hold a public hearing on the application of CP Atlantic, L P. (the "Borrower") the address of which ~s CP Atlantic, L P, c/o Atlantis-Michaels, LLC, 1 East Stow Road, Marlton, NJ 08053, for the Authority to issue, pursuant to Chapter 643 of the Virginia Acts of Assembly of 1964, as amended (the "Act"), up to $5,500,000 of its tax-exempt and/or taxable mult~farnlly housing revenue bonds and to reissue ~ts Multlfamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Atlantis Apartments ProJect) Series 2003 in the aggregate principal amount of $7,500,000 (collectively, the "Bonds") to assist the Borrower in the acquisition, rehablhtat~on and equipping of a 208-unit multifamily housing project located at 999 Atlantis Drive m Virginia Beach, V~rgmia (the "ProJect") The pubhc hearing, which may be continued or adjourned, will be held at 8 30 a m on June 17, 2003, before the Authority, at the Authorlty's office, 222 Central Park Avenue, Virginia Beach, Virginia. As required by the Act, the Bonds will not pledge the credit or the taxing power of the City of' Virginia Beach, Virginia, or the Authority, but will be payable solely from revenues derived from the Borrower and pledges thereof. Any person interested in the issuance of the Bonds or the location or nature of thc proposed project may appear and be heard A copy of thc Borrower's application ~s on file and ~s open for inspection at the Authority's office at 222 Central Park Avenue, V~rgm~a Beach, V~rgm~a, during business hours The pubhc hearing is being held pursuant to the requirements of Section 147(0 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended regarding the pubhc approval pre-requisite to the exclusion from gross ~ncome for federal ~ncome taxation purposes of interest on the Bonds and Section 15 2-4906 of the Virginia Code of 1950, as amended Any person interested in the ~ssuance of the Bonds or the ProJect may appear and be heard EXHIBIT B City of Virginia Beach Development Authority Record of Public Hearing on June 17, 2003 (Atlantis Apartments Project) The chairman of the City of Vlrgania Beach Development Authority (the "Authority") announced the commencement of a public hearing on the request of CP Atlantic, L P (the "Borrower"), and that a notice of the hearing was published once a week for two consecutive weeks In the Virginian Pilot, a newspaper having general circulation in the City of VargIma Beach, Virginia Such public hearing was held not less than six days and not more than 21 days after the second notace appeared an such newspaper A copy of the notice and certificate of publication of such notice have been filed with the records of the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach The following individuals appeared and addressed the Authority at such public hearing Matthew J Blssonette, an attorney with Elchner & Norris PLLC appeared on behalf of the Borrower Mr Blssonette gave a brief description of the proposed financing and explained that the proposed issuance of the bonds (the "Bonds") would be used to assist the Borrower in financing the acquisition and renovation of Atlantis Apartments in the City of Virginia Beach and that the tax exempt portion was necessary to obtain significant low income housing tax credits under Sectaon 42 of the Code This approval is being requested at this tame and as required by the Internal Revenue Code Mr Blssonette further outlined certaan benefits anuring to the City of Varganaa Beach and its cttIzens including the nonrecourse nature of the financing and the amount of the proposed rehabilitation In addition, Mr Blssonette and Authority staff pointed out that the enhancement of Atlantis Apartments will assast the Caty in attracting and retaanang busaness and industry as quality rental housing opportumtaes for low and moderate income persons are an important criterion to businesses when considering whether to relocate or to stay an a particular locality No other persons appeared to address the Authority, and the chairman closed the public hearing The Authority hereby recommends that the City Council of the City of Vlrglma Beach, Vlrglma approve the issuance of the proposed financing and hereby transmits the Fiscal Impact Statement to the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach and asks that this recommendation be received at ItS next regular or special meeting at which this matter can be properly placed on the Council's agenda for hearing EXHIBIT C RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS (ATLANTIS APARTMENTS PROJECT) SERIES 2003 WHEREAS, the C~ty of Vlrglma Beach Development Authority (the "Authority") is a pohhcal subdlws~on of the Commonwealth of V~rg~ma (the "Commonwealth"), duly created pursuant to Chapter 643 of the V~rg~nla Acts of Assembly of 1964, as amended (the "Act"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Act, CP Atlantte, L.P., a Cahfornia limited partnership (the "Borrower"), has requested that the Authority issue ~ts tax-exempt and taxable Mult~famfly Housing Revenue Bonds (Atlantis Apartments) Series 2003 (the "Additional Bonds") to finance, in part, the acqmslhon, rehablhtat~on and eqmpplng of a 208-unit apartment development (the "Project") located on an approximately 14 acre parcel of land located at 999 Atlantis Drive, Virginia Beach, Vlrglma and occupied in part (at least 40%) by persons of low or moderate income in order for the ProJect to quahfy as a "quahfied residential rental project" within the meaning of Sechon 142(d) of the Code (here~naRer defined); and, the Borrower has requested that the Authority Issue the Bonds and make a loan of the proceeds thereof to the Borrower for the purpose of makang funds available to acqmre and rehabilitate the Project; and WHEREAS, on April 7, 2003, the Authority issued $7,500,000 pnnclpal amount of its tax- exempt MultlfamHy Housing Revenue Bonds (Atlantis Apartments Project) Series 2003 (the "Original Bonds" and, together w~th the Additional Bonds, the "Bonds") to finance a port~on of the acqms~t~on, rehablhtatlon and equipping of the Project; and WHEREAS, the Authority has found and determined that (a)there ~s a s~gmficant shortage of affordable, sanitary and safe res~dentlal rental property ~n the C~ty of Vlrg~ma Beach, Virginia (the "City") for individuals and families of low and moderate income and (b) the issuance of the Bonds, the financing of the Project and the acquisition, rehabilitation and equlppmg of the Project by the Borrower will benefit the inhabitants of the City through the promotion of their safety, health, welfare, convenience or prosperity, and will be consistent w~th the general pm-poses of the Authority and the Act; and WHEREAS, the City has not activated a housing authority pursuant to §§ 36-4 and 36-4.1 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended; and WHEREAS, with respect to such proposed plan of financing, the Authority has caused a notice of public hearing to be pubhshed ~n the Vlrglman-Pllot, a newspaper of general mrculatlon in the City of Vlrglma Beach, Vlrglma, and has this date held a pubhc hearing, all ~n accordance wath the provlstons of § 147(f)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and the regulatmns, ruhngs and proclamations promulgated or proposed thereunder (collectively, the "Code"), and § 15 2-4906, Code of Vlrglma, 1950, as amended, and other applicable laws of the Commonwealth NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY' 1. The Authority hereby agrees to assist the Borrower to finance the acqms~tmn. rehabilitation and eqmpplng of the ProJect and, in particular, to undertake the ~ssuance of the Additional Bonds in an amount not to exceed $5,500,000 and the refunding of the Original Bonds upon the terms and conditions to be mutually agreed upon between the Au-thonty and the Borrower, and to loan the proceeds of such Bonds (the "Loan") to the Borrower for the purpose of financing the ProJect The Loan will be made to the Borrower pursuant to a loan agreement or a financing agreement. The Bonds will be ~ssued and secured pursuant to an indenture of trust or similar document whmh will provide for the precise principal amount of the Bonds, the maturity schedule therefor, the interest rate or rates the Bonds will bear and the denomination, form and other terms of the Bonds, and will secure the Bonds by an assignment of all the Authonty's rights to the Loan, together with the proceeds thereof, and the security therefor. The Bonds will be limited obligations of the Authority payable solely from the revenues pledged thereto pursuant to the indenture. 2. It hamng been represented to the Authority by the Borrower that it 1s necessary to proceed immediately with the financing of the ProJect, the Authority hereby agrees that the Borrower may proceed w~th plans for such financing, enter into contracts for such financing of the Project and take such other steps as it deems appropriate in connection therewith, provided that nothing herein shall be deemed to authorize the Borrower to obligate the Authority in any manner whatsoever, including the payment of money or the performance of any acts in connection with the Project. The Authority agrees that the Borrower may be reimbursed from the proceeds made available from the issuance of the Additional Bonds for all costs incurred by it after the effective date of this inducement resolution in connection w~th the financing of the acquisition, rehabilitation and equipping of the Project only to the extent permitted under Section 103 of the Code and the Act 3. The Authority hereby agrees to the Borrower's designation of the firm of Eichner & Norris PLLC, Washington, D C., as Bond Counsel ("Bond Counsel") and hereby appoints such firm to supervise the proceedings and approve the issuance of tine Bonds. 4. All costs and expenses ~n connection wath the financing of the acqms~taon, rehabilitation and eqmpplng of the ProJect, including fees and expenses of Bond Counsel, Counsel to the Authority and the Authority, shall be paid at the direction of the Borrower from the proceeds made available from the ~ssuance of the Bonds or from other funds of the Borrox~rer. If for any reason the Bonds are not issued, it is understood that all such fees and expenses shall be prod by the Borrower and that the Authority shall have no responsiblhty therefor. 5. In adopting this inducement resolution authorizing the issuance of the Bonds, the Authority declares its official intent to issue the Bonds and provide moneys to reimburse the Borrower for its expenditures with respect to the ProJect, as contemplated by Treasury Regulations 1150-2 promulgated pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. 6. The Authority shall perform such other acts and adopt such further proceedings as may be required to implement its undertakings as herein set forth. Prior to the ~ssuance and dehvery of the Bonds, there shall be submitted to the Authority for its approval a Bond Resolution approving (a) the ~ssuance of the Additional Bonds, and (b) such other documents as may be necessary ~n the opinion of Bond Counsel to complete the transaction, provided such documents are acceptable to counsel to the Authority. 7 The Authority hereby recommends that the Caty Council of the City of V~rglma Beach, Virginia approve the issuance of the Bonds and directs the Chmr of the Authority to transmit the Fiscal Impact Statement and a copy of this Resolution to the C~ty Council of the City of Varglnla Beach 8 The proper representative of the Authority ~s hereby authorized and directed to transmit this recommendation to the City Council of the City of V~rgm~a Beach at ~ts next available regular meeting at which an approval resolution can be properly placed on the Council's agenda for considerat~on. 9 The proper representative of the Authority ~s hereby authorized and d~rected to execute and dehver to the V~rg~ma Small Bus~ness F~nanmng Authority an apphcatmn for the allocat~on of volume cap for tax exempt bonds to satisfy the reqmrements of Section 146(0 of the Code. 10. This Resolution shall take effect ~mmed~ately upon ~ts adoption. If the Bonds are not ~ssued within one (1) year of the date of adoption of this Resolution, this Resolution shall be void and of no further effect. 11. The Authority hereby agrees, if requested, to accept the recommendation of the Borrower wath respect to the appointment of an agent or underwriter for the sale of Bonds or a purchaser of the Bonds in a private placement pursuant to terms to be mutually agreed upon. ADOPTED: June ~__~, 2003 [SEAL) Chalr~o' pment 1~ ,~,~',,aXo, ex~x SecYetary Authority The undersigned Secretary of the C~ty of Vlrg~ma Beach Development Authority hereby certifies that the foregoing as a true, correct, and complete copy of a Resolution a49pted by the Authorlty's commissioners present and votang at a meeting duly called and held on June [_'~_,~003, in accordance with law, and that such Resolution has not been repealed, revoked, rescinded, or amended, but as in full force and effect as of the date hereof. WITNESS my hand and the seal of the Authority this \~" day of June, 2003. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By' b b',b~r.x.e,.'k Secretary EXHIBIT D DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Date' July 17, 2003 Apphcant's Name(s) CP ATLANTIC, L. P., a California limited partnership All Owners (~dtfferent from apphcant): Type of Apphcataon: Rezomng. From Conditional Use Permit' Street Closure: to Subdivision Variance: Other' Bond Issue The following as to be completed by or for the Apphcant: 1. If the apphcant as a CORPORATION, hst all the officers of the Corporataon: 2. If the apphcant ~s a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM or other Unincorporated Orgamzataon, hst all members or partners in the organization: Atlantis- Michaels, LLC, General Partner The following ~s completed by or for the Owner Of d~fferent from the apphcanO 1. If the apphcant is a CORPORATION, hst all the officers of the Corporataon: 2. If the apphcant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM or other Umncorporated Orgamzat~on, hst all members or partners ~n the orgamzat~on: CP ATLANTIC, L.P., a California limited partnership By: Atlantis - M~chaels, LLC, ats General Partner By. Machael J. Lewtt, its Sole Member and VIRGINIA BEACH EXHIBIT E V~gm~a Beach Development Author tty 222 Central Park Avenue, State 1000 V~rg~ma Beach, VA 23462 (757) 437-6464 FAX (757) 499-9894 Web~tte www vbgov com CITY OF VIGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY UP TO $5,500,000 MULTIFAMILY MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS (ATLANTIS APARTMENTS) SERIES 2003 The Authority recommends approval of this financing The proceeds of the Bonds to be Issued will be used to assist the Borrower, CP Atlantis, L P, a California hmited partnership, In acquiring and rehabilitating the Atlantis Apartments, a 208-umt apartment building at 999 Atlantis Drive ~n Virginia Beach The use of $2,500,000 of tax exempt bonds, along with previously issued tax-exempt bonds to be refunded, (the remainder will be federally taxable) will allow the Borrower to obtain substantial equity through the sale of low income housing tax credits under Section 42 of the Code The benefits of mmntenance of affordable housing in the City of VirgIma Beach along with the capital Investment, construction payroll, and creation and retainage of jobs, constitutes the bas~s for this recommendation The financing will enhance a slgmficant rental housing asset w~th~n the City where low and moderate income employees can hve and assist the City ~n attracting and retaining business and industry Exhibit F FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT DATE. TO PROJECT NAME. TYPE OF FACILITY: July 23, 2003 THE CITY COUNCIL OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA ATLANTIS APARTMENTS 208 Units of affordable multlfarmly housing . o o . o $9,360,000 ($45,000 umt) 1. Maximum amount of financing sought $13,000,000 Estimated taxable value of the facility's real property to be constructed ~n the municipality (post renovation) Estimated real property tax per year using present tax rates Estimated personal property tax per year using present tax rates Estimated merchant's capital (business license) tax per year using present tax rates Estimated dollar value per year of goods and services that will be purchased locally Estimated number of regular employees on year round basis (full timers) Average annual salary per employee (full timers) $104,000 $555 $345 $310,470 10 8 $20,600 The information contained in this Statement 1s based solely on facts and estimates provided by the Apphcant, and the Authority has made no independent investigation with respect thereto CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By. ~2(halrr - ~...J EXHIBIT G SUMMARY SHEET CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS PROJECT NAME ATLANTIS APARTMENTS 999 ATLANTIS DRIVE LOCATION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 208 units of affordable multlfamlly housing AMOUNT OF BOND ISSUE PRINCIPALS $13,000,000 Michaels Development, Michael J Levitt ZONING CLASSIFICATION' a Present zoning classlficat~on of the Property b Is rezomng proposed? c If so, to what zoning classification9 A-18 (Apartment District) Yes No X NOTE THIS DOCUMENT MUST BE ON 8-1/2 X 14 INCH PLAIN BOND PAPER City of Virginia EXHIBIT H Beach DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION (757) 426-5750 FAX (757) 426-5766 TDD (757) 426-5794 CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (757) 427-4421 June 16, 2003 MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING 18A 2424 COURTHOUSE DRIVE VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23456-9083 Chairman, Virginia Beach, Development Authority One Columbus Center, Suite 300 Virginia Beach, VA 23462 FAX# 499-9894 Gary Fentress, Esq. Office of the City Attorney Mumclpal Center FAX# 563-1167 Evaluation of Public Benefit Atlantis Apartments Project Multi-Family Rental Housing Bond Application 206 units low income housing VBDA Agenda June 16, 2003 I have reviewed the information provided regarding the above referenced project. In my opinion a public benefit is achieved by the rehabilitation of these housing units by providing decent, safe and affordable housing for low income households. We have been advised by the applicant that 40% of the units will be occupied by persons having an income of 60% of area median income or less The rent for these units will be restricted to no more than 30% of 60% of area median income as adjusted for family s~ze, thus meeting the definition for housing affordabhty. This project is in conformity with the City of Virginia Beach's Consolidate Plan and Strategy. Please let me know if you need anything further regarding this issue. Thank you Sincerely, Housing Program Administrator CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: MEETING DATE' A Resolution Assigning Administrative Responsibility for Freedom of Information Act Requests to the City Attorney' Office August 12, 2003 Background' Currently, the Department of Management Services has administrative responsibility for the coordination of the City's responses to requests for documents pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act. Considerations: The proposed resolution would reassign that responsibility to the City Attorney's Office. Public Information: Public Information will be handled through the normal Council agenda process. · Attachments: Resolution Recommended Action' N/A Submitting Department/Agency: City Manager: City Council F XDataXATY~OrdlnhNONCODEWolaarf wpd A RESOLUTION ASSIGNING ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUESTS TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 10 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA 11 BEACH, VIRGINIA: 12 That the City Attorney'S Office shall be responsible for 13 the coordination and administration of the City's responses to 14 requests for documents pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act. 15 16 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 17 Virgmnia, on the day of , 2003. 18 19 CA-8975 20 ORDIN\NONCODE\ foiares, wpd 21 R-1 22 August 7, 2003 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: City At t otn~y~~t t i ce'~ }INIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM CITY OF VlR( ITEM: City of Virginia Beach, Amendment to the City Zoning Ordinance (Bed and Breakfast Inns) MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 Background: An Ordinance to amend the City Zoning Ordinance allowing bed and breakfast inns as a cond~bonal use in certain Apartment, Business, and Resort Tourist D~stncts and to further amend the specific cond~bons for bed and breakfast inns. Bed and Breakfast Inns are currently only allowed ~n H~stoncal and Cultural Districts. Th~s amendment w~ll increase the zoning d~stricts where they are allowed and also ~ncrease the requirements that will be applicable to them. Considerations: One of the means of preserving and enhancing the character of neighborhoods, particularly older neighborhoods, the Oceanfront Resort Area, the Shore Drive Corndor, and older communities in the city ~s by promobng adapbve reuse of the older homes and buildings where existing uses contained ~n the buildings may not be able to maintain them One potential adapbve reuse of such buildings, where appropriate and where the market and amen~bes ex~st to support ~t, ~s as a bed and breakfast inn Bed and breakfast inns (B&Bs) offer adaptive reuse of older res~denbal homes ~n neighborhoods that are in transition from residential to other types of uses w~thout destroying the residential character or allowing a prol~ferabon of strictly commercial uses These inns are, more often than not, relatively small in size. They typically have from 6 to usually no more than 15 guest rooms and are unlikely to have on-s~te restaurants and bar operations In add~bon, B&Bs usually cater to the h~gher end of the traveling market The greater majority of B&Bs fall ~nto an "upscale" lodging category, usually matching the h~gher rates of the most expensive lodging ~n the area They are not a cheaper alternative and must offer a h~gher standard of personalized service, facd~bes, and amen~bes to jusbfy their h~gher rates (nabonal study by Yowno-Young, 1990) Another charactensbc ~s the architectural d~sbncbon and h~stoncal context of some B&Bs. The most common B&B is a converted residence of the V~ctorian era (1850-1900), s~nce such homes are large, though homes from the Colonial era and the early-20th Century are also good candidates. Amendment to the C~ty Zoning Ordinance Page 2 of 2 Staff recommended approval. There was opposition to the request as presented to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission rewsed the amendment ~n response to the concerns presented at the hearing. Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a mobon by a recorded vote of 9-0 to approve th~s amendment. Attachments: Staff Review Ordinance Planning Commission Minutes Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval Planning Commission recommends approval Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department~~[~?~ City Manager: <~~ ~.., ~ ~t~q. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH / # 18 July 9, 2003 Background: One of the means of preserving and enhancing the character of neighborhoods, particularly older neighborhoods, the Oceanfront Resort Area, the Shore Drive Corridor, and older commun~bes ~n the city ~s by promoting adaptive reuse of the older homes and buildings where ex~sbng uses contained ~n the buildings may not be able to maintain them. One potenbal adapbve reuse of such buildings, where appropriate and where the market and amen~bes ex~st to support ~t, ~s as a bed and breakfast ~nn. Bed and breakfast ~nns (B&Bs) offer adaptive reuse of older residential homes in neighborhoods that are ~n trans~bon from res~denbal to other types of uses w~thout destroying the residenbal character or allowing a prohferation of strictly commercial uses, These inns are, more often than not, relatively small ~n size. They typically have from 6 to usually no more than 15 guest rooms and are unlikely to have on-s~te restaurants and bar operabons. In addition, B&Bs usually cater to the h~gher end of the traveling market. The greater majority of B&Bs fall into an "upscale" lodging category, usually matching the h~gher rates of the most expensive lodging in the area They are not a cheaper alternabve and must offer a h~gher standard of personahzed service, fac~l~bes, and amenities to justify their h~gher rates (nabonal study by Yowno-Young, 1990). Another characteristic is the architectural d~stincbon and historical context of some B&Bs. The most common B&B is a converted residence of the V~ctor~an era (1850-1900), since th such homes are large, though homes from the Colonial era and the early-20 Century are also good candidates Proposed Amendments: An Ordinance to amend the C~ty Zoning Ordinance allowing bed and breakfast ~nns as a conditional use ~n certain Apartment, Bus~ness, and Resort Tourist Districts and to further amend the specific cond~bons for bed and breakfast ~nns Bed and Breakfast Inns are currently only allowed ~n H~storical and Cultural Districts. Th~s amendment w~ll ~ncrease the zoning d~str~cts where they are allowed and also ~ncrease the requirements that w~ll be applicable to them Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH I # 18 Page 1 Bed and Breakfast Inns will be allowed as conditional uses ~n the RT-3, B-4, A-12, A-18, A-24 and A-36 Zoning Districts, w~th the following addibonal requirements: 1. A primary residential structure, not an accessory structure, shall be used, 2. The home must be 50 years old or of h~storical s~gn~flcance; 3 The maximum length of stay is 14 consecutive days w~th~n a 30 day period; 4. There can be no receptions or similar funcbons for compensation; and 5 There must be a minimum of one bathroom per floor. Agricultural D~stricts currently have a s~m~lar use, categorized as Country Inns, already allowed with a Cond~bonal Use Permit; thus, the Agricultural D~stncts were not included as part of this amendment Evaluation: Staff recommends approval of the amendment The amendment provides for adapbve reuse opportunities for certain residential structures in such a way as to contribute to the conbnued stabdity and growth of overall neighborhood character The amendment also allows for an alternabve type of lodging that will help to ~ncrease the overall base of attracbons that the City of V~rgin~a Beach can offer ws~tors. Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH I # 18 Page 2 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW BED AND BREAKFAST INNS AS CONDITIONAL USES IN CERTAIN APARTMENT, BUSINESS AND RESORT TOURIST DISTRICTS AND SPECIFIC CONDITIONS FOR BED AND BREAKFAST INNS SECTIONS AMENDED- CZO §~ 111, 225.1, 601, 901 AND 1521 WHEREAS, the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice so require; BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That Sections 111, 225.1, 601, 901 and 1521 of the City Zoning Ordinance are hereby amended and reordained, to read as follows' Sec. 111. Definitions. For the purpose of this ordinance, words used in the present tense shall include the future; words used in the singular number include the plural and the plural the singular; the use of any gender shall be applicable to all genders; the word "shall" is mandatory; the word "may" is permissive; the word "land" includes only the area described as being above mean sea level; and the word "person" includes an individual, a partnership, association, or corporation. In addition, the following terms shall be defined as herein indicated- ' 1 Bed and breakfast inn. A bui~uing Cultural District A primary residential structure of historical 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 significance in which not more than ten (10) rooms are provided for lodging transients, for compensation, on daily or weekly terms, with or without board breakfast. Sec. 225.1. Bed and breakfast inns. In addition to general requirements, bed and breakfast inns shall be subject to the following requirements, which shall be deemed to be conditions of the conditional use permit- (1) No more than ten (10) lodging units may be provided, and no such units shall have direct ingress or egress to the outside of the building. Living quarters for the owner or manager of the inn nra7 shall be provided in addition to lodging units. The operator, or his designated representative who is responsible for the premises, shall be available on the premises while it is open for use. Such owner or manaqer shall be on site and available on 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 a 24-hour basis. (2) Antiques may be sold at retail as an accessory use if expressly permitted by the conditional use permit, provided, that such sales are conducted from within the same building in which the lodging units are located and that no more than twenty (20) per cent of the total floor area of the building shall be used in the conduct of such sales. 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 (3) Food and beverages mzmI will be served ~ if expressly permitted by the conditional use permit, and in no event shall seating capacity exceed twenty-five (25) persons, including lodging guests. Breakfast will be served to guests. (4) Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this ordinance, signage shall be limited to one identification sign not exceeding nine (9) square feet per face~, and may be -- -- , , ~__ , , ~:--~ ....... ly upon f~ndzng ~y the hzstorzc and cultural review board that the proposed signage is appropriate to the character and appearance of the (5) At least one (1) vehicular parking space per lodging unit shall be provided on the site. Additional parking capacity may be required by the city council if food service serving capacity exceeds the number of lodging units. Parkinq shall not be allowed in the front of the primary residential structure. (6) The following plans shall be submitted with the application for conditional use permit- a. A floor plan delineating, at a minimum, the total floor area of the building, the number and dimensions of lodging units, the location and dimensions of areas to be used for food service and 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 antique sales, if applicable, and the location of all entrances and exits; and b. A plan delineating the location, dimensions, colors, materials and illumination of proposed signage. (7) The bed and breakfast inn shall be operated in a primary residential structure and not in any accessory structure. The structure to be used shall be historically, architecturally or culturally significant because (1) it is associated with events that have made a contribution 87 88 89 9O 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 to the broad patterns of our history or (2) is associated with the lives of persons or groups important to our past, or (3) embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, desiqn or method of construction, represents the work of a recognized master, or possess hiqh artistic values. (8) Maximum lenqth of stay for a transient paying quest shall be fourteen (14) consecutive days in any thirty (30) day period of time. (9) Receptions and other such functions, for compensation, shall not be permitted. (10) A minimum of one (1) bathroom, to include a bathtub or shower, shall be provided on each floor of the structure to be occupied by guests; however, city council may 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 require additional bathrooms as a condition of approval of the use permit. Sec. 601. Use regulations. [Apartment Districts] (a) Principal and conditional uses. The following chart lists those uses permitted within the A-12 through A-36 Apartment Districts. Those uses and structures in the respective apartment districts shall be permitted as either principal uses indicated by a "P" or as conditional uses indicated by a "C." Uses and structures indicated by an "X" shall be prohibited in the respective districts. No uses or structures other than as specified shall be permitted. Use A-12 A-18 A-24 A-36 Bed and breakfast inns ~ ~ ~ ~ Sec. 901. Use regulations. [Business Districts] (a) Principal and conditional uses. The following chart lists those uses permitted within the B-1 through B-4 Business Districts. Those uses and structures in the respective business districts shall be permitted as either principal uses indicated by a "P" or as conditional uses indicated by a "C." Uses and structures indicated by an "X" shall be prohibited in the respective districts. No uses or structures other than as specified shall be permitted. 125 Use B-1 B-IA B-2 B-3 B-3A B-4 126 127 Bed and breakfast 128 inns 129 130 Sec. 1521. Use regulations. [RT-3 Resort Tourist District] 131 132 (c) Conditional uses and structures' Uses and structures 133 134 135 136 137 hereinafter specified, subject to compliance with the provisions of part C of article 2 hereof; and provided, that except as set forth in subdivision (5.5), drive-through facilities shall not be permitted as a conditional or accessory use in any portion of the district east of Arctic Avenue, south of Winston-Salem Avenue and 138 4th Street, or north of 35th Street' 139 140 (2.5) Bed and breakfast inns 141 142 COMMENT 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 Bed and Breakfast Inns are currently only allowed in Historical and Cultural Districts. This amendment will increase the zoning districts where they are allowed and also increase the conditions that will be applicable to them. Bed and Breakfast Inns will be allowed as conditional uses in the RT-3, B-4, A-12, A-18, A-24 and A-36 Zoning Districts, with the following additional requirements: . 2. 3. 4. 5. Primary residential structure, not accessary structure, shall be used; Of historical significance; Maximum length of stay is 14 days in 30 days; No receptions or similar functions for compensation; and Minimum of one bathroom per floor. 153 154 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this day of , 2003. CA-8907 DATA/ORDIN/PROPOSED/czo0225.1 (B&B) ord. wpd R6 - July 29, 2003 APPROVED AS TO CONTENTS: 4-1-~ Pl~nn~ng~partment APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUEFI~IEN,CY~~/~/~/,:,~, ~~_,/ Department of Law Item # 18 City of Virginia Beach/Ordinance Amendment An Ordinance to amend the City Zoning Ordinance allowing bed and breakfast inns as a Conditional Use in certain Apartment, Business, and Resort Tourist Districts and to further amend the specific conditions for bed and breakfast ~nns July 9, 2003 REGULAR Robert Miller: The next item is Item # 18, The City of Virginia Beach Ordinance Amendment. We only have one speaker in opposition? Ronald Ripley: On the amendment? Stephen, do you all want to present the amendment? Stephen White: Yes sir, I'll be glad too This amendment that we're bringing to you today Is in response to individuals who have come to us with proposals for bed and breakfast inns, particularly ~n the Oceanfront area and some of our older homes. There are two other things at work here As our neighborhoods decline we're looking for opportunities for adaptive reuse of some of these homes, some of these buildings and also for our visitors to the City we're looking for an alternative means of stay beyond a hotel room. Say something a little more upscale but cozier, and bed & breakfast inns fit that mode. So what we got for you today is an amendment that would allow bed and breakfast inns as a Conditional Use Permit ~n certain Apartment, Bus~ness and Resort Tourist D~stricts. Currently bed and breakfast inns are allowed as Conditional Uses in historic and cultural districts, and this would expand the scope of those somewhat. There is a similar type of use allowed ~n Agricultural D~strlcts. They're called Country Inns. So, that's why the Agricultural Districts are not included in this amendment The amendment, as I noted would make th~s a Conditional Use Permit, and it has certmn criteria under the Conditional Permit Use section that we're proposing to you. And, among those we had in there is that it would have to be a primary residential structure. The age of the structure would have to be 50 years old or be of historical significance. But, I think after our discussion th~s morning there was an agreement that we would strike the part dealing with 50 years old and just keep historical s~gmficance The maximum length of stay in any of those rooms would be 14 consecutive days in a 30-day period. There would be no reception or similar functions for which the owner was compensated. And there must be a minimum of one bathroom per floor. Those are some of the major criteria that we would use in evaluation of a proposal for a bed and breakfast. As I noted this morning we talked about striking the part dealing w~th 50 years of age and if it's you're pleasure to do that on Line 79-80, when you make the motion you need to strike the part that says starting on L~ne 79, "at least 50 years old or is", so then it would read as "structure to be used shall be historically, architecturally, or culturally significant, etc, etc." And, with that ~f you have any questions, we'll be glad to answer them but we're recommending approval of this amendment Item # 18 City of Virginia Beach/Ordinance Amendment Page 2 Kay Wilson: You also need to strike lines 28 & 29, in the definition of bed and breakfast inn at least 50 years old on line 28 & 29 Stephen White: Thank you Ronald Rlpley' Okay. Is there any discussion by the Commission? Robert Miller: We have a speaker Ronald Rlpley: I'm sorry We do have a speaker that wishes to address us Robert Miller: We have a speaker in opposition. Stephen LaFond. Stephen LaFond: Good afternoon Mr. Chairman. Commission members I'm Stephen LaFond. I'm at 400 16th Street. I'm a proud owner of the Barkley Cottage. I purchased it from Peter Captainese on May 15th. I was a bit surprised to see the change in the zoning regulation. After reading it I supported almost 100 percent, but I'm before you today not because I oppose having more bed and breakfast, which would be maybe a natural thing to protect my business interest, but I think there's plenty of business in Virginia Beach for multiple bed and breakfast. What I'm concerned with those is the way the ordinance is drafted. In a bed and breakfast as I understand it and the research that I did before we purchased the Barkley Cottage, a bed and breakfast is a place where you get a bed and a breakfast One of the things that I find missing from your ordinance is the requirement that will provide breakfast to the people that are staying there Not only that, but I think you should also make sure that either the owner or the manager must live on the premises or have someone there 24 hours because that's the nature of a bed and breakfast You're on duty 24-7 You must be there when the toilets back up You must be there when somebody needs to find out what is open at two o'clock in the morning so they can go get a snack or a drink or whatever. I think you must require them to serve a breakfast for the people who are staying there. With respect to any additional dining facilities whether it's lunch or brunch, or whatever, that it'll be open to the outside and non-residents or non- renters of the rooms. I don't think that fits into a bed and breakfast. I think you need a separate classification that you might call an inn much like a Holiday Inn perhaps or a Fairfield Inn, or whatever, and that is when you can allow meals around the clock. Bed and breakfast is just what it says, bed and breakfast. The historic significance and I'm glad to hear that you taken out that 50-year number I thought that was a little strange because 50 years from now we'll be having bed and breakfast in homes that were built today, and that doesn't make too much sense to me. I think if you had put in a year like 1920, prior to 1930 or something like that, and then made it for historic architectural or cultural significance, then I think you got yourself a pretty decent product. Also, I'm concern that right now your definition in lines 28, 29 & 30 as pointed out by Counsel, does not coincide with all the information in Subsection 7 of Section 225 1. I think you should in your definition put something to the fact that it's architecturally, culturally, and historically significant. Those were my objections, but otherwise it's a good deal Ronald Ripley: Thank you Are there any questions? We have somebody that is raising his hand. Item # 18 City of Virginia Beach/Ordinance Amendment Page 3 Robert Miller: Nobody else signed up Ronald Ripley: You're not signed up but come up. Anthony Offredl: I'm sorry I'm Anthony Offredl. I signed up for Item #19 but I understand Item # 18 affects me Ronald Ripley: State your name. Anthony Offredi' Anthony Offredi: 2416 Artic Avenue. I just have a couple of questions on the variance change. On number 18, who dictates what is culturally, architecturally and historically significant9 Ronald Rlpley: The answer to that would be recommended by staff, and then the Planning Commission will consider it, and the Council will consider it Anthony Offredl: So it will be a house by house. Ronald Ripley: Yes Anthony Offredi It will be house by house. So, if I build a house that is architecturally significant, if I require an architect that something fabulous, and I make a bed and breakfast out of it, and I get it approved, therefore I can have a bed and breakfast that is architecturally significant to the area? Ronald Ripley: I think it's going to be other tests in there that you're going to need to meet. Anthony Offredi: I understand that I'm just trying to, and since I've moved down to the area, I'm one of the very few owners that have a single home on a plot of land that's eighth well, and the population density has actually increased since I've been down there. I don't have a problem with because most of them are very nice town homes that have gone up in the area. The only thing that I do have an issue with is the density. It's increasingly getting crowded down there for single homeowners like myself And, that's why I'm trying to figure out if we're going to have a rash of these culturally significant clones come up, I'm going to have to be here all the time This doesn't include just the beach borough area. Old Beach and the north end are going to have a rash of these come up, and the density is going to increase tremendously Ronald Ripley: That may occur but so far it hasn't. Staff, have you been deluged with a lot of bed and breakfast requests? Stephen White: No sir Ronald Ripley: This is sort of one of the first ones Item #18 City of Virginia Beach/Ordinance Amendment Page 4 Anthony Offredi: Yeah. I can understand that because it's just starting to come up, but my main concern is the re-trafficking of the cul-de-sacs. If we start including the 400 block, 500 block, 600 block of the Old Beach area then we're going to run into a density issue as well as a traffic issue. That's my viewpoint on this. Ronald Ripley: Good point. Anthony Offredl: Thank you. Ronald Rlpley: Okay. Are there any questions? Thank you. Okay. Is there anybody else Mr. Miller? Robert Miller: Mr. White needs to answers the statements with regards to breakfast and the 24-7, I think view points that were made Stephen White: In regard to breakfast, of course the idea of the bed and breakfast is to have breakfast served. We're not going to require the applicant to serve breakfast, but I know that the apphcant that you have on Item # 19 will be doing that. The main thing and the comment that I heard regard to food being served or there be a restaurant kind of environment to people who are not guests at the inn. Under Section 225.1 as proposed to specifically notes that something like that cannot occur Food and beverages may be served only as expressly permitted by the Conditional Use Permit That is something that you're going to cover in your Conditional Use Permit. So, you can deal with that at that point, if you think it's appropriate. Historically, architecturally, culturally sigmficant, once again in Section 225.7, if someone built a house that replicated a Victorian home, I don't know if staff will tell you that's architecturally significant. To us, that's a clone of something that was architecturally significant. And, under number seven, I think we have the ability to tell you that with what's listed there. If there is anything I missed William Din: Twenty-four hour management. Eugene Crabtree' Living on site. Stephen White: I think that's something that's going to be covered by 24-7 manager on site. Faith Christie: We don't plan on having a manager on site. Stephen VV'hlte: Is that something that we need to add as conditions? Is that something that is covered under other codes? Faith Christie: I don't know. The bed and breakfast that I have been to in Charleston and Key West, their managers were not on site 24-7. Ronald Ripley: Some do, some don't Item # 18 City of Virginia Beach/Ordinance Amendment Page 5 Faith Christie: Yeah Stephen White: If you feel strongly about it, it's a Conditional Use Permit, you can have that as a condition. Ronald Ripley: Professional management is not adequate either, I don't think because that can be deemed off site all the time too. Any ideas? You got to realize that this is a new ordinance, and we've discussed a lot of things this morning We don't pretend to have the answers. We're just creating this new thing. William Din: I think one of the charms of having a bed and breakfast or a cottage or a use like this is having I guess an owner who feels strongly about the residence provides some cultural relationship. I think that adds a lot of charm to a bed and breakfast. I would encourage the owner to be a primary resident in that home also To me, if he didn't live there maybe did have a manager there 24 hours a day would be a good idea. But to me, when you stay in a bed and breakfast, I think the charm of having something like is to have some relationship Some kind of ownership that supplies that to the area, which 24-hour manager or typically the owner would provide Ronald Ripley: Or live in management that lives on site9 William Din' Correct Ronald Ripley: I think that's about the best you can do because I've stayed in bed and breakfasts where the manager was not the owner but has been there for 20 years. The owner lived in another state. But you still had that same feeling because you had the same type over there but they did. But to try to put this type of a requirement onto a owner requiring him to have someone there and to pay him 24 hours a day that is something you have to think out in a business plan because you can sink the whole business plan that you have set up but, anyway Mr. Miller. Robert Miller. What I think I said this morning is I would like to make sure that this ordinance is asking for what we want and not trying to stop something that we don't want. I do like the idea of having a professional or someone, if it's the owner that's fine, that's there 24-7 I think that makes for the right thing that we would like to have And, I think the phrasing on page 2, line 49 if it said food and beverages will be served if expressly permitted. I think the intent there was to make sure that it was set up in a way that the Health Department would approve it and so forth, so I think if you say Jt will be served but it has to be expressly permitted by us, that gets us into the category, I felt like I'd like to be instead of saying may be served as only expressly submitted I think we're trying to get and the encouragement would be to have it served but if somebody was not able to for whatever reasons be able to meet the Health Department standards or other standards that may come into effect that would be something that may not be able to do because the size of these will potentially vary from three rooms to 10 rooms or something different. So, I think I would favor both of those changes One is that we have a Item # 18 City of Virginia Beach/Ordinance Amendment Page 6 professional person on staff or a manager, again whatever the right definition is or the owner 24-7, and that food and beverages will be served if expressly permitted Ronald Rlpley: Well, that's in the ordinance. Robert Miller' Something with the phrasing. I'm just trying to go the other end of the phrasing and say positive that we would have that there. That is what we would like to encourage. Ronald Ripley: We're not getting ahead of ourselves but the application that we're going to hear after this does state specifically the type of food they will serve and that's what you're trying to do. Robert Miller: That is what I want to have ~n here is that we want to encourage people and I think the point was made very well by Mr LaFond that I would think that a bed and breakfast, and I never thought any differently, that it would have breakfast. It didn't even cross my mind. I think it's a very good point, and I think it's one that we can just encourage. There may be some that for whatever reasons would not have that, and I think I do understand that there will certainly be situations that might not present themselves. And, that is something that we have to decide on a proJect-by-project basis Ronald Rlpley: Mr LaFond, did you have a comment if it's new and short Stephen LaFond: If you don't have breakfast and all you're doing is renting rooms then what you've got is a rooming house. If you don't have an owner that is present on the premises or a manager that is present there 24-7, you don't have basically a residence for a resident of Virginia Beach. You have an absentee owner who is running a rooming house And, then it's a whole different type of clientele then your background information which was researched quite well I might add. A lot of the same lnfbrmation is contained in the Professional Association of Innkeepers International Bi-Annual Report that are put together showing the demographic of the types of people that use bed and breakfast and what typically bed and breakfast have Again, I really think it's important that you have breakfast. Not just that you're going to serve meals because that kind of opens up lunch and dinner and now you got a little different situation You got yourself a restaurant and it's only a hop, skip and jump from three meals a day to opening it up to folks that are coming in from the outside. Because all of them want to eat at this really great little bed and breakfast but it's not a bed and breakfast, it's an inn It ~s now serving three meals a day Ronald Rlpley' Thank you for your input. Stephen LaFond. If there are any other questions, I'll be happy to answer them I've done an awful lot of research on this before I bought this place. One of the things of course was exciting was that fact that we were the only one in Virginia Beach The Victorian Inn does not have breakfast. Angle's give you a chip. It's a youth hostile. Item # 18 City of Virginia Beach/Ordinance Amendment Page 7 You can stay there for $17 00 a night There are other places like Gallagher's Js right around the corner from us They don't have bed and breakfast. Robert Miller: Isn't there a song similar called "Nothing Succeeds like Success". Congratulations. Stephen LaFond: Thanks. I welcome more of them We could refer a whole bunch of people. Ronald Rlpley: Thank you very much. Alnght, Will Din. William Din: One other comment on the ordinance, what kind of set backs are placed on these bed and breakfasts? I notice that applications are going to have a lot of renovations to it and a lot of addition to it When you have a residence in this area on a lot what set back requirements are going to be followed9 Stephen White: Whatever is applicable to the district within that structure is located. That's the setbacks they will have to meet. Janice Anderson: The underlying zoning or whatever. Stephen White' Right Ronald R~pley: Okay. Joseph Strange: I have a question. Ronald Rlpley' Joe Strange. Joseph Strange. I have a question for the opposition here. When you were researching this and doing your research, how many of the ordinances require that they serve breakfast? Stephen LaFond: To tell you the truth Mr. Strange, many different cities don't even have any ordinances that deal with this. I was involved, I'm an attorney, and I was involved in putting together a bed and breakfast in the City of Tomlin, Connecticut. That goes way back to revolutionary times much as many those around here do And, Tomhn didn't have any ordinances whatsoever. I represented a young couple that turned a beautiful old home into a fantastic bed and breakfast and it's been going ever since. But we had to create the ordinance for the town and we had to create all of the information that they needed to do and so on, and they're weren't sure what the Health Department regulations even applied at all. We felt that they should because it was to their benefit to the owners. But anyway, it is uncharted ground. Each city does things differently I have not checked with Norfolk. I know there is a new, basically two new inns that were set up there, the Page House and the Freemason Inn. Bob Epstein is doing that and apparently both of them are doing quite well We refer a lot of people over there. I'd love to refer Item # 18 City of Virginia Beach/Ordinance Amendment Page 8 people and keep the money here in Virginia Beach but there really aren't places to do that. Ronald Ripley: Are there any other questions or comments? Jan, did you have a comment9 Jamce Anderson: Yeah. I have to be in agreement I think if you're going to call it a bed and breakfast then you're going to put it m your zoning, I would put it in the definition is "residence that serves breakfast" and leave it at that. I would put that in your definition It's a primary residential structure and historical significance that provides lodging and breakfast. Just leave it in your definition, then the other part dealing with the onslte manager, I think everyone is in agreement with that. That needs to be there I think that prevents any problems you have A lot of these are going to be in residential neighborhoods. You want on site managers just in case things come up We don't want it to be a mini hotel. The food and beverage, I can understand why in number 3 under 225.1. I think that was beyond breakfast Food and beverage may be served only expressly permitted. I can understand the reasoning in putting that language there is a more restrictive because you don't want it turning into a restaurant. So, I know you wanted to change it Robert Miller: When you change to breakfast, you fixed Janice Anderson: Okay. Well, I think in three it says, "beyond breakfast." If you're going to serve food and beverages that would be expressly permit then you can limit to whether it is going to change but I think with those changes. Ronald Ripley' I think we said something like onsite owner or manager will be required to live on site to manage Charhe Salle': I'm thinking its Section 1, line 40 probably should say that it provides living quarters for the owner or manager of the inn may be provided probably should be provided. Then put in a manager or owner shall be presented on the premises 24 hours a day. Ronald Rlpley: That would work. Charlie Salle': Kay, did you get the other part? Stephen LaFond' My wife and I do go out shopping once in a while. Kay Wilson. Stephen and I have been rewording. For the definition it will say, "a primary residential structure of historical significance in which not more than ten rooms provided for lodging transient for compensation on a daily or weekly terms with breakfast being served." That's your definition. Ronald Ripley: Did you cover the management? Okay. Item # 18 City of Virginia Beach/Ordinance Amendment Page 9 Kay Wilson: Under number one under Section 225.1, I have to use my glasses differently. If you go down to the second sentence, "living quarters for the owner or manage of the inn shall be provided in addition to lodging units Such owner or manager shall be on site and available on a 24 hour basis Ronald Rlpley: Does that work? Charlie Salle' Manager or owner? Kay Wilson: Or owner. Charlie Salle': Okay. Kay Wilson: Shall be on site and available on a 24 hour basis So you can go to the movies but take your cell phone. Ronald Ripley' Okay. Charlie Salle" You want it on number 3 on line 49, you want to put food and beverage? Kay Wilson. That' s where we're going. "Food and beverage will be served if expressly permitted by the Conditional Use Permit, that way were getting into the Health Department, and no event will the seating capacity exceed 25 persons including lodging guests Breakfast will be served to guests." Janice Anderson: Why are you changing "will" Why don't you just leave it Kay Wilson' Because we have already said that breakfast will be served. Janice Anderson: Okay Kay Wilson: Because we said breakfast will be served and those are the two things that we said that we had to serve breakfast and you have to have an onslte manager Those were the changes that will accomplish that. Ronald Ripley: Unless it's something new? Stephen LaFond: Is for something that Counsel just mentioned. Ronald Rlpley: Come back up. Stephen LaFond' I'm sorry. On number 3 when we said that food and beverages would be served only if expressly permitted by the Conditional Use Permit and no event will seating capacity exceed 25 persons including lodging guests. That implies in the ordinance that you're open for people other than lodging guests And, I think you need to address that. Item # 18 City of Virginia Beach/Ordinance Amendment Page 10 Kay Wilson: I think you could in your Conditional Use Permit, Council can say you could have a little dining room that would be of 25-50 people. You have to have breakfast. Ronald R~pley: Okay. Jan did you want to make a motion on thts9 Jan~ce Anderson' Yes. I'll make a motton to approve Item #18 which ts the addition of the ordinance regarding bed and breakfast be a Conditional Use Permtt in the following zones, RT-3, B-4, A-12, A-18, A-24 and A-36 Zomng Districts as we have amended w~th the definition being changed to bed and breakfast to tnclude breakfast betng stowed with the change under 225.1, Section 1, manager/owner shall be on s~te available 24 hours. And, food and beverages will be served as expressly permttted besides the breakfast, which shall be served Eugene Crabtree: Jan? Excuse me. We should also tnclude that we have struck the reqmrement of 50 years of age on line 28 & 29 and on hnes 79 & 80. Janice Anderson: Thank you. Ronald Ripley: So we have a motton made and the second agreed to that and discussion from Mr Crabtree. Anybody else have anything else to say? Watchtng legislation and sausages is not pretty is what you say But this ~s a new one. We're ready to vote. Ed Weeden: Ms. Anderson9 Janice Anderson' Yes Ed Weeden: Mr. Crabtree? Eugene Crabtree: Yes. Ed Weeden Mr. Dtn? Wilham Din. Yes Ed Weeden: Ms. Katsias9 Kathy Katsias: Yes Ed Weeden: Mr. Kmght? Barry Knight. Yes. Ed Weeden: Mr Miller? Robert Miller: Yes. Item # 18 City of Virginia Beach/Ordinance Amendment Page 11 Ed Weeden. Mr. Ripley? Ronald Ripley: Yes. Ed Weeden. Mr. Salle'? Charlie Salle: Yes. Ed Weeden' Mr. Strange9 Joseph Strange. Yes AYE 9 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 2 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD ABSENT ABSENT Ed Weeden: By a vote of 9-0, the motion passes. Ronald Ripley: Kay, when you get that worked through with all the wording, can you send that back around to the Commission so we can see it? Kay Wilson' Sure. Ronald Ripley So, we can see the way ~t worked out. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM III II II III ITEM: Gregory Nelson - Conditional Use Permit (Bed and Breakfast Inn) MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 · Background: An Ordinance upon Application of Gregory Nelson for a Conditional Use Permit for a bed and breakfast on property located at 2420 Arcbc Avenue (GPIN 2427052744). DISTRICT 6 - BEACH The purpose of this request ~s to convert the ex~sting s~ngle-family dwelling ~nto a bed and breakfast Considerations: The ~mmed~ate area has remained fairly stable w~th a mixture of s~ngle-family dwelhngs, duplexes, multiple-family dwellings, and a rehg~ous center. The s~te was zoned R-3 Mulbple-Fam~ly Residence D~stnct unbl November 1973 With the adopbon of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance ~n 1973, the s~te was zoned A- 1 Apartment d~stnct. In 1988, the site was zoned A-12 Apartment d~str~ct. The exisbng dwelhng was constructed ~n 1938. It is an excellent example of development ~n the early years of the resort area. A large second floor porch ~s the main focal point of the front of the house. An "A" frame roof supported by box columns covers the porch. The exterior ~s clapboard s~ding on the first floor and cedar shakes on the second floor The applicant plans to maintain the exisbng structure so that it has nine rooms available for compensation and one room for the on-s~te manager The proposed addibon will closely match the ex~stmg structure ~n both design and building materials The applicant also plans extensive landscaping ~n the yard areas The request ~s consistent with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan and w~th the specific requirements specified for bed and breakfast inns within the C~ty Zoning Ordinance. The character of the neighborhood should not be adversely affected by the operabon of a bed and breakfast ~nn at th~s location D~rectly across the street exists the C~ty of V~rg~n~a Beach 25th Street Parking lot, and a religious center exists several lots west of the site. Staff recommended approval There was oppos~bon to the request Gregory Nelson Page 2 of 2 · Recommendations: This Conditional Use Permit request can be acted on by the City Councd only ~f the City Council has approved the amendment to the City Zoning Ordinance allowing bed and breakfast ~nns in the A-12 Apartment District with a use permit. Otherwise, th~s request is null and cannot be acted on The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-0 to approve this request with the following cond~bons: , Site and building ~mprovements shall be substanbally as submitted. Modifications may, however, be made to the plans if necessary due to acbon of the Board of Zoning Appeals related to variance requests. Any such changes shall be submitted to the Director of Planning for approval. 2 There shall be no more than nine (9) rooms avadable for compensation. One addibonal room may be provided for an on-site manager. . Food service shall be limited to breakfast and a menu of sandwiches, salads, soups, fruit and cheese plates, and snacks provided for the guests of the inn. Promobonal specials, such as oyster roast, crab picking or w~ne tasting, are permitted provided the special is only available to the patrons of the inn. 4. Signage shall be hmited to one (1)~dent~ficat~on sign no more than nine (9) square feet m area. There shall be no other s~gnage in or on the windows, doors or exterior of the building other than emergency or direcbonal signs that may be required by the Building Code Official 5 Occupancy shall be limited to twenty-five (25) including the on-s~te manager. Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Locabon Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval Planning Commission recommends approval Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Departmen~~g,~c~--~ City Manager~ ~(~-' ~'~~)Y~L GREGORY NELSON/# 19 July 9, 2003 General Information: APPLICATION NUMBER: M06-215-CUP-2003 REQUEST: Cond~bonal Use Permit for a Bed and Breakfast ADDRESS: 2420 Arctic Avenue M--d Ma to ~cmle Nelson Crptn 2427-05-2744 GPIN' ELECTION DISTRICT: 14878286540000 6 - BEACH Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 1 SITE SIZE: 8,400 square feet STAFF PLANNER: PURPOSE: Faith Chrisbe To convert the ex~sting single-family dwelhng into a bed and breakfast. Major Issues: · Compabbd~ty with the surrounding area. · Consistency with the recommendabons of the Comprehensive Plan. Land Use, Zoning, and Site Characteristics: Existinq Land Use and Zoninq The site ~s occupied by an ex~sbng single- family dwelling, and ~s zoned A-12 Apartment D~strict. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoninq North: South: East: West: · 25th Street · Across 25th Street are s~ngle-famdy dwellings / A- 12 Apartment · S~ngle-fam~ly dwelhng / A-12 Apartment · Arcbc Avenue · Across Arctic Avenue ~s the C~ty of Virgima Beach 25th Street Parking lot · An alley · Across the alley ~s a s~ngle-family dwelling / A-12 Apartment Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 2 Zoning History The immediate area has remained fairly stable w~th a m~xture of s~ngle-fam~ly dwellings, duplexes, multiple-family dwelhngs, and a religious center. The s~te was zoned R-3 Multiple-Family Residence District until November 1973. W~th the adopbon of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance ~n 1973, the s~te was zoned A-1 Apartment district. In 1988, the s~te was zoned A-12 Apartment district. The ex~sting dwelhng was constructed in 1938. It is an example of the early development of this area of the Oceanfront. Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) The s~te ~s in an AICUZ of 65 to 70dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana The Un~ted States Navy has reviewed the applicabon and has no comment. Public Facilities and Services Water and Sewer The s~te has an ex~sting 5/8-inch water meter, which may be upgraded. Sewer and pump stabon analys~s may be required to insure that the new flows can be accommodated. Transportation Master Transportation Plan (MTP) I Capital Improvement Program (CIP): Arctic Avenue and 25th Street are considered two-lane local streets There are no plans to upgrade e~ther street at th~s time. Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Present Generated Traffic Volume Capacity Arcbc Avenue 3,098 ADT ~ Ex~sbng Land Use 2_ 14 6,200 ADT ~ 25th Street 1,410 ADT ~ Proposed Land Use 3_ 62 Average Dady Trips 2 as defined by the ex~sbng apartment zoning 3 as defined by the proposed bed and breakfast Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 3 M-~ Ma to Scale Nelson Gpin 2427-05-2744 ZONING HISTORY 1 Modification to a Nonconforming Use - Approved 12-10-02 Public Safety Police: Fire and Rescue: The apphcant ~s encouraged to contact and work w~th the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevenbon Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this s~te. A fire hydrant is required within 400 feet of this use. Private fire hydrants must be maintained annually as ~denbfied ~n the N.F P A. 25 A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained from the Budding Code Official before occupancy of the structure. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan Map identifies th~s area as Suburban Residenbal/Medium and H~gh Density. This ~s an area planned for residential density of above 3.5 dwelling units per acre. Summary of Proposal Proposal · The applicant wishes to obtain a Cond~bonal Use Permit for a Bed and Breakfast on the site. The applicant proposes to enlarge the exisbng structure so that ~t has n~ne rooms available for compensabon and one room for the on- site manager. The apphcant notes that a continental breakfast and a light menu of sandwiches, salads, soups, fruit and cheese plates, and snacks will be provided. On Saturday and Sunday, a hot breakfast wdl be served The applicant plans to have beach chairs, bikes, umbrellas, and coolers available for the guests. Wednesday w~ll be special day at the inn when the applicant will showcase certain Virginia trad~bons and items, such as a crab picking, an oyster roast, a wine tasbng or strawberry desserts. The applicant also plans to provide a spa and massage therapy room as a part of the inn's mission to provide a totally relaxing and peaceful stay · The existing structure was built in 1938 and is an excellent example of development ~n the early years of the resort area. A large second floor porch Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 4 ~s the main focal point of the front of the house An "A" frame roof supported by box columns covers the porch The exterior is clapboard s~d~ng on the first floor and cedar shakes on the second floor. The applicant plans to maintain the ex~sbng structure. The proposed addition w~ll closely match the ex~sting structure in both design and building materials. The applicant w~ll need to obtain several variances from the Board of Zoning Appeals due to the change of use of the structure. The applicant is aware of the required variances Should the apphcant be unsuccessful with the Board of Zoning Appeals he w~ll not be able to develop the s~te with a bed and breakfast inn. Evaluation of Request The request for a Cond~bonal Use Permit for a bed and breakfast ~nn is acceptable subject to the conditions listed below. The request ~s consistent w~th the recommendabons of the Comprehensive Plan and w~th the specific requirements specified for bed and breakfast ,nns w~thin the C~ty Zoning Ordinance. The character of the neighborhood should not be adversely affected by the operabon of a bed and breakfast ~nn at this location Directly across the street exists the C~ty of V~rginia Beach 25th Street Parking lot, and a rehg~ous center exists several lots west of the site. The applicant proposes to retain the charm of the exisbng "cottage" w~th a proposed addition using the same building materials and design as the exisbng structure The applicant also plans extensive landscaping ~n the yard areas. Staff recommends approval of the request for a Condibonal Use Permit for a bed and breakfast ~nn subject to the conditions I~sted below. Conditions , . Site and building improvements shall be substantially as submitted. Modificabons may, however, be made to the plans if necessary due to acbon of the Board of Zoning Appeals related to variance requests Any such changes shall be submitted to the Director of Planning for approval. There shall be no more than n~ne (9) rooms available for compensation. One additional room may be prowded for an on-site manager Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 5 Food service shall be limited to breakfast and a menu of sandwiches, salads, soups, fruit and cheese plates, and snacks prowded for the guests of the ~nn. Promobonal specials, such as oyster roast, crab p~ck~ng or w~ne tasbng, are permitted prowded the special ~s only available to the patrons of the inn Signage shall be I~mited to one (1)~dentification s~gn no more than nine (9) square feet ~n area. There shall be no other signage in or on the windows, doors or exterior of the building other than emergency or direcbonal signs that may be required by the Building Code Official. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. The site plan submitted with this conditional use permit may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. Conditional use permits must be activated within 12 months of City Council approval See Section 220(g) of the City Zoning Ordinance for further information. Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 6 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 7 ~N~ FLOR Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 8 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 9 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 10 V Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 11 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 12 ARCTIC ALLEY Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 13 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 14 ~pplicant's Name: J~4st All Current Property Owners: APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) ,~/~/ If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach fist i~Check here rf the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other ~ in co rpo rated organization. If the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Property Owner Disclosure section below: PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, hst all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) E] Check here ~f the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated orgamzabon CERTIFICATION' I certify that the information contained herein is true la~/~accurate'~~~-~atur~r~ ~ PrintName .... ~ '"' '~2-~ /J~~ '"-'~ ~'il ir Conditional Use Permit Apphcabor~ Page 8 of I2 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 15 List All Current Property Owners: APPUCANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary). ~../,¢Z~/ If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) ~ /, ~ l~Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other ~ ,[ihincorporated organization. If the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Property Owner Disclosure section below: PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) if the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) [:::] Check here ~f the property owner ~s NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and. accurate. ...... ,/ ....... ....... P,rintu Name ........................ Conditional Use Permit Appllcabon Page 8 of t2 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GREGORY NELSON/# 19 Page 16 Item #19 Gregory Nelson Conditional Use Permit 2420 Arctic Avenue D~strict 6 Beach July 9, 2003 REGULAR Robert Mdler: The next ~tem ~s Item # 19, Gregory Nelson. Gregory Nelson: Good afternoon. Ronald R~pley: Good afternoon. Gregory Nelson: My proposal ~s a bed and breakfast, and we want to build th~s on the comer of 25th and Arctic ~ncorporat~ng the ex~stmg structure. Ed Weeden: Could you please ~dent~fy yourself. Gregory Nelson: Gregory Nelson Ed Weeden: Thank you. Gregory Nelson: I'm the owner of the property. I've owned it s~nce 1989. And, I don't know ~f you're famd~ar w~th that neighborhood, in 1989 there was a lot gmng on at that t~me. And, we pretty much tore the whole face of th~s bmld~ng off and restored ~t back to the original condlt~on w~th cedar shake, clapboard s~d~ng and tried to keep to the same aesthetics that ~t always had. What we're proposing ~s a bed and breakfast not only ~n the ex~st~ng structure but to add on to make the numbers work really. In order to make a bed and breakfast you have to have so many rooms. The current structure only has enough space for two rooms. And, that wouldn't even allow for space for a manager. So, we have to add on to ~t ~n order to accomphsh what were looking for. That addition that we are looking for which ~sn't up there but I th~nk we have shdes for lt. The yellow ~s the new addition that would accompany all the new bedrooms. The would allow for guests to have not only separate entrance off the mmn or the emst~ng structure but each one wdl also have their own bathroom, which I th~nk ~s very ~mportant. I traveled around North Carolina and V~rglma staying at bed and breakfasts, and the only th~ng I d~dn't hke was shanng a bathroom w~th someone down the hall so that ~s very ~mportant to me, that every guest have their own bathroom. W~th that addition, we are going to keep that same look, the cedar shake up top and the clapboard look on the bottom. The clapboard on the bottom wdl be a cement board to not only preserve the look but also preserve the mmntenance ~ssue, which comes w~th clapboard. Unfortunately, the thing w~th ex~st~ng structures ~s the clapboard. They decay so quickly that ~t ~s a regular mmntenance ~ssue So, we're going to try and bnng ~n a natural look but at the same t~me keep the mmntenance down The tower ~n the middle was really k~nd of designed for the look of Item # 19 Gregory Nelson Page 2 not only to observe the ocean from that level, but also the lifeguard museum, which is just down the street. So, there was some thought process going into that design to incorporate with rest of the surroundings. The intent is to fully operate as a bed and breakfast with a manager on site hvlng there on a regular basis, but only operate eight months out of the year, to be closed for four months out of the year. Until the need arises to possibly continue four months. I don't see January, February, March and April being those types of months that will suffice operations. So, we only structured it for eight months of operation at this time. That could change with the demand with changes that the City is doing with 31 st Street, with the Pavdlon and everything else that is involved. But that is how we see it now. With of course 25th Street being one of the only streets that hasn't been blocked off, there is a lot of traffic, of course coming down 25th and turning left on Arctic. And with the municipal parking lot there is a lot of visibility for this site. I think the intention is, and of course since I've been the owner for a long time I don't plan on bmldlng this and selhng it right of way. I'm planning on keeping it for a long, long time and maintaining it as a structure that I'm going to be very proud of and hopefully, the neighbors and everybody else will be proud. My goal is to create a relaxed atmosphere. A lot of the plans that you see, I mean it's a rough rendenng, unfortunately it doesn't show all the plans and all the layout but we plan English gardens, beautiful with little fountains in the front, really dressing up the front so that if someone wanted to take stroll through the garden they create that relaxed feel, not the hustle and bustle that may be you can get at the beach front but they can step a little back and a couple of streets back and go to a bed and breakfast and have relaxation and enjoy themselves without a lot of the beach front activity. So, that's really the goal, and that is my marketing strategy is to make sure that I go after that clientele that's going to sit back, relax and enjoy, not be loud, not be noisy. That's not my intent at all. So, I think we changed the bedroom. We were looking at trying to squeeze in four people per bedroom, and I just don't see how that's going to work. There are going to be two bedrooms that will probably will allow that or two units that will allow that. The other units will only be two people per bedroom. So, I think it's a total of about 35 occupants that could actually fit in this bed and breakfast at a full capacity level. Ronald Rlpley: Are there any questions? I have a couple of questions. You mentioned the manager on site so you're okay with that. Gregory Nelson: I planned on having someone living there on a regular basis at all times. Ronald Rlpley: I'm talking about land use but this part of this whole is the ambiance of the way you described it, and I think we really like what you have to say there. Can you enter your property and you go inside, we realize we're moved a way from land use but what would you see when you walk into your lobby? What would it be like? Are you planning on doing some special with antiques? Gregory Nelson: I don't plan on selling any antiques. Ronald Rlpley: I don't mean sell them but decor, etc. Item #19 Gregory Nelson Page 3 Gregory Nelson: The d6cor will go with the beach look. I don't plan on bringing a lot of heavy antiques into lt. I plan on bnnglng on more of the beach feel into it. I'm not sure what it's going to be and it's not going to be anything of a wicker type, but may be more of the and I can't think of the right word but certain furniture that works with the beach atmosphere. Ronald Rlpley: Okay Gregory Nelson: But when you walk into this structure you will have hardwood floors, a fireplace, and I'm not planning on changing too much of the interior. And, you look into a dining room, a living room and up to the wing on the left around the right as we look at it, which was an addition to the house that existed in the older house. That's the bedroom. So, I plan on creating a little hallway there to allow access to the one unit, the end unit on the right hand side. Ronald Rlpley: How about serving you a breakfast? How would you do that? Gregory Nelson: That would also be in the service area. Ronald Rlpley: Can you point that out. I'm not sure where that is. Gregory Nelson: Yeah. Ronald Rlpley: Mr. Gregory? Gregory Nelson: There's a pointer? Ronald Rlpley: Mr. Nelson, Excuse me. Barry Knight: Top left Ronald Rlpley: The black thing to the right of you. Gregory Nelson: Right here? Ronald Rlpley: Yeah. Gregory Nelson: As you walk in there's a wall right there. And, then there's a wall here. And, this is the kitchen area. And, when you walk in there's a split here in the wall that splits the dining room but still keeps it open So, I was planning on putting a hutch back here where the kind of breakfast is served. I'm putting a couple of tables in the dining room, and also I'm having a sit down area up here but it's more w~th the chairs and the couches and maybe more of the tables that pull out, but I don't plan on making this into a restaurant style serving area. More of a dining table, more of a home style sort of and with the hot breakfast, we would have to do a phase in like maybe two breakfasts where Item #19 Gregory Nelson Page 4 we would go at eight in the morning and one at ten or something of that nature. Because this house just could not faclhtate all of this. Ronald Rlpley: Do you have any opportunity outside to do anything like in the courtyard area? Gregory Nelson: Yeah. I thought about that. I'm not sure my neighbors or myself would like the traffic coming outside. I think it would be wonderful for the guests. I'm not sure that the neighbors or myself would like people roaming around outside on a regular basis every weekend eating outside. I think it's a great idea but I don't know how well that would take. Ronald Rlpley: Okay. Gregory Nelson: We may do some trial basis and get a feel for it. One of the things that I really want to work on with this bed and breakfast is the neighbors. I want the neighbors to create a lot of the guest issue, tell their friends. We have a wonderful place to come and stay in Virginia Beach. A lot of the houses in that area are very small. We have 836 across the street that are very small unit and they want to bnng their guests in but they may have to put them down in the resort and here you have an opportunity to bnng someone in the neighborhood and have them stay at a beautiful bed and breakfast. Ronald Rlpley: And your parking? It says concrete slab. Is that going to be just slab or exposed aggregated? Gregory Nelson. Well, I'm thinking more of and because of the drainage issue, I will have to try to do impervious paver of some sort that will allow the draining rather than draining right into the alley or into the street or out through the soil in some fashion because there is a lot of structure there. So, we're going to have to take that into consideration when we put everything in. Ronald Rlpley: Okay. Are there any other questions? Thank you. Robert Miller: We have Mr. Memtt Miller. Memtt Miller: I'm Merntt Miller. I own the property right next door to the property he is talking about making into a bed and breakfast. Most of that area is rented property right now. To afford a bed and breakfast I don't know if I'm really crazy about this or not To me, truthfully they're for the tourists. You have to stop and think of the people who own the property and the people who live here that pay the taxes. My taxes went up 28 percent, which is a big jump. They don't raise taxes. They raise the assessment. My assessment went up 28 percent Ronald Rlpley: Hopefully, we all know that. Item # 19 Gregory Nelson Page 5 Merrltt Miller: I have tried to work with the City as far as getting the alley between his property and mine black topped. No, we can't do lt. That's only a street on paper. They black topped between 24th and 25th up to the center and from Arctic to Baltic all the way across the block. But, the half, where my properties are, they won't black top it. They can't even get the grader out there to grade it. I've hauled crush and run in myself I paid to have it done. Every time it rains my house gets flood with water underneath. I need something done there, but back to the subject here on bed and breakfast I'm not really in favor of it. The way everything is set up. I noticed back 1988 they changed the zoning on my property. I was never notified of that. It went to A- 12 from A- 1. Ronald Rlpley: Are you right next door to the property? Merritt Miller: I'm right next door. Ronald Rlpley: So, your JUSt south? Memtt Miller: Right west of his property. I'm on 25th Street. Ronald Rlpley: You're on 25th Street. Merntt Miller: Yes. Ronald Rlpley: Okay. Merntt Miller: I've got 408 & 410. Ronald Rlpley: Okay. Merntt Miller: But in 1988, they changed the zoning on that property. I was never notified. Ronald Rlpley: Is that when they changed it to the RT zone? Merntt Miller: That is when they changed it to A-12. Ronald Rlpley: Oh, A- 12. Charhe Salle': A- 12 and A- 1 are the same thing Merntt Miller: It is? And, my final thing is I'm not in favor of it. I think for me to observe some of the thoughts of the people who actually own property around there and how they feel. We're actually the people that are support Virginia Beach. Ronald Rlpley: Mr. Miller has a question. Robert Miller. Question for Mr. Miller Item # 19 Gregory Nelson Page 6 Memtt Miller. Yes. Robert Miller: You rent the properties that you have? Merrltt Miller: Yes. They are rental properties. Robert Miller: And you said them was flooding in that area. I think this is one of the project areas Stephen is It not, for a calming. And, we're also doing drainage improvements in this area? Is that correct? Stephen White: That's correct. Robert Miller: So hopefully that will be something, and the City IS doing some projects in there. As far as the alley way goes, that should be maintained by Public Works. It is a public right-of-way. Maybe we will just make a note of that and see if we can't notify the appropriate people. Memtt Miller: The trucks and the fire trucks they all could use it. Robert Miller: Fire trucks go through there? Merrltt Miller: They can get through them if they have too. I just had three cars towed out of there this past weekend because they parked out in the alley. Robert Miller: I think the City has a responslblhty to make sure that alley way 1s maintained and that the drainage ~mproves. We'll make sure that the staff notifies Public Works Department and they will follow up. You feel free to call Planning. They'll help direct you to the people m Pubhc Works to help you with that. Merrltt Miller: Okay. Thank you very much. Ronald Rlpley: Kathy Katsias had a question. Kathy Katslas: Excuse me. You said your property were for rent. You rent them both? Merrltt Miller: Yes. Kathy Katslas: On a weekly basis? Yearly basis? Memtt Miller: No Yearly basis. We got family in both places. Kathy Katslas: Thank you. Ronald Rlpley: Are there any other questions? Thank you very much. William Din: Can you use the pointer and show where you live again? Item # 19 Gregory Nelson Page 7 Stephen LaFond: Next to the left. There you go. Memtt Miller: Right there. That's 408 and 410 is directly behind lt. Ronald Rlpley: Gene, do you have a question? Eugene Crabtree: Do you physically live in one of those houses? Memtt Miller: No, I don't. Eugene Crabtree: You just rent them. You do not hve on that property that you own. Merrltt Miller: No, I don't. Ronald Rlpley: Okay. Are there any other questions? Thank you for coming down. Robert Miller: Mr. LaFond. Stephen LaFond: The original building that's being renovated is a temfic looking building I think. It just looks like it has a beach feel to it, and it probably does have some sort of historical and architectural significance. But that is only about a third of the finished product. And, I don't really think it would fit in with a bed and breakfast as we got the ordinance drafted. The reason being is that the bed and breakfast has to be in a resldenual structure. It's presumably an existing residential structure not something that is being created as a brand new venture. That rules out cultural significance, historical significance or something that you originally had drafted that was over 50 years old. It's unfortunate that a lot of braidings don't lend themselves to a bed and breakfast because they are too small, and they are economically not feasible. And, that's what I heard the apphcant talking about in this case. If that is the situation then I would suggest that he strongly look some place else or come in before the Board under a different plan because I think the structure or the drawings that he's done on the rendition really look terrific. I mean it looks like it will be a great bmldlng. But certainly it would not, I think fall under the bed and breakfast zoning that you just passed, but probably should be something under a motel/hotel or whatever I'm a little concern looking at the plans. There are bathrooms in each of the rooms that appear on the first floor, and I'm not sure or maybe it's just my ignorance on how the plans are here but it's just open to below if you look at the second floor plan. And, there's only one bathroom upstairs although it looks like five or SlX rooms and there is no access to that bathroom from the front room for example. There is no bathroom in the area that's accessible from most of those rooms unless they're open to the room that's directly beneath that and again, that could be hke a two story apartment or townhouse style. Either that or that whole second floor is one unit which would really be substantial because it would be somewhere in the area of 2,000 square feet. Thank you. Ronald Rlpley: Are there any questions? Thank you Okay. Mr. Nelson, did you wish to come back and rebut9 Item #19 Gregory Nelson Page 8 Anthony Offred~: My card ~s ~n there. Robert Miller: No sir. Ronald Pdpley: Please come up. Anthony Offredl. Thank you. Ronald Rtpley: Sorry. Anthony Offred~: Anthony Offredi, 2416 Arctic Avenue. I'm the one that pretty much effected by this whole proposal. I'm unfortunately deeply in opposition to lt. And, once I get through my little spiel here you'll understand why. I'm going to pass through. Ronald Pdpley: Can you point out where your property Anthony Offredl: Oh sure. Not a problem. I'm right here. That's me. Ronald Rlpley: Okay. Anthony Offredl: I want to pass around some pictures and what not, and I also have a letter from my other neighbor. He couldn't make it because he basically snobers down here. He does rent his house on a weekly basis but he screens all his chents before they are allowed to rent. He lives right here. And, this house right here, his grandfather gave him that is five or slx units. I'm not exactly sure. As you can see ~t's quite a dense area and if you want to go through with what I have stated here. I'm a current property owner directly adjacent to 2420 Arctic Avenue. I'm deeply effected by this proposed variance change. The proposed bed and breakfast will bring great hardship on my family as well as the neighborhood based on the following. Number one, parking is at a premium in the area. The cul-de-sac change will now force a change down to Arctic on to 25th Street. People illegally park up and down 25th Street as well as an alleyway. Tow trucks are now a constant s~ght ~n the area even w~th off street parking. How is the neighborhood going to deal with v~s~tors parking on the property? I can tell you right now that Memtt and I he spent two hours on Sunday taking care of the problem in the alleyway with the police officers as well as the towing facdltles. And, I was blocked in also and I had to wmt until the facilities came and this would greatly exacerbate the s~tuatlon. Second, how's the congestion? Currently all the neighbors just have enough room to feel private yet still in a close net community. Any more population m the area as well as expansion is going to cause uneasiness amongst friendly neighbors My backyard is my sanctuary from traffic, you know, work and the City. I relax and play with my dog and child without feeling hke I'm being watched. I can't say that I have the same feeling if you're going to be living next door to a hotel. I feel like I'm going to be watched 24-7. The City has spent thousands of dollars effectively splitting the residential from the commercial vacation industry, which we greatly appreciate. The spht physically occurs east of Arctm and the cul-de-sacs. Although some unforeseen traffic conditions have occurred it was welcomed by the Old Beach area with open arms. This variance will blow the lines that they spent Item #19 Gregory Nelson Page 9 so much time and money developing. Everyone pretty much knows where the residential area now ~s and where the commercial area ~s and that has been fantastic over the last couple of months. We really appreciated that. Property values. I have no doubt ~n my m~nd that the surrounding property values wdl decrease in value. My wife and I spent a great deal of time and money refurbishing a rundown ranch into a beautiful beach house. Th~s proposed action will undue any sweat eqmty we put in. Lastly, I can't rinse a family and retire next to a hotel. If th~s proposed action was next to your two year old daughter, would you not agree w~th ~t? Imagine what the ramfficat~ons of v~sltors staying for a few days and dec~ded to use your private yard next door would be a great place to m~sbehave. Ronald R~pley: Mr. Offredl, you kind of ran out of time. You k~nd of need to summarize ~f you can. Anthony Offredl: Really, I thought I had ten minutes. Ronald R~pley: No. Three m~nutes. Anthony Offred~: Three m~nutes. Okay. If you look on page 7 and 17 in there, ~t basically shows there are two color pictures ~n there of my backyard and how ~t would be affected. Basically, this proposal would ehm~nate any privacy that my famdy does have as a sanctuary. Ronald R~pley: Do you want these back? Anthony Offredl: No. They're for you. You can keep them. They're all on file. I have copies But as you can see, ~t would cause great d~scomfort to me, and my famdy as well as the neighbors. I feel really hard about coming up here. There have been other proposals by Greg ~n the past about turning that th~ng into some beautiful town homes which we came to an agreement back, I th~nk a couple of years ago And, I was all for those. I lived in a couple of town homes before I actually moved ~nto the property and if we could go back to that type of atmosphere, I th~nk that would be better for the neighborhood. I feel this as well as Horace Hanshaw. He's the second page and he's the other neighbor that wrote a letter and he will down here on the 12th Ronald Rlpley: Okay. Anthony Offred~: So, if you want cop~es of the letters, I can give you these. Ronald R~pley: Does anybody on the Commission have any questions? Mr. Offredl? Thank you very much. Anthony Offredl: Thank you. Gregory Nelson: In reference to Mr. Mdler's concern with the alley, I totally understand the fact, that my th~nklng ~s to help the alley along by pawng that port~on that the bed and breakfast joins so that ~t wdl help the flow of the water and th~ngs of that nature and the Item #19 Gregory Nelson Page 10 constant mmntenance of that entrance to that alley because the stones are always kicked around. I'm on a regular basis digging out the sidewalk because of the lowness of that area creates just a puddhng effect and it's always pond~ng with dirt and salt and things of that nature. So, that's obwously a need to improve and I'm wllhng to do that. In reference to the plans as far as the bathrooms and things of that nature, they are probably 80 percent complete so you may not see all the fixtures in the plans. But, every bedroom or every occupant that would reside in this would have a bathroom. For instance, the top right there, that's the bedroom. Even though there aren't any fixtures. That's the bathroom, that's a bathroom w~th a s~ttlng area. So, we did that just to ~mprove speed~ness to try and make th~ngs move a little faster w~thout the plans. And, ~n reference to Mr. Offredl's comments in privacy, I'm obviously very concerned about that ~f we were to sw~tch the side to south elevation, I'm planning on putting a large, right now there's skyrocketing cypress in front of the house. I plan on moving those to the side. That's the type of plant that you see there. I'm trying to shield and create that privacy. I'm also plalmlng on putting a fence line around that which emsts now. In fact, that fence line would be enhanced with a nicer fence and also creating privacy and preventing people from casualty walking into the neighbor's yard. That ~s why the whole front yard ~s also proposed to be fenced at a low fence. More of a wrought ~ron look with the planting which you can just catch a glimpse of the arbor ~n the front there. For that same issue ~s to create that perimeter to say, "Gus, stay within the perimeter", that type of s~tuatlon so we hope to control lt. And, as far as cars parking ~n the alley that would have to be managed on a regular bas~s. I understand that. There are nine parking spots, which is what the total reqmres for nine bedrooms, and I'm making sure of that there will be nine parking spots available on site, not off site. Ronald R~pley: Are the planting that you plan there, are those Leyland Cypress? Mr. White, do you know? Stephen White: I don't what they are. Do you know what they are Greg? Gregory Nelson: The trees that are in front of the house, I beheve are skyrocketed Cypress. That ~s what I call them. That is what I plan on using ~s the same plant that is ~n front of the house including those to the rear or to the side and creating that buffer. Not only front that location but also along 25th Street where the parking ~s. I want to create a buffer there to so when people drive down the road they don't see that string of parked cars. So, I'm trying to blanket it and create a little buffer there so it is very appeahng. It's very ~mportant to me. Ronald R~pley: Faith, do you know the species your looking for there? Faith Christie: I don't know what those are. They could be some sort of fir. Ronald Rlpley: Yeah. They don't look like they are cypress. Faith Christie: They're not cypress. Item # 19 Gregory Nelson Page 11 Ronald Rlpley: They're not cypress. Gregory Nelson: They've done very well. They've been there from 10-12 years Ronald Rlpley: See, that's the point. They really don't have much growth to them and they're pretty narrow. The Leyland Cypress is a normal plant that we use to provide a buffer. For example, the shopping center that we were looking at earlier today it had buffered behind the shopping center as a mini storage, Leyland Cypress were put in and you didn't know the houses were back there. Gregory Nelson: My only concern is how wide they get. I've taken up half way along that side because I want to make a nice httle garden pathway between the fence line and the structure and these stay narrow and they slow at growth but some of those are approaching 15 feet in height. Ronald Rlpley. I'd like to see you work that out with staff' and come to term with a plant that will accommodate your parking with and still get the buffer if this application is approved. Gregory Nelson: We can be more than willing to do that. Ronald Ripely: Ms. Katslas has a question. Kathy Katslas' Mr. Nelson, the existing square footage of the house now is what? Gregory Nelson: Approximately 1,800. Kathy Katsias: And you're increasing it to what? Gregory Nelson: The new structure, I think is 3,600. Kathy Katslas. So, it will be a total of what? Gregory Nelson: 5,400. Kathy Katslas: With the addition, do you have to go by ADA requirements being that your going to be renting the house and having people reside there? Gregory Nelson: I'm not sure. I haven't looked that part up. I do have an elevator planned for the tower area to be able to move people up and down the floors. Kathy Katslas' How wide are the bathrooms? Gregory Nelson: I planned on going along 36 inches and making sure the spaces are appropriate for any type of handicap. Item # 19 Gregory Nelson Page 12 Kathy Katslas: So, you're doubling the size of the existing square footage that currently is there now. Gregory Nelson: More than doubling. Yes. Kathy Katslas: Thank you. Ronald Rlpley: Are there any other questions? Charhe Salle': I have a question. Ronald Rlpley: Mr. Salle'. Charhe Salle" Would you be agreeable, if you can do it to a limitation on the number of guests that will be on the premises? Gregory Nelson: Economically, I would have to look at it. To have a live in manager and to have all the other things and try to bnng this type of structure into an upscale environment and provide the aesthetics and architectural features that I want to do demands a certain number of rooms. And, there's a certain rental factor. Charhe Salle': Have you come up with a number of guests you have to have'? Gregory Nelson: Just rooms. Renting out on a six-month level at about 80 percent occupancy, nine of those rooms being rented out at an average of $100.00 per night. They are going to vary from $95-150 is what my goal is. The larger rooms obviously and the better views will obviously push the higher dollar amount. Charhe Salle': How many people per room? Gregory Nelson: Two bedrooms or two people in a bedroom in the smaller ones and we have that's up to six. I'm revisiting some of that because I'm not sure if that's the wisest move. I think maybe scaling it down to four may be more appropriate. That's for comfort too. I don't feel comfortable having someone sleep six ~n a room, pullouts and tripping over each other. I don't think that's appropriate. Charhe Salle': I have some concerns of that to in terms, I mean you may have the perfect operation but you may not own th~s property forever and we have four people to a room and we have nine rooms. And, we have that many people staying in that size facdlty in that location could be a real issue. Gregory Nelson: But if we need to put an occupancy level on ~t, we could address that I guess. Charhe Salle': The bmld~ng would have code reqmrements that would do that anyway. Item #19 Gregory Nelson Page 13 Ronald Rlpley: What did you have in mind Charhe? Charhe Salle': I was thinking two per room and that would make it 23 guests. Gregory Nelson: Could we have 20 maximum of some sort where we can put three in a room? I mean by doing two in a room you're minimizing your market. Many people that come in with a child or something to that nature that you're just killing that whole market setting. I just don't see how that would be feasible. That's why I think at least one of the bedrooms is going to be four per room because some have two children. The average family is 2.2 children in America. So, this is an ideal location for a lot of Washington DCers to drive away and get away and I just think its perfect for Charhe Salle': Well, I'm not expert in this field and I don't know what the number should be but it just seemed to me that there ought to be some constraints on how the operation should work. Gregory Nelson: I understand. I think four to a room and I might be willing to look at that. I think six is too much. That was my original plan and every time I think about it, it scares me so I think I should scale it back down to four Charhe Salle': Four to a room would be in access to what I think it should be on this property. Gregory Nelson: Not every room though. That would only be two rooms out of all nine. Robert Miller' You said a minute ago 20. Is that a limit you could live with? Gregory Nelson: Yeah I think 20 occupants would be probably reasonable. I think 25 is more reasonable. I really do. It's how you can market the rooms. If I'm limited to 20, that means almost two per room. If I have two in each room and there's nine room, that's 18 that only allows me one room to go to four. And, if I start seeing a number of people wanting three sleeping arrangement, and I have the ability to have at least four rooms that could supply that space of three, I'd just kill the large market segment and therefore it could cause me to suffer as far as a successful bed and breakfast. Charhe Salle': I've never stayed in a bed and breakfast so I'm not an expert in anyway. But it just seems to me that what you're talking about when your catering to a couple of children and so forth that you're getting out of what I consider to be a bed and breakfast operation and more in to what I consider a motel operations Gregory Nelson' Well, that's a good point. I consider who stays at bed and breakfast and typically it's professionals traveling but we're in a different market then most bed and breakfasts. We're at the beach And a large portion of the segment that comes to this area are famlhes and if I'm not mistaken, that is what Virginia Beach is looking for is a more of a family oriented type of clientele and if we're going to go after that market I would think the bed and breakfast should also have that small opportunity for that. I'm Item #19 Gregory Nelson Page 14 not asking for the whole bed and breakfast but maybe we limited six of the rooms for two bedrooms and the remaining three rooms to be four to a bedroom. I think that's appropriate So, that would be actually 30. Is that 24? Eugene Crabtree: Twenty-four people. Ronald Rapley: Okay. Yes, Barry do you have a question? Barry Knight: I noticed in the ordinance under bed and breakfast inns, number three it addresses food and beverages may be served only if expressly permitted by a Conditional Use Permit in no event shall sitting capacity exceed 25 persons. That's the only place where I see a number mentioned in here. And, it kind of seems based on the numbers that I come up with that 25 persons maximum occupancy would certainly be a number that I could live w~th, Just to throw that out. But we do have that number under the food service category. Ronald Rlpley: Are there any other questions of Mr. Nelson? Thank you very much. Joseph Strange: Am I to assume that you never actually ran a bed and breakfast before? Gregory Nelson: No. I've not run abed and breakfast. I've had restaurant experience but not bed and breakfast experience. Ronald Rlpley. Thank you very much. Gregory Nelson: Thank you. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Let's open this up to discussion amongst ourselves here. Does anybody want to lead off?. Kathy Katslas: Well, I think Mr. Nelson was very Arctlculate in describing in the beginning as to what his bed and breakfast would be hke. Continuing on, it seems to me he is trying to squeeze in as many people as possible and not have the charm of strolling in the garden. And, just trying to get as many people in the rooms and I think 20 people and four people to a room would be very crowded. And, he's doubhng the size of the structure that is currently there So, I feel like, getting back to the ordinance it doesn't comply what original ordinance we just passed. So, I'm really strugghng with approving this apphcatlon. Ronald Ripley. So, the occupancy is an issue, sounds hke to me to be a big concern. Jan, do you have a comment? Janlce Anderson: Yes. I like the appllcat~on. I think a bed and breakfast down at that part of the resort strip where the residents already have residential housing would be some alternative to those who come with big hotels. That area it has a lot of rental if you look at the picture. What he is proposing is a great improvement I looked around that Item # 19 Gregory Nelson Page 15 section and there are small older houses there and ~t ~s mostly residential. So, when you're adding something hke this I th~nk ~t ~s going to be an asset and not worldly work agmnst h~m. If you got rental properties all around, you can rent next door to rowdy person and they're going to be there for a year, but ~f you got a rowdy tenant maybe they wall be gone ~n a week. So, I really wouldn't take that bad by hawng this that you're going to have a rowdy person next door. So far as whether ~t comphes w~th the ordinance we just passed, I th~nk the ordinance says ~t should be a primary residential place and he ~s starting w~th a primary residential umt. I don't th~nk any bed and breakfast really don't have any kind of ~mprovement ~n trying to modify an old house to make a bed and breakfast. You're going to have to take some kind of ~mprovement. The overall land coverage of the proposed bmld~ng, he's actually going less than what ~s zoned under the A-12. So, he meets that reqmrement. He probably could have more umts ~f he wanted to put condos or have mult~ famdy umts there. Actually, four months out of the t~me ~t won't be used so you've got some low t~me there. If you're going to have a manager on duty 24 hours you're going to have that hve ~n manager to control th~ngs if they get out of s~te. You have someone to call and strmghtened th~ngs out. But, I th~nk that ts going to be the whole d~fference. And, so far as the k~nd of chentele that ~t will bnng, I know the concern w~th the Oceanfront and the tourists, you'll get younger, I think this is going to be an older crowd. I guess there are studies on who stays at bed and breakfast but I don't th~nk ~t's going to be as crowded. The clientele that you're asking to come into the neighborhood ~s not going to be the young 18 year olds who pile e~ght ~nto a room. I don't have any problem w~th that. Barry suggested hm~t~ng ~t to 25 percent mammum occupancy. But, I th~nk it's a positive move, on that end I will support ~t. Ronald R~pley: Thank you very much. Barry, do you wish to make a comment? Barry Kmght: We went by there and looked at the place the other day. It's a central scene that old house and as he expands some of these other rooms, I've been at some bed and breakfasts that are hke that also, and I certmnly th~nk and hope that he'll focus as h~s theme "the old structure" that's there in keeping w~th the general concept of our ordinance and general theme of a bed and breakfast down there. And, where I came up w~th the number is, and he says he going to rent rune rooms for compensation. That would g~ve h~m seven rooms w~th two folks in ~t, which ~s 14, two rooms w~th four, which g~ves you 22 and he has th~s other room for his own personal manager or h~mself and his wife and k~d whatever, which g~ves us a maximum of 25 and that would be consistent w~th the 25 mammum seating as far as eating is concerned. And, I would support but I would hke to see as a condition put ~n there of maximum occupancy rate and the number that I throw out right now would be 25 but I would be open on the number Ronald R~pley: Does anybody else have any comments? Will D~n. Wdham Din: I hke the concept of the bed and breakfast. And, I th~nk this apphcat~on has a lot of merit to ~t In looking at what he is trying to do here, I think h~s ~ntent ~s very good. He's got very race elevations as we see here. I am a httle concern w~th the size of th~s th~ng on this piece of property, just as one of our speakers mentioned that ~ts hard to Item #19 Gregory Nelson Page 16 tell how much of the original house is being retained here. And like Barry, I think since it is and I've never stayed at a bed and breakfast but I would like to see th~s original house be the main focal point of how this design comes out. And, I can understand that you have to have some addition to it in order to accommodate the rooms that he is seeking to have in his bed and breakfast I like the concept. I know this is all new to everybody and not having experience a bed and breakfast myself I think it's a good starting point for these things. And, I think our ordinance will be refined as we go through th~s thing and I think the applications that we see will probably be refined. I think there is a lot of rental in this area. And, this sort of fits into that to some degree but it will provide some additional adversity of the type of rental property that is available for a place you can stay at the beach. I think bed and breakfasts are needed here and I think I can support this issue. Ronald Rlpley: Thank you Will. Gene, do you have a comment? Eugene Crabtree: Yes. I agree with what Will said and I agree with Barry in the fact that we need to put a limitation on the occupancy of this and it should be limited to and I don't know if four people in a bedroom because I agree with some of the comment that a family comes in with one child is one thing I know some come in with two. I don't know if we need more than 25. Since the ordinance says 25, I think 25 would be a feasible figure to say maximum occupancy of the building. And, I do agree that we do need bed and breakfasts in this area. Ronald Rlpley: Okay. Coming up with the numbers is kind of difficult. I know particularly with bed and breakfasts. Typically, I know my children are gone, and if I didn't have a place with a pool I would have been killed. When we showed up we would have to go some place else. So, typically in a bed and breakfast you don't have children or have a lot of children if you do. And, in this case you might have some because we market our city as a family oriented city so definitely will probably have some and that would make a difference. And, if we could go back to the site plan that shows the first floor, the site plan Itself?. I found that when I look at it from Arctic, the scale and I think the way the addition is being added to the side, it doesn't over mass the site because the bulk of the improvements are occumng towards the rear and of course its along the 25th Street side and that kind of step back to which I think helps. When I look at this I think well it's not going to be that out of scale, and I believe the concern of the neighbor being next door, and I think if we can address the landscaping in site plan review, I think that would be critical to having this fit in with the neighborhood better. I like the apphcat~on also. I think it does make senses in our community, and it pamcularly makes sense from a Comprehensive Plan point of view, and I'm really afraid that to pick a number for this man's occupancy because it does dictate what he can and can't do as far as the economic viability of his business plan, but on the other hand I think if you don't you probably will put too many people in there or you could potentially put to many people and then you've caused a problem with the neighbors. So, I think we probably do need to pick a number 25 or Charhe was at 20. This is being arbitrary but I think 25 makes sense also. Mr. Mdler? Item #19 Gregory Nelson Page 17 Robert Miller: I'd like to make a motion. Ronald Rlpley: Go ahead. Robert Miller: That we approve the application and that we limit the occupancy to 25. Ronald Rlpley: We got a motion by Mr Miller. Charhe Salle': I'll second that but I think in Condition 2, we might have to clean up a little bit where it says, "one additional room may be provided to on site manager" I guess we can just take that out. That's required now I guess. Robert Miller: We can change it to will be provided. Charhe Salle': It's either shall be can come out or the ordinance requires it. Robert Miller: I agree. Charhe Salle': With the understanding that the 25 occupants will include the manager. Ronald Pdpley: Kay, you okay with that? Kay Wilson: So, there will be five conditions. Robert Miller: Five conditions. Ronald Rlpley: Okay, we have a motion and a second with the additions that were said. Does anybody else have anything to add? Let's call for the question. Ed Weeden: Ms. Anderson? Jamce Anderson: Yes Ed Weeden: Mr. Crabtree? Eugene Crabtree: Yes. Ed Weeden: Mr. Din? Wflham D~n: Yes Ed Weeden: Ms. Katslas? Kathy Katslas: Yes. Ed Weeden: Mr. Knight? Item #19 Gregory Nelson Page 18 Barry Knight: Yes Ed Weeden: Mr. Miller? Robert Miller: Yes. Ed Weeden: Mr. Rlpley? Ronald Rlpley: Yes. Ed Weeden: Mr. Salle'? Charhe Salle': Yes. Ed Weeden. Mr. Strange? Joseph Strange: Yes. AYE 9 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 2 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD ABSENT ABSENT Ed Weeden By a vote of 9-0, the motion passes with the five conditions Ronald Rapley: Okay. I think that 1s all that we have on our agenda today. Stephen, thank you all very much for an excellent agenda and excellent package. Stephen White: Thank you. Ronald Rlpley: We're adjourned. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Ocean Beach Club, L.L.C. - Change of Zoning District Classification MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 · Background: An Ordinance upon Apphcabon of Ocean Beach Club, LLC for a Change of Zoninq District Class~flcabon from RT-1 Resort Tourist D~stnct to Conditional RT- 2 Resort Tourist District on property located on the west s~de of Atlanbc Avenue, beginning at a point approximately 80 feet south of 34th Street (GPIN 2428032152, 2428033031) The Comprehensive Plan recommends use of th~s property for resort uses including lodging, retail, entertainment, recreabonal, cultural and other uses DISTRICT 6 - BEACH The purpose of th~s request ~s to construct a two-story building that w~ll have retail uses on the first floor and convenbon / meebng fac~l~bes on the second floor The proposed building w~ll complement the proposed hotel on the east s~de of Atlanhc Avenue, d~rectly across the street Considerations: The property ~s currently occupied by a "Real Italian Ice" fac~hty and a gravel parking lot. The s~te ~s zoned RT-1 Resort Tourist The s~te was rezoned from B-1 Retad Bus~ness to M-H Motel-Hotel and a Cond~bonal Use Permit was approved for 87 mulbple-famdy dwelhng units ~n November 1973 W~th the adoption of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance ~n November 1973, the s~te was zoned H-2 Hotel DIstnct From April 1988 to the present, the s~te has been zoned RT-1 Resort Tourist D~stnct The submitted s~te plan depicts a proposed budding of 195 feet ~n length and 65 feet ~n w~dth. The proposed budding wdl be 22,200 square feet and ~s situated five feet from the property hnes along Atlantic Avenue and 34th Street A parking garage ~s planned for the s~te as part of a hotel project on the Atlantic Ocean side of Atlantic Avenue Planmng Commission placed th~s ~tem on the consent agenda because the zoning change to RT-2 ~s consistent w~th the RT-2 zoning predom~nately found on the west s~de of Atlanbc Avenue, the zoning change w~ll provide for amenities associated w~th the development of a quality hotel and conference center ~n th~s Ocean Beach Club Page 2 of 2 area of the Oceanfront Staff recommended approval as proffered There was no oppos~bon to the request · Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a mobon by a recorded vote of 10-0 to approve th~s request as proffered Attachments: Staff Review D~sclosure Statement Planning Commission M~nutes Locabon Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval Planmng Commission recommends approval Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department~f(~¢i~,l_,~ .~ City Manager' ~'~, ~ "~'~'~ OCEAN BEACH CLUB, LLC/# 3 July 9, 2003 General Information: APPLICATION NUMBER: M05-210-C RZ-2003 REQUEST: ADDRESS: Change of Zoning Distri ct Classifcation from RT-1 Resort Tourist to Conditional RT-2 Resort Tourist Property located on the west side of Atlantic Avenue, 80 feet south of 34th Street Ocean Beach LLC Gt~ 2428-03-Z152, $031 GPIN- ELECTION DISTRICT: 24280321520000 24280330310000 6 - BEACH IIIIIIiiii III Planning Commissio 'Agenda July 9, 2003 OCEAN BEACH CLUB, LLC i # 3 Page 1 SITE SIZE' 10~ 511 square feet STAFF PLANNER: PURPOSE' Faith Chrisbe To construct a two-story budding that will have retail uses on the first floor and convention / meebng facihbes on the second floor The proposed building w~ll complement the proposed hotel on the east side of Attanbc Avenue, directly across the street Major Issues: · Consistency w~th the Comprehensive Plan recommendations for the resort area. Land Use, Zoning, and Site Characteristics: Existing Land Use and Zonin_cj The property ~s currently occupied by a "Real Itahan Ice" facility and a gravel parking lot The s~te ~s zoned RT-1 Resort Tourist. Surrounding Land Use and Zoninq North: South: East: West: 34th Street Across 34TM Street ~s the Mayflower apartment building / RT-2 and RT-3 Resort Tourist d~stricts A new "Sunsabons" retail shop / RT-2 Resort Tourist Atlantic Avenue Across Atlantic Avenue ~s the Budget Lodge / RT- l Resort Tourist Vacant undeveloped property / RT-1 Resort Tourist Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 OCEAN BEACH CLUB, LLC ! ~ 3 Page 2 Zoning and Land Use Statistics With Existing Zoning: Any of the uses allowed in the RT-1 Resort Tourist D~strict such as hotels and motels, public buildings and grounds, museums, temporary commercial parking lots, restaurants operated m conjunction w~th a hotel or motel, parking structures, and recreational and amusement facdit~es. With Proposed Zoning' Retail uses and a conference center Zonin_q Histow The stte was rezoned from B-1 Retail Business to M-H Motel-Hotel and a Conditional Use Permit was approved for 87 multiple-family dwelling units ~n November 1973. With the adoption of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance in November 1973, the site was zoned H-2 Hotel district, From April 1988 to the present, the sIte has been zoned RT-1 Resort Tounst distnct. ~i,r, Installation Compatible U...s.e. Z0ne (AiCUZ) The site ~s in an AICUZ of 65-70dB Ldn and 70-75dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. The United States Navy has rewewed the request and has no comment Public Facilities and Services Water and Sewer The site must connect to the available City water and sewer Transportatio,q Master Transportation Plan (MTP) i Capital Improvement Program (CIP): Atlanbc Avenue in front of this s~te ~s classified as a major urban c~ty street. Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 OCEAN BEACH CLUB, LLC 1 ~ 3 Page 3 Traffic Calculations: Street Name Atlantic Avenue Present Volume 2,649 ADT ~ : Present Capacity 7,300 ADT ~ Generated Traffic The majority of the chentele frequentmg the establishment will hkely be pedestrians, therefore, the number of trips cannot be effectively calculated. Average Da~ly Tnps Public Safety Police: Fire and Rescue: The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Cnme Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. A fire hydrant must be located within 400 feet of a commercial structure. Additional Fire Department concerns will be addressed during detailed site plan review. A Certificate of Occupancy must be obtained from the Building Code Official before occupancy of the building. Fire code permits may be required at the time of occupancy Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan Map designates this area as the Resort Area planned for resort uses including lodging, retail, entertainment, recreational, and cultural uses. Summary of Proposal Proposal ..... :::::::::::::::::::: · The applicant proposes to rezone the site from RT-1 Resort Tourist to RT-2 Resort Tourist in order to construct a retail / conference center The retatl shops will occupy Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 OCEAN BEACH CLUB, LLC / # 3 Page 4 the first floor of the building; the convention / meeting space will occupy the second floor of the building The development is part of the proposed Ocean Beach Club hotel development that is proposed to the east, across Atlantic Avenue. Site Desian · The submitted site plan depicts a proposed building of 195 feet in length and 65 feet in width. The proposed building will be 22,200 square feet. The proposed building is situated five feet from the property lines along Atlantic Avenue and 34th Street. Vehicular and P~destrian,,,, ,Access · Pedestrian access is provided along Atlantic Avenue and 34th Street. A pedestrian bridge over Atlantic Avenue is also shown on the conceptual master plan connecting the hotel complex with the conference center. The pedestrian bridge is not a component of this rezoning request. The applicant will seek approval from the City Council for the bridge through a separate process. Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 OCEAN BEACH CLUB, LLC / # 3 Page 5 A parking garage ~s planned for the site as part of the hotel project. Staff did not receive detailed plans for the parking garage and cannot comment on vehicular circulation at this bme. The conceptual plan (above) shows vehicular access to the garage from 34th Street and Pacific Avenue. Arch]tect,ural Design · The submitted elevation depicts a two-story building, designed in a modified "prairie" style of architecture. The proposed extenor of the proposed building is cream color exterior insulated finishing system (EIFS). The roof is a modified hip roof of standing seam metal, green in color. Triangular shaped vented dormers provide architectural relief in the roof. At the northern end of the building the roof is shaped in a pagoda style. Landscape and Open Space · The submitted landscaping plan depicts foundation screening along the building walls facing both Atlantm Avenue and 34th Street. The proposed plants are of the specIes that staff recommends for use at the oceanfront. A decorative water feature (fountain) is depicted at the northeast corner of the building. Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 OCEAN BEACH CLUB, LLC / # 3 Page 6 Proffers PROFFER # 1 Staff Evaluation: The architectural design and color of the structure constructed on the Property shall be substantially compatible with the architectural style and colors depicted ~n the rendering enbtted "Ocean Beach Club- Gold Key Resorts Retail/Conference Center Atlanbc Ave Elevation" prepared by NCG Architects, Inc submitted by the Grantor in connecbon w~th the Rezoning apphcabon, and on file with the Ptann~ng Department of the City of Virginia Beach The proffer ~s acceptable It insures that the proposed retail/conference center will be constructed substantially m accordance with the submitted etevahons The proposed building will be complementary and accessory to the hotel facility proposed to the east. City Attorney's Office: The C~ty Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer agreement dated 11 June 2003, and found ~t to be legally sufficient and in acceptable tegal form Evaluation of Request The request to rezone the s~te from RT-1 Resort Tounst to Cond~bonat RT-2 Resort Tounst to construct a retail / conference center ~s acceptable as proffered The request ~s ~n keeping with the recommendabons of the Comprehensive Plan The development of this site in conjuncbon w~th the redevelopment of the hotel s~te to the east w~tl prowde a quality hotel and conference center In this area. Staff recommends approval of the request for a Rezon~ng from RT-1 Resort Tounst to RT-2 Resort Tou.r~st ~n order to develop a retail t conference center as proffered NO TE: " ......... Further c'onditi~'nS may b'"e""~equire~i' durin~ the' administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all .... ,a, pplica.b.,!,,e .City Codes; Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 OCEAN BEACH CLUB, LLC t # 3 Page 7 ILl ,0 ~9 I I I I I z Z Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 Error! Reference source not found Page 8 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 Errod Reference source not found Page 9 /o0 'OZ. Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 Error! Reference source not found Page 10 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 Errod Reference source not found. Page 11 2: O 2: Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 Errod Reference source not found Page 12 Z Z Z DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's Name List All Current Property Owners ~._Ocean Beach Clu~%~ .... Ocean Beach Club,LLC PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, hst all officers of the Corporabon below (Attach hst ~f necessary) If the property owner ~s a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, c)r other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, hst all members or partners ~n the orgamzatlon below. (Attach list tf necessary) Please see attached. [] Check here ~f the property owner ~s NOT a corporabon, partnership, firm, or other umncorporated orgamzatlon If the apphcant ~s not the current owner of the property, complete the Apphcant D~sclosure section below: APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the property owner ~s a CORPORATION, hst all officers of the Corporabon below (Attach hst ff necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, hst all members or partners m the orgamzabon below (Attach l/st /fnecessary) [] Check here ~f the property owner ~s NOT a corporation, partnership, firm or other umncorporated orgamzahon CERTIFICATION I certify that the information contained herein is true ~nd accurate. ~ ;. - V~c¢ Pres~de~ of ~gnature . ~ ,~:%~ Print Name .~a~a~ n~ Mem~er :,, :, .............................. , ...... Cond~bonal Rezomng Apphcat~on Page 10 of 14 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 Error! Reference source not found Page 13 MEMBERS OF OCEAN BEA CH CLUB, LLC BQTS Assocmtes, Inc (Managing Member) Members of BQTS Assocmtes, Inc: Bruce Thompson, President David Sh~vely, Vice President Mmhael Poch, Secretary Treasurer Tradewmds, L C Members of Tradew~nds, L.C.. M~d~Atlant~c Credit Inc. Professional Hosp~tahty Resources Bruce L. Thompson K~mberly M~dgett Charles J. Sass Ronelle Camper-Leach James P McAlhster John L. Houser, Jr Carmela Houser L~nda L Markert Michael Pooh Mark D. Rondeau Thomas G. Griffin Michael H. Levmson Other Members: F A. Haycox Mart~n Palac~os John Shelhorse Charles Cole William Rountme Dr. Robert Martin Janet Martin Mmhael Poch M~chael Lcwnson David Sh~vely Hosp~tahty Associates Beam Reach Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 Errod Reference source not found. Page 14 Item #3 Ocean Beach Club, LLC Change of Zoning District Classification West side of Atlantic Avenue District 6 Beach July 9, 2003 CONSENT Ronald Rlpley: We'll bring this meeting back to order. We've been told that the recording machine is working but as far as the voting machine, it doesn't work We'll vote by hand When we get to a vote, it will be Yes or No. Your name will be called out. Correct? Okay. We are at the Consent agenda portion of our agenda. These items as you heard earlier are items that we think should be recommended to Council to be approved. We've reviewed them and staff reviewed them. We believe that they are appropriate to move on with an affirmative vote. So, Charlie Salle' is going to conduct this portion of the meeting. And Charlie, would you please go through the consent agenda? Charlie Salle': Certainly. When I call your application item, will the applicant or the applicant's representative, please come forward to the podium. The first item is Item #3, Ocean Beach Club, LLC, which is a request for a Change in Zoning Classification from RT-1 Resort Tourist to a Conditional RT-2 Resort Tourist. The property is located on the west side of Atlantic Avenue, 80 feet south of 34th Street. Tom Kleine: Good afternoon Mr. Chairman. For the record, my name is Tom Kle~ne. I'm an attorney with Troutman Saunders here in Virginia Beach. And, I'm here on behalf of Ocean Beach Club, LLC Charlie Salle': That's a proffered rezomng so no conditions. Is anybody opposed to this application? Thank you. Tom Klelne: Thank you Commission. Charlie Salle': I would move that we approve the consent agenda Item #3 Ronald Ripley: So we have a motion to approve the consent agenda as read by Charlie Salle'. Do I have a second? I have a second by Gene Crabtree. Prior to the vote, I'd like for the benefit of the public and the benefit of the readers of this verbatim, I've asked a number of the Commissioners to comment on the position of the Commission on these various different items. So, I'm going to start with Item #3 And Joe, I think you're going to take this one. Joseph Strange: That's right Ron. Item #3 is a change of Zoning District Classification from RT-1 Resort Tourist to Conditional RT-2 Resort Tourist. This is necessary to Item #3 Ocean Beach Club, LLC Page 2 construct a two-story building that will have retail uses on the first floor, and convention and meetings on the second floor. The proposed building is being designed to compliment the proposed hotel on the east side of Atlantic Avenue The request comes with one proffer that the Planning Department has approved It has to do with l he color and architectural design to make sure that it is compatible with the hotel that was going to be built across the street. The majority of the clientele that would be visiting this site would be pedestrians so traffic is not an issue here at this point. And together the two projects will provide a quality hotel and a conference center for this area an opportunity Ronald Rlpley' Joe, thank you very much. I hope the public has a better understanding as to why we we're recommending this consent item and that's the purpose of this discussion. We do have a motion on the floor and I believe we have a second. [ would like to call for the vote So all in favor of the motion raise your hand. Opposed? AYE 9 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 2 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD ABSENT ABSENT Ronald Rlpley: The motion carries. Item #3 Ocean Beach Club, LLC Page 3 Map M-5 Not to Scale Ocean Beach b, LLC Gpin 2428-03-2152, 3031 ZONING HISTORY 1 11-12-73 -- Rezoning (B-1 Retail Bus~ness to M-H Motel-Hotel) and a Conditional Use Permit (Multiple-family dwellings- 87 un~ts)- Approved 4-16-73 -- Street Closure - Approved 2. 1-14-97 -- Enlargement of a Nonconforming Use - Approved 3. 9-10-96 -- Conditional Use Permit (W~reless Commun~cabon Facility) - Approved 6-11-90 -- Conditional Use Permit (M~n~-golf) - Approved 4 9-26-88 -- Rezoning (A-12 Apartment to RT-4 Resort Tourist) - Approved 9-26-88 -- Conditional Use Permit (Home for the Aged) - Den~ed 11-13-86 --Rezoning (A-1 Apartment to B-4 Resort Commercial)- W~thdrawn 5 6-13-88 -- Change in a Nonconforming Use - Den~ed FORM NO P S liE) OUR City of Virginia Beach I~TER-OFFICE CORR~SPOIqOE~ICE In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF-5713 DATE: July 31, 2003 TO: Leslie L. Lilley-~ DEPT: City Attorney FROM: B. Kay Wilson~k.~TM DEPT: City Attorney Conditional Zoning Application Ocean Beach Club, LLC The above-referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on August 12, 2003. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated June 11, 2003, and have determined it to be legally sufficient and in proper legal form. A copy of the agreement is attached. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further. BKW Enclosure Document Prepared By and Return to: Troutman Sanders LLP 222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 2000 Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462 Phone: 757-687- 7500 Facsimile: 757-687-7510 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made this///~ day of June, 2003 by and between OCEAN BEACH CLUB~ LLC, a Virginia hmited liability company (hereinafter referred to as "Grantor"), the owner of certain of property generally located on the west side of Atlantic Avenue, between 34th Street and 33ra Street, in Virginia Beach, Virginia; and the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of V~rginia (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, all of the Grantor's property described as set forth on Exhibit A is zoned RT-1, and the Grantor has initiated an amendment to the Zoning Map of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, by petition addressed to the Grantee, so as to change the zoning classification of a portion of the Grantor's property from RT-1 to RT-2 Conditional; WHEREAS, the portion of the Property subject to the Grantor's rezoning request contains approximately 10,511 square feet, is more particularly described in the attached Exhibit B, and is the only portion of the Grantor's property subject to Grantor's rezoning request and this Agreement (the "Property"). WHEREAS, the Grantor acknowledges that the competing and sometimes incompatible uses conflict, and that in order to permit differing uses on and in the area of the subject Property and at the same time to recognize the effects of the change and the need for various types of uses, certain reasonable conditions governing the use of the Property for the protection of the GPIN: 2428-03-2152; 2428-03-3031 community that are not generally applicable to land similarly zoned RT-2 are needed to cope with the situation to which the Grantor's rezoning application gives rise; and WHEREAS, the Grantor has voluntarily proffered in writing ~n advance of and prior to the public hearing before the Grantee, as part of the proposed conditional amendment to the Zoning Map, in addition to the regulations provided for in the ex~sting RT-2 zoning district by the existing City's Zomng Ordinance (the "CZO"), the following reasonable conditions related to the physical development, operation and use of the Property to be adopted as a part of said amendment to the new Zomng Map relative to the Property, all of which have a reasonable relation to the rezoning and the need for which ~s generated by the rezoning; and WHEREAS, said conditions having been proffered by the Grantor and allowed and accepted by the Grantee as part of the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, such conditions shall continue in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes the zoning on the Property covered by such conditions; prowded, however, that such conditions shall continue despite a subsequent amendment if the subsequent amendment is part of the comprehensive ~mplementation of a new or substantially revised zoning ordinance, unless, notwithstanding the foregoing, these conditions are amended or varied by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and executed by the record owner of the subject Property at the time of recordation of such instrument; provided, further, that said instrument is consented to by the Grantee in writing as evidenced by a certified copy of ordinance or resolution adopted by the governing body of the Grantee, after a public hearing before the Grantee advertised pursuant to the provisions of the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2- 2204, which said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along w~th said instrument as conclusive evidence of such consent. NOW THEREFORE, the Grantor, for itself, it's successors, assigns, grantees, and other successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement by or exaction from the Grantee or its governing body and without any element of compulsion of quid pro quo for zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit or subdiwsion approval, hereby make the following declaration of conditions and restrictions which shall restrict and govern the physical 2 development, operation and use of the Property and hereby covenant and agree that these proffers (collectively, the "Proffers") shall constitute covenants running with the said Property, which shall be binding upon the Property and upon all parties and persons claiming under or through the Grantor, it's heirs, personal representatives, assigns, grantees and other successors in ~nterest or title, namely: 1. The architectural design and color of the structure constructed on the Property shall be substantially compatible with the architectural style and colors depicted in the rendering entitled "Ocean Beach Club -- Gold Key Resorts Retail/Conference Center Atlantic Ave. Elevation" prepared by NCG Architects, Inc., submitted by the Grantor in connection with the rezoning application, and on file with the Planning Department of the City of Virginia Beach. Further conditions mandated by applicable development ordinances may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan and/or subdivision review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. All references hereinabove to zomng districts and to regulations applicable thereto, refer to the City Zoning Ordinance of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in force as of the date the conditional zoning amendment is approved by the Grantee. The Grantor covenant and agree that (1) the Zoning Administrator of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia shall be vested with all necessary authority on behalf of the governing body of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia to administer and enforce the foregoing conditions, including (i) the ordering in writing of the remedying of any noncompliance with such conditions, and (ii) the bringing of legal action or stat to ensure compliance with such conditions, including mandatory or prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages or other appropriate action, suit or proceedings; (2) the failure to meet all conditions shall constitute cause to deny the ~ssuance of any of the required building or occupancy permits as may be appropriate; (3) if aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Administrator made pursuant to the provisions of the City Code, the CZO or this Agreement, the Grantor shall petition the govermng body for the review thereof prior to instituting proceedings in court; and (4) the Zoning Map shall show by an appropriate symbol on the map the existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the subject Property on the map and that the ordinance and the conchtions may be made readily avmlable and accessible for public inspection in the office of the Zoning Administrator and in the Planning Department and that they shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and indexed in the name of the Grantor and Grantee. [Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank] [Signature page to Agreement] GRANTOR: OCEAN BEACH CLUB, LLC David Shively, Associates, Inc., Managing Beach Club, LLC Member of BQTS of Ocean Commonwealth of Virginia City of Virginia Beach, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this !~ day of ,) c~ ~ 2003, by David Shively, Vice President of BQTS Associates, Inc., Managing Member of Ocean Beach Club, IJI~C. He is personally known to me. My Commission Expires: Notary Public 237417v2 EXHIBIT A ALL THAT certain piece or parcel of land, together with the improvements thereon and the appurtenances thereunto belonging, lying, situate and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and being more particularly described as follows: PARCEL I: Beginning at a point in the Southwest intersection of Atlantic Avenue and a twenty (20) foot lane bisecting Block 79, as shown on the Plat Number 3 of the Virginia Beach Development Company, duly of record in the Clerk's office of the Circuit Court of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Map Book 3, at page 177; thence in a southerly direction along the western side of Atlantic Avenue forty (40) feet to a point; thence in a westerly direction and parallel to the north side of 33rd Street, one hundred forty (140) feet to a point; thence in a southerly direction and parallel to Atlantic Avenue, one hundred (100) feet to the north side of 33d Street; thence in a westerly direction along the north side of 33rd Street, one hundred eighteen (118) feet to a point in the eastern line of Pacific Avenue, one hundred forty (140) feet to a point; thence east along the southern side of the aforesaid twenty (20) foot lane two hundred fifty-eight (258) feet to a point of beginning; and said parcel is comprised of the north forty (40) feet to lots one (1) and two (2), the north forty (40) feet to the eastern forty (40) feet of Lot three (3), the western ten (10) feet of Lot three (3), Lot four (4), the eastern thirty-eight (38) feet of Lot five (5), all in said Block seventy-nine (79), and the twenty (20) foot strip adjoining said Lot five (5) on the west, conveyed to Sea Pines Corporation by the City of Virginia Beach, by deed dated May 14, 1951, and duly recorded in said Clerk's Office in Deed Book 295, at page 486. PARCEL 1I: Beginning at a point in the northwest intersection of Atlantic Avenue and the aforesaid twenty (20) foot lane bisecting said Block seventy-nine (79); thence in a northerly direction along the western side of Atlantic Avenue one hundred forty (140) feet to 34th Street; thence in a westerly direction along the southern side of 34th Street, two hundred fifty-eight (258) feet to the eastern line of Pacific Avenue; thence in a southerly direction along the eastern line of Pacific Avenue one hundred forty (140) feet to a point; thence in an easterly direction along the northern side of the said twenty (20) foot lane two hundred fifty-eight (258) feet to the point of beginning; said parcel is comprised of lots six (6) through nine (9) and the eastern thirty-eight (38) feet of lot ten (10), in said Block seventy-nine (79) and the twenty (20) foot strip adjoining the said lot ten (10) on the west conveyed to Sea Pines Corporation by the City of Virginia Beach, by deed dated May 14, 1951, and duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, in Deed Book 295, at page 486. PARCEL 1II: All that certain alley or lane, situate in the Virginia Beach Borough of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, twenty (20) feet in width and extending from Easterly line of Pacific Avenue to the Westerly line of Atlantic Avenue, which alley bisects Block 79 as shown upon that certain plat entitled "Property of Virginia Beach Development Co., Virginia Beach, Virginia, North of 25th Street," which map is or record in the Clerk's office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach in Map Book 3, at pages 176-177, said alley having been closed and vacated by Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach. PARCEL IV: All that certain lot, piece of land, in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, with the buildings and improvements thereon, and the appurtenances thereunto belonging, known, numbered and designated as Lot No. One (1) and the southern then (10) feet of Lot No. Two (2) in Block Eighty -One (81), as shown on Plat No. 3 of part of the property of Virginia Beach Development Company, which plat is duly of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the said City, in Map Book 3, at page 177. Beginning at a stake in the western side of Atlantic Boulevard where it intersects with the northern side of 34th Street; thence along the northerly side of 34th Street in a westerly direction 150 feet to a stake on the eastern side of Atlantic Avenue in a northerly direction 60 feet; thence along a line parallel to the northern side of 34th Street in an easterly direction 150 feet to the western side of Atlantic Boulevard; thence along the Western side of Atlantic Boulevard, 60 feet to the point of beginning. PARCEL V: All of those certain lots, pieces and parcels of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon and the appurtenances thereunto belonging, situate, lying and being in the City of Virginia Beach, State of Virginia, known, numbered and designated as Lots Five (5) and Six (6) in Block numbered Seventy-Eight (78), on Plat numbered Three (3), of the property of Virginia Beach Development Company, which plat is recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Map Book 3, at page 177, to which reference is hereby made for a more particular description of said lots. EXHIBIT B The portion of the Grantor's Property subject to the Grantor's rezoning request and this Agreement contains approximately 10,511 square feet of land and is more particularly described as follows: All that certain property identified as "Area Currently Zoned RT-1; Proposed Rezoning to RT-2" as shown on that exhibit titled "Ocean Beach Club Rezoning Exhibit" prepared by Clark Nexsen and dated 3/24/03, having an area of 10,511.44, 0.241 acres, and more specifically identified as: That property located on the west side of Atlantic Avenue between 34th Street and 33rd Street, Beginning at a Point; Thence S 76006'52" W a Distance of 70.00'; thence N 13o53'08'' W a Distance of 150.16'; thence N 76o06'52'' E a Distance of 70.00'; thence 13053'08'' E a Distance of 150.16'; which is the point of beginning, having an area of 10,511.44 Square Feet, 0.241 Acres. IT BEING a portion of the Grantor's Property described as set forth on Exhibit A. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Riganto, LLC - Change of Zoning and Conditional Use Permits MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 Background: (A) Change of Zoning D~strict Classification from AG-1 and AG-2 Agncultural Distr~ct to Condibonal R-20 Residential District and from AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural District to Cond~bonal P-1 Preservabon D~strict (90 9 acres) (B) Conditional Use Permit for an Open Space Promotion (185.1 acres) (C) Conditional Use Permit for recreabonal and amusement facdibes of an outdoor nature (stables and horse riding nngs) (90.9 acres). Considerations: The Planning Commission heard and recommended approval of the requests at their May 8, 2002 meebng. The City Council voted to indefinitely defer the requests at their June 25, 2002 meeting. The rabonale for the deferral was to allow the work of the Sandbndge Road Project Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) to come to completion, as the potenbal existed for some of the alternatwe ahgnments of Sandbridge Road to affect the subject property. However, the penod of deferral conbnued past the work of the CAC to allow for the complebon of the work of the Trans~bon Area Technical Advisory Committee (TATAC). With the completion of that work and the adoption by the C~ty Council of Comprehensive Plan Intenm Guidelines for the Transition Area, the applicant revised the plans for th~s proposed development. Revisions to the plan for th~s project to reflect the recommendabons of the TATAC ~nclud~ng the Hybrid 1 Alternatwe for Sandbridge Road, recently adopted by the City Councd as an element of the Master Transportation Plan (MTP) The proposed development has been assessed through use of Transibon Area Design Guidelines, ~ncluding the Matrix Based on that assessment, the development appears to be consistent w~th the goals and objecbves of the Comprehensive Plan to the extent that the residential component merits a density of 0.98 unit per acre, which equates to 269 dwelling un~ts for th~s 276 acre s~te. The applicant ~s requesbng 256 s~ngle-famdy dwellings as part of an overall development that w~ll provide 170 acres of open space (62 percent of the total s~te), approximately 91 of which will be devoted to equestrian fac~l~bes for d~sabled ind~wduals ~n the c~ty and surrounding region Moreover, connecbons of R~ganto, LLC Page 2 of 3 the open space to adjoining properties are prowded, ensunng that this development becomes part of the larger open space system that w~ll make this area of the c~ty "an open space and recreational mecca with residenbal development present only to the extent ~t supports the primary purpose of advancing open space and recreabonal uses" Staff concludes this development provides an appropriate m~x of natural resource and open space preservation and enhancement, amenity, and overall design, which is consistent w~th the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Specific details regarding the plan and ~ts consistency with the Comprehensive Plan policies and the Trans~bon Area Design Guidelines are provided in the attached staff report Staff recommended approval, subject to conditions. There was opposibon to the request Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 with 1 abstention to approve this request w~th the following cond~bons: Conditions (Open Space Promotion Use Permit) 1 The applicant shall obtain approval from the City Council to encroach ~nto the public right-of-way prior to installabon of the s~gn in the median of the entrance roadway to this development. If approval for the encroachment ~s not granted by the C~ty Councd, the applicant shall relocate the s~gn outside the public right-of-way 2. The applicant shall submit for review and approval to the D~rector of Planning or his or her designee prior to final site plan approval a plan showing how the area between the residential lots and Sandbridge Road area w~ll be landscaped. Such plan shall ~nclude a detailed descripbon of the plant species, size, and spacing for any areas to be reforested. . Fencing w~thin the res~denbal area of the community shall be limited to white aluminum picket style which ~s no more than 50 percent opaque, substanbally s~m~lar to the fence detail sheet (enbtled "FencCoat- Jenth's Powder Coated F~nish") submitted to and on file w~th the Department of Planning. Conditions (Recreational Facility Use Permit- Equestrian) 1. A 50 foot w~de vegetabve buffer shall be ~nstalled along the shoreline of the stormwater management facihty adjacent to the Equ~-K~ds facility. R~ganto, LLC Page 3 of 3 2. The facility shall be for the exclusive use of the non-profit organ~zabon known as Equ~-K~ds. There shall be no horse shows staged by other organizabons. There shall be no horse shows staged for the purpose of attracting the public or promoting compebbon between horses or equestrian groups beyond that for the chents served by Equi-Kids. 3. Any lighting for the facd~ty shall be d~rected ~n toward the s~te and shall not exceed a height of 14 feet. · Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department ,~~L~ City Manager: ~~/.... ,~'~ RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) May 8, 2002 REV: August 12, 2003 General Information: REQUEST: Change of Zoning D~strict Classification from AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural District to Conditional R-20 Res~denbal District and from AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural District to Conditional P-1 Preservabon District (90.9 acres) Condibonal Use Permit for an Open Space Promotion (185.1 acres) Conditional Use Permit for recreational and amusement facilities of an outdoor nature (stables and horse riding rings) (90.9 acres). Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 1 ADDRESS: South s~de of Sandbridge Road, 3400 feet more or less east of Princess Anne Road GPIN: ELECTION DISTRICT' SITE SIZE: STAFF PLANNER: APPLICATION HISTORY: 24135994540000 7 - PRINCESS ANNE 276 acres Stephen J. White These requests were deferred at the July 11, 2001 Planning Commission at the request of the applicant. The deferral was requested to prowde the applicant an opportunity to attempt to address a variety of issues raised by Staff The requests were deferred again at the August 8 and December 12, 2001 public heanngs and again at the February 13, 2002 hearings. The Planning Commission heard and recommended approval of the requests at their May 8, 2002 meebng. The C~ty Council voted to ~ndefln~tely defer the requests at their June 25, 2002 meebng. The rabonale for the deferral was to allow the work of the Sandbndge Road Project C~bzen Adwsory Committee (CAC) to come to complebon, as the potential existed for some of the alternabve ahgnments of Sandbndge Road to affect the subject property. However, the period of deferral conbnued past the work of the CAC to allow for the complebon of the work of the Trans~bon Area Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 2 PURPOSE: Technical Advisory Committee (TATAC). With the complebon of that work and the adoption by the C~ty Council of Comprehensive Plan Interim Guidelines for the Transibon Area, the applicant revised the plans. The rews~ons reflect the recommendabons of the TATAC and include the Hybrid 1 Alternabve for Sandbridge Road, recently adopted by the C~ty Council as an element of the Master Transportation Plan (MTP). To develop the site for 256 single-family homes with open spaces, tra~ls, and an equestrian facility for Equi-K~ds. Major Issues: · Consistency with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan for the Trans~bon Area. · Impact on C~ty systems (transportabon, ubl~ties, schools). Compatibihty with the surrounding area in terms of land use. Land Use, Zoning, and Site Characteristics: Existing Land Use and Zoninq The property ~s currently zoned AG- I and AG-2 Agricultural D~stricts The majority of th~s property ~s ~n cultivabon The remaining portions are wooded. The City's Agriculture Department reports that development of the site as proposed w~ll result in the reduction of approximately 190 acres of farmland Surroundinq Land Use and Zoninq North: · Sandbndge Road · Red Mill Elementary School/R-15 Residential · S~ngle-family residential (Lagomar neighborhood) Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 3 South: East: West: / R-15 Residenbal · Rural s~ngle-family dwelhngs and cultivated land / AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural · Rural s~ngle-family dwellings / AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural · Cultivated land / AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural Zoning and Land Use Statistics With Existing Zoning: The property could be developed w~th 18 s~ngle-famdy dwellings under the density provisions of Secbon 402 of the City Zoning Ordinance or with any other permitted or condibonal use allowed in the AG Districts. With Proposed Zoning: On the portion of the s~te zoned R-20 (Open Space Promotion), the property wdl be developed with up to 256 single-family dwellings meebng the proffers of the submitted Conditional Zoning Agreement. On the portion of the property zoned P-1 Preservation, a facility for Equ~-Kids, a therapeubc horse-riding program, could be developed. Zonin.q History There has been no zoning acbwty on this parcel s~nce 1981. The area to the west was downzoned to AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural in 1986 The area to the east has had a number of Condibonal Use Permits for s~ngle-fam~ly dwellings during the m~d-1980s. Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) The western port~on of the property is s~tuated in an AICUZ area of 65-70dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. The eastern porbon of the property is an AICUZ of less than 65 dB Ldn. Natural Resource and Physical Characteristics The s~te is almost completely under culbvabon. The areas not under cultwation are wooded. The site drains either to the north toward Scopus Marsh or eastward to Ashvdle Bridge Creek and Back Bay. The rates of actual flow are heavdy wind- influenced. There are no tidal or non-bdal wetlands on any portions of the s~te to be developed. There are areas of non-bdal wetlands as defined by the U.S. Corps of Engineers (but not by the City) ~n the wooded area that w~ll be preserved. None of the property is within the 100-year floodplain Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 4 Public Facilities and Services Water and Sewer Water: There is no C~ty water in Sandbridge Road fronting th~s parcel In order for the site to be developed as proffered, the development must connect to the C~ty water system Plans and bonds for construcbon would be required. Sewer: There is no City sewer available to this site. In order for the site to be developed as proffered, the development must connect to the City sewer system. Plans and bonds for construcbon of a pump station and sewer system would be required. Transportation Traffic Calculations: Calculation of the traffic for the proposed development is complicated by the fact that there is no known traffic generabon standard for an equestrian center of the type proposed. According to informabon provided to Staff by Equ~-K~ds, "approximately 75 students nde [the horses] dunng weekday afternoons and evenings. Another 20-30 participate weekday mornings through a School Partnership Program w~th local elementary schools. Over 100 interested ~nd~viduals are on our wa~bng I~st as of January 2001 .... With increased funding, more full time staffing would be able to begin to provide services to the 30,000 special needs ~nd~wduals in the region." Based on this ~nformation, it appears that the number of trips to be generated could be anywhere between 50 to 100 for the present and could ~ncrease ~n the future as Equ~-Kids moves ~nto new facilities and is able to ~ncrease the number of students ~t could handle. For the purpose of th~s analys~s, therefore, Staff has placed the number at 80 trips These 80 trips added to the 2,560 trips generated by the dwellings results in 2,640 trips Street Name Present Present Generated Traffic Volume Capacity Ex~sbng Land Use - 0 Sandbr~dge Road 11,340 ~ ADT ~ 16,200 ADT Potenbal Land Use 2 -_ 180 Proposed Land Use 3_ 2,640 Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 5 Average Dady Trips as defined by 18 s~ngle-famdy dwelhngs as defined by 256 smgle-famdy dwelhngs and Equ~-K~ds facd~ty Traffic Engineering notes that: 1. R~ght and left turn lanes on Sandbndge Road w~ll be required, and 2. A traffic signal may be warranted The developer w~ll be required to post a bond based on the traffic generated by the project Master Transportation Plan (MTP) / Capital Improvement Program (CIP): The Master Transportabon Plan was amended by the C~ty Council on May 27, 2003 to show Sandbndge Road as an undivided roadway with a 70 foot right-of-way with a b~keway and a scenic easement. The MTP also recommends that Sandbridge Road follow an alignment to the south and west of the existing roadway. This alignment is known as Hybrid 1 Alignment and ~s a result of the work of the Sandbridge Road Project C~tizen Advisory Committee. The ex~sting Sandbridge Road right-of-way ~n th~s wcmity is approximately 30 feet in width but is variable at places. The submitted plans show sufficient area for the right-of-way as needed for the Sandbridge Road project and prowdes for the alignment shown on the MTP. Schools School Name Current Capacity Portables Additional Generation Enrollment2 Currently Portables on Site Needed Red Mdl 866 812 8 4 79 Elementary Princess Anne 1,511 1,492 0 I 46 Kellam 2,276 1,791 8 2 50 "generation" represents the d~fference between generated students under the ex~sbng zoning and under the proposed zoning The number can be positive (add~bonal students) o~ negabve (fewer students) 2 as of September 30, 2003 Red Mdl Elementary School is currently more than 10 percent over ~ts opbmal ubhzation capacity. The current development of Lagomar Section 7 to the north will bnng an additional 390 housing un~ts and approximately 90 to 120 new students to the Red Mdl attendance zone, resulting in severe overcrowding at th~s school. However, the following Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project addresses the overcrowding at th~s fac~hty. CIP # 1-090 Elementary School 2005 Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 6 This project ~s for construcbon of an elementary school with a design capacity of 900 students. Necessary classroom space and resource areas should result in a facility of approximately 87,500 square feet on a seventeen acre s~te at the ~ntersection of Pnncess Anne Road and Sandbndge Road, which has been acquired. Construction ~s scheduled to begin ~n March 2004 for a September 2005 opening. Public Safety Police: No comments. Fire and Rescue: Capital Improvement Program Project 3-404, for the construcbon of a new 13,800 square foot fire station adjacent to the Princess Anne Recreabon Center on N~mmo Parkway near General Booth Boulevard, was recently closed out with the complebon of this new stabon. Summary of Proposal Proposal · The applicant desires to develop th~s ex~sting 276 acre site for a 256 lot s~ngle-famdy residential development on 185.1 acres and an equestrian fac~hty for Equ~-K~ds on 90.9 acres. · The site is located ~n the Transition Area, south of the Green Line. Site Desiqn · Conceptually, the s~te plan depicts the exisbng property divided ~nto three sections: (1) single-family residential lots; (2) facilities for "Equi-K~ds Therapeutic R~ding Center;" and (3) a preserved existing wooded area. Residential Area --- The res~denbal area ~s designed in a single-famdy residenbal lot layout, with one long curvil~near road that encircles the center of the neighborhood. Landscaped circles are located at the intersections of th~s road with one of the collector roads that runs to the southwestern port~on of the neighborhood. Landscaped c~rcles are also located at four other roadway ~ntersections Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 7 The development proposes to utilize the Open Space Promobon prows~on of the C~ty Zoning Ordinance (CZO) (Secbon 250), which allows the reducbon of lot sizes to the minimum set out in Section 506 of the CZO, which ~s 12,000 square feet for the R-20 zoning category. Secbon 506 sets out all other dimensional requirements of the developm~nt.'Addibonally, 15 percent of the neighborhood must be set aside as open space. Th~s requirement is discussed below in the Landscape and Open Space section. The residential area is arranged so that each lot backs up e~ther to open space or to one of the stormwater management ponds. Some of the open space is, however, located on adjoining property and could, ~n the future, be developed in some use other than open space. Each residential lot will have staggered front setbacks rather than a un~form setback, thus enhancing the streetscape throughout the development. Each lot will have a decorative white cast aluminum mailbox, which will be un~form throughout the development. Corridors of open space run through the center of the site connecting open space on the western s~de of the neighborhood with the eastern s~de of the neighborhood. Seven stormwater management ponds are shown on the site plan. The ponds wdl all be benched. One of the ponds acts as a diws~on between the ma~n portion of the Equ~-K~ds facility and the res~denbal lots. The remaining ponds are spread throughout the community w~th a pond located ~n each of the major secbons. Review Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 8 of the plan by City agencies has indicated concern over the s~ze and conflgurabon of the proposed ponds, noting that one or two larger and broader facilities would be more functional than the smaller s~ze and long and narrow configuration of those proposed. Concern has also been noted that a vegetated buffer should be planted between the stormwater pond and the horse riding areas due to the potential for direct runoff of excrement and loose dirt into the ponds Equestrian Center--- The eastern 90.9 acres is devoted to the Equ~-Kids center. The main portion of the center is located adjacent to Sandbridge Road. Conceptual s~te design for this area shows the entrance to the Equi-K~ds center from the ma~n roadway entenng the residential neighborhood. The plan shows three riding rings and a stable and administration building. The plan indicates that a "decorabve fence" will run along the periphery of the center adjacent to Sandbridge Road, the ma~n entrance to the community, and the lake separating the center from the residenbal area. Vehicular and Pedestrian Access Residential Area --- A d~wded roadway with a wide landscaped median and 15 foot travel lanes on e~ther side of the median prowdes access to the development from Sandbridge Road at ~ts exisbng intersecbon with Entrada Drive. Access to the individual residenbal lots ~s provided by roadways set w~thin a 50 foot w~de right-of-way. The details submitted with the plan show that the pavement w~dth within this right-of-way will be 30 feet with rolled curbs The sidewalks along the roadways provide pedestrian access through the community and connect to the trad system provided through the open space ~n the community. Tra~ls separate from the roadways are located: o along the lake adjacent to the stormwater pond that separates the residential area from the open space along Sandbndge Road, o along the preserved area of trees on the eastern side of the site, and o at the southern edge of the property connecting to any future development to the south. · Beyond the designated trads, the open space corridors that run behind residential lots prowde open space and recreational opportunities. Each side of these corridors Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) ~ :: ....... Page 9 is physically separated from the residenbal lots by a four-foot h~gh white aluminum wrought ~ron-style fence, which will be required along the rear of all the building lots. Limiting this fence to an open four-foot h~gh fence ensures that the open space corridor ~s safe through v~sibd~ty from adjacent lots and increases the open space "feel" of the corridor. Six-foot h~gh solid fences along the rear lot lines of these lots will be prohibited by the Homeowner's Association's "Restricbons" and through a condition attached to the Open Space Promobon permit, recommended at the end of this report. A vehicular street t~e to the adjoining undeveloped properties is not shown, but opportunities to make such a connection are provided at two places along the southern edge of the property, which are shown as open space connecbons on the plan. Equestnan Center--- Conceptual site design shows the entrance to the facility at the ma~n roadway entering the site from Sandbndge Road at its ex~sting ~ntersection with Entrada Drive. A parking area ~s not shown; however, adequate space exists for parking to be prowded Th~s detad can be addressed at site plan review should these applications be approved. Architectural Design Residential Area --- As noted below ~n the d~scussion for Proffer 4, all of the homes will have an exterior surface of at least 75% brick and all w~ll have a minimum of 2,800 square feet of heated hving area. No addibonal details on the architecture of these buddings are available. · Architecture of the structures in the neighborhood must be rewewed and approved by the Homeowner's Association Equestrian Center--- · Rendered drawings of the Equ~-K~ds facility were submitted w~th the applicabon and as noted under Proffer 5 Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 10 · The buildings are done in a 'modern rural' style, with roof dormers, cupolas, and tradibonal plan posts. Exterior building materials and colors are not known. Landscape and Open Space Open Space Promotion Option .... Under the Open Space Promotion provision, at least 15 percent of the total acreage of the property, excluding streets and parking areas, must be set aside as open space. Section 253 of the CZO notes that All open space areas shall be permanently maintained as landscaped park, recreational space, or natural areas. No open space shall be used except ~n its natural state or for community recreational-related uses ... No structure shall be erected except for maintenance or recreabonal purposes. The intent of the Open Space Promotion provision is to provide for "a more flexible means of residential development" and "to promote the preservation of open space through lot s~ze reductions without density variabon" (Secbon 250). The prowsions of the Open Space Promobon ~mply that the preserved open space should be "made available for use of the residents" (Secbon 253(e)(2)). The ~ntent, therefore, ~s that the open space ~s easily accessible, available for the use of the residents of the community and maintained either by a Homeowners Association (or s~mdar organization) or by the City (Sec. 253(e)). The submitted s~te plan ~nd~cates that of the 185.1 total acres w~thin the res~denbal area, there are 58 acres of qualifying open space. The requirement for this development ~s 27 8 acres. There are also 90.8 acres of equestrian-related open space; however, th~s area ~s only accessible to the residents of the community and the pubhc through the visibd~ty of the open space and equestrian acbwties from Sandbridge Road and the trad along the lake w~th~n the community, and thus does not quahfy for the Open Space Promobon prows~ons. The Transibon Area policies of the Comprehensive Plan call for developments of th~s type to strive for 50 percent open space. Of the total acreage of the s~te (276 acres), almost 62 percent is ~n "open space," whether that open space be neighborhood spaces, preserved wooded areas, or equestrian facilities Even ~f the proposed right- of-way for the relocation of the Sandbridge Road and the areas of the ex~sbng s~te north and east of that right-of-way were ehminated from consideration, the percentage of total open space for the development ~s still above 50 percent. The 90.9 acres of the Equi-Kids facd~ty w~ll be zoned P-1 Preservation, and wdl be, as noted below in the description of Proffer 5, subd~wded from the res~denbal portion of the community and transferred by deed of gift to a non-profit corporation, Equi- Kids Therapeutic Riding Center Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 11 Landscape Design .... · Landscaping for the residential community is provided along the roadways and at the open space corridors through the center of the site. Extensive open space ~s provided along Sandbridge Road, consistent w~th the recommendabons of the Comprehensive Plan Th~s landscape treatment w~ll maintain much of the open space wsta that currently exists along Sandbridge Road. Entrance signage ~s shown on the plan w~thin the median of the entrance roadway. The entrance sign consists of a cobblestone panel with lettering and two rails on each s~de of the main panel secured at the end by cobblestone-faced p~ers. S~nce this sign will be located w~thin the median (and thus within a public right-of-way), an encroachment agreement with the City will be required. Landscape enhancement for the equestrian center consists of a white three-rad wnyl fence around the periphery of the ma~n riding area along Sandbndge Road and the stormwater pond. Proffers PROFFER # 1 When the Property is developed, it shall be developed as a single family res~denbal community of no more than two hundred fifty-six (256) building lots w~th parklands, open spaces, trails, an Equi-K~ds Therapeubc R~d~ng Center and other amenibes substanbally ~n conformance w~th the Exhibit enbtled "Conceptual Site Layout Plan of Heritage Park Sandbndge Road, Virginia Beach, VA" dated 04/02/02, prepared by MSA, P.C., which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach C~ty Council and is on file with the V~rg~n~a Beach Department of Planning ("Concept Plan"). Staff Evaluation: The specific details of the development were provided above in the Summary of Proposal section. The Transition Area Matrix, which/s a component of the design and development gu/dehnes for the Transition Area, was used to assist in the evaluation of th/s development. The result of that evaluation was a score that suggested a maximum density for the development of 0.98 dwelling units per Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 12 PROFFER # 2 Staff Evaluation: PROFFER # 3 Staff Evaluation: acre. Such density is equivalent to a max/mum of 269 un/ts. The design proposed by the applicant provides for 256 un/ts, which/s a density of 0.93 units per acre. When development of the Property is commenced, the party of the first part shall install the landscaped "Entrance Plan", "Identification S~gnage", a s~x foot (6') w~de paved mulb-purpose trad, and stormwater retenbon lakes with wetlands benches substanbally ~n accordance with the plan enbtled "Details of Heritage Park Sandbndge Road, Virginia Beach, VA.", dated 04/02/02, prepared by MSA, P.C., which has been exhibited to the V~rgin~a Beach C~ty Councd and is on file w~th the Virginia Beach Department of Planning ("Detail Plan"). The details of the landscape features are described above in the Summary of Proposal section. When the property ~s subdiwded that portion of the Property Zoned R-20 shall be subject to a recorded Declaration of Protective Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("Deed Restricbons") administered by a Property Owners Association. The Entrance feature along Sandbndge Road as well as the Open Space depicted on the Concept Plan and any other common areas shall be dedicated to and maintained by the Property Owners Association. The Deed Restrictions which ~nclude Articles providing for Architectural Controls and Mandatory assessments, has been exhibited to the V~rg~n~a Beach C~ty Council and ~s on file w~th the V~rg~n~a Beach Department of Planning. The Deed Restrictions require decorative white cast aluminum '~Villiamsburg" mailboxes and only white aluminum fencing which ~s no more than fifty percent (50%) opaque. The Open Space Promotion provision requires that the open space and recreation areas be maintained either by a homeowners association or by the C/ty through dedmation of property. The applicant has submitted proposed deed restrictions providing for the maintenance of the open space, thus meeting the requirement. The deed restrictions also regulate architecture and other design elements within the commumty, ensunng a continued high level of quality. The proffer/s acceptable. Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 13 PROFFER # 4 Staff Evaluation: PROFFER # 5 Staff Evaluation: All homes constructed on the residential lots depicted on the Concept Plan shall have an exterior surface of at least seventy-five percent (75%) brick and all front yards and s~de yards adjacent to a pubhc street shall be sodded. Each home shall have a m~nimum of 2800 square feet of heated living area. The proffer provides assurance that the homes should be valued at $400,000 and above and result in real estate tax payments suffmient to cover the costs of prowding services to the development. The development will require extension of water and sewer servmes to the site (the extension of the lines will be borne by the developer), and will have other impacts on C/ty systems. The $400,000 value of the homes is consistent w/th the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan for the Transibon Area. When the Property is subdivided, approximately 90.9 acres of land zoned P-1 as depicted on the "Rezon~ng Exhibit of Heritage Park Sandbndge Road, V~rgin~a Beach, VA." Dated 4/02/02, prepared by MSA, P. C., which has been exhibIted to the Virginia Beach C~ty Council and is on file w~th the Virginia Beach Department of Planning ("Zoning Exhibit") shall be transferred, by Deed of G~ft to EQUI-KIDS THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER, a V~rg~nia non-profit corporabon. In addibon, the GRANTOR, party of the first part, shall contribute the sum of $400,000 00 ~n ~mprovements to the Equi-Kids Therapeutic R~d~ng Center and shall, prior to subdivision approval, post a performance bond ~n that amount with the GRANTEE securing installation of the fencing, access road, stables and facihbes as depicted on the Concept Plan and on Renderings prepared by Porterfield Design Center dated May 15, 2001, which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Councd and are on file ~n the V~rg~n~a Beach Department of Planning This proffer notes that the applicant will contribute $400,000 towards the improvements for the Equi-Kids facilities and w/ll transfer the ownership of the fac#ities to Equi-Kids The applicant/s further guaranteeing that the facilities will be built through agreement to post a Planning Commission Agenda ~o~_ . May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 14 PROFFER# 6 Staff Evaluation: performance bond pnor to subd/wsion approval to cover the cost of the improvements. The proffer does not address whether the property could be transferred or leased to another entity or/f that enbty would have to be non-profit or for-proht. However, the P-1 Zomng for the site and Proffer # 1 restrict the uses of the property to those shown on the site plan; so, even if there was a transfer of property/n the future, the use to which the property could be put ~s hmited without further zoning action and approval by the City Council. Further conditions may be required by the GRANTEE during detaded Site Plan review and administration of applicable C~ty Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. This is a standard proffer noting that all prows/ons of the City Code must be adhered to as the proposal moves toward development. The proffer/s acceptable. City Attorney's Office: The C~ty Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer agreement dated April 15, 2002, and found ~t to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehenswe Plan recommends use of th~s parcel for appropriate growth opportun~bes, consistent w~th the economic vitahty policies of Virginia Beach in accordance w~th other Plan pohcies Th~s area, classified by the Plan as the Trans~bon Area, serves as a land use buffer between the clearly urbanizing area of the north and the clearly rural area of the south. Staff has evaluated the proposed development against the latest Comprehensive Plan policies for the Trans~bon Area, ~ncluding the Transition Area Matrix and the Design Guidelines. Staff concludes that the development satisfies the recommendabons of the plan ~n regard to design and that the dwelhng unit density proposed falls w~thm the Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 15 guidelines regarding maximum allowable density in the Transibon Area (a copy of the matrix is included at the end of this report) Evaluation of Request The requests for a conditional change of zoning and conditional use permits are recommended for approval w~th the conditions that follow after this evaluation. Staff wholeheartedly agrees that the Equi-K~ds organization is an outstanding non-profit that prowdes a much-needed service to this region, and that the applicant ~s to be commended for volunteenng to provide land and funding for a facility for th~s group. Unfortunately, reahzing the development of the Equi-K~ds facihty through this development has been difficult to achieve due to the need to continually evolve th~s development over the course of the last three years ~n order to comply with the policies of the Transition Area. The prowsion of the Equi-K~ds facihty was originally tied a 276 unit s~ngle-famdy residenbal subdivision. The original designs for the development also lacked the uniqueness, natural resource preservabon and enhancement, amenity, and open space and recreational integration in the overall design as the Comprehensive Plan calls for Staff, as the professionals charged with objectively evaluating proposals for development for consistency with City plans, policies, and ordinances, could not lend ~ts support to the prewous proposals. The applicant, however, has persevered with Staff through the process of working to arrive at a development that more fully meets the Plan's goals and objectives for this area The applicant has created an overall concept and design for this project that meets the majonty of the provisions of the Plan The proposed development has been assessed through use of Transition Area Design Guidelines, ~ncluding the Matrix Based on that assessment, the development appears to be consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan to the extent that the residenbal component merits a density of 0.98 unit per acre, which equates to 269 dwelling units for this 276-acre site The applicant ~s requesbng 256 s~ngle-family dwellings as part of an overall development that will prowde 170 acres of open space, approximately 91 of which wdl be devoted to equestrian facihties for d~sabled ~ndlwduals ~n the city and surrounding region. Moreover, connecbons of the open space to adjoining properties are provided, ensunng that th~s development becomes part of the larger open space network that w~ll make this area of the c~ty "an open space and recreabonal mecca w~th residential development present only to the extent ~t supports the primary purpose of advancing open space and recreabonal uses." Staff concludes, as now designed, this development prowdes an appropriate mix of natural resource and open space preservabon and enhancement, amenity, and overall Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 16 design, which is generally consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Approval of these requests, therefore, is recommended with the conditions below. Conditions (Open Space Promotion) I ! The applicant shall obtain approval from the City Council to encroach into the public right-of-way prior to installation of the sign in the median of the entrance roadway to this development. If approval for the encroachment is not granted by the C~ty Council, the apphcant shall relocate the sign outside the public right-of- way. . The applicant shall submit for review and approval to the Director of Planning or h~s or her designee prior to final site plan approval a plan showing how the area between the res~denbal lots and Sandbndge Road area will be landscaped Such plan shall ~nclude a detaded descripbon of the plant species, size, and spacing for any areas to be reforested. . Fencing w~thin the residential area of the community shall be limited to white aluminum wrought iron-style which is no more than 50 percent opaque, substantially similar to the fence detail sheet (enbtled "FencCoat - Jerith's Powder Coated Finish") submitted to and on file with the Department of Planning. Conditions (Recreational Facility- Equestrian) 1. A 50 foot wide vegetative buffer shall be installed along the shoreline of the stormwater management facility adjacent to the Equi-Kids facility. 2. The facility shall be for the exclusive use of the non-profit organizabon known as Equi-K~ds. There shall be no horse shows staged by other organizabons. There shall be no horse shows staged for the purpose of attracting the pubhc or promobng compebbon between horses or equestrian groups beyond that for the clients served by Equ~-K~ds. 3. Any lighting for the facihty shall be d~rected in toward the site and shall not exceed a height of 14 feet. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of aoolicable Citv Ordinances. Plans Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 17 submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. Planning Commission Agenda ~ May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 ~,~~ ~ RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) ~. ..... Page 18 Transition Area Matrix (Riganto, LLC - Heritage Park) Maximum allowable residential density for any rezonmg ~n the Transition Area under the pohc~es of the Comprehensive Plan is 1 unit per acre. The maximum density can be achieved through adherence to the Evaluative Criteria prowded below and further explained in the Design Gu~dehnes for the Transition Area. Each section of the Evaluabve Criteria below ties to the Design Gu~dehnes through the graphic ~con at the top of the section. For further guidance on the respective section of the Matrix, turn to the page of the Guidelines that has the corresponding graphic icon. Staff wdl 'score' the proposed development for its consistency with the Evaluative Criteria below. The scores are then totaled and the total ~s 'plugged' ~nto the formula below to determine the recommended maximum density for the development. Evaluative Criteria Total Comments Natural Resources Degrees to which the project preserves and ~ntegrates ~nto the 1 7 overall project the natural resource amenities on the site Amenity Nature and degree of the 3.9 amenity Design Degree to which the project 4 9 ~ncorporates good design ~nto the project L~ne A -- Line B -- Line C -- Dne D -- L~ne E -- (^) [ (B) TOTAL/11 possible points I 0.95 (C) Line (B)* 0.5 = I 0.475 (D) Line (C) + 0.5 du/acre = I 0.975 du/acre (E) Line (D)* total I 269 units developable acres ( 276 ) = I total number of points from the worksheets on the following pages total d~wded by the total number of possible points, which ~s 11 total from L~ne B mulbphed by 0 5, whmh ~s the amount between the basehne density of 0 5 dwelhng un~ts per acre and the possible 1 dwelhng unit per acre (du/ac) total from Line C added to 0 5 du/ac (the basehne density) to obtain the maximum density for the s~te total from L~ne D mulbphed by the number of developable acres on the s~te, thus prowd~ng the maximum number of un~ts for the s~te Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 19 (1) Natural Resources 'existing forests, wetlands, meadows, cultivated fields, and ~ related features~ Total a) Are natural resources protected? Comments: · The ex/sbng wooded areas on the s~te are YES (0 to 1 1.0 preserved point) · The farm/and on the s~te ~s preserved along Sandbndge Road and w/thin the area set as/de for the Equ~-K/ds facd/ty NO (0 points) b) Are natural resources integrated into project? I Comments: , YES (0 to 1 · The ex/sting wooded area/n the southwest 0.7 I portlon of the s~te/s Integrated ~nto the ~ point) project through the clustenng of homes along i /ts penphery · The wooded area on the eastern s/de of the I s/te remains ~ntact Res/denbal lots are not ~ntegrated ~nto the area The area/s devoted to the Equ/-K/ds fac/hty Greater/ntegrabon of the wooded area w/th the res/denbal area would have been/deal NO (0 points) TOTAL (NATURAL RESOURCES) 1.7 Insert ~n appropriate box on page 1 Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 20 a feature that increases the attractiveness or value of the site ~ consistent w~th the goals and objecbves of the~ Total Comprehensive Plan for the Trans~bon Area a) Is the amenity, ~f present, wsually or operabonally available to those who do not own property ~n the development? YES (0 to 1 Comments: point) 0.9 · The amemty for the site consists of the Equ/- K/ds facility, the open space and wooded areas, and the trails that provide operational and visual access to each · The Equ/-K/ds facility/s not physically accessible to those who do not own property /n the development However,/t/s visually available from Sandbndge Road and from ~ the trail system i · The open space/wooded areas of the site NO (0 points) are accessible through the trail system that runs through the development b) Does the amenity consist of recreabonal components? Comments' YES (0 to 1 · Yes, through the walking, runmng, etc that I 0 can occur along the trails and through the point) act/v/t/es provided to the patrons of the Equ/- K/ds facility NO (0 points) Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 21 c) Are improvements made that provide visual or physical access to the natural resources on the site OR are ~mprovements made to create a new amenity to the property? YES (0 to 1 1.0 point) Comments: · Trads · Improvements related to the Equ~-K~ds fac~hty NO (0 points) d) Is there connecbvity linking any open space and/or amenities between this development and adjacent exisbng or future developments? YES (0 to I 10 : Comments: point) : · There are tra~ls and open space connections prowded along the edges of the property, allowing future connecbons to adjoining properties : NO (0 points) I TOTAL (AMENITY) 3.9 Insert ~n appropriate box on page 1 Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 22 (3) Design creation or execubon in an artistic or highly skilled manner consistent w~th the goals and objecbves of the Comprehensive Plan for the Trans~bon Area. a) Are natural or manmade water features ~ncorporated into the development in a way that they serve as amenities? Comments: · There are no natural water features on the site . The design Includes stormwater ponds In venous locations in the community The Iocabon of the ponds provides for accesslb~hty to much of the communlty as an amenity · One of the largest water features in the community is located between the resldenbal lots and the Equi-K~ds facility The lake serves as a both a buffer and an amenity b) Is there an attempt to integrate un~ts with amenities within the development? Comments: · The lots in the community back up to lakes and open space and have accessibility to the trails Total YES (0 to 1 point) NO (0 points) YES (0 to 1 point) NO (0 points) 1.0 1.0 Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 23 c) Does the development retain or create views or scenic v~stas that can be seen from the road? YES (0 to 1 10 point) Comments: · The area along the Sandbndge Road frontage ~s kept open and w~ll be modified through landscape and berm~ng ~mprovements · The frontage also retains an open space and rural wsta by the location of the Equ~-K~ds facility along the roadway NO (0 points) d) Is a mixture of lot sizes and the clustering or massing of homes used to achieve a primarily open space development? i YES (0to 1 0.9 Comments: ; point) · Lot s~zes range from shghtly over 12,000 ! square feet to over 40,000 square feet The ~ average/s 12,000 square feet · There/s some clustenng of homes/n the southwest corner of the site, preserving the wooded area m that location · The majority of the homes are situated on the currently culbvated area of the site, preserving the wooded area as open space · Of the total area of the site, a/most 62%/s NO (0 points) preserved as open space and recreational areas Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 24 e) Does the development use roadway and "hard ~nfrastructure" that ~s appropriate for its design? Is it consistent w~th the ws~on and recommendabons of this area as expressed in YES (0 to 1 1.0 the Comprehensive Plan? point) Comments: · Yes NO (0 points) TOTAL (DESIGN) 4.9 Insert ~n appropriate box on page I Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 25 ? Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 26 / / Planning Commission Agenda ~'- ~' /~. , May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 [~ RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) ~ : Page 27 V ENTRANCE IDENI1FICA'llQN SIGNAGI~ DETAIL Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 28 Details of Heritage Park Sandbridse Road, Virginia Beach, VA 50' R/~/~ SE:CTI~ ASPHALT VAR[ABLE. tMDTH R/~. SECTION Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 29 Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 30 Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 Page 31 APPLICATION PAGE 4 OF 4 CONDITIONAL REZONING CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's Name: R~ganto, L~.L._~C. List All Curr~nt Prope~yOwners: Oav£d...~.~ .Hill, Jr t.. Susa~p ~. H~!l_,_Luke H. ~H~_I~ II PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner Is a CORPORATION, b~t all offieers of the Corporation below (Attach lt~t if necessary) ff the property owner Is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZA'I ION, all members or partner~ tn thc organization below (Attach Itst if necessary) {~ Check hero d the property owner is NOT a corporation, pertnersh~p, firm, or other umncorporatext organization If the applicant l~ not the current owner of the property, complete the Applicant Disclosure rection below: APPLICANT DIS CLOSURE If the apphcant ~s a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below (Attach hst ~fnecessary) If the apphcant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION. hst all members or partners m th~ orgamzation below (Attach hst ~fnecessary) James Pl. Arnhq~d, Member ~4. Breck ~'oodt. ~.ember Check here ~f the apphcant ~s NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other umncorporatcd orgamzat~on CERTIFICATION I certify that the infortnation contained herein is true and accurate. US~gnature Prm~ Name Planning Commission Agenda May 8, 2002 Rev: August 12, 2003 RIGANTO, LLC (HERITAGE PARK) Page 32 Item #18-20 Rlganto, L L C An Ordinance upon Apphcation of Riganto, L L C, for a change of Zoning District Classification Conditional Use Permit for an Open Space Promotion An Ordinance upon Application of Raganto, L L C for a Conditional Use Permit for recreational and amusement Facilities of an outdoor nature District 7 Princess Anne May 8, 2002 REGULAR AGENDA Robert Miller Next Item is Items 18, 19, & 20 Raganto, L L C Eddie Bourdon Give me a minute John Baum I'll ask the rest of the Council Did you all read all these conditions word for word9 Robert Vakos Every word John Baum Every word Okay Betsy Atklnson I did not I want to be honest I dld not Eddie Bourdon Mr Chairman Members of the Planning Commission My name 1s Eddie Bourdon, Virginia Beach attorney for the record, representing the applicant I did hear what was indicated this morning and have taken steps to try and keep this brief 1 do want, however, make a brief presentation describing the applicatmn The project before you is a 276-acre p~ece of property owned by the Hill Family And the applications are for change of zoning category from AG-1, AG-2 to Conditional R-20 with a Conditional Use Permit for Open Space Promotion on 185 acres of the 270-acre property As also the apphcatlon for change of zoning to P-1 Preservation District with a Conditional Use Permit for recreational and amusement faclhtles of an outdoor nature for Equl-Klds for stables, horse riding faclhties, for the therapeutic riding program at F, qul-ICdds And that is the extent of that Use Permit The property is on the south side of Sandbndge Road just east of the Food Lion Shopping Center within one mile of the Red Mill Commons Commercial Power Center, Wal-Mart, future Home Depot and lots of other commercial enterprises there It is directly across the street from the Lagomar Community and from Red Mill Elementary School and it is on the northern boundary of the area, commonly referred to as the Transition Area As your professional staff has appropriately pointed out, my clients, Mr Jim Amhold and Mr Breck Wood along with the Board of Directors of Equl-Kads have been working diligently with your staff for two years on this version of the development proposal on the property In fact, Mr Amhold, Mr Wood, have been working on this project for almost three years It began in the August of 1999, with contracting with the Hill Family and have been working on the project on this property We do appremate everyone's efforts, especially those of your professional staff, both direct and indirect in getting this to the point where we are today Back in August of 2001, you heard a lengthy presentation from me and from a number of representatives and participants in the Equl-Kads program on the earlier version of this plan We're not going to go through that again today, but we would like to adopt that Information into the package if it can be put in them before it goes to Council Otherwise, we will have make a presentation to Council so that everyone is familiar with Eqm-I<hds and what they bnng to the table as far as th~s project is concerned, but we're not going to do that today Barbara Ford, the Executive Director of Equl-Kads will have a very brief few remarks and we'll ask the other folks who came down today to stand, but we did not bring all the participants with us because we didn't anticipate that you want to hear that again That earlier plan, that you heard from us about, was a plan that showed not only an Equl-Kads Therapeutic riding center but also an Equestrian show faclhty in addttlon to that and there were also community resident created of 276 homes on smaller lots than what is before you today As I indicated to you all back in February when you were k~nd enough to Item # 18-20 Rlganto, L L C Page 2 allow me to speak when this item was last on your agenda, we heard what you said We heard what the staff said and your recommendations and we thought at that time, and we certainly believe now that we have incorporated those changes into a plan that everyone - I think they can get onboard with We reduced the number of residential lots by 20 We increased their size to over 21,000 square feet on average And we have - I think, provided that a common vision for how to integrate the Eqm-Kads facdlty into the community We have a plan, which we think does that to the greatest extent practicable, taking safety ~ssues into concern We also got a plan which incorporates the most, if not all of the design recommendations which Mr Randall Arendt who the City has sponsored to come in and give a number of talks - I guess the Southeastern Dlsmct Planning Association, most recently the City, brought Mr Arendt here We've listened to what he's had to say as obviously, your professional staff has and we think this plan fits the bill as far as, his recommendations for a good design that is more rural in character The plan involves, first of all 90 8 acres of area preserved with P-1 Zoning, that will be given to Eqm-Kads That land, located essentially on the east of the property, as you look up there and I got it here on this monitor I'll put this down It is shown up there in green, and I guess this isn't working All that land will be zoned P-1 and will be g~ven to Eqm-Kads That property- the value of that property, the cost of that property to my clients is in excess of two million dollars That's an outright gift to Eqm-K~ds In addition to that, my chent will put in $400,000 of improvements to the Eqm-IZdds property including fencing, water and sewer and stables and of that will be bonded to assure that it will be done and Eqm-K~ds, obviously be investing and raising money to do additional improvements to their property The project also xnvolves within the residential component, 30 1 acres of parklands and open space The additional 19 7 acres of lakes, which are open areas and aesthetic amenities, which you can see on this plan and the more detailed plan is on the pin- point You can see it up there This plan is colored, which makes it a little easier to see than the black and white version And Eqm-K~ds here, all this land will be P-1 It will be theirs All the lakes - the areas of open space that are dedicated to the Homeowners Association out here along Sandbrldge Road, linear park through here, the tree area being preserved here A number of open space areas that are located at the corners of the project and then there are open space easements across the front of each lot There are 24 8 acres ofpubhc right-of-way, within the development, including a very large swath of land for the widening of Sandbndge Road, about 96 acres - excuse, feet of right-of-way for fi~ture widening of Sandbridge Road 110 6 acres is actually in residential lots That's less than 40 percent of total acreage will be in residential lots The density of the development is 93 units per acre, below one unit per acre Across the street, Lagomar density, two and a half, Red Mill, three and half units per acre, where we transition from higher density to lower density The equestrian facility on the east features fencing - I'll let you see on the exhibits - it's split rail fencing along Sandbndge Road Agmn, the ,, lewscape from Sandbndge Road, you know, this farm and all this wooded area, preserved Once you get past the entrance To the west, this is the Homeowners Association The development, that we're putting in is undulated berms and reforestation It will not - 450 plus feet back from Sandbndge Road of open area where the berms and the landscaping and the reforestation will take place Driving along Sandbndge Road, you will not see the residential component of this community Now here, across the Eqm-Kads facility, across the pasture and the farm, again, there will be some landscaping but we also have this nice path and road against this pond, so you may see the front of these houses across the street but again, this is 700 feet or more from Sandbrldge Road and you're not looking at the back of anybody's house That was one of the comments that, and again, one of the things that of the design perspective makes this very much unique All of the wooded areas are being preserved There are- and there's a trail that connects to the central park trail that comes through the woods, comes here, will provide an opportunity to attach to open space to the south When the development plan comes forward for that piece of property And we set this thing up again, so none of the homes back up to each other They back up to ponds or open space or adjacent properties where the opportunity exists and I think we'll come to fruition where they'll be additional ()pen space, so you won't have houses that back up to each other The homes have been proffered, in terms of their size, 2,600 square feet mlmmum living area per home We expect that most will be larger with minimum of brick fronts and sodded yards adjacent to all streets We also - endeavor features which you have copies of and bottom hne is, we are completely Item # 18-20 Rlganto, L L C Page 3 confident that the value of the homes that will be constructed here, will at a minimum be in $250,000 range and maximum will be up to $400,000 and above Using a conservative estimate, you're looking at well over $70 million in real estate tax base from the development of the homes on the property, at well under one unit per acre All infrastructure, water, sewer, roads, etc, are put in at the cost of the developer There are no public monies that expended in putting in the infrastructure for this project for this residential component for Eqm-K~ds There is a reference in here to public school enrollment, which I want to just address briefly Our public school em'ollment has been fairly stagnant over the last two or three years As has our population growth It's been very much controlled over the last 3 to 5 years, low controllable sustmnable growth We've also seen significant increases in our housing costs in the City Homes are more valuable New homes being built are valuable and that's generally very much a good thing I think we all like that and I think that's something that the plan - the City's plan on the way it's been camed out, you know, should be complimented One of the results of this is that many young families with young school age children are choosing or are being forced to live in adjolmng sister cities where housing costs are less And I think that also contributes to the fact that we're not seeing a very significant increase in school age population, you know, it's not a criticism, that's just an observation We here, would point out that across the street is Red Mill Elementary School, which does have some over crowding, but there is a brand new elementary school being built or soon to be built on other property owned by the Hill Family which is again, just less ~han a mile, probably less than a ½ mile to the west of this property Further, St John's Catholic Church is constructing or will be opening in the fall a Parochial School, K-9th Grade, I believe, directly across the street which will also be serving this area and will certainly alleviate some of the crowding conditions that exist in Red Mill This development is not going to necessitate the need for any new schools to be constructed Just in case somebody has that idea The bottom line is that we have 51 percent of this propert5 by our calculations That does not include the landscape easements across the front of the homes, 51 percent in open space, via Eqm-Kads The 30 plus acres of dedicated open space and the lakes on the property Close to 2 ½ million dollars ofvahie donated to Eqm-Iqds both in land and in improvements and this is an area we called for a long time the Rec ca-Mecca and I stated to this Commission previously, I'm a golfer and I love playing, golf but not every recreational opportunity is golf And this special needs population and what Eqm-Kads provides to them in terms of a recreational opportunity, it's not measurable And we think that this is something that is a real jewel in the Transition Area And as I've said, the homes that are going to be constructed here will be beautiful high-end homes with, I believe, positive tax generation and significant increase in our real estate tax base There is one thing that I want to bnng as far as the conditions, which are all acceptable Condition number 2, on Page 21, we ask for a slight rewording It deals with a restriction on Eqm-¥dds being able to have competitions there They do anticipate having competition but only for special needs individuals There are other groups like theirs, and they may host an event where people in those groups like theirs from outside the area, might come to their facility, so all that we would ask is that the very last phrase, Eqm- I4hds is at the end of condition number 2 be deleted and in place of that "special needs organizations" be inserted Ronald Pdpley Where was that agaln'~ Eddie Bourdon The very last word in Condition number 2 on Page 21 Ronald Pdpley Served by Eqm-Kads9 Eddie Bourdon Served by Eqm-Ktds Instead of EquM4hds, special needs organizations They way it's worded does permit, you know, competitions and we want that to be an opportunity, but again, if its not quote unquote Eqm-I4hds - I did review that with Stephen White prior to the meeting but I didn't know of that needed change until I talked to Barbara Ford just before the meeting Ronald Pdpley Betsy? Betsy Atklnson In that regard, and I had written when I read this the other day Number three, any lighting for facilities shall be directed toward and shall not exceed the height of 14 I also would like to add that there be no outside paging Item # 18-20 Puganto, L L C Page 4 Eddie Bourdon I don't think that will be a problem at all Betsy Atklnson You know, if you got competition going on, you got a lot of hey, we need to do this or dunng the day Eddie Bourdon This is not the equestrian faclhty we had in the previous application That isn't a problem We're not anticipating any And - what I brought up is just simply so we're not I don't think anyone would ever care noted, but if we chd There is an event where people from a similar facility or you know, similar program in another part of the state or another part of the country were to come here, that we wouldn't be violating number 2 Again, just for special needs individuals No paging system is fine Ronald Pdpley Yes Will Din9 William Din Eddie, do you have any idea how many additional people that would draw into this area I mean you're talking about a competition that may draw outside help I'm not saying that is not a need or nothing, but I'm just concerned that the Eddie Bourdon These are public events I mean, you're talking about the participants You might have -- the question is better asked of Barbara Ford who is going to come up and speak so I'll defer to her but, from our discussion, we are talking about something that's really - you're talking about the participants themselves and it's not like something that's going to bnng thousands of them, it might not even bnng hundreds of people here, if that comes to pass And that isn't part of the mission It's just something we see as being, you know, as being a possibility Something that they might want to do on occasion if there are similar groups in different areas of the country, but Barbara talked about that We're not talking about an on going situation We're not talking about a recumng situation We're not talking about that's going to draw traffic of any magnitude at all and it would be a weekend situation if ~t occurred at all Ronald Rlpley In your representation, you mentioned some landscape easements Are you refemng to the easements that run through the property or are they on the front9 Eddie Bourdon On the front That is something else that you need to this project and I appreciate the opportunity to address it The roads within the residential component, we are proposing those roads, as indicated in your write up, to be 40 feet in width as far as the right-of-way is concerned with a 28 foot pavement section and swales on rather side This is based on conception and discussion that have been on-going with staff Again, I think Mr Arendt's noted, and just looking at trying to make the road section, as the Comprehensive Plan asks for in the Transition Area, different from the rest of the City and that's what this is, that's what - I think, what we're trying to accomplish But because of that on either side of the 3 foot right-of-way, what we have done is shown ~s 20 foot wide, land, perpetual landscape easement within which there's a 5 foot sidewalk, that's not a straight, you know, we're talking about sidewalk that is rneandenng and double rows of trees on either s~de of that, within that landscape easement and that will be maintained by the Homeowners Association on the fronts of all the homes along the right-of-way That is - we consider that additional open space but for the purpose of meeting all the criteria of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, none of that has been included in those computations, and my calculation that we had 51 percent of this total area in open space area that does not include those easements either Ronald Pdpley The lot hnes run into the easement9 Eddie Bourdon The lot lines - yes sir The lot lines run to the front - to the right-of- way line, the easements within the lots, within the front of the lots Ronald Pdpley Okay Eddie Bourdon And so the fronts will be maintained, you know, by the community association with the trees, the sidewalk, if you will, and other landscaping the Association Item # 18-20 Poganto, L L C Page 5 may put ~n If I could add one other thing, I neglected to mention Along the rear of these lots there will not be privacy fencing, and that's one of the restrictions And that's along the central park trail that runs through the middle of the neighborhood and along the rear of the homes that adjoin - actually the fronts adjoin the Eqm-Kads, so that you won't have any privacy fencing that blocks the views, the vlewscapes that we're trying to create Ronald Pdpley Any other questions of Mr Bourdon? Okay Is there anybody else? Robert Miller Barbara Ford Eddie Bourdon I apologize Let me do just one other thing and th~s will just take a second The Munden's were here and had to leave and they ask me to read a very brief statement on thexr behalf It's from Bill, Pochard, Wayne and Tommy Munden They would like to in behalf of their family let the C~ty Planning Commission know that they fully support this project They feel that this development fits into the Ideas that the City has presented for the Transition Area south of the Green Line We own 75 acres adjacent to this property and feel that this project will only enhance our property values Of course this facility for Eqm-Kads is a great idea for the children in this area These kids will benefit greatly from this project and the rewards will be far reaching We hope that the City Planmng Commission passes this project and many more hke It I'll gtve this to Mr White Ronald Popley Thank you very much Robert Miller Barbara Ford Charhe Salle' Ron, before we get, could I Ronald Rlpley Eddie, could you come back up9 Charhe Salle' As far as, Eddie, condition number 2, if ~ts adopted - the change ~s adopted by the Commission, I would propose that ~t would read after the words Eqm- Kads in that paragraph, we would add "and other orgamzatlons similar to Eqm-I<hds providing service for persons with special needs" Would that Eddie Bourdon Perfectly fine Charhe Salle' Okay Eddie Bourdon Your language is better than mine No problem w~th that whatsoever Robert Mdler Okay Is everybody ready now? Ronald Popley Yes Robert Miller Barbara, you can come up now We just can't seem to get there Barbara Ford Thank you My name ~s Barbara Ford My address ~s 2200 W~ndom Place and I'm the Executive Director for Eqm-I<hds I had to write things down today First of all, I would like to say thank you to the Planning Commission I know we've been here several times and also thanks to the Planning staff I know it's been an Interesting year We would also like to thank Jim Amhold who broke wood for their vision and for taking Eqm-Kads on as their project and I think that it's very exciting for us We've been in existence for 13 years now, and we have just had a huge success, w~th all the specml needs populations that we've served over the last 13 years We teach not only youths, but also adults And today, as of last week, we had served 175 Special Ed children from the elementary school systems in Vlrgnma Beach and ]Norfolk at no charge And so those children would have never had the opportunity to do that As of this week, we have over a 170 people on our wmtlng hstjust waiting to nde Some of them as young as 6 months old, just waiting to get into the program Pdght now, it's taken three years or so to get into the program full t~me, so we desperately need to expand on our Item it 18-20 Pdganto, L L C Page 6 program What I would also like to say is that once this gets approved or on board and stuff, the donation that P~ganto has made to the program is going already to be half way toward our capital campaign goal which we're ready to set offthls smmner, so, we're really excited about that Andjust to have the opportunity to show V~rginla Beach what their Specml Ed population could do As far as the horse shows and everything go, I have managed the State Therapeutic Horse Show for the past 3 or 4 years and have been a member of that organization for the past 13 or 14 years We have about 80 therapeutic riders or Special Ed riders that come in over two day weekend at the Virginia Horse Center in Lexington The revenue that's generated from show fees, hotel fees, you know, lodging, food fees and stuff, I think, would just be a welcome addition to the City of Virginia Beach and I know a long time ago that the Mayor had once wanted Virginia Beach to be one of the most progressive cities with their special needs interest and I think having Eqm-Kads expand in this way, is just going to be a positive asset for Vlrglma Beach I'd also like to say that last year and the year before, we've had special Olympic competitions at the sites that we are now And as far as I know, Virginia Beach has been selected for the Special Olympic State Games for the next two years and Eqm-Iqds was the first site here to hold state games, as far as equestrian and so those are the kind of horse shows were talking at Once a year type, mostly on the weekends I have been approached by friends of mine in California that would like to have a national competition here as well We travel all over the State My riders have also traveled to Georgna and we plan to go to Vermont this summer just to compete So were not talking just about the cbaldren that just are sitting at home riding with the three side walkers and stuff We do have riders that do go off with their side walkers and leaders and they compete all across the nation So these are the shows that we're talking about Not huge, thousands like Virginia Horse Center, but enough to get the special needs populations involved Ronald Pdpley Okay Any questions of Ms Ford? I have a question The contribution of the $400,000 and the land is significant Is that going to be sufficient to build your facility or how much more do you th~nk you need to raise9 Barbara Ford We have already talked to several of the, hke the equestrian horse facility, the builders And that should be able to do it What we're trying to do with our capital campaign is have endowment funds and everything, so that for the next 5 or 10 years were solidly locked in to expansion Ronald Rlpley So this should build the facility you need9 Barbara Ford Ah hmmm With improvements and everything, but we would llke to have additional funding for staffing Pdght now I'm the only full time person on the program We need at least six more full-time and with th~s, it just boosts us because now what we can do is then go to bigger foundations We are supported by a lot of Virginia Beach foundations and we can now go into Norfolk and other areas and say that, you know, we got this promise and hopefully get those foundations on board Ronald Pdpley IS it your understanding that if your cost exceeds the $400,000, that's a cost you pay for9 Barbara Ford Absolutely Absolutely And we're excited to be able to do that I think once this is in place, everybody will be so amazed at what this is It's a therapeutic program but it does so much more for these people then these citizen of the beach Ronald Rlpley Any other questions9 Mr Din? William Din I do have a question for Stephen White Changes to condition 2, is that acceptable? Stephen White Yeah That's fine Actually the way Mr Salle' winded it, like Eddie says, better than the way Eddie worded it, so that's great Wllham Din Thank you Ronald R~pley Okay Any other questions Ms Ford9 Item # 18-20 Pdganto, L L C Page 7 Barbara Ford Thank you Ronald Pdpley Thank you very much Is there any other speaker9 Robert Miller No str Ronald Pdpley If there are no other speakers, ts there anybody ~n opposttton that hasn't stgned up who w~shes to speak9 Okay Eddte, do you have anythmg to add9 That's good, that's very good Okay Alnght, do you have any comments here9 Betsy Atk~nson I do Ronald Pdpley Yes Betsy Atktnson I know, I know Mr Bourdon and everyone tnvolved', tn thts process ts worktng really, really hard to put thts together And I actually saved 'my previous agendas from this and I've read through them the other night when I was readtng the present one, and tt's remarkable how far and how really good looktng thts project ~s And a couple of things that I really hke ~s the 21,000 average square foot lots that we talked about, and also the swale which ts gotng to gtve that rural look when you drive through there wtth the landscaptng on e~ther stde I just want to comphment everybody tn the process and I know tt was hard getttng there A lot of sleepless mghts but - and I would be wflhng to make a motton at the appropriate time Ronald Pdpley Okay Any other comments9 I would like to comment also I th~nk, anybody's just ~n the audience here that ts not famfltar wtth thts particular apphcatlon, just to retterate, that has been through four deferrals and tt's been going on a long ttme and we've had some very long pubhc heanng on tt The plan that's here ~n front of us, want to comphment Mr Scott and hts staff for revtewtng and accepting some very cutting edge design crtterm that's here, and ~t's a very exciting plan, qmte frankly, and th~nk the way tt's laid out and the road systems, the way the lots - and the way you ~ntertw~ne the open space and some easements to achteve open space ~s commendable th~nk the developer d~d a finejob of this also I don't know how th~s will play when ~t moves up to Council but from my optmon, Ithtnk ~t's very well - very good Betsy Atktnson And the engtneer Ronald Pdpley I wasn't going to say that but the engineer too So, tfthere are no other cornments? Mr Scott, did you want to make any comments'~ Robert Scott No str I'm fine Ronald Pdpley You commented enough Okay Betsy ~f you do want to make a motion Betsy Atktnson Yeah I would hke to make a motton to also ~nclude ~n the condttton number 2 as, and I don't have that exact wordtng but, Charhe do you want to say? Charhe Salle' Yes At the end of that sentence you would add "and other orgamzattons stmflar to Eqm-ICdds servtng persons w~th special needs" Betsy Atklnson Thank you And that's for condltton number 29 And also tn condttton number 3, I'd hke to also add at the end of 14 feet and "no outside pagtng" And w~th that, I would recommend approval of the apphcaUon Dorothy Wood Second ~t Ronald Rlpley So we have a motton by Betsy Atkmson, seconded by Dot Wood, and Mr Miller9 Item # 18-20 Rlganto, L L C Page 8 Robert Miller Well, I need to abstmn but I need abstmn not because I'm the engineer The landscape architect is Mike Perry and the people on our staiTwotked very hard w~th Stephen and like you said the professional staff of the City so ! w~ll abstmn and it's a long abstention because my firm ~s working on the project Thank you Ronald Rlpley Okay So, we have a motion and a second We're ready to vote AYE 10 NAY 0 ABS 1 ABSENT 0 ATKINSON AYE BAUM AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE MILLER RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE VAKOS AYE WOOD AYE ABS Ronald R~pley By a vote of 10-0 w~th one abstention, the motion passes Eddie Bourdon Thank you all very much for patience and hstenlng to th~s so many times Ronald R~pley Thank you for your patience Robert Miller It's like a real love lest here A~aps ~ 12,13 Mop No% to Sco]e Riganto, L.L. C. 2 Conditional Rezoning AG-2 Gpin 2413-59-9454 . 3 4 5 6 7 8. 9 10. 11 12. 13. 14 15. Change of Zoning (B-2 Conditional Use Permit Conditional Use Permit Conditional Use Permit Change of Zoning (B-2 Subd~ws~on Vanance- Conditional Use Permit Conditional Use Permit Conditional Use Permit (gas station) - Den~ed, 11-5-84 & 6-17-85, Granted, 6-25- 96 Downzone by C~ty to AG-1 and AG-2, 8-27-86 Conditional Use Permit (s~ngle-fam~ly dwelling) - Granted, 12-10-84 Conditional Use Permit (s~ngle-fam~ly dwelhng)- Granted, 4-15-85 to R-15) - Granted, 11-12-96 (outdoor recreation) - Granted, 10-10-88 (athletic club and outdoor recreation) - Granted, 9-25-90 (church)- Granted, 3-26-90 and 8-28-93 (expansion) to R-15) - Granted, 9-12-95 granted, 10-23-90 (borrow p~t) - Den~ed, 12-10-91 - Granted, 12-11-89 Conditional Use Permit (retail sales) - Den~ed, 7-9-91 Floodplain Variance - Den~ed, 11-23-99, Reconsidered and Granted, 1-4-00 Modification to Land Use Plan- Granted, 12-17-91 and 5-10-94 Change of Zoning (AG-2 to B-2) - Granted, 5-25-99 Conditional Use Permit (lodge/meeting hall)- Granted, 4-27-99 FORM NO P $ 119 ~}~ IC ity o f Vi r g i n ita Ft e a c h ~-~ INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF-5203 DATE: July 31, 2003 TO: Leslie L. Lilley,~.~r~ DEPT: City Attorney FROM: B. Kay Wilson~J" DEPT: City Attorney Conditional Zoning Application Riganto, L.L.C., et als The above-referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on August 12, 2003. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated April 15, 2002, and have determined it to be legally sufficient and in proper legal form. A copy of the agreement is attached. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further. BKW Enclosure PREPARED BY AtlEI~N & [.[NY PC RIGANTO, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company SUSIE W. HILL, DAVID B. HILL, JR. and LUKE H. HILL, II TO (PROFFERED COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS) CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia THIS AGREEMENT, made this 15th day of April, 2002, by and between RIGANTO, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, GRANTOR, party of the first part; SUSIE W. HILL, DAVID B. HILL, JR., and LUKE H. HILL, II, GRANTORS, parties of the second part; and THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia, GRANTEE, party of the third part. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the parties of the second part are the owners of a parcel of property located in the Princess Anne District of the City of Virginia Beach, containing approximately 276.952i acres, and described as "Parcel One" in Exhibit "A' attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Said parcel is hereinafter referred to as the "Property"; and WHEREAS, the party of first part, being the contract purchaser of the "Property" as described herein has initiated a conditional amendment to the Zoning Map of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, by petition addressed to the GRANTEE so as to change the Zoning Classifications of the subject property from AG-1 and AG- 2 to R-20 Residential District, subject to an open space promotion conditional use permit, and P-1 Preservation District; and GPIN: 2413-59-9454 RETURN TO: SYKES BOURDON, AHERN & LEVY, P.C. PEMBROKE ONE BUILDING, THE FIFTH FLOOR VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23462 PREPARED BY /SYI~ES, I~()I'EDON. AtI[RN & [~Y P C WHEREAS, the GRANTEE'S policy is to provide only for the orderly development of land for various purposes through zoning and other land development legislation; and WHEREAS, the GRANTORS acknowledge that the competing and sometimes incompatible uses conflict and that in order to permit differing uses on and in the area of the Property and at the same time to recognize the effects of change, and the need for various types of uses, certain reasonable conditions governing the use of the Property for the protection of the community that are not generally applicable to land similarly zoned are needed to cope with the situation to which the GRANTORS' rezoning application gives rise; and WHEREAS, the GRANTORS have voluntarily proffered, in writing, in advance of and prior to the public hearing before the GRANTEE, as a part of the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map, in addition to the regulations provided for the R-20 Zoning District, the Open Space Promotion Option and P-1 Zoning Districts by the existing overall Zoning Ordinance, the following reasonable conditions related to the physical development, operation, and use of the Property to be adopted as a part of said amendment to the Zoning Map relative and applicable to the Property, which has a reasonable relation to the rezoning and the need for which is generated by the rezoning. NOW, THEREFORE, the GRANTORS, for themselves, their successors, personal representatives, assigns, grantees, and other successors in tire or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement by or exaction from the GRANTEE or its goveming body and without any element of compulsion or quid pro quo for zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit, or subdivision approval, hereby make the following declaration of conditions and restrictions which shall restrict and govern the physical development, operation, and use of the Property and hereby covenant and agree that this declaration shall constitute covenants running with the Property, which shall be binding upon the Property and upon all parties and persons claiming under or through the GRANTORS, their successors, personal representatives, assigns, grantee, and other successors in interest or title and which will not be required of the GRANTORS until the Property is developed: PREPARED BY SYI~[S, lt0UtlDON. AlII;lIN & LEVY PC 1. When the Property is developed, it shall be developed as a single family residential community of no more than two hundred fifty-six (256) building lots with parklands, open spaces, trails, an Equi-Kids Therapeutic Riding Center and other amenities substantially in conformance with the Exhibit entatled "Conceptual Site Layout Plan of Heritage Park Sandbridge Road, Virginia Beach, VA" dated 4/02/02, prepared by MSA, P.C., which has been exhibited to the Virgima Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning ("Concept Plan"). 2. When development of the Property is commenced, the party of the first part shall install the landscaped "Entrance Plan", "Identification Signage', a six foot (6) wide paved multipurpose trail, and stormwater retention lakes vath wetlands benches substantially in accordance with the plan entitled "Details of Heritage Park Sandbridge Road, Virginia Beach, VA.", dated 4/02/02, prepared by M SA, P.C., which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning ("Detail Plan"). 3. When the property is subdivided that portion of the Property Zoned R- 20 shall be subject to a recorded Declaration of Protective Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("Deed Restrictions") administered by a Property Owners Association. The Entrance feature from Sandbridge Road as well as the Open Space areas depicted on the Concept Plan and any other common areas shall be dedicated to and maintained by the Property Owners Association. The Deed Restrictions which include Articles providing for Architectural Controls and Mandatory assessments, has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and ~s on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. The Deed Restrictions require "staggered" front yard setbacks for each house to create a varied streetscape. The Deed Restrictions require decorative white cast aluminum "Williamsburg" mmlboxes and only white aluminum fencing which is no more than fifty percent (50%) opaque. 4. All homes constructed on the residential lots depicted on the Concept Plan shall have an exterior surface of at least seventy-five percent (75%) brick and all front yards and side yards adjacent to a public street shall be sodded. Each home shall have a minimum of 2800 square feet of heated living area. 5. When the Property is subdivided, the approximately 90.9 acres of land zoned P-1 as depicted on the "Rezoning Exhibit of Heritage Park Sandbridge Road, PREPARED BY §Yl~t;§. t~OUt/i)ON, AtlEt/N & LEVY, PC Virginia Beach, VA." dated 4/02/02, prepared by M SA, P.C., which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning ("Zoning Exhibit") shall be transferred, by Deed of Gift to EQUI-KIDS THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER, a Virginia non-profit corporation. In addition, the GRANTOR, party of the first part, shall contribute the sum of $400,000.00 in improvements to the Equi-Kids Therapeutic Riding Center and shall, prior to subdivision approval, post a performance bond in that amount with the GRANTEE securing installation of the fencing, access road, stables and facilities as depicted on the Concept Plan and on Renderings prepared by Porterfield Design Center dated May 15, 2001, which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file in the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. 6. Further conditions may be required by the GRANTEE during detailed Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. The above conditions, having been proffered by the GRANTOR (party of the first part) and GRANTORS (party of the second part) and allowed and accepted by the GRANTEE, party of the third part, as part of the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, shall continue in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes the zoning of the Property and specifically repeals such conditions. Such conditions shall continue despite a subsequent amendment to the Zoning Ordinance even if the subsequent amendment is part of a comprehensive implementation of a new or substantially revised Zoning Ordinance until specifically repealed. The conditions, however, may be repealed, amended, or varied by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and executed by the record owner of the Property at the time of recordation of such instrument, provided that said instrument is consented to by the GRANTEE in writing as evidenced by a certified copy of an ordinance or a resolution adopted by the governing body of the GRANTEE, after a public hearing before the GRANTEE which was advertised pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. Said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with said instrument as conclusive evidence of such consent, and if not so recorded, said instrument shall be void. PREPARED BY /gYi~[5, t~OUt~DON. AtI[RN & LEVY. p C The GRANTORS covenant and agree that: (1) The Zoning Administrator of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, shall be vested with all necessary authority, on behalf of the governing body of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, to administer and enforce the foregoing conditions and restrictions, including the authority (a) to order, in writing, that any noncompliance with such conditions be remedied; and (b) to bring legal action or suit to insure compliance with such conditions, including mandatory or prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages, or other appropriate action, suit, or proceeding; (2) The failure to meet all conditions and restrictions shall constitute cause to deny the issuance of any of the required building or occupancy permits as may be appropriate; (3) If aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Administrator, made pursuant to these provisions, the GRANTORS shall petition the governing body for the review thereof prior to instituting proceedings in court; and (4) The Zoning Map may show by an appropriate symbol on the map the existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the Property, and the ordinances and the conditions may be made readily available and accessible for public inspection in the office of the Zoning Administrator and in the Planning Department, and they shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and indexed in the names of the GRANTORS and the GRANTEE. PREPARED BY JSYI~[S. I~OUI~I)ON. Attr~N & L[YY. PC WITNESS the following signature and seal: GRANTOR: Riganto, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company By: ~ ~ (SEAL) ~ Managing Member STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF '~'"'~ ..... "" ~'~u to-wit: / The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this t day of April, 9.002, by dames M. Amhold, Managing Member of Riganto, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, Grantor. Notary Public My Commission Expires: PREPARED BY /SYI~[S. itOUttDI)N. AtI~N & [D/Y PC WITNESS the following signature and seal: GRANTOR: Susie W. Hill (SEAL) STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF/~~~~CII, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 2002, by Susie W. Hill, Grantor. ~ Notary Public / 7 day of April, My Commission Expires: '~" 2 t D c~ PREPARED BY l§YILES. i~OUl~l)ON, AtlERN & LEVY. PC WITNESS the following signature and seal: STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this / 7 9.002, by David B. Hill, Jr., Grantor. Notary Public My Commission Expires: (SEAL) day of April, PREPARED BY §YI([S. I~01~I~I)ON. Atli~N & Linty. PC WITNESS the following signature and seal: GRANTOR: "~' ~ ~ ,(SEAL) Luke H. Hill, II STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF ~ s~u to-wit: I The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this //' 2002, by Luke H. Hill, II, Grantor. . Notary Public My Commission Expires: '~'' $ ~ ' ~ ~ day of April, PREPARED BY JSYI~ES I~OIrI~DON. All[tiN & LEVY PC EXHIBIT "&" ALL THAT certain tract, piece or parcel of land with the improvements thereon and the appurtenances thereunto belonging, lying, situate and being in Princess Anne Borough in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and more particularly bound and described as follows, to-wit: BEGINNING at a point on the southern side of the right of way of Sand Bridge Road in the dividing line between this property and the property now or formerly Garrison, and from said point of beginning, running thence North 81° 52' 50' West 25.5 feet to a pin; thence continuing the same course 159.7 feet to a pin; thence North 81° 37' 50' West 128.10 feet to a pin; thence North 78° 22' 50' West 177.50 feet to a pin; thence North 78° 37' 50' West 118.00 feet to a pin; thence turning and running North 31° 07' 10" East 268.4 feet to a pin; thence North 31° 22' 10" East 138.6 feet to a pin; thence North 31° 07' 10' East 133.90 feet to a pin; thence turning and running North 41° 22' 50' West 330.00 feet to a pin; thence North 39° 37' 50' West 165.66 feet to a pin; thence North 51° 52' 50' West 235.60 feet to a pin; thence turning and running South 43° 59' 10" West 211.5 feet to a pin; thence South 45° 59' 10" West 222.00 feet to a pin; thence South 48° 49' 10' West 226.2 feet to a pin; thence South 48° 44' 10" West 109.00 feet to a pin; thence South 48° 24' 10" West 122.1 feet to a pin; thence turning and running South 44° 15' 50' East 106.20 feet to a pin; thence South 44° 20' 50" East 263.10 feet to a pin; thence South 44° 15' 50' East 255.5 feet to a pin; thence South 42° 45' 50" East 94.50 feet to a pin; thence South 43° 55' 50" East 202.0 feet to a pin; thence South 42° 50' 50" East 50.5 feet to a pin; thence turning and running South 24° 49' 10" West 120.5 feet to a pin; thence South 25° 44' 10" West 227.90 feet to a pin; thence turning and running South 34° 30' 50" East 218.50 feet to a pin; thence South 29° 35' 50' East 339.40 feet to a pin; thence turning and running South 78° 14' 10" West 275.00 feet to a pin; thence South 66° 14' 10" West 233.00 feet to a pin; thence South 57° 14' 10" West 28.85 feet to a point; thence turning and running North 37° 14' 10" West 53.56 feet to a pin; thence North 39° 09' 10" West 202.60 feet to a pin; thence North 37° 59' 10" West 168.90 feet to a pin; thence North 39° 11' 10" West 408.3 feet to a pin; thence North 36° 24' 10" West 129.5 feet to a pin; thence North 46° 59' 10' West 167.70 feet to a point; thence North 43° 18' 10" West 44.9 feet to a marked Beech tree; thence North 52° 09' 10" West 549.00 feet to a pin; thence North 54° 29' 10" West 140.20 feet to a pin; thence North 50° 13' 00" West (.)84.14 feet to a pin; thence North 70° 49' 40" West along the center of a lead ditch 514.89 feet to a point; thence North 60° 44' West 603.27 feet to a point; thence turning and running South 34° 40' 19" West 344.38 feet to a point; thence South 18° 37' 24" West 18.93 feet to a pin dividing this property from the property of W. W. Oliver, fomerly Pungo Airfield; thence turning and running along the dividing line between this property and the property of Oliver South 70° 28' 40" West 202.11 feet to a pin; thence South 63028' 40" West 128.92 feet to a pin; thence South 55006' 10" West 165.91 feet to a pin; thence turning and running North 67020' 35" West 171.23 feet to a pin; thence North 82° 12' 25" West 333.95 feet to a pin; thence North 79° 50' 38" West 1,168.90 10 PREPARED BY M$Y13;$. Atl[RN & I.[VY. PC feet to a point; thence turning and running along the dividing line between this property and the property now or formerly Williamson North 56° 56' 55" East 247.65 feet to a point; thence North 49° 26' 55" East 186.92 feet to a point; thence North 26° 32' 22" East 46.53 feet to a point; thence North 49° 26' 55" East 94.90 feet to a point; thence North 66° 46' 00" East 203.32 feet to a point; thence North 53° 35' 52" East 133.88 feet to a point; thence North 64° 26' East 88.79 feet to a point; thence North 45° 25' 11" East 43.37 feet to a point; thence North 50° 46' 32" East 154.83 feet to a point; thence North 63° 25' East 189.39 feet to a point; thence North 52° 59' 10" Eat 552.28 feet to a point; thence North 57° 43' 36" East 122.82 feet to a point; thence North 50° 35' 48' East 172.66 feet to a point; thence North 58° 45' 33" East 220.65 feet to a point; thence North 43° 35' 39" East 49.59 feet to a point; thence North 56° 37' 36" Eat 379.40 feet to a point; thence North 45° 03' 47" East 108.18 feet to a point; thence North 30044' 54" Eat 649.99 feet to a point in the southern side of the right of way of the Sandbridge Road; thence turning and running along the southern side of the right of way of the Sandbridge Road along the arc of a circle, the radius of which is 331.02 feet, an arc distance of 160.84 feet to a point; thence continuing along the arc of a circle the radius of which is 138.50 feet, the arc distance of 92.03 feet; thence continuing along the said right of way North 71° 08' East 21.90 feet; thence continuing along the arc of a circle the radius of which is 638.51, an arc distance of 136.71 feet; thence continuing North 58° 51' 55" East 197.55 feet; thence continuing along the said right of way, along the arc of a circle, the radius of which is 367.10 feet, an arc distance of 233.98 feet; thence continuing South 84° 36' 56" East 670.53 feet to a point; thence along the arc of a circle, the radius of which is 360.00 feet, an arc distance of 220.78 feet; thence South 49° 28' 35" East 36.52 feet to a point; thence South 49° 46' 50" East 400.03 feet to a point; thence South 49° 35' 21" East 379.55 feet to a point; thence leaving the said fight of way and running thence South 38° 05' 10" West 266.38 feet to a pin; thence turning and running South 48° 42' 20" East 171.0 feet to a point; thence turning and running North 38° 05' 10" East 267.02 feet to a point in the southern side of the right of way of the Sandbridge Road; thence turning and running along the southern side of the right of way of the Sandbridge Road, South 48° 49' 57" East 160.24 feet to a point; thence South 49° 02' 35' East 996.39 feet to a point; thence along the arc of a circle, the radius of which is 615.00 feet, an arc distance of 288.61 feet; thence South 22° 09' 19" East 92.21 feet to a point; thence along the arc of a circle, the radius of which is 815.00 feet, an arc distance of 102.29 feet; thence South 29° 20' 50' East 68.15 feet; thence South 28° 16' 50" East 78.60 feet to a point; thence South 24° 00' 24" East 69.87 feet to a point; thence South 20° 30' 50" East 72.00 feet to a point; thence South 12° 33' 50" East 32.39 feet to a point; thence South 07° 05' 07" East 549.55 feet to a point; thence along the arc of a circle, the radius of which is 284.50 feet an arc distance of 166.1 feet to a point; thence South 26° 22' 00' West 320.10 feet to the point of beginning. 11 PREPARED BY ISYi~[§. l~()l !ED()N. AtlEIIN & LDrY. PC Said parcel of land containing 296.545 acres and being shown on a certain plat of survey entitled "Survey of Property of D. B. Hill, et al, in Princess Anne Borough, Virginia Beach, Virginia, made by Bruce B. Gallup, Surveyor and dated September 24, 1975. Reference to said plat is hereby made for a more particular description of said property. GPIN: 2413-59-9454 CONCREZN/RIGANTO / HERITAGE/PROFFER7 ~'v 4/15/o2 12 Item V-LZ - 34- PLANNING ITEM # 4 7759 (Contmued) I/otmg 10-0 Council Metnbers Votmg Aye Ltnwood 0 Branch, III, Margaret L Eure, Wtlham W Harrtson, Jr, Barbara M Henley, Louis R Jones, Reba S McClanan, Robert C Man&go, Jr, Mayor Meyera E Oberndorf, Nancy K Parker and Rosemary Wtlson Council Members Vottng Nay None Counctl Members Absent Vtce Mayor Wtlham D Sesso~ns, Jr February 13. 2001 Item V-I.Z - 33 - PLANNING ITEM # 47759 (Contmued) The proposed buddmg and canopy shall substanttally conform to the prehmma~ elevatton tttled "PROPOSED CONVENIENCE STORE & GAS PUMPS FOR SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC" prepared br' Otts Meekms, AIA, Archttect, dated November 14, 2000, and on file tn the Ctty of Vlrgtnta Beach Planmng Department subject to thejollowtng condtttons The proposed buddmg and canopy shall be of a colomal design to match the extsttng butldmg The butldtng matertals shall be brtck to match the extsttng brtck and the roofing matertals shall be fiberglass roof shingles to simulate the slate roof of the extstmg building The proposed canopy shall have a mansard roof wtth fiberglass roof shtngles to stmulate the extsttng budding's slate roof and shall be supported by brtck columns The extsttng nonconformtng monument stgn shall be removed and may be replaced wtth a conforming monument stgn The base of the stgn shall be of the same brick as the proposed butldmg The stte shall employ low level ltghtlng, as requtred tn ~ 224 of the Ctty Zonmg Ordtnance Automottve repatr shall be only the type as spectfically defined tn the Cay Zoning Ordinance under ~ 111 Defimttons - Automobile repair estabhshment or Automottve Servtce Estabhshment No outstde storage of vehtcles, auto parts or ttres wtll be permttted, other than tn the destgnated outstde storage area Vehtcles may be located outstde the storage area whtle awattmg servtce or repair or ptckup b¥ the customer after servtce or repatr No more than 30 vehtcles shall be stored wlthtn the vehtcle storage area The storage area shall be screened by the fence and Category VI land~caplng The portton of the fence factng South Lynnhaven Road shall also be screened as noted, wtth the exception of the area of the gate accesstng the storage area A new fence ,hall be tnstalled All servtce work on vehtcles shall be performed tnstde the butldtng Stgn~ _for the stte shall be hmtted to traffic control stgns, the monument stgn noted above tn Condttton Three, and such other signs for the service statlon bulldlng as permltted under Sectton 905 of the C1(¥ Zoning Ordlnance No stgns for the convenience store, other than one (1) busmess ldenttficatton sign, shall be mstalled Signs constructed of exposed neon shall not be installed on the convemence st. ore, mcludl.ng on the windows so as to be vtstble from the publtc rtght-o_f-wa¥ Thts Ordinance shah be effecttve tn accordance wtth Sectton 107 09 of the Zoning Ordtnance Adopted by the Council of the City of Vtrglnta Beach, Vtrgmta. on the Thtrteenth o_f Februa~. Two Thousand One Februa~. 13, 2001 Item V-I. 2. - 32 - PLANNING ITEM # 47759 Attorney Edward Bourdon, Pembroke One, Phone 499-8971, represented the apphcant Attorney Davtd Hay, 228 North Lynnhaven Road, Sutte 107, Phone 481-0000, represented Kay Chaplatn, the adjacent property owner and regtstered tn OPPOSITION to the automottve storage Upon motton by Councd Lady McClanan, seconded by Counctlman Branch, Cay Counctl ADOPTED Or&nance upon apphcatton of SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC., for a Con&ttonal Use Permtt ORDINANCE UPON APPLICATION OF SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATION IN CONJUNCTION WITH A CONVENIENCE STORE, AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR AND AUTOMOTIVE STORAGE ) R02013028 BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA Ordmance upon apphcatton of Satr Enterprtses, Inc for a Condtttonal use Permtt for an automobtle servtce statton tn conjunctton wtth a conventence store, automottve repatr and automottve storage at the northwest corner of South Lynnhaven Road and Sthna Drtve (GPIN #1497-10-7039) Satd parcel ts located at 3096 South Lynnhaven Road and contams 41,599 8 square feet ROSE HALL - DISTRICT3 The followtng condtttons shall be requtred The stte shall substanttally conform to the submttted prehmtnary stte plan tttled "PROPOSED CONVENIENCE STORE & GAS PUMPS FOR PLAZA CITGO, 3096 South Lynnhaven Road, Vtrgtnta Beach, Va 23450, for SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC" prepared by Otts Meektns, AIA, Archttect, dated November 14, 2000, and on file tn the Ctty of Vtrgtnta Beach Planning Department subject to the folIowtng con&ttons a Category IVscreemng shall be tnstalled along the enttre length of the property hne along Hospttal Drtve The street frontage screentng along South Lynnhaven Road shall exceed the requirements of the Stte Plan Ordinance, 3~ 5A The plants shall be a mtx of dense evergreen trees, such as Deodar Cedar or Leland Cypress, permttted street trees and shrubs The two extsttng entrances on South Lynnhaven Road shall be closed and replaced with a stngle entrance Artght turn lane must be constructed along the full frontage of the site on South Lynnhaven Road to Sthna Drtve The rtght turn lane taper shall be 50feet, and the corner radtus at South Lynnhaven Road and Sdma Drtve shall be 35feet The extsttng entrances on Sthna Drtve shall be closed and replaced wtth a smgle entrance [t shah be located so there ts a mtmmum 50-foot tangent section between the end of the corner radtus at South Lynnhaven Road and the begtnnmg of the entrance radta! return February l3. 2001 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Sair Enterprises, Inc.- Modification of a Conditional Use Permit MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 · Background: An Ordinance upon Apphcation of Sair Enterprises, Inc. for a Mod~flcabon of a Condibonal Use Permit for an automobile service station ~n conjunction with a convenience store and storage yard approved by City Council on February 13, 2001. Property is located at 3096 South Lynnhaven Road (GPIN 1497107039). DISTRICT 3- ROSE HALL Considerations: The s~te was rezoned from RS-4 Residence Suburban D~stnct to CG-2 General Commercial District on March 12, 1962. A condibonal use permit for a gasoline supply stabon was approved on March 7, 1966. The site has been zoned B-2 Community Business District since 1973. In February 2001, C~ty Councd approved a Condibonal Use Permit for automobile service station w~th a convenience store, automotive storage, and automobve repair. Condition 2 requires that the building be constructed consistent with the elevation approved with the 2001 Conditional Use Permit The drawing shows a canopy connecting the ma~n building with the canopy covering the gas pump area. The applicant is requesting that this canopy be deleted as a requirement. The building as constructed does not have this portion of the canopy. The applicant also desires to modify the Conditional Use Permit by removing one of the uses prewously allowed (automobile storage), expanding a prewously approved use (automobve repair) and adding an additional use (car wash) The ex~sting automobile storage area ~s located behind the building. Th~s area w~ll be eliminated and instead ubhzed for an access drive to the proposed car wash, trash dumpster and a parking space (designated on the s~te plan for the manager). The ex~sbng building has three service bays facing South Lynnhaven Road. The apphcant proposes an addition to the north end of the building providing two more service bays and a car wash. The design of the addibon wdl match the ex,sbng budding, ,ncludmg a brick exterior and architectural style fiberglass shingles on the roof Sa~r Enterprises Page 2 of 3 The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because ~t ~s an ex~st~ng use and has the potential for ~mproving the aesthetics of the s~te. Staff recommended approval. There was no opposition to the request Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a mobon by a recorded vote of 10-0 to approve this request with the following condibons: . The site shall substanbally conform to the submitted preliminary site plan btled "PLAZA CITGO CARWASH & 2 SERVICE BAYS, 3096 South Lynnhaven Road, V~rg~nia Beach, Va 23452", dated April 26, 2003, and which ~s on file ~n the City of V~rgm~a Beach Planmng Department subject to the following condibons. a In lieu of the Iocabon of the trash dumpster as shown on the plan, the applicant shall cooperate w~th staff dunng site plan rewew to determine a new Iocabon. b. Category IV screening shall be ~nstalled along the entire length of the property line along Hospital Drive. c. The street frontage screening along South Lynnhaven Road shall exceed the requirements of the S~te Plan Ordinance, Section 5A. The plants shall be a m~x of dense evergreen trees, such as Deodar Cedar or Leland Cypress, permitted street trees, and shrubs. d. The two ex~sbng entrances on South Lynnhaven Road shall be closed and replaced with a single entrance. A right turn lane must be constructed along the full frontage of the site on South Lynnhaven Road to Sil~na Drive. The right turn lane taper shall be 50 feet, and the corner radius at South Lynnhaven Road and S~lina Drive shall be 35 feet. e. The existing entrances on Silma Drive shall be closed and replaced w~th a single entrance. It shall be located so there is a m~nimum 50-foot tangent secbon between the end of the corner radius at South Lynnhaven Road and the beginning of the entrance radial return. 2. The proposed budding and canopy shall substantially conform to the elevation btled "S. LYNNHAVEN ROAD ELEVATION" on the plan btled "PLAZA CITGO CARWASH & 2 SERVICE BAYS, 3096 South Lynnhaven Road, Virginia Beach, Va. 23452", dated April 26, 2003, and is on file ~n the City of V~rgmia Beach Planning Department. 3. The ex~sting nonconforming freestanding s~gn shall be removed and may be replaced w~th a conforming monument sign. The base of the s~gn shall be of the same brick as the proposed building All lighting on the s~te shall be consistent w~th those standards Sair Enterprises Page 3 of 3 recommended by the Illuminabon Eng~neenng Society of North America (IESNA). A photometric I~ghbng plan ind~cabng the number and types of lighting w~ll be submitted as part of the formal s~te plan submission for review by the Police Department to determine consistency with Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles and practices. Lighting shall be ~nstalled and operated as shown on the approved plan. Canopy hghting shall consist of flush mounted fixtures on the ce~hng of the canopy. All I~ghbng shall be directed inward and downward within the s~te so as to eliminate glare onto a adjacent properties and rights-of-ways. . Automotive repair shall be only the type as specifically defined in the City Zoning Ordinance under Section 111 Definibons - Automobile repair establishment or Automotive Service Estabbshment. 6. No outside storage of vehicles, auto parts or tires will be permitted. 7. All service work on vehicles shall be performed inside the building. 8. No outside speakers wdl be allowed. 9. Hours of operation for the car wash shall be 6.00 a.m. to 10:00 p m. 10. S~gns for the site shall be hm~ted to traffic control s~gns, the monument sign noted above ~n Condibon Three, and such other signs for the service stabon building as permitted under Section 905 of the City Zoning Ordinance. No s~gns for the convenience store, other than one (1) bus~ness ~denbfication s~gn, shall be installed. No signs for the car wash, other than one (1) business ~dentiflcabon s~gn, shall be ~nstalled. Signs constructed of exposed neon shall not be installed on the convenience store or car wash, ~nclud~ng on the windows so as to be visible from the public right-of-way Attachments: Staff Rewew D~sclosure Statement Planning Commission M~nutes Locabon Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval Planning Commission recommends approval Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department~z~ ~ City Manage~ ~"~ SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC./# 14 July 9, 2003 General Information: APPLICATION NUMBER: H07-210-MOD-2003 REQUEST: Modification of Conditions placed on a condibonal use permit for an automobde service station w~th a convenience store, automobve repair, and automobile storage, approved by C~ty Council on February 13, 2001 ADDRESS: 3096 South Lynnhaven Road Map H-7 Mop Not to Sc~e SAIR Inc. Nlodificat~on of Conditions GPIN: 14971070390000 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC./# 14 Page 1 ELECTION DISTRICT: SITE SIZE STAFF PLANNER: PURPOSE: 3 - ROSE HALL 0.955 acre Faith Christie and Stephen White Applicant desires to (1) eliminate a requirement for the ~nstallabon of a canopy between the gas pump canopy and the ma~n building, (2) eliminate the automobde storage area, and (3) add two service bays and a car wash. Major Issues: Ensunng that the requested modiflcabons to the Conditional Use Permit condibons are appropriate and do not negabvely affect the surrounding properties. Land Use, Zoning, and Site Characteristics: Existing Land Use and Zoning An automobde service stabon that recently underwent a substantial redevelopment effort consistent with the 2001 use permit is located on the s~te The site is zoned B-2 Community Business D~strict. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoning North: South: East: · A vacant parcel/B-2 Community Bus~ness District · S~lina Drive · Across S~lina Drive a Convenience Store w~th Gas Pumps / B-2 Community Business D~stnct · South Lynnhaven Road Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC. / # 14 Page 2 West: · Across South Lynnhaven Road, Multiple-Family Dwellings / A-18 Apartment District · Hospital Drive · Across Hospital Drive Single Family Dwellings / R-7.5 Residential D~strict Zoninq History The site was rezoned from RS-4 Residence Suburban District to CG-2 General Commercial D~strict on March 12, 1962. A conditional use permit for a gasoline supply station was approved on March 7, 1966. The s~te has been zoned B-2 Community Bus~ness D~strict s~nce 1973. In February, 2001, City Councd approved a Conditional Use Permit for automobile service stabon w~th a convenience store, automobve storage, and automotive repair. Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) The site ~s in an AICUZ of 70-75dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana Public Facilities and Services Water and Sewer There ~s an 8 ~nch water ma~n ~n Sal~na Drive fronting the property and in South Lynnhaven Road. The site ~s already connected to City water. There ~s an 8 inch gravity sanitary sewer main ~n Sahna Drive fronting this property. The s~te is already connected to C~ty sewer. Transportation Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Present Generated Traffic Volume Capacity The add~bon of a car wash and 2 19,130 service bays will generate an South Lynnhaven Road ADT ~ 20,000 ADT ~ add~bona1120 to 140 tnps per day Average Dady Trips Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC./# 14 Page 3 Public Safety Police: The apphcant is encouraged to contact and work w~th the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevenbon Through Environmental Design (CPTED)concepts and strategies as they pertain to th~s site Fire and Adequate. Rescue: Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan recommends this area for retail, serwce, office, and other compabble uses w~thin commercial centers surrounding neighborhoods and communities. Summary of Proposal Proposal The Conditional Use Permit permitting automobile service stabon with a convenience store, automotive storage, and automotive repair was approved by the City Council on February 13, 2001. The Conditional Use Permit has eight conditions' 1. The site shall substanbally conform to the submitted preliminary site plan btled "PROPOSED CONVENIENCE STORE & GAS PUMPS FOR PLAZA CITGO, 3096 South Lynnhaven Road, Virginia Beach, Va. 23450, for SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC.", prepared by Ohs Meekins, AIA, Architect, dated November 14, 2000, and is on file in the City of V~rgin~a Beach Planning Department subject to the following conditions' a. Category IV screening shall be ~nstalled along the entire length of the property line along Hospital Drive b. The street frontage screening along South Lynnhaven Road shall exceed the requirements of the S~te Plan Ordinance, Secbon 5A The plants shall be a mix of dense evergreen trees, such as Deodar Cedar or Leland Cypress, permitted street trees, and shrubs Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC. / # 14 Page 4 C. The two exisbng entrances on South Lynnhaven Road shall be closed and replaced w~th a single entrance. A right turn lane must be constructed along the full frontage of the site on South Lynnhaven Road to S~lina Drive. The right turn lane taper shall be 50 feet, and the corner radius at South Lynnhaven Road and Sil~na Drive shall be 35 feet. d. The exisbng entrances on S~lina Drive shall be closed and replaced w~th a single entrance. It shall be located so there is a m~nimum 50-foot tangent section between the end of the corner radius at South Lynnhaven Road and the beginning of the entrance radial return. 2. The proposed building and canopy shall substantially conform to the preliminary elevabon titled "PROPOSED CONVENIENCE STORE & GAS PUMPS FOR SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC." prepared by Otis Meekins, AIA, Architect, dated November 14, 2000, and is on file in the C~ty of Virginia Beach Planning Department subject to the following conditions: a. The proposed building and canopy shall be of a colomal design to match the exisbng budding. The building materials shall be brick to match the exisbng brick, and the roofing materials shall be fiberglass roof shingles to simulate the slate roof of the exisbng building. b. The proposed canopy shall have a mansard roof with fiberglass roof shingles to simulate the existing budding's slate roof, and shall be supported by brick columns. . The existing nonconforming freestanding sign shall be removed and may be replaced with a conforming monument s~gn. The base of the sign shall be of the same brick as the proposed budding. 4. The site shall employ Iow-level lighting, as required in Section 224 of the City Zoning Ordinance. , Automotive repair shall be only the type as specifically defined in the City Zoning Ordinance under Section 111 Definitions - Automobile repair establishment or Automotive Serwce Establishment. 6. No outside storage of vehicles, auto parts or tires wdl be permitted. 7 All service work on vehicles shall be performed ~ns~de the building 8 S~gns for the s~te shall be I~m~ted to traffic control s~gns, the monument sign noted Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC. / # 14 Page 5 above in Condition Three, and such other signs for the service stabon building as permitted under Section 905 of the City Zoning Ordinance. No s~gns for the convemence store, other than one (1) bus~ness ~dent~flcabon s~gn, shall be installed. S~gns constructed of exposed neon shall not be ~nstalled on the convenience store, including on the w~ndows so as to be ws~ble from the public right-of-way. Condition 2 requires that the budding be constructed consistent w~th the elevabon drawing shown below. The drawing shows a canopy connecbng the ma~n building with the canopy covering the gas pump area. The apphcant is requesting that th~s canopy be deleted as a requirement The building as constructed does not have this porbon of the canopy (see photo on the next page). CANOPY JOINING GAS PUMP AREA WITH BUILDING (as approved by City Council in 2001) Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC. I # 14 Page 6 Missing canopy The applicant also desires to modify the Condibonal Use Permit by removing one of the uses previously allowed (automobile storage), expanding a prewously approved use (automotive repair) and adding an addibonal use (car wash). Automobile Storage Area The existing storage area is located behind the budding. This area will be eliminated and ~nstead ubl~zed for an access drive to the proposed car wash, trash dumpster and a parking space (designated on the s~te plan for the manager) Automotive Repair Bays The exisbng building has three service bays facing South Lynnhaven Road. The apphcant proposes an addition to the north end of the building providing two more serwce bays. The design of the addition will match the exisbng building, ~ncludmg a brick exterior and architectural style fiberglass shingles on the roof. Car Wash The addition proposed for the north end of the exisbng budding includes a single-bay, drive-through car wash. Vehicular access to the car wash is provided via a drive aisle that runs from the gas pump and convenience store parking area, around the rear of the ex~sbng building, to the car wash entrance (Hospital Drive side). Vehicles exit the car Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC./# 14 Page 7 wash on the s~de facing South Lynnhaven Drive and then empty ~nto the parking area in front of the service bays. To accommodate the car wash, the trash dumpster is relocated to the rear of the s~te, accessible via the drive for the car wash. Staff does not find this Iocabon to be the best opbon for the trash dumpster due to its Iocabon on the car wash drive and the extent of the reverse movement that would be required of the waste management truck servicing the dumpster. Should th~s Mod~flcabon of Cond~bons be approved, staff w~ll work with the apphcant dunng site plan review to determine an acceptable Iocabon for the trash dumpster. Evaluation of Request The modiflcabon to Condition 2 ~s reasonable and is recommended for approval. The modification of the Use Permit to allow for the addition of two automobile repair and service bays and a car wash ~s also recommended for approval The elim~nabon of the canopy between the main building and the canopy over the gas pumps is reasonable. This canopy area would have served only as a partial covering of individuals moving between the gas pump area and the main budding, since the sides would have remained open to the elements. Its role as protecbon from the elements would have been negligible Staff also concludes that the overall aesthebc affect of the site is better without the connection between the gas pump area canopy and the main building. The lack of the canopy results in less mass and thus a more human scale. The addition of the two service bays and the car wash, and the resulting loss of the automobde storage area, are reasonable and can be accommodated on the s~te. The addibon should not result in any additional adverse affect on the surrounding area, and actually should ~mprove the s~tuation through the loss of the storage area, which can, if not properly maintained and monitored, have a significant adverse affect The design of the additional service bays and the car wash are consistent w~th the ex~sting building, which fits the surrounding area well due to the residential styhng of many elements of the architectural design. Staff, therefore, recommends approval as conditioned below. Conditions The site shall substanbally conform to the submitted preliminary s~te plan btled "PLAZA CITGO CARWASH & 2 SERVICE BAYS, 3096 South Lynnhaven Road, V~rg~nia Beach, Va. 23452", dated April 26, 2003, and which ~s on file in the C~ty Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC. / # 14 Page 8 of Virginia Beach Planning Department subject to the following conditions: a. In lieu of the location of the trash dumpster as shown on the plan, the applicant shall cooperate with staff dunng site plan review to determine a new location. b. Category IV screening shall be installed along the enbre length of the property line along Hospital Drive. C. The street frontage screening along South Lynnhaven Road shall exceed the requirements of the Site Plan Ordinance, Section 5A. The plants shall be a mix of dense evergreen trees, such as Deodar Cedar or Leland Cypress, permitted street trees, and shrubs. d. The two existing entrances on South Lynnhaven Road shall be closed and replaced with a single entrance. A right turn lane must be constructed along the full frontage of the site on South Lynnhaven Road to Silina Drive. The right turn lane taper shall be 50 feet, and the corner radius at South Lynnhaven Road and Silina Drive shall be 35 feet e. The existing entrances on S~lina Drive shall be closed and replaced with a s~ngle entrance. It shall be located so there is a m~nimum 50-foot tangent secbon between the end of the corner radius at South Lynnhaven Road and the beginning of the entrance radial return. . The proposed building and canopy shall substantially conform to the elevation titled "S LYNNHAVEN ROAD ELEVATION" on the plan titled "PLAZA CITGO CARWASH & 2 SERVICE BAYS, 3096 South Lynnhaven Road, Virginia Beach, Va. 23452", dated April 26, 2003, and ~s on file ~n the C~ty of Virginia Beach Planning Department . The exisbng nonconforming freestanding sign shall be removed and may be replaced with a conforming monument s~gn The base of the sign shall be of the same br~ck as the proposed budding. All hghtmg on the site shall be consistent w~th those standards recommended by the Illumination Engineering Society of North America (IESNA). A photometric lighting plan ~nd~cabng the number and types of hghting w~ll be submitted as part of the formal s~te plan submission for review by the Police Department to determine consistency w~th Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles and practices. Lighbng shall be ~nstalled and operated as shown on the approved plan. Canopy lighbng shall consist of flush mounted fixtures on the ceihng of the canopy. All hghbng shall be directed reward and Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC. / # 14 Page 9 , downward within the site so as to eliminate glare onto a adjacent properbes and rights-of-ways Automobve repair shall be only the type as specifically defined in the C~ty Zoning Ordinance under Secbon 111 Deflnibons - Automobile repair establishment or Automotive Serwce £stabfishment. 6. No outside storage of vehicles, auto parts or bres w~ll be permitted 7. All service work on vehicles shall be performed ~nside the building. 8. No outside speakers will be allowed. 9. Hours of operation for the car wash shall be 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 10. S~gns for the s~te shall be limited to traffic control signs, the monument sign noted above ~n Condition Three, and such other signs for the service station building as permitted under Secbon 905 of the City Zoning Ordinance. No s~gns for the convenience store, other than one (1) bus~ness ~dentiflcat~on s~gn, shall be installed No signs for the car wash, other than one (1) business idenbfication s~gn, shall be installed. S~gns constructed of exposed neon shall not be installed on the convenience store or car wash, ~nclud~ng on the w~ndows so as to be wsible from the public right-of-way. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. The site plan submitted with this conditional use permit may require rew'sion during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. Conditional use permits must be activated within 12 months of City Council approval. See Section 220(g) of the City Zoning Ordinance for further information. Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC. / # 14 Page 10 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC./# 14 Page 11 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC. / # 14 Page 12 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's Name..,~ 2:! List All Current Property Owners: ~ c::~ j{~ ~___~~) I[~. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner ts a CORPORATION, list ali officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if n.ece~sary) _ If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners ~n the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) I-I Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. if the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Applicant Disclosure section below: APPLICANT DISCLOSURE tf the property owner ~s a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) Check here ~f the property owner ~s NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other umncorporated organizabon CERTIFICATION: ! certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. ,... Signature~ Print Name ' r r . ' ~ ..... · .. , ......... ~,,,,~ f~, ~,. :, ........ ~ ....... mi,-,,,,,, = ........... i..i. i ...... ,.il.mi:: :~ . : ,,¢ .......... Modification of Conditions Application Page 9 of 13 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 SAIR ENTERPRISES, INC./# 14 Page 13 Item # 14 Sair Enterprises, Inc. Modification of a Conditional Use Permit 3096 South Lynnhaven Road District 3 Rose Hall July 9, 2003 CONSENT Next item is Item//14, Salr Enterprises, Inc. And, that's a Modification of conditions placed on a Conditional Use Permit for an automobile service station with a convenience store, automotive repair and automotive storage at 3096 South Lynnhaven Road. John Pdchardson: Mr. Salle'. Mr Rlpley, members of the Commission. My name John Pdchardson. I'm a local attorney. I represent the applicants in this matter. The conditions as revised this morning are acceptable to us. Charhe Salle': Thank you. John Richardson: There was a change in condition number nine I believe. Charhe Salle': There are 10 conditions. John Pdchardson: And the 10 are acceptable. Ronald Ripley: There was a change in number four. John Pdchardson: Was it number four Mr. Pdpley? Ronald Rlpley: I think so. Robert Miller: It was number nine. John ~chardson: That's right, it was number nine in the other application. Thank you. Charhe Salle': Is there any opposition to this application? I would move that we approve the consent agenda Item # 14 with ten conditions. Ronald Ripley: So we have a motion to approve the consent agenda as read by Charhe Salle'. Do I have a second? I have a second by Gene Crabtree. I've asked Barry Knight to comment on the item. Barry Knight: Item #14, Salr Enterprises, Inc., requests a modfficatlon of conditions placed on a Conditional Use Permit for an automobile service station with a convenience store, automotive repair and automobile storage. And, this was approved by City Council Item # 14 Star Entepnses, Inc. Page 2 on February 13,2001. We're talking about the ehminat~on of the canopy between the mmn bmld~ng and the canopy over the gas pumps ~s reasonable. Let me go back. The ehm~nat~on of the canopy between the mare bmld~ng and the canopy over the gas pumps ~s reasonable Th~s canopy area would have served only as part~al covenng of lnd~v~duals moving between the gas pump area and the mmn bmld~ng, since the s~des w~ll remmn open to all the elements. Th~s role of protection from the elements would have been neghg~ble. Staff also concludes the overall aesthetics of this site would be better w~thout a connection between the gas pump area and the mmn building. The addition of the two service bays and carwash, and the resulting loss of the automobde storage area are reasonable and can be accommodated on th~s s~te. The addition should not result in any additional adverse effect on the surrounding area, and actually should ~mprove the s~tuat~on through the loss of the storage area. It ~s also noted that some of the adjoining neighbors would like for the hghts to be less ~ntmslve and that's been addressed. They also requested adequate buffer zone, and we beheve that has been done. We also would hke to commend the owner of th~s property. It looks hke he's taken th~s comer that ~n years pass was not qmte as desirable or acceptable of the use as ~t ~s today. It ~s a fine looking comer and ~t looks race. Therefore, we deemed th~s an appropriate use of th~s property. Ronald R~pley: Barry, thank you very much. I hope the pubhc has a better understanding as to why we we're recommending this consent ~tem and that's the purpose of this d~scuss~on. We do have a motion on the floor and I beheve we have a second. I would hke to call for the vote. So all ~n favor of the motion rinse your hand. Opposed? AYE 9 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 2 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORLSEY KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD ABSENT ABSENT Ronald R~pley. The motion cames. ~ H-~ SAIR Eni ' Inc. Map Not to ~cole Modification of Conditions ZONING HISTORY 1. 3-12-62 -- Change of Zoning (Residence Suburban D~strict to CG-2 General Commercial Distnct)- granted 3-7-66 -- Conditional Use Permit (gasoline supply station) - granted 2-13-2001 --Conditional Use Permit (automobile service stabon with convenience store, automobile storage area, automobile service)- granted 2. 3-23-99 -- Conditional Use Permit (min~-warehouses) - granted CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Fort Worth Development, Inc. - Conditional Use Permit MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 · Background: An Ordinance upon Applicabon of Fort Worth Development, Inc. for a Conditional Use Permit for multi-family dwellings ~n B-4 (SD) on the north side of Shore Drive between Dinw~ddie Road and Dupont Circle (GPIN 1489590079). DISTRICT 4- BAYSIDE The purpose of this request is to construct 27 multi-family dwellings in a condominium form of ownership. Considerations: The applicant is requesting to develop th~s 1.14-acre site with 27 mid-rise (6- story) mulbfamily units (24 units per acre). The Zoning Ordinance ~dentifies mulbfamdy dwelling units ~n the B-4 District as a "conditional use" rather than a "permitted" use thereby requinng the applicant to seek a Conditional Use Permit. The applicant recently submitted a revised plan to staff The revisions are minor and include moving the pool and clubhouse to the second floor of the budding and adding three (3) parking spaces for a total of 63. The proposed 27-unit condominium development does meet the density allowed under the B-4 zoning (albeit the maximum allowed at 24 un~ts per acre); however, Staff d~d not recommend approval of the proposal to the Planning Commission based on specific concerns regarding the height of the structure and the resulting massiveness of the six (6) story, 111,596 square foot budding Secbon 221 0) of the City of C~ty Zoning Ordinance stipulates that any cond~bonal use" ..be compatible with the neighborhood ~n which it ~s to be located, both in terms of exisbng land uses and conditions and ~n terms of proposed land uses and use permitted by right ~n the area Among matters to be considered ~n this connecbon are traffic flow and control, access to and circulation w~thin the property; off-street parking and loading; refuse and service areas; ubl~ties; screening and buffering; s~gns, yards and other open spaces; height, bulk and Iocabon of structures, location of proposed open space uses, hours and the manner of operabon, and no~se, light, dust, odor, fumes and vibrations" Fort Worth Development Page 2 of 3 While the "use" of the property for mult~-famdy dwellings is acceptable, Staff concludes that the massiveness and height of the structure could negatively ~mpact the surrounding residential properbes to the west Secbon 221 requires, among other th~ngs, that the height and the bulk of the proposal be ~n concert w~th all surrounding properbes. There are the two (2) and three (3) story residenbal un~ts to the west Staff acknowledges the existence of the adjacent 12 story Chesapeake House to the east However, the massiveness of that development does not appear as ~mpos~ng due to the fact that the footpnnt of the high rise ~tself does not encompass the majority of the s~te as does th~s project and the Chesapeake House property ~s larger, thereby reducing ~ts "presence." In add~bon, the h~gh nse's aboveground 3 story parking deck provides for some form of a transition from the 12 story h~gh rise to th~s property ~n question. The more serious concern ~nvolves the Master Transportation Plan The Master Transportation Plan ~dent~fles th~s port~on of Shore Drive as a 150-foot w~de right- of-way The ex~sbng right-of-way ~s deficient ~n th~s regard The ex~sbng right-of- way ~n th~s location, as measured by staff, ~s approximately 106 to 110 feet. Staff estimates that a 20 to 22 foot reservation w~ll be needed on th~s s~de of the road at th~s Iocabon to accomplish the required 150-foot w~de right-of-way Shore Dr~ve ~s planned to have extensive landscaping and trads, which when combined w~th future ~mprovements to the roadway lanes and the replacement of the Lesner Bridge, requires a w~de right-of-way Sechon 201(b) of the C~ty Zoning Ordinance requires that the yard setback be measured from the ultimate r~ght-of- way, as expressed ~n th~s case by the reservabon I~ne There ~s space on the plan to accommodate the reservation, however, the building setback cannot be met when measured from the reservation hne. It ~s, therefore, staff's pos~t~on that regardless of any other ~ssue, the failure of the apphcant to adhere to the C~ty's adopted Master Transportabon Plan makes ~t ~mposs~ble for staff to support th~s request as currently designed Staff ~s not supportive of th~s request for a Conditional Use Permit and recommended to the Planning Commission that the project be den~ed was opposition to the proposal at the Planning Commission heanng There · Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a mobon by a recorded vote of 6-3 to approve th~s request w~th the following cond~bons The development of the s~te 0nclud~ng s~te layout, ~ngress/egress, fence Iocabon and materials, etc ) shall substanbally conform to the submitted plan enbtled, "Conceptual S~te Layout & Landscape Plan of Dupont Circle Shore Drive, V~rg~n~a Beach, VA," prepared by MSA, P C., dated 2-3-03, which has been exhibited to the V~rg~n~a Beach C~ty Council and ~s on file ~n the Planning Department 2 The budding shall be constructed as depicted on the rendering enbtled, "Shore Drive facade at Dupont C~rcle" prepared by Howard Architectural Fort Worth Development Page 3 of 3 Presentabons, and the elevations enbtled, "Dupont C~rcle Condominiums pages A 2, and A 7," dated March 5, 2003, which have been exhibited to the V~rg~n~a Beach C~ty Council and are on file ~n the Planning Department The Landscape Plan to be submitted dunng final s~te plan rewew shall m~m~c the plan ~dent~fled above ~n Cond~hon I Any additional planting shall adhere to the Landscape Guidelines estabhshed ~n the adopted Shore Drive Corridor Plan, Appendices Any trees ~dent~fled to be saved shall be adequately protected w~th chain I~nk fencing surrounding the entire tree at the drip hne untd construction ~s complete In addition, a certified arbonst shall be present at the bme of cleanng and shall periodically ~nspect the s~te to ensure the health of the preserved trees 4 Ident~flcabon s~gnage shall be monument style and shall adhere to all apphcable Shore Dnve Corridor Design Gu~dehnes Attachments: Staff Rewew D~sclosure Statement Planning Commission M~nutes Locabon Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends den~al approval Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department~)~jj,~ City Manager: ~/~=~3 ~"- "~~"~ Planning Commission recommends FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT / # 15 June 11, 2003 General Information: APPLICATION NUMBER: G03-213-C U P-2003 REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for 27 multi famdy dwellings ~n the B-4 (Shore Drive Corridor Overlay D~strict) Resort Commercial D~stnct. ADDRESS: 2300 Dinwidd~e Road Ma~?, G-3 M~p No ~ ~co~e Fort Worth Develo ment Inc. Gptn 1489-59-0079 GPIN: ELECTION DISTRICT: SITE SIZE: 14895901970000 4 - BAYSIDE 1.14 acres Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT / # 15 Page 1 STAFF PLANNER: PURPOSE: APPLICATION HISTORY: Carolyn A K. Smith To construct 27 mulb famdy dwellings ~n a condominium form of ownership Th~s request was deferred at the May 14 Planning Commission meebng. Major Issues: Degree to which the proposal is consistent with the Shore Drive Overlay District, Shore Drive Design Guidelines and compatible with surrounding land uses, Land Use, Zoning, and Site Characteristics: Existing Land Use and Zoning The vacant site ~s currently zoned B- 4 (SD) Resort Commercial D~strict with the Shore Drive Corridor Overlay. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoning North: South: East: West: · C~ty rights-of-way, Chesapeake Bay · Shore Dnve · Single-family dwellings, restaurant / B-2 Community Bus~ness District · Condominiums / B-4 Resort Commercial D~stnct · Restaurant, duplex / B-2 Community Bus,ness Distnct, R-5R Residential Distnct Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT / # 15 Page 2 Zoninq History In the wc~n~ty, no s~milar requests have been submitted for consideration by City Council. Acbwty in the area ~ncludes a community boat dock, a street closure request, and a communication tower. The approved rezoning includes changes to the P-1 Preservabon District. Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) The site is ~n an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Public Facilities and Services Water and Sewer There is a 16 inch water main in Shore Drive fronting the property. The site must connect to City water. Hydraulic calculations may be required. There ~s a 10 inch sanitary sewer main and an 18 inch force ma~n in Shore Drive fronting the property Sewer and pump station upgrades will be required. There ~s no C~ty water or sanitary sewer avadable in Dupont Circle or Dinwidd~e Road. Transportation Master Transportation Plan (MTP) I Capital Improvement Program (CIP): Shore Drive in the vicinity of this application ~s considered a four (4) lane urban arterial. It is ~dentified ~n the adopted Master Transportation Plan (which replaced the 1991 Master Street and H~ghway Plan ~n 1997) as a 150-foot w~de right-of-way w~th a multi-use trad. The exisbng right-of-way ~n this Iocabon, as rneasured by staff, ~s approximately 106 to 110 feet. Staff esbmates that a 20 to 22 foot reservation will be needed on th~s side of the road at this location to accomplish the required 150- foot w~de right-of-way. Section 201 (b) of the City Zoning Ordinance requires that the yard setback be measured from the ultimate right-of-way, as expressed ~n this case by the reservabon line. The applicant, however, notified of th~s need, has not revised the plans to accommodate the reservabon and the building setback and has ~nd~cated no intenbon to do so Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT I # 15 Page 3 Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Present Generated Traffic Volume Capacity Ex~sbng Land Use z_ 627 ADT Shore Dnve 35,000 17,300 ADT ~ ADT ~ Proposed Land Use 3_ 158 ADT Average Dady Trips as defined by general B-4 uses as defined by 27 condominium umts Schools School Current Capacity Generation ~ Change 2 Enrollment Thoroughgood 606 684 1 8 2 Great Neck Middle 1141 1330 0.9 1 Cox High 2040 2018 1.2 1 I "generabon" represents the number of students that the development wdl add to the school 2 "change" represents the d~fference between generated students under the ex~sbng zomng and under the proposed zoning The number can be pos~bve (add~bonal students) or negabve (fewer students) Public Safety Police: The applicant ~s encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevenbon techmques and Crime Prevenbon Through Enwronmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to th~s site. Fire and Rescue: Adequate - no further comments. Comprehensive Plan The area of the proposed development falls w~thin the "Mixed Zone" as ~dentified in the Shore Drive Corridor Design Guidelines. Th~s port~on of Shore Drive possesses a mix of uses, primarily s~ngle-famfly and duplex un~ts, office and commercial uses. The Comprehensive Plan generally supports resort type uses ~nclud~ng lodging, retail, Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT / # 15 Page 4 entertainment, recreabonal, cultural and other uses in this area The Bayfront Planning Area's land use policies support well-planned and designed res~denbal developments that promote community aesthebcs, economic wtality, quahty physical environment, and enhanced quality of life. The Shore Drive Corridor Plan and the Design Guidelines are established to ensure that these ~nitiatives are achieved. In addition, mulbple-family dwellings ~n the B-4 (SD) Resort Commercial District are allowed as Conditional Uses only. Summary of Proposal Proposal The applicant ~s requesting to develop this 1.14 acre site with 27 m~d-nse (6- story) multifamily un~ts (24 un~ts per acre). The Zoning Ordinance identifies multifamily dwelling units ~n the B-4 District as a "cond~bonal use" rather than a "permitted" use thereby requiring the applicant to seek a Conditional Use Permit. Site Desi,qn The site plan depicts a single entrance along the eastern property I~ne off of Dupont Circle. All 60 parking spaces w~ll be under the s~x (6) story building. Access to the units ~s prowded via four (4) ~nterior stairwells and two (2) elevators accessed under the building, within the parking area. Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT / # 15 Page 5 The structure containing the 27 units ~s "U" shaped. On the ground floor, within the m~ddle of the building, the s~te plan depicts two (2) rooms adequately sized for meetings, banquets or recreabon/exerc~se A k~tchen and restrooms are also proposed ~n this area. A patio from the meeting and banquet rooms leads to an outdoor pool depicted on the northern limits of development, at the foot of primary coastal sand dune. A Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) variance ~s required as the structure is proposed four (4) feet from western property I~ne (Dupont C~rcle right-of-way) and it therefore within the required eight (8) foot s~de yard setback. In addition, the depicted six (6) foot fence is shown on the property lines on both D~nwidd~e Road and Dupont C~rcle instead of the required e~ght (8) feet setback Vehicular and Pedestrian Access No d~rect access to Shore Dr~ve ~s proposed. Only a single ~ngress/egress along the eastern property I~ne, off of Dupont Circle, is proposed. An outdoor pool ~s depicted on the northern I~mits of development, at the foot of primary coastal sand dune The DSC has indicated that sidewalks along Shore Drive and up to the entrance along Dupont Circle will be required. Architectural Desiqn · The front elevation facing Shore Drive depicts a six (6) story budding with parking underneath on the first floor. The exterior building materials are a mix of reddish brick along the foundabon and "stepping up" to the third floor from the east and west corners, then transiboning to vinyl shakes The applicant has markedly ~mproved the Shore Drive fa(;ade with the ~nclus~on of porches and columns An architectural grade, green asphalt shingle will cover the roof and the parking and storage areas (the first and second floors). In an attempt to shield the parking from the street, ~t was covered with a roof and treated as a port~on of the fa~;ade. Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT /# 15 Page 6 · The rear and side elevabon m~m~cs the front w~th the use of porches to capture the wews available to the Chesapeake Bay. Applicability to the Pertinent Shore Drive Desiqn Guidelines: General Design Concepts/Residential Guidelines · Facades should be articulated to reduce the scale and one-dimensional appearance. The overall intent is to encourage a more human scale and pedestrian orientabon. Staff Comment: The apphcant has modified the origlnal design to achieve this guidehne. However; the human scale is lacking and the there is no obvious pedestrian orientation. Facades greater than 50 feet in length, v~sible from a public street, should ~ncorporate wall plane projecbons or recesses hawng a depth of at least three feet Staff Comment: The proposed design does ubbze projections and recesses to reduce the redundancy and increase the wsual interest. Fronts oriented toward Shore Drive should incorporate one-story porches, arcades, bay w~ndows, entry areas, breezeways, awnings, or other features. Staff Comment: The original design has been modified to include porches facing Shore Drive. The building does have a "false arcade'" that provldes cover to the parking spaces facing Shore Drive; however, it is obvious that it is covering a parking area rather than providing a pedestrian entry and cover. The roof of th~s arcade is somewhat odd and perhaps could be modified so that doesn't extend beyond the first floor. Fa(;ade colors should be Iow reflecbve, subtle, neutral, or earth tone colors. Staff Comment: The earth tones of hght and darkish brown are in keeping with this guideline. The placement of dormers and other raised roof areas, w~th a pnnc~pal sloping roof, are encouraged Use of half story, etc. Staff Comment: The proposed variations in the roofline do help to enhance the appearance of the building; however, the hezght being s~x (6) stories does not provide for a lot of roof exposure other than the somewhat awkward roof covering the parking. Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT / # 15 Page 7 Front budding facades should be located at the front yard setback. Staff Comment: The building ~s located at the exisbng front yard setback of 30 feet; however, as noted earlier, due to Shore Drive being identified on the Master Transportation Plan as a 150 foot w~de right-of-way, the Iocabon of the structure should be located 30 feet from the reservation. The applicant is unwilling to recogmze th~s requirement This serious issue nullifies any pos~bve merits of the building's design. The street elevabon of mulbple-unit res~denbal buildings should have at least one street oriented entrance and contain the pnncipal windows of the front unit. Staff Comment: There is no pedestrian entrance v~sible from Shore Drive. The covered parking area that leads to the elevators and stairs is hidden from the rights-of-way. Walls · Walls should be clad ~n wood, cedar shingles, hardboard s~ding, lightweight concrete siding, or shingles. Limited quantities of brick, stone or EIFS or spht faced block ~s allowable. Horizontal lap vinyl siding is d~scouraged. Staff Comment: The building materials include brick, two (2) variations of wnyl shake. The intent of this guideline has been met. Walls of more than one material should only change material along a horizontal hne - the "heavier" material beneath the "lighter" material, trim required at the change. Staff Comment: Th~s recommendabon has not been used in the design of the building. The second floor should be stepped back from the first floor, relative to Shore Drive. Staff Comment: The covered parking does extend out to Shore Drive beyond the upper floors. Roofs · Pitched roofs should be metal standing seam, copper, wood shakes, or high- quality asphalt shingles with a slope between 6 12 and 10 12. Staff Comment: The roofs have a h~gh qua#ty architectural style green shing/e. Fascia and soffit material should be painted wood, vinyl or metal. Open fascia with decorative rafter tads of 10 to 12 ~nches are encouraged. Staff Comment: The fascia and soffit are wnyl ~n a color to match the Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT / # 15 Page 8 building. However, the fascia/s not open and does not incorporate decorative rafter tails. Variations ~n roof hnes w~th the use of overhanging eaves, parapets, height variations and entrance features is encouraged. Staff Comment: There/s some attempt to meet this guideline. Roofs specified ~n the Mixed Zone should be p~tched to maintain compatibdity w~th the residenbal ~dentity of the Ocean Park neighborhood Staff Comment: While the roof may mimic those of the residential dwellings to the west, due to the height and square footage of the structure,/t will appear out of balance. Even though there is a higher building to the east, it is set away from the property line and does not have as massive an appearance from Shore Dnve. As this project maximizes the allowable lot coverage,/t w/Il appear more massive and out of scale w/th the development to the west. Building Materials · Porches should be wood, synthetic wood or faces with brick or stone. Porch cedmgs should be painted or have detailed vinyl covenng Staff Comment: The proposed porches/patios w/Il have concrete floonng. · Railing systems should be wood, painted steel or vinyl. Staff Comment: The railing systems will be vinyl coated aluminum. Columns should be wood or synthebc wood. Staff Comment: The columns w/Il be steel wrapped in vinyl and will appear as painted wood. Porches, arcades, breezeways, etc. should be verbcally proporbonal to the budding Staff Comment: This guideline has generally been met. · Balconies should not extend more than 4 feet from the building. Staff Comment: It appears that this guideline has been met. Windows and Doors · W~ndows and exterior casing should be high quality wood, wnyl clad wood, v~nyl or aluminum. Exterior casing should be 3 ½ ~nches to 6 inches w~de around all windows and doors facing rights-of-way. Window s~ze on the second floor should be same proporbon but shghtly small than the first floor Staff Comment: Varying window sizes are proposed The exterior casing appears to be narrow and not cons/stent w/th this guideline. Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT / # 15 Page 9 Landscape and Open Space Design · The rear of the property ~s encumbered by a coastal primary sand dune that prowdes approximately 7,500 square feet of open, unbuddable area. A Board of Zoning Appeals variance will be sought for the elimination of the required Category I landscaping between the fence and the property I~nes where required. If fencing ~s installed w~thin five (5) feet of any right-of-way, Category I screening ~s required. On th~s site, Category I would be required for approximately the n~ne (9) feet along Dinw~ddie Road and approximately the 27 feet along Dupont C~rcle where the proposed fence is planned w~thin five (5) feet from these rights-of-way Some landscaping ~s proposed in these areas in lieu of the tall growing Category I species. The Concept Plan ~denbfles 12 trees to be saved, however, it does not indicate the number of large trees that are proposed for removal. It appears that many of these trees are actually within the right-of-way, however, extreme care must be taken ~f these are to be preserved The plan depicts 16 new L~ve Oaks to be ~nstalled on the site and evergreen flowering shrubs serving as foundation landscaping. Evaluation of Request Staff cannot support this request. The applicant is requesbng to develop this 1.14 acre s~te w~th 27 m~d-rise mulbfam~ly units at a density of 24 un,ts per acre (the maximum allowed under the City Zoning Ordinance). The applicant had an approved plan (dated 12-19-98) for a 40 unit condominium prior to the adoption of the Shore Drive Overlay D~strict, however, this site plan approval has expired and it ~s not the desire of the apphcant to construct the same project. However, th~s new proposal ~s not recommended for approval. There are two main areas of concern: (a) project concept and design and (b) Master Transportation Plan Proiect Concept and Design The area of the proposed development falls w~th~n the "M~xed Zone" as ~dentifled ~n the Shore Drive Corridor Design Gu~dehnes. This portion of Shore Drive possesses a m~x of uses, primarily single famdy and duplex un,ts, office and commercial uses Multiple family dwelhngs proposed ~n the B-4 (SD) Resort Commercial D~strict are permitted as Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT / # 15 Page 10 Conditional Uses only, thereby requiring review and approval by the City Council. Certain uses are allowed as "Conditional" when a potential exists for that use to have an adverse impact on surrounding properties. The applicant has worked to improve the design of the structure, particularly with respect to the fa(;ade facing Shore Drive, as well as alleviate concerns expressed by the neighborhood regarding trash p~ck-up, vehicular and pedestrian access and tree preservation. The proposed 27-unit condominium development does meet the density allowed under the B-4 zoning (albeit the maximum allowed at 36 units per acre) and the design can be viewed as being somewhat consistent w~th the specific design guidelines of the Shore Drive Overlay However, Staff cannot recommend approval of the proposal based on specific concerns regarding the height of the structure and the resulting massiveness of the s~x (6) story, 111,596 square foot building. Section 221 (i) of the City of City Zoning Ordinance sbpulates that any condibonal use ".. be compatible with the neighborhood ~n which it ~s to be located, both in terms of ex~sbng land uses and condibons and in terms of proposed land uses and use permitted by right in the area. Among matters to be considered in this connection are traffic flow and control, access to and circulabon within the property; off-street parking and loading; refuse and service areas; utilities; screening and buffering; s~gns, yards and other open spaces; height, bulk and location of structures; Iocabon of proposed open space uses, hours and the manner of operabon; and noise, I~ght, dust, odor, fumes and wbrations." Whde the "use" of the property for mulb-family dwellings ~s acceptable, Staff concludes that the massiveness and height of the structure could negatively ~mpact the surrounding residential properties to the west. Section 221 requires, among other th~ngs, that the height and the bulk of the proposal be in concert w~th all surrounding properties There are the two (2) and three (3) story res~denbal un,ts to the west. Staff acknowledges the existence of the 12 story, Chesapeake House h~gh rise adjacent to the east. However, the massiveness of that development does not appear as imposing due to the fact that the footpnnt of the h~gh rise itself does not encompass the majority of the s~te as does th~s project and the Chesapeake House property ~s larger, thereby reducing its "presence." In addition, the high rise's above ground 3 story parking deck provides for some form of a transition from the 12 story h~gh rise to this property in quesbon Moreover, the recent changes to the zoning ~n the Shore Drive Corridor and the accompanying Shore Drive Design Guidelines are intended to encourage a more human scale and pedestrian orientabon for development along Shore Dr~ve, particularly along this segment of the roadway. Staff recommends that the apphcant apply this pnnciple and reconsider the concept and design of the project. Master Transportation Plan The more serious concern of City staff ~nvolves the Master Transportation Plan. The Master Transportabon Plan ~dentifles th~s portion of Shore Drive as a 150-foot w~de Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT / # 15 Page 11 right-of-way. The ex~sbng right-of-way ~s deficient ~n th~s regard The ex~sbng right-of- way ~n this location, as measured by staff, ~s approximately 106 to 110 feet. Staff esbmates that a 20 to 22 foot reservabon w~ll be needed on th~s side of the road at this Iocabon to accomphsh the required 150-foot w~de r~ght-of-way Shore Drive is planned to have extensive landscaping and trads, which when combined w~th future improvements to the roadway lanes and the replacement of the Lesner Bridge, requires a w~de right-of-way Secbon 201(b) of the C~ty Zoning Ordinance requires that the yard setback be measured from the ultimate nght-of-way, as expressed ~n th~s case by the reservabon I~ne There ~s space on the plan to accommodate the reservabon, however, the budding setback cannot be met when measured from the reservabon I~ne. It ~s, therefore, staffs poslbon that regardless of any other ~ssue, the failure of the applicant to adhere to the C~ty's adopted Master Transportabon Plan makes ~t ~mposs~ble for staff to support th~s request as currently designed Staff is not supportive of this request for a Cond~bonal Use Permit and recommends that the project be denied. Should the request be approved, the following condlbons are encouraged Conditions . . The development of the s~te 0nclud~ng s~te layout, ~ngress/egress, fence location and matenals, etc.) shall substantially conform to the submitted plan enbtled," Conceptual Site Layout & Landscape Plan of Dupont C~rcle Shore Dnve, V~rgin~a Beach, VA," prepared by MSA, P C, dated 2-3-03, which has been exhibited to the V~rgin~a Beach C~ty Councd and ~s on file ~n the Planning Department The budding shall be constructed as depicted on the rendenng entitled, "Shore Drive fa(;ade at Dupont C~rcle" prepared by Howard Architectural Presentations, and the elevations entitled, "Dupont C~rcle Condominiums pages A 2, and A 7," dated March 5, 2003, which have been exhibited to the V~rg~n~a Beach City Council and are on file ~n the Planning Department The Landscape Plan to be submitted dunng final s~te plan rewew shall m~m~c the plan ~denbfled above in Condition 1 Any add~bonal planbng shall adhere to the Landscape Guldehnes established ~n the adopted Shore Dnve Corridor Plan, Appendices Any trees ~denbfled to be saved shall be adequately protected with chain hnk fencing surrounding the entire tree at the dnp I~ne untd construchon is complete. In add~bon, a certified arbonst shall be present at the bme of cleanng and shall periodically ~nspect the s~te to ensure the health of the preserved trees. Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT I # 15 Page 12 4 Idenbflcat~on s~gnage shall be monument style and shall adhere to all applicable Shore Drive Corridor Design Gu~dehnes 5 The mulbple-fam~ly dwelhng structure shall be I~m~ted to three (3) stones ~n height. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. The site plan submitted with this conditional use permit may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. Conditional use permits must be activated within 12 months of City Council approval See Section 220(g) of the City Zoning Ordinance for further information. Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT / # 15 Page 13 Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT / # 15 Page 14 Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT I # 15 Page 15 Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT / # 15 Page 16 Z Z Z Applicant's Name' Fort .Wg_r~_h, Deve] p_p_m_e_t~_t_,_~l~]c ................ List All Current Property Owners Fort Worth Develo_Em_e_n_tj__i_nc. __ PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, hst all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) Start T seAg~__P.r__e_si_d_ .e_n.t.._R_ ._.S_e_c _r_et_ _a r_ ~ ~_ If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organizabon below (Attach fist if necessary) I-'! Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other · unmcorporated orgamzabon If the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Applicant Disclosure section below: APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below' (Attach hst if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below (Attach list /f necessary) E] Check here ~f the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. Fort Wo~th,'Peve]a~ment, Inc. B~_~_/-L-'__'_-~~~ S tan Tsemg~ President Signature" ~" Print Name .......... ]!.,i.,T IIILI.~[ .... I II II , I I II jl II I I I Ii! ! ' _.;~.' ; .' . . ; _ :;; : : . ; ~ :: _ !1 _!1.1.1.1.1.1.. !.1.!1.1... lU. Conditional Use Permit Appt~cabon Page 8 of 12 Planning Commission Agenda June 11, 2003 FORT WORTH DEVELOPMENT / # 15 Page 17 Item # 15 Fort Worth Development, Inc. Conditional Use Permit North side of Shore Drive between Dlnwiddle Road and Dupont Circle District 4 Bayside REGULAR Robert Miller: The next item 1s Fort Worth Development, Inc. Eddie Bourdon: For those of you who didn't hang on to or bnng your packages from last month, I've got packages, which I'm passing around. Again, there is a little bit of additional information in what I've passed around to what I provided last month. For the record, my name is Eddie Bourdon. I'm a Virginia Beach attorney. I'm representing Fort Worth Development on this application. I'm going to state like I state every single time that this application and my representation had no relationship whatsoever to the Crab Creek proposal on the other side of Shore Drive. I'm going to be far briefer this month than I was last month. I appreciate your indulgence last month. It is a complicated application. I would ask very strongly if the staff could be sure lo have included in the package to City Council the transcript from the May public hearing. As there was a lot of information provided then that I would not be repeating today. The property we're dealing with, just to summarize, is on the north side of Shore Drive located next to the 13-story tall, 120 unit Chesapeake House Condominium and adjacent to the Chesapeake House is the 356 Home on the Bay Condominium which is 10 stones in height. The property that we're deahng with is a B-4 zoned piece of property that's been owned by my client for close to 20 years. To our west is a property that is zoned B- 2 where on it is located a Mexican restaurant. And, I dare say that if someone came in with a tightly proffered plan so much as Mr. Arnold's plan for that Mexican restaurant. He got nd of that The folks who hve adjacent to it in those duplexes to the north who think their quality of hfe had been improved dramatically. But, still they wouldn't want it to be rezoned in a way that would leave it open to putting a high-rise on lt. The request is for a Conditional Use Permit today. We're forced to do that under the Shoxe Drive Overlay Ordinance, which was adopted in 1999, which down zoned th~s property by a total of 13-umts and instituted this Conditional Use Permit process. In 1999, the applicant had a site plan approved by the City of Virginia Beach for a 40-unit condomlmum on this site. In your package, I have included an elevation of what that building would have looked hke on the top of the left side of your package. My chent decided not to do that to wait and try to upgrade the project to a high-end project and what a good decision that was given the market and how the market has development. Also in this package on the left side you'll see a letter from Mr. Jim McElhgott, the President of the Ocean Park Civic League dated May 7, 1999 and a letter frorn myself to Bob Scott dated May 20, 1999 and a recent letter from my client to the Ocean Park Civic League President Mr Billy Sykes, who unfortunately, Billy has been under the weather and hasn't been able to attend any of the meetings here with the Planning Commission. Item #15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 2 But, I would ask you if you have a chance to peruse and review those letters. The Ocean Park Civic League and the Chesapeake House, we've met with them on a number of occasions and we've changed our landscaping design. We preserved live oaks on the property as you heard us discuss last month. I've also mentioned to you that our landscape plan also consists of the recommendations containing the Parsons Bnckerhoff 2001 Transportation Study, which was adopted by City Council in 2002. And, that same adopted recommendation, although it's not in the Transportation Plan shows Shore Drive as 120 feet in width. I want to mention on the record as I did last time, the Chesapeake House we've agreed to assist them. We will construct a wall if need be to protect the foundation of their parking garages that wraps around the backside or north side of our property. We will also provide them with a gate or other means of controlling cross traffic through their parking lot. This is our proposal for a 27-umt condominium, 2200 square feet plus size of the units. The units will sell for half million dollars and above, just what everyone wanted back in 1999, and if you look at the letter from Mr. McElhgott and my letter to Mr. Scott. The only issue that I think exists in our eyes is one that we talked about last month. That's the 150 Shore Drive as called for in the Master Transportation Plan. In 1991, there was a 150-foot Shore Drive for an eight-lane highway. When the most recent Comprehensive Plan was adopted the eight lanes came out but it still stays 150-foot Shore Drive, 150-foot Shore Drive really doesn't exist and we don't think it will exist. But I will just point out these facts. The brick base of our fence on this proposal, which encloses our parking area and that is all it does is 30-feet from our front property line along Shore Drive. The building itself, the bmld~ng with the units in it, which sits back from our fence, is 44-48 feet because of the architectural variation from our front property line. There is an unimproved section of Shore Drive in front of our property line that averages 35 feet in width plus our fenced in parking area is 65 feet back from the existing pavement. And, our building is 79-83 feet back from the existing pavement. If we were to measure from the center hne of Shore Drive and the median that exists in Shore Drive today, to the front of our property, the 75 feet back from that there would be an additional 20 feet of setback before you got to the fence. In other words, the fence is 95 feet back from the centerhne measured from the middle of the median. And, our building is an additional 14-18 feet beyond that or 34-38 feet back from where our property line would be if 150 foot right-of-way were ever to occur along Shore Drive. I don't think Tim and all my friends here from Ocean Park, any of us want to see that ever happen and were that to happen the cost would be astronomical to acquire all the property along Shore Drive to widen it to 150 feet. And, in fact 356 on the Bay, I don't know if you could even get another 20 feet which would require to make the property on Shore Drive in front of 356 on the Bay 150 feet wide. It is now at 130. To acquire an additional 20 feet on each side would bring the road either into the braiding or at the building. And, I think that would actually be in the building. To suggest, as I did last month, and I have not been shown otherwise, that this property must have a setback that is based upon a road that is hypothetical and a road that I think no one desires to see or will ever see at a 150 feet in width is a taking. This property has already been the subject of a taking which we lived with and we actually wind up with a whole lot better product and everyone w~nds up with a whole lot better project because we did not move forward with that project back in 1999 for a 40-umt condominium that would have a first Item # 15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 3 floor fimshed elevation of 38 feet as ~s shown on that plan which will give you what you see in front of you today. The bmld~ng that we have designed, we have done everything that has been asked of us from the staff prospective other than make the bmld~ng shorter which we simply cannot do. We must fit the number of umts that are allowed under the Overlay, which is not an increase in density but ~s m fact a decrease ~n density over the zoning that was on the property before the Overlay occurred. And, we have designed a building that will be very attracUve. One that will have the units that will have the prices that we talked about and one that will not have any problem ~n being marketed given the cond~Uons that ex~st on Shore Drive. One quesnon that was asked last month was about parking? We have six ws~tor parking spaces in our parking, which ~s all underneath the bmld~ng, all enclosed. What we also will be dmng and talking w~th our markenng people we expect a number of the umts will not be occupied on a 365 day a year bas~s and many will just be a occupied temporary, weekends and dunng summer months. All of the parking spaces will be fitted with s~gns so that when people are not ~n their umts and they're gone for weeks and months at a time, they'll just flip the little lever and it will say visitor space so that everyone will have the opportunity to utilize other spaces that are not in use in the parking garage. We also would make any other improvements to Dupont C~rcle to add parking availability to Dupont Circle but we don't beheve our neighbors want to see that and ~t would be public parking. It would not be parking that could be restricted. But, those are two ways that addmonal parking can be prowded. The original plan that was approved ~n 1999 as I mentioned last month and I will mention ~t again, d~d not ~nvolve any setback from a 150-foot right-of-way. And, the 150 feet ~n the Master TransportaUon Plan has never changed. And, ~n fact that building was 14-18 closer to Shore Drive than th~s bmld~ng and our parking was certmnly 16 feet closer to Shore Drive than it is with th~s building. Everything about this bmlding is a tremendous and substantial ~mprovement of what was approved with our s~te plan in 1999. And, the ciwc league, at that pmnt, was very suppomve. Thmr posmon now has obviously somewhat changed. Ronald R~pley: Thank you Mr. Bourdon. Are there any questions of Mr. Bourdon? I do have a questmn. In the formal session, Mr. Scott, I understand you have worked through the front yard setback ~ssue or the right-of-way ~ssue Is that correct? Eddie Bourdon: That ~s correct. We recognize that the law says that you have to get a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals. I think we are ~n agreement that this has not been umversally followed but I'm certmnly not going to argue agmnst what the law says even thought that has not been umversally followed. We will go to the Board of Zomng Appeals The only variance reqmred because of the 150-foot ultimate right-of-way where Shore Drive ~s for the fence and roof over it that protects the parking ~n front. Not for the building ~tself. And, ~t would be a variance that appears to us to be, although 1tS not uniform across because of where the right-of-way, roughly a variance of 10 feet to a 20-foot setback for the brick face front structure of the bmld~ng ~nto the what would be the setback if the right-of-way were to be a 150-feet at some point m the future. Ronald Rlpley: Okay. Mr. Scott, does that sound about right? Item #15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 4 Robert Scott: Yeah. I know that we all have opinions on what's legal and what's happening. Here are two important things. We need to acquire the right-of-way up to 150- feet purchased at fair market value at the time we need it without it being encumbered by structures and so forth. We're convinced that opportunity is there for us. Ronald Rlpley: Okay. Robert Scott: Number two. We need to have the setback of the building to be measured from the line of distance to 30-feet, and I agree the building itself does to our collective eye appear to have that feature but it doesn't and he is going to need to get a variance to that aspect. Ronald Rlpley: Okay. Thank you very much. Are there any other questions? Okay, we have some speakers. Dorothy Wood: Mary Compton. Mary Compton: I'm Mary Compton. And I live on Dlnwlddle on the west side of the structure. I've lived there for over 20 years. And, I want to thank you for gyp'lng me the opportunity to express how I feel about this. First of all I want to say to you I would love more than anything to see a nice piece of property be developed on this lot that would add to the culture and character of Ocean Park. I do have some issues and I don't want to beat a dead horse to death but the notification of this coming before you today. I'm the closest residence to the property. I probably eat and sleep closer than anybody to this structure that's being built. And, I have seen no signs on the property that this was coming up today. I found out from my neighbor who had gotten a certified letter. And, I've not had any notification. The last time I didn't get notification but I did see the sign out there that made me aware that the hearing was coming up. So, I don't know what the process is to notify people about this or what, but do you normally post signs when the second heanng is coming up? Ronald Rapley: The sign has to be posted how many days? What is it 14 days? Robert Scott: Right now its 15 days. But that's going to be changed to 30. Mary Compton: But there have been no signs on this property that this was going to be on your agenda today. Ronald Rlpley' There's no sign up on that property? Mary Compton: No. Kathy Katslas' It's been taken down. There was one originally Item #15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 5 Mary Compton: For the hearing a month ago ~t was. That one was taken down, but no new s~gn was put up for the heanng today. Ronald R~pley: Anyway. We don't seem to have knowledge of that. And, ffwe had d~rect knowledge we would have seen that. Mary Compton: Because I asked all my neighbors ~f they've seen any s~gns on the property about today. I travel a lot and I happen to find out from my nmghbor who hves further away from the property than me who had gotten a certffied letter. Ronald R~pley: Okay. You might want to proceed with any other points. I'm using your time up by talking to you. Mary Compton: Okay, let me finish w~th the other ~ssues that I have here. I've been an Ocean Park resident for over 20 years And, I feel hke the structure on this lot is just too large for the p~ece of property and I th~nk ~t will detract from the character and the culture of our commumty. It's hard for me to ~mag~ne a slx-story structure less than 75-feet from my house. And, I'm the only house that looks directly at the west s~de of the bmld~ng. It's hke you s~tt~ng there looking at th~s back wall here at a slx-story structure. I s~t down and I try to think about ~t and that's actually half the size of the Chesapeake }louse, which is on the other s~de of the lot. Also, near and dear to my heart, as well as the rest of the commumty ~s this one last natural sand dune on th~s property. Th~s ~s one of the last if not maybe the last sand dune that we have ~n Ocean Park. It's been said ~n the past that the C~ty should put a dome over th~s dune to protect ~t so our school children could come and see lt. Common sense tells me that a structure th~s large cannot be built on th~s property w~thout at least destroying part of the sand dune, ~f not all of ~t over t~me. We all know that th~s sand dune has a covenant on it that was put on ~t by a prewous owner and our civic league ~s now researching how th~s covenant is to be momtored and managed because we don't know that right now. This ~s just too beautiful of a piece of property to be developed w~th something that doesn't fit ~n w~th the character of Ocean Park. For these reasons, I'm agmnst a structure ofth~s s~ze being put on th~s lot. And, I task you today to take ~n consideration the Impact that th~s structure will have on our character of Ocean Park which is always been hve oaks and sand dunes And, we already know that we are going to g~ve up one of our oldest hve oaks that we have ~n the community. And, that's my feehngs. Ronald R~pley: Thank you Ms. Compton. Mary Compton: Thank you. Dorothy Wood: Our next speaker, ~s ~t Solamc? T~m Solamc: I will try to be as brief as possible. We covered a lot ofth~s a rnonth ago. I was quite frankly surprised we were coming back w~th~n a month after Mr. Bourdon smd last month, "we will be very happy to work w~th the staff and w~th the ~ssue w~th that the Item #15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 6 right-of-way with PV study, we also will continue to work with the civic league." And part of the discussion that we had if you recall when you were asking If there were any opposition to the deferral, was based on the condition that we would have communication in the future. The only communication we've had since then, Mr Bourdon was out of town and everything, was the letter that apparently he gave you, which was faxed to our president who has been sick and he is at a trial right now. He couldn't convince a judge to come down here, two days ago at 5:15 and the letter is inaccurate. There's an inaccurate quote in lt. It starts off saying that we're willing to work with the civic league but they did not feel that we were totally straight with the civic league. They never recommumcated with us from the condition that was placed from the last meeting. Ronald Pdpley: Well, I'm sure he'll have an opportunity. I don't know how this vote will go here today or what's going to happen but I'm sure there will be an opportunity between now and Council to meet. Tim Solamc: Right. Ronald Ripley: I'm sure and I know that applicant is interested in trying to satisfy you. Tim Solamc: Right. That's what we thought. I just wanted to mention that to get on the record because I wasn't even going to bnng up this letter but apparently it's in the packet that was given to you. Ronald Rlpley: Well, the ovemdlng concern that I saw was the setback issue. And, that was a very major issue and I wanted Mr. Scott and the applicant to talk about it and they have talked about lt. So, that was the primary issue for reason to defer as far as I was concerned. The Planning Commissioners may have some other reasons particularly the meeting with the civic league. That should be an ongoing process between now and City Council and I'm sure it will be. Tim Solamc: I'm just trying to understand the law. Ronald Rlpley: Sure. Tim Solamc: Just starting to read for it and everything. I'm just trying to understand the legal aspects of notification. The legal aspects of the transcripts kept forever and ever quoting what was said before, what's conditional, what's appropriate even to bnng up. What's repetitive and all that sort of thing. I'm just trying to do the right thing. Ronald Ripley: This is not a court of law. This is a citizen group trying to bring some citizen input to the process that occurs. Tim Solamc: And, I didn't want to waste all of our time and I just brought up the letter because it's inaccurate. But, I now know it's in your packet. Item #15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 7 Ronald Rtpley: Yes sir. Tim Solamc: Over a month ago, and I'm going to be as brief as possible. About a month ago Mr. Bourdon also mentioned that there was no B-4 zoning west of this property. I'm implying, I guess that's a good thing, just a comment there. This area between, also to get on the record, a six-story structure on that property will basically block the swimming pool. It would be in shade 100 percent of the time. I just wanted to get that on the record. I'm not sure how they're going to sell property with a pool that has no sun. You heard Mary Compton mention that building is within 75-feet of a three-story structure. Again, this goes back to the height and that is our only issue. We obviously prefer open space. When the open space subcommittee convinced whoever to write a check to buy it but it's that 300 year old live oak tree on that side Dlnwlddle. It's the width of Dlnwlddle, which now also is mentioned, which one of the planners had admitted that they missed it at the last meeting, which we did not know about until last meeting. There's a pedestrian doorway on Dlnwlddle as well and you mentioned that you're familiar with Dlnwlddle. I can find the quote in here if you want to but Mr. Bourdon mentioned that very briefly. With only six parking spots, especially dunng the summertime where's everyone else gong to park or have the opportunity to park? They could quite possibly park in Dlnwlddle Several years ago before I got involved with Captain and Mr. Hook, they went to Richmond to have that gorgeous property shut down from the ABC Board or whoever it was because of parking on Dlnwlddle and buyer protection. So, that's another consideration with the pedestrian door right there, parking and people are going to be getting on this huge structure that's on this proposal. Mr. Bourdon also referred to the dune as a secondary sand dune. He also referred to it as a primary sand dune. Ronald Rlpley: You have about a minute. Tim Solamc: Meeting with some environmental engineers in our community it is impossible to build a six-story structure without touching that sand dune Ronald Rlpley: I think that's the lumber that you have here that they are trying to avoid touching the sand dune not just the pool. Tim Solamc: The pool is right on the edge of the sand dune but to put a six-story structure there without affecting that sand dune and Mr. Bourdon also mentioned that the previous owners can enforce that deed restriction. We've already got donations to keep a microscope on the sand dune to protect it like Mary Compton said. And, that's the last dune on Shore Drive and that 300-year old oak tree. Thank you very much. Ronald R~pley: Thank you very much. Dorothy Wood: Mr. Todd Solomon please. Item # 15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 8 Todd Solomon: Good afternoon again. My name is Todd Solomon. I'm representing the Shore Drive Community Coalition again. The Shore Drive Community Coalition requests that this item be denied based on the following two items. The first one being the Comprehensive Plan recommendation that this property be purchased as open space which my understanding was touched upon at last month's meeting but wasn't taken very far. The second item would be the projects massive structure and density, which had been highlighted a little bit but I'm going along a little further. The Comprehensive Plan, which is created and interpreted obviously by the Planning Commission, recommends that this property be purchased via the Open Space Fund. It's one of three properties on Shore Drive area that were earmarked for open space. One of them has already been purchased for a fire station and the other two are still here. The Shore Drive Community Coalition voted to endorse the acquisition of this property as open space and affirmed this vote in a letter sent to City Council on May 12, prior to your last month's meeting. Planning Staff Ms. Smith did an excellent job in her review of this project. However, nowhere does it mention that the Comprehensive Plan recommends this property as an open space. As purveyors of the document, shouldn't it be the Planning Commission's duty to address this planned use in the project review somewhere for City Council's review? We fully understand that the final decision will be made by City Council, however, the discrepancy such as this and alternate uses I think should show up somewhere in the review package. The second item, the massive structure of this project and being an engineer I was trytng to determine a way to kind of correlate what Ocean Park looks like, what Chesapeake House looks like and what this property looks like and equate it in all in some way shape or form. The best thing I could come up with was a ratio of the square footage of use of a development divided by the square footage of the lot size. And, what I've come up with on Ocean Park's R-5, the average ratio of that is about 5,000 square feet of living space, 5,000 square feet for R-5, so the ratio of one. Chesapeake House roughly 120,000 square feet and one half acres, which ratlo's out to about 1.8, the Dlnwlddle project here, Dupont Circle with its roughly 112,000 and 1.14 acres ratlo's out to about 2.3. So you can see a far as that ratio goes that this property is even using more dense that what the Chesapeake House property shows up to be. And, if you were trying to merge something between the two you'd be more likely to have something around 1.4 ratio, which would require this project to be about 15 units versus the 27 units that is proposed now. So, that is one of the items you talked about last month as far as the density and the massiveness of it. And, I wanted to put it in perspective for you as ratios. Ronald Rlpley: Thank you very much. Are there any questions of Mr. Solomon? Thank you. Dorothy Wood: Our last speaker is Jack Bryan. Jack Bryan: Thank you and introductions a side, Chairperson or Commissioners. Just to clarify, I represent 350 residents To speak to a previous issue and one that seems to come up again about notification. And just as a note and not to complain about it Our response time for the civic leagues is one month. That's how often we have a meeting Item #15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 9 Two weeks not~ce ~s too short. The only reason why my c~wc league ~s on top of th~s ~s we act hke a business. We have a bus~ness once a month and we have an alternating meeting once every month. So, we have a vote every two weeks. Other c~wc leagues can't do that and they also take breaks. People go on vacation. I just want to bnng up a few ~ssues and although they may not be considered here but ~n regards to the primary dune. We respect the primary dune. And everyone ~n our nmghborhood does. We own property that ~s actually a beach that ~s actually privately held. We actually allow the C~ty to use the commons and we respect that. We also have right-of-way issues. And, th~s neighborhood has right-of-way ~ssues. Could you bnng up the plat showing D~nw~ddle and Dupont? And now that I know th~s ~s here, I'll use lt. I'm sorry s~r. There's another one. That one will be fine. Th~s ~s an easement. The right-of-way. It's not just a road. It's how people get to the beach. And, there ~ssues ~n other neighborhoods along the Shore Drive Comdor, the Shore Drive Commumty Coaht~on, and The Shore Drive Adwsory Commtttee have all brought these ~ssues up, where encroachment close to the setbacks for houstng such as thts area here. Thts area here and th~s area all along here make ~t difficult for people to and from the beach for egress to make tt less ~nwt~ng. When you beg~n to encroach ~n these areas you start to see people push their temtonal space, thetr personal territorial space you start to see domesttc tssues start to occur. Also tn th~s area, I would start looking as future beach access for residents who are on the other stde of Shore Drive and people who are travehng thts way to get to the beach and people who are travehng down Shore Drive to get to the beach from whatever location they m~ght be ortg~nating from. We don't agree w~th the encroachment ~n to the Ctty right-of-way. Also, the massiveness of th~s and the s~te plan does not allow for a stagtng area dunng construction to avotd the primary dune, which ts the designated primary dune or ~t has been tdentffied as the primary dune by the ctty. Cont~nmng on, we ask that you deny th~s. We th~nk that ~t ~s too massive. We agree that ~f ~t was smaller ~t would probably be more acceptable. We ask that you respect the s~de setbacks. We're just not womed about the Shore Drive setback ~f you're able to resolve that. That's fine. We would hke to purchase ~t as taxpayers though we hope that both of those tssues, s~de setbacks and front setbacks can be observed. I'm going to refer to that as a dune setback. When you get close to a dune you start to d~g ~nto ~t or you get w~th~n the toe of the dune exactly on the toe of the dune you d~g ~nto ~t, the sand caves tn and the dune starts to cave ~n. When you put a wall agmnst ~t, scorp~ng occurs. It's called "w~nd scorping." And these are thtngs that affect lt. But, Ithtnk that's handled ~n a d~fferent area, a d~fferent arena. Ronald R~pley: You've run out of t~me but ~f you could wrap up. Jack Bryan: Wrapptng up. Our letter, whtch we sent to you today, ts full of these ~ssues. However, I would say "buyer beware." The lawyer stated that ~n order to get their money back out of thts tnvestment for the property they need to bmld somethtng th~s stze When I buy my property tt's the same thtng that I would probably say but I look at ~t and say, "what's affecting thts property" and I look at all the ~ssues tnvolved. It's not our job to enable people to get the most money out of their property. It's our job to look at ~t from all respectable areas. I've heard three c~wc leagues speak out here on the Shore Drive Item # 15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 10 Community Coalition. A lot of citizens and its the ones that are most directly impacted. I'm lucky that I'm retired at my early age. And, in that regard, I'm able to attend these meetings and I'm here to respond for 350 individuals. I hope it's recognized. I'm not just one complaining individual. Another item that was passed out to you here, a picture, a rendering, not a true frontal site building picture. I'd like for you to look at this piece of paper. It's called a magic trick and artists use it quite a bit. I think the building looks nice the way it's drawn or drawing or a rendering but if I fold this edge like this and turn it like this it certainly looks smaller. And, now I'm going to show you a picture, which is here which was presented to you. That's the same thing that's occurnng here. This building is massive. It's our opinion it's massive. I've seen buildings like this. I have 19 years of construction. I have nine years with a bank. So, don't be misled that I'm just a banker who sits behind a desk. This rendenng does not represent what this building looks like. I think it's attractive. It could be smaller but I don't think it represents how massive it is and I don't think it shows the building right beside it or the little houses that are over here. Thank you. Ronald Pdpley: Thank you. Do we have any other speakers? Dorothy Wood: No sir. That's all the speakers that we have signed up. Ronald Rlpley: Mr. Bourdon would you like to readdress us please? Eddie Bourdon: First off, the sign issue and you are all aware, the signs are posted before the first heanng and they are not reposted. We have no knowledge of anyone. We certainly didn't take the signs down but they are not reposted every time in terms of putting new dates on them. That's not the requirement. The signs were posted and I believe they're still posted but they don't have new dates. This proposal involves a 50- percent lot coverage. That's all the lot coverage that exists. With regard to the beach access, if you look at the letter from the civic league that I put in your packets from 1999, at the access and primary beach access is Dmwlddle. And, we had to agree that we put a walkway over the dune to the beach. But now the civic league doesn't want that. We had that on our original plan. We will be putting a walk-way over this dune fi>r our residents but nothing inhibiting the use of Dlnwlddle, which is the beach access that the people in this area use and have used for years, which is one of the reasons why the civic league back in 1999 did not want us to develop the site plan that we had approval for because our access to our 40-umt condominium was off of Dmwlddle. And, that plan, had we developed with that plan would have wiped out every one the live oaks on this property rather than what were doing now and that is saving many and planting far more, with a building that would have been 75-feet in height versus one in this case ~s over 80- feet in height, very little difference in the height of the building. Yet, we don't have to put a turn lane on Shore Drive We don't Involve Dlnwlddm in any way with this project as far as the development is concerned and as I said, we will not be impacting the beach access in any way, shape or form either Dlnwlddle or Dupont and will be providing our own. Todd Solomon's httle interesting game with numbers. What he calculates as density. Chesapeake House has a 120-umts. We have 27. Clearly their density is far, far Item #15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 11 greater than ours, and if you break it down by square footage of the land area. What he neglects to point out is that those units are 900 square foot flats. What the civic league wanted to see and frankly and I know what a lot of Chesapeake House wanted to see and that's a far higher quality of residential development. And, that is part of what we're here to make sure that we get and achieve on Shore Drive is not just 900 square foot flats. We can put twenty-seven 900 square foot flats on here and we'll be way down below the ratio. And, in fact that would not get a better development. We can in fact have built the 1999 plan and had a lower ratio than the one that he's talking about for this plan today with 40-umts, 40-umts versus 27 but under his scenario we have more density today. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me but he wants to play with numbers to try and create some statistical argument. We got a plan here for a project that everyone will be very proud of and it will be step up in quality for anything else that is out there for Shore Drive. And, I see that my time is up. I said I was going to be brief and I'm going to that. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them. Ronald Rlpley. Appreciate you being brief. That wasn't a question. It was a statement. We got some questions down here. I th~nk Will Din and then Gene. Wdham Din: There are several people who have brought up the dune areas down here. And, I don't know if that has ever been addressed. Again, at this meeting I know it was addressed at our previous meeting about whether those dunes are protected or not. I don't believe they are protected. Could you go through that? Eddie Bourdon: They are protected by deed restrictions. Steve, if you could put the composite map up there? That's probably the best one. The dune is in this area here and you can see we got the parking garage back here and we got all these units over here, these duplexes. We're talking about a dune that is way back here. Even as a secondary sand dune, there ~s a deed restrlcnon that deals w~th ~t not being disturbed and our plans do not involve disturbance of that sand dune. We stayed off the sand dune. And, that is actually what was the case w~th the 1999 40-umt plan as we stayed off the sand dune. In hononng that deed restriction that emsts on that sand dune and that w~ll not be changed in anyway by what is before you today. We're off the dune. We will not be using the dune but it is clearly a secondary dune when you look at where it's located back here in relation to the beach and the dunes that are all out here on Chesapeake Bay and the development on rather s~de of us that go well beyond or north of what is in essence a secondary dune. It's a sand hill back on this p~ece of property. But we're staying off of that sand hill and the staging will occur ~n the front of the building for the construction of the building. Wdham D~n. Have you had any assessment as to how the ~mpact of the pool or anything else will be on that dune? Eddie Bourdon: The pool is not in the dune in anyway shape or form And if you go back to the not~on that Tim has that there won't be any sun on the swimming pool. Clearly there will be a shadow on the swimming pool in the afternoon but last time I Item # 15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 12 checked the sun rises ~n the east and it goes overhead there'll be certainly plenty of sun on the swimming although it w~ll be shaded by the building in the afternoon, the dune is not affected by the swimming pool. And, we will have a walkway over the dune to the beach for the residents of this community and we had offered to do one on Dlnwlddle for everyone. The civic league now does not wish to have that. Ronald Pdpley: Gene has a question. Eugene Crabtree: Yeah, I think you answered my question in the process of answenng Mr. Dln's. The staging area for construction you said will be on the Shore Drive s~de of the bmldlng and will not in impact the dunes. Am I correct? Eddie Bourdon: We must, by that deed restriction, avoid any impacts on the dune and that's a private deed restriction that will be enforced by the former owners or their successors in interest as far as that deed restriction is concerned Ronald Rlpley: I believe Kathy Katslas has a question. Kathy Katslas: My concern last month was with the parking situation Eddie and I understand that you had six guest parking spaces which when the residents aren't there, there will be additional parking. Unfortunately, I'm sure most of the residents will be there in the summertime and that's when more parking is going to be required. And, I don't think six is enough to accommodate this building. Eddie Bourdon: The two parking spaces per unit that exists also would y~eld because we all know that every unit owner is not going to have two vehicles at this locatmn. In fact, again, we expect that there will be a number of units that will be a second home scenario and they're generally not going to have two vehicles located there. They will have one vehicle if they are here for the summer but generally not two. So, we believe and quite confident that there will be more than six parking spaces that will be avadable for visitors but they will vary in term of their number. Little doubt that on the fourth of July there probably won't be a great deal of visitor parking available in that building. But there is public parking available across Shore Drive from this site with a very large parking lot that goes along with the boat ramp on Crab Creek but there is public parking there. Kathy Katslas: Last month weren't you going to check with the adjacent property owners and see If they could deal with parking? Eddie Bourdon: The parking that could be created in the public right-of-way can be done. There's no two ways about that and there are recommendations at one point that was supported by the Ocean Park Civic League and I don't think they are no longer supported by them when they're looking for sand out there about improving these public right-of-ways and providing better beach access and providing better opportunities for people to park. We are not adverse to improving Dupont Circle in this direction and providing public parking. It would not be that you could restrict it to people who live Item #15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 13 here. Had we done the 99' plan and had an entrance off of Dlnwiddle, Dlnw~ddle would have been widened and parking would have been more easily attainable on Dlnwlddle. We respected the community's desire to stay off of Dlnwlddle with this plan as we agreed with the civic league in 1999 that we would do. Again, there are no improvements with this plan for Dlnwlddle at all and the only access is again, there's a door on that side of the parking area where, again, that's going to be controlled access with a code. Kathy Katslas: Thank you. Ronald Rlpley: Is that door a firer requirement too? Eddie Bourdon: I believe it would be a requirement under the fire code Mr. Ripley otherwise, we really don't have to have it other than for fire code or security and I believe it will be a requirement but it's just a door. Ronald Rlpley: Are there any other questions? Eddie Bourdon: If I could, one other thing. To our west there are 24-umts in 12 duplexes on the next block plus a Mexican restaurant and a restaurant that had a checkered history as far as the community. We're talking about 27-umts on this piece of property and a halfmdhon dollars and up. The density issue we don't buy that. It's a question of whether you want smaller, less valuable units. Ronald Rlpley: Any idea of the approximate size of those units? Eddie Bourdon. In the duplexes? Ronald Rlpley: In the proposal. Eddie Bourdon: Oh in this. They are 2200 square feet. One will be larger but basically 2200 square feet per unit. Ronald Rlpley: Thank you. Alnght. I will open this up for discussion with the Planning Commission. Who would like to go? Will. William Din: I think the applicant has tried to work through this process quite well. We've talked about the sand dune. We've talked about the setback. And, I think those areas are well worked out. I think that the only problem is the massiveness of the building that people are concerned w~th. There is 13-story building adjacent to that which is setback quite far. That appears to be less massiveness because it is setback. And because of the way that this building is sitting on the piece of property I think it is quite large looking. I think that's mentioned in the report and I think my own concern is probably the massiveness of it. I think that's something that I could probably live with. I think the high quahty of the building and the way it looks and constructed is well bmlt. I Item # 15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 14 think the appearance of it looks very good. I don't think the height of that is very restricted because I think it steps it down. I think it does look like a transition from the Chesapeake House down to the duplexes to the west of that. There is a lot of effort to save the sand dune, a lot of effort to put in some live oak trees. The applicant has been trying to work with that. I really think there has been a lot of effort in trying to put up good quality development in this area. I really don't have a whole lot of problem with that so I'll probably be support this. Ronald Rlpley: Okay. Are there any other comments? Jan. Jamce Anderson: I'm kind of going both ways on this. But I just wanted to bring out some stuff for discussion. I think the project is very nice but there are problems that I have with the right-of-way variance. It's clear now that they're going back to the Board of Zoning Appeals to try to get a variance. But, they could have scaled back and gone back behind the setback line but they chose not to do that so they're looking to build into the right-of-way there. So far as the coverage of the lot, this is rather a small lot for this size of braiding. They are covering every portion of it with building that's bmldable because the sand dune is reserved and that's protected so any bmldable land that's there, they're covering every chunk of it. So far as the civic leagues are concerned w~th communication I think that the applicant haa been very good at going out to the civic leagues before but the civic league's communication goes both ways. If they know something out there and somebody doesn't contact them they need to go out and contact the applicant. I'm not really womed about the communication. It is B-4. You do have the high rises due to the one size. And this is a step down but I think in the area, just the location how close the road it is kind of heavy. The previous 40-umts that they had, it is a good thing the Council has approved these Overlay districts and they've come from Planning but this is the kind of structure you had before and it's nice that these restrictions are there. Ronald Rlpley: Does anybody else have any comments? Gene. Eugene Crabtree: I agree that the building intends to crowd the property and however, there are other precedence's in the City of braidings which crowd the property to, some of which are on Shore Drive. Some which have been approved in recent years in the center of the City. The building that is currently going on that we are working with now so I don't see as to where the arrangement of the parking underneath the building and the amenities in the second floor and the living units above that the crowding of the property is all that drastic. And, that it makes that much difference and I agree the six stories is a step down from the 13-stories that is adjacent to it on the east side. Therefore., I think I'm going to support the application since the other issues have been ironed out with the staff. Ronald Rlpley: Thank you Gene. Dot. Dorothy Wood: I'm like Kathy on the parking. I think that they do need more parking and I'm certainly torn with this application. I like the high end. I hke the $400,000 units Item # 15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 15 and people will just, excuse Mr. Bourdon, $500,00 units. I do think it is very massive but there are other buildings on Shore Drive llke Mr. Crabtree said that have been recently built that are massive and do not fit in to the area also. It's just a real hard decision. I know that the City and all the civic leagues are against lt. And, w~th the parking, I have a problem with that so I'm really torn. I'm interested ~n heanng what my fellow Commissioners have to say. Ronald Popley: Well Mr. Scott, with regard to the parking and Mr. Bourdon mentioned about possibility of making some improvements to Dupont Circle, which certainly will be public parking but also would be an opportumty for visitors to use pubhc parking also, would that have any public benefit or is that something that you don't want to do at this point ~n disturbing that land? Robert Scott: I think there's really some limited opportunity. Let me put ~t this way. When most people talk about providing parking in the Shore Drive area they're talking about th~s site for public parking not the streets adjoining the site. There's been talk and I've heard for many years in purchasing properties hke this to build public parking lots on lt. I don't know if I like that idea too much but I've heard that idea but to use Dupont Circle itself it doesn't seem like there's a whole lot of opportumty to use that limited bit of roadway for public parking. And also, it's again time I guess to reemphas~s the importance of the dunes there. And you don't want to dig into the dunes just to put parking in. Ronald Ripley: No. I went out and walked this site and walked all over the dunes. Of course, I had to walk on the dunes but I did walk around ~t to take a look at ~t and try to get a sense of scale because that was a concern that I was hearing and a concern that staff wrote about. And, on balance I think the, to me, it appears to be a natural stepping down from the Chesapeake House to the lower residential to the west. I've heard mentioned and I think Mr. Solomon mentioned that the Comprehensive Plan refers to this as open space but that's kind of a "catch 22" because this open space plan reached out and put a net over every piece of vacant space in the whole city I think. And, the d~scussion that the Planning Commission had and I know with our doors people was that this should not taint the property because if the city doesn't buy it, people have by-right uses and this is a by-right use that this person has come m to ask for a rezomng. I think Jan points out a good point. Prior to the Overlay District by right could have been that exhibit that Mr. Bourdon handed out. It's the first t~me I've seen that. It's a pretty ugly building. I'm not saying that's where we would end up, but we certainly could have ended up with something pretty back quite frankly prior to the Overlay. So, it ~s good that we have the Overlay. And, it ~s good that we have the public participation on what goes on to these properties because I think we're all trying to improve Shore Drive and a lot of effort has gone into that and I think we're seeing results along that Corridor. Two spaces per apartment is probably.., what is the minimum Mr. Scott? Is it less than two? Robert Scott: Yeah. Can you tell me what the ordinance says on that9 Item # 15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 16 Ronald Rlpley: Is it two for the first 50 or something? So it is two? So, two would be the minimum? So, you have six over the minimum basically? That is a concern and I think we've raised it too. I've talked to Mr. Bourdon about trying to actually access this but it looks like the access to the units will be underneath the building into the elevators and how that is treated will be up to the architect. I'm inclined given the high quahty of the property and I don't have that much problem with scale. I think it's encumbenng a lot of the property but on the other hand this dune is pushing the property forward and I think that's part of the dilemma with this whole thing. And, on the other hand at the same time I think the applicant is trying to create a high quahty community. And, half mflhon-dollar condominiums is definitely high quality as far as I'm concerned. So, I will probably be supporting this also. Is there anybody else? Would someone like to make a motion? Wflham Din: I move to approve this apphcatlon. Ronald Rlpley: Does that include the conditions that are in here? Wllham Din: The conditions state that it shall be hmlted to three stones in height. Ronald Rlpley: Does it include that condition? Conditions 1-47 Wllham Din: I don't think the applicant 1s agreeable to that. Eddie Bourdon: We agree with all the conditions that the staff has recommended except for condition five. Ronald Rlpley: So Will, what's your motion? William Din: I'd like to approve the apphcatlon without condition five. Ronald Rlpley: Do I have a second? Got a second by Barry Knight. So, were open for discussion. Is there any discussion from the group? We can't talk anymore. We're in the middle of discussing this motion now. Tim Solamc: I would just hke to make one comment. Whenever the appropriate time will be just to get it on the record because I wasn't given the opportunity to rebut Mr. Bourdon. Ronald Rlpley. You don't have that opportunity Your only opportunity to rebut is at Council. Tim Solamc: Right. I understand. I'm basically asking for someone to sponsor a comment for the public record after you vote, before you vote. Anytime you feel appropriate. Item #15 Forth Worth Development, Inc. Page 17 Ronald Rlpley: After we vote, you're welcome to come to City Council and put it on record there. Tim Solamc: Okay. Ronald Pdpley: Okay. Thank you. Is there any discussion on the motion? We're ready to vote. AYE 6 NAY 3 ABS 0 ABSENT 2 ANDERSON CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS KNIGHT AYE MILLER RIPLEY AYE SALLE' STRANGE AYE WOOD NAY NAY NAY ABSENT ABSENT Ronald Rlpley: By a vote of 6-3, the motion cames. Okay is that the last item to come before us? I believe it is so this meeting is adjourned. Map G-3 h'lop Not to Scole Fort Worth Development, Inc. C~e~zAe~z~e % Gpin 1489-59-0079 ZONING HISTORY 1 Change of Zoning (Condibonal B-1 Neighborhood Bus~ness District to O-2 Office D~stnct)- Granted 7-5-00 Change of Zoning (0-2 Office D~stnct to Condibonal B-1Neighborhood Business District) - Granted 8-11-98 2 Conditional Use Permit (communication tower)- Granted 8-11-98 Condibonal Use Permit (beauty shop)- Den~ed 5-23-83 3. Conditional Use Permit (convalescent home) - Granted 2-25-97 4. Street Closure - Granted 9-14-81 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Victory Chapel - Conditional Use Permit (church) MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 · Background: An Ordinance upon Application of Victory Chapel for a Conditional Use Permit for a church on property located at 6644 Indian R~ver Road (GPIN 1456050942). DISTRICT 2-KEMPSVILLE The purpose of th~s request is to allow a church to operate on th~s s~te Considerations: There ~s an exisbng 1,800 square foot one-story building with a taller two-story addition off of the northeast corner of the budding. An asphalt, paved parking area surrounds three sides of the building. The church membership at present is 35 There is ample parking on s~te to accommodate substanbal growth of the church. Although not clearly marked due to disrepair, the parking lot can accommodate 38 parking spaces or up to 190 seats within the facdity This esbmate ~s solely based on the Zoning Ordinance, which requires at least one parking space for each five seats within a sanctuary. Other factors may further restrict the ulbmate growth of the church at th~s location The applicant has indicated that exterior aesthebc improvements to the ex~sbng building are planned and include: pa~nbng the exterior an off-white earth tone color, remowng the exisbng non-conforming s~gn, installing landscaping ~n planters along the fa(;ade facing Indian R~ver Road and resurfac~ng the exlsbng parking lot. The 18,576 square foot s~te is s~gnificantly less than the three-acre s~te size required by the Zoning Ordinance for free-standing churches; however, as provided for in the Zoning Ordinance (Section 221(e)), the cond~bons recommended below should offset the negabve effects inherent ~n the area deficiency The use w~ll have I~ttle, ~f any, negative ~mpact on the surrounding properbes. According to the apphcant, members w~ll use the church on Wednesday evenings and then on Sundays for two services. The church does not operate during the peak hours for the commercial uses that are located ~n the wcin~ty of th~s s~te, and at th~s bme the church has only 35 members V~ctory Chapel Page 2 of 2 The Planning Commission placed th~s item on the consent agenda because the proposed use and ~mprovements to the property w~ll enhance this area Staff recommended approval. There was no opposition to the request. Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a mobon by a recorded vote of 10-0 to approve th~s request w~th the following cond~bons. 1. The asphalt area shall be resurfaced and remarked for standard parking spaces, w~th at least one van accessible hand~cap space marked. 2. The exterior of the building shall be painted an off-white color. , The ex~sting nonconforming sign shall be removed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Any new freestanding s~gn shall be monument style w~th a brick base. All new signage shall adhere to all applicable requirements within the City of V~rg~nia Beach Zoning Ordinance. 4. A Cerbficate of Occupancy shall be obtained from the Building Official's Office prior to occupancy of the church. 5. The maximum attendance at the church at any one bme shall be 190 6. The Use Permit shall be administratively rewewed on an annual bas~s. . Foundabon landscaping shall be ~nstalled along at least 50 percent the fa(;ade facing Indian R~ver Road. This requirement may be met with the use of large planters Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Locabon Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval Planning Commission recommends approval Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Departmen~~ .~--~- City Manager~~e¢"~/~.~ ~ VICTORY CHAPEL / # 22 General Information: APPLICATION NUMBER: REQUEST: ADDRESS: A08-210-CUP-2003 Condibonal Use Permit for a free-standing church 6644 Indian River Road Not to Scale July 9, 2003 Cha GPIN: ELECTION DISTRICT: SITE SIZE: Gp~n 1456-05-0942 14560509420000 1 - CENTERVILLE 18,576 square feet Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 VICTORY CHAPEL I # 22 Page 1 STAFF PLANNER: PURPOSE: APPLICATION HISTORY: Carolyn A K. Smith To allow a church to operate on this s~te Th~s application was deferred at the June 11 heanng to allow staff and the applicant addibonal time to work on outstanding ~ssues. Major Issues: · Degree to which the proposal ~s compatible w~th the surrounding area. Land Use, Zoning, and Site Characteristics: Existinq Land Use and Zoning There is one-story budding on the site, approximately 1,800 square feet, surrounded by asphalt pavement for parking. This site ~s currently zoned B-2 Community Business D~strict and has been vacant for some time. Surroundin~ Land Use and Zoning North: South: East: West: · Office (under construction), single-family dwellings / B-2 Community Bus~ness D~strict, R-10 Res~denbal District · Indian River Road · Retail uses- restaurant, fuel sales / B-2 Community Business D~stnct · Office (under construction) and retail uses / B-2 Community Business D~stnct · Sandra Lane Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 VICTORY CHAPEL / # 22 Page 2 · Bowling alley / B-2 Community Business D~strict Zoninq History A variety of Conditional Use Permits have been granted ~n the v~cinity of this request. The permits range ~n uses from churches to ch~ldcare and mini-storage to motor vehicle rentals. No specific zoning actiwty has occurred on this parcel w~thin the last 20 years. Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) The site ~s in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Public Facilities and Services Water and Sewer The building on the site is currently served by City water and sewer. Transportation The traffic generated at th~s s~te for the church use ~s less than what would be generated were the s~te developed with a commercial use allowed by-right ~n the B-2 Business zoning district. The Master Transportation Plan identifies this port~on of Indian R~ver Road planned for an ulbmate w~dth of 150 feet. Currently, the right-of-way width at this location is approximately 115 feet. Future reservabon and/or dedications may be required. This would only affect the exisbng parking lot and not the exisbng structure. Public Safety Police: Not reviewed - no comments. Fire and Rescue: To be occupied as a Place of Assembly, additional building code requirements must be met ~n regards to fire protection, tenant separabon and means of egress Additional review of these requirements and other related ~ssues w~ll be done at a later date. Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 VICTORY CHAPEL / # 22 Page 3 Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan Map recommends this area for continued use for retad, service, office and other compatible uses w~thin commercial centers serving surrounding neighborhoods and communities. Summary of Proposal Proposal There ~s an ex~sting 1,800 square foot one-story building w~th a taller two- story addition off of the northeast corner of the building. An asphalt, paved parking area surrounds three sides of the budding. The church membership at present ~s 35. There ~s ample parking on s~te to accommodate substantial growth of the church. Although not clearly marked due to d~srepair, the parking lot can accommodate 38 parking spaces or up to 190 seats w~thin the facility. Th~s esbmate ~s solely based on the Zoning Ordinance, which requires at least one parking space for each five seats w~thin a sanctuary. Other factors may further restrict the ulbmate growth of the church at this location. The applicant has indicated that exterior aesthetic ~mprovements to the exisbng building are planned and include: painting the exterior an off-white earth tone color, removing the existing non-conforming s~gn, installing landscaping in planters along the fa(;ade facing Indian R~ver Road and resurfac~ng the existing parking lot. Evaluation of Request The request for a free-standing church at th~s Iocabon is acceptable. Staff has noted that the 18,576 square foot s~te ~s s~gniflcantly less than the three-acre s~te s~ze required by the Zoning Ordinance for free-standing churches; however, as prowded for ~n the Zoning Ordinance (Section 221(e)), the condlbons recommended below should offset the negative effects inherent in the area deficiency. The use will have little, if any, negative impact on the surrounding properties According to the applicant, members wdl use the church on Wednesday evenings and then on Sundays for two services The Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 VICTORY CHAPEL / # 22 Page 4 church does not operate during the peak hours for the commercial uses that are located ~n the wcin~ty of this site, and at this time the church has only 35 members. It is recommended that the Conditional Use Permit for the church be approved w~th the following condibons. Conditions 1. The asphalt area shall be resurfaced and remarked for standard parking spaces, w~th at least one van accessible hand~cap space marked. 2. The exterior of the building shall be painted an off-wh~te color. . The exisbng nonconforming sign shall be removed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy Any new freestanding s~gn shall be monument style with a brick base. All new signage shall adhere to all apphcable requirements w~thin the C~ty of Virginia Beach Zoning Ordinance 4 A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained from the Building Official's Office prior to occupancy of the church. 5. The maximum attendance at the church at any one bme shall be 190. 6. The Use Permit shall be administratively reviewed on an annual bas~s. . Foundation landscaping shall be installed along at least 50 percent the facade facing Indian River Road. Th~s requirement may be met w~th the use of large planters. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. The site plan submitted with this conditional use permit may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. Conditional use permits must be activated within 12 months of City Council approvaL See Section 220(g) of the City Zoning Ordinance for further information. Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 VICTORY CHAPEL / # 22 Page 5 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 VICTORY CHAPEL / # 22 Page 6 6644 Indian River Road (Lot Size: 22,500 SF / 0.52 acre) Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 VICTORY CHAPEL / # 22 Page 7 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 VICTORY CHAPEL I # 22 Page 8 l~, CLOSURE STATE M E~T Applicant's Name: List All Current Property Owners: If the applicant is a CORP01~~ list ail offic, ers of the Corporation below: (Attach hst)f necessary) .. If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list ~f necessary) [~tDheck here if the apphcant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. If the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Property Owner Disclosure section below: If the property owner ;s a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below' (Attach fist if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners m the organization below: (Attach list if ne~e)~ary) i~Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization. CERTIFICATION' I certify that the information contained herein is true and a~ ~ure  , ..... I,I I ....................... .... ~l I I I [1_11 IIIIII Print Name Conditional Use Permit Application Page 8 of 12 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 VICTORY CHAPEL I # 22 Page 9 Item #22 Victory Chapel Conditional Use Permit 6644 Indian River Road District 2 Kempsvdle July 9, 2003 CONSENT Charhe Salle': The last item is Item #22, Victory Chapel. It's a Conditional Use Permit for a freestanding church at 6644 Indian River Road. Do we a representative of Victory Chapel? Is there any opposition to this item? There are seven conditions. I guess we could approve it based on those conditions if they it's not acceptable they can deal with it. Ronald Rlpley: I think they can. Charhe Salle': That's all the items on the consent agenda. I would move that we approve the consent agenda Item #22 with seven conditions Ronald Rlpley: So we have a motion to approve the consent agenda as read by Charhe Salle'. Do I have a second? I have a second by Gene Crabtree. And, Item #22, Kathy, I think it is our last item. Could you make a comment on this on behalf of the Commission? Kathy Katslas: This is for a Conditional Use Permit for a freestanding church. It was previously a gun shop, and it's 1800 square feet. They have 33 members of the church. They're going to make considerable improvements to the property, and we recommended approval. Ronald Rlpley. I hope the public has a better understanding as to why we we're recommending th~s consent item and that's the purpose of this discussion. We do have a motion on the floor and I believe we have a second. I would hke to call for the vote. So all in favor of the motion raise your hand. Opposed? AYE 9 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 2 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE ABSENT WOOD ABSENT Ronald R~pley: The motion cames. Okay. That concludes the consent agenda. Cha to Scale B-2 3 Gpin 1456-05-0942 ZONING HISTORY 1. 10-2-01 --Conditional Use Permit (child care)- Granted 2 5-22-01 --Conditional Use Permit (child care & church expansion)- Granted 1-27-98 -- Conditional Use Permit (church & school) - Granted 3. 9-8-98 -- Conditional Use Permit (mini warehouse) - Granted 4 8-22-95 --Conditional Use Permit (motor vehicle rentals)- Granted 5. 8-10-87 -- Conditional Use Permit (home occupabon beauty salon) - Den~ed 6. 3-11-85 -- Street Closure - Granted 7. 5-14-84 -- Change of Zoning (B-2 Community Business Distr~ct to A-2 Apartment D~str~ct) - Granted ITEM: CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM Gateway Christian School - Conditional Use Permit (private school) MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 · Background: An Ordinance upon Applicabon of Gateway Christian School for a Conditional Use Permit for a private school on property located at 5473 Virginia Beach Boulevard (GPIN 1467472600; 1467463886). DISTRICT 2- KEMPSVILLE The purpose of th~s request ~s to add four portable traders for additional classroom space on a temporary basis. The trailers are needed for ex~sting overcrowding ~n the classrooms. The apphcant ~s working on a Master Plan to accommodate current and long-term needs for both the church and school. Considerations: The Kings Grant Chnsban Day School received Cond~bonal Use Permit approval for the western half of the subject property on June 26, 1967. In 1978, the Fairmont Park Freewill Bapbst Church received Use Permit approval for the entirety of the subject property The names of the school and church have since changed. A school has been operating at this Iocabon for over 30 years and ~s an established use in the area. The property ~s large enough to easily accommodate the school and the associated church without causing a disturbance to neighboring properties The four trailers are proposed just south of the parking lot located between the church and the school. The tra~lers are shown ~n two groups of two, w~th a wooden deck connecting the area between the tra~lers The trailers are proposed at a location on the s~te that ~s not ws~ble from the street or from ne~ghbonng properbes. The tra~lers are ~ntended as a temporary means to m~bgate an ex~sbng problem with overcrowded classrooms. A long-term solubon ~s ~n the planning stages that w~ll address the ex~sbng and future needs of the church and school The Planning Commission placed this ~tem on the consent agenda because ~t ~s an ex~sbng use and the proposed trailers would not be v~sible from the street or adjacent properties Staff recommended approval. There was no opposibon to the request. Gateway Christian School Page 2 of 2 · Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to approve this request w~th the following condibons. . A total of four traders are permitted as shown on the s~te plan entitled "Gateway Chrisban School" dated May 2003 by Patton Harris & Rust Associates. All trailers shall be removed w~thm five years of the date of approval of th~s Cond~bonal Use Permit request. 2. The base of the traders shall be enclosed to prevent entry underneath the tra~lers 3. Foundabon landscaping shall be installed and maintained around the base of the trailers, except where they are connected by a deck. 4 Locking dewces acceptable to the Police Department shall be installed on all doors and w~ndows of the trailers. 5. The metal frame currently located ~n the general area of the proposed traders shall be removed. Attachments: Staff Review D~sclosure Statement Planning Commission M~nutes Locabon Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval Planning Commission recommends approval Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Departmen~~ i/~=~ City Manager:~C¢~ ~Z-- · ~~¥~z- GATEWAY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL/# 11 July 9, 2003 General Information: APPLICATION C06 - 215 - CUP - 2003 NUMBER: REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for private school (portable trailers) ADDRESS: 5473 Virginia Beach Boulevard Ma C-6 Plop N~'i~to Scale Gatewa, Christian School Gp~n: 1467-47-2~00 and 46-3886 GPIN: ELECTION DISTRICT: 14674726000000 & 14674638860000 KEMPSVILLE- 2 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GATEWAY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL / # 11 Page 1 SITE SIZE: 24.303 acres STAFF PLANNER: PURPOSE: Ashby Moss To add four portable traders for additional classroom space on a temporary basis. The traders are needed for ex~sting overcrowding in the classrooms. The applicant ~s working on a Master Plan to accommodate current and long term needs for both the church and school. Major Issues: · Visibility of traders from off-site. · Temporary nature of trailers pending future budding expansion. Land Use, Zoning, and Site Characteristics: Existinq Land Use and Zoninq The property is currently used as a private school and a church. The property ~s zoned R-7.5 Res~denbal District and A-12 Apartment District. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning North: South: East: · Retad uses and auto repair he between the subject property and Virginia Beach Boulevard / B-2 Community Bus~ness D~stnct · Vacant property, significantly impacted by wetlands / 0-2 Office District. · Beyond that is 1-264. · Single-family res~denbal dwellings / R-7 5 Res~denbal D~str~ct Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GATEWAY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL / # 11 Page 2 West: · Single-famdy residential dwellings / R-10 Residential D~strict Zoning History The Kings Grant Chrisban Day School received Conditional Use Permit approval for the western half of the subject property on June 26, 1967. In 1978, the Fairmont Park Freewill Bapbst Church received Use Permit approval for the enbrety of the subject property. The names of the school and church have s~nce changed. In 1982 and again in 1983, the church received approval to allow the ex~sting dormitories on a portion of the property to be used for group quarters The ~ntent at the bme was to allow military personnel to use the dormitories at no cost during the weekends Two p~eces of the subject property were rezoned to A-1 Apartment District on two separate occasions. The property on the western side, which does contain a structure, was rezoned from B- 2 Business to A-1 Apartments on April 13, 1981. The property on the eastern s~de, which ~s currently vacant, was rezoned from R-6 Res~denbal to A-1 Apartments on February 27, 1984 Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) The sIte is ~n an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Public Facilities and Services Water and Sewer The property is already connected to City water and sewer. Transportation Master Transportation Plan (MTP) / Capital Improvement Program (CIP): Virginia Beach Boulevard in the vicinity of th~s application is considered an e~ght lane d~v~ded major urban arterial. The MTP designates this roadway as a 150-foot right- of-way w~th d~wded traffic lanes. There are no upgrades programmed for th~s secbon of V~rginia Beach Boulevard in the current adopted CIP Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GATEWAY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL / # 11 Page 3 Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Present Generated Traffic Volume Capacity 41,000 Ex~sbng Land Use z_ 606 V~rg~n~a Beach Bird ADT ~ 34,949 ADT ~ Proposed Land Use 3_ 606 Average Dady Trips as defined by current enrollment of 480 students enrollment w~ll not change Public Safety Police: The Police Department recommends secure locking dewces for the doors and w~ndows of the trailers and secure skirbng around the base to prevent vandalism and break-~ns. Adequate hghting should also be provided in the ~mmediate vicinity of the tra~lers. Fire and Rescue: A Fire Code permit must be obtained from the F~re Department, and a Certificate of Occupancy must be obtained from the Building Official Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan Map recommends Iow density s~ngle family res~denbal land use for the subJect property. Summary of Proposal Proposal · The applicant requests to ~nstall four mobde traders to be used as classrooms at the back of the property. · The apphcant currently intends to beg~n planning an expansion for the school to be constructed within five years. Site Design · The property already contains several buildings associated w~th the church and/or the school Most of the buildings are located on the south side of the property. Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GATEWAY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL I # 11 Page 4 · The four tra~lers are proposed just south of the parking lot located between the church and the school. I I I I I The tra~lers are shown ~n two groups of two, with a wooden deck connecting the area between the traders Vehicular and Pedestrian Access · The property has two vehicular access points. One ~s located on V~rg~n~a Beach Boulevard, and the other is located on Cross Street, which connects to Toy Avenue and Sedgefleld Avenue Architectural Design · Two single-wide (12 feet by 60 feet) and two double-wide (24 feet by 60 feet) trailers are proposed. · The base of the tra~lers must be enclosed with secure skirting to prevent entry underneath the trader. Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GATEWAY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL I # 11 Page 5 Landscape and Open Space · Foundabon landscaping around the outside of the trailer groupings ~s recommended as a condition of the Use Permit. Evaluation of Request Th~s Conditional Use Permit apphcation for temporary trailers for a private school is acceptable. A school has been operating at this Iocabon for over 30 years and is an established use in the area. The property ~s large enough to easily accommodate the school and the associated church w~thout causing a d~sturbance to ne~ghbonng properbes. The traders are proposed at a location on the s~te that is not ws~ble from the street or from neighboring properties. The trailers are intended as a temporary means to m~tigate an exisbng problem w~th overcrowded classrooms. A long lerm solubon is ~n the planning stages that wdl address the ex~sting and future needs of the church and school. Therefore, this applicabon is recommended for approval, subject to the cond~bons ksted below: Conditions I . A total of four trailers are permitted as shown on the site plan enbtled "Gateway Christian School" dated May 2003 by Patton Harris & Rust Associates. All traders shall be removed w~thin five years of the date of approval of this Conditional Use Permit request 2 The base of the trailers shall be enclosed to prevent entry underneath the tra~lers. 3. Foundation landscaping shall be installed and maintained around the base of the tra~lers, except where they are connected by a deck 4. Locking devices acceptable to the Police Department shall be ~nstalled on all doors and w~ndows of the tra~lers. 5. The metal frame currently located in the general area of the proposed trailers shall be removed. NOTE: Further conditions may be reouired durin(~ the Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GATEWAY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL / # 11 Page 6 administration of applicable City Ordinances. The site plan submitted with this conditional use permit may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. Conditional use permits must be activated within 12 months of City Council approval. See Section 220(g) of the City Zoning Ordinance for further information. Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GATEWAY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL / # 11 Page 7 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GATEWAY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL / # 11 Page 8 24' by 60' 12' by 60' Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GATEWAY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL / # 11 Page 9 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GATEWAY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL / # 11 Page 10 DISCLOSURE STATEMENt,,T ..... [[[['[[ [[[ [ :: ': ~." ' [1'1 ................... II Il[[I ' ' I II I [1[[ ' r lull[ [ [ [[ [[ r-I LiStpropertyAll Cur.nt~nem: ~~~ ~~'/d ~~ APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the appli~nt ~s a CORPORATION, list all o~m of the Co~ora~on below: (A~ach list ~ ne~ssa~) If the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) I-i Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organizahon ff the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Property Owner Disclosure section below: PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE If the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below' (Attach list if necessary) I"! Check here ~f the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization CERTIFICATION' i certify t~t the information contained herein is true Signature Print Name l. : i Illlllllllll' ,,, ,, . ! ..... I . : ]Ill I Il Il . I · Conditional Use Permit Apphcabon Page 8 of 12 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GATEWAY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL / # 11 Page 11 Certification: I certify that the attached information contained herein is true and accurate. Gateway FWB Church Trustees: property OWner's SignatUi e Property Owner's S~gnature Mr. Ken Sullivan Mr. Howard Brooks Mr. Manford Gibbs Mr. Vincent Fingleton Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 GATEWAY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL / # 11 Page 12 Item # 11 Gateway Christian School Conditional Use Permit 5473 Virginia Beach Boulevard District 2 Kempsvdle July 9, 2003 CONSENT Charhe Salle': Next item, I guess is Item # 11, Gateway Christian School. And this is a Conditional Use Permit for a private school for some portable trailers at 5473 Virginia Beach Boulevard. Kirk Berkhlmer: I'm K~rk Berkhimer. I represent Patten, Harris, Russ & Gateway Christian Schools. Charhe Salle': And there are three conditions. Are they acceptable9 Kirk Berkhlmer: We accept them. Yes. Charhe Salle': Is there any opposition to this application? Thank you. I would move that we approve the consent agenda Item # 11 with three conditions. Ronald Rlpley: So we have a motion to approve the consent agenda as read by Charhe Salle'. Do I have a second? I have a second by Gene Crabtree. And, I've asked Barry Knight to comment on this item, so Barry Item #11. Barry Knight: Item #11 is a request for Gateway Clmstlan School for a Conditional Use Permit for a private school, specifically portable trailers. School has been operating in this location for over 30 years. It's an established Use in the area. The property is large enough to easily accommodate the school and the associated church without causing disturbance to the nelghbonng properties. Trailers are proposed at a location on the site that is not visible from the street or from the nelghbonng properties. The trailers are intended as a temporary means to mitigate an existing problem with overcrowded classrooms. A long-term solution is in the planning stages that will address the future needs of the church. It was also noted that our own public schools have portable trailers and they have a need and we understand that the private sector has that same need. So, we view this as an acceptable use of the property subject to the conditions. Ronald Rlpley: Barry, thank you very much. I hope the public has a better understanding as to why we we're recommending this consent item and that's the purpose of this discussion. We do have a motion on the floor and I believe we have a second. I would like to call for the vote. So all in favor of the motion raise your hand. Opposed? Item # 11 Gateway Clmstlan School Page 2 AYE 9 NAY 0 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD Ronald Rlpley: The motion cames. ABS 0 ABSENT 2 ABSENT ABSENT Ma C-6 Christian School Hop No~'~ 'co Cjcole Gptn: 1467-47-2600 and 46-3886 ZONING HISTORY 1 5-9-83 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (group home) - Granted 4-19-82- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (group home)- Granted 10-16-78 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (church) - Granted 6-26-67 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (school) - Granted 2 4-9-96 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (auto repair garage) - Granted 6-8-93 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (auto repair facility) - Granted 3 7-2-02- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (church) - Granted 9-26-00 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (church) - Granted 4 7-3-01 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (church)- Granted 5 3-12-02 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (small engine repair-motorcycles) - Granted 10-26-99 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (auto rental fac~hty) - Granted 6-9-86 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (auto repair) - Granted 6 7-6-93 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (truck rentals) - Granted 9-6-83 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (mmv-warehouses) - Granted 9-6-83 - REZONING (R-6 Res~denbal to B-2 Bus~ness) - Granted 7 12-3-02 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (church) - Granted 4-22-85 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (church) - Granted 11-28-83 - REZONING (R-6 Res~denbal to B-2 Bus~ness) - Granted 8 4-13-81 - REZONING (B-2 Bus~ness to A-1 Apartments) - Granted 9 2-27-84 - REZONING - (R-6 Res~denbal to A-1 Apartments) - Granted 10 4-11-77 - REZONING (R-6 Residential to B-2 Business) - Granted CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Custom Stone Co. - Conditional Use Permit (bulk storage yard) MEETING DATE: August 12, 2003 · Background: An Ordinance upon Application of Custom Stone Co for a Conditional Use Permit for a bulk storage yard on property located at 2621 Quality Court (GPIN 1496777137). DISTRICT 6- BEACH The purpose of this request ~s to use the remaining vacant area on the property as a bulk storage yard. Considerations: A portion of th~s property ~s developed w~th industrial buddings and an ex~sbng bulk storage yard. The applicant is proposing another bulk storage yard on the western half of the property, which ~s currently vacant. The property ~s zoned I-1 L~ght Industrial District. A Conditional Use Permit for a contractor's storage yard was approved for the subject property on February 24, 1998. The proposed storage area ~s located on the front (western) half of the property and ~s approximately 125,000 square feet. An existing storage yard ~s located on the eastern side of the property and is approximately 75,000 square feet. Office and warehouse buildings are located between the two storage yards The applicant proposes to store granite slab within the new storage area. The rear storage area would be retained for storage of other ~tems The proposed use ~s consistent with surrounding auto repair and storage yard uses w~th~n the London Bridge Industrial Park II and ~s ~n keeping w~th the Comprehensive Plan. S~te requirements pertaining to screening and landscaping w~ll screen ~tems w~th~n the storage yard from adjacent properties and from the street. The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because it ~s an ex~sbng use and is consistent w~th surrounding businesses. There was no oppos~bon Custom Stone Co. Page 2 of 2 · Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to approve th~s request with the following conditions 1. The bulk storage areas shall be as shown on the site plan entitled, "Preliminary Site Plan for Bulk Storage Yard for Custom Stone Company" dated April 21,2002 by NDI, L.L.C. However, the chain I~nk fence w~th barbed w~re shown around the western bulk storage area shall not be permitted. The fence shall comply w~th Article 3.3 of the City Landscaping Guide unless a variance ~s approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals. . Fencing, landscaping and I~ghting shall be ~nstalled ~n accordance w~th Secbon 228 of the City Zoning Ordinance and the requirements of the Site Plan Ordinance. 3 The site shall comply w~th apphcable stormwater management requirements. Attachments: Staff Rewew D~sclosure Statement Planning Commission M~nutes Locabon Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval Planning Commission recommends approval Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department,~l~.~l~------ City Manager:~~r~,:~ ~.._, ~~ CUSTOM STONE CO./# 12 July 9, 2003 General Information: 108 - 210 - CUP - 2003 APPLICATION NUMBER: REQUEST: ADDRESS' Conditional Use Permit for bulk storage yard 2621 Quality Court Ma~ I-8 Custom Stone Co. Gpm 1497-77-7137 I-I GPIN: ELECTION DISTRICT: SITE SIZE. 14967771370000 6 - BEACH 9 9 acres Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 CUSTOM STONE CO./# 12 Page 1 STAFF PLANNER: PURPOSE: Ashby Moss To use the remaining vacant area on the property as a bulk storage yard. Major Issues: · Degree to which the proposal ~s compatible w~th the surrounding area. Land Use, Zoning, and Site Characteristics: Existinq Land Use and Zonin.q A portion of this property is developed w~th industrial buildings and an ex~sting bulk storage yard. The applicant ~s proposing another bulk storage yard on the western half of the property, which ~s currently vacant. The property ~s zoned I- 1 L~ght Industrial District. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoninq North: South: East: West: · Across Quality Court, a contractor's storage yard / I-1 L~ght Industrial District · Auto repair and bulk storage yard / I-1 Light Industrial District · Vacant property / I-1 Light Industrial D~strict · Across Central Drive, auto repair / I-1 L~ght Industrial D~stnct Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 CUSTOM STONE CO./# 12 Page 2 Zonin_a History A Conditional Use Permit for a contractor's storage yard was approved for the subject property on February 24, 1998. Cond~bons of that Use Permit are as follows: The cond~bonal use permit ~s approved for a 5 05 acre porbon of the subject property beginmng approximately 660 feet east of Central Drive, as depicted on the s~te plan enbtled "Prehm~nary S~te Plan of Office/Warehouse and Contractors Storage Yard at Parcel 43 London Bridge Industrial Park II" Fencing, landscaping and hghbng shall be ~nstalled in accordance w~th Secbon 228 of the C~ty Zomng Ordinance and the requirements of the S~te Plan Ordinance The rote shall comply w~th apphcable stormwater management requirements Zoning actions in the ~mmediate vicinity ~nclude several other Cond~bonal Use Permits for bulk storage yards and auto repair establishments. Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) The site is ~n AICUZ greater than 75dB Ldn and Accident Potential Zone II surrounding NAS Oceana. Public Facilities and Services Water and Sewer Th~s property is already connected to City water and sewer. Transportation No s~gn~flcant ~ncrease ~n trip generation ~s anticipated w~th this proposal Public Safety Police: No comments. Fire and Adequate - no further comments. Rescue: Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 CUSTOM STONE CO./# 12 Page 3 Comprehensive Plan The Comprehenswe Plan recommends this area for a variety of employment uses, ~ncluding business parks, offices, and appropriately located industrial and employment support uses. Summary of Proposal Proposal · The applicant proposes to store granite slab within the new storage area. The rear storage area would be retained for storage of other ~tems. Site Desiqn · The proposed storage area ~s located on the front (western) half of the property and is approximately 125,000 square feet. · The exisbng storage yard is located on the eastern s~de of the property and ~s approximately 75,000 square feet. · Office and warehouse buildings are located between the two storage yards. Vehicular and Pedestrian Access · All of the vehicular access points for this property are located off of Quality Court. Landscape and Open Space · In accordance w~th Section 228 regarding special requirements for bulk storage yards, the storage yard must be completely enclosed by a s~x-foot fence and Category VI landscaping. Landscaping I~sted for Category VI includes evergreen shrubs reaching a m~n~mum height of 8 to 10 feet at maturity. Article 3.3 of the Landscaping Guide: Landscaping, Screening and Buffenng Specifications and Standards specifies that corrugated metal fences and chain hnk fences do not sabsfy screening requirements. Therefore, the fence for the proposed bulk storage area cannot be chain link as shown on the submitted s~te plan. Evaluation of Request The request for another bulk storage yard on the property ~s acceptable The proposed use is consistent with surrounding auto repair and storage yard uses w~th~n the London Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 CUSTOM STONE CO. I # 12 Page 4 Bridge Industrial Park II and ~s ~n keeping w~th the Comprehensive Plan. Site requirements pertaining to screening and landscaping wdl screen items within the storage yard from adjacent properbes and from the street Therefore, th~s application is recommended for approval, subject to the conditions listed below Conditions 1. The bulk storage areas shall be as shown on the site plan enbtled, "Preliminary Site Plan for Bulk Storage Yard for Custom Stone Company" dated April 21, 2002 by NDI, L.L.C. However, the chain I~nk fence with barbed w~re shown around the western bulk storage area shall not be permitted The fence shall comply w~th Article 3 3 of the City Landscaping Guide unless a variance ~s approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals. , Fencing, landscaping and lighbng shall be installed ~n accordance w~th Section 228 of the C~ty Zoning Ordinance and the requirements of the S~te Plan Ordinance 3. The site shall comply with applicable stormwater management requirements. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. The site plan submitted with this conditional use permit may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. Conditional use permits must be activated within 12 months of City Council approval See Section 220(g) of the City Zoning Ordinance for further information. II Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 CUSTOM STONE CO. / # 12 Page 5 I ! ! ! ! II ! I II I II I II I II II I 11 I l i ! I l I ! Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 CUSTOM STONE CO. I # 12 Page 6 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 CUSTOM STONE CO. / # 12 Page 7 ,, i lll ii II Applicant's Name: List All Current Property Owners: APPLICANT DISCLOSURE if the apphcant is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) tf the applicant is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, list all members or partners in the organization below: (Attach list if necessary) I"1 Check here if the applicant ~s NOT a corporation, partnership, hrm, or other unincorporated organization. If the applicant is not the current owner of the property, complete the Property Owner Disclosure section below: PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE tf the property owner is a CORPORATION, list all officers of the Corporation below: (Attach list if necessary) If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP, FIRM, or other UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZATION, hst all members or partners in the organizahon below: (Attach list if necessary) !-I Check here if the property owner ~s NOT a corporabon, partnership, firm, or other unincorporated organization CERTIFICATION. I certify th~at the information contained herein is true i,~}'~gr~ature P-rint Name ' Conditional Use Permit Application Page 8 of 12 Planning Commission Agenda July 9, 2003 CUSTOM STONE CO./# 12 Page 8 Item # 12 Custom Stone Co. Conditional Use Permit 2621 Quality Court District 6 Beach July 9, 2003 CONSENT Charhe Salle': Next item is Item #12, Custom Stone Company. Christina Sims: Good afternoon. My name is Christina Sims. And, I represent Custom Stone Company. Charhe Salle': And, there are 3 conditions and there is some new language associated with those conditions. Are you familiar with that? Christina Sims: Yes. Charlie Salle': And, are they acceptable? Christina Sims: Yes, they are. Charlie Salle': Is there any opposition to this application? Thank you. I would move that we approve the consent agenda Item #12 with three conditions. Ronald Pdpley: So we have a motion to approve the consent agenda as read by Charhe Salle'. Do I have a second? I have a second by Gene Crabtree. I've asked Barry Knight to comment on this item. Barry Knight: Item #12 is an application from Custom Stone Company for a Conditional Use Permit for a bulk storage yard. The proposed use is consistent with surrounding auto repair and storage yard uses within the London Bridge Industrial Park and is Jn keeping with the Comprehensive Plan. The site requirements pertaining to screening and landscaping will screen the items within the storage yard from adjacent properties and from the street. Therefore, we believe this is an acceptable use for this property subject to the conditions stated therein. Ronald Rlpley: Barry, thank you very much. Ronald Rlpley: I hope the public has a better understanding as to why we we're recommending this consent item and that's the purpose of this discussion. We do have a motion on the floor and I believe we have a second. I would like to call for the vote. So all ~n favor of the motion raise your hand. Opposed? AYE 9 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 2 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE SALLE' AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD ABSENT ABSENT Ronald Rlpley: The motion cames. Ma 1-8 M~ ~qo~I~ Scale Custom Stone Co. I-2 9 I-! Gpin 1497-77-7137 ZONING HISTORY I-1 1. 2-24-98 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (contractors storage yard) - Granted 2. 10-29-86- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (auto repair & bulk storage)- Granted 3. 10-13-92 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (auto repair garage) - Granted 5-12-92 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (contractors equipment storage yard) - Granted 4. 3-28-95 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (auto repair facility) - Granted 5. 2-26-02- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (commun~cabon tower)- Granted 2-26-02- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (bulk storage yard)- Granted 6. 10-14-97- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (contractors storage yard)- Granted 7. 5-12-98 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (outside storage of vehicles) - Granted 8. 3-13-01 -CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (bulk storage yard)- Granted 9 2-26-02 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (communication tower) - Granted CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: MEETING DATE: A Resolution Referring to the Planning Commission Proposed Amendments to Sections 111,233.1, 1501, 1511 and 1521 of the City Zoning Ordinance, Pertaining to Conditional Use Permits for Sales of Alcoholic Beverages in the RT-1, RT-2 and RT-3 Resort Tourist Districts August 12, 2003 Background: Current City Zoning Ordinance provisions have proven to be inadequate to control the proliferation of bars in the Resort Area. While the City has consistently opposed applications for ABC licenses for establishments in the Resort Area, the ABC Board has granted those applications over the City's objections. The City's having a greater measure of control over such establishments is especially needed in the Resort Area because much of the undesirable behavior (including, but not limited to, the commission of criminal offenses) at the Oceanfront is the direct or indirect result of the consumption alcoholic beverages. Considerations: The Resolution refers to the Planning Commission proposed amendments to the City Zoning which would, in effect, require a conditional use permit for any establishment serving or selling alcoholic beverages (on- or off- premises) in the RT-1, RT-2 or RT-3 Resort Tourist District. The Staff will also present to the City Council, as a part of the City's 2004 Legislative Package, proposed Virginia Code amendments which would significantly expand the City's ability to use the conditional use permit process as a means to control such establishments. The Mayor has requested that the Resolution referring the proposed amendments to the Planning Commission be placed on the City Council's agenda. Alternatives: The adoption of the Resolution would require the Planning Commission to consider and provide a recommendation on the amendments. When the amendments come before the City Council, the Council may adopt, decline to adopt, or modify and adopt them. Public Information: The amendments themselves will be advertised as a regular planning item before both the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings, in accordance with legal requirements. Recommendations: Adoption of Resolution referring proposed amendments to the Planning Commission · Attachments: Proposed Ordinance Recommended Action: Adoption of Resolution Submitting Department/Agency: City Manage~ ~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A RESOLUTION REFERRING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SECTIONS 111, 233.1, 1501, 1511 AND 1521 OF THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE, PERTAINING TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR SALES OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN THE RT-1, RT-2 AND RT-3 RESORT TOURIST DISTRICTS WHEREAS, the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice so require; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: There is hereby referred to the Planning Commission, for its consideration and recommendation, proposed amendment to Sections 111, 233.1, 1501, 1511 and 1521 of the City Zoning Ordinance, pertaining to conditional use permits for sales of alcoholic beverages in the RT-1, RT-2 and RT-3 Resort Tourist Districts. A true copy of such proposed amendment is hereto attached. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the day of , 2003 CA-8974 wmm\ordres\alcoholicbevreferres.wpd R-1 August 7, 2003 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL Department of Law ' AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTIONS 111, 233.1, 1501, 1511 AND 1521 OF THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE, PERTAINING TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR SALES OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN THE RT-1, RT- 2 AND RT-3 RESORT TOURIST DISTRICTS SECTIONS AMENDED: City Zoning Ordinance Sections 111, 233.1, 1501, 1511 and 1521 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA' That Sections 111, 233.1, 1501, 1511 and 1521 of the City Zoning Ordinance are hereby amended and reordained to read as follows: Sec. 111. Definitions. For the purpose of this ordinance, words used in the present tense shall include the future; words used in the singular number include the plural and the plural the singular; the use of any gender shall be applicable to all genders; the word "shall" is mandatory; the word "may" is permissive; the word "land" includes only the area described as being above mean sea level; and the word "person" includes an individual, a partnership, association, or corporation. In addition, the following terms shall be defined as herein indicated: Alcoholic beveraqe. Alcohol, spirits, wine, beer, or any one or more of such varieties containinq one-half of one percent or 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 more of alcohol by volume, including mixed alcoholic beverages, and every liquid or solid, patented or not, containinq alcohol, spirits, wine, or beer and capable of being consumed by a human beinq. Any liquid or solid containing more than one of the four varieties shall be considered as belonging to that variety which has the higher percentaqe of alcohol, however obtained, according to the order in which they are set forth in this definition. Eating and drinking establishment or restaurant. A commercial establishment where food, beverages and meals are served and consumed, including any areas set aside for their storage or preparation. COMMENT The amendments add a definition of the term "alcoholic beverage" (essentially the same definition as appears in Virginia Code Section 4.1-100), and clarify that the term "restaurant" is used interchangeably with "eating and drinking establishment" in the City Zoning Ordinance. 45 46 Sec. 233.1. Eating and drinking establishments serving alcoholic beverages. 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 In addition to general requirements, eating and drinking establishments which serve alcoholic beverages, as defined in section 4-2 of the Code of Virginia, for on-premises consumption and which are located within five hundred (500) feet of any residential or apartment district or have on-site parking within three hundred (300) feet of any residential or apartment, district, or which are located within the RT-1, RT-2 or RT-3 Resort Tourist 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 District, shall be subject to the following requirements, which shall be deemed to be conditions of the conditional use permit: (a) Category VI landscaping shall be installed along any lot line adjoining a residential or apartment district without an intervening street, alley or body or water greater than fifty (50) feet in width. The fencing element of such landscaping shall not be less than six (6) feet nor more than eight (8) feet in height. Landscaping shall be maintained in good condition at all times~ (b) The operation of such establishments shall not disturb the tranquility of residential areas or other areas in close proximity or otherwise interfere with the reasonable use and enjoyment of neighboring property by reason of excessive noise, traffic, overflow parking and litterv~ (c) Operators of such establishments shall not allow loitering or congregations of individuals in the parking lot or other exterior portions of the premises, except for areas in which the consumption of alcoholic beverages is specifically permitted by the terms of the establishment's Alcoholic Beverage Control license, and shall keep all entrance and exit doors closed at all times of operation, except when patrons, employees or 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 other persons are entering or exiting the interior of the establishment~; and (d) Such establishments shall be required to implement any other measures the city council deems necessary or appropriate to minimize noise or other potential adverse effects upon neighboring residential areas. A violation of any of the aforesaid requirements shall be grounds for revocation of the conditional use permit. COMMENT The amendment in Lines 48-49 strikes out the reference to the Virginia Code definition of "alcoholic beverage" in light of the addition of the definition to Section 111 of the City Zoning Ordinance. The amendments in Lines 77-79 clarify that doors may be open when persons are entering or exiting the establishment. The amendment in Line 83 removes the limitation as to residential areas. Sec. 1501. Use Regulations (RT - i Resort Tourist District) (a) Principal uses and structures: (1) Except as provided in sections 1501(b) (2) and 1501 (b) (4.1), hotels and motels, which may have in conjunction with them any combination of restaurants, outdoor cafes, retail commercial use and convention facilities, provided that uses in conjunction with hotels and motels may not occupy more than ten (10) percent of the floor area of all structures (excluding parking) located on the lot, subject to the following: (i) The structure enclosing the uses permitted in conjunction with hotels and motels shall be fully 4 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 enclosed at all times by solid exterior walls and roof with no exterior opening, other than passage-way doors as may be required by the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code; (ii) Such enclosed structure shall be located entirely within the same structure enclosing the principal use; and (iii) No entrances or exit to a use permitted in conjunction with hotels and motels shall be located on the side of the structure facing the boardwalk, unless such entrance or exit provides access to a courtyard or intervening open area, in which case such open area shall be fully fenced or walled to a height of at least four (4) feet and without any entrances or exits facing the boardwalk. The only exceptions to this condition apply to boardwalk cafes as permitted by special regulations established in franchise agreements approved by city council. (iv) Parking structures shall be permitted in conjunction with hotels and motels provided that ground level parking fronting Atlantic Avenue, the boardwalk, or any public park or open space is 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 prohibited except for necessary access drives and ramps. (b) Conditional uses and structures' Uses and structures hereinafter specified, subject to compliance with the provisions of part C of article 2 hereof: (2) Restaurants operated in conjunction with hotels or motels and servinq alcoholic beveraqes where ~-~ of the following occur; provided, however, that drive-through facilities shall not be permittedc (i) Alcoholic beverages are served; '::~ The est-~io au~ -hment excludes persons on the bao~= of age ~u=~ng any part of the day. (4.1) Retail sales of alcoholic beverages. COMMENT The amendments in Lines 134 to 139 change the existing ordinance by requiring a conditional use permit for any restaurant in a hotel or motel in the RT - 1 Resort Tourist District which serves alcoholic beverages, irrespective of whether or persons are excluded on the basis of age during any part of the day. The amendment in Line 141 requires conditional use permits for all retail sales of alcoholic beverages. Sec. 1511. Use regulations (RT-2 Resort Tourist District). (a) Principal uses and structures: For parcels less than fourteen thousand (14,000) square feet in size, any one of the 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 following is allowed; provided, however, that drive-through facilities and sales of alcoholic beveraqes shall not be permitted as a principal or accessory use' (8) Eating and drinking establishments, except as specified in subsection (c) (6); (14) Private clubs, lodges, social centers, eleemosynary establishments and athletic clubs, provided that alcoholic beveraqes may be served only by conditional use permit; and (17) Retail establishments, except as provided in section 1511 (c) (16.1), including the incidental manufacturing of goods for sale only at retail on the premises; retail sales and display rooms and lots, provided that yards for storage of new or used building materials or yards for any scrap or salvage operations or for storage or display of any scrap, salvage or secondhand building materials or automobile parts shall not be allowed, further provided that adult bookstores shall be prohibited from locating within five hundred (500) feet of any apartment or residential district, single- or multiple-family dwelling, church, park or school. 177 .... 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 For parcels greater than fourteen thousand (14,000) square feet, any one of the following additional uses is allowed' (19) Motels and hotels which may have in conjunction with them any combination of restaurants, retail commercial use and convention facilities, provided that uses in conjunction with hotels and motels may not occupy more than ten (10) percent of the floor area of all structures (excluding parking) located on the lot; provided, further, that drive-through facilities shall not be permitted as a principal or accessory use and that sales of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted only by conditional use permit. For parcels greater than forty thousand (40,000) square feet, any of the above permitted uses may be used in combination on the same zoning lot with other permitted uses. COMMENT The effect of the amendments is to prohibit the sale of alcoholic beverages in the RT-2 Resort Tourist District as a principal permitted (i.e., of-right) use. All such sales require a conditional use permit under the provisions of subsection (c). (b) Accessory uses and structures' Uses and structures which are customarily accessory and clearly incidental and subordinate to the principal uses and structures; provided, however, that drive- 202 through facilities and sales of alcoholic beverages shall not be 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 permitted as accessory uses: COMMENT TheamendmentsprohibitsalesofalcoholicbeveragesasanaccessoryuseintheRT-2Resort TouristDistrict. (c) Conditional uses and structures: Uses and .structures hereinafter specified, subject to compliance with the provisions of part C of article 2 hereof; provided, however, that except as set forth in subdivision (5.5), drive-through facilities shall not be permitted as a conditional or accessory use: (6) Eating and drinking establishments where both of the following occur; (i) Alcoholic alcoholic beverages are servedT (ii) m~_~= establishment excludes persons on the 'oasis of age during any part of the day; (13.8) Private clubs, lodqes, social centers, eleemosynary establishments and athletic clubs which serve alcoholic 222 223 224 225 beverages; (16.1) Retail sales of alcoholic beverages; COMMENT 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 The amendments change the existing ordinance by requiring a conditional use permit for aH sales of alcoholic beverages in the RT - 2 Resort Tourist District, either for on - premises or off- premises consumption. Sec. 1521. Use regulations (RT-3 Resort Tourist District). (a) Principal uses and structures' For parcels less than twenty thousand (20,000) square feet in size, any one (1) of the following is allowed; provided, however, that except as provided in subdivision (5.5) of subsection (c), drive-through facilities shall not be permitted in any portion of the district' (9) Eating and drinking establishments, except as specified in subsection (c) (6); (15) Private clubs, lodges, social centers, eleemosynary establishments and athletic clubs, provided that alcoholic beveraqes may be served only by conditional use permit; (18) Retail establishments, except as provided in section 1521 (c) (16.1), including the incidental manufacturing of goods for sale only at retail on the premises; retail sales and display rooms and lots, provided that yards for storage of new or used building materials or yards for any scrap or salvage operations or for storage or display of any scrap, salvage or secondhand building materials or 10 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 automobile parts shall not be allowed, further provided that adult bookstores shall be prohibited from locating within five hundred (500) feet of any apartment or residential district, single- or multiple-family dwelling, church, park or school. For parcels greater than twenty thousand (20,000) square feet, any of the following additional uses are allowed and may be used in combination with any of the permitted uses listed above: (20) Motels and hotels which may have in conjunction with them any combination of restaurants, retail commercial use and convention facilities, provided that uses in conjunction with hotels and motels may not occupy more than ten (10) percent of the floor area of all structures (excluding parking) located on the lot, and provided further, that drive-through facilities shall not be permitted as a principal use in any portion of the district east of Arctic Avenue, south of Winston-Salem Avenue and 4th Street, or north of 35th Street and that sales of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted only by conditional use permit. (b) Accessory uses and structures' Uses and structures which are customarily accessory and clearly incidental and subordinate to 11 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 the principal uses and structures; provided, however, that drive- through facilities and sales of alcoholic beverages shall not be permitted as accessory uses: (c) Conditional uses and structures: Uses and structures hereinafter specified, subject to compliance with the provisions of part C of article 2 hereof; and provided, that except as set forth in subdivision (5.5), drive-through facilities shall not be permitted as a conditional or accessory use in any portion of the district east of Arctic Avenue, south of Winston-Salem Avenue and 4th Street, or north of 35th Street- (6) Eating and drinking establishments where both of the following occur- ~ Alcoholic alcoholic beverages are served; age during any part of the day; COMMENT The amendments change the existing ordinance by requiring a conditional use permit for all sales of alcoholic beverages in the RT - 3 Resort Tourist District, either for on - premises or off- premises consumption. 12 297 298 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the day of , 2003. CA-8887 wmm\ordres \alcoholicbevordin. wpd August 7, 2003 R-3 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY' 13