Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
OCTOBER 12, 2004 AGENDA
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH "COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME" I CITY COUNCIL MAYOR MEYERA E. OBERNDORF, At -Large VICE MAYOR LOUIS R. JONES, Bayside - District 4 HARRY E. DIEZEL Kempsville - District 2 ROBERT M. DYER, Centerville - District 1 REBA S. McCLANAN, Rose Hall - District 3 RICHARD A. MADDOX, Beach - District 6 JIM REEVE, Princess Anne - District 7 PETER W. SCHMIDT, At -Large RONA. VILLANUEVA, At -Large ROSEMARY WILSON, At -Large JAMES L. WOOD, Lynnhaven -District 5 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY MANAGER - JAMES K. SPORE CITYATTORNEY - LESLIE L. LILLEY CITY CLERK - RUTH HODGES SMITH, MMC 12 October 2004 I. CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING A. VIRGINIA BEACH 2O07 Mac Rawls, Chair II. CITY MANAGER BRIEFINGS CITY HALL BUILDING 2401 COURTHOUSE DRIVE VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456-8005 PHONE: (757) 427-4303 FAX (757) 426-5669 - Conference Room - E-MAIL: Ctycncl@vbgov.com A. PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE AMENDMENTS Andrew M. Friedman, Director - Housing and Neighborhood Preservation B. BICYCLES and OTHER WHEELED DEVICES Vanessa Valldejuli, Assistant City Attorney III. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS IV. REVIEW OF AGENDA ITEMS V. INFORMAL SESSION - Conference Room - A. CALL TO ORDER — Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf B. ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL 1:00 PM 3:30 PM C. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION VI. FORMAL SESSION 6:00 PM A. CALL TO ORDER — Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf B. INVOCATION: Reverend Kevin Milcarek, Pastor Back Bay Christian Assembly C. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA D. ELECTRONIC ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL E. CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION F. MINUTES G H. I. Pq 1. INFORMAL AND FORMAL SESSIONS AGENDA FOR FORMAL SESSION PUBLIC HEARING 1. WEST NECK ROAD— EXCESS CITY PROPERTY CONSENT AGENDA ORDINANCES/RESOLUTIONS October 5, 2004 1. Ordinance to AMEND §2-7 of the City Code re the Volunteer Council to be renamed the Office of Volunteer Resources and the "Coordinator" appointed by City Council be retitled "Director" 2. Ordinance to AUTHORIZE the City Manager to declare EXCESS property at West Neck Road and execute an Agreement of Sale re conveying same to the Virginia Beach Development Corporation (VBCDC) 3. Resolution to AUTHORIZE the 2005 COMMUNITY LEGISLATIVE AGENDA and to REQUEST the Legislators sponsor and/or support this legislation in the 2005 General Assembly that would carry out the goals and objectives of the City as set forth 4. Resolutions re Town Center: a. REQUESTING the Virginia Beach Development Authority to cause Town Center Associates, L.L.C. release its Option on the balance of Block 6 (Caliotos property) of Town Center ("Theater Parcel") b. REQUESTING the Development Authority pay the Developer $165,625 for this Option C. AUTHORIZE the City Manager to expend $1,190,673 from Pavilion Theatre Replacement Capital Project to pay costs incurred by the Development Authority for this release (Theater Parcel) d. AUTHORIZE the Development Authority acquire the "Theater Parcel" e. EXECUTE a Comprehensive Agreement with Clancy and Theys Construction Company re the design and construction of the Performing Arts Theater 5. Resolution re 2007 Virginia Beach Jameston/Celebration: a. ACCEPT the 2007 LEGACY PROJECTS as nominated by the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee Virginia Beach Convention Center Restoration of the Thoroughgood House Lynnhaven River 2007 Improvements at First Landing State Park b. AUTHORIZE the City Manager to execute a MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) re participatation in the Preservation and Development Plan for an Interpretive Area in the Fort Story Historic District at Cape Henry with: United States Army National Park Service Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities C. REQUESTING the Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee anchor replicas of the Three Jamestown Ships off First Landing State Park during the celebration of April 26-29, 2007. 6. Ordinance to AUTHORIZE a temporary encroachment into the right-of-way at the intersection of Selwood Drive and Providence Road by BELLAMY WOODS CIVIC LEAGUE to construct and maintain landscaping with two (2) lights for their neighborhood identification sign. 7. Ordinances re Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center: a. ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE a $96,681 Grant from Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center Foundation to the Department of Museums and Cultural Arts for the Sea Scholars programs b. ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE a $45,969 Grant from Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center Foundation to the Department of Museums and Cultural Arts for the Watershed Wonderers program C. ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE a $31,000 Grant from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality to the Department of Museums and Cultural Arts re maintenance of their statewide stranding network Ordinance to APPROPRIATE $1,636,000 to the Fire Department as reimbursement revenue from FEMA re the Urban Search and Rescue Virginia Task -Force 2 assistance with Hurricanes Frances and Ivan cleanup. 9. Ordinance to APPROPRIATE $1,000,000 of General Fund balance designated for Mental Health to the FY 2004-05 Operating Budget of Human Services to develop a Residential Village for citizens with mental retardation and physical disabilities L. PLANNING — NO ACTION 1. Application of SBA COMMUNICATIONS for a Conditional Use Permit re a communications tower at 2165 Pungo Ferry Road. (sign improperly posted) (DISTRICT 7— PRINCESS ANNE) Recommendation: M. PLANNING Deferral to November 9, 2004 Ordinances to AMEND the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) : a. § 102, 1505, 1703 and 1704 by changing the name of the B-4 Resort Commercial District to the `B-4 Mixed Use District" and establishing the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District b. §900, 901, 902, 903, 904, 905 and 906 by setting forth the legislative intent of the B- 4 Mixed Use District and B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District to establish use regulations, dimensional requirements, sign regulations, off-street parking regulations and density restrictions in the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District Mixed Use Development Guidelines amendment to the Comprehensive Plan d. §33-114.3 of the City Code pertaining to encroachments by outdoor cafes and other storefront use in the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District Recommendation: 9. Bikeways and Trails: APPROVAL a. Ordinance to AMEND the Comprehensive Plan by the incorporation of the Bikeways and Trails Plan b. REPEAL the Master Bikeways Plan of 1986 c. Resolution to ESTABLISH the BIKEWAYS and TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE Recommendation: APPROVAL 3. Petition for a Variance to § 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires newly created lots meet all the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) for GAIL H. DAVIDSON, to subdivide the property into two (2) single family dwellings at 4946 Lake Lane (DISTRICT 4 — BAYSIDE) Recommendation: APPROVAL 4. Application of TAG ONE, L.L.C. for a MODIFICATION to the Timberlake Land Use Plan to allow automotive service as a permitted use (approved by City Council on September 9, 2003) at 1400 South Independence Boulevard (DISTRICT 2 — KEMPSVILLE) Recommendation: APPROVAL 5. Application of ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH for a MODIFICATION to a Conditional Use Permit re church expansion (approved by City Council on August 13, 1996 and August 11, 1998) at 2208 Princess Anne Road (DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE) Recommendation: APPROVAL 6. Application of MICHAEL D. SIFEN, INC. for a Conditional Use Permit re mini - warehouses at Kempsville Road and Providence Road (DISTRICT 1 — CENTERVILLE) Recommendation: APPROVAL 7. Application of LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES, L.C. fora Change of Zoning District Classi acation from B-2 Community Business District, A-12 Apartment District, R-2.5, R-10 and R-15 Residential Districts to Conditional R-51) Residential Duplex District, A-12 and A-18 Apartment Districts with a PD-112 Overlay District at Wesleyan Drive, Cypress Point Boulevard and Broad Meadows Boulevard (DISTRICT 4 BAYSIDE) Recommendation: APPROVAL 8. Application of REAL INVESTMENTS ASSOCIATES, L.L.C. for a Change o Zoning District Classification from AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional R-15 Residential District with a PD-112 Overlay at the intersection of Bernadotte Street and Seaboard Road (DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE) Recommendation: N. APPOINTMENTS BICYCLE and TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINORITY BUSINESS COUNCIL PARKS and RECREATION COMMISSION REVIEW AND ALLOCATION COMMITTEE (COG) SOCIAL SERVICES BOARD TOWING ADVISORY BOARD APPROVAL VIRGINIA BEACH PERFORMING ARTS THEATRE ADVISORY COMMITTEE O. UNFINISHED BUSINESS P. NEW BUSINESS Consider regular Sessions of City Council scheduled for November 2, 2004, "Election Day". 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 Virginia Relay Center at 1-800-828-1120. (TDD - Telephonic Device for the Deaf) I. CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING - Conference Room - 1:00 PM A. VIRGIIVIA BEACH 2O07 Mac Rawls, Chair II. CITY MANAGER BRIEFINGS A. PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE AMENDMENTS Andrew M. Friedman, Director - Housing and Neighborhood Preservation B. BICYCLES and OTHER WHEELED DEVICES Vanessa Valldejuli, Assistant City Attorney M. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS IV. REVIEW OF AGENDA ITEMS V. INFORMAL SESSION - Conference Room - 3:30 PM A. CALL TO ORDER — Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf B. ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL C. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION VI. FORMAL SESSION FA NO C. IN E. CALL TO ORDER — Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf INVOCATION: Reverend Kevin Milcarek, Pastor Back Bay Christian Assembly 6:00 PM PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ELECTRONIC ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION F. MINUTES 1. INFORMAL AND FORMAL SESSIONS October 5, 2004 G. AGENDA FOR FORMAL SESSION H. PUBLIC HEARING 1. WEST NECK ROAD- EXCESS CITY PROPERTY I. CONSENT AGENDA PUBLIC HEARING SALE OF EXCESS CITY PROPERTY The Virginia Beach City Council will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on the disposition and sale of Excess City Property, Tuesday, October 12, 2004, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber of the City Hall Building (Building #1) at the Virginia Beach Municipal Center, Virginia Beach, Virginia. The property is located off of West Neck Road and is a portion of (GPIN 1493-99-7053). The purpose of this hearing will be to obtain public input to determine whether this property should be declared "Excess of the City's needs". 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 VIRGINIA RELAY CENTER at 1-800-828-1120. Any questions concerning this matter should be directed to the Office of Real Estate, Building #2, Room 392, at the Virginia Beach Municipal Center. The Real Estate Office telephone number is (757)427-4161. Ruth Hodges Smith, MMC City Clerk PUBLIC HEARING SALE OF EXCESS CITY PROPERTY The Virginia Beach City Council will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on the disposition and sale of Excess City Property, Tuesday, October 12, 2004, 2004 at 6:00 p.m...in the Council Chamber of the City Hall Building (Building #1) at the Virginia Beach Municipal Center, Virginia Beach, Virginia. The property is located off of West Neck Road and is a portion of (GPIN 1493-99-7053). The purpose of this hearing will be to obtain public input to determine whether this property should be declared "Excess of the City's needs". If you are physically disabled or visually impaired and need assis- tance at this meeting, please call the CITY CLERK'S OFFICE at 4274303 ; Hearing impaired, call Virginia Relay at 1-800-828-1120 for assistance in reaching the City Clerk's Office. Any questions concerning this matter should be directed to the Office of Real Estate, Building #2, Room 392, at the Virginia Beach Munici- pal Center. The Real Estate Office telephone number is (757) 427-4161. Ruth Hodges Smith, MMC City Clerk Beacon Oct. 3, 2004 12083318 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Virginia Beach City Council will meet in the Chamber at City Hall, Municipal Center, 2401 Courthouse Drive, Tuesday, October 12, 2004, at 6:00 p.m. The following applications will be heard: DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE 1. SBA COMMUNICATIONS Application: Conditional Use Permit for a communications tower at 2165 Pungo Ferry Road (GPIN 23095107380000) 2. ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH APPLICATION: Modification to a Conditional Use Permit for a church approved on April 12, 1988 at 2208 Princess Anne Road (GPIN 24049528810000). The purpose of the modification is for an expansion. 3. REAL INVESTMENTS ASSOCIATES, L.L.C. Application: Change of Zon- ing, District Classification from AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural to Condi- tional R-15 Residential with a PD-H2 Overlay at the southeast intersec- tion of Bernadotte Street and Seaboard Road (GPINS 24046029260000; 24046101620000; 24045182260000; 24045163450000; 24045076090000). The Comprehensive Plan, designates this site as being part of Princess Anne (Transition Area). DISTRICT 4 - BAYSIDE 3. LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES, L.C. Application: Change of Zoning District Classification from B-2 Community Business, A-12 Apartment and R-2.5, R-10 and R 15 Residential to Conditional R 5D Residential Duplex, A-12 and A-18 Apartment with a PD-H2 Overlay on the north and south sides. of Wesleyan Drive, approximately 890 feet east of Cypress Point Boulevard and Broad Meadows Boulevard (GPINS 1468847648 - part of; 14688318360000). The Comprehensive Plan designates this site as being part of the Primary Residential Area, suit- able for appropriately located suburban residential and non-residential uses consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in regard to certain ele- ments of the Subdivision Ordinance, Subdivision for Gail H. Davidson, at 4946 Lake Drive (GPIN 15705056350000). DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE - 5. TAG ONE, L.L.C. Application: Modification to the Timberlake Land Use Plan to allow automotive service as a permitted use at 1400 South Independence Boulevard (GPINS 14767763710000; 14767791970000 - part of). DISTRICT 1- CENTERVILLE 6. MICHAEL D. SIFEN, INC. Application: Conditional Use Permit for mini -warehouses on the west side of Kempsville Road, approximately 360 feet south of Indian River Road (GPIN 14653810520000). CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH 7. Amend Sections 102, 203,1505, 1703 and 1704 of the City Zoning Ordinance by changing the name of the B-4 Resort Commercial Dis- trict to the "B-4 Mixed Use District" and establishing the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District. 8. Amend Sections 900, 901, 902, 903, 904, 905 and 906 of the City Zoning Ordinance by setting forth the legislative intent of the B-4 Mixed Use District and B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District and estab- lishing use regulations, dimensional requirements, sign regulations, off-street parking regulations and density restrictions in the B-4C Cen- tral Business Mixed Use District. 9. Adopt the Mixed Use Development Guidelines as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. 10. Adopt the Bikeways and Trails Plan as an amendment to the Compre- hensive Plan and Master Transportation Plan. All interested citizens are invited to attend. Ruth Hodges Smith, MMC City Clerk Copies of the proposed ordinances, resolutions and amendments are on file and may be examined in the Department of Planning. For information call 427-4621. If you are physically disabled or visually impaired and need assis- tance at this meeting, please call the CITY CLERK'S OFFICE at 4274303. Hearing impaired, call: VIRGINIA RELAY at 1-800.828-1120 The Planning Commission Agenda is available through the City's Inter- net Home Page at http�//wvww vbP-ov com/planninPcommission Beacon Sept. 26 & Oct. 3, 2004 12007961 K. ORDINANCES/RESOLUTIONS 1. Ordinance to AMEND §2-7 of the City Code re the Volunteer Council to be renamed the Office of Volunteer Resources and the "Coordinator" appointed by City Council be retitled "Director" 2. Ordinance to AUTHORIZE the City Manager to declare EXCESS property at West Neck Road and execute an Agreement of Sale re conveying same to the Virginia Beach Development Corporation (VBCDC) 3. Resolution to AUTHORIZE the 2005 COMMUNITY LEGISLATIVE AGENDA and to REQUEST the Legislators sponsor and/or support this legislation in the 2005 General Assembly that would carry out the goals and objectives of the City as set forth 4. Resolutions re Town Center: a. REQUESTING the Virginia Beach Development Authority to cause Town Center Associates, L.L.C. release its Option on the balance of Block 6 (Caliotos property) of Town Center ("Theater Parcel") b. REQUESTING the Development Authority pay the Developer $165,625 for this Option C. AUTHORIZE the City Manager to expend $1,190,673 from Pavilion Theatre Replacement Capital Project to pay costs incurred by the Development Authority for this release (Theater Parcel) d. AUTHORIZE the Development Authority acquire the "Theater Parcel" e. EXECUTE a Comprehensive Agreement with Clancy and Theys Construction Company re the design and construction of the Performing Arts Theater 5. Resolution re 2007 Virginia Beach Jameston/Celebration: a. ACCEPT the 2007 LEGACY PROJECTS as nominated by the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee Virginia Beach Convention Center Restoration of the Thoroughgood House Lynnhaven River 2007 Improvements at First Landing State Park b. AUTHORIZE the City Manager to execute a MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) re participatation in the Preservation and Development Plan for an Interpretive Area in the Fort Story Historic District at Cape Henry with: United States Army National Park Service Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities C. REQUESTING the Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee anchor replicas of the Three Jamestown Ships off First Landing State Park during the celebration of April 26-29, 2007. 6. Ordinance to AUTHORIZE a temporary encroachment into the right-of-way at the intersection of Selwood Drive and Providence Road by BELLAMY WOODS CIVIC LEAGUE to construct and maintain landscaping with two (2) lights for their neighborhood identification sign. 7. Ordinances re Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center: a. ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE a $96,681 Grant from Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center Foundation to the Department of Museums and Cultural Arts for the Sea Scholars programs b. ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE a $45,969 Grant from Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center Foundation to the Department of Museums and Cultural Arts for the Watershed Wonderers program C. ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE a $31,000 Grant from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality to the Department of Museums and Cultural Arts re maintenance of their statewide stranding network 8. Ordinance to APPROPRIATE $1,636,000 to the Fire Department as reimbursement revenue from FEMA re the Urban Search and Rescue Virginia Task -Force 2 assistance with Hurricanes Frances and Ivan cleanup. 9. Ordinance to APPROPRIATE $1,000,000 of General Fund balance designated for Mental Health to the FY 2004-05 Operating Budget of Human Services to develop a Residential Village for citizens with mental retardation and physical disabilities CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Ordinance to Amend the City Code, Section 2-7, Pertaining to Volunteer Council and Coordinator MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: The Volunteer Council was organized in 1978. Mary Russo has served as the Volunteer Council Coordinator since the inception of the Volunteer Council and continues to serve at the pleasure of City Council. The Volunteer Council is composed of the Coordinator; volunteers from the Volunteer Council Office; Susan Walston, the City Manager's representative; staff who coordinate volunteer programs within departments and several representatives of community organizations. The Virginia Beach Volunteer Program, with a 26-year history, is a model of success and viewed as a "Best Practice" across the country. During 2004, the Volunteer Council evaluated the program to assure its continued success in the 21St Century. Based on review of the current state of volunteerism in America and both input and collaborative effort by volunteers and staff, a restructuring of the Volunteer Council is recommended. ■ Considerations: The proposed restructuring includes changing the name of the Volunteer Council to the Office of Volunteer Resources and the position title of Coordinator to Director. The mission of the office would remain the same. ■ Public Information: Proposed changes resulting from this evaluation process were presented to the Volunteer Council on July 22, 2004 and a vote in support of the changes occurred on September 23, 2004. ■ Alternatives: If the ordinance is not adopted, the names of the Volunteer. Council and Coordinator will not reflect the restructuring recommended by the volunteers and staff who are involved in the City's volunteer program. ■ Recommendation: Adoption of ordinance 0 Attachments: Proposed ordinance ■ Attachments: Proposed ordinance Recommended Action: Adoption Submitting Department/Agency: Volunteer Council City Manager: c� V f� 1 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CITY CODE SECTION 2-7, 2 PERTAINING TO THE VOLUNTEER COUNCIL AND 3 COORDINATOR 4 5 SECTION AMENDED: § 2-7 6 7 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA 8 BEACH, VIRGINIA: 9 10 That Section 2-7 of the City Code is hereby amended and 11 reordained, to read as follows: 12 Sec. 2-7. Veluntee- eordina'"'-' Office of Volunteer 13 Resources; Director 14 The Office of Volunteer Resources Velunt er- ^""""" shall 15 promote volunteerism within City governmental agencies to enhance 16 the economic, educational, social and physical quality of the 17 community and to support municipal services valued by citizens of 18 the City. The City Council shall appoint a Vey= eer- Geianell 19 Geer=dinater-Director of the Office of Volunteer Resources, who 20 shall serve without pay and at the pleasure of the City Council and 21 shall coordinate the activities of the Office of Volunteer 22 Resources Velenteer- Geun and volunteers of the City. 23 COMMENT 24 25 This amendment replaces references to the Volunteer Council with references to the Office of 26 Volunteer Resources. 27 28 29 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 30 Virginia, on this day of , 2004. APPROVED AS TO CONTENT Q� City Manager's Office APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY City Attorney's Office CA-9387 H:\PA\GG\ORDRES\Volunteer Council ord.doc Rl September 23, 2004 Y �jy CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Sale of Excess City Property on West Neck Road Portion of GPIN 1493-99-7053 MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: The Department of Human Services has recognized that there is a shortage of residential care facilities for adult, mentally retarded clients who are medically fragile. As a result, the Department has worked with other city departments to identify solutions to meet the needs of these clients. In addition, the Department has developed a working relationship with the Virginia Beach Community Development Corporation (VBCDC), a non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation created by the City Council, and with Business Network for Special Opportunities (BizNet), an organization of parents and supporters of mentally retarded clients, to develop a residential program that would serve 24 mentally retarded individuals in need of 24-hour care. As a result of these joint efforts, a ±7.8 acre parcel of land located on West Neck Road has been identified as a potential site for the residential care program. The parcel is part of a 138-acre site owned by the City of Virginia Beach. The VBCDC has proposed constructing 2 twelve -bedroom homes that would be certified as an intermediate care facility by the State Health Department and operated by the City's Department of Human Services. Persons served in the homes would receive 24/7 supervised care. The homes would be owned, subject to certain reverter provisions, and maintained by VBCDC which can secure a variety of low interest loans and grants to fund the construction. BizNet will help offset the cost of the project with in -kind donations of engineering and architectural services and fundraising to help cover the cost of furnishings and other residential amenities. Payment of the debt service and facility operations, including city staffing, would be paid from Medicaid funds. ■ Considerations: The partnership between, VBCDC, BizNet and City Department's will ensure compliance with all rules and regulations both in the construction and maintenance of the facilities, and in the operation of the program. ■ Public Information: Advertisement for public hearing as required by §15.2-1800 of the Code of Virginia and advertisement of City Council agenda. ■ Alternatives: Retain ownership of the subject site. ■ Recommendations: Approve the conveyance of the ±7.8 acre parcel subject to the terms and conditions the agreement, which shall be in accordance with the Summary of Terms attached hereto. Attachments: Ordinance, Summary of Terms, Location Map Recommended Action: Approve Submitting Department/Agency: Public Works/Human Services �j�r City Manager: g I � Y F:\Data\ATY\Forms\Deeds\WORKING\Mental Health Group Home\Agenda Request form.vr2.doc 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 AN ORDINANCE DECLARING CERTAIN PROPERTY FRONTING ON WEST NECK ROAD EXCESS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT OF SALE AND CONVEY SAME TO VIRGINIA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach acquired ownership by deed recorded in Deed Book 2764 at Page 2102 of a certain parcel of real property containing approximately 138± acres, located off of West Neck Road (GPIN: 1479-33-4430) in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, (the "West Neck Parcel"); WHEREAS, the Virginia Beach Community Development Corporation, (the "VBCDC"), a 501 (c)(3) corporation created by the City of Virginia Beach, has requested that the City of Virginia Beach declare as excess and convey to the VBCDC approximately 7.8 acres of the West Neck Parcel (the "Property") for the construction and operation of two twelve - bedroom mental health group homes; WHEREAS, the City Council is of the opinion that the Property as shown on the 19 "LOCATION MAP SHOWING EXCESS CITY OWNED PROPERTY TO BE CONVEYED 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 TO THE VIRIGINIA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION", attached hereto as Exhibit A, is in excess of the needs of the City of Virginia Beach. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That the Property is hereby declared to be in excess of the needs of the City and that the City manager is hereby authorized to execute an Agreement of Sale and any necessary documents to effectuate the sale of the Property to the VBCDC. 30 That the Property shall be conveyed in accordance with the Summary of Terms 31 attached hereto as Exhibit B and such other terms, conditions or modifications as may be 32 satisfactory to the City Attorney. 33 This ordinance shall be effective from the date of its adoption. 34 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the day of 35 , 2004. 36 37 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT 38 39 40 �%'� ' 41 JDepartm t t uman Services 42 43 44 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT 45 46 47 /Real Estate 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 CA- 4 350 55 R —1 56 Prepared: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY Q� Ci y Atto ey's Office Exhibit B SELLER: PURCHASER: PROPERTY: PURCHASE PRICE: ZONING CHANGE: RESUB- DIVISION: REVERTER CLAUSE/USES: SUMMARY OF TERMS City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Community Development Corporation ("VBCDC"), a 501(c) corporation ± 7.8 Acres fronting on West Neck Road, a portion of GPIN 1493-99- 7053 as shown on Exhibit A $1.00 No zoning change is required. A Conditional Use Permit for the group home was granted by City Council on September 14, 2004. The ±7.8 acre parcel is part of a larger parcel. The necessary resubdivision plat will be prepared by the City. The Property will revert to the City under the following conditions: 1. Use of the Property for purposes other than a mental retardation group home or other use approved by the City. 2. Dissolution or insolvency of the VBCDC. 3. Failure of VBCDC to begin construction on at least one of the two planned buildings within 24 months of the date of conveyance of the Property by the City to the VBCDC. F:\Data\ATY\Forms\Deeds\WORKING\Mental Health Group Home\sot.doc Exhibit B SELLER: PURCHASER: PROPERTY: PURCHASE PRICE: ZONING CHANGE: RESUB- DIVISION: REVERTER CLAUSE/USES: SUMMARY OF TERMS City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Community Development Corporation ("VBCDC"), a 501(c) corporation ± 7.8 Acres fronting on West Neck Road, a portion of GPIN 1493-99- 7053 as shown on Exhibit A $1.00 No zoning change is required. A Conditional Use Permit for the group home was granted by City Council on September 14, 2004. The ±7.8 acre parcel is part of a larger parcel. The necessary resubdivision plat will be prepared by the City. The Property will revert to the City under the following conditions: 1. Use of the Property for purposes other than a mental retardation group home or other use approved by the City. 2. Dissolution or insolvency of the VBCDC. 3. Failure of VBCDC to begin construction on at least one of the two planned buildings within 24 months of the date of conveyance of the Property by the City to the VBCDC. F:\Data\ATY\Forms\Deeds\WORKING\Mental Health Group Home\sot.doc FO�,'F "4•C17 �u. ZSj CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: A Resolution Adopting the City's 2005 Community Legislative Agenda and Requesting Members of the City's Local Delegation to the General Assembly Sponsor and/or Support Legislation that would Carry Out the Goals and Objectives Set Forth Therein. MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: City Council has a tradition of presenting a Community Legislative Agenda to the General Assembly each year. This Agenda provides the Virginia Beach Delegation with concerns of the City Council on funding, legislation, public safety, and other issues that may be brought before the General Assembly. ■ Considerations: This Agenda was prepared based on input from Councilmembers, Department Directors, community leaders, and representatives from various citizen groups. ■ Public Information: Councilmembers Wilson and Villanueva, with the help from staff, held two informal public meetings in August 2004 with community leaders and representatives of various citizen groups to obtain items for inclusion in the 2005 Community Legislative Agenda. An opportunity for public comment was held on Tuesday, September 28, 2004 in Council Chambers. The draft Agenda is also available on the City's Web site for review. ■ Alternatives: Do not adopt the 2005 Community Legislative Agenda. ■ Recommendations: It is recommended that City Council approve the attached resolution that adopts the 2005 Community Legislative Agenda and requests the City's local Delegation to the General Assembly sponsor and/or support legislation that would carry out the goals and objectives set forth. ■ Attachments: (1) Resolution (2) 2005 Community Legislative Agenda Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: City Manager's Office City Manager. 14., , ,�iG" i1L A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE CITY'S 2005 COMMUNITY LEGISLATIVE AGENDA AND REQUESTING THAT MEMBERS OF THE CITY'S LOCAL DELEGATION TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY SPONSOR AND/OR SUPPORT LEGISLATION THAT WOULD CARRY OUT THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES SET FORTH THEREIN WHEREAS, the City Council traditionally adopts a Community Legislative Agenda and requests member of the City's local Delegation to the General Assembly sponsor and/or support legislation therein; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered a number of goals and objectives for inclusion in the city's 2005 Community Legislative Agenda; and WHEREAS, as in past years, a Safety Addendum Package, not part of the formal Agenda, is included for consideration by the General Assembly; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That the City Council hereby adopts the City's 2005 Community Legislative Agenda, which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and is hereby incorporated by reference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That the City's Delegation to the General Assembly is hereby requested to sponsor and/or support legislation in the 2005 Session of the General Assembly that would carry out the goals and objectives of the City as set forth in its Community Legislative Agenda. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That the City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a copy of this resolution to each member of the City's local Delegation to the General Assembly. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, this day of 2004. APPROVED TO CONTENT: C-tranager�'s Office CA-9401 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: lv/ 9� 94&-fll City Attorney's Office G N 0�1`I !� , t5, C� a'. ^�>.a.a.... CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: A Resolution to Request the Development Authority to Cause Town Center Associates, L.L.C. to Release its Option on the Theatre Parcel at Town Center and Authorize the City Manager to Expend $1,190,673 from Capital Project #3- 283 Pavilion Theatre Replacement to Pay the costs incurred by the Development Authority to Release the Theater Parcel from the Option and to Acquire the Theater Parcel MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: The Town Center Project (the "Project") has been a long-term priority for the City. The City Council first recognized the importance of the Project in the Central Business District of the City when it adopted the Comprehensive Plan on November 4, 1997. On November 23, 1999, the City Council adopted the Central Business District — South Tax Increment Financing District with the intent of entering into an agreement with a developer and using the funds to help pay for the City's participation in the Project. The City Council approved a Development Agreement for Phase I of the project at its February 8, 2000 meeting. On December 11, 2001, the City Council endorsed the Town Center as the site for the new performing arts theatre. Since this time, the City Council has continued its on -going support of the Project. Phase I of the Project, comprised of a 272,000 square foot office tower, 109,000 square feet of commercial space, a 176-room hotel, an 18,000 square foot bank headquarters building, a 1,284-car public parking garage, and public streets, sidewalks and utilities, has been substantially completed. ■ On June 3, 2003, the City Council approved the Phase II Development Agreement (the "Agreement") containing the rights and obligations of the Virginia Beach Development Authority (the "Authority") and Town Center Associates, L.L.C. (the "Developer") with respect to Phase II of the Project. One of the blocks associated with the second phase of the Project, the Galyan's Sports and Outdoor Adventure Store, opened in April of 2004 with an adjoining 574 space public parking facility, and 18,000 square feet of retail space. Future development includes a 10-story 341-unit luxury apartment complex with an 858- space public parking facility, a public plaza and 194,000 square feet of office/retail/entertainment space. ■ Considerations: The portion of Block 6 known as the "Theater Parcel" is currently owned by the Authority. The other portion of Block 6 (formerly the Galiotos property) is owned by the City (City Council authorized the purchase on August 12, 2003). ■ Pursuant to an Option Agreement between the parties, the Developer has the option to purchase certain property in the Project owned by the Authority, including the Theater Parcel. The Authority has the right to cause the Developer to release its option on the Theater Parcel if exercised by November 1, 2004, and the Authority must reimburse the Developer for costs incurred with respect to the Theater Parcel, which are estimated to be $165,625. In addition, the Authority currently holds title to the Theater Parcel, which cost the Authority $1,025,048 to acquire. Pursuant to a Support Agreement between the City and the Authority, the City has agreed to pay the costs incurred by the Authority to release the Theater Parcel from the option and to acquire the Theater Parcel. ■ Public Information: Public Information for this item will be handled through the normal Council agenda process. ■ Alternatives: Block 6 at Town Center has been identified as the optimal location for the performing arts theater. If the Authority does not cause the Developer to release its option on the Theater Parcel, the property will be developed without a performing arts theater. ■ Recommendations: Approve the Resolution requesting the Authority to cause the Developer to release its option on the Theater Parcel and authorize the City Manager to expend $1,190,673 from Capital Project # 3-283 Pavilion Theatre Replacement for the purpose of paying, pursuant to the Support Agreement, the costs incurred by the Authority to release the Theater Parcel from the option and to acquire the Theatre Parcel. ■ Attachments: Resolution Recommended Action: Approval of attached Resolution Submitting Department/Agency: City Manager's Office 4 City Manage FAData\ATY\Forms\CommercialProjcTown Center\Block 6 Option ARFDOC 1 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE VIRGINIA 2 BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TO 3 CAUSE TOWN CENTER ASSOCIATES L.L.C. TO 4 RELEASE ITS OPTION ON THE THEATER 5 PARCEL AT TOWN CENTER AND TO 6 AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXPEND 7 $1,190,673 FROM CAPITAL PROJECT #3-283 8 PAVILION THEATRE REPLACEMENT TO PAY 9 THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE VIRGINIA 10 BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TO 11 RELEASE THE THEATER PARCEL FROM THE 12 OPTION AND TO ACQUIRE THE THEATER 13 PARCEL 14 15 WHEREAS, Town Center Associates, L.L.C. (the "Developer") and the Virginia Beach 16 Development Authority (the "Authority") are developing a Central Business District Project 17 known as "the Town Center of Virginia Beach" (the "Project"), a mixed -use commercial 18 development utilizing the structure of an economic development park in the B-3A Pembroke 19 Center Business Core District, an area of the City of Virginia Beach which is zoned to optimize 20 development potential for a mixed -use, pedestrian -oriented, urban activity center with mid to 21 high-rise structures that contain numerous types of uses, including business, retail, residential, 22 educational, and other public and private uses; 23 WHEREAS, the Authority and the Developer have entered into a Phase II Development 24 Agreement of the Town Center of Virginia Beach, dated as of June 17, 2003, as amended (the 25 "Phase II Development Agreement") for the development of the Project; 26 WHEREAS, the Authority and the Developer are also parties to an Option Agreement, 27 dated June 5, 2000, as modified by that certain First Modification to Option Agreement dated as 28 of December 12, 2002, that certain Second Modification to Option Agreement dated as of 29 February 21, 2003, that certain Third Modification to Option Agreement dated as of July 3, 2003 30 and that certain Fourth Modification to Option Agreement dated as of April 19, 2004 (the 31 "Option Agreement"), which gives the Developer the option to purchase property in the Project 32 from the Authority; 33 WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach City Council endorsed the Project as the site for 34 the new performing arts theater on December 11, 2001; 35 WHEREAS, Block 6 of the Project provides the necessary land for the proposed 36 performing arts theater, and a portion of Block 6 (the Galiotos Property) was previously 37 purchased by the City of Virginia Beach (the "City"), as authorized by City Council on August 38 12, 2003; 39 WHEREAS, the Phase II Development Agreement provides the Authority the right to 40 cause the Developer to release its option under the Option Agreement on the balance of Block 6 41 (the "Theater Parcel"), which is currently owned by the Authority, if such right is exercised by 42 November 1, 2004; 43 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Phase II Development Agreement, the Authority is 44 responsible for the payment of (i) an option release fee to the Developer of $56,029 and (ii) an 45 amount equal to the Developer's actual cost of carry as to the Theater Parcel totaling $109,596 in 46 order to cause the Developer to release its option on the Theater Parcel; 47 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Phase II Support Agreement (the "Support Agreement") 48 between the Authority and the City dated June 17, 2003, the City has agreed, subject to 49 appropriation by City Council, to make funds available to the Authority as required to meet the 50 Authority's obligations under the Phase II Development Agreement; 51 WHEREAS, under the Support Agreement, the Authority plans to use revenues made 52 available from the City to pay the amount due to the Developer for release of its option on the 53 Theater Parcel under the Phase II Development Agreement; and 54 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Support Agreement, the City plans to pay the $1,025,048 55 incurred by the Authority to acquire the Theater Parcel. 56 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 57 VIRIGNIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 58 1. That the Virginia Beach Development Authority (the "Authority") is hereby requested 59 to cause Town Center Associates, L.L.C. (the "Developer") to release its option on the balance 60 of Block 6 of the Town Center of Virginia Beach (the "Theater Parcel"). 61 2. That the Authority is hereby requested to pay the Developer $165,625 for the option 62 release fee and the Developer's actual cost of carry as to the Theater Parcel. 63 3. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to expend $1,190,673 from Capital 64 Project #3-283 Pavilion Theatre Replacement to pay, pursuant to the Support Agreement, the 65 costs incurred by the Authority to release the Theater Parcel from the option and to acquire the 66 Theater Parcel. 67 68 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the day 69 of 2004. ME 71 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROV AS TO LEGAL SUFFIENCY: 72 �A, iZOV142 73 Department of Management Services City Att 's Office 74 75 FAData\ATY\Forms\Commercial Projects\Town Center\Block G Option Ordinance.DOC 76 CA-9352 4 'r~ Z77� CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Comprehensive Agreement for the Design and Construction of the Performing Arts Theater at Town Center MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: On September 9, 2003, City Council directed staff to pursue the design and construction of the Performing Arts Theater Project at Town Center as a qualifying project under the Public -Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act ("PPEA"). After soliciting proposals, City staff has now negotiated a Comprehensive Agreement with the successful responder, Clancy & Theys Construction Company. Execution of the Comprehensive Agreement requires approval of City Council ■ Considerations: Clancy & Theys Construction Company met all of the evaluation criteria contained in the Request for Proposals for the Theater Project. Furthermore, the terms of Comprehensive Agreement are consistent with the Project as it is described in the City's Capital Improvement Program (Project # 3-283). The attached resolution contains the necessary findings by the City Council that the Comprehensive Agreement satisfies the public purpose of the PPEA. ■ Public Information: The City Council established the Performing Arts Theater Steering Committee to provide for public input on this project, and this Committee has been briefed on all of the relevant aspects of the project. In addition, the public was invited to comment on the visual display presentation of the proposals on February 11, 2003 at the Contemporary Arts Center. This resolution will be publicized through the normal process of advertising the Council's agenda. ■ Alternatives: Without the City Council's approval of the Comprehensive Agreement, the project cannot go forward. ■ Recommendation: Approval of the resolution authorizing execution of the Comprehensive Agreement. ■ Attachments: Resolution and Summary of Terms of the Comprehensive Agreement Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Public Work/Engineerin City Manager: Slam- - 5 to-• 1 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE 2 AGREEMENT WITH CLANCY & THEYS CONSTRUCTION 3 COMPANY FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 4 PERFORMING ARTS THEATER AT THE TOWN CENTER 5 6 WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach issued a request for 7 proposals, pursuant to the Virginia Public Private Education 8 Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002 (the "Act"), to enter 9 into a public -private partnership for the design and construction a 10 new performing arts theater (the "Project"); 11 WHEREAS, after review, the proposal submitted by Clancy & 12 Theys Construction Company was selected, and satisfactory terms and 13 conditions for the design and construction of the Project have been 14 negotiated; 15 WHEREAS, in accordance with the Act, a Comprehensive Agreement 16 has been prepared for the design and construction of the Project, 17 and a copy has been filed with the City Clerk; and 18 WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the proposed 19 Comprehensive Agreement, and hereby makes the following findings: 20 (a) that the Project, as described in the Comprehensive 21 Agreement, is a qualifying project, as defined in the Act; 22 (b) that there is a public need for design and construction 23 of the Project, and that a public benefit will be derived from the 24 Project and its design and construction as provided for in the 25 Comprehensive Agreement; 26 (c) that the estimated cost of the Project is reasonable in 27 relation to similar facilities; 1 28 (d) that the plans for the Project will result in its timely 29 design and construction; and 30 (e) that the design and construction of Project and the 31 proposed Comprehensive Agreement serve the public purposes set 32 forth in the Act. 33 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY 34 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 35 1. That the City Council hereby accepts the proposed Project 36 for the design and construction of a new performing arts theater at 37 the Town Center as submitted by Clancy & Theys Construction 38 Company, and hereby approves the Comprehensive Agreement between 39 the City of Virginia Beach and Clancy & Theys Construction Company. 40 2. That the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed 41 to execute the Comprehensive Agreement in substantially the form as 42 presented to the Council. 43 3. That the City Attorney is hereby directed to forward a 44 copy of the Comprehensive Agreement to the Auditor of Public 45 Accounts, as provided by Virginia Code § 56-575.9(F). 46 47 48 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 49 Virginia, on this day of , 2004. 50 51 52 53 54 E 55 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: 56 57 58 59 P c Works 60 61 62 PPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: 63 64 65 66 Cit Attorn ' s Of if" ce Y Y 67 68 69 CA-9380 70 R5 - 71 September 28, 2004 72 H:\PA\GG\ORDRES\Comp Agreement Clancy ord.doc 73 3 SUMMARY OF TERMS Performing Arts Theater at Town Center This Summary of Terms sets forth the proposed basic business terms and conditions regarding the agreement between the City and Clancy & Theys Construction Company for the design and construction of a performing arts theater on real property located in the Town Center Development in furtherance of Clancy & Theys' Response to the City's Request for Proposals under the Public -Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002. Owner: The City of Virginia Beach (the "Owner") Operator: Clancy & Theys Construction Company ("Operator"). Pro e : Approximately 2.87 acres parcel of land referred to as Block 6 in the Town Center Development in Virginia Beach Virginia. Project: Design and construction of a 1,200-seat, 84,000 square foot, multi -purpose, professional quality performing arts theater (the "Project"). The theater facility is sized to accommodate both community arts groups and small touring performances. The Project includes a plaza that will be configured for outdoor performances. Contract Price: $40,289,921— This lump sum contract amount includes: design, architecture, and engineering; construction: theater performance equipment, a $300,000 allowance for office furniture and equipment, and a 5% Owner's construction contingency. Progress payments will be made on a monthly basis, with a 5% retainage held until final completion. Substantial Completion and Final Payment Date: Work for the Project will be substantially completed not later than 960 calendar days after the Notice to Proceed date and ready for final payment in accordance with the General Conditions on or before 990 calendar days after the Notice to Proceed date. Operator is subject to a liquated damage rate of $5000 per day for each day beyond substantial completion, and $2500 per day for each day beyond final completion. Additionally, Operator has an incentive for early completion at the rate of $5000 per day, capped at 30 days for an amount not to exceed $150,000. Operator's Responsibilities: Operator shall (i) obtain and pay for all required permits and comply with all federal, state or local laws or regulations, including all safety and environmental laws and regulations; (ii) supervise the construction of the Project and manage all activities of its subcontractors; (iii) provide and maintain a schedule for the work to ensure timely completion of the Project; (iv) maintain the construction site in an orderly and clean manner; (v) provide record documents upon completion of the project; and (vi) provide post - construction start-up and training, warranties, and guarantees. Insurance: During the term of the Agreement, Operator will provide and maintain insurance policies with coverage and in amounts as required by Owner's Risk Management Administrator. Indemnification: Operator shall indemnify and hold harmless the Owner from and against all claims, costs, losses, and damages, including attorney's fees, arising out of or resulting from Operator's design or construction of the Work or the violation of any laws or regulations by Operator or those for whom Operator is legally liable. Owner's Responsibilities: The Owner will (i) furnish all Owner information pertinent to the Project and site; (ii) inspect the Project and site for compliance with all laws or regulations and for compliance with the terms and conditions of the Agreement; (iii) designate a Project representative to oversee the work; and (iv) pay for completed work on a monthly basis, within 30 days of invoice. Suspension of Work/Termination of Agreement: The Owner may suspend the work at any time and without cause for a period of not more than 90 days with written notice to Operator. The Owner may also terminate the Agreement (i) for cause due to Operator failure to perform with 14 days prior written notice to Operator, or (ii) for convenience with 14 days prior written notice to Operator. 2 u1WD��. 00 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: A Resolution to Designate Legacy Projects for Virginia Beach for the 2007 Commemoration of the 400th Anniversary of the Landing of English Colonists at Cape Henry and Later Settlement at Jamestown MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: In 2002, City Council appointed a Steering Committee of interested citizens to initiate plans and advise Council regarding the 2007 commemorative activities for the 400th anniversary of the arrival of the first permanent English colonists. The initial organizational and planning efforts of the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee resulted in the recognition of Virginia Beach as one of approximately 20 "pilot" communities by the Jamestown 2007 statewide committee in June 2003. Participants in the Jamestown 2007 Community Program are encouraged to establish legacy projects that will serve to commemorate past and future achievements of the state. A legacy project is described as a developing project that will be completed by 2007 and have a lasting and worthy impact on the communities in which it is located. The criteria for legacy projects has been interpreted broadly throughout the state and current projects range from historical restoration in Alexandria, to a $400 million redevelopment project in downtown Richmond, and to a history center and park in Chesapeake. Communities are not limited to the number of projects they may designate and several communities have chosen to designate more than one. ■ Considerations: A sub -committee of the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee studied and nominated 2007 legacy projects for Virginia Beach. They chose to seek out projects that have the greatest potential for improving the quality of life in Virginia Beach in terms of addressing the environmental, recreational, historical and economic needs and opportunities in our city. This year they have nominated four projects as described below. They also wish to reserve the right to nominate additional projects in the upcoming years between now and 2007 as tentative plans for various other worthwhile projects become more finalized. Upon final approval by City Council, each of the Virginia Beach legacy projects will receive an official certificate and plaque indicating this honored designation. The four projects nominated as Virginia Beach 2007 Legacy Projects are as follows: Virginia Beach Convention Center — Scheduled for completion in 2007, this state of the art facility will have a major impact upon Virginia Beach's visitor and convention industry as well as provide an architectural icon for the city. Restoration of the Thoroughgood House - This structure is a National Historic Landmark. Since its recent acquisition by the City of Virginia Beach, restoration efforts have been underway that will protect its historic features and also further authenticate its historic past. Lynnhaven River 2007 — Organized as a coalition of citizens, city government and various environmental groups, Lynnhaven River 2007 hopes to improve the ecological health of the river and create a greater public appreciation of its needs and history. As a measure of the river's health, one of the organization's goals is to make it possible to once more harvest consumable oysters from this historic body of water. Improvements at First Landing State Park — In preparation for 2007 and more, First Landing State Park is undergoing major improvements in the amount of more than $2.5 million that will make it a centerpiece for many of the planned 2007 activities. This is most fitting since the park occupies the site for some of the most historical events to occur in the history of our city and our nation. ■ Public Information: Discussion and decisions concerning the Virginia Beach 2007 Legacy Projects took place during the meetings of the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee. These meetings were publicized and open to the public. Public information of this agenda item will be provided through the normal process of advertising the Council's agenda. ■ Alternatives: The alternatives would be to nominate other projects or none at all. ■ Recommendations: Approve the Virginia Beach 2007 Legacy Projects as nominated by the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee. ■ Attachments: Resolution Recommended Action: Approval Submitting DepartmentlAgency: Department of Museums and Cultural Arts. City Manager: S 1 1 RESOLUTION TO DESIGNATE LEGACY PROJECTS FOR 2 VIRGINIA BEACH FOR THE 2007 COMMEMORATION OF 3 THE 400TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE LANDING OF ENGLISH 4 COLONISTS AT CAPE HENRY AND LATER SETTLEMENT 5 AT JAMESTOWN 6 WHEREAS, in May 2002, City Council established the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 7 Steering Committee to initiate plans and advise Council regarding commemorative activities for 8 the 2007 commemoration of the 400`h anniversary of the arrival of the first permanent English 9 colonists; 10 WHEREAS, in June 2003, the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee's 11 organizational and planning efforts resulted in the recognition of Virginia Beach as one of 12 approximately 20 pilot communities by the Jamestown 2007 statewide steering committee; 13 WHEREAS, participants in the Jamestown 2007 Community Program are encouraged to 14 establish legacy projects that will be completed by 2007, will have a lasting and worthy impact 15 on the community in which it is located, and will serve to commemorate past and future 16 achievements of the state; 17 WHEREAS, the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee has nominated the 18 following four projects for Virginia Beach, based on their potential for improving the quality of 19 life in Virginia Beach by addressing the environmental, recreational, historical and economic 20 needs and opportunities in our city: 21 Virginia Beach Convention Center — Scheduled for completion in 2007, this state of the 22 art facility will have a major impact upon Virginia Beach's visitor and convention 23 industry as well as provide an architectural icon for the city. 24 Restoration of the Thoroughgood House — This structure is a National Historic 25 Landmark. Since its recent acquisition by the City of Virginia Beach, restoration efforts 26 have been underway that will protect its historic features and also further authenticate its 27 historic past. 28 Lynnhaven River 2007 — Organized as a coalition of citizens, city government and 29 various environmental groups, Lynnhaven River 2007 hopes to improve the ecological 30 health of the river and create a greater public appreciation of its needs and history. As a 31 measure of the river's health, one of the organization's goals is to make it possible to 32 once more harvest consumable oysters from this historic body of water. 33 Improvements at First Landing State Park — In preparation for 2007 and more, First 34 Landing State Park is undergoing major improvements in the amount of more than $2.5 35 million that will make it a centerpiece for many of the planned 2007 activities. This is 36 most fitting since the park occupies the site for some of the most historical events to 37 occur in the history of our city and our nation; and 38 WHEREAS, upon approval by City Council, each of the Virginia Beach legacy projects 39 will receive an official certificate and plaque indicating this honored designation. 40 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BYTHE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 41 VIRIGNIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 42 That the four projects nominated by the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering 43 Committee are hereby approved as Virginia Beach 2007 Legacy Projects. APPROVED AS TO CONTENT APPPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY useums and Cultural Arts City Attorney's Office CA9403 H/ords/Legacy Projects RES:doc October 6, 2004 R-1 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: A Resolution Requesting the Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee to Anchor Replicas of the Three Jamestown Ships Off First Landing State Park During the Period April 26-29, 2007, as Part of the Jamestown 2007 Celebration MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: In December 1606, three ships —the Godspeed, the Discovery, and the Susan Constant —departed England, setting sail for the New World. On April 26, 1607, the ships arrived at Virginia, entered the Chesapeake Bay. On that date, the colonists came ashore at what is believed to be Virginia Beach, making Virginia Beach the site of the first landing in Virginia. Three days later, on April 29, 1607, the first permanent English colonists planted a cross at Cape Henry, making their claim to the new colony. The ships then set sail for Jamestown, where they would establish the first permanent settlement. In celebration of the 400th anniversary of the colonists' arrival at Jamestown, the Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee intends to send replicas of the three ships on a promotional tour. In May 2002, City Council established the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee to initiate plans and advise Council regarding the 400th anniversary celebration. Given the historical significance of the colonists' arrival at Cape Henry, the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee has asked that City Council urge the Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee to send the ships to anchor off First Landing State Park during the period of April 26-29, 2007. The Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee also seeks that this be designated as one of the signature events of the Jamestown 2007 observances. ■ Considerations: The water depth off of First Landing State Park is more than sufficient to accommodate the drafts of all of the vessels, and parking and public facilities will be provided at First Landing State Park and Fort Story. In order to share the ships with the public beyond the landing and departure events, the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee has proposed that charter ships. be used to take members of the public to the ships. The groups would not board the ships, but would instead receive a program to be given by a crewmember and transmitted remotely to the speaker system on the charter boats. Proceeds would go to the Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee to support the celebratory activities. First Landing State Park is developing an outdoor drama, similar to Roanoke Island's Lost Colony, to depict what occurred as those first permanent colonists set foot on what likely now is the park site. The Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee is working diligently in hopes of obtaining a loan of an original copy of the Magna Carta to be displayed at the convention center, and the Mariners Museum is working with the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee to build a shallop for a daylong voyage up the Lynnhaven River. On April 28, there will be a history fair on the Boardwalk, and on April 29, the Order of Cape Henry will conduct a reenactment of the erection of the cross at Cape Henry. Finally, there will be a reenactment of the departure of the colonists as they leave Cape Henry. ■ Public Information: Public information will be provided through the normal process of advertising the Council's agenda. ■ Attachments: Resolution Recommended Action: Approval Requested By: Councilmember Rosemary Wilson REQUESTED BY COUNCILMEMBER ROSEMARY WILSON 1 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE JAMESTOWN 2007 2 STEERING COMMITTEE TO ANCHOR REPLICAS OF THE 3 THREE JAMESTOWN SHIPS OFF FIRST LANDING STATE 4 PARK DURING THE PERIOD APRIL 26-29, 2007, AS PART 5 OF THE JAMESTOWN 2007 CELEBRATION 6 WHEREAS, the observance of the 400th anniversary of the founding of Jamestown is 7 scheduled to be a major event in the history of the Commonwealth of Virginia; 8 WHEREAS, the Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee intends to send replicas of the 9 three Jamestown ships —the Godspeed, the Discovery, and the Susan Constant —on a 10 promotional tour as part of the anniversary celebration; 11 WHEREAS, on April 26, 1607, the Jamestown ships arrived at Virginia and entered the 12 Chesapeake Bay, and made their first landing in Virginia at what is believed to be Virginia 13 Beach; 14 WHEREAS, on April 29, 1607, the first permanent English colonists planted a cross at 15 Cape Henry, making their claim to the new colony; 16 WHEREAS, the first landing at Cape Henry is second only to the establishment of 17 Jamestown in terms of symbolic importance of England's claim to the New World; 18 WHEREAS, the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee, which was 19 created by City Council in May 2002, has planned, and coordinated with other organizations, a 20 variety of activities and events to celebrate the 400th anniversary, including reenactments of the 21 colonists' arrival, departure, and the planting of the cross at Cape Henry; and 22 WHEREAS, the anchoring of the three replica ships off First Landing State Park during 23 the period April 26-29, 2007, would compliment Virginia Beach's anniversary activities and 24 events and would serve as an excellent lead-in to, and promotion of, the celebratory events at 25 Jamestown. 26 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 27 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 28 That the Council of the City of Virginia Beach hereby requests that (1) the Jamestown 29 2007 Steering Committee anchor the three Jamestown ships off First Landing State Park during 30 the period April 26-29, 2007, as part of the Jamestown 2007 Celebration; and (2) that this event 31 be designated as one of the signature events of the Jamestown 2007 observances. APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY '! _ City Attorney's Offic CA9385 HJords/Jamestown Ships RES.doc October 6, 2004 R-1 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Encroachment to construct and maintain landscaping and two (2) lights for the neighborhood identification sign for Bellamy Woods Civic League MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: In September of 2003 Bellamy Woods Civic League entered into an encroachment agreement with the City of Virginia Beach to allow the construction and maintenance of a subdivision identification sign at Selwood Drive and Providence Road. Bellamy Woods Civic League has now requested permission for an additional encroachment into a portion of the City's right-of-way located at Selwood Drive and Providence Road. The purpose of this encroachment is to construct and maintain landscaping and two (2) lights for the neighborhood identification sign. ■ Considerations: Staff has reviewed the requested encroachment and recommended approval of same, subject to certain conditions outlined in the agreement. ■ Public Information: Advertisement of City Council Agenda. ■ Alternatives: Approve the encroachment as requested, deny the encroachment, or add conditions as desired by Council. ■ Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of this encroachment subject to the applicant complying with conditions set forth in the agreement. Authorize City Manager to sign agreement. ■ Attachments: Ordinance, Location Map, Agreement, Plat and Pictures Recommended Action: Approval Submitting DepartmenVAgency: Public Works?v ij1 City Manager: ,L • �- HAForms\Encroachment\Council Action\Bellamy Woods Civic League\AGENDA.FORM.doc 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1.2 Requested by Department of Public Works AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE A TEMPORARY ENCROACHMENT INTO A PORTION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AT THE INTERSECTION OF SELWOOD DRIVE AND PROVIDENCE ROAD, BY BELLAMY WOODS CIVIC LEAGUE, ITS ASSIGNS AND SUCCESSORS IN TITLE WHEREAS, BELLAMY WOODS CIVIC LEAGUE desires to construct and 13 maintain landscaping and two (2) lights for the neighborhood identification sign within 14 the City's right-of-way located at the intersection of Selwood Drive and Providence 15 Road. 16 WHEREAS, City Council is authorized pursuant to §§ 15.2-2009 and 15.2-2107, 17 Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, to authorize temporary encroachments upon the 18 City's right-of-way subject to such terms and conditions as Council may prescribe. 19 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 20 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 21 That pursuant to the authority and to the extent thereof contained in §§ 15.2- 22 2009 and 15.2-2107, Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, Bellamy Woods Civic 23 League, its assigns and successors in title are authorized to construct and maintain a 24 temporary encroachment for landscaping and two (2) lights for the neighborhood 25 identification sign in the City rights -of -way as shown on the map entitled: 26 "ENCROACHMENT PLAT OF PROPOSED BRICK SIGN IN SELWOOD DRIVE RNV 27 FOR BELLAMY WOODS CIVIC LEAGUE ADJACENT TO LOT 1, BLOCK CC 28 BELLAMY MANOR ESTATES, SECTION FIVE, MAP BOOK 132, PAGE 13, VIRGINIA 29 BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated August 25, 2003 and revised: August 5, 2004, Scale 1"= 25', 30 prepared by Precision Measurements, Inc., a copy of which is on file in the Department 31 of Public Works and to which reference is made for a more particular description; and 32 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that the temporary encroachments are expressly 33 subject to those terms, conditions and criteria contained in the Agreement between the 34 City of Virginia Beach and Bellamy Woods Civic League (the "Agreement"), which is 35 attached hereto and incorporated by reference; and 36 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that the City Manager or his authorized designee 37 is hereby authorized to execute the Agreement; and 38 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that this Ordinance shall not be in effect until such 39 time as Bellamy Woods Civic League and the City Manager or his authorized designee 40 execute the Agreement. 41 Adopted by the Council of' the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the 42 day of , 2004. 43 44 APPROVED AS TO CONTENTS 45 �r;173`1'<Y C , '%, 46 SIGNATURE 47 1 s zl_ ciL 48 DEPARTMENT 49 50 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL 51 SUFFICIENCY AND FORM 52 P.G(aa 4. "(JW 53 CITY ATtORNEY 54 55 CA9257 56 PREPARED:9/14/04 57 H:\Fonns\Encroachment\Council ActionSellamy Woods Civic League\ENC.doc tc: ;.* 2 V2 m. PREPARED BY VIRGINIA BEACH CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE EXEMPTED FROM RECORDATION TAXES UNDER SECTIONS 58.1-811(c)(3) THIS AGREEMENT, made this 140' day of September, 2004, by and between the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, a municipal corporation, Grantor, "City", and BELLAMY WOODS CIVIC LEAGUE, ITS ASSIGNS AND SUCCESSORS IN TITLE, "Grantee", even though more than one. WITNESSETH: That, WHEREAS, IT IS PROPOSED BY THE Grantee to construct and maintain landscaping and two (2) lights for the neighborhood identification sign, "Temporary Encroachment", in the City of Virginia Beach; and That, WHEREAS, it is proposed by the Grantee to construct and maintain the Temporary Encroachment, it is necessary that the Grantee encroach into a portion of existing City rights -of -way known as Selwood Drive and Providence Road, "The Encroachment Area", and the Grantee has requested that the City permit the Temporary Encroachment within The Encroachment Area. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the premises and of the benefits accruing or to 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 permission to use The Encroachment Area for the purpose of constructing and maintaining the Temporary Encroachment. GPIN: City right of way. No GPIN assigned. It is expressly understood and agreed that the Temporary Encroachment will be and maintained in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia and City of Virginia Beach, and in accordance with the City's specifications and approval and is particularly described as follows, to wit: A Temporary Encroachment into The Encroachment Area as shown on that certain plat entitled: "ENCROACHMENT PLAT OF PROPOSED BRICK SIGN IN SELWOOD DRIVE R/W FOR BELLAMY WOODS CIVIC LEAGUE ADJACENT TO LOT 1, BLOCK CC BELLAMY MANOR ESTATES, SECTION FIVE, MAP BOOK 132, PAGE 13, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated August 25, 2003 and revised: August 5, 2004, Scale 1 "= 25', prepared by Precision Measurements, Inc., 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) jdays 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 i removal. It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee shall indemnify and I hold harmless the City, its agents and employees, from and against all claims, damages, losses j 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. 2 It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee agrees to maintain Temporary Encroachment so as not to become unsightly or a hazard. It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee must submit and approved a traffic control plan before commencing work in The Encroachment Area. 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 the engineer's cost estimate, to the Office of Development Services Center/Planning Department. It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee must obtain and I 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 Temporary Encroachment may not exceed: thirty-two square feet per face, 2 faces, 6 feet above the natural grade at the curb. Landscaping materials must be approved by the Landscape Services Division of the Department of Parks and Recreation. 3 It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee must submit for iew and approval, a survey of The Encroachment Area, certified by a registered professional engineer 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 Engineering Division of the Public Utilities 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 p 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, Bellamy Woods Civic League has caused this iAgreement to be executed by Debbie Westbrook, President of said civic league with due authority to bind said civic league. 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. (THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) 0 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH By City Manager/Authorized Designee of the City Manager BELLAMY WOODS CIVIC LEAGUE By: W-4i v W a.) Debbie Westbrook, President i STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this — _ day of 2004, by CITY MANAGER/AUTHORIZED I DLSIGNEE OF THE CITY MANAGER. Notary Public I My Commission Expires: STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2004, by RUTH HODGES SMITH, City Clerk for the CITY OF VIRGINIA I BEACH. My Commission Expires: Notary Public 5 STATE OF CITY/COUNTY OF(7 ' u� to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 15-7� day of 2004, by Debbie Westbrook, President, on behalf of Bellamy Woods Civic My Commission Expires: a _a f -aZ5 APPROVED AS TO CONTENTS SWFNAjTURE DEPARTMENT Notary Public APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFIECIENCY AND FORM laud Gfall�lGW HAForms\Encroachment\Council Action\Bellamy Woods Civic League\ENCROACHMENT.AGR.doc PROPOSED LANDSCAPE I BED (3' X 3') SAN. MANHOLE 8"SS— g I. 'UGT-- FC 1 " (;OgC IFI_Pk 28 " I HIGH uj °° MASONRY SIGN I i Or '7- o� I <�� -� ;r w x U) v i O = a. J Lr) I I 10. I; m �J I W � H i � C � c A 1� I I, WATER I VALVE f REVISED: AUGUST 5. 2004 EXHIBIT "A" PROVIDENCE ROAD (80' R/W) (M.B. 132, PG. 13) TOP OF BANK _ S = �C� DITCH —UGT TOP OF 8� C— 1>�"CONDUUIT„ C1 R=10.00' A=16.20' A=92'47'22" T=10.50' CHORD=14.48' CH.BRG.=N74'44'08"E POWER POLE PIN N58'52' 11 "W 203.91, FOUND A - 2. 7' 15" HACKBERRY_ _ 103.41 ' _ _ 90.00' �kR=10.00' C1 �_ A=16.20' S' TRAFFIC CONTROL EASEh!ENT. i 8" ;CREPE MYRTLE NO INGRESS, EGRESS OR REGRESS co j 0 70 m -o m m 9 IL m m HYDRANT PERMI i I E D kM.B. 132, PG. ,13) L-PROPOSED POWER PEDESTAL (W/ METER) -, LOCATED IN CITY R/W (HEIGHT=55 CABINET SIZE = 14" X 26") LOT 1, BLOCK CC BELLAMY MANOR, SECTION FIVE (M.B. 132, PG. 13) R=10.00' A=15.22' ti=87*12'38" T=9.52' CHORD=13.79' CH.BRG.=N 15' 15'52"W S58'52' 11 "E 98.54' 108.06' w 0 p O N w O � w Z Z ' IU O n U U ON CL J m C' N Q m o�v g J w m LARKWOOD DRIVE ENCROACHMENT PLAT (50' R/W) (M.B. 132, PG. 13) OF PROPOSED BRICK SIGN REFERENCES: O.F BOOK 132, PMAP AGE 13 SIMEK zo. 7(D MERIDIAN IS BASED 546 ON: 5��MAP ' BOOK 132, PAGE 13 R`I� IN SELWOOD DRIVE R/W FOR BELLAMY WOODS CIVIC LEAGUE ADJACENT TO LOT 1, BLOCK CC BELLAMY MANOR ESTATES, SECTION FIVE MAP BOOK 132, PAGE 13 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA DATE: AUGUST 25, 2003 1 SCALE: 1 "=25' PRECISION MEASUREMENTS, INC. SURVEYORS • GPS • GIS • MAPPERS 851 SEAHAWK CIRCLE, SUITE 103 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23452 (757) 368-0945 �±�Xx 'Y s � r •�' y 6LJ RRIV � ;, ,+r w, :::,emu, , *�3?v'r"a•= . -- 'S? � .u. � _ w .Ga ak F hIZ r � t { tS �- MW 1AR. BELLAMY WOODS CIVIC LEAGUE 1205 Worthington Lane Virginia Beach, VA 23464 July 9, 2004 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Under the Constitution and By -Laws instituted by the Bellamy Woods Civic League in 1988, the Board of Directors will handle the day to day business relating to the Bellamy Woods Community and it's Membership. The Board of Directors consists of a President, Vice -President, Secretary and Treasurer. Each member of the Board of Directors has authorization to sign checks and conduct business in order to accomplish the running of the Civic League. Debbie Westbrook, President Bellamy Woods Civic League, has the authority to sign checks and contracts in order to complete the business that has been previously authorized by the General Membership and the Board of Directors. The President also has the authorization to write checks up to an amount agreed upon by the General Membership or Board of Directors, relating to League Donations or other such matters. Kathy Merritt, Secretary Bellamy Woods Civic league 421 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: An Ordinance to Appropriate $96,681 of Additional Revenue From the Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Center Foundation to the FY 2004-05 Operating Budget of the Department of Museums and Cultural Arts and Create One Full -Time Equivalent Position MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: The Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Center Foundation, Inc. ("Foundation") has been awarded a 2004 "Museums for America" Grant in the amount of $149,922 from the Institute of Museum and Library Services. This grant project will fund the Sea Scholars program for a period of two years. Sea Scholars provides students in high -needs elementary schools in Hampton Roads with SOL-based experiences focusing on marine science. Five participating elementary schools are selected annually based on need. Each school will be provided with a continuum of aquarium -led educational programs during the school year. The Foundation is required and agrees to match this award with $110,097 in personnel, services, supplies and equipment. Considerations: The Foundation has committed part of the proceeds from this grant to fund the salary of one FTE Educator II for a period of two years. This individual will be responsible for coordinating instructional experiences for participating classes and community enrichment activities in the summer. The addition to the FY 2005 operating budget of the Department of Museums and Cultural Arts of one staff member for two years is requested, to be fully reimbursed by the Foundation. Since all salary and associated benefit costs of this employee will be reimbursed by the Foundation using grant funds, this request represents no additional cost to the City. If grant funding is not awarded in subsequent years, the Foundation will either find alternative funding sources for the program, or terminate the position. ■ Public Information: The public will be informed through the normal agenda process. ■ Alternatives: Do not accept the additional revenue from the Foundation and do not approve the addition of one FTE position to the Department of Museums and Cultural Arts. ■ Recommendations: Approve the addition of one FTE educator to the Department of Museums and Cultural Arts for two years, and increase anticipated local revenue from the Foundation in the amount of $96,681. ■ Attachments: Grant Award Letter and Ordinance. Recommended Action: Approve the addition ordinance. Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Museums and Cultural Arts. City Manager: L - - UWJ-2 1 AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND 2 APPROPRIATE $96,681 FROM THE 3 VIRGINIA AQUARIUM & MARINE SCIENCE 4 CENTER FOUNDATION TO THE FY 2004- 5 05 OPERATING BUDGET OF THE 6 DEPARTMENT OF MUSEUMS AND CULTURAL 7 ARTS TO FUND ONE FULL-TIME 8 POSITION FOR THE SEA SCHOLARS 9 PROGRAM 10 WHEREAS, the Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Center 11 Foundation ("the Foundation") received a $149,922 grant from the 12 Institute of Museum and Library Sciences for the operation of a Sea 13 Scholars program for a period of two years, and the Foundation will 14 provide $96,681 of this funding to the Department of Museums and 15 Cultural Arts. 16 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 17 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 18 1. That $96,681 is hereby accepted from the Virginia Aquarium & 19 Marine Science Center Foundation and appropriated to the FY 20 2004-05 Operating Budget of the Department of Museums and 21 Cultural Arts for implementation of the Virginia Aquarium & 22 Marine Science Center's Sea Scholars program, with revenue 23 from local sources increased accordingly. 24 2. That one full-time equivalent educator position is hereby 25 added in the FY 2004-05 Operating Budget of the Department of 26 Museums and Cultural Arts, with continuation of this position 27 contingent upon future funding from the Foundation. 28 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, 29 on this day of , 2004. M APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Management Services CA-9394 R-1 September 30, 2004 H:\PA\GG\ORDRES\Sea Scholars ord.doc APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: City Attorney "' Office 2 September 21, 2004 ��of h°USE&,4r . Ms. Nancy Walsh Virginia Marine Science Museum " 717 General Booth Blvd Virginia Beach, VA 23451 �/PRE INSTITUTE Dear Ms. Nancy Walsh, of MUSEUM and L 1 B R A R Y It gives me great pleasure to notify you that your proposal has been S E R V I C E S selected to receive a 2004 Museums for America Grant award. This year we received 829 applications requesting more than $147,525,164. Through our field review and panel process, we have selected 190 projects to receive funding totaling $16,406,694. The projects selected represent a wide spectrum of activities that will help museums serve their communities better through increased education programs, community outreach programs, and behind -the -scenes projects. Enclosed you will find a letter from Mary Estelle Kennelly, Associate Deputy Director for Museum Services, providing details about the terms and conditions of this award. Please review her letter and the enclosed forms and materials carefully and follow the instructions they contain. Congratulations on your successful award and thank you for your participation in the first year of this new program. Your participation has helped shape our new program in the years to come. I am delighted that the Institute of Museum and Library Services is able to provide support for this project. Robert S. Martin, Ph.D. Director Enclosures A Federal agency serving the public by strengthening museums 6- libraries 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue. NW . Washington. DC 20506 9 Phone: 202-606-8536 • Fax: 202-606--8591 September 21, 2004 Ms. Nancy Walsh Virginia Marine Science Museum 717 General Booth Blvd Virginia Beach, VA 23451 A, ell etMusef, J N Dear Ms. Nancy Walsh: I B R ^0.� This package contains the information you will need to manage your award: 1. Grant Award Notification; INSTITUTE 2, Award Reporting Schedule of MUSE UM 3. Museums for America Grants Awards Procedures and LIB R A R Y 4. SF 3881, ACH (Automated Clearing House) Enrollment Form, to be completed SERVICES and returned immediately, 5. SF 270, Request for Advance or Reimbursement, to be submitted each time you request a payment; also available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/grants forms.html 6. SF 269A, Financial Status Report (short form), to be submitted annually; also available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/grants forms html 7. IMLS formes for Interim and Final Narrative Reports 8. Museums for America Grant Outcomes Based Evaluation FAQ sheet 9. "General Terms and Conditions of an IMLS Award" document 10. "Get the Word Out" press packet. 11. Description of MFA review process 12. Field Review Comments 13. Panel Comments 14. List of FY 2004 MFA recipients The Grant Award Notification and "General Terms and Conditions of an IMLS Award" document contain important information about complying with the terms of the award. Please read all of this information carefully. If you wish to have someone other than the individual identified as your project director at time of application have responsibility for the overall administration of the project, please notify us immediately. The amount of your award, the dates of the award period and the grant award number we have assigned are provided in the Grant Award Notification. In all correspondence with EV LS about your award, including requests for reimbursement, please reference your grant award number. As specified in the 2004 Museums for America Grants Application and Guidelines, your grant activities are expected to have quantifiable and measurable outcomes. You will be expected to evaluate the success of the project against your established outcomes. IMLS will be providing technical assistance to help you establish at least one outcome evaluation for your project. Please see the "Museums for America Grant Outcomes Based Evaluation FAQ sheet" for details. A Federal agency serving the public by strengthening museums 6- libraries 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW • Washington, DC20506 • Phone: 202-606-8536 • Fax: 202-606-8591 The completed SF 5881, Automated Clearinghouse Enrollment (ACI) Form must be returned to the IMLS Grants Office at the address below, in order to set up the -disbursement process. You must also submit a completed SF 270, Request for Advance or Reimbursement, each time you request a payment. As specified in the award terms, you must submit a semi-annual narrative program report and an annual financial report. Copies of the forms are enclosed. Please send one copy of all interim and two copies of all final reports to: Grant Administration Office Institute of Museum and Library Services 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW room 223 Washington, DC 20506 Fax: (202) 606-0395 imisrMorting@,imis.gov Re: Interim (or Final) Report If you send your forms electronically, please be sure to fax or mail a copy of the reporting form with a signature for our files. Please refer to the enclosed "Award Reporting Schedule" for the due dates of your reports. It is a requirement that your institution credit the Institute of Museurn and Library Services in all publications and activities relating to the use of your award. To assist you in publicizing your award, we are pleased to provide you with our "Get the Word Out" press packet, which you may use in developing your own release to your local media. Your public recognition of. EvI S support encourages others to apply, and we appreciate your cooperation. We are also enclosing two other items of interests for grantees: a description of the review process that was used in making funding decisions, and copies of the Field Review comments and Panel comments for your application. We urge you to consider concerns raised by reviewers as you undertake your project as their suggestions could, in many cases, result in stronger projects. After reviewing all of the enclosed documents pertaining to your Museums for America Grant award, if you have any questions, please contact your assigned program specialist, as listed on the enclosed "Museums for America Grants Award Procedures" document. Congratulations on having been selected to receive a 2004 Museums for America Grant award. We look forward to following the progress of your project and to sharing information about it with the museum field. Sincerely, —A"tovi�— ILC#eezz Mary Estelle Kennelly Associate Deputy Director for Museum Services Enclosures 9-29-04;12:24PM;vmsm Admin.offlce ;4374976 Q Of t'AUSE 4, Institute of Museum and Library Services h J• y Official Award Notification for Grants and Cooperative Agreements z� m F O L� ���RR1Ry Awardee Name and Address Virginia Marine Science Museum 717 General Booth Blvd, Suite 1 Virginia Beach, VA 23451 Official Contact Nancy Walsh 717 General Booth Blvd Virginia Beach, VA 23451 Program Name Museums for America CFDA Number 45.301 Project Type MFA- Serving as Centers of Community En Scope of Work and/or Special Conditions Date of Award August 24, 2004 Award Number MA-03-04-0119-04 Award Period From October 01, 2004 To September 30, 2006 Award Amount $ 149,922.00 08/24/2004 $149,922.00 Original Award 1. This grant is awarded for the purposes identified in the awardee's application for the FY 2004 Museums for America Grant, except as indicated by any attached correspondence from the awardee amending the project in accordance with the provision in the "General Terms and Conditions of IMLS Awards" document. 2. Changes requiring prior approval include changes in the scope of work, key personnel, grant period, or changes in the project budget, as detailed in the "General Terms and Conditions of IMLS Awards" document. A request for a no -cost extension of this award must be made in writing no less than 30 days before the end of the grant period. All requests for approval of changes should be made to IMLS, Associate Deputy Director for Museum Services, 1100 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Room 609, Washington, DC 20506. 3. This grant shall be administered by the project director, as identified in the project proposal, unless amended. 4. Award terms and provisions, including payment and reporting procedures, are described in the "General Terms and Conditions of IMLS Awards" document. IMLS Authorizing Official Signature Name and Title Mary Estelle Kennelly Associate Deputy Director for Museums n 8/ 10 S CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Ordinance to Accept and Appropriate a $31,000 Grant from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality to the FY 2004 — 2005 Operating Budget of the Department of Museums and Cultural Arts to Maintain a Statewide Stranding Network MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: The Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Center has been awarded a 2004 Coastal Zone Management Grant in the amount of $31,000, from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration through the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. VAMSC will be required to match this award with $31,000 in indirect and in -kind costs of personnel and equipment. This grant will be used to maintain a statewide stranding response network including a volunteer stranding response team and other cooperating organizations. Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Center Stranding Program (VAMSC-SP) staff, volunteers and cooperators respond to more than 400 marine mammal and sea turtle strandings occurring along the ocean coast, Eastern Shore and lower Chesapeake Bay each year. Live stranded animals are provided with emergency medical care and rehabilitated for return to the wild. Dead stranding response includes carcass recovery, external and internal examination with photographs and/or video, human interaction analysis, stomach content analysis, tissue sampling and dissemination, coordination of carcass disposal, and database management. ■ Considerations: The Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Center Stranding Program is permitted by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), US Fish and Wildlife Service and the State to manage the marine mammal stranding network, as well as respond to marine mammal and sea turtle strandings in Virginia. The VAMSC-SP maintains the state marine mammal stranding database and submits reports to NMFS and the other agencies. Sea turtle stranding data is stored in the VAMSC-SP database and submitted to NMFS and the Virginia Institute of Marine Science. Through these ways, information regarding the status of marine mammals and sea turtles in Virginia is presented to the agencies and individuals responsible for the conservation and management of natural resources. The VAMSC-SP is dedicated to educating the public. Their conservation message is presented at schools, to groups such as Girl and Boy Scouts, to civic organizations and at conferences and special events. Each stranding event is viewed as an opportunity to educate the public about Virginia's protected marine mammals and sea turtles. ■ Public Information: The public will be informed through the normal process of publicizing the Council's agenda. ■ Alternatives: Do not accept grant funds. ■ Recommendations: Appropriate grant funds. ■ Attachments: Grant Award Letter and Ordinance. Recommended Action: Appropriate grant funds. Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Museums and Cultural Arts. City Manager: k Arfs/Stranding Network 1 AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND 2 APPROPRIATE A $31,000 GRANT 3 FROM THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF 4 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TO THE FY 5 2004-2005 OPERATING BUDGET OF 6 THE DEPARTMENT OF MUSEUMS AND 7 CULTURAL ARTS TO MAINTAIN A 8 STATEWIDE STRANDING NETWORK 9 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA 10 BEACH, VIRGINIA: 11 That a $31,000 grant is hereby accepted from the Virginia 12 Department of Environmental Quality and appropriated to the FY 13 2004-2005 Operating Budget of the Department of Museums and 14 Cultural Arts for the Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science 15 Center to maintain a statewide stranding network, with estimated 16 revenue from the federal government increased accordingly. 17 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 18 Virginia on the day of 91 2004. CA9389 H/ords/Stranding Network September 30, 2004 R-2 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: �1 Management Services APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: City Attorney' Office �J'—Ly—V4�lL=L4F�IVI�VIIIS111 HUIIII fI. VTT ILC .4J/4y/O v .. :. v COMMONWEALTH ®f VIRGINIA DEPARTIvHNT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Street address: 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219 W. Tayloe Murphy, Jr. Mailing address: P.O. Box 10009, Richmond, Virginia 23240 Secretary of Natural Resources Fax (804) 698-4500 TDD (804) 698-4021 www.deq.state.va.us September 1, 2004 TO: Virginia Coastal Program Grantees for FY 2004 FROM: Laura B. McK I is Coastal Program Manager -- er� g 9 g Phone: (804) 698-4323 Fax: (804) 698-4319 RE: FY 2004 Coastal Program Award Notification NOAA Grant # NA04NOS4190060 FF L / l U ro51C S-0 Robert G. Burnley Director (804) 698-4000 1-800-592-5482 The Department of Environmental Quality has received approval for the 2604 Coastal Zone Management Grant Award from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). We are pleased to notify you that your proposal has been approved for funding for the period shown on your enclosed contract. We look forward to working with you in the coming year. In July 2004, The Virginia Coastal Program (VCP) received final findings from NOAA's evaluation team. The team suggested, 'The VCP should continue its efforts to maintain and increase program visibility through its outreach and other activities ... The VCP should also assure that all projects funded through the VCP acknowledge that role with appropriate signage or other written statements as appropriate" (Evaluation Findings for the Virginia Coastal Management Program November 1999 through July 2003. July 2004). CREDIT IS CRITICAL- USE THE L0005! 3�� nirbsv�,q� VIRGINIA DMMOFa ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 4, VIRGINIA COASTAL PROGRAM a91 fM�� In part because the Virginia Coastal Program and other state coastal programs are often not credited, we are facing budget cuts in FY'05. Congress and the general public do not understand what Coastal Zone Management dollars do in Virginia and other coastal states. Therefore it is imperative that you make certain that Coastal Management funding for your projects is properly recognized — on your project deliverables, on your websites, in newsletters and journal articles, on signage at construction and acquisition sites and during interviews by the media. Be certain that proper acknowledgement of Coastal Management funding in both language and logos appears in your deliverables. Language and logos are available on our website by following the link: htti)://www.deg.virginia.- ov/coastal/acknowlg.htm#language You will find the following in this contract package: • Contracts (2 original) for signature • Attachments: A (Scope of Work), B (DEQNCP Terms &Conditions), C (US Dept. of Commerce Terms & Conditions), D (NOAA Programmatic Special Award Conditions), & E (Certifications form). Please note that in these DOC and NOAA conditions the word "recipient" refers to DEQ. You are technically a'Isub-recipient" but are held to the same terms and conditions. 9-29-04 ; 12 = Z4PM; VMSM Acim i fl_ ott ice 43 /49 /f3 i# 3 / 1 U • Reporting Forms: Reports on progress and requests for financial reimbursement will be processed on a semiannual basis. If another payment schedule is needed, please contact your Coastal Program Project Manager highlighted below. You must use the Budget Amendment Form if you need to change your budget. Please see your Contract and its Attachment B for deadlines and details. Please visit our Web site for guidance on preparing progress reports, Anal products, downloadable logos and new project proposals. http.lAvww.dea.virainia.4ov/coastal/fundin .html To fully execute your contract, please complete the following steps: 1. Sign both original contracts marked with colored tabs. I have already signed the originals. 2. Sign the one page Attachment E. This is also marked with a colored tab. 3. Return one original signed contract and the original signed Attachment E to: Krista Trono, Coastal Program Department of Environmental Quality 629 E. Main Street Richmond, VA 23219 4. Keep the remaining signed contract with the attachments for your files. Thank you for your close attention to these details. Coastal Program Contacts Your Coastal Program Project Manager is your primary contact, and is highlighted below. Contact this person for general project management issues, scope of work changes, budget amendments, extension requests, 306A documentation, final products, audit reports, and new project development. - Laura McKay, Coastal Program Manager Julie Bixby, Coastal Program Planner Shep Moon, Coastal Program Planner Scott Lerberg, Coastal Specialist (804) 698-4323 Ibmckay �deq.virginia.gov (804) 698-4333 iablxbv(aD-deg.virginia.gov (804) 698-4527 hsmoon@dea.virainia.gov (804) 698-4537 sblerberg07deg.virginia.gov For grants tracking, signed contracts, progress reports, NOAA logos, Coastal Program credit language and various forms. Krista Trono, Research Assistant (804) 698-4051 k1trono0deg.yirginia.gov For public information, Coastal Management Magazine, interpretive signage for construction projects: Virginia Witmer, Outreach Coordinator (804) 698-4320 vgwitmer0deg.virginia.gov Coastal Program staff may also be reached by fax at (804) 698-4319. For payment, fiscal questions, fixed asset reporting: Patty Walsh, Senior Accountant (804) 698-4173 pwwalsh0deQ.virginia.gov 9-29-04;12:24PM;Vmsm AdMin.office ;4374976 # 4/ 10 VIRGINIA COASTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM GRANT CONTRACT Grant#: NA04NOS4190060 Grant Year. 2004 Task#: 50 This agreement is made by and between the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (hereinafter referred to as the "Department") and the Grantee (listed below). The parties to this agreement, in consideration of the mutual covenants and stipulations set out herein, agree as follows: Scope of Work: The Grantee shall carry out the project as set forth in Attachment A. Project Period: The project shall commence on the Project Start Date, and shall terminate no later than the Project End Date. The grantee's closeout period ends on the Final Product and Billing Date. These dates are specified below: Project Start date: 10/1/2004 Final Product and Billing Date:11/15/2005 Project End date: 9/30/2005 Period of performance (months): 12 Payments: The Department shall pay the Grantee on a reimbursement basis, not to exceed the Federal Funding Total shown below for the project. The said sum, together with the matching funds provided as set forth in Attachment A, shall include all expenses of the project. Payment shall be made upon submission of invoices and/or other appropriate documentation of program expenditures, and progress reports and their acceptance by the Department. Such invoices and reports shall be submitted within 15 days of each reporting period end and shall be detailed in accordance with Attachment A to show what tasks have been completed and to compare the time of completion with the proposed time of completion. Federal Funding Total: $31,000.00 Federal Coastal Zone Management Act Section: Section 306 Reporting Schedule: Report Report Period Due Date Reauired Elements 1st Semiannual Oct 01, 2004-Mar 31, 2005 Apr 15, 2005 Forms A,B 2nd Semiannual Apr 01, 2005-Sep 30, 2005 Oct 15, 2005 Forms A,B Closeout Period Oct 01, 2005-Nov 15, 2005 Nov 15, 2005 Forms B,C,remaining deliverables Contract Documents: The Contract documents shall consist of. 1) This signed form; 2) The Scope of Work (Attachment A); 3) VA Coastal Resources Management Program Grant Contract Terms and Conditions (Attachment B); 4) U.S. Dept. of Commerce Financial Assistance Standard Terms and Conditions (Attachment C); 5) NOAA Tem►s and Conditions (Attachment D); and 6) Signed CD-512: U.S. Dept, of Commerce Certification (Attachment E) Precedence In the event of a conflict between or among terms in the documents included in this contract, the following of Terms: documents control in the following order. Attachments D, C, E, B, this signed form, and Attachment A. Grantor. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Laura B. McKay, Manager Coastal Resources Management Program Typed name and title Signatu -<��.vi illl/ l 7ivC �� Date Grantee: VA Beach/Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center 1/?rttiniz Jky�ir�,,,.� 5 j�al(iv+� Sc.icn�.� C���er Typed name and title Signatu -// 7/0 �f Date VCRMP Contract rev. 9/25/2001 y3N 8F �a CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: An Ordinance to Appropriate $45,969 of Additional Revenue from the Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center Foundation to the FY 2004-05 Operating Budget of the Department of Museums and Cultural Arts to fund a Full -Time Position for the Watershed Wanderers program MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: The Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Center Foundation, Inc. ("Foundation") has been awarded a $76,490 grant funds by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. This grant project will work with designated Virginia Beach schools to increase student awareness and understanding of watersheds and the Chesapeake Bay, to develop skills students need to become active environmental supporters, and to help students achieve higher success in science. This grant will allow aquarium educators to provide multiple aquarium -led experiences, which will be integrated into the class curriculum through teacher led linking activities. The Foundation is required and agrees to match this award with $16,363 in personnel, supplies and equipment. Considerations: This grant project will involve 1,100 students in 3rd, 4th and 5th grades at four elementary schools located within Virginia Beach's Owls Creek-Rudee Inlet Watershed. Three of the four schools service high -needs students, as determined by socioeconomic status. This project, Watershed Wanderers, will provide meaningful educational experiences to a population of students who often miss out on these opportunities because of fewer advantages. This project funds the salary of one FTE Educator II for a period of one year. This individual will be the project coordinator responsible for all aspects of the program. He/She will work directly with teachers to help enforce Virginia Standards of Learning through hand -on, project based activities. The addition to the FY 2004-05 Operating Budget of the Department of Museums and Cultural Arts of one staff member is requested, to be fully reimbursed by the Foundation. Since all salary and associated benefit costs of this employee will be reimbursed by the Foundation using grant proceeds, this request represents no additional cost to the City. The opportunity for continued funding in subsequent years is available. However if this grant funding is not awarded in subsequent years, the Foundation will either find alternative funding sources for the program, or terminate the position. ■ Public Information: The public will be informed through the normal agenda process. ■ Alternatives: Do not accept the additional revenue from local sources and do not approve the addition of one FTE position to the Department of Museums and Cultural Arts. ■ Recommendations: Accept the additional revenue from local sources and approve the addition of one FTE educator to the FY 2004-05 Operating Budget of the Department of Museums and Cultural Arts. ■ Attachments: Grant Award Letter and Ordinance. Recommended Action: Approve the ordinance Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Museums and Cultural Arts. City Manager: u1s, H/arfs/Watershed Wanderers 1 AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND 2 APPROPRIATE $45,969 FROM THE 3 VIRGINIA AQUARIUM & MARINE 4 SCIENCE CENTER FOUNDATION TO THE 5 FY 2004-05 OPERATING BUDGET OF 6 THE DEPARTMENT OF MUSEUMS AND 7 CULTURAL ARTS TO FUND ONE FULL- 8 TIME POSITION 9 WHEREAS, the Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Center 10 Foundation ("the Foundation") has received $76,490 in grant funding 11 from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for the 12 operation of the Watershed Wanderers program for a period of one 13 year, and the Foundation will provide $45,969 of this funding to the 14 Department of Museums and Cultural Arts. 15 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 16 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 17 1. That $45,969 is hereby accepted from the Virginia Aquarium & 18 Marine Science Center Foundation and appropriated to the FY 19 2004-05 Operating Budget of the Department of Museums and 20 Cultural Arts for implementation of the Virginia Aquarium & 21 Marine Science Center's Watershed Wanderers program, with 22 revenue from local sources increased accordingly. 23 2. That one full-time equivalent educator position is hereby 24 added in the FY 2004-05 Operating Budget of the Department of 25 Museums and Cultural Arts, with continuation of this position 26 contingent upon future funding from the Foundation. 27 28 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, 29 on this day of 2004. CA9392 H/ords/Watershed Wanderers September 30, 2004 R-2 Approved as to Content: Management Services Approved as to Legal Sufficiency: City Attorney' Office a'r,ra,`�� UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration s'+e,,,.�or►+d OFFICE OF FI NANCE AND ADMINISTRATION GRANTS MANAGEMENT DIVISION 1325 EAST -WEST HIGHWAY SSMC2 - OFA621 - ROOM 9344 SILVER SPRING, MARYLAND 20910-3283 Ms Lynn Clements Executive Director VIRGINIA MARINE SCIENCES MUSEUM FOUNDATION 717 GENERAL BOOTH BOULEVARD VIRGINIA BEACH VA 23451 Reference: NOAA Award No. NA04NMF4570274 Amendment No. 0 Federal Share $76,490 Dear Ms Clements: AUG ' 31 2004 Enclosed for your review and approval are two originals of the above referenced NOAA award. If you concur, please sign each of the originals and return the one original marked "Grants Copy" to the address above within 30 days of receipt. Copies of the applicable OMB Circulars and Department of Commerce regulations, which have been incorporated into this award by reference, are available from the NOAA website at http://www.ofa.noaa.gov/—grants/. NOAA contact information. NOAA Grants Specialist: zekiea.o.jones@noaa.gov at 301-713-0923 ext 136 Federal Program Officer: shannon.sprague@noaa.gov at 410-267-5664 ext If you have any grants management questions concerning this award, please contact the NOAA Grants Management Specialist, and for technical questions, please contact the Federal Program Officer as listed above. Sincerely, ,Lua,,�Uj Emmanuel E. Atsalinos Grants Officer Enclosures CC: SHANNON SPRAGUE, N 45-1 Printed on RroyC1Cd Paper y-L�-V4> IG G4YIv1>VIIIJ;11 HUIIII II. VTT II�C �4�/4'_1/tJ vtr)AN"n rr,-%n,t - CORM CD-450 REV 10/98) U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE , , u- , %j ❑ GRANT ❑x COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AWARD ACCOUNTING CODE N/A !EC IPIENT NAME AWARD NUMBER VIRGINIA MARINE SCIENCES MUSEUM FOUNDATION NA04NMF4570274 ;TREET ADDRESS 717 GENERAL BOOTH BOULEVARD FEDERAL SHARE OF COST FEDER$76,49AL 3TY, STATE, ZIP CODE RECIPIENT SHARE OF COST ✓IRGINIA BEACH, VA 23451 $16,363 WARD PERIOD 118/01/2004 - 07/31/2005 OTAL ESTIMATED COST $92,853 .UTHORITY --dueation: 16 U.S.C. 753a; 15 U.S.C. 1540 FDA NO. AND PROJECT TITLE From our Creek to our Bay: Watershed Wanderers 1.457 this Award approved by the Grants Officer is issued in triplicate and constitutes an obligation of Federal funding. 3y signing the three documents, the Recipient agrees to comply with the Award provisions checked below and attached. Upon acceptance by the Recipient, two signed Award documents shall be returned to the Grants Officer and the third document shall be retained by the Recipient. If not signed and returned without modificiation by the iecipient within 30 days of receipt, the Grants Officer may unilaterally terminate this Award. XC� Department of Commerce Financial Assistance Standard Terms and Conditions Q Special Award Conditions (Attachment B) I Q Line Item Budget (Attachment A) Q 15 CFR Part 14, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, Other Non -Profit, and Commercial Organizations ❑ 15 CFR Part 24, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements to State and Local Governments ❑ OMB Circular A-21, Cost Principles for Educational Institutions ❑ OMB Circular A-87, Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments ❑ OMB Circular A 122, Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations ❑X 48 CFR Part 31, Contract Cost Principles and Procedures XQ OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non -Profit Organizations Other(s) 'Department of Commerce Pre -Award Notification requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements 66 FR 49917 as amended by the Federal Register notice published on October 30 2002 (67 FR 66109) 1. r GNATURE OF PEPARTMENT OF COMM RCE G TS OFFICER TITLE NOAA GRANTS OFFICER DATE AUG 3 1 Z9 04 (PED NAME AND SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED RECIPIENT OFFICIA TITLE DATE 6%11-/0 �! CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: National Urban Search and Rescue Response System Activation MEETING DATE: October 12th, 2004 ■ Background: The City of Virginia Beach is the sponsoring agency for VA -Task Force 2, Urban Search and Rescue Team. In addition, senior members of the Team are pre - selected by the Department of Homeland Security/FEMA Operations to participate in Incident Support Teams that serve to oversee specific large-scale incidents involving multi jurisdictional response agencies. The Department of Homeland Security/FEMA activated both VA-TF2 and specific IST members to support recovery efforts from Hurricane Frances and Hurricane Ivan. The activation notice was effective at 2 A.M. on September 2, 2004. ■ Considerations: As the sponsoring agency, the City of Virginia Beach is responsible for administrative and fiscal management of the team and its assets. Consistent with previous deployments, DHS/FEMA has authorized the reimbursement of all expenses to support the participation of all Team members, including backfilling public safety operational positions to maintain response readiness and staffing in Virginia Beach as well as neighboring participating agencies. ■ Public Information: Public Information will be handled through the normal process. ■ Alternatives: The City's designation as Sponsoring Agency for FEMA VA-TF2 is a pre- arranged relationship and obligation between the City of Virginia Beach and DHS/FEMA. ■ Recommendations: Approve and appropriate $1,636,000 to cover deployment expenses for VA-TF2 to the Hurricane Frances and Ivan events in Florida. ■ Attachments: Ordinance VA-TF2 Activation Order from FEMA IST Activation Order from FEMA Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agenc : Fire Department. City Manager! L , �( �- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 AN ORDINANCE TO APPROPRIATE $1,636,000 IN REIMBURSEMENT REVENUE FROM THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT'S FY 2004-05 OPERATING BUDGET FOR DEPLOYMENT TO ASSIST FLORIDA COMMUNITIES WITH CLEANUP FROM HURRICANE FRANCES AND HURRICANE IVAN WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency ("FEMA") issued an alert order for members of the FEMA Urban Search and Rescue Virginia Task -Force 2 for assistance with cleanup from Hurricane Frances and Hurricane Ivan and has approved $1,636,000 in reimbursement costs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 16 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 That $1,636,000 in reimbursement revenue from the Federal Emergency Management Agency is hereby appropriated to the Fire Department's FY 2004-05 Operating Budget for costs associated with the deployment of members of the urban search and rescue team, with federal revenue increased accordingly. Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the day of , 2004. Approved as to Content: / 1 0; (� Management Services CA 9393 R-2 September 30, 2004 H:\PA\GG\ORDRES\FEMA EMERG DEPLOY ORD.DOC Approved as to Legal Sufficiency: ' 1I/ �l City Attorn FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY ASSISTANCE AWARD/AMENDMENT 1. ASSISTANCE INSTRUMENT 2. TYPE OF ACTION Q COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT ❑ GRANT ❑ AWARD Q AMENDMENT 3. INSTRUMENT NUMBER 4. AMENDMENT NUMBER 5. EFFECTIVE DATE 6. CONTROL NUMBER . EMW-2003-CA-0111 M007 See Block 21 WN01180Y2.004T 7. RECIPIENT NAME AND ADDRESS 8. ISSUINGIADMINISTRATION OFFICE Virginia Beach Fire Department Federal Emergency Management Agency. Attn: Mark Piland Financial & Acquisition Management Div Special Operations, Municipal Center Grants Management Branch 2408 Courthouse Drive, Building #21 500 C Street, S.W., Room 334 _ Washington DC 20472 Virginia Beach VA 23456-9065 Specialist: Tanya D. Barnes,. 202-646-3742 9. RECIPIENT PROJECT MANAGER 10. FEMA PROJECT OFFICER Mark Piland, 752-427-0693 Wanda Casey; 202-646-4013 11. ASSISTANCE ARRANGEMENT 12. PAYMENT METHOD 13. PAYMENT OFFICE Q. COST REIMBURSEMENT TREASURY CHECK Federal Emergency. Management Agency ❑ COST SHARING REIMBURSEMENT Disaster Finance Center ❑ ❑ P.O. Box 800 FIXED PRICE ADVANCE CHECK Building 708 ❑ OTHER ❑ LETTER OF CREDIT Berryville VA 22611-0800 14. ASSISTANCE AMOUNT 15. ACCOUNTING & APPROPRIATION DATA PREVIOUS AMOUNT $1, 589, 857.53 See Continuation Page AMOUNT THIS ACTION $112, 000.00 $1, 701, 857.53 TOTAL AMOUNT io. Urxrar uvry Ur rYCwtl,I This amendment provides funding for reimbursement for activation of US&R IST members to support Hurricane Frances. The total amount hereby obligated is increased by $112,000.00 from $1,589,857.53 to $1,701,857.53. All other terms and conditions remain in effect. END OF MODIFICATION M007. 17. RECIPIENT REQUIREMENT F1 RECIPIENT IS REQUIRED TO SIGN AND RETURN THREE (3) COPIES OF THIS DOCUMENT TO THE ISSUING/ADMIN OFFICE IN BLOCK 8. ❑ RECIPIENT IS NOT REQUIRED TO SIGN THIS DOCUMENT. 18. RECIPIENT (TvDe name and title) 119.ASSIST NCE OFFICER(Type name and title) Richard W. Goodman Gregory B.. Cade, Fire Chief Assistance Officer 20. SIG E OF E�D I %7 ,j t o `'f I21. 51 NATUR F Ab�N t UFFI(:tK I j 1 t J l FEMA FA640.2{ APR if / REPLACES EDITION OF JUL 84. tNUATION PAGE A.1 PRICE/COST SCHEDULE ITEM NO. 1 DESCRIPTION OF QTY UNIT SUPPLIES/SERVICES 1.00 Activation of IST members to support Hurricane Fra UNIT PRICE $112,000.00 FUNDING/REQ NO: 1: $112,000.00 WN0118OY2004T GRAND TOTAL --- ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA: ACRN APPROPRIATION REQUISITION NUMBER 1 2004-06-1545DR-9044 - 4101-D WN01180Y2004T P AMOUNT $112,000.00 $112,000.00 AMOUNT $112,000.00 CONTINUATION PAGE A.1 PRICE/COST SCHEDULE ITEM DESCRIPTION OF QTY UNIT UNIT AMOUNT NO. SUPPLIES/SERVICES PRICE 0001 1.00 Lot $24,000.00 $24,000.00 Activation of IST members to support Hurricane Ivan from VA TF 2 FUNDING/REQ NO: 1: $24,000.00 WN01324Y2004T GRAND TOTAL --- $24,000.00 ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA: ACRN APPROPRIATION REQUISITION NUMBER AMOUNT 1 2004-06-1549DR-9044 --4101-D WN01324Y2004T P $24,000.00 FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY ASSISTANCE AWARD/AMENOMENT 1. ASSISTANCE INSTRUMENT 2. TYPE OF ACTION COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT ❑ GRANT ❑ AWARD AMENDMENT 3. INSTRUMENT NUMBER 4. AMENDMENT NUMBER 5. EFFECTIVE DATE 6. CONTROL NUMBER EKW-2003-CA-0111 M009 See Block 21 WN01324Y2004T 7. RECIPIENT NAME AND ADDRESS 8. ISSUING/ADMINISTRATION OFFICE Virginia Beach Fire Department Federal Emergency Management Agency Attn: Mark Piland Financial & Acquisition Management Div Special Operations, Municipal Center Grants Management Branch 2408 Courthouse Drive, Building #21 500 C Street, S.W., Room 350 Washington DC 20472 Virginia Beach VA 23456-9065 Specialist: Marilynn Grim 202-646-3459 9. RECIPIENT PROJECT MANAGER 10. FEMA PROJECT OFFICER Mark Piland 752-427-0693 Wanda Casey, 202-646-4013 11. ASSISTANCE ARRANGEMENT 12. PAYMENT METHOD 13. PAYMENT OFFICE Q COST REIMBURSEMENT TREASURY CHECK Federal Emergency Management Agency ❑ COST SHARING REIMBURSEMENT Accounting Services Division ❑ FIXED PRICE ❑ ADVANCE CHECK Disbursement & Receivables Branch 500 C Street, S.W., Room 723 ❑ OTHER ❑ LETTER OF CREDIT Washington DC 20472 14. ASSISTANCE AMOUNT 15. ACCOUNTING & APPROPRIATION DATA PREVIOUS AMOUNT $1, 741, 857.53 See Continuation Page AMOUNT THIS ACTION $24 , 000.00 $1,765,857.53 TOTAL AMOUNT 16. DESCRIPTION OF PKVJtGI This amendment provides funding for reimbursement for activation of Urban Search & Rescue IST Members for the Joint Management Team in support of Hurricane Ivan. The total amount obligated is hereby increased by $24,000.00 from $1,741,857.53 to $1,765,857.53. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged and in full force and effect. END OF MODIFICATION M009. 17. RECIPIENT REQUIREMENT RECIPIENT IS REQUIRED TO SIGN AND RETURN THREE (3) COPIES OF THIS DOCUMENT TO THE ISSUING/ADMIN OFFICE IN BLOCK 8. ❑ RECIPIENT IS NOT REQUIRED TO SIGN THIS DOCUMENT. Gregory B. Cade, Fire Chief I Sylvia A. Carroll ` Assistance Officer 0 FEMAFo - I.AA s R PLACES E ITIOJiOF JUL 84, WHICH IS OBSOLETE. FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY ASSISTANCE AWARD/AMENDMENT 1. ASSISTANCE INSTRUMENT 2. TYPE OF ACTION COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT ❑ GRANT ❑ AWARD AMENDMENT., 3. INSTRUMENT NUMBER 4. AMENDMENT NUMBER 5. EFFECTIVE DATE 6. CONTROL NUMBER EMW-2003-CA-0111 M006 See Block 21 WNOi181Y2004T' ' 7. RECIPIENT NAME AND ADDRESS 8. ISSUING/ADMINISTRATION OFFICE Virginia Beach Fire Department Federal Emergency Management Agency, Attn: Mark Piland Financial.& Acquisition Management Div Special Operations, Municipal Center Grants Management Branch 2408 Courthouse Drive, Building #21 500 C Street, S.W., Room 334 Washington DC 20472. Virginia Beach VA 23456-9065 Specialist: Tanya D. Barnes,. 202-646-3742 9. RECIPIENT PROJECT MANAGER 10. FEMA PROJECT OFFICER Mark Piland, 752-427-0693 Wanda Casey; 202-646-4013 11. ASSISTANCE ARRANGEMENT 12. PAYMENT METHOD 13. PAYM NT OFFICE 0. COST REIMBURSEMENT 0 TREASURY CHECK Federal Emergency Management.Agency ❑ COST SHARING REIMBURSEMENT Disaster Finance Center ❑ FIXED PRICE ❑ ADVANCE CHECK P.O. Box 800 Building 708 ❑ OTHER ❑ LETTER OF CREDIT Berryville VA 22611-0800 14. ASSISTANCE AMOUNT 15. ACCOUNTING & APPROPRIATION DATA PREVIOUS AMOUNT $89,857..53. See Continuation Page AMOUNT THIS ACTION $1,500,000.00 $1,589,857.53 TOTAL AMOUNT 16. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT This amendment provides funding for reimbursement for operational expenditures required to activate VA-TF2 to support Hurricane Frances. The total amount hereby obligated is increased by $1,500,000.00 from $89,857.53 to $1,589,857.53. All other terms and conditions remain in effect. END OF MODIFICATION M006. f 17. RECIPIENT REQUIREMENT Q RECIPIENT IS REQUIRED TO SIGN AND RETURN THREE (3) COPIES OF THIS DOCUMENT TO THE ISSUINGIADMIN OFFICE IN BLOCK 8. ❑ RECIPIENT IS NOT REQUIRED TO SIGN THIS DOCUMENT. Gregory B. Cade, Fire Chief I Richard W. Goodman Assistance Officer FEMa 40-2, R REPLACES EDITION OF JUL 84, MCH IS OBSOLETE. A.1 PRICE/COST SCHEDULE ITEM DESCRIPTION OF QTY UNIT UNIT AMOUNT i NO. SUPPLIES/SERVICES PRICE 1 1.00 $1,500,000.00 $1,500,000.00 Amendment to provide funding in support of Hurricane Frances FUNDING/REQ NO: 1: $1,500,000.00 WN01181Y2004T GRAND TOTAL --- $1,500,000.00 ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA: ACRN APPROPRIATION REQUISITION NUMBER AMOUNT 1 2004-06-1545DR-9044 - -4101=D WN01181Y2004T F $1,500,000.00 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Request by the Human Services Department for the Appropriation of $1,000,000 of Fund Balance to Develop a Residential Village for Citizens with Mental Retardation and Physical Disabilities MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: The Human Services Department requests that City Council appropriate $1,000,000 of the Fund Balance in the General Fund designated for Mental Health to the FY2004-05 Operating Budget of the Department of Human Services. These funds will be used to develop a residential village for citizens with mental retardation and co-occurring physical disabilities. Specifically, it will include construction of two 12-bed facilities in partnership among the City, the Virginia Beach Community Development Corporation ("VBCDC"), and BIZNET, a private non-profit organization with a mission of addressing housing needs of Virginia Beach residents with mental retardation. Once constructed, the facilities will be leased back to the City and maintained by VBCDC to operate as Intermediate Care Facilities —Mental Retardation. ■ Considerations: The residential village will meet housing needs of the most severely disabled consumers served by the Department of Human Services, Mental Retardation Division. These consumers are severely disabled young adults inappropriately placed in nursing homes or being cared for at home by aging parents/family members no longer able to adequately care for them. Once established, the program should be able to generate adequate revenue to meet ongoing expenses. ■ Public Information: The initiative being funded with the additional revenue has been discussed and approved by the Community Services Board at its regular meeting on July 29, 2004. All other public information will be handled through the normal Council agenda process. ■ Alternatives: Without this resource, young adults will continue to be inappropriately placed in nursing homes or will remain in homes with aging parents/family members and will receive inadequate/inappropriate care. ■ Recommendation: Appropriate $1,000,000 as set forth above to develop the proposed residential village program. ■ Attachments: Ordinance Recommended Action: Adoption of Ordinance Submitting Department/Agency: Department Of Human Services City Manager: 4 , M 1 AN ORDINANCE TO APPROPRIATE $1,000,000 FROM 2 FUND BALANCE IN THE GENERAL FUND DESIGNATED 3 FOR MENTAL HEALTH TO THE FY 2004-05 OPERATING 4 BUDGET OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES TO 5 PROVIDE FUNDS TO DEVELOP A RESIDENTIAL VILLAGE 6 FOR PERSONS WITH SEVERE MENTAL RETARDATION AND 7 PHYSICAL DISABILITIES. 8 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, 9 VIRGINIA: 10 1. That $1,000,000 of fund balance in the General Fund 11 designated for Mental Health is hereby appropriated to the FY 2004- 12 05 Department of Human Services Operating Budget for the purpose of 13 funding a residential village for persons with severe mental 14 retardation and physical disabilities. 15 2. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to develop and 16 enter into a grant agreement with the Virginia Beach Community 17 Development Corporation to fund the residential village project. 18 3. That estimated revenue in the FY 2004-05 Operating Budget 19 from appropriations of fund balance is hereby increased by 20 $1,000,000. 21 22 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 23 Virginia, on the day of , 2004. 24 Requires an affirmative vote by a majority of the members of 25 City Council. Approved As to Content: \ J Oulu Management Services CA9391 H/ords/Residential Village September 29, 2004 R-3 Approved As To Legal Sufficiency: 4 ,vt,t, ^ �, u I qr City Attorney'` Office CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: A Resolution to Authorize the City Manager to Enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the United States Army, the National Park Service and the Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities to participate in the Planning of a Preservation and Development Plan for an Interpretive Area in the Fort Story Historic District at Cape Henry MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: The Cape Henry area of Virginia Beach is historically significant on local, state and national levels. It contains the likely landing site of the first permanent English colonists in April 1607; is the site of the first federal public works project, the Old Cape Henry Lighthouse, which is now a National Historic Landmark; and, was witness to the Battle Off the Capes in1781, the decisive naval engagement of the American Revolution. In December 2003, City Council adopted a resolution in support of the formation of a Cape Henry National Park and Visitors Center to properly commemorate this historic location. The issue is complicated due to the location of this site on a United States Army installation, but there have been ongoing discussions among the interested parties. The principal property owners of the historic site at Cape Henry are the U.S. Army, the Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities (APVA) and the National Park Service (NPS). Additionally, the City of Virginia Beach has a strong vested interest in the historical events that occurred there. Whereas the goals and needs of each group are all worthy, they are understandably not always compatible and likewise do not always work in the best interests of the history of the site. This is currently evident in the appearance of the site and a lack of programming reflective of the site's historical significance. ■ Considerations: A subcommittee of the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 Steering Committee, which was appointed by City Council in May 2002, attempted to bring all parties together to plan for changes that would have enhanced the site in preparation for Jamestown 2007 events. Developing security concerns and other considerations made this a somewhat daunting task. Much to the credit of the current command of Fort Story, the Army has now agreed to host and coordinate a planning effort that will allow all of the involved parties to consider both the short and long term needs of the Cape Henry historic site from the perspectives of the primary users and to work toward the development of a collaborative plan of action. A Memorandum of Understanding has been developed to provide a framework for preservation and development planning. The Cape Henry Memorandum of Understanding is an agreement involving the U.S. Army, the APVA, the NPS and the City of Virginia Beach that permits the formal discussion of improvements and planning needed at the Cape Henry historic site. It obligates none of the parties in terms of financial commitments. It is made clear in the agreement that the U.S. Army has the right of approval on all items. ■ Public Information: Public information will be provided through the normal process of advertising the Council's agenda. ■ Alternatives: Choose not to participate in discussions for the improvement of the Cape Henry historical site. ■ Recommendations: Approve participation by the City of Virginia Beach in discussions for improvements at the Cape Henry historical site. ■ Attachments: Resolution Memorandum of Understanding Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: City Manager: Department of Museums and Cultural Arts Memorandum of Understanding Among The United States Army The National Park Service The Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities and The City of Virginia Beach Whereas, federal agencies are required through Section 106 and 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) to preserve and maintain historic properties to standards set forth by the Secretary of Interior. Whereas, the Secretary of the Interior determined in April 2003 that the historic district within the Fort Story Installation is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Whereas, the United States Army, the National Park Service (NPS) and the Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities (APVA) manage historic properties within the Fort Story Historic District. Whereas, Executive Order 13287 (Sec. 2), invites public and private entities to play a part in historic preservation processes and to form appropriate partnerships on federal properties to promote local economic development and vitality. Whereas, the APVA and the City of Virginia Beach have expressed interest in participating in the development and preservation of an interpretative area within the Fort Story Historic District for the upcoming Virginia Beach 2007 celebration. Whereas, the National Historic Light House Preservation Act of 2000 (NHLHPA) facilitates the transfer of light towers and associated complexes to private entities. Whereas, the APVA has agreed to assume control of the newer U.S. Coast Guard light tower and attendant structural complex and will use proceeds from tourism to maintain the structures to Department of Interior standards. Whereas, development of a controlled access interpretive area will greatly reduce security concerns on the Installation. Now, therefore, the aforementioned parties agree to develop a preservation and development plan for an interpretive area within the historic district in accordance with Section 106 and 110 of the NHPA and shall be administered with the following stipulations. I. The U.S. Army shall ensure, as the lead agency, that the Virginia Department of Historic Resources (VDHR) is consulted prior to all undertakings. All participating entities will be furnished copies of all correspondence between the VDHR and the U.S. Army. II. All participating entities will meet quarterly to discuss funding avenues and develop the historic interpretative area plan. III. The Fort Story Garrison Commander will approve all undertakings prior to implementation. IV. Historic interpretation will be the collective responsibility of all parties herein. The Installation is in the process of developing an Integrated Cultural Resources Management Plan (ICRMP). This plan will identify and define all historic landscapes within the Installation boundary and will serve as the foundation for historic interpretation. Date: Garrison Commander, Fort Story Date: National Park Service Date: APVA Date: City of Virginia Beach I RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO 2 ENTER INTO A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 3 WITH THE UNITED STATES ARMY, THE NATIONAL PARK 4 SERVICE AND THE ASSOCIATION FOR THE 5 PRESERVATION OF VIRGINIA ANTIQUITIES TO 6 PARTICIPATE IN THE PLANNING OF A PRERERVATION 7 AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR AN INTERPRETIVE AREA 8 IN THE FORT STORY HISTORIC DISTRICT AT CAPE 9 HENRY 10 WHEREAS, the Cape Henry area of Virginia Beach is historically significant on local, 11 state and national levels, as it contains the likely landing site of the first permanent English 12 colonists in April 1607, is the site of the first federal public works project, and was witness to the 13 Battle Off the Capes in 1781, the decisive naval engagement of the American Revolution; 14 WHEREAS, in December 2003, City Council adopted a resolution in support of the 15 formation of a Cape Henry National Park and Visitors Center to properly commemorate this 16 historic location; 17 WHEREAS, the principal property owners of the historic site at Cape Henry are the 18 United States Army, the Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities, and the 19 National Park Service; 20 WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach also has a strong vested interest in the area and 21 the historical events that occurred there; 22 WHEREAS, in May 2002, City Council established the Virginia Beach/Jamestown 2007 23 Steering Committee, which has attempted to bring these interested parties together to plan for 24 changes that would enhance the site in preparation for the Jamestown 2007 celebratory events; 25 WHEREAS, the United States Army has agreed to host and coordinate a planning effort 26 that will allow all of the involved parties to consider both the short and long term needs of the 27 Cape Henry historic site; and 28 WHEREAS, a Memorandum of Understanding has been drafted to provide a framework 29 for preservation and development and planning, to which the United States Army, the 30 Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities, the National Park Service, and the City 31 of Virginia Beach would be parties, and which contains no financial obligations on behalf of any 32 of the parties. 33 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 34 VIRIGNIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 35 1. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the attached Memorandum 36 of Understanding with the United Sates Army, the Association for the Preservation of Virginia 37 Antiquities, and the National Park Service. 38 2. That all actions of the City Manager, which are in conformity with the purpose 39 and intent of this Resolution, are hereby approved. 40 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the day of 41 , 2004. APPROVED AS TO CONTENT Museums and Cultural Arts CA9402 H/ords/Army Park RES.doc October 6, 2004 R-1 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY -E City Attorney's Office L. PLANNING — NO ACTION Application of SBA COMMUNICATIONS for a Conditional Use Permit re a communications tower at 2165 Pungo Ferry Road. (sign improperly posted) (DISTRICT 7— PRINCESS ANNE) M. PLANNING Ordinances to AMEND the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) : a. § 102, 1505, 1703 and 1704 by changing the name of the B-4 Resort Commercial District to the `B-4 Mixed Use District" and establishing the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District b. §900, 901, 902, 903, 904, 905 and 906 by setting forth the legislative intent of the B- 4 Mixed Use District and B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District to establish use regulations, dimensional requirements, sign regulations, off-street parking regulations and density restrictions in the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District C. Mixed Use Development Guidelines amendment to the Comprehensive Plan d. §33-114.3 of the City Code pertaining to encroachments by outdoor cafes and other storefront use in the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District 2. Bikeways and Trails: a. Ordinance to AMEND the Comprehensive Plan by the incorporation of the Bikeways and Trails Plan b. REPEAL the Master Bikeways Plan of 1986 c. Resolution to ESTABLISH the BIKEWAYS and TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE 3. Petition for a Variance to § 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires newly created lots meet all the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) for GAIL H. DAVIDSON, to subdivide the property into two (2) single family dwellings at 4946 Lake Lane (DISTRICT 4 — BAYSIDE) 4. Application of TAG ONE, L.L.C. for a MODIFICATION to the Timberlake Land Use Plan to allow automotive service as a permitted use (approved by City Council on September 9, 2003) at 1400 South Independence Boulevard (DISTRICT 2 — KEMPSVILLE) 5. Application of ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH for a MODIFICATION to a Conditional Use Permit re church expansion (approved by City Council on August 13, 1996 and August 11, 1998) at 2208 Princess Anne Road (DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE) 6. Application of MICHAEL D. SIFEN, INC. for a Conditional Use Permit re mini - warehouses at Kempsville Road and Providence Road (DISTRICT 1 — CENTERVILLE) 7. Application of LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES, L.C. for a Change of Zoning District Classification from B-2 Community Business District, A-12 Apartment District, R-2.5, R-10 and R-15 Residential Districts to Conditional R-5D Residential Duplex District, A-12 and A-18 Apartment Districts with a PD-112 Overlay District at Wesleyan Drive, Cypress Point Boulevard and Broad Meadows Boulevard (DISTRICT 4 BAYSIDE) 8. Application of REAL INVESTMENTS ASSOCIATES, L.L.C. for a Chan e o Zoning District Classification from AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional R-15 Residential District with a PD-112 Overlay at the intersection of Bernadotte Street and Seaboard Road (DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE) Map J-20,27 Not to Scale B-4 •D 0 Cr f 8 A - Q' o • cC] 1 8 Y ' 0 0 O O ea' •a � o PSG 13 CDo •- OLD AG-2 o AG-V RD- • 0 WO I� 1i Gpin 2309-57-0736 ZONING HISTORY 1. Conditional Use Permit and Subdivision Variance for Alternative Rural Residential Development — Granted 01 /09/2001 2. Conditional Use Permit (Single Family Dwelling) — Granted 10-14-85 Conditional Use Permit ( Dog Kennel) — Denied 03-14-88 3. Conditional Use Permit (Cemetary) — Granted 04/14/86 Conditional Use Permit (Church Addn) — Granted 10-13-86 _» CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: SBA Communications — Conditional Use Permit for Wireless Communication Tower MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: An Ordinance upon Application of SBA Communications for a Conditional Use Permit for a communications tower on property located at 2165 Pungo Ferry Road. DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE. IN Considerations: This application was indefinitely deferred by the City Council on August 28, 2001. The applicant recently requested that the matter be brought back to the City Council; thus, it was advertised for City Council's October 12 meeting. However, the matter cannot be acted on by the City Council at the October 12 meeting, because the public notice signs were not posted on the property as required by the City Zoning Ordinance. Staff has notified the applicant of the need to post the signs on the property 30 days prior to the meeting at which Council hears the application. This matter will be re -advertised for the November 9, 2004 City Council meeting. ■ Recommendations: Deferral to November 9. ■ Attachments: Location Map Recommended Action: Deferral to November 9. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Departmen City Manager: �--• � aqy''L t�i LL: :lv CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: City of Virginia Beach — Amendments to the City Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan pertaining to the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: a) An Ordinance to amend Sections 102, 1505, 1703 and 1704 of the City Zoning Ordinance by changing the name of the B-4 Resort Commercial District to the "B-4 Mixed Use District" and establishing the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District. b) An Ordinance to amend Sections 203, 900, 901, 902, 903, 904, 905 and 906 of the City Zoning Ordinance by setting forth the legislative intent of the B-4 Mixed Use District and B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District and establishing use regulations, dimensional requirements, sign regulations, off- street parking regulations and density restrictions in the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District. c) Ordinance to adopt the Mixed Use Development Guidelines as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. ■ Considerations: The recently adopted Comprehensive Plan notes that the city has reached the point in its history where mixed -use development must play a critical role in the future growth of the city in order to maintain its overall health: In envisioning the redeveloped city of the future, it is apparent that in the Strategic Growth Areas where high intensity uses critical to our future tax and employment base must go, there frequently exist today lesser intensity uses that do not fully utilize their locational advantage, and so a transition must take place. Often these current uses were well located with respect to the market forces at play when they were instituted, but since then circumstances have changed. Eventually, market forces will cause these uses to relocate to more appropriate sites, often at great profit to the landowner, but this process is often more gradual than is compatible with this plan or are of the type that fail to achieve true potential of a site. The uses involved are often service - related and low intensity commercial uses that are essential elements of a livable community, and so their retention in the community is vital. If the strategic growth areas identified in the plan are to serve their intended City of Virginia Beach — B-4C District Amendments Page 2of3 purpose, then a transition from less intense to more intense land use must occur and the plan must identify suitable sites and areas to which the owners and operators of these uses can willingly and easily relocate. The identification of such available alternative sites will speed the transition process (p. 52). To accomplish this transition from `less intense to more intense land use' within the Strategic Growth Areas identified by the Comprehensive Plan, the Plan suggests several steps as part of an overall strategy, one of which notes that we must develop mixed use as a principal tool for redevelopment and as a preferred land use pattern in the strategic growth areas, and develop necessary zoning and other regulatory tools to encourage it, (p. 52). This attached amendment and design guidance is provided as part of the foundation of the implementation of this recommendation. The amendments accomplish the following: Re-establish the purpose of the B-4 Resort Commercial District, establishing it as a mixed -use district with potential citywide application and renaming it the B-4 Mixed Use District. The B-4 District was originally established as a "resort" district, providing for a mixture of uses that catered primarily to visitors to the Oceanfront and other resort areas within the city. With the establishment of the Resort Tourist zoning districts at the Oceanfront Resort Area and the Shore Drive Corridor Overlay District along the Bayfront Area, the B-4 District's use as a `resort only' district has been curtailed. The B-4 District, however, is one of the only districts provided by the City Zoning Ordinance that provides the opportunity for mixed use development. The 13-3A District provides for mixed use, but its use is limited by the City Zoning Ordinance to a specific geographic area (Town Center). Thus, the B-4 is an ideal candidate for use as the foundation for mixed use zoning within those areas where the Comprehensive Plan recommends mixed use as a redevelopment strategy. 2. Establish a B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District. The first area where the application of a mixed -use district makes the most sense is the area around the Town Center, where for many years the Comprehensive Plan has envisioned mixed use, urban type development. Staff has been approached by a number of property owners and potential developers who have indicated a desire to build on the energy that has been created by the Town Center. Staff concludes that the timing is good to implement the recommendation of the Comprehensive Plan for mixed -use development in the Strategic Growth Area encompassing the Town Center. The attached amendments establish the necessary zoning district for application primarily in the areas around the Town Center that are currently zoned B-3 and provide use and dimensional requirements for City of Virginia Beach — B-4C District Amendments Page 3 of 3 that district. The use and dimensional requirements are very similar to those for the B-3A District but retain some components of the B-4 District. Use of this new zoning district will require property owners and developers to rezone sites to B-4C, providing the Planning Commission and the City Council the opportunity to evaluate and approve any developments that wish to pursue this new opportunity. 3. Establish Mixed Use Development Guidelines. The content of the design guidelines borrows heavily from one of the City's first official guides for mixed -use development, the Laskin Road Gateway Design Guidelines, which encourages such development within the Laskin Road Gateway Overlay District between Beach Garden Park and Pacific Avenue on Laskin Road. It is hoped that the document and its future amendment for other Strategic Growth Areas will give property owners and developers direction in the creation of unique and instrumental places that will transform the City of Virginia Beach as it enters its next phase of growth. In particular, the document should be used as part of the process of evaluating the appropriateness of a request for any mixed -use zoning category as specified by the City Zoning Ordinance, such as the proposed B-4C. The guidance provided in the document is not overly detailed, as it is intended to give an overall framework regarding the fundamentals of mixed -use development while providing designers and developers an appropriate level of flexibility, encouraging creativity in responding to the opportunities presented by each site. The Planning Commission placed these amendments on the consent agenda because the amendments implement the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan, staff recommended approval, and there was no opposition. ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a vote of 9-0 with one abstention to recommend approval of the amendments to the City Council. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Ordinances Mixed Use Development Guidelines Planning Commission Minutes Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manage . gyllZ CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH �= B-4C MIXED USE DISTRICT -- Agenda Items #20, 21, & 22 September 8, 2004 Public Hearing The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. 20. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH An Ordinance to amend Sections 102, 1505, 1703 and 1704 of the City Zoning Ordinance by changing the name of the B-4 Resort Commercial District to the "B-4 Mixed Use District" and establishing the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District. 21. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH An Ordinance to amend Sections 900, 901, 902, 903, 904, 905 and 906 of the City Zoning Ordinance by setting forth the legislative intent of the B-4 Mixed Use District and B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District and establishing use regulations, dimensional requirements, sign regulations, off-street parking regulations and density restrictions in the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District. 22. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH Ordinance to adopt the Mixed Use Development Guidelines as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. The recently adopted Comprehensive Plan notes that the city has reached the point in its history where mixed -use development must play a critical role in the future growth of the city in order to maintain its overall health: In envisioning the redeveloped city of the future, it is apparent that in the Strategic Growth Areas where high intensity uses critical to our future tax and employment base must go, there frequently exist today lesser intensity uses that CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH Agenda Items # 20, 21, & 22 Page 1 do not fully utilize their locational advantage, and so a transition must take place. Often these current uses were well located with respect to the market forces at play when they were instituted, but since then circumstances have changed. Eventually, market forces will cause these uses to relocate to more appropriate sites, often at great profit to the landowner, but this process is often more gradual than is compatible with this plan or are of the type that fail to achieve true potential of a site. The uses involved are often service -related and low intensity commercial uses that are essential elements of a livable community, and so their retention in the community is vital. If the strategic growth areas identified in the plan are to serve their intended purpose, then a transition from less intense to more intense land use must occur and the plan must identify suitable sites and areas to which the owners and operators of these uses can willingly and easily relocate. The identification of such available alternative sites will speed the transition process (p. 52). To accomplish this transition from `less intense to more intense land use' within the Strategic Growth Areas identified by the Comprehensive Plan, the Plan suggests several steps as part of an overall strategy, one of which notes that we must develop mixed use as a principal tool for redevelopment and as a preferred land use pattern in the strategic growth areas, and develop necessary zoning and other regulatory tools to encourage it, (p. 52). This attached amendment and design guidance is provided as part of the foundation of the implementation of this recommendation. The amendments accomplish the following: 1. Re-establish the purpose of the B-4 Resort Commercial District, establishing it as a mixed -use district with potential citywide application and renaming it the B-4 Mixed Use District. The B-4 District was originally established as a "resort" district, providing for a mixture of uses that catered primarily to visitors to the Oceanfront and other resort areas within the city. With the establishment of the Resort Tourist zoning districts at the Oceanfront Resort Area and the Shore Drive Corridor Overlay District along the Bayfront Area, the B-4 District's use as a `resort only' district has been curtailed. The B-4 District, however, is one of the only districts provided by the City Zoning Ordinance that provides the opportunity for mixed use development. The B-3A District provides for mixed use, but its use is limited by the City Zoning Ordinance to a specific geographic area (Town Center). Thus, the B-4 is an ideal candidate for use as the foundation for mixed use zoning within those areas where the Comprehensive Plan recommends mixed use as a redevelopment strategy. 2. Establish a B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District. The first area where the application of a mixed -use district makes the most sense is the area around CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH Agenda Items # 20, 21, &-22 Page 2 the Town Center, where for many years the Comprehensive Plan has envisioned mixed use, urban type development. Staff has been approached by a number of property owners and potential developers who have indicated a desire to build on the energy that has been created by the Town Center. Staff concludes that the timing is good to implement the recommendation of the Comprehensive Plan for mixed -use development in the Strategic Growth Area encompassing the Town Center. The attached amendments establish the necessary zoning district for application primarily in the areas around the Town Center that are currently zoned B-3 and provide use and dimensional requirements for that district. The use and dimensional requirements are very similar to those for the B-3A District but retain some components of the B-4 District. Use of this new zoning district will require property owners and developers to rezone sites to B-4C, providing the Planning Commission and the City Council the opportunity to evaluate and approve any developments that wish to pursue this new opportunity. 3. Establish Mixed Use Development Guidelines. The content of the design guidelines borrows heavily from one of the City's first official guides for mixed - use development, the Laskin Road Gateway Design Guidelines, which encourages such development within the Laskin Road Gateway Overlay District between Beach Garden Park and Pacific Avenue on Laskin Road. It is hoped that the document and its future amendment for other Strategic Growth Areas will give property owners and developers direction in the creation of unique and instrumental places that will transform the City of Virginia Beach as it enters its next phase of growth. In particular, the document should be used as part of the process of evaluating the appropriateness of a request for any mixed -use zoning category as specified by the City Zoning Ordinance, such as the proposed B-4C. The guidance provided in the document is not overly detailed, as it is intended to give an overall framework regarding the fundamentals of mixed -use development while providing designers and developers an appropriate level of flexibility, encouraging creativity in responding to the opportunities presented by each site. ^Staff Evaluation Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments to the City Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH Agenda Items # 20, 21, & 22 Page 3 1 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY ZONING 2 ORDINANCE BY CHANGING THE NAME OF THE 3 B-4 RESORT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO THE 4 %%B-4 MIXED USE DISTRICT" AND 5 ESTABLISHING THE B-4C CENTRAL BUSINESS 6 MIXED USE DISTRICT 7 8 9 Sections Amended: City Zoning Ordinance 10 Sections 102, 1505, 1703 and 1704 11 12 13 WHEREAS, the public necessity, convenience, general 14 welfare and good zoning practice so require; 15 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE 16 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 17 That Sections 102, 1505, 1703 and 1704 of the City 18 Zoning Ordinance are hereby amended and reordained to read as 19 follows: 20 Sec. 102. Establishment of districts and official zoning maps. 21 (a) In order to carry out the purposes and provisions of 22 this ordinance, the following districts are hereby established 23 and are hereby listed in order from most restrictive to least 24 restrictive: 25 . . . . 26 (7) Business Districts. Business Districts shall 27 consist of: 28 B-1 Neighborhood Business District 29 B-lA Limited Community Business District 30 B-2 Community Business District 31 B-3 Central Business District 32 B-3A Pembroke Central Business Core District 33 B-4 T eser:� Ems= Mixed Use District 34 B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District 35 . . . . 36 37 (al) In addition to the districts enumerated in 38 subsection (a), there is hereby established the Shore Drive 39 Corridor Overlay District. Such district shall be designated on 40 the official zoning map by the notation "(SD)" following the 41 designation of the underlying zoning district. As an 42 illustration, property in the Shore Drive Corridor Overlay 43 District and in the B-4 Pesert GeRc neL=e- ,1 Mixed Use District 44 shall be designated on the official zoning map as having the 45 classification "B-4(SD)." 46 . . . . 47 COMMENT: 48 The amendments: 49 50 (1) Rename the existing B-4 Resort Commercial District to `B-4 Mixed Use 51 District," as the latter nomenclature is more consistent with the B-4 District's 52 current use and purpose; and 53 54 (2) Establish the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District. 55 56 2 57 ARTICLE 15. RESORT TOURIST DISTRICTS 58 59 A. RT-1 RESORT TOURIST DISTRICT 60 . . . 61 62 Sec. 1505. Off -site parking facilities. 63 Off -site parking facilities in connection with hotels and 64 motels located within the RT-1 Resort Tourist District may be 65 permitted on zoning lots within the RT-2 Resort Tourist 66 District, RT-3 Resort Tourist District and the B-4 ReseL=:� 67 '`.,...,ae:e .; al Mixed Use District where the required off-street 68 parking cannot be provided on the lot with the principal 69 building or use provided: 70 (a) Structures for parking facilities shall conform to the 71 regulations of the district in which located. 72 (b) A written agreement assuring continued availability of 73 the number of spaces indicated shall be drawn and executed, and 74 a certified copy of such agreement shall be recorded with the 75 clerk of the court. Such agreement shall stipulate that, if such 76 space is not maintained or space acceptable to the planning 77 director substituted, the use or such portion of the use as is 78 deficient in number of parking spaces shall be discontinued. The 79 agreement shall be subject to the approval of the city attorney. 80 . . . . 3 81 COMMENT 82 83 The amendment reflects the renaming of the B-4 Resort Commercial District to "13-4 Mixed 84 Use District." No substantive change is made. 85 86 . . . . 87 88 ARTICLE 17. THE SHORE DRIVE CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT 89 90 . . . . 91 92 Sec. 1703. Use regulations. 93 (a) Principal uses. Subject to general requirements and to 94 the regulations of the underlying zoning district, all uses and 95 structures permitted as principal uses in the underlying zoning 96 district in which they are located shall be permitted as 97 principal uses within the Shore Drive Corridor Overlay District, 98 except the following: 99 (1) Hotels and motels in the B-4 (SD) ReselFr 100 GeFE Rere -,' Mixed Use District; 101 (2) Multiple -family dwellings in the B-4 (SD) Re_en 102 aria-1 Mixed Use District; 103 (3) Attached dwellings in the B-4 (SD) Reserz 104 r _ _ ereial Mixed Use District; 105 (4) Boat sales in the B-4 (SD) Resert ,-....,,.,.reia-l- 106 Mixed Use or B-2(SD) Community Business Districts; and V 107 (5) Commercial parking lots, parking garages and 108 storage garages located in the B-4 ( SD) Rose r} ,-e ffa:ftere - ' Mixed 109 Use or B-2(SD) Community Business Districts. 110 In addition, the following uses shall be permitted within 111 the Shore Drive Corridor Overlay District, although not 112 allowed as principal uses in the underlying zoning district: 113 (1) Duplex dwellings in the B-4 (SD) Rese 114 re""TMer^ ,' Mixed Use Districts. 115 (b) Accessory uses. Subject to general requirements and 116 to the regulations of the underlying zoning district, all uses 117 and structures permitted as accessory uses in the underlying 118 zoning district in which they are located shall be permitted 119 as accessory uses within the Shore Drive Corridor Overlay 120 District. 121 (c) Conditional uses. Subject to general requirements 122 and to the regulations of the underlying zoning district, all 123 uses and structures permitted as conditional uses in the 124 underlying zoning district in which they are located shall be 125 permitted as conditional uses within the Shore Drive Corridor 126 Overlay District, as well as the following uses and 127 structures: 128 (1) Hotels and motels in the B-4 ( SD) Reno - la Ge ffh ; a' 129 Mixed Use District; 61 130 (2) Multiple -family dwellings in the B-4 (SD) der 131 r,.mTMere; ,' Mixed Use District; 132 (3) Attached dwellings in the B-4 (SD) BeseiFt ---- - 133 Mixed Use District; 134 ( 4 ) Boat sales in the B-4 ( SD) Resert rem er-eia Mixed Use 135 or B-2(SD) Community Business Districts; and 136 (5) Commercial parking lots, parking garages and storage 137 garages located in the B-4 (SD) Resoa} GeRif eVe;,' 138 Mixed Use or B-2(SD) Community Business Districts. 139 (d) Additions to single-family dwellings, duplexes, 140 attached dwellings and multiple -family dwellings not increasing 141 the number of dwelling units in any such use shall be permitted 142 as a matter of right, provided that all other requirements of 143 this ordinance are met. Where setbacks or other dimensional 144 requirements pertaining to such additions are not specified in 145 the regulations of the underlying zoning district, such 146 requirements shall be as specified in the A-18 Apartment 147 District. 148 COMMENT 149 150 The amendments reflect the renaming of the B-4 Resort Commercial District to "13-4 Mixed 151 Use District." No substantive change is made. 152 153 154 155 156 157 Sec. 1704. Dimensional and other requirements; density; 158 landscape screening and buffering. 159 Subject to the provisions of Section 1703 of this 160 ordinance, dimensional and other requirements for uses and 161 structures located within the Shore Drive Corridor Overlay 162 District shall be as specified in the underlying zoning 163 district; provided, however, that: 164 (a) The density of multiple -family dwellings shall not 165 exceed: 166 (1) Eighteen (18) units per acre or the maximum density 167 permitted by the regulations of the underlying 168 zoning district, whichever is the lesser, on 169 zoning lots having a lot area of thirty thousand 170 (30,000)square feet or less; 171 (2) Twenty-four (24) units per acre or the maximum 172 density permitted by the regulations of the 173 underlying zoning district, whichever is the 174 lesser, on zoning lots having a lot area greater 175 than thirty thousand (30,000) square feet and 176 less than four(4)acres; or 177 (3) Thirty-six (36) units per acre or the maximum 178 density permitted by the regulations of the 179 underlying zoning district, whichever is the 0 180 lesser, on zoning lots having a lot area 181 four(4)acres or more. 182 (b) Where a zoning lot within the B-2(SD) or B-4 (SD) 183 district adjoins any district in which single-family dwellings, 184 duplexes, attached dwellings or multiple -family dwellings are 185 permitted as a conditional or principal use, without an 186 intervening street, alley or body of water over twenty- 187 five(25)feet in width, a fifteen -foot minimum yard shall be 188 required along all lot lines adjoining such district. Category 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 IV landscape screening shall be required, and no other uses or structures shall be permitted, within the yard. (c) The following chart lists the requirements within the B-4 Resew} Mixed Use District (Shore Drive Corridor Overlay District) for minimum lot area, width, yard spacing and maximum lot coverage for duplex dwellings. For duplex dwellings in the 2-4(SD) ReseE} ' eFE:ff eEe ^_ Mixed Use (Shore Drive Corridor Overlay District): (1) Minimum lot area (2) Minimum lot width (3) Minimum front yard (4) Minimum front yard setback when adjacent to a 40-foot right-of-way created in accordance with section 4.1(m) of the subdivision ordinance (5) Minimum side yard Duplexes 10,000 square feet 75 feet 20 feet 25 feet 10 feet 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 Duplexes (6) Minimum side yard setback when adjacent to a street 15 feet (7) Minimum side yard setback when adjacent to a 40-foot right-of-way created in accordance with section 4.1(m) of the subdivision ordinance 20 feet (8) Minimum rear yard 20 feet (9) As an exception, the setback for any yard adjacent to the Chesapeake Bay for any structures shall be 30 feet in the B-4 (SD) District (10) Maximum lot coverage 35 percent (11) Maximum total of building floor area and area of garages greater than 1,000 square feet expressed as a percentage of maximum allowable lot coverage 200 percent (12) Maximum area of impervious,cover, as defined in 103 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance, expressed as a percentage of lot size 60 percent COMMENT The amendments reflect the renaming of the B-4 Resort Commercial District to `B-4 Mixed Use District." No substantive change is made. Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the day of CA-9363 OID/ordres/B-4C establish ordin.doc R-1 August 27, 2004 I 2004. 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ' I Department APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: )- City-ttorney's Office 10 1 AN. ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY ZONING 2 ORDINANCE BY SETTING FORTH THE LEGISLATIVE 3 INTENT OF THE B-4 MIXED USE DISTRICT AND B- 4 4C CENTRAL BUSINESS MIXED USE DISTRICT AND 5 ESTABLISHING USE REGULATIONS, DIMENSIONAL 6 REQUIREMENTS, SIGN REGULATIONS, OFF-STREET 7 PARKING REGULATIONS AND DENSITY 8 RESTRICTIONS IN THE B-4C CENTRAL BUSINESS 9 MIXED USE DISTRICT 10 11 Sections Amended: City Zoning Ordinance 12 Sections 203, 900, 901, 902, 903, 904, 905 13 and 906 14 15 16 WHEREAS, the public necessity, convenience, general welfare 17 and good zoning practice so require; 18 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIGINIA 19 BEACH, VIRGINIA, VIRGINIA: 20 That Sections 203, 900, 901, 902, 903, 904, 905 and 906 21 of the City Code are hereby amended and reordained to read as 22 follows: 23 ARTICLE 2. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES 24 APPLICABLE TO ALL DISTRICTS 25 26 A. REGULATIONS RELATING TO LOTS, YARDS, HEIGHTS, 27 OFF-STREET PARKING AND OFF-STREET LOADING 28 29 . . . . 30 31 Sec. 203. Off-street parking requirements. 32 33 . . . . 34 35 (g) Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this 36 section, within the B-3A Pembroke Central Business Core District 37 and B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District, there shall be 38 provided for nonresidential uses, except hotels and uses 39 accessory to hotels, no fewer than three (3) spaces per one 40 thousand (1,000) square feet of gross floor area, and for 41 residential uses no fewer than one and seven -tenths (1.7) spaces 42 per dwelling unit. Parking requirements for hotels and uses 43 accessory to hotels shall be as specified in subsection (a). 44 (h) Notwithstanding anything in this ordinance to the 45 contrary, required off - street parking for any use located on 46 property within the B-3A Pembroke Central Business Core District 47 or B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District may be made 48 available for use by the general public as well as by the 49 customers or patrons of such% use. The required number and 50 dimensions of parking spaces shall be as specified in this 51 section, and no parking space shall be used to satisfy the 52 parking requirement of more than one (1) establishment. 53 (i) Parking requirements for uses within the B-3A Pembroke 54 Central Business Core District or B-4C Central Business Mixed 55 Use District may be satisfied by any one, or a combination of, 56 the following: 57 (1) On -site parking; 58 (2) Off -site parking facilities, as set forth in Section 59 901 of this ordinance; or 60 (3) Public parking, if the Planning Director determines 61 (i) that there is at least a sufficient number of 2 62 public parking spaces located within the same 63 development phase of the B-3A District or B-4C 64 District as the proposed use to meet public parking 65 demands; (ii) that such public parking spaces are not 66 used to satisfy the parking requirements of any other 67 use, and (iii) that the use of such public parking 68 spaces to satisfy the parking requirements of the 69 proposed use, either wholly or partially, is warranted 70 in light of the following considerations: 71 A. The extent to which the proposed use advances the 72 goals and objectives of the B-3A Pembroke Central 73 Business Core District or B-4C Central Business 74 Mixed Use District, as the case may be, as stated 75 in Section 900 of the City Zoning Ordinance; 76 B. The extent to which the proposed use conforms to 77 the Urban Design Plan component of the Virginia 78 Beach Central Business District Master Plan if 79 such proposed use is within the B-3A Pembroke 80 Central Business Core District or, if the 81 proposed use is within the B-4C Central Business 82 Mixed Use District, the extent to which it 83 conforms to the Mixed Use Development Guidelines; 84 and 3 85 C. The amount of the projected tax revenue to be 86 generated by the proposed use and improvements. 87 For purposes of this section, the term "parking 88 requirements" shall mean the number of off-street vehicular 89 parking spaces required by this section. 90 COMMENT 91 92 The amendments set forth the parking requirements applicable to the B4C District. In 93 particular, the amendments allow the use of public parking facilities to comply with off-street 94 parking requirements in the B-4C District (as is presently allowed in the B-3A District). In 95 order to qualify for using public parking to meet off-street parking requirements, a use must 96 meet the same standards as are currently in place in the B-3A District (Lines 72-87). 97 98 99 ARTICLE 9. BUSINESS DISTRICTS 100 101 Sec. 900. Legislative intent. 102 103 The purpose of the B-1 Neighborhood Business District is to 104 provide areas where a limited range of business establishments 105 can be located near or adjacent to residential development 106 without adversely impacting the adjacent residential area. The 107 purpose of the B-lA Limited Community Business District is to 108 provide areas where limited commercial development can be 109 dispersed to support the needs of nearby residential 110 neighborhoods. The purpose of the B-2 Community Business 111 District is to provide land needed for community -wide business 112 establishments. This district is intended for general 113 application in the city. It is intended that, by the creation of 114 this district, business uses will be geographically 4 115 concentrated. The purpose of the 13-3 Central Business District 116 is to set apart that portion of the city which forms the 117 metropolitan center for financial, commercial, professional and 118 cultural activities, including business, professional and 119 cultural development in a manner that complements the B-3A 120 Pembroke Central Business Core District and the policies 121 identified in the City of Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan. It 122 is intended that any uses likely to create friction with these 123 proposed types of activities will be discouraged. This district 124 is not intended for general application throughout the city. The 125 purpose of the B-3A Pembroke Central Business Core District is 126 to optimize development potential for a mixed -use, pedestrian- 127 oriented, urban activity center with mid- to high-rise 128 structures that contain numerous types of uses, including 129 business, retail, residential, cultural, educational and other 130 public and private uses. The B-3A district is intended to 131 comprise publicly accessible community open space areas, 132 generally reflective of the concepts identified in the city's 133 Comprehensive Plan and the Pembroke Central Business District 134 Master Plan. Requests for rezonings to the B-3A Pembroke Central 135 Business Core District shall be limited within the area bound by 136 Independence Boulevard, Jeanne Street, Constitution Drive and 137 the Norfolk -Southern Railroad right-of-way. As to those 136 buildings and structures rendered nonconforming by a rezoning to 5 139 B-3A, it is the intent of the City Council to encourage their 140 appropriate expansion or renovation by resolution, as set forth 141 in section 105, in order to effectuate the intent of this 142 section. This district is not intended for general application 143 throughout the city. The purpose of the B-4 ReseL-f= G emmeTeica= 144 Mixed Use District is to provide for retail and commercial 145 service facilities and residential uses te— serve -the needs-ef 146 :,Q- i 9��in those areas of the city where a mixture of such uses 147 is desirable and recommended by the policies of the 148 Comprehensive Plan. te—emisting—Eese :6 a eas--and r-es-ides 149 living n—er adjaeette sueh areas- it is net the intentTe 151 The purpose of the B-4C Central Business 152 Mixed Use District is to provide an area that complements the B- 153 3A Pembroke Central Business Core District through quality mixed 154 use development at intensities and patterns that support 155 multiple modes of transportation, higher residential densities, 156 and an integrated mix of residential and non-residential uses 157 within the same building or on the same lot. Requests for 158 rezonings to the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District shall 159 be limited to the area surrounding the B-3A Pembroke Central 160 Business Core District and generally bounded by Thalia Creek on 161 the east, Interstate 264 on the south, Aracgona Boulevard on the 162 west, and Jeanne Street and Broad Street on the north. 21 163 Development within the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District 164 should adhere to the Comprehensive Plan's Mixed Use Development 165 Guidelines. 166 COMMENT: 167 168 The amendments modify the purpose of the B4 Mixed Use District so as to be consistent 169 with the District's existing and future usage. The amendments also establish the purpose of the new 170 B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District and note that it is only to be applied in the area around 171 the existing B-3A District (Town Center). 172 173 174 Sec. 901. Use regulations. 175 (a) Principal and conditional uses. The following chart 176 lists those uses permitted within the B-1 through B-4 Business 177 Districts. Those uses and structures in the respective business 178 districts shall be permitted as either principal uses indicated 179 by a "P" or as conditional uses indicated by a "C." Uses and 180 structures indicated by an "X" shall be prohibited in the 181 respective districts. No uses or structures other than as 182 specified shall be permitted. 183 184 185 Use B-1 B-lA B-2 B-3 B-3A B-4 B-4C 186 Animal hospitals, 187 veterinary estab- 188 lishments, pounds, 189 shelters, commercial 190 kennels, provided all 191 animals shall be kept in 192 soundproofed, air- 193 conditioned buildings P P P P P P P 194 195 Antennas, building 196 -mounted X X P P P P P 7 197 Auditoriums, assembly 198 halls, and union halls X 199 Automobile repair garages 200 and small engine repair 201 establishments, provided 202 that all repair work shall 203 be performed within a 204 building X 205 Automobile repair 206 establishments dealing 207 exclusively in minor 208 repairs of the type 209 provided at automobile 210 service stations X 211 Automobile service 212 stations; provided that, 213 where there is an 214 adjoining residential or 215 apartment district without 216 an intervening street, 217 alley or permanent open 218 space over twenty-five 219 (25) feet in width and 220 where lots separated by a 221 district boundary have 222 adjacent front yards, 223 Category VI screening 224 shall separate the 225 automobile service station 226 use from the adjacent 227 residential district or 228 apartment district and no 229 ground sign shall be 230 within fifty (50) feet of 231 the residential district 232 or apartment district X 233 Bakeries,confectioneries 234 and delicatessens, 235 provided that products 236 prepared or processed on 237 the premises shall besold 238 only at retail and only on 239 the premises P C X X X 0 R5 C C X No X Ce C Is; X X M 0 Me C C W X X X 0 0 240 Use B-1 B-lA B-2 B-3 B-3A 13-4 B-4C 241 Bed and breakfast inns X X X X X C X 242 Beverage manufacturing 243 shops, which shall not 244 exceed three thousand 245 (3,000) square feet in 246 floor area X X P P X P P 247 Bicycle and moped rental 248 establishments X X X X X C X 249 Bingo halls X X C X X C X 250 Boat sales X X P X X P X 251 Body piercing 252 establishments X X C X X X X 253 Borrow pits X X C X X X X 254 Bulk storage yards and 255 building contractors 256 yards; provided that no 257 sale or processing of 258 scrap, salvage or 259 secondhand material shall 260 be permitted in such 261 yards; and, provided 262 further that such storage 263 yards shall be completely 264 enclosed except for 265 necessary openings in 266 ingress and egress by a 267 fence or wall not less 268 than six (6) feet in 269 height X X C X X X X 270 Business and vocational 271 schools which do not 272 involve the operation of 273 woodwork shops, machine 274 shops or other similar 275 facilities X C C C C C C 276 Business studios, offices 277 and clinics P P P P P P P 9 278 Use B-1 B-lA B-2 B-3 B-3A B-4 B-4C 279 Car wash facilities, 280 provided that: (i) no 281 water produced by 282 activities on the zoning 283 lot shall be permitted to 284 fall upon or drain across 285 public streets or 286 sidewalks or adjacent 287 properties; (ii) a minimum 288 of three (3) off-street 289 parking spaces for 290 automobiles shall be 291 provided for each car wash 292 space within the facility 293 X X C C C C X 294 Child care and child care 295 education centers C C P P P P P 296 Churches X C C C C C C 297 Colleges and universities, 298 public or private X C C C C C C 299 Commercial parking lots, 300 parking garages, parking 301 structures and storage 302 garages X X P P P P P 303 Commercial parking gar- 304 ages and storage garages 305 which include car wash, 306 car rental or car 307 detailing services when 308 wholly enclosed within a 309 parking structure and 310 accessory thereto X X C C P C P 311 Commercial recreation 312 facilities other than 313 those of an outdoor nature 314 X X C C C P C 315 Dormitories for marine 316 pilots X X X X X C X 10 317 Use B-1 B-lA B-2 B-3 B-3A B-4 B-4C 318 Drugstores, beauty shops 319 and barbershops and other 320 similar personal service 321 establishments P P P P P P P 322 Dwellings, Attached X X X X X P X 323 Dwellings, Multi -family X X X X C P C 324 Eating and drinking 325 establishments without 326 drive -through windows, 327 when not freestanding and 328 incorporated inside a 329 mixed use building, except 330 as otherwise specified in 331 this section X X X X P X P 332 Eating and drinking 333 establishments with drive- 334 through windows, except as 335 specified below X X P P X P X 336 Eating and drinking 337 establishments without 338 drive -through windows, 339 except as specified below 340 P P P P X P X 341 Eating and drinking 342 establishments where all 343 three of the following 344 occur: 345 1. Alcoholic beverages are 346 served; 347 2. The establishment is 348 located within five 349 hundred (500) feet of a 350 residential or apartment 351 district; 352 3. The establishment 353 excludes persons on the 354 basis of age during any 11 355 Use B-I B-IA B-2 B-3 B-3A B-4 B-4C 356 part of the day, or 357 provides entertainment, 358 audible from an adjoining 359 property. X X C C C C C 360 Fiber -optics transmission 361 facilities X C C C C X C 362 Financial institutions P P P P P P P 363 Flea markets X X C C C C C 364 Florists, gift shops and 365 stationery stores P P P P P P P 366 Funeral homes X P P P X P X 367 Furniture repair and 368 upholstering, repair 369 services for radio and 370 television and household 371 appliances other than 372 those with gasoline 373 engines; carpet and 374 linoleum laying; the 375 setting, sign shops and 376 other small service 377 businesses X P P P X P X 378 Greenhouses and plant 379 nurseries X P P X X P X 380 Grocery stores, carry -out 381 food stores and 382 convenience stores all 383 being both freestanding 384 and in a structure with a 385 gross floor area of less 386 than five thousand (5,000) 387 square feet C C P P X P X 388 Grocery stores, carry -out 389 food stores and 390 convenience stores whether 391 or not freestanding, but 12 392 Use B-1 B-lA B-2 B-3 B-3A B-4 B-4C 393 in a structure of a gross 394 floor area of not less 395 than five thousand (5,000) 396 square feet X X P P C P C 397 Grocery stores, carry -out 398 food stores and 399 convenience stores any of 400 which are not freestanding 401 but in a structure with a 402 gross floor area of less 403 than five thousand (5,000) 404 square feet P P P P C P C 405 Heliports and helistops X X C C C C C 406 Home occupations X X X X C C C 407 Housing for seniors and 408 disabled persons or 409 handicapped, including 410 convalescent or nursing; 411 maternity homes; child 412 care centers other than 413 covered under permitted 414 principal uses 415 hereinabove, provided that 416 the maximum height shall 417 not exceed one hundred and 418 sixty-five (165) feet; 419 provided, however, that no 420 structure shall exceed the 421 height limit established 422 by section 202(b) 423 regarding air navigation C C X X C C C 424 Hospitals and sanitariums 425 X X C C C C C 426 Hotels and motels X X X P P P P 427 Hotels and motels with 428 increased lodging unit 429 density and height, 430 provided that the maximum 13 431 Use B-1 B-lA B-2 B-3 B-3A B-4 B-4C 432 density shall be one 433 hundred and twenty (120) 434 lodging units per acre, 435 the minimum lot area shall 436 be one acre and the 437 maximum height shall be 438 one hundred (100) feet; 439 notwithstanding the above, 440 no structure shall exceed 441 the height limit 442 established by section 443 202 (b) regarding air 444 navigation X X X X X C X 445 Laboratories and 446 establishments for the 447 production and repair of 448 eye glasses, hearing aids 449 and prosthetic devices X X P P P P P 450 Laundry and dry cleaning 451 agencies P P P P P P P 452 Liquor stores, package 453 only P P P P P P P 454 Marinas, commercial X X C C X C X 455 Medical and dental offices 456 and clinics P P P P P P P 457 Medical laboratories X X P P P P P 458 Mini -warehouses X C C C X C X 459 Mobile home sales X X C X X X X 460 Motor vehicle sales and 461 rental, provided the 462 minimum lot size is twenty 463 thousand (20,000) square 464 feet; and provided 465 further, that truck and 466 trailer rentals shall 467 comply with the provisions 468 of section 242.2 X X C C X C X 14 469 Use B-1 B-lA B-2 B-3 B-3A B-4 B-4C 470 Motor vehicle sales and 471 rental, provided such use 472 is wholly enclosed within 473 a building, and further 474 provided that no outdoor 475 use accessory to or in 476 conjunction with the 477 principal use shall be 478 allowed X X X X P X P 479 Museums and art galleries C P P P P P P 480 Newspaper printing and 481 publishing, job and 482 commercial printing X P P P P P P 483 Off -site parking 484 facilities for any use 485 within the B-3, er- B-3Aor 486 B-4C Districts may be 487 permitted on any zoning 488 lot within ether any of 489 those twe (2) three (3) 490 districts, provided all of 491 the following requirements 492 are met: (a) Structures 493 for parking facilities 494 shall conform to the 495 regulations of the 496 district in which located; 497 (b) Off -site parking 498 facilities shall be 499 located within one 500 thousand, five hundred 501 (1,500) feet from the use 502 they are intended to 503 serve, but in no case 504 shall any such facility be 505 located opposite Virginia 506 Beach Boulevard and 507 Independence Boulevard 508 unless grade -separated 509 pedestrian access is 510 provided; (c) Off -site 511 parking structures serving 15 512 Use B-1 B-lA B-2 B-3 B-3A B-4 B-4C 513 uses within the B-3A 514 District shall not be 515 separated by Independence 516 Boulevard; (d) A written 517 agreement assuring 518 continued availability of 519 the number of spaces 520 indicated shall be drawn 521 and executed, and a 522 certified copy of such 523 agreement shall be 524 recorded with the clerk of 525 the court. Such agreement 526 shall stipulate that, if 527 such space is not 528 maintained or space 529 acceptable to the 530 planning director 531 substituted, the use or 532 such portion of the use as 533 is deficient in number of 534 parking spaces shall be 535 discontinued. The 536 agreement shall be subject 537 to the approval of the 538 city attorney X X X P P X P 539 Outdoor cafes P P P P P P P 540 Outdoor plazas P P P P P P P 541 Passenger transportation 542 terminals X X C C C C C 543 Passenger vessels 544 permitted by U.S. Coast 545 Guard regulations to carry 546 more than one hundred 547 forty-nine (149) 548 passengers and used for 549 commercial purposes X X C X X C X 550 Personal service 551 establishments, other than 552 those listed separately P P P P P P P 16 553 Use B-1 B-lA B-2 B-3 B-3A B-4 B-4C 554 Personal watercraft 555 rentals X C C C X C X 556 Private clubs, lodges, 557 social centers, 558 eleemosynary 559 establishments and 560 athletic clubs P P P P P P P 561 Public buildings and 562 grounds P P P P P P P 563 Public utilities 564 installations and 565 substations provided 566 storage and maintenance 567 facilities shall not be 568 permitted; and provided 569 further that utilities 570 substations, other than 571 individual transformers, 572 shall be surrounded by 573 Category IV screening 574 solid except for entrances 575 and exits; and provided 576 also, transformer vaults 577 for underground utilities 578 and the like shall require 579 only Category I screening, 580 solid except for access 581 openings P P P P P P P 582 Public utilities offices X X P P P P P 583 Public utility storage or 584 maintenance installations X X C C X C X 585 Radio and television 586 broadcasting stations and 587 line -of -sight relay 588 devices X C C C C C C 589 Recreational and amusement 590 facilities of an outdoor 591 nature, which may be 592 partially or temporarily 17 593 Use B-1 B-IA B-2 B-3 B-3A B-4 B-4C 594 enclosed on a seasonal 595 basis with approval of 596 city council; provided 597 that, in the development 598 of such properties, 599 safeguards are provided to 600 preserve and protect the 601 existing character of 602 adjacent properties, 603 except that riding 604 academies and recreational 605 campgrounds shall not be 606 allowed as a conditional 607 use or otherwise X C C C C C C 608 Repair and sales for radio 609 and television and other 610 household appliances and 611 small business machines P P P P P P P 612 Retail establishments, 613 other than those listed 614 separately, including the 615 incidental manufacturing 616 of goods for sale only at 617 retail on the premises; 618 retail sales and display 619 rooms and lots, provided 620 that yards for storage of 621 new or used building 622 materials or yards for any 623 scrap or salvage 624 operations or for storage 625 or display of any scrap, 626 salvage or secondhand 627 building materials or 628 automobile parts shall not 629 be allowed, further 630 provided that adult book 631 stores shall be prohibited 632 from locating within five 633 hundred (500) feet of any 634 apartment or residential 635 district, single- or m 637 Use B-1 B-lA B-2 B-3 B-3A B-4 B-4C 638 multiple -family dwelling, 639 church, park, or school X P P P P P P 640 Satellite wagering 641 facility X X C C C X C 642 Specialty shops C P P P P P P 643 Storage garages X X P P X P X 644 Tattoo parlors X X C X X X X 645 Wholesaling and 646 distribution operations, 647 provided that such 648 operations do not involve 649 the use of: (i) more than 650 two thousand (2,000) 651 square feet of floor area 652 for storage of wares to be 653 sold at wholesale or to be 654 distributed, or (ii) any 655 vehicle rated at more than 656 one and one-half (1 1/2) 657 tons, or (iii) a total of 658 more than five (5) 659 delivery vehicles X X P C X X X_ 660 661 662 COMMENT 663 664 The amendments to this section set forth the permitted and conditional uses in the B-4C 665 Central Business Mixed Use District. The uses are a mixture of the existing B4 and B-3A uses, 666 consistent with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan for the area close to the Town 667 Center. 668 669 In addition to the substantive amendments setting forth the uses permitted in the B4C 670 District, a prior unintentional omission has been corrected by the insertion of the word "tons" in 671 Line 657. 672 19 673 Sec. 902. Dimensional requirements. 674 675 . . . . 676 (b) The following chart lists the requirements within the 677 B-3A Pembroke Central Business Core District and B-4C Central 678 Business Mixed Use District for minimum lot area, width, and 679 yard spacing for all uses and structures: 680 B-3A B-4C 681 682 (1) Minimum lot area in square feet: 10,000 10,000 683 684 (2) Minimum lot width in feet:* 100 100 685 686 (3) Minimum setback from a street in feet 0 0 687 688 (4) Maximum setback from a street in feet. 689 There shall be no maximum setback from 690 a street for structures where the total 691 floor area consists of residential use. 10 10 692 693 (5) Minimum side yard setback in feet, 694 unless otherwise identified herein or a 695 greater setback is required by section 696 903 0 0 697 698 (6) Minimum rear yard setback in feet, 699 unless a greater setback is required by 700 section 903 0 0 701 702 (7) Maximum density per acre of multifamily 703 dwellings in the B-4C District. Density 704 shall be determined based on the area 705 of the entire zoning lot, even if such 706 lot is partially occupied by other 707 principal uses or conditional uses. For 708 every 10,000 square feet of commercial 709 space in a given development project, 710 an additional dwelling unit per acre 711 beyond that allowed by the maximum 20 712 B-3A B-4C 713 714 density may be built. N/A 36 715 716 (8) Maximum density of hotels and motels N/A 80 717 718 *Where applicable, newly created corner lots must also 719 adhere to section 4.4(c) of the Subdivision Ordinance, requiring 720 additional lot width on certain owner lots. 721 Except as otherwise provided herein, setbacks affecting only the 722 first floor of multistory buildings may be increased by no more 723 than twenty (20) feet in order to allow the creation of covered 724 passageways within the B-3A and B-4C Districts. In addition, 725 building setbacks adjacent to roadway intersections may be 726 increased to provide safe and reasonable line -of -sight 727 clearances. 728 . . . . 729 (d) The following chart lists the requirements within the 730 B-4 Reser} ^effhme e a Mixed Use District for minimum lot area, 731 width, yard spacing, maximum lot coverage, maximum density and 732 maximum number of units constructed in a single building for 733 single-family attached dwellings (townhouses). 734 735 For attached dwellings (townhouses): 736 B-4 737 (1) Minimum lot area in square feet: 1,400 738 (2) Minimum average lot area in square feet: 2,500 21 739 (3) Minimum interior lot width in feet:* 14 740 (4) Minimum exterior lot width in feet: 30 741 (5) Minimum front yard setback in feet: 20 742 (6) Minimum side yard setback in feet: 10 743 (7) Minimum rear yard setback for dwellings 744 in feet: 20 745 746 (8) Minimum rear yard setback for accessory 747 buildings of less than 100 square feet, 748 in feet: 5 749 750 (9) Maximum lot coverage by buildings and 751 parking, excluding recreational buildings 752 and surfaces in percent: 40 753 754 (10) Maximum density in dwellings per acre: 12 755 (11) Maximum number of attached dwellings in 756 one group without side yard setbacks: 6 757 758 *Where applicable, newly created corner lots must also 759 adhere to section 4.4(c) of the Subdivision Ordinance, requiring 760 additional lot width on certain corner lots. 761 . . . . 762 (e) The following chart lists the requirements within the 763 B-4 Mixed Use Resert Gemmereiarl District for minimum lot area, 764 width, yard spacing, maximum lot coverage and maximum density 765 for multiple -family dwellings. 766 For multiple -family dwellings: 767 B-4 768 (1) Minimum lot area in square feet: 40,000 769 (2) Minimum lot width in feet: 200 22 770 (3) Minimum front yard setback in feet:* 30 771 (4) Minimum side yard setback in feet: 8 772 (5) Minimum rear yard setback in feet: 10 773 (6) Maximum lot coverage by buildings and 774 parking, excluding recreational buildings 775 and surfaces in percent: 75 776 777 (7) Maximum density in dwelling units per acre: 36 778 *Where applicable, newly created corner lots must also 779 adhere to section 4.4(c) of the Subdivision Ordinance, requiring 780 additional lot width on certain corner lots. 781 . . . . 782 COMMENT 783 The amendments to subsection (b) set ' forth the dimensional requirements in the B-4C 784 District. The dimensional requirements are similar to the existing used in the B-3A with two 785 significant changes: first„ a provision has been added regarding the maximum setback for 786 buildings where the entire floor area is devoted to multi -family dwellings (the only dwelling type 787 allowed in the B-4C District). In addition, the density of multi -family dwellings in the B-4C 788 District may be increased beyond 36 units per acre (at a rate of one additional unit for every 10,000 789 sq. ft. of commercial floor area) if commercial uses are provided. 790 791 The amendments to the remaining portions of the section are not substantive in nature an 792 only reflect the change of name of the B-4 Resort Commercial District. 793 794 795 796 Sec. 903. Landscape screening and buffering regulations. 797 For the B-1 through B-4 Commercial Districts, the following 798 landscape screening and buffering regulations shall apply: 799 (a) When a zoning lot within a B-1 or B-lA Gemme~-e; ,l 800 Business District adjoins a residential, apartment or hotel 801 district without an intervening street, alley or body of water 802 over twenty-five (25) feet in width, a fifteen -foot minimum yard 23 803 shall be required along all lot lines adjoining the residential, 804 apartment or hotel district. Category I landscape screening 805 shall be required within the yard area. No other uses or 806 structures shall be permitted in such yards. 807 (b) When a zoning lot within a the B-2, B-3, B-3A, eir B-4 808 or B-4C Gefff ere District adjoins a residential or apartment 809 district without an intervening street, alley or body of water 810 over twenty-five (25) feet in width, a fifteen -foot minimum yard 811 shall be required along all lot lines adjoining the residential 812 or apartment district. Category IV landscape screening shall be 813 required within the yard area. No other uses or structures shall 814 be permitted in such yards. 815 (c) When a zoning lot within a the 2-2, B-3, B-3A, e-r B-4 816 or B-4C r.....,--...re District adjoins an 0-1 Office District 817 without an intervening street, alley or body of water over 818 twenty-five (25) feet in width, a ten -foot minimum yard shall be 819 required along all lot lines adjoining the office district. 820 Category I landscape screening shall be required within the yard 821 area. No other uses or structures shall be permitted in such 822 yards. 823 COMMENT 824 The amendments make the landscape screening and buffering requirements applicable in 825 other Business Districts applicable to the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District. Other changes 826 are merely stylistic in nature. 827 24 828 Sec. 904. Height regulations. 829 . . . . 830 (b) Where a zoning lot within the B-2 Community Business 831 District, B-3 Central Business District, B-3A Pembroke Central 832 Business Core District, e-r B-4 Mixed Use Resert GefF ere al 833 District or B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District adjoins the 834 side or rear yard of a zoning lot in a residential or apartment 835 district without an intervening street or alley over twenty-five 836 (25) feet in width or a body of water over fifty (50) feet in 837 width, the following maximum height regulations shall apply on 838 that portion of the commercial zoning lot within one hundred 839 (100) feet of the adjoining residential or apartment district. 840 In cases where more than one of the following apply, the most 841 restrictive shall apply. 842 (1) When adjacent to residential district, the maximum 843 height shall be thirty-five(35)feet. 844 (2) When adjacent to A-12 or A-18 Apartment Districts, the 845 maximum height shall be thirty-five(35)feet. 846 (3) When adjacent to A-24 Apartment District, the maximum 847 height shall be forty-five(45)feet. 848 (4) When adjacent to A-36 Apartment District, the maximum 849 height shall be one hundred twenty (120)feet. 850 (c) The maximum height for hotels and motels within the B- 851 4 Resort Ge mer..; a l Mixed Use District is seventy-five (75 ) feet. 25 852 (d) Except as specified in items (a),(b) and (c) 853 hereinabove, there shall be no maximum height regulations in the 854 B-2, B-3 and B-4 GeRiffiereial Districts. Within the B-3A Pembroke 855 Central Business Core District, the minimum building height 856 shall be thirty-five(35)feet and the maximum building height 857 shall be four hundred (400)feet. In the B-4C Central Business 858 Mixed Use District, minimum building height shall be thirty-five 859 (35) feet and the maximum building height shall be two hundred 860 (200) feet. 861 (e) Notwithstanding the above, no building or other 862 structure shall exceed the height limit established by section 863 202(b) regarding air navigation. 864 COMMENT 865 The amendments establish height restrictions in the B4C Central Business Mixed Use 866 District. The minimum building height is 35 feet, and the maximum height is 200 feet. 867 868 869 Sec. 905. Sign regulations. 870 . . . . 871 (d) Within the B-3A Pembroke Central Business Core 872 District and the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District, signs 873 shall be permitted as follows: 874 (1) For each foot of occupancy frontage an establishment 875 shall have no more than sixty one -hundredths (.60) 876 square feet of sign area. No single establishment 877 shall have more than four (4) signs, nor more than two 26 878 (2 )signs per building facade, and no individual sign 879 shall exceed sixty (60) square feet in surface area. 880 Any establishment having less than forty (40) feet of 881 occupancy frontage may have one (1) sign not exceeding 882 twenty-four (24) square feet. No such sign shall be 883 allowed above the second story of any building. 884 (2) A sign identifying the entrance to upper -floor 885 residential dwelling units shall be permitted; 886 provided, that no such sign shall exceed eight (8) 887 square feet of surface area, and that the number of 888 signs shall be limited to one (1) sign at street level 889 at each principal entrance. 890 (2.5) Commercial buildings, including hotels and motels, of 891 less than five (5) stories in height shall have no 892 more than two (2) building identification signs, and 893 no sign shall have a surface area exceeding one 894 hundred fifty (150) square feet. Such signs shall be 895 mounted on or above the fourth story of the building, 896 but not above the roofline of such building, and only 897 one (1) sign per building facade shall be allowed. 898 Additionally, two (2) building identification signs, 899 not exceeding twenty (20) square feet each, shall be 900 allowed at street level if the building has a street 901 level entrance. 27 902 (3) Commercial buildings, including hotels and motels, of 903 five (5) stories to ten(10)stories shall have no more 904 than two (2) building identification signs, and no 905 sign shall have a surface area exceeding two hundred 906 (200) square feet. Such signs shall be mounted on or 907 above the top one -quarter (1/4) of the building, but 908 not above the roofline of such building, and only one 909 (1) sign per building facade shall be allowed. 910 Additionally, two (2) building identification signs, 911 not exceeding twenty (20) square feet each, may be 912 allowed at street level, if the building has a street 913 level entrance. 914 (3.5) Commercial building, including hotels and motels, of 915 more than ten (10) stories in height shall have no 916 more than two (2) building identification signs, and 917 no sign shall have a surface area exceeding three 918 hundred (300) square feet. All signs shall be mounted 919 on or above the top one -quarter (1/4)of the building, 920 but not above the roofline of such building, and only 921 one (1) sign per building facade shall be allowed. 922 Additionally, two (2) building identification signs, 923 not exceeding twenty (20) square feet each, may be 924 allowed at street level, if the building has a street 925 level entrance. 28 926 (3.7) Major Tenant Sign Option. For each foot of building 927 footage, a major tenant may have a maximum of one and 928 two -tenths (1.2) square feet of sign area, provided 929 that pedestrian scale features and amenities such as 930 outdoor cafe seating, planters, kiosk areas, 931 fountains, display windows or sculptures are provided 932 on the facade or adjacent thereto. No major tenant 933 shall have a total of more than four(4) signs, nor 934 more than two (2) signs per building facade. 935 (4) All freestanding signs shall be approved by the City 936 Council, as consistent with the general purpose and 937 intent of the design provisions presented in the July, 938 1991, Pembroke Central Business District Master Plan 939 and any applicable design standards approved by city 940 council. 941 (5) Signs on building awnings shall not be included in 942 determining the number of building signs permitted, or 943 in determining permissible sign area, if they meet the 944 following criteria: 945 a. Such signs are uniform in font, color, size and 946 style; 947 b. Only the name of the establishment appears on the 948 awning; 949 C. There is only one (1) sign per awning; and 29 950 d. Such are no larger than two (2) square feet. 951 (6) Public or private parking structures and parking 952 garages may have one (1) sign per vehicle entrance and 953 two (2) additional signs. Such signs shall have no 954 more than seventy-five (75) square feet of surface 955 area and shall identify the building on which they are 956 located as a parking structure or parking garage. 957 (7) As used in this section: 958 a. "Occupancy frontage" means the exterior length of 959 that portion of a building occupied exclusively 960 by a single establishment having at least one (1) 961 exterior public access; 962 b. "Building identification sign" means a sign 963 which displays only the name of the building on 964 which it is located; 965 C. 11major tenant" means the space in a building 966 occupied by a single establishment with a 967 building wall height of at least thirty-five (35) 968 feet and with at least one (1) continuous wall 969 containing at least eighty (80) feet of building 970 frontage; and 971 d. "Building frontage" means the exterior length of 972 that portion of a building occupied exclusively 973 by a single establishment. 974 (e) Within the B-4 Reser*- ^eTMMersal Mixed Use 975 District, the sign regulations shall apply as 976 follows: 977 . . . . 978 COMMENT 979 The amendment in Line 292 provides that the sign regulations applicable in the B-3A 980 Central Business Core District also apply in the new B4C Central Business Mixed Use District. 981 982 The amendment in Line 394 reflects the change of name of the B-4 Resort Commercial 983 District. Because no changes are made to the sign regulations applicable in that District, and 984 because of their length, the regulations themselves are not reproduced in this ordinance. 985 986 987 988 Sec. 906. Off-street parking regulations. 989 Parking shall be required for all uses and structures 990 permitted in the B-1 through B 4 GemfREe a B-4C Central 991 Business Mixed Use Districts in accordance with Section 203. 992 For single-family attached (townhouse) developments, no parking 993 area on any lot shall exceed farther than twenty (20) feet from 994 the right-of-way line and no area within a garage, or an 995 enclosed or covered space shall be counted toward meeting off- 996 street parking requirements. 997 COMMENT 998 The amendment provides that parking requirements in the B4 Central Business Mixed Use 999 District are as set forth in Section 203, the amendments to which are set forth above. 1000 1001 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach on the 1002 day of , 2004. 1003 31 1004 CA-9357 1005 OID\ordres\B-4Cregsordin.doc 1006 R-2 1007 September 2, 2004 1008 1009 1010 Approved as to Content: 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 P an in Department Approved as to Legal Sufficiency: k �/, 44,11; - City t orney's O fice 32 1 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE 2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY THE 3 INCORPORATION OF THE MIXED USE 4 DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES 5 5 WHEREAS, on September 8, 2004, the Planning Commission held 6 a public hearing concerning the amendment of the Comprehensive 7 Plan (the "Plan") by the incorporation of the Mixed Use 8 Development Guidelines (the "Guidelines), and at the conclusion 9 of such public hearing, recommended that the Plan be amended by 10 the incorporation of the said Guidelines as an appendix to the 11 Plan; 12 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 13 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 14 That the Comprehensive Plan be, and hereby is, amended and 15 reordained by the incorporation of the Mixed Use Development 16 Guidelines, as an appendix to the Comprehensive Plan. A true 17 copy of the said Guidelines was exhibited to the Planning 18 Commission on September 8, 2004, and on this day to the City 19 Council. 20 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 21 Virginia, on the day of , 2004. 22 CA-9369 23 OID/ordres/Bikeways/Comp Plan2.doc 24 R-1 25 September 1, 2004 26 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: 27 (46JU� 28 Pia!nliil Department APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: jz&# R - Ra-�ly, City Attorney's Office Mixed Use Development Guidelines Virginia Beach, Virginia (THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY) Mixed Use lopme Guidelines Table of Contents 1- Mixed Use Development 1 2 - Site Design 4 3 - Building Mass and Design 6 4 - Form and Roofline 8 5 - Building Entrances 9 6 - Architectural Features 10 1- Materials and Colors 11 8 - Signage and Lighting 12 9 - Outdoor Spaces and Amenities 13 Mixed Use Development "Mixed use" is a type of land development that suits the Rreat truism that `what's old becomes new again.' Prior to the early part of the 20t Century, the development of land in almost any urban area was `mixed,' with homes, shops, and workplaces blended either within the same building or juxtaposed to each other. The denseness of the development and the mixture of uses resulted in an environment where walking was the primary mode of transportation for those who lived, visited, and worked in these cities. In the early 20th Century, with the introduction of new modes of transportation and new legal frameworks for regulating land use and land development, the pattern of land use in cities changed and mixed use became an infrequent form of development in all but the largest cities in the United States. In its place came a pattern that we are familiar with today, exemplified by the segregation of uses and a heavy dependence on the automobile as the means of moving from one place to another. Toward the end of the 20th Century, and particularly as we entered the 21St Century, we came to the realization that our dependence on the segregated form of land use as the primary method of development may not be the best method for all circumstances. New forms of land use and development have evolved, some of which have been stimulated by various schools of thought regarding urban and regional planning including "Neo-Traditional Development," "New Urbanism," and "Smart Growth." No matter what the name, each school of thought on now we should use and develop our land utilizes the concept of mixing uses and at higher densities. The use of mixed use development is particularly advocated in situations where land available for development is scarce (for whatever reason) and there is a desire to maintain growth within a pre -defined area rather than allowing growth to continually spread outward beyond the existing area of development, which is a known outcome of the use -segregated, low -density pattern used during most of the 20th Century. In sum, the idea at the heart of this document when it comes to mixed use is the transformation of the pattern of development in certain areas of Virginia Beach where advocated by the Comprehensive Plan from a "suburban" one to an "urban" one. Many people believe that the term `urban' refers only to high-rise construction or big buildings close together as evidenced most often by such places as New York, London, or Paris. In its truest sense, "urban" most The vision that many people have when they think of "urban." This is not the type of `urban' referred to by these guidelines. Page 1 accurately describes those parts of our built environment that are discernibly different from their suburban and rural counterparts. It connotes denser arrangements of buildings characterized by overlapping patterns of use and activities, and clearly defined, humanely -scaled external spaces, where citizens can conduct their business and meet and mingle freely with others. These factors create a system of relationships that is larger and more comprehensive than the design of individual buildings, and which requires special consideration for best results. The organization of these various factors, including building design, landscape, open space and transportation is referred to as "urban design," and these guidelines provide clear examples of the practices that are necessary for the creation of successful, memorable places within the City of Virginia Beach. Urban design is intended to bring order, clarity and a pleasing harmony to the urban places within the city. Urban design creates the "character' of a place. This character is primarily formed by the arrangement and details of the elements that defines it — the walls of buildings that enclose a plaza, for example; or the storefronts along the commercial street; or the dwellings that line a residential avenue. These guidelines provide guidance on the appropriate urban design for mixed -use environments in the City of Virginia Beach. The latest Comprehensive Plan for the City of Virginia Beach notes that the city has reached the point in its history where mixed -use development must play a critical role in the future growth of the city in order to maintain its overall health: In envisioning the redeveloped city of the future, it is apparent that in the Strategic Growth Areas where high intensity uses critical to our future tax and employment base must go, there frequently exist today lesser intensity uses that do not fully utilize their locational advantage, and so a transition must take place. Often these current uses were well located with respect to the market forces at play when they were instituted, but since then circumstances have changed. Eventually, market forces will cause these uses to relocate to more appropriate sites, often at great profit to the landowner, but this process is often more gradual than is compatible with this plan or are of the type that fail to achieve true potential of a site. The uses involved are often service -related and low intensity commercial uses that are essential elements of a livable community, and so their retention in the community is vital. If the strategic growth areas identified in the plan are to serve their intended purpose, then a transition from less intense to more intense land use must occur and the plan must identify suitable sites and areas to which the owners and operators of these uses can willingly and easily relocate. The identification of such available alternative sites will speed the transition process (p. 52). Page 2 To accomplish this transition from `less intense to more intense land use' within the Strategic Growth Areas identified by the Comprehensive Plan, the Plan suggests several steps as part of an overall strategy, one of which notes that we must develop mixed use as a principal tool for redevelopment and as a preferred land use pattern in the strategic growth areas, and develop necessary zoning and other regulatory tools to encourage it, (p. 52). This document is provided as part of the foundation of the implementation of this recommendation. A component of a coordinated approach involving detailed area plans, zoning and development ordinance revisions, and design guidance, the content of this document will evolve over time as specific plans are developed for each Strategic Growth Area where mixed use development is recommended. The content of this document heavily borrows from one of the City's first official guides for mixed -use development, the Laskin Road Gateway Design Guidelines, which encourages such development within the Laskin Road Gateway Overlay District between Beach Garden Park and Pacific Avenue on Laskin Road. This document has been created to accompany the creation and use of the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District. It is hoped that the document and its future amendment for other Strategic Growth Areas will give property owners and developers direction in the creation of unique and instrumental places that will transform the City of Virginia Beach as it enters its next phase of growth. In particular, the document should be used as part of the process of evaluating the appropriateness of a request for a mixed -use zoning category as specified by the City Zoning Ordinance, such as the B-4C. The guidance provided in the following pages is not overly detailed, as it is intended to give an overall framework regarding the fundamentals of mixed -use development while providing designers and developers an appropriate level of flexibility, encouraging creativity in responding to the opportunities presented by each site. Questions regarding the guidance within this document or the development ordinances, plans, and policies for Strategic Growth Areas should be directed to the Department of Planning of the City of Virginia Beach at 757-427-4621. This scene is a good example of the mixed -use `urban' development that should result from the use of the principles in these guidelines. Page 3 Site Design Probably the most important aspect of mixed -use development is the way that the project is integrated physically and functionally as to encourage pedestrian activity and walking as the primary means of moving through and around the project. Desiqn Goal: Provide interest at the street level to encourage walking and to enhance the pedestrian experience. Align a building's front at the sidewalk (right-of-way) edge ❑ A minimum of 75% of the building front (and side, if on a corner) should have a zero foot setback. ❑ Primary building facades should be parallel to the sidewalk (right-of- way), except where it is desired to maintain a highly desirable vista. ❑ Where portions of a building aret set back from the sidewalk (right-of- way), such areas should be treated as courtyards (see Outdoor Spaces section later in this document). Develop the ground floor level of a building to encourage pedestrian activity ❑ The linear frontage of a commercial or mixed -use building should include pedestrian -oriented elements, such as: U 'i a k ha ii klinn with a r-m jrtua rrt i n fmnt is a oomoriata the building wall is maintained. t" Inappropriste: Align at least 75% the building front at the sidewalk edge. This building, set back from the sidewalk, erodes the visual continuity essential to a strong retail district. o Transparent display windows o Outdoor dining areas (cafes) o Public art or other public amenities such as fountains, benches, etc. ❑ Blank walls or vacant lot appearance is not appropriate. Locate on -site parking to minimize visibility from the sidewalk. ❑ Parking should not be located so that it interrupts the storefront continuity along the sidewalk. ❑ Place on -site parking behind the buildings, either at -grade or within a parking structure. Page 4 ❑ Parking should be accessed from the rear of parcels if possible. If not possible, the entrance to parking from the street should be `hidden' designing it as part of the rhythm of the storefronts but not in such a way that it is a hazard for pedestrians. When necessary, such driveways should be minimized in width and provide for good visibility of pedestrians from vehicles using the driveway. A change in material for the sidewalk should be utilized to indicate to or `warn' pedestrians where the access to the parking is located. ❑ The entrance to parking facilities should be located on a secondary street and not on an arterial roadway. Locate mechanical equipment and service areas out of public view. Page 5 Building Mass and Design Design Goal: New buildings and additions should be delineated both vertically and horizontally to reflect a human scale. The height of buildings should provide for a human scale to the overall streetscape while respecting surrounding development in the area. In no case should the height of a building exceed that specified by the City Zoning Ordinance. ❑ The portion of buildings along the street should not exceed a maximum height of five to six stories. Increased height beyond that should be achieved on the by setting back the upper floors from the initial five or six stories, thus reducing the impact of the overall mass. Buildings should be divided into "modules" that provide visual interest and serve to create a traditional "Main Street." ❑ Create modules of 25 to 50 foot wide as traditionally found in Main Street environments. ❑ A clear visual division between upper and lower floors should be incorporated through a change in materials, colors, and use of canopies and awnings. Note the use of 25 to 50 foot modules in this building as a means of providing visual interest Page 6 Facades of buildings that face the street should incorporate human -scale detailing through the use of reveals, belt courses, cornices, expression of structural or architectural bays, recessed windows or doors, material or material module changes, color and/or texture differences, or strongly expressed mullions. Each building housing a principal nonresidential use should incorporate at least two (2) of the following additional features on all building facades facing a public street, public plaza, or public open space: ❑ Arcades; ❑ Arbors; ❑ Contrasting building materials or textures; ❑ Incorporation of street furniture at the ground floor, ❑ Incorporation of outdoor eating or seating areas at the ground floor, ❑ Variations in rooflines along a single block face; ❑ Transparent windows that allow views into and out of the building, black, mirrored, or other opaque surfaces should never be used. Page 7 Form and Rooffine Design Goal: Simple rectangular forms with horizontal roof forms should predominate on commercial and mixed -use structures. Use of pitched rooflines on residential structures is appropriate. Simple rectangular volumes are preferred. ❑ New buildings and additions should be designed with simple rectangular volumes, accented by other shapes as details. ❑ Cylindrical, pyramidal, and other elaborate forms as the main building are not appropriate. Horizontal roof forms should predominate and be screened by extensions of the building wall planes. The primary form of this building is rectangular, but it is accented with a variety of other geometric forms ❑ Parapet walls should be used for screening flat roofs and should be detailed with such features as cornice to define the building roofline. ❑ Sloping roof forms may be considered as accents. For primarily residential structures, horizontal roof forms or sloped roof forms are appropriate. ❑ Sloped roof forms may be considered as a means of screening a flat roof on a residential structure. Page 8 Building Entrances Desiqn Goal: Clearly identify the primary entrance to a building and orient it to the street. Orient the primary entrances to the sidewalk and the primary pedestrian ways. Al M1 Primary entrances to ground floor spaces and upper levels should be oriented to the sidewalk and primary pedestrian ways. If a courtyard is part of the overall design, an entrance may be located on it as well. Buildings located at the intersection of roadways should be designed with angled entrances at the corner. Note the change in material, color, and form used at the corner of this building, clearly designating the entrance Clearly identify the primary entrance ❑ Use an awning, change in roofline, or other architectural feature to define the entrance. ❑ A sign mounted at the entry may also be used. ❑ Special paving treatments may be used to define the entry. Recessed entries should be used in storefront construction. ❑ Storefront entries should be recessed to emphasize the entrance, increase window display area, and provide a sheltered transition to the interior of the store. ❑ Building entrances should provide shade from the sun and weather protection for pedestrians. This may involve overhangs that are at least 48 inches deep, arcades, roofs, porches, alcoves, porticos, awnings, or any combination of these features. ❑ Storefront entries should be centered on the fagade and be highly `transparent.' Solid doors are discouraged. This building makes good use of recessed areas as a means of clearly identifying the entrance Page 9 �F4 Architectural Features Design Goal: Architectural features should be used to provide weather protection and highlight building features and entries. Buildings should be designed to incorporate awnings. ❑ Storefront window openings should be designed to accommodate awnings above the windows. ❑ The awning should fit the shape of the opening of the building. ❑ Awnings should be mounted to highlight moldings that may be found above the storefront or to fit within a sign panel that may be part of the fagade design. ❑ While fabric (canvas or other high quality fabric) awnings are preferred, fixed metal canopies are also acceptable. Vinyl awnings are inappropriate. A fixed canopy may be used where enhanced weather protection is desired. ❑ Permanent structures may be used on building facades with harsh sun exposure and where outdoor dining is planned. ❑ They must be incorporated into the overall design of the building and be appropriate in mass and scale with the structure. These features must be designed to not obstruct storefront visibility and pedestrian access. Good use of awnings. Note how the awnings `fit' into the brick molding along the storefront. Page 10 Materials and Colors Design Goal: Building materials and colors should exhibit quality and help establish a human scale while providing visual interest. While some diversity in exterior building materials and color is a part of the tradition of urban form, the range should be limited in order to promote a sense of visual continuity for the area. ❑ Use the highest quality materials on exposed exterior surfaces, such as brick, pre -cast, the and stucco. ❑ Innovative materials are encouraged provided they appear similar in quality, texture, finish and dimension to those used traditionally in a mixed - use area. ❑ Stucco and synthetic stuccos should be detailed to create a composition of smaller wall surfaces and establish a sense of human scale. Simple material finishes are encouraged. ❑ Matte finishes are preferred. Polished stone or ceramic tile, for example should be avoided or limited to accent elements. ❑ Reflective or mirror glass is discouraged. ❑ Building colors should evoke a sense of richness and liveliness to complement and support the overall character benefiting a mixed -use area. The buildings along this street reveal a good mix of quality materials and colors, providing both human scale and visual interest Page 11 signage Lighting Design Goal: Design buildings with careful consideration for the incorporation of signage and lighting. New buildings and additions should be designed to allow for signs appropriate in scale and location to the use and the surrounding area. Signs shall comply with the City Zoning Ordinance. Exterior building lighting should be used to accentuate the building design and the overall ambiance of the area. ❑ Highlight architectural details and features with lighting integrated into the building design. ❑ Fagade lighting should provide for a sense of vibrancy and safety without resulting in excessive light and glare. ❑ The innovative use of lighting is encouraged. ❑ Energy conservation and efficiency should also be considered. This sign is both visible to passing vehicles while being scaled and designed for pedestrians This building makes lighting an architectural feature by integrating the fixtures into the pilasters, illuminating the detail above and providing safety to those below Page 12 Outdoor Spaces and Amenities Design Goal: Design outdoor spaces and amenities to enliven the sidewalk level and provide for private open space for shoppers, employees, and residents. A variety of outdoor spaces may be considered. ❑ A courtyard at sidewalk level, set in line with the building front. o An interior courtyard with a major entrance clearly visible from the street. ❑ Upper -level decks, balconies, and rooftop gardens are encouraged as private open space. Such structures should be located so as to avoid encroachment into the public right-of-way. Courtyards are encouraged as places for outdoor commercial activities. ❑ No more than 25% of a new commercial storefront building should be set back for a courtyard. ❑ Consider environmental conditions such as sun, shade and prevailing winds when positioning courtyards and outdoor seating areas. ❑ Trees, trellises or similar shade elements to be designed into a courtyard are encouraged. Upper story decks, balconies or rooftop gardens should be incorporated for residential uses. ❑ Balconies on the front fagade should be located and designed to minimize potential conflicts with pedestrian traffic on sidewalks below. Such structures should also be located so as to avoid encroachment into the public right-of-way. ❑ Balconies should be appropriately scaled and incorporated into the overall design of the building. ❑ Projecting balconies should not obscure visibility of signs or storefronts. ❑ Consider environmental conditions such as sun, shade, and prevailing winds when designing decks, balconies or rooftop garden spaces. Pedestrian amenities such as patios and plazas, landscaped mini -parks, squares or greens should be provided as amenities and may include seating, lighting, special paving, planting, food and flower Page 13 vendors and artwork. 9 0 Patios, plazas, mini -parks, squares and greens should be proportionate in size to the development. Small-scale amenities are appropriate for small developments, and large-scale amenities are appropriate for large developments. In order to serve as a focal point, a feature should be visible and easily recognizable as an area that encourages outdoor assembly. It may be framed by a view corridor, be placed on a high point, or be visually related to a multi -use trial or other walkway. An example of large-scale amenities appropriate to large-scale development Page 14 Item #20, 21 & 22 City of Virginia Beach An Ordinance to Amend Sections 102, 1505, 1703 and 1704 of the City's Zoning Ordinance by changing the name of the B-4 Resort Commercial District to the B-4 Mixed Use District and establishing The B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District An Ordinance to amend Sections 900, 901, 902, 903, 904, 905 and 906 Of the City's Zoning Ordinance by setting forth the legislative intent Of the B-4 Mixed Use District and B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District and establishing use regulations, dimensional requirements, Sign regulations, off-street parking regulations and density restrictions In the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District Ordinance to adopt the Mixed Use Development Guidelines as an Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan September 8, 2004 CONSENT Our next items are all related. We're going to take all three of them and they are Items #20, 21 & 22. Item #20 is an Ordinance to amend Section 102, 1505, 1703 and 1704 of the City Zoning Ordinance by changing the name of the B-4 Resort Commercial District to the B-4 Mixed Use District and establishing a B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District. Item #21 is an amendment to Sections 900, 901, 902, 903, 904, 905 and 906 to the City Zoning Ordinance. This sets forth the legislative intent of the B-4 Mixed Use District and B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District regulations, off street parking and density restrictions on B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District. Item #22 is a City of Virginia Beach B-4C, an ordinance to adopt the Mixed Use Development Guidelines as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. I'd ask Mr. Scott to speak on these amendments. Robert Scott: Mr. Din and members of the Commission. I think the description that has just been read is pretty much inclusive of what's going to happen here. However, let me start the description from another area. As we talk about our needs to redevelop in Virginia Beach, normally where most of those efforts are going on right now and that is in and around the Pembroke area. We feel the need to establish a good Mixed Use Zoning District is really important in those areas. We think that looking at the ordinances that we already have rather than creating a new one, with some fundamental adjustments would work very well. That is what is being done here. We're recycling, I guess, the old district. There used to be a Resort District; certainly, most of Pacific Avenue area. We have found different ways as our goals have slightly changed in that area to address our zoning needs at the Oceanfront. With this district, it's perfectly suitable with a few adjustments that have been working at the Pembroke area. Those adjustments have to do with signage, parking and some other basic requirements. The application of density in the area is very important and also the establishment of design guidelines to guide Item #20, 21 & 22 City of Virginia Beach Page 2 developers in that area to do aesthetically the type of improvement to their developments that would be appropriate for the area. And that entire package is before you today. I think it's a major step forward to address the immediate needs of redevelopment in that area. As we think through some of the other pressing issues that face us in the city, whether it's the Joint Use Study or whether it is redevelopment, generally affordable housing, or any number of other issues, there may be a need to further address some of the components that are in here. But to do so in a comprehensive manner that addresses all of those concerns, it will take time. What the staff is telling you at this point is that the package that you have before you is a good package and is suitable for adoption. But, we may wish to revisit it at some point in the future to refine it as things go forward. William Din: Thank you Mr. Scott. Is there any opposition to placing this on the consent agenda? Thank you. Madame Chair, I would like to make a motion to approve Item #20 City of Virginia Beach. This is the ordinance to change the name of B-4 Resort Commercial District to B-4 Mixed Use District and to establish B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District and approve Item #21 City of Virginia Beach. This is an amendment to certain sections of the City's Zoning Ordinance and sets up the intent of the B-4 Mixed Use District and approve Item #22 City of Virginia Beach. This is an ordinance to adopt the Mixed Used Development Guidelines as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Dorothy Wood: Do I hear a second? Eugene Crabtree: I'll second it. Dorothy Wood: Seconded by Gene Crabtree. Ron? Ronald Ripley: I need to abstain on Items #20, 21 & 22. I have ownership in a company, that if this ordinance passes, will be applying for an application under the new ordinance. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Ronald Ripley: It will be in the near term. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Is there anyone else? AYE 9 NAY 0 ABS 1 ABSENT 1 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY ABSENT KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY ABS Item #20, 21 & 22 City of Virginia Beach Page 3 STRANGE AYE WALLER AYE WOOD AYE Ed Weeden: By a vote 9-0, the consent agenda items have been approved by the Board. o° `'-" ' CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Encroachments in the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: An Ordinance to amend and reordain City Code Section 33-114.3 pertaining to encroachments by outdoor cafes and other storefront uses in the B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District. ■ Considerations: The amendments allow the administrative approval of encroachments by outdoor cafes and other storefront uses in the newly -created B-4C Central Business Mixed Use District under the conditions specified in the ordinance. The ordinance has allowed such encroachments to be administratively approved in the B-3A District (Town Center) since May 2002. ■ Recommendations: Approval of the amendment is recommended. Without the amendment, encroachments for cafes and other storefront uses as part of urban -scale mixed - use developments in the new B-4C District would have to be approved by the City Council. ■ Attachments: Ordinance Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager.�'3 1 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CITY 2 CODE SECTION 33-114.3, PERTAINING TO 3 ENCROACHMENTS BY OUTDOOR CAFES AND 4 OTHER STOREFRONT USES IN THE B-4C 5 PEMBROKE CENTRAL BUSINESS MIXED USE 6 DISTRICT. 7 8 Section Amended: City Code Section 33- 9 114.3 10 11 Sec. 33-114.3. Administrative approval ofeertain 12 encroachments within the B-3A Pembroke Central emss 13 GAMe D by str et outdoor cafes, etc . , within certain zoning 14 districts. 15 16 Notwithstanding the provisions of section 33-114.1 of 17 this Code, the City Manager or his designee may, and is 18 hereby vested with the authority to, approve the 19 encroachment, upon or over any public street or sidewalk in 20 the B-3A Pembroke Central Business Core District or the B- 21 4C Central Business Mixed Use District, e-€ by outdoor cafes 22 or portions thereof or other storefront uses, provided at 23 least eight (8) feet of sidewalk width with eight (8) or 24 more feet of vertical clearance remains unobstructed along 25 such encroachments. Such encroachments met shall conform 26 with all applicable zoning and building codes, regulations 27 and standards. 28 29 COMMENT 30 31 The amendments allow the administrative approval of encroachments by outdoor 32 cafes and other storefront uses in the newly -created B-4C Pembroke Central Business 33 Mixed Use District under the conditions specified in the ordinance. The ordinance has 34 allowed such encroachments to be administratively approved in the B-3A District (Town 35 Center) since May 2002. Other changes are purely stylistic in nature. 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 CA-9383 OID\ordres\B-4Cencroachmentord.doc R-1 September 16, 2004 Approved as to Content: �.4 , 4, q.10.0 . Plann Department Approved as to Legal Suffic'ency: City Attorney's Office 2 7q ti�vsate h.`� (V �' m•.r..w CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: City of Virginia Beach — Bikeways and Trails Plan MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: An Ordinance to adopt the Bikeways and Trails Plan as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Master Transportation Plan. IN Considerations: The Departments of Parks & Recreation, Planning, and Public Works along with other internal and external stakeholders have been meeting over the past year and a half to identify a prioritized, continuous, safe, and coordinated system of bikeways and shared use trail facilities for a variety of user types. Initial steps included a complete inventory and analysis of existing facilities and the administration of a Citizen Bike Survey. From this information two main goals were established for the network: To establish connectivity throughout the City with the designation and implementation of a safe, continuous, and coordinated system of bikeways and shared use facilities that provide access to recreational, employment, educational, and commercial activity centers. To provide a variety of facilities to satisfy the transportation and recreational needs of different user types and abilities. The recommended network is comprised of three system types, a primary network, a 50-mile on road loop, and smaller local area networks. An initial Public Open House was held on April 22, 2004 to share components of the Draft Bicycle & Trails Plan and to gather feedback from the Citizens of Virginia Beach. A second Public Open House was held at the Bayside Recreation Center on May 13, 2004 to gather additional input and for viewing of the changes made from comments received at the previous meeting. A final public meeting was held August 30, 2004 at the Central Library. A public hearing on the amendments was held during City Council's September 28, 2004 meeting. ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a vote of 10-0 to unanimously recommend approval of the amendments. City of Virginia Beach — Bikeways and Trails Plan Page 2 of 2 ■ Attachments: Staff Review Ordinances Planning Commission Minutes Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Departmen City Manager: k . CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH BIKEWAYS AND TRAILS PLAN Agenda Item # 19 September 8, 2004 Public Hearing The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. 19. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH An Ordinance to adopt the Bikeways and Trails Plan as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Master Transportation Plan. Staff Evaluation The Departments of Parks & Recreation, Planning, and Public Works along with other internal and external stakeholders have been meeting over the past year and a half to identify a prioritized, continuous, safe, and coordinated system of bikeways and shared use trail facilities for a variety of user types. Initial steps included a complete inventory and analysis of existing facilities and the administration of a Citizen Bike Survey. From this information two main goals were established for the network: To establish connectivity throughout the City with the designation and implementation of a safe, continuous, and coordinated system of bikeways and shared use facilities that provide access to recreational, employment, educational, and commercial activity centers. To provide a variety of facilities to satisfy the transportation and recreational needs of different user types and abilities. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH — BIKEWAYS AND TRAILS Agenda Item # 19 Page 1 The recommended network is comprised of three system types, a primary network, a 50-mile on road loop, and smaller local area networks. The Primary Network builds upon existing and programmed facilities and forms the framework of the overall system linking major destination points throughout the City. It consists of a number of City streets and other rights of way that are recommended priorities for facility funding and implementation. The Secondary Network forms the inner web of the overall system, providing access to minor destination such as community parks, recreation centers, libraries, and neighborhood commercial areas. Specialized Facilities provide unique venues for various bikeway and trail users and are intended to serve special events, users, and functions. Recommended facilities include a 50 mile on -road loop as a safe route for various sponsored events and experienced bikers, an off -road unpaved soft path trail system for equestrian use, a one mile off -road paved shared use path criterion bike course for special events and race training, and a specialty designated Virginia Scenic Byway motor vehicle and bike route. Additionally, recommendations of facility types have been made to ensure appropriate, safe and consistent facilities. Due to different development patterns, planned land uses, and environmental (physical, social, & cultural) characteristics, the City has been divided into three zones: the urban north, the developing Princess Anne/Transition Area, and the rural south. Specific facility type recommendations for each of these areas are based on the individual opportunities and constraints of each area. An initial Public Open House was held on April 22, 2004 to share components of the Draft Bicycle & Trails Plan and to gather feedback from the Citizens of Virginia Beach. A second Public Open House was held at the Bayside Recreation Center on May 13, 2004 to gather additional input and for viewing of the changes made from comments received at the previous meeting. A final public meeting was held August 30, 2004 at the Central Library. Included as part of this request are the following: 1. The Bikeways and Trails Plan (provided as a separate handout); 2. An amendment to the Appendix of the Comprehensive Plan, noting the adoption by reference of the Bikeways and Trails Plan as a part of the Comprehensive Plan; and 3. Amendments to the Master Transportation Plan. Staff recommends approval of the amendments. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH — BIKEWAYS AND TRAILS Agenda Item# 19 Page 2 1 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE 2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY THE 3 INCORPORATION OF THE BIKEWAYS AND 4 TRAILS PLAN AND REPEAL OF THE 5 MASTER BIKEWAYS PLAN 1986 6 WHEREAS, on September 8, 2004, the Planning Commission held 7 a public hearing concerning the amendment of the Comprehensive 8 Plan (the "Plan") by the incorporation of the Bikeways and 9 Trails Plan (the "Trails Plan") and the repeal of the Master 10 Bikeways Plan 1986 (the "Bikeways Plan"), and at the conclusion 11 of such public hearing, recommended that the Plan be amended by 12 the incorporation of the said Trails Plan as an appendix to the 13 Plan and the repeal of the Bikeways Plan; 14 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 15 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 16 That the Comprehensive Plan be, and hereby is, amended and 17 reordained by the incorporation of the Bikeways and Trails Plan, 18 dated August 30, 2004, as an appendix to the Comprehensive Plan 19 and the repeal of the Master Bikeways Plan 1986. A true copy of 20 the said Trails Plan was exhibited to the Planning Commission on 21 September 8, 2004, and on this day to the City Council. 22 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 23 Virginia, on the day of 1 2004. 24 CA-9362 25 OID/ordres/Bikeways/Comp Plan.doc 26 R-2 27 August 31, 2004 28 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT 29 _ 30 Plann'n epartment APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: 0 c iv, City Attorney's Office 2 1 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2 PERTAINING TO THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN BY 3 ADDITION OF TEXT AND AMENDING THE MAP RELATING TO 4 THE BIKEWAYS AND TRAILS PLAN 5 WHEREAS, the public necessity, convenience, general 6 welfare and good zoning practice so require; 7 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 8 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 9 That the Master Transportation Plan of the Comprehensive 10 Plan (the "Plan") of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia be, 11 and hereby is amended and reordained by the following 12 amendments: 13 . . . . 14 There are seven guiding principles that form the foundation of 15 the Master Transportation Plan in Virginia Beach. These 16 principles are set out below. 1 / 18 3. . . . . The MTP must address the mobility needs of all of our 19 citizens 20 Not all citizens have access to private transportation. 21 There is a growing segment of our community that must rely 22 of some form of community or public transportation. These 23 citizens deserve safe, convenient and affordable 24 transportation options. This plan acknowledges the need 25 for additional transportation options including improved 26 public transportation. 27 Mult-image s e trails, frZs • �s� 30 A comprehensive system of bikeways and trails should be 31 integrated with the Master Transportation Plan as 32 appropriate. Consistency between the MTP and the Bikeways 33 and Trails Plan should be ensured. 34 . . . . 35 6. The MTP must be realistic and fiscally responsible. 36 The City's MTP represents both a visionary plan and a 37 financially constrained plan. It is comprised of 38 components that depict both the City's long-term vision for 39 transportation and also the City's shorter -term priorities 40 as required by•TEA-21 and subsequent federal transportation 41 funding legislation. What it doesn't include is a 42 financial plan for implementing improvements for other 43 modes such as transit, walking and bicycles. A financial 44 plan for these components of the system is just as 45 important as the financially constrained highway portion of 46 the plan. 47 The Bikeways and Trails Plan also represents both a 48 visionary plan and a financially constrained plan. 2 49 . . . . 50 Transportation Goals and Policies 51 Goal T-1 52 Establish better linkages to the regional and national 53 transportation networks. 54 . . . . 55 Policy T-1-8 56 Continue to support the recommendations of the Bikeways and 57 Trails Plan. 58 Providing a safe and interconnected system of bikeways 59 and trails requires that these facilities have 60 linkages to adjoining jurisdictions. Similarly, it is 61 important that physical barriers within this bikeways 62 and trails system are addressed through coordinated 63 planning and design with the roadway system. Examples 64 of such barriers include the Lesner Bridge, I-64 and 65 I-264. 66 GOAL T-2 67 Protect and enhance the service levels of the City's 68 transportation system. Specific attention should be given to 69 arterials within the City that connect major employment and 70 activity centers. 71 Although this plan acknowledges the need for a balanced approach 72 to solving our transportation problems, it also recognizes that 73 the City's roadway network is the mobility lifeline that serves 3 74 nearly every mode of travel within the City. Roadways allow 75 access by emergency vehicles and are essential for the movement 76 of people, goods and services throughout the community. The 77 City's bikeways and trails system predominately shares the 78 corridor of the roadway network, as well. This plan also 79 acknowledges that the City's roadway network is inadequate, in 80 several locations, to meet anticipated demand. The locations 81 that are of particular concern include those that serve 82 strategic employment or activity centers. 83 . . . . 84 The City's Transportation Plan Maps set forth future corridor 85 improvements and provide the legal basis (in conjunction with 86 the City's Subdivision Ordinance) for right-of-way 87 dedication/reservation requirements on new developments. The 88 maps establish the right-of-way required for future 89 improvements, identify roadway hierarchy, and according to 90 regional policies, set priorities by establishing those 91 projects slated for construction over the next twenty years. 92 See Appendix for a partial listing of labeled roadway segments 93 included in the Master Transportation Plan Map. 94 Refer to the City's Bikeways and Trails Plan for a prioritized 95 listing of improvements to the bikeways and trails system. 96 4 97 GOAL T - 3 98 Develop and implement strategies that strive for better balance 99 in the City's transportation network. Consider the needs of all 100 residents and visitors, including those with limited mobility 101 options. 102 . . . . 103 Policy T-3-2 104 Encourage amenities such as seating, shelter, lighting, 105 bicycle storage, and posted information at bus stops to 106 increase rider comfort and safety. 107 This policy further supports making the regional 108 transit system a viable component of the City's 109 transportation system. This plan not only recommends 110 improved service but improved facilities to enhance ill the image and convenience of the service. 112 . . . 113 Policy T-4-11 114 Develop centerlines for corridors identified in the Master 115 Transportation Plan in order to facilitate improved 116 coordination with land use planning, environmental 117 protection, and the provision of aesthetic and multimodal 118 opportunities. 119 This policy recognizes the need to identify more 120 specific right-of-way requirements early in the G 121 planning process to ensure compatibility with adjacent 122 land uses and ample capacity for aesthetics, bikeways, 123 and trails. 124 GOAL T-5 125 In addition to adding highway capacity, manage demand where 126 opportunities exist. 127 . . . . 128 GOAL T-6 129 Establish a roadway hierarchy that serves the city's 130 transportation, economic and mobility needs. 131 . . . . 132 Areas of Strategic Importance 133 This plan recognizes that a one -size fit all approach to 134 transportation planning does not work well in a community' the 135 size and complexity of Virginia Beach. Consequently, this 136 section of the plan identifies areas that require special 137 policies or programs. For areas included here, there are 138 specific recommendations. The Bikeways and Trails Plan also has 139 a similar listing of specific recommendations that require 140 special policies or programs for certain areas or corridors. 141 Transition Area 142 . . . . 143 Virginia Beach Boulevard Corridor 144 . . . . 9 145 • Realign Bonney Road to better serve Town Center and 146 connections to Rosemont Road. 147 •— Establish -cedes „/ b i eyed e- trail a l engSeuth Plaza Trams 148 • Improve the accessibility of the Lynnhaven office and 149 retail district. 150 . . . . 151 • Improve Virginia Beach Boulevard from Laskin Road to 152 Pacific Avenue. 153 • Improvements in this corridor should include the 154 following: access controls, aesthetic treatments, 155 pedestrian and --brevet^ fae l't' and safety 156 improvements. 157 • Extend Norfolk Avenue west to connect with Southern 158 Boulevard. 159 . . . . 160 Kempsville 161 . . . . 162 Resort Area 163 . . . . 164 Lynnhaven 165 . . . . 166 Corporate Landing/Dam Neck Road Corridor 167 . . . . 168 Bayfront 7 169 . . . . 170 Northampton Boulevard 171 . . . . 172 Newtown 173 . . . . 174 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 175 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 176 That the map for the Master Transportation Plan shall be 177 amended as found in the Amended Master Transportation Plan Map 178 dated October 5, 2004. 179 COMMENT 180 These amendments to the Master Transportation Plan, both the text and the map, are in keeping 181 with the Bikeways and Trails Plan. 182 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 183 Virginia, on the day of , 2004. 184 CA- 9362 185 OID/ordinances/bikeways/MTPA.doc 186 R2 187 September 7, 2004 188 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: 189 SUFFICIENCY: 190 191 4anj'' Department APPROVED AS TO LEGAL City Attorney's Office R DOCUMENTS ADOPTED BY REFERENCE The following documents and any related amendments to them are hereby adopted by reference as part of this Comprehensive Plan: Virginia Beach Central Business District Master Plan, 1991 Oceanfront Resort Area Concept Plan, 1994 (as amended) Virginia Beach Historic Resources Management Plan, 1994 Natural Heritage Report, 1994 Virginia Beach Outdoors Plan, 1994 Municipal Center Master Plan, 1997 Consolidated Strategy and Plan for Housing and Community Development Programs Princess Anne Corridor Study, 2000 Laskin Road Phase 1 Corridor Plan, 2000 Public Facilities: General Aesthetic Guidelines, 2000 Shore Drive Corridor P1an,2000 Virginia Beach Outdoors Plan 2000 Update, 2001 Southern Watershed Area Management Plan, 2001 *Multiple Benefits Conservation Plan, 2001 *Strategic Plan for Agriculture in Chesapeake and Virginia Beach, 2001 *Southern Watershed Area Rural Area Preservation Plan, 2001 *Conservation Plan for the Southern Watershed Area, 2001 Beach Management Plan, April 2002 Retail Establishments and Shopping Center Ordinance Guidelines, 2002 Princess Anne Commons Design Guidelines, 2003 publl r •1•+ Ci 1 n +1, +' Guidelines, 2000 Retail 1= + bl l n4 a Shopping Center- n l 'r 'Al 1' -0 7nn7 Master- Bikeways Plan 1986 Laskin Road Gateway Design Guidelines, 2004 Bikeways and Trails Plan, 2004 City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Appendix /Amended October 12, 2004 F-1 CHAPTER EIGHT 1VIASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN Introduction This chapter of the Comprehensive Plan outlines the City's policies, goals and programs regarding the planning and implementation of transportation facilities in the City of Virginia Beach. It is intended to provide our citizens and policy makers with an overview of the issues confronting our transportation system today, as well as a glimpse into our transportation system of the future. Meeting the needs of residents, visitors and businesses calls for comprehensive and forward -looking solutions. The Master Transportation Plan establishes a policy and program framework that will support future implementation of a wide range of transportation solutions. It is important to point out that the plan does not contain a "silver bullet" that solves all of the City's transportation problems. Virginia Beach, like most suburban communities in the US, will require a multiple outcome approach that focuses on managing demand as well as adding capacity to resolve its transportation problems. Much of this plan focuses on the issue of congestion and the need for comprehensive solutions. Although the City's roadway network is the city's mobility lifeline that supports nearly every mode of transportation, it is abundantly clear that the City will not be able to build its way out of its congestion problems. To have any hope of solving its congestion problems, the City will need to maximize the efficiency of the existing system while implementing new solutions. A second important point is the recognition that mobility is not a goal that supercedes all others. This plan recognizes the need to better integrate transportation as one component of a larger community enhancement strategy that also includes, for example, the need to protect stable neighborhood areas. Transportation improvements should complement rather than compromise the other goals identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Many of the goals, policies and programs identified in this plan apply generally throughout the City. These recommendations typically address systems improvements or general planning practices. However, the plan recognizes that some geographic areas are of particular strategic importance and require special planning attention. The last part of this chapter focuses on these strategic initiatives and provides detailed guidance on transportation issues in these areas. As we began the Comprehensive Plan review process in 2001, various listening sessions were conducted throughout the City. These sessions offered the public an opportunity to voice their concerns and opinions on a wide range of topics including transportation. Citizens emphasized the need for better integration of transportation and land use planning, a more balanced transportation system that does not rely solely on privately owned vehicles, and the importance of pedestrian and bicycle facilities that are safe and City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan 195 accessible. The Master Transportation Plan establishes goals, policies and programs that address these issues and others related to transportation planning that are important to the citizens of Virginia Beach. Guiding Principles There are seven guiding principles that form the foundation of the Master Transportation Plan in Virginia Beach. These principles are set out below. 1. The Master Transportation Plan (MTP) serves as the City's primary policy document for transportation. Implementation of the goals, programs and policies identified in this plan are intended to produce a transportation system that is safe, accessible, attractive, economically viable, and environmentally sound. The Plan is not intended to provide specific details regarding roadway design and/or engineering. For details regarding roadway engineering, the reader should consult the City's Public Works Department and its design standards. 2. The MTP should be local, but establish links to regional plans and even national plans, where appropriate. The adoption by the U.S. Congress of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and other similar federal legislation requires strict coordination between local and regional transportation plans. Local projects not included in the regional long-range plan are not eligible for state or federal transportation funds. Consequently, this plan acknowledges the connection between the two plans and specifically identifies projects for each. 3. The MTP must address the mobility needs of all of our citizens Not all citizens have access to private transportation. There is a growing segment of our community that must rely of some form of community or public transportation. These citizens deserve safe, convenient and affordable transportation options. This plan acknowledges the need for additional transportation options including improved public transportation. Multipur-pose trails, ineluding appr-exiiRately planned bike lanes and paths, shE)Uld b integrated . pai4 of the Master T-r-anopeft.,tie Pl.,..andMaster- Bikeway Plan, A comprehensive system of bikeways and trails should be integrated with the Master Transportation Plan as appropriate. Consistency between the MTP and the Bikeways and Trails Plan should be ensured. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 196 4. The MTP must be flexible because our ability to predict the future is limited. The future, particularly long term, is often determined by events and societal changes that are beyond our abilities to predict. Consequently, this plan strives to incorporate flexibility into its recommended transportation program. The intent is to preserve options, where feasible, without imposing undue burdens on City finances or private landowners. 5. The MTP strives for a balanced transportation system that serves the community's mobility needs without damage or negative impact to the community itself. To the extent possible, transportation should be integrated into the community rather than the community developing around the transportation system. This principle recognizes that mobility is not a goal that supercedes all others. This principle deals with the issue of competing, and sometimes conflicting, community goals. This plan recognizes the need for integrated goals. Transportation improvements that may come at the expense of other goals, such as neighborhood preservation, are extremely undesirable. This plan also recognizes the need for a more balanced transportation system. A number of disturbing transportation trends have occurred over the past several years: 1) The number of trips people make has increased at a rate faster than population growth; 2) Trip distances have increased despite efforts to curb sprawl; and 3) Automobile occupancy and transit usage have declined. These trends, when combined with a healthy rate of community growth and limited transportation resources, make solving the City's congestion problem with roadway construction alone an impossible proposition. This plan acknowledges the roles that transit and demand management can play in solving the City's congestion problems. The challenge is to develop and implement strategies that successfully expand the role that both play in the movement of people, goods, and services in Virginia Beach. 6. The MTP must be realistic and fiscally responsible. The City's MTP represents both a visionary plan and a financially constrained plan. It is comprised of components that depict both the City's long-term vision for transportation and also the City's shorter -term priorities as required by TEA- 21 and subsequent federal transportation funding legislation. What it doesn't include is a financial plan for implementing improvements for other modes such as transit, walking and bicycles. A financial plan for these components of the system is just as important as the financially constrained highway portion of the plan. The Bikeways and Trails Plan also represents both a visionaryplan and a financially constrained plan. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October I2, 2004 197 7. The MTP should aim to integrate land use and transportation planning by managing future development patterns in a manner that minimizes the rate of increase in travel demand. One of the most important factors influencing travel demand is the pattern of community development. A compact form of development characterized by proximity of places of residence, employment, and community services will generally have less impact on travel demand than a widely dispersed, low density form of development. Policies aimed at encouraging infill and redevelopment to higher densities within strategic areas of the City are consistent with this goal. Transportation Goals and Policies Goal T-1 Establish better linkages to the regional and national transportation networks. The City of Virginia Beach is often referred to as the cul-de-sac at the end of I-264. The policies included here strive to overcome this situation by creating better connections to the regional and national transportation system. Improved linkages are not only important transportation goals, but also represent important components of the City's economic development strategy as the City strives to expand its tax base and create additional employment opportunities. The linchpin to the City's strategy to establish better linkages to the regional and national transportation systems is the Southeastern Parkway and Greenbelt. The parkway is important because of the linkages it potentially creates with US 460 to the west and I-95 south of Richmond. The parkway also serves a more local purpose in that it provides a more direct connection to I-664 in Chesapeake and the Monitor -Merrimac Bridge Tunnel. As congestion at the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel grows, more travelers will choose the Monitor Merrimac Bridge Tunnel as their point of access to southside Hampton Roads. For those travelers destined for Virginia Beach, the Southeastern Parkway will provide a more direct means of access, particularly those traveling to the resort. Policy T-1-1: Continue to diligently pursue the Southeastern Parkway and Greenbelt as a limited access parkway connection between I-264 in Virginia Beach and I-64 in Chesapeake. Policy T-1-2: Continue to pursue an improved US Route 460 in Southside Virginia to provide a better connection I-95 and a parallel (east -west) alternative to I-64. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 0': Improvements to US Route 460 represent an important component of the City's goal of creating a new "window" to the west with better linkages to I- 95 south of Richmond. Policy T-1-3: Continue to pursue improvements to I-64 in Hampton Roads including interchange improvements at I-264. If I-264 serves as the City of Virginia Beach's economic lifeline, then I-64 is the lifeline that serves the greater Hampton Roads area. To support the City's growing tourist industry as well as other service, military and industrial employers, I-64 must be improved. An improved I-64 on the peninsula, in Chesapeake and at the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel are absolutely critical to serve Virginia Beach's growing economy. One project of particular importance is an improved interchange at I-264. Without the proposed Southeastern Parkway, the I-264/I-64 interchange serves as the only major gateway to Virginia Beach. That gateway currently suffers from extraordinary levels of congestion during the morning and afternoon peak periods. Improvements to the interchange, particularly to the ramps (I-64 to eastbound I-264) are absolutely critical in terms of maintaining the gateway at I-264. Policy T-1-4: Continue to pursue improvements to I-264 at the following locations: The most important link in the City's existing transportation network is I-264. An overwhelming majority of the City's daily movement of goods and services occurs along this corridor. It is the City's primary connection to the rest of the world. Despite significant improvements over the past two decades, parts of I-264 are woefully inadequate. This plan supports continued study and funding for improvements at the following locations: • Improve the Interchange at I-264 and Lynnhaven Parkway • Improve the Interchange at I-264 and Rosemont Road • Improve the Interchange at I-264 and Witchduck Road • Study an additional interchange between Independence Blvd. and Witchduck Road • Study an additional interchange between Independence Blvd. And Rosemont Road • Study an additional interchange at Great Neck Road City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 199 Policy T-1-5 Continue to support completion of the improvements planned for the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel Although not carrying the same level of traffic volumes as the connections at I-64 and I-264, the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel is an important gateway to Virginia Beach from the northeast corridor. The Bay Bridge Tunnel Commission recently completed construction of a parallel span to separate north and southbound traffic. The next phase is to construct parallel tunnels to complete the improvements. This plan supports continued study and funding for the additional tubes. Policy T-1-6 Continue to support programmed improvements at Norfolk International Airport The City of Virginia Beach recognizes the importance of domestic and international air travel as a component of the local and regional transportation systems. This plan endorses the parallel runway improvements slated for Norfolk International Airport. The City also supports improved facilities at Pungo Airfield and other outlying airfields in Hampton Roads. Policy T-1-7 Continue to pursue high-speed rail connections to southside Hampton Roads. As part of its strategy to balance both the local and the larger regional transportation systems, this plan acknowledges the importance of a high-speed rail connection to Southside Hampton Roads and endorses continued study of this proposal. Between the two alternatives previously under study, the City of Virginia Beach endorses the alignment along the US Route 460. Policy T-1-8 Continue to support the recommendations of the Bikeways and Trails Plan. Providing_a safe and interconnected system of bikeways and trails requires that these facilities have linkages to adjoiningjurisdictions. Similarly, it is important that physical barriers within this bikeways and trails system are addressed through coordinated planning and design with the roadway system. Examples of such barriers include the Lesner Bridge, I-64 and I-264. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 200 GOAL T-2 Protect and enhance the service levels of the City's transportation system. Specific attention should be given to arterials within the City that connect major employment and activity centers. Although this plan acknowledges the need for a balanced approach to solving our transportation problems, it also recognizes that the City's roadway network is the mobility lifeline that serves nearly every mode of travel within the City. Roadways allow access by emergency vehicles and are essential for the movement of people, goods and services throughout the community. The City's bikeways and trails system predominately shares the corridor of the roadway network as well. This plan also acknowledges that the City's roadway network is inadequate, in several locations, to meet anticipated demand. The locations that are of particular concern include those that serve strategic employment or activity centers. Specific examples of needed arterial improvements include: • Lynnhaven Parkway • Witchduck Road • Rosemont Road • City Line Road • Indian River Road • Newtown Road • Dam Neck Road The following list is a more comprehensive list of roadway projects committed as part of the City and Region's Long Range Plan. Highway Projects Committed in City and Regional Long Range Plans Projects From To Improvement Baker Rd Ext'd Summit Arch w. of Witchduck Rd New Alignment Birdneck Rd Gen Booth Blvd Southern Blvd Widening Buckner Blvd / Shipps Corner Rd Rosemont Rd Holland Rd New Alignment Centerville Tnpk Ches CL Kempsville Rd Widening Centerville Tnpk Kempsville Rd Indian River Rd Widening Concert Dr Ext'd Recreation Dr Dam Neck Rd New Alignment Constitution Dr ext'd Columbus St Bonney Rd New Alignment Elbow Rd / Dam Neck Rd New Castle School GTE VB Amphitheater New Alignment Elbow Rd / Dam Neck Rd Indian River Rd GTE VB Amphitheater Widening First Colonial Rd Great Neck Rd Republic Rd Widening First Colonial Rd / VB Blvd Intersection n.a. n.a. Turn Lane(s) Holland Rd Nimmo Pkwy Dam Neck Rd Widening Holland Rd Dam Neck Rd Rosemont Rd Widening Indian River Rd Centerville Tnpk Ferrell Pkwy Widening City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 201 Indian River Rd Indian River Rd Indian River Rd Jeanne St Kempsville Rd / PA Rd Intersection Laskin Rd Laskin Rd Laskin Rd London Bridge Rd, Great Neck Rd Lynnhaven Pkwy Lynnhaven Pkwy - Volvo Pkwy Lynnhaven Pkwy - Volvo Pkwy Nimmo Pkwy Nimmo Pkwy Nimmo Pkwy Nimmo Pkwy (cost includes 26-283) Princess Anne Rd (cost included in 26-276) Princess Anne Rd Princess Anne Rd Providence Rd Rosemont Rd Salem Rd Salem Rd Sandbridge Rd Seaboard Rd Seaboard Rd Shore Dr (Lesner bridge) Wesleyan Dr West Neck Pkwy ext'd West Neck Pkwy ext'd West Neck Rd Witchduck Rd Witchduck Rd misc. TIP projects (bikeways, turn lanes, signals, etc.) Lynnhaven Pkwy Elbow Rd West Neck Rd Constitution Dr n.a. First Colonial Rd Oriole Rd w. of Holly Rd. International Pkwy Holland Rd Ches CL Centerville Tnpk Indian River Rd Holland Rd Upton Dr Princess Anne Rd Dam Neck Rd Indian River Rd Upton Dr Kempsville Rd VB Blvd North Landing Rd Elbow Rd Princess Anne Rd Nimmo Pkwy Princess Anne Rd west approaches Norf CL Elbow Rd North Landing Rd North Landing Rd I-264 Princess Anne Rd n.a. Elbow Rd North Landing Rd North Landing Rd Independence Blvd n.a. Oriole Rd w of Holly Rd Atlantic Ave VB Blvd Lishelle PI Centerville Tnpk Indian River Rd West Neck Rd ext'd Gen Booth Blvd Sandfiddler Rd Holland Rd Nimmo Pkwy Sandbridge Rd General Booth Blvd PA Rd Holland Rd Elbow Rd Independence Blvd Atwoodtown Rd PA Rd (near PA Elem Sch) Princess Anne Rd east approaches Baker Rd North Landing Rd Indian River Rd Indian River Rd VB Blvd I-264 n.a. Widening Widening Reconstruction Widening Turn Lane(s) Widening Widening Widening Widening Widening New Alignment New Alignment New Alignment New Alignment New Alignment New Alignment Widening Reconstruction Widening Widening Widening Widening Widening Widening Widening Reconstruction Reconstruction Widening New Alignment New Alignment Widening Widening Widening misc. The City's Transportation Plan Maps set forth future corridor improvements and provide the legal basis (in conjunction with the City's Subdivision Ordinance) for right-of-way dedication/reservation requirements on new developments. The maps establish the right- of-way required for future improvements, identify roadway hierarchy, and according to regional policies, set priorities by establishing those projects slated for construction over the next twenty years. See Appendix for a partial listing of labeled roadway segments included in the Master Transportation Plan Map. Refer to the City's Bikeways and Trails Plan for a prioritized listingof f improvements to the bikeways and trails system. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 202 Policy T-2-1 Support efforts to minimize vehicular access along arterials including purchase of abutting properties. As part of the City's policy to maximize the efficiency of the existing transportation network, this plan recognizes the importance of minimizing access points (curb cuts) along the City's arterials. These access points rob valuable capacity from the transportation system as vehicles transition between adjacent properties and the arterial roadway. Policy T-2-2 Require a traffic impact analysis for any development proposal generating 100 trips or more during the am or pm peak hour. To ensure that the integrity of the City's transportation system is maintained, all new development proposals generating 100 or more vehicle trips in the morning or afternoon peak period will submit a traffic impact study to assess the operational impacts of the new traffic. Policy T-2-3 Preserve, maintain, and enhance the existing transportation system by utilizing Intelligent Transportation Systems and transportation systems management techniques. This policy also supports the goal of maximizing the efficiency of the City's existing transportation system. Considerable progress has been made in the area of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). The Virginia Department of Transportation has completed the first phase of the Hampton Roads ITS system. Two additional phases are anticipated over the next few years. The City Virginia Beach has completed its first ITS Master Plan. The City's plan proposes an integrated system that would essentially serve as expansion of the VDOT system to include strategic locations at the resort and critical north -south arterials. Now that the plan is complete, the city will make a concentrated effort to seek federal, state and regional funding to implement the ITS Master Plan. GOAL T-3 Develop and implement strategies that strive for better balance in the City's transportation network. Consider the needs of all residents and visitors, including those with limited mobility options. The rate of growth in travel in Virginia Beach continues to be nearly three times the rate of population growth. The Hampton Roads Planning District Commission estimates vehicle miles of travel in Virginia Beach is increasing at a rate of approximately 1.7% per City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 203 year. This has occurred during a period when population growth was around .5% per year. The following two factors have contributed to this situation. 1) Whereas in the past a majority of the work trips originating in Virginia Beach were destined for surrounding cities, the City now retains nearly 58% of its daily work trips. 2) The percentage of work trips made by private auto are increasing while travel by other modes are decreasing or, in the case of public transportation, flat. The following table describes this changing pattern of commuting: MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION TO WORK (workers 16 years and over) Census 1990 Census2000 Change 1990 to 20M Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Workers 213,432 100.0°/ 222,648 100.00/ 9,216 4.30 Drove Alone 167,255 78.40A 182,639 82.09% 15,374 9.2"/ Carpooled 25,531 12.Wc 24,036 10.8°/ 1,495 -6.9°/ Public Transportation(Includestax 1,637 0.8"/ 1,651 0.7°/ 14 0.90 6icyde or Walk 8,285 3.9°/ 5,088 2.30% 3,197 38.W( Motorcyde or Other Means 3,757 1.80A 3,069 1.4°/ -6W 18.3( Worked at Home 6,967 3.3°/ 6,165 2.80A a92 41.4°/ Source: U.S. Department of Commerce: 1990 Census and 2000 Census Now more than ever single occupant vehicles dominate the City's transportation system. This trend has a number of consequences including increased delay, energy consumption, air pollution, and neighborhood impacts. One of the great challenges of this plan will be to develop strategies that result in fewer drive alone trips in Virginia Beach. It is important to add that while there is little excess roadway capacity during the peak travel periods, considerable capacity is available to accommodate all of these alternative modes. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan /Amended October 12, 2004 204 Percentage of Commuters by Mode of Travel Policy T-3-1 Develop a convenient, efficient public transit system that provides a viable alternative to driving. This plan fully recognizes that any comprehensive strategy to improve the City's transportation system must include better utilization of the regional transit system. This strategy specifically calls for improving public transit service in those corridors where demand for such services is planned or has been established. This means preventing fragmentation of existing corridors that can accommodate future transit service and exploring ways to provide alternative multimodal links within designated areas and corridors. Additional transit service is recommended for the following locations/corridors: Virginia Beach Boulevard (bus service frequency), Independence Boulevard, Town Center, the Resort Area, Lynnhaven Parkway. Other complementary service proposals include establishing a circulator service connecting Town Center to surrounding office and retail centers. This service should operate with smaller scale buses that are suitable for a downtown environment. Some connection to the Silverleaf Station Park and Ride lot may be warranted. Policy T-3-2 Encourage amenities such as seating, shelter, lighting, bicycle storage, and posted information at bus stops to increase rider comfort and safety. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 205 This policy further supports making the regional transit system a viable component of the City's transportation system. This plan not only recommends improved service but improved facilities to enhance the image and convenience of the service. Policy T-3-3 Install bike racks or carriers on buses and trolleys. This is another strategy aimed at increasing the ridership and appeal of the transit system. Although these amenities could prove to be valuable for all transit services, it could have great utility for the City's trolley service. Policy T-3-4 Encourage a responsive private sector taxi service. The plan recognizes that the private sector has a role to play in serving the mobility needs of the community. Local cab, jitney, and taxi services can be particularly effective serving tourist and others who do not have access to private transportation resources. Strategies to make these services more affordable for those with limited resources are also an important component of this policy. Policy T-3-5 Expand and improve transportation alternatives for those with disabilities and senior citizens. This plan recognizes that many citizens have limited transportation options. The purpose of this policy is to encourage the development of new and improved transportation alternatives for those with limited mobility. In developing these new alternatives the City should explore the following initiatives: a. Grassroots transportation alternatives using nonprofits and faith based organizations as the primary service provider. b. The use of vouchers to offset the costs of private transportation for qualified citizens. c. The use of flexible bus service where paratransit and fixed bus routes operate together using the same vehicle. d. Create better information resources for those with limited transportation options. e. Create educational resources to assist citizens in making wise housing choices since transportation alternatives are not equal throughout the city. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan /Amended October 12, 2004 206 GOAL T-4 Integrate land use and transportation planning to create a land use pattern and a transportation system that enhances the livability of our community. To be truly effective, the community planning process must better integrate its transportation planning activities with its land use planning efforts. An important step in this process is recognizing that land use patterns dictate certain transportation solutions. Consequently, if the City wants to expand certain aspects of its transportation system, it must pursue land use patterns that are suitable for those modes. Whereas the City's Master Transportation Plan formerly consisted of a document that essentially identified the road projects anticipated in the future, this plan acknowledges the role that land use patterns play in generating travel demand and subsequently suggests that one way of reducing automobile travel is by encouraging and accommodating land use patterns that support alternative transportation modes. Policy T-4-1 Design and maintain transportation facilities to be compatible with adjacent land uses. This plan acknowledges that one size fit all may not be appropriate when it comes to the design and maintenance of transportation facilities. Transportation facilities, whether a road or a transit shelter, should reflect the character of the surrounding community. Policy T-4-2 Promote land uses that reduce reliance on single occupant vehicles. Transportation and land use are inextricably linked. If the City is to come to grips with the issue of congestion, it must promote land uses that support alternate forms of transportation. Low -density suburban land uses generally require autos. Public transportation, for example, has not been an effective alternative in low -density suburban communities. Transit is most effective in communities or corridors where densities are at least 6 or 7 units per acre. The same can be said for pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Policy T-4-3 Encourage infill, redevelopment and re -use of vacant or underutilized parcels employing minimum density requirements that are appropriate to support transit, bicycling and walking. By most accounts, transit is only an effective mode of travel when it serves higher density development. In low density communities transit struggles to meet minimum performance standards. Bicycle and pedestrian activities typically increase in higher density corridors as well, provided adequate City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 207 facilities are available. This program attempts to link land use and transportation planning by acknowledging that certain densities are required to make some alternate forms of transportation viable. Policy T-4-4 Continue to support the City's neighborhood traffic calming program. One impact of traffic congestion is motorists often seek alternative routes to avoid highly congested areas. In some cases the alternative routes consist of local streets through existing residential areas. For some time the City has actively implemented traffic calming techniques to discourage through trips in residential neighborhoods. This plan recognizes the importance of traffic calming and endorses its continued use where appropriate. Policy T-4-5 Address the needs of people with disabilities during the planning and implementation of transportation and parking improvement projects, as well as site plan development. With the adoption of the American's with Disabilities Act (ADA), transportation and mobility problems for millions of disabled Americans have improved. Under the ADA, eligible citizens now have guaranteed paratransit service within 3/ mile of a fixed bus route. Unfortunately, the cost of the paratransit services is quite high. Some citizens prefer to use the fixed route bus service, but traveling 3/ of a mile can present a real challenge for somebody who is wheelchair bound. This policy acknowledges that barriers for the disabled, much like barriers for cyclist or pedestrians, need to be addressed if we intend to their mobility options. Policy T-4-6 Housing opportunities for senior citizens and persons with disabilities should be located in corridors where public transportation operates. Policy T-4-7 Support State and Federal legislation to reduce vehicle emissions, noise and fuel consumption. Policy T-4-8 Expand and improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities throughout the city. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 m" A key way to improve bicycle and pedestrian circulation is to overcome barriers and provide more linkages between destinations. Detouring around obstacles like expressways and railroads is more significant to bicyclists and pedestrians than it is to motorists. Simple links that avoid the need to detour around large buildings, parking lots, or dead-end streets are also important. As with streets, there should be a hierarchy of pedestrian and bicycle routes, ranging from busy bike lanes along major thoroughfares to low -volume travel along local streets. The Virginia Beach landscape, like most suburban communities, is dominated by the car. The infrastructure needed to serve high traffic volumes of vehicular traffic is oftentimes a barrier for pedestrians and cyclists. This plan acknowledges the need to eliminate barriers and improve linkages between key activity centers. Areas in need of particular attention include Town Center, the Virginia Beach Boulevard corridor, the oceanfront resort area, Princess Anne Commons, and the Shore Drive corridor. Policy T-4-9 Use appropriate landscaping and other aesthetic treatments to buffer the transportation system from abutting land uses. Such treatments are particularly critical when the abutting land uses are residential. This policy recognizes the need to improve the aesthetics of all roadways in Virginia Beach. In this plan special attention has been given on the Thoroughfare Map to expand corridors to accommodate additional landscaping and green space within the right-of-way of most corridors. The additional right-of-way also serves to protect abutting land uses from the transportation facilities in the event additional lanes are required in the future. Corridors of particular significance in terms of landscaping and scenic byways include: ■ Atlantic Avenue ■ Dam Neck Road ■ General Booth Boulevard ■ Independence Boulevard ■ Laskin Road ■ Lynnhaven Parkway ■ Nimmo Parkway ■ Pacific Avenue ■ Princess Anne Road ■ Rosemont Road ■ Sandbridge Road ■ Shore Drive ■ Virginia Beach Boulevard City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 209 ■ Witchduck Road Policy T-4-10 Use landscaping and other improvements to create attractive and distinctive gateways into the City. Related to policy T-4-9, this policy recognizes the need to improve the various gateways to the City. The purpose of the policy is to promote the use of landscaping and other ornamental treatments to create distinctive gateways into the City. Policy T-4-11 Develop centerlines for corridors identified in the Master Transportation Plan in order to facilitate improved coordination with land use planning, environmental protection, and the provision of aesthetic and multimodal opportunities. This policy recognizes the need to identify more specific right-of-way requirements early in the planning_ process to ensure compatibilitwith adjacent land uses and ample capacity for aesthetics, bikeways, and trails. GOAL T-5 In addition to adding highway capacity, manage demand where opportunities exist. Generally speaking there is more than sufficient roadway capacity available to meet the community's needs during a majority of each day. Unfortunately, most citizens try to use the available capacity at the same time. The concept of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) focuses on strategies aimed at spreading roadway demand over longer periods of time. Specific techniques include flexible work hours, telecommuting, ridesharing, vanpools and increased use of public transportation. As part of the City's multiple outcome approach to planning for its transportation system, the City actively encourages the use of TDM measures and requires its implementation in those areas of the City that experience significant traffic congestion (based on level of service calculations). These areas include the Town Center and its surrounding environs and the general Lynnhaven office and retail areas. The City will assist in the establishment of a Transportation Management Association (TMA) to serve the Town Center and larger Pembroke Area. The purpose of the TMA will be to communicate ongoing transportation issues that impact citizens, visitors and businesses located in this area. A second TMA is encouraged for the Lynnhaven Parkway corridor to serve businesses generally located between South Lynnhaven Road and I-264. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 210 Policy T-5-1 Support regional efforts such as Traffix to work with private interests such as the Chamber of Commerce and major employers to develop and coordinate trip reduction strategies. For years Traffix, the TDM arm of Hampton Roads Transit, has been promoting demand management as a transportation and parking solution for major employers in Hampton Roads. This policy calls for continued effort in this area. Policy T-5-2 Encourage telecommuting, satellite office concepts, and flex schedules. These programs are recognized as effective transportation demand management strategies. Specific mention of these policies suggests that the City should assist Traffix in promoting these programs, particularly in corridors where congestion is high. Policy T-5-3 Create a long-term education program to change the travel habits of residents, visitors, and workers by informing them about transportation alternatives, incentives, and impacts. Work with the Virginia Beach School District and even with private interests, such as the Chamber of Commerce, to develop and implement this program. This policy follows earlier successes such as educational efforts for recycling and water conservation. Policy T-5-4 Support the continued development of regional on-line transportation services to provide current information on transit, parking, and roadway conditions. Although VDOT has made some headway in this area of ITS, there is much more to be done. Additional travelers' information, including roadway advisory systems, can help manage demand during certain peak periods of the day. GOAL T-6 Establish a roadway hierarchy that serves the city's transportation, economic and mobility needs. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 III To function efficiently, the City's transportation network should consist of a system of roadways that serve a variety of transportation purposes. The system should range from local streets, where access to abutting residences is as important as mobility, to interstate highways that serve unimpeded high speed travel. This plan includes a conceptual functional hierarchy of roadways to guide access and land use decisions along select corridors. Areas of Strategic Importance This plan recognizes that a one -size fit all approach to transportation planning does not work well in a community the size and complexity of Virginia Beach. Consequently, this section of the plan identifies areas that require special policies or programs. For areas included here, there are specific recommendations. The Bikeways and Trails Plan also has a similar listing of specific recommendations that require special policies or programs for certain areas or corridors. Transition Area The Transition Area presents a unique challenge in that most of the transportation network is rural in character and not designed to support any significant increase in demand. Combine this fact with policies permitting some increase in residential and nonresidential development and there will be a need for some improvement to the transportation system. The following policies are specifically intended for the Transition Area. • Establish a transportation network that is capable of serving a range of land use alternatives. • Protect roadway corridors to accommodate land use uncertainties as well as provide appropriate buffering and aesthetic treatments. • Apply extraordinary aesthetic treatments along select corridors in the Transition Area, either on public or private property. These corridors include: Princess Anne Road, Sandbridge Road, Nimmo Parkway between Indian River and Princess Anne Roads. • Either extend West Neck Parkway to connect with Indian River Road or provide an alternative connection between Nimmo Parkway and Indian River Road west of Courthouse Estates. • Continue to protect the Nimmo Parkway corridor east of General Booth Boulevard. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 212 Virginia Beach Boulevard Corridor This corridor, to a large degree, encompasses the areas identified as strategic growth areas. Consequently, the plan offers specific guidance with regard to future improvements. In many cases the exact nature of the proposed improvements are unknown. In those cases, a listing of the location suggests the need for a study to better identify specific transportation improvements. • Improve Newtown Road and its intersection with Virginia Beach Boulevard. • Improve Witchduck Road and its intersections with I-264 and Cleveland Street. • Improve Cleveland Street and complete the connection of this roadway between Witchduck and Newtown Roads. • Protect the Norfolk Southern Rail road right of way for future transportation options. • Improve Rosemont Road and its intersections with I-264 and Virginia Beach Boulevard. • Improve the accessibility of the Town Center. • Realign Bonney Road to better serve Town Center and connections to Rosemont Road. • Improve the accessibility of the Lynnhaven office and retail district. • Improve the Lynnhaven Parkway interchange with I-264. ■ Construct I-264 interchange improvements at Great Neck Road. ■ Improve intersection at Lynnhaven and International Parkways. • Improve Virginia Beach Boulevard from Laskin Road to Pacific Avenue. ■ Improvements in this corridor should include the following: access controls, aesthetic treatments, pedestrian ffid ti..:,.Yele r.,,..ties-, and safety improvements. • Extend Norfolk Avenue west to connect with Southern Boulevard. • Extend the Norfolk Avenue Trail to connect with Southern Boulevard. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 1I II Kempsville The community of Kempsville represents nearly 30% of the City's population. Because of this high percentage of residential land uses and the travel demand in Kempsville for access to the interstate, Kempsville suffers from particularly high levels of peak hour congestion along the key portals to the community. Indian River Road, Witchduck Road and Princess Anne Road all suffer from peak hour congestion. This section of the plan highlights several important recommendations to address congestion. Some of these recommendations are ongoing improvement projects currently under study by the City. These recommendations include: • Improve Witchduck Road. • Improve the intersection at Kempsville and Indian River Roads. • Construct City Line Road in accordance with the recommended alignment from VDOT (connection with Centerville Turnpike) and new interchange at I-64. • Improve the intersection at Kempsville and Witchduck/Princess.Anne Roads. • Connect Lynnhaven and Volvo Parkways. • Expand public transportation services to serve Regent University and neighboring retail areas in the Kempsville Road corridor. Resort Area The Virginia Beach Resort presents a unique transportation challenge in that it is, for the most part, a seasonal destination that experiences high levels of discretionary auto trips during the summer weekends and holidays. Although trolley ridership has more than doubled over the past 4 years, weekend and holiday congestion remains an issue. This section of the plan identifies specific recommendations for the resort. • Continue efforts to calm and/or divert tourist traffic from resort neighborhoods. • Explore Bus Rapid Transit as a transportation alternative. • Continue to expand and improve the resort trolley system. o Improve headway times. Implement technological improvements to maintain vehicle spacing. o Expand service area to include the Hilltop retail area. o Provide daily trolley service to Hilltop and Lynnhaven Mall. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October I2, 2004 214 o Extend seasonal services to correspond with tourist demands. • Improve Pacific Avenue. (Reference: Pacific Avenue Corridor Study) • Continue efforts to implement a resort bypass via Birdneck Road. • Improve 17`h (Virginia Beach Boulevard) and 19`h Street in accordance with Old Beach Plan District. • Continue to explore the possibility of constructing a multi -modal transportation center at the resort. The center would serve as a point for transferring visitors from touring buses, Amtrak, and private automobiles to the resort trolley system. Serves as a transportation information center for the resort. Provides additional parking for special events, commuters, and other visitors. Lynnhaven For purposes of this section of the MTP, the Lynnhaven area refers to the area bound by Lynnhaven Road to the West and London Bridge Road to the east, extending from I-264 south to Dam Neck Road. This area generally represents one of the largest concentrations of employment in Hampton Roads. Because it is overwhelmingly an employment destination, it too suffers from peak hour congestion. This section of the plan includes several specific recommendations for the Lynnhaven area including: • Improve interchange at Lynnhaven Parkway and I-264. • Construct interchange improvements at I-264 and Great Neck Road. • Improve intersection at International and Lynnhaven Parkways. • Identify additional east -west connection between Lynnhaven Parkway and London Bridge Road. Corporate Landing/Dam Neck Road Corridor This area represents an evolving employment center with significant amounts of supporting retail. The primary transportation component of this area is the Southeastern Parkway and Greenbelt and the proposed interchange at Dam Neck Road. For this area to recognize its full economic potential, the Parkway is essential. • Construct new loop road connecting Dam Neck Road to General Booth Boulevard south of and outside Red Wing Park. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan / Amended October 12, 2004 11G • Construct Southeastern Parkway. • Extend Corporate Landing Parkway north to connect with Oceana Boulevard. Bayfront This area of the city has developed into a blend of uses that is principally made up of single-family and multi -family residences. Secondarily, the area hosts retail and resort type uses that serve the local and visitor populations. Shore Drive, the single arterial serving the area, accommodates local traffic and serves as the only significant east -west arterial north of Virginia Beach Boulevard. It also serves as a secondary entryway to the oceanfront resort. The challenge in Bayfront is to maintain the transportation viability of Shore Drive in such a way that it does not detract from the special character of this area. Further information may be found in the Shore Drive Corridor Study. Northampton Boulevard This corridor primarily functions as a connection to I-64 and Route 13 for travelers coming into the city or who are bound for external destinations. Northampton Boulevard is heavily used by truck and commercial traffic and by local commuters. A large portion of the corridor has a limited access design to accommodate high volumes and speed. A smaller portion of the corridor is highly commercialized and oriented to serving travelers. • Improve access to Norfolk International Airport from Northampton Blvd. • Improve interchange at Shore Drive (see Shore Drive Corridor Study). • Improve Pleasure House Road between Northampton Blvd. and Shore Drive. • Improve Wesleyan Drive between Baker Road and North Hampton Blvd. • Improvement of the existing interchange at I-264 by VDOT needs to be aggressively pursued. Newtown This corridor serves as a connection to I-64, I-264, Virginia Beach Boulevard, and Princess Anne Road. It also directly serves the employment areas located along and around Newton Road (including Sentara Leigh Hospital, Interstate Commerce Park, and the Greenwich Road office complexes. Improve intersection at Newtown and Virginia Beach Boulevard. Improve Newtown Road. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan /Amended October 12, 2004 216 • Study realignment of Greenwich Road to connect with Southern Boulevard. • Reevaluate intersection at Newtown and Kempsville Roads and possible impacts of the proposed light rail station. City of Virginia Beach 2003 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document Master Transportation Plan /Amended October 12, 2004 216-A Item #19 City of Virginia Beach An Ordinance to adopt the Bikeways and Trails Plans as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Master Transportation Plan September 8, 2004 CONSENT William Din: Our next item is Item #19 from the City of Virginia Beach. This is an Ordinance to adopt the Bikeways and Trails Plan as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Is there any opposition to placing this on consent? If not, our representative on the Bikeways and Trails Committee for this Commission, Mr. Gene Crabtree, will speak on it. Eugene Crabtree: Thank you Mr. Din. We placed this on the consent agenda. This has been a plan that has been in the works since January of this past year. There has been quite a bit of work done on it. What it has done was it has attempted to take the Bikeways and Trails Plan and make it of interest to all interest groups within the city whether it's for recreational biking or if it would be someone for health purposes or whether it would be used for transportation, whether it be used for a sporting event whether it could be used for biking, whatever we use. The plan will be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan of the Planning Commission. It will also address the Master Transportation Plan of the city and will connect all portions of the city together with bike trails and bike paths that can be used by all bikers of all interest regardless of what they use it for, and consequently, we think this is a good plan and should be put into affect. It is workable and it is a foreseeable that this can be accomplished with reasonable ease. It has major streets and roadways, which are to be worked on. And, also, these paths will be included in the site plans as well. We're asking developers if they will make their developments bike friendly as well. Consequently, we think this is valuable for the consent agenda. Thank you. William Din: Thank you. Madame Chair, I would like to make a motion to approve Item #19 City of Virginia Beach. This is an Ordinance to adopt Bikeways and Trails Plan as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Dorothy Wood: Do I hear a second? Eugene Crabtree: I'll second it. Dorothy Wood: Seconded by Gene Crabtree. AYE 10 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE Item #19 City of Virginia Beach Page 2 DIN AYE HORSLEY KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE STRANGE AYE WALLER AYE WOOD AYE ABSENT Ed Weeden: By a vote 10-0, the consent agenda item has been approved by the Board. a�l CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: A Resolution to establish the Bikeways and Trails Advisory Committee as recommended in the Bikeways and Trails Plan MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: The City of Virginia Beach has developed a Bikeways and Trails Plan to guide the planning, design, implementation, and maintenance of an integrated system of bikeways and trail facilities throughout the City. The Plan has been developed by an interdepartmental team and citizens representing the development, recreational and civic interests in the community. A major recommendation in the Plan calls for the City Council to establish a Bikeways and Trails Committee to assist the Council in determining the appropriate courses of action to take with respect to the Plan. The Committee would serve as the primary body responsible for coordinating and implementing the Plan. ■ Considerations: The Plan incorporates a broad range of issues, goals, and recommendations that extend beyond the jurisdiction or scope of any one City department or citizen group. The Plan requires the coordination of a broad range of interested parties. Therefore, a Committee with membership categories is suggested to ensure that effective and comprehensive dialogue on bikeways and trails issues is achieved. The Committee would be staffed principally by the Parks and Recreation Department, with input and support from other City departments on a regular or as -needed basis. Accordingly, the Bikeways and Trials Advisory Committee's mission would be to coordinate the timely construction of bikeways and trails in accordance with the priorities established by the Plan, to promote a balanced approach between and among various trail users' interests in the City, and to provide a forum for continued citizen input in the planning and programming of future bikeways and trails. The Committee would report through the Parks and Recreation Commission to City Council and prepare an annual report on its activities, recommendations, and accomplishments. ■ Public Information: The development and adoption of the Bikeways and Trials Plan has involved a series of forums for public input, commencing with a Citizen Bike Survey in August, 2002. This survey was followed by three public workshops held on April 22, May 13, and August 30, 2004, and a City Council Public Hearing on September 28, 2004. Formation of the Committee as recommended in the Plan will ensure that a forum or continued public input and participation in the implementation phase of the Plan are accommodated. ■ Alternatives: Alternatives to this approach considered by staff included a No Action Alternative for overseeing the implementation of the Bikeways and Trails Plan, and a City Staff Only Alternative. The No Action Alternative was deemed ineffective at achieving the optimum desired benefits to be derived from a coordinated and comprehensive strategy for implementing the Bikeways and Trials Plan. Similarly, the City Staff Only Alternative was deemed ineffective at routinely and systematically accommodating both general and special interest concerns from the public related to the implementation of the Plan. ■ Recommendations: Approval of the Resolution to establish the Bikeways and Trials Advisory Committee. ■ Attachments: Ordinance Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Planningjtbli City Manager: `:�r �- , 4�� 1 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE 2 BIKEWAYS AND TRAILS ADVISORY 3 COMMITTEE 4 5 6 WHEREAS, City Council on October 12, 2004, adopted the 7 Bikeways and Trails Plan (the "Plan") for the City of Virginia 8 Beach and is committed to effectively implementing the Plan; 9 WHEREAS, input from citizens, the bicycle and trail 10 community and other parties interested in implementation of the 11 Plan will greatly assist Council in determining the appropriate 12 course of action to take with respect to such implementation. 13 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 14 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 15 1. That City Council hereby establishes the Bikeways and 16 Trails Advisory Committee (the "BTAC"). 17 2. That the membership of the BTAC shall be comprised of: 18 a. Three citizen members with diverse geographical 19 representation and experience; and 20 b. Four representatives from the bicycle and trails 21 community. 22 3. That with respect to the terms of office of the seven 23 (7) members, two (2) shall expire on June 30, 2006, three (3) 24 shall expire on June 30, 2007 and two (2) shall expire on June 25 30, 2008. Thereafter, the terms of all such members shall be 26 for three (3) years; 27 4. That one member each from the Virginia Beach City 28 Council, Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, 29 and Agricultural Advisory Committee shall serve as liason 30 members of the BTAC. 31 5. That the mission of the BTAC shall be to serve in an 32 advisory capacity to City Council with respect to the 33 implementation and coordination of the Bikeways and Trails Plan 34 and to coordinate the timely construction of bikeways and trails 35 in accordance with the priorities established by the Bikeways 36 and Trails Plan, to promote a balanced approach between and 37 among various trail users' interests in the City, and to provide 38 a forum for continued citizen and governmental input in the 39 planning and programming of future bikeways and trails. 40 Specifically, the BTAC shall be charged with the following 41 duties and responsibilities: 42 a. Work with local civic groups and other interested 43 citizens to develop secondary network priorities, linkages, and 44 potential new corridors; 45 b. Work with City staff to review road construction 46 projects to ensure that all roads and bridges, where part of the 47 primary or secondary networks, are constructed, improved or 48 maintained in a manner consistent with the Bikeways and Trails 49 Plan; 2 50 C. Work with City staff to review the City's 51 Development Ordinances and recommend revisions in consultation 52 with City staff to encourage bicycle and trail related 53 accommodations; 54 d. Identify potential funding sources for proposed 55 projects through various private, local, state and federal 56 programs; 57 e. Provide a forum for direct citizen input in the 58 planning of future bikeways and trails facilities; and 59 f. Focus efforts on achieving completion of the 60 priority projects as identified in the Plan. 61 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 62 Virginia, on the day of , 2004. CA-9395 OID/ordres/Proposed/Bikeways/BTAC R-1 Prepared: October •1,2004 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: �I Pla ning Department APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: City Attorneys Office 3 Aff-d, r '7 /'"N • 1 t T lr% SUBDIVISION VARIANCE o 'ky � rr CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Gail H. Davidson — Subdivision Variance MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in regard to certain elements of the Subdivision Ordinance, Subdivision for Gail H. Davidson. Property is located at 4946 Lake Drive (GPIN 15705056350000). DISTRICT 4 — BAYSIDE ■ Considerations: There are two existing lots. One lot consists of 4,481 square feet and the other lot consists of 10,288 square feet. There is an existing single-family home that straddles the common lot line of the two existing lots. The small existing lot adjacent to Northampton Boulevard cannot reasonably accommodate a single- family home as currently configured due to setback requirements for Northampton Boulevard. The applicant is proposing to create two single-family homes sites in lieu of replacing the existing single family dwelling with a duplex structure, which would be allowed on this property by right in the R-5R district. The two single-family homes are better suited for the surrounding area, which consists predominately of single-family homes. Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda finding that a hardship existed due to the affect of the Northampton Boulevard right-of-way on the lot and concluding that the creation of two single family homes is more appropriate for this area than a duplex. ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to approve this request with the following condition: 1. A note shall be provided on the final subdivision plat that these parcels are approved for single-family homes only. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Gail H. Davidson Page 2 of 2 Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agen cy: City Manager: . "��6 Planning Departmen W,4L Q E02-212-SVR-2004 M-1 GAIL H. DAVIDSON Agenda Item # 5 September 8, 2004 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Barbara J. Duke The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. 4" Location and General Information REQUEST: Subdivision Variance to Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet all the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance LOCATION: Property located at 4946 Lake Drive E-2 to S�.le Gail H. NA11122 5UbUIVINUN VAKIAI'4(-,r GAIL DAVIDSON Agenda Item # 5 Page 1 GPIN: 1570505635;1570505712 COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 4 — BAYSIDE SITE SIZE: 14,769 square feet EXISTING LAND USE: One single-family home SURROUNDING North: • Single -Family homes/ R-5R Residential District LAND USE AND with Shore Drive Overlay ZONING: South: . Vacant / R-5R Residential District with Shore Drive Overlay East: . Single -Family homes / R-5R Residential District with Shore Drive Overlay West: . Northampton Boulevard NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL The site is currently developed with one single-family home. There FEATURES: are some mature trees existing on the site. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Summary of Proposal` Existing Lots: There are two existing lots. One lot consists of 4,481 square feet and the other lot consists of 10,288 square feet. There is an existing single-family home that straddles the common lot line of the two existing lots. Proposed Lots: It is the intent of the applicant to resubdivide the two existing lots to create two single-family home sites. GAIL DAVIDSON Agenda Item # 5 Page 2 tem Required Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot Width in feet (measured on Lake Drive) 50 75.25 20* Lot Area in square feet 5,000 6,616 8,153 *Variance required Comprehensive Plan % The Comprehensive Plan designates this area as being part of the "Primary Residential Area." The land use planning policies and principles for the Primary Residential Area focus strongly on preserving and protecting the overall character, economic value and aesthetic quality of the stable neighborhoods located in this area. In a general sense, the established type, size and relationship of land use, both residential and non- residential, located in and around neighborhoods should serve as a guide when considering future development. Staff Evaluation Staff recommends approval of this request. Section 9.3 of the Subdivision Ordinance states: No variance shall be authorized by the Council unless it finds that: A. Strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. B. The authorization of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and the character of the neighborhood will not be adversely affected. GALL DAVIDSON Agenda Item # 5 Page 3 C. The problem involved is not of so general or recurring a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of general regulations to be adopted as an amendment to the ordinance. D. The hardship is created by the physical character of the property, including dimensions and topography, or by other extraordinary situation or condition of such property, or by the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto. Personal or self-inflicted hardship shall not be considered as grounds for the issuance of a variance. E. The hardship is created by the requirements of the zoning district in which the property is located at the time the variance is authorized whenever such variance pertains to provisions of the Zoning Ordinance incorporated by reference in this ordinance. Staffs evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials, does provide evidence of a hardship justifying the granting of a variance to the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. The applicant has demonstrated a hardship through the following: (1) The small existing lot adjacent to Northampton Boulevard cannot reasonably accommodate a single-family home as currently configured due to setback requirements for Northampton Boulevard. The reconfiguration of the lots will better accommodate the setbacks required for single-family dwellings. (2) The applicant is proposing to create two single-family homes sites in lieu of replacing the existing single family dwelling with a duplex structure, which would be allowed on this property by right in the R-5R district. The two single-family homes are better suited for the surrounding area, which consists predominately of single-family homes. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request with the condition below. Condition 1. A note shall be provided on the final subdivision plat that these parcels are approved for single-family homes only. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. GAIL DAVIDSON Agenda Item;# 5 Page 4 Supplemental V Information Zoning History SUBDIVISIUN VAKIANU # DATE REQUEST ACTION 1 11/26/02 REZONING FROM A18/132 TO Al2 (PDH2) GRANTED 2 11/23/99 REZONING FROM B-2 TO R-5D (PDH2) GRANTED 3 10/10/88 REZONING FROM R-6 TO Al2 GRANTED GAIL DAVIDSON Agenda Item# 5 Page 5 Public Agency Comments Public Works No impact on the transportation system is anticipated by the development of the proposed lots. Public Utilities Water: I There is an existing water line in Lake Drive available for this site. Sewer: There is an existing sewer line in Lake Drive available for this site. GAIL DAVIDSON Agenda Item # 5 Page 6 Exhibits re Exhibit A Aerial of Site Location GAIL DAVIDSON Agenda Item #-5 Page 7 LAKE -DRIVE P R 0 P GEE, E D PAF�tLIT Exhibit B Proposed Subdivision GAIL DAVIDSON Agenda Item # 5 Page 8 � ryp%.➢ 7 C O = rC- � � � L t•? t • W U me=r-mc 2 a3� C « 96 x L C^ O C s+ J Lr"- Sy p .l; T7 C .c- L Y• � L5 C T � cp��� o� m 0.0 s 01 LS tl CA O p C b n 'y ^ '1 .J r .'- C C O EV°? ce_ t-, O Er . a :. u = '' an d if; c crc: j� ._. .... O C L� t: 0 - C v N c_ a ¢ Oa ° 'L'm ° w= d= _ °% � o pw cc aa o c o UJ a ail c c o il ��ocs_ 71 s o s il3 c _ il. L J C 2t—c n rz C 'D— ci Exhibit C Disclosure Statement GAIL DAVIDSON Agenda Item # 5 Page 9 Item #5 Gail H. Davidson Subdivision Ordinance 4946 Lake Drive District 4 Bayside September 8, 2004 William Din: Our second item on consent is Item #5 Gail D. Davidson. This is a Subdivision Ordinance change for property located at 4946 Lake Drive located in the Bayside District. Gail Davidson: Hi. I'm Gail Davidson. You have all reviewed this. What we're asking for is instead of having a duplex on this property to have it subdivided into two single families. I live in the area and we're very partial to single family homes compared to duplexes. William Din: Yes ma'am. We're familiar with it. We have placed it on consent here. There is one condition attached to this. Have you read that? Gail Davidson: Yes. William Din: Do you agree with that? Gail Davidson: That the condition will be that a note shall be provided on the final subdivision plat that these parcels are approved for single-family homes only. Where it says conditions? William Din: Yes. Gail Davidson: Okay. William Din: Do you agree with that? Gail Davidson: Yes. William Din: Okay. Is there any opposition to placing this on consent? If not, Mr. Ripley is going to explain why we had that on consent. Ronald Ripley: The Planning Commission felt and agreed with the staff that this item would be appropriate to receive a variance. It's a parcel of property that contains approximately 14,769 square feet. It's a duplex. By right, you can build a duplex. The minimum lot size for the area is 5,000 square feet so it is basically being broken up into two lots that will be used for single family. As you heard, the applicants agree that they Item #5 Gail H. Davidson Page 2 will limit the use for single family. So, this is a good move the neighborhood. We believe it's more single family and less duplex for the area. It is also an odd shaped piece of land basically that was created when the Northampton Boulevard extension that ties into the Bay Bridge Tunnel was put in. It left kind of an odd shape. The Commission felt that it was keeping with the Comprehensive Plan and recommend that it be placed on consent. William Din: Thank you Mr. Ripley. Madame Chair, I would like to make a motion to approve Item #5 Gail H. Davidson. This is an Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in regard to certain elements of the Subdivision Ordinance in the Bayside District with one condition. Dorothy Wood: Do I hear a second? Eugene Crabtree: I'll second it. Dorothy Wood: Seconded by Gene Crabtree. AYE 10 NAY 0 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE STRANGE AYE WALLER AYE WOOD AYE ABS 0 ABSENT 1 ABSENT Ed Weeden: By a vote 10-0, the consent agenda item has been approved by the Board. - 47- Item V-K 6. PLANNING ITEM # 51680 Upon motion by Vice Mayor Jones, seconded by Councilman Wood, City Council MODIFIED application of KEMpsHIRE ENTERPRISES, L.L. C. re the Timberlake PD-HI Land Use Plan Ordinance upon Application of Kempshire Enterprises, L L C for a Modification to the Timberlake PD-Hl Land Use Plan for property located on the southeast corner of South Independence Boulevard and Silverleaf Drive (GAIN 1476776371, 1476779197) DISTRICT 2 — KEMPSVILLE The following condition shall be required Agreement encompassing proffers shall be recorded with the Clerk of the Circuit Court and is hereby made a part of the record Voting 10-0 (By Consent) Council Members Voting Aye Harry E Diezel, Margaret L Eure, Vice Mayor McClanan, Richard A Maddox, Mayor Meyera E Peter W Schmidt, Rosemary Wilson and James L Council Members Voting Nay None Council Members Absent Ron A Villanueva Louis R Jones, Reba S Oberndorf, Jim Reeve, Wood September 9, 2003 AA". e, F Q Amendment to PDH Plan /i7 A,% T T . o �y .�1 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Tag One, L.L.C. — Modification to the Timberlake Land Use Plan MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: An Ordinance upon Application of Tag One, L.L.C. for a Modification to the Timberlake Land Use Plan to allow automotive service as a permitted use. Property is located at 1400 South Independence Boulevard (GPINS 14767763710000; 14767791970000 — part of). DISTRICT 2 — KEMPSVILLE ■ Considerations: The applicant proposes to add four bays and an office for a Texaco Express Lube to a recently approved carwash. The proposed building will be adjacent to the recently approved 12-bay car wash facility. The building will be constructed of masonry block, glass and metal to complement the carwash facility. There will be six employees, and the hours of operation will be 8:00 am to 8:00 pm daily. The proposed tune and tube facility is appropriate for this location. The northern half of the site is currently designated by the Timberlake Land Use Plan as an automobile service station. The tune and lube facility fits this designation and is compatible with the adjacent Hampton Roads Transit Park and Ride site and other nearby commercial uses. There are no residential uses located immediately adjacent to the site. The site plan is well designed with extra landscaping, helping to break up the large expanses of pavement, which are typical with automobile related sites. Vehicular movements are controlled to create smooth traffic flow from the three access points. No vehicular access is permitted directly onto S. Independence Boulevard, which is in keeping with the Master Transportation Plan's "controlled access" designation for this roadway. The building design is also appropriate for this location. The masonry block, glass and metal materials create a unique - looking building that is compatible with other buildings in the vicinity. Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because they concluded the use is appropriate for this site, there was no opposition, and staff recommended approval. Tag One, L.L.C. Page 2 of 2 ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to approve this request. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: City Manager: <Zz-�r� Planning Department F08-215-MOD-2004 MW TAG ONE, L.L.C. Agenda Item # September 8, 2004 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Faith Christie The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. Location and General Information REQUEST: Modification to the Timberlake Land Use Plan LOCATION: Property located at 1400 S. Independence Boulevard May FiTa One LLC D6-2 - 14 �' G, �' DOO ,�!/ter' �a/•. PD-HI �c lvncndmrnt to PDH Plan GPIN: 14767763710000; 14767791970000 —part of COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 2 - KEMPSVILLE SITE SIZE: 1.75 acres EXISTING The property is currently vacant and is zoned Conditional PD-H1 LAND USE: Planned Unit Development District. The property is part of the TAG ONE Agenda Item # 2 Page 1 Timberlake planned development. The Timberlake Land Use Plan currently calls for an automobile service station for a portion of the site. A modification to the land use plan was approved in September 2003 to allow a car wash with 10 self -wash bays and two automated bays. SURROUNDING . Across Silverleaf Drive, Wawa gas station and LAND USE AND convenience store / B-2 Community Business ZONING: North: District • Across Commuter Drive, vacant property currently for sale by Virginia Department of Transportation / South: PD-H1 Planned Unit Development District • Commuter `Park and Ride' lot / PD-H1 Planned East: Unit Development District • Across S. Independence Boulevard, townhouse development and commercial daycare facility / PD- West: H1 Planned Unit Development District NATURAL RESOURCE AND The site is grassy and currently undeveloped. There are no CULTURAL significant natural resources or cultural features associated with the FEATURES: site. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Summary Of 8p'osa1`14- The applicant proposes to add four bays and an office for a Texaco Express Lube facility in conjunction with the recently approved carwash. The proposed building will be adjacent to the recently approved 12-bay car wash facility. The building will be constructed of masonry block, glass and metal to complement the carwash facility. There will be six employees, and the hours of operation will be 8:00 am to 8:00 pm daily. TAG ONE Agenda Item # 2 Page 2 E Major Issues The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this request. Staffs evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these issues are adequately addressed. • Compatibility of the proposed tune and lube facility with the planned uses in the Timberlake Land Use Plan and with the adjacent Virginia Department of Transportation Park and Ride site. • Quality appearance of site in terms of site development and architecture from Independence Boulevard and coordination with adjacent Park and Ride site. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan designates this site as being part of the Primary Residential Area. The land use planning policies and principles for the Primary Residential Area focus strongly on preserving and protecting the overall character, economic value and aesthetic quality of the stable neighborhoods located within the area. The established type, size, and relationship of land use, both residential and nonresidential, in and around these neighborhoods should serve as a guide when considering future development. Staff recommends approval of this request. Staff Evaluation ;= TAG ONE Agenda Item # 2 Page 3 Staff's evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials and the proffers, adequately addresses each of the `Major Issues' identified above. The proposal's strengths in addressing the `Major Issues' are (1) As a land use, the proposed tune and lube facility is appropriate for this location. The northern half of the site is currently designated in the Land Use Plan as an automobile service station. The tune and tube facility fits this designation and is compatible with the adjacent Park and Ride site and other nearby commercial uses. No residential uses are located immediately adjacent to the site. (2) The site plan is well designed with extra landscaping, helping to break up the large expanses of pavement, which are typical with automobile related sites. Vehicular movements are controlled to create smooth traffic flow from the three access points. No vehicular access is permitted directly onto S. Independence Boulevard, which is in keeping with the Master Transportation Plan's "controlled access" designation for this roadway. The building design is also appropriate for this location. The masonry block, glass and metal materials create a unique - looking building that is compatible with other buildings in the vicinity. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. TAG ONE Agenda Item # 2 Page 4 2 Supplemental Information Zoning History F-8 drip IREQUEST ACTION # JDATE 1. 12-18- Conditional Use Permit (automobile service station) Granted 01 2-25-74 Rezoning (PDH to B-2) Granted 2. 5-24-94 Amendment to Timberlake Land Use Plan for mini- Granted warehouses 3. 5-13-85 Street Closure Granted 4. 9-9-03 Modification to the Timberlake Land Use Plan Granted 6-14-71 Rezoning to PDH Granted TAG ONE Agenda Item # 2 Page 5 Public Agency Comments Public Works Master Transportation South Independence Boulevard in the vicinity of this Plan MTP): application is considered a four lane divided major urban arterial. The MTP designates this road as a 120- foot right-of-way with divided travel lanes and access control. There are no projects listed in the current adopted CIP for this roadway. Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Existing Zoning — 1,953 S.Inde.pendence 36,000 32,500 Blvd ADT' ADT' Proposed Modification 3- 1,456 'Average Daily Trips 2 as defined by a gas station with 10 fueling positions 3 as defined by carwash and tune and lube facility Public Utilities Water: There is an existing 8-inch water line in Silverleaf Drive and a 16- inch water line in South Independence Boulevard fronting the property. Sewer: There is 8-inch city gravity sanitary in Silverleaf Drive and a 12-inch force -main in South Independence Boulevard fronting the property. Public Safety Police: The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Where lighting fixtures are installed along streets, in parking areas, or on the building for illumination purl TAG ONE Agenda Item # 2 Page 6 all fixtures should be of appropriate height and design as to prevent any direct reflection or glare toward adjacent uses and city streets. Lighting should be directed down at the around and not out horizontally or up in the air. Fire and Rescue. Any hazardous, flammable, or combustible materials used, stored, or sold on -site must comply with the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code requirements. The operator must supply an on -site hazard mitigation kit for fuel spills. Fire Code permits may be required at the time of occupancy. TAG ONE Agenda Item # 2 Page 7 Exhibits TAG ONE Agenda Item # 2 Page 8 . .. . .......... . ..... Exhibit 8 . Proposed Site Plan TAG ONE Agenda Item # 2 Page 9 A Exhibit C Proposed Building RPnderina TAG ONE Agenda Item #2 Page 10 Exhibit D Proposed Building Elevation !Egli y. TAG ONE Agenda Item # 2 Page 11 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Exhibit E - 1 Disclosure Statement APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: "1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) Tag One, L.L.C.: Stephen J. Chaplin, Managing Member Stanley L. Chaplin, Member 2. List all businesses that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity` relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business. or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members. trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) Kempshire Enterprises, L.L.C.: Christopher T. Giroux, Managing Member John K. Bishard, Member Steven W. Bishard, Member 2. List all businesses that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity` relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) ❑ Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business. or other unincorporated organization. & See next page for footnotes Amendment to POH Plan Application Page 12 of 13 Revised: 211912004 TAG ONE Agenda Item # 2 Page 12 DISCLOSURE-STATEMEN ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services, financial services, accounting services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) Fry -Moss Structures Sykes, Bourdon, Ahern & Levy, P.C. Land Design and Development, Inc. ' "Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, 1 am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to inAtructions in this package. Tag On / � Stephen J. Chaplin By' Print Name Managing Member Applic s Signature Kempshire5nterprises, L.L.C. By: /%ice, __" r ChristopherT. Giroux Properi�y Owner's Signature (if different than applicant) Print Name Managing Member Exhibit E - 2 Disclosure Statement Amendment to P JH Plan Appli ation Page 13 of 13 Revised: 2/19120C.4 1 �I TAG ONE Agenda Item # 2 Page 13 Item #2 Tag One, L.L.C. Modification to the Timberlake Land Use Plan 1400 South Independence Boulevard District 2 Kempsville September 8, 2004 CONSENT Dorothy Wood: The next item of business will be our consent items. This will be conducted by our Vice Chairman Mr. William Din. William Din: Thank you Ms. Wood. Today we have 10 items on our consent agenda. As I call each of the items would the representative or the applicant please come to the podium, state your name, your relationship to the application and state that you have read the conditions and are in fact agree to those. I would like to welcome everybody to the public hearing this morning. Our first item is Item #2, which is Tag One, L.L.C. This is a Modification for the Land Use Plan to allow automotive service as a permitted use. This is located at 1400 S. Independence Boulevard in the Kempsville District. Eddie Bourdon: Thank you Madame Chair. Eddie Bourdon, a Virginia Beach attorney representing the applicants. We appreciate being on the consent agenda. William Din: Thank you. Is there any opposition to this being on the consent agenda? If not, Mr. Miller will explain our reason for placing this on consent. Robert Miller: We placed this item on the consent agenda because about a year ago we approved the car wash at the same location, the four bay Texaco Express Lube. It looked like a reasonable addition, and the architecture is matching the proffers. We're in agreement with the previous proffers for the car wash. This is adjacent to the Park & Ride, and we felt like this was an appropriate use for this area in this commercial part of the corridor. William Din: Thank you Mr. Miller. Madame Chair, I would like to make a motion to approve Item #2 Tag One, L.L.C., a Modification for Timberlake Land Use Permit in the Kempsville District. Dorothy Wood: Do I hear a second? Eugene Crabtree: I'll second it. Dorothy Wood: Seconded by Gene Crabtree. AYE 10 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 Item #2 Tag One, L.L.C. Page 2 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE STRANGE AYE WALLER AYE WOOD ABSENT Ed Weeden: By a vote 10-0, the consent agenda item has been approved by the Board. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. -31 - Rem V-L PUBLIC HEARING ITEM g 41102 PLANNING BY CONSENT Upon motion by Vice Mayor Sessoms, seconded by Councilman Baum, City Council ADOPTED an Ordinance upon application of JAN KOTTKE for a Conditional Use Pernut: ORDINANCE UPON APPLICATION OF JAN KOTTKE FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A SCHOOL R08962055 BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE C17Y OF VIRGINLt BEACH, KRGINL4 Ordinance upon application of Jan Kottke for a Conditional Use Permit for a school on the north side of Princess Anne Road beginning at a point 110 feet more or less east of Huckleberry Trail. Said parcel is located at 2208 Princess Anne Road and contains 2.8 acres. PRINCESS ANNE BOROUGH. The following conditions shall be required: I. A maximum of 45 children maybe cared for at this site. 2. Hours of operation shall be limited to Monday through Friday, 7.30 a.m. until 5.30 p.m. This Ordinance shall be effective in accordance with Section 107 (0 of the Zoning Ordinance. Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the Thirteenth QfAumst. Nineteen Hundred and Ninety -Sir Voting: 9-0 (By Consent) Council Members Voting Aye: John A. Bain Linwood O. Branch, Ill, Harold Heischober, Barbara M. Henley, Louis R Jones, Reba S. McClanan, Mayor Meyera E Oberndorf, Nancy K Parker and Vice Mayor Wiliam D. Sessoms, Jr. Council Members Voting Nay: None Council Members Absent. William W Harrison, Jr. and Louisa M. Strayhorn August 13, 1996 -31- Item IV-K3.b. PUBLICHEARING ITEM # 43931 PLANNING Upon motion by Vice Mayor Sessoms, seconded by Councilman Branch, City Council MODIFIED CONDITIONS in the Application of REVEREND PETER STILLER of ST. MICHAELLUTHERAN CHURCHre Conditional Use Permit approved in behalf ofJANKOTTKE 13 August 1996for a school at 2208 Princess Anne Road (DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE (Condition No. 2, highlighted starting time is changed) 2. Hours of operation shall be limited to Monday through Friday, 7: 00 AM - S: 30 PM Voting: 11-0 (By Consent) Council Members Voting Aye: Linwood O. Branch, III, Margaret L. Eure, William W. Harrison, Jr., Harold Heischober, Barbara M. Henley, Louis R. Jones, Reba S. McClanan, MayorMeyeraE. Oberndorf, NancyK. Parker, Vice Mayor William D. Sessoms, Jr. and A. M. 'Don Weeks Council Members Voting Nay: None Council Members Absent: None August 11, 1998 Jt. mzcnaet Lutheran unurcn I — 1� M .� ! A CULTURA I 0-2 f /S�OR L _ en ou \ IS, 2 Mnrlifiratinn to a Cnnrlitinnal Use atieGxr �c �L i CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: St. Michael Lutheran Church — Modification of Conditions MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: An Ordinance upon Application of St. Michael Lutheran Church fora Modification to a Conditional Use Permit for a church approved on April 12, 1988 on property located at 2208 Princess Anne Road (GPIN 24049528810000). The purpose of the modification is for an expansion. DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE ■ Considerations: A Conditional Use Permit allowing a church at this location was approved by the City Council on April 25, 1988. A Conditional Use Permit allowing a school at the church was approved by the City Council on August 13, 1996. A Modification to the Conditions for the school was approved by the City Council on August 11, 1998. St. Michael Lutheran Church is requesting a modification of their existing Conditional Use Permits to allow for a 5,682 square foot (SF) expansion of their sanctuary and a 2,488 SF youth ministry facility expansion. The building is currently open Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM until 9:00 PM and Saturday from 9:00 AM until 6:00 PM for various meetings and Bible studies, and on Sundays from 8:00 AM until 1:00 PM. The church operates a preschool and daycare program Monday through Friday. The additional space is needed for Sunday School and preschool as well as the expanded youth ministry programs and fellowship. Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because they concluded the expansion is compatible with the surrounding area, there were no objections, and staff recommended approval. ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to approve this request with the following conditions: 1. All conditions attached to the Conditional Use Permit granted by the City Council on April 25, 1988 remain in affect. St. Michael Lutheran Church Page 2 of 2 2. The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the submitted plan entitled "Preliminary Site Layout for St. Michael Lutheran Church Building Addition Virginia Beach Virginia" prepared by NDI,L.L.C. Basgier and Associates Division, dated June 14, 2004. 3. There shall be no encroachments into the scenic buffer along Princess Anne Road, previously dedicated to the City of Virginia Beach. 4. The architectural design elements and exterior building materials shall be developed in substantial conformance with the submitted plan entitled "Alterations and Additions to St. Michael Lutheran Church Building 2208 Princess Anne Road Virginia Beach, Virginia" prepared by Daugherty & Associates, dated February 10, 2004. 5. The landscaping shall be developed in substantial conformance with the submitted plan entitled "Landscape Plan of St. Michael Lutheran Church Building Addition Virginia Beach Virginia" prepared by NDI,L.L.C. Basgier and Associates Division, dated February 20, 2004. 6. Condition Number 1 of the August 11, 1998 Modification of a Conditional Use Permit is deleted and replaced with the following: A maximum of 70 children may be cared for at this site. 7. Condition Number 2 of the August 11, 1998 Modification of a Conditional Use Permit is deleted and replaced with the following: The hours of operation shall be limited to Monday through Friday 6:30 A.M. until 6:00 P.M. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Departmenl*),-�� City Manager: V -7�d Wt r4.. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: St. Michael Lutheran Church — Modification of Conditions MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: An Ordinance upon Application of St. Michael Lutheran Church for a Modification to a Conditional Use Permit for a church approved on April 12, 1988 on property located at 2208 Princess Anne Road (GPIN 24049528810000). The purpose of the modification is for an expansion. DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE ■ Considerations: St. Michael Lutheran Church is requesting a modification of their Conditional Use Permits for a 5,682 square foot (SF) expansion of their sanctuary and a 2,488 SF youth ministry facility expansion. As a church, the building is currently open Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM until 9:00 PM and Saturday from 9:00 AM until 6:00 PM for various meetings and Bible studies, and on Sundays from 8:00 AM until 1:00 PM. The church operates a preschool and daycare program Monday through Friday. The additional space is needed for Sunday School and preschool as well as the expanded youth ministry programs and fellowship. The Conditional Use Permit permitting a church was approved by the City Council on April 25, 1988 with seven (7) conditions attached to the request. A Conditional Use Permit permitting a school at the church was approved by the City Council on August 13, 1996. A Modification to the Conditions for the school was approved by the City Council on August 11, 1998. The modified Conditional Use Permit had two conditions attached to the request. Staffs evaluation of this request reveals the proposal adequately addresses the `Major Issues' of compatibility with surrounding land uses and consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed church and school addition are in keeping with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan regarding the Primary Residential Area. The church and school have been on the site since the late 1980's and have proved to be compatible with the adjacent properties. Staff recommends approval of this request. Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because it is an appropriate use of the property. St. Michael Lutheran Church Page 2 of 3 ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to approve this request with the following conditions: All conditions attached to the Conditional Use Permit granted by the City Council on April 25, 1988 remain in affect. 2. The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the submitted plan entitled "Preliminary Site Layout for St. Michael Lutheran Church Building Addition Virginia Beach Virginia" prepared by NDI,L.L.C. Basgier and Associates Division, dated June 14, 2004. 3. There shall be no encroachments into the scenic buffer along Princess Anne Road, previously dedicated to the City of Virginia Beach. 4. The architectural design elements and exterior building materials shall be developed in substantial conformance with the submitted plan entitled "Alterations and Additions to St. Michael Lutheran Church Building 2208 Princess Anne Road Virginia Beach, Virginia" prepared by Daugherty & Associates, dated February 10, 2004. 5. The landscaping shall be developed in substantial conformance with the submitted plan entitled Landscape Plan of St. Michael Lutheran Church Building Addition Virginia Beach Virginia" prepared by NDI,L.L.C. Basgier and Associates Division, dated February 20, 2004. 6. Condition Number 1 of the August 11, 1998 Modification of a Conditional Use Permit is deleted and replaced with the following: A maximum of 70 children may be cared for at this site. 7. Condition Number 2 of the August 11, 1998 Modification of a Conditional Use Permit is deleted and replaced with the following: The hours of operation shall be limited to Monday through Friday 6:30 A.M. until 6:00 P.M. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Location Map St. Michael Lutheran Church Page 3 of 3 Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: d K1 1 -213-MOD-2004 ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 12 September 8, 2004 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Karen Prochilo The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. Location and General Information REQUEST: LOCATION: GPIN: COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: Modification of Conditions placed on conditional use permits for a church granted on 4/25/88 and school granted on 8/11/98. Property located on the north side of Princess Anne Road 110 feet east of Huckleberry Trail. 24049528810000 ;? St. Michael cLS��utheran Church So At IV z, % \ �15$�1DRICAL ' o %' #A_T 2 CUP: for Church i rpancion 7 — PRINCESS ANNE ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 12 Page 1 SITE SIZE: 2.819 acres EXISTING LAND USE: Church and preschool SURROUNDING North: • Single -Family / R-10 Residential District LAND USE AND South: . Across Princess Anne Road is a 7-11 and offices / ZONING: B-1 a and B-2 Business District East: . Medical office building / 0-1 Office District West: • Single -Family / R-10 Residential District NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL FEATURES: This site does not have any significant historical or cultural features. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of 65 to 70 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Summary of PropOsaV St. Michael Lutheran Church is requesting a modification of their Conditional Use Permits for a 5,682 square foot (SF) expansion of their sanctuary and a 2,488 SF youth ministry facility expansion. As a church, the building is currently open Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM until 9:00 PM and Saturday from 9:00 AM until 6:00 PM for various meetings and Bible studies, and on Sundays from 8:00 AM until 1:00 PM. The church operates a preschool and daycare program Monday through Friday. The additional space is needed for Sunday School and preschool as well as the expanded youth ministry programs and fellowship. The Conditional Use Permit permitting a church was approved by the City Council on April 25, 1988. The Conditional Use Permit had the following seven (7) conditions attached to the request. 1. A dedication of right-of-way for a right turn lane is required for the site from Princess Anne Road. ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 12 Page 2 2. Improvements to the right turn lane may be required with future expansion of the church facilities. The requirement of turn lane construction will be determined during future detail site plan review. This determination will be based on the type and extent of the expansion and the additional need generated by the expansion. 3. Improvements for two left turn lanes may be required with future expansion of the church facilities to provide for safe U-turn movements. The required left turn lanes will be located eastbound on Princess Anne Road at its intersection with General Booth Boulevard and westbound on Princess Anne Road at its intersection with Huckleberry Trail. The requirement for turn lane construction will be determined during future detail site plan review. This determination will be based on the type and extent of the expansion and the additional need generated by the expansion. 4. An alternative to the left turn lane improvements, it is suggested that the representative of the church negotiate points of ingress and egress with the owners/developers of the adjacent property located to the northeast. If and when this property is developed and appropriate City ordinances allow for the ingress and egress of the church related traffic across the property, the church related traffic will be afforded access to the traffic signal at General Booth Boulevard and Princess Anne Road, therefore allowing the need for left turn lanes for U-turn purposes. 5. The utilization of best management practice for controlling storm water runoff which are reasonably applicable to the development of the site and in keeping with the recommendations for the proposed Back Bay/ North Landing River Management District. 6. Category I screening shall be installed along the boundary of the proposed church building site adjacent to the residential sites. 7. In accordance with the City's Master Street and Highway Plan, a dedication is required along the frontage of Princess Anne Road to provide a scenic buffer. Approximately 15 feet of dedication will be required. The exact dedication will be determined during detailed site plan review. A Conditional Use Permit permitting a school at the church was approved by the City Council on August 13, 1996. A Modification to the Conditions for the school was approved by the City Council on August 11, 1998. The modified Conditional Use Permit had the following two conditions attached to the request. 1. A maximum of 45 children may be cared for at this site. 2. Hours of operation shall be limited to Monday through Friday 7:00 A.M. until 5:30 P.M. For the current request, St. Michael's Lutheran Church provided letters to surrounding property owners informing them of the church and school's expansion. ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 12 Page 3 Major Issues The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this request. Staffs evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these issues are adequately addressed. • Compatibility with the surrounding land uses. • Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site to be in the Primary Residential Area. Religious and educational services would be considered supportive land uses to residential neighborhoods. BMW; Staff Evaluation Staffs evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials, adequately addresses each of the `Major Issues' identified above. The proposed church and school addition are in keeping with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan regarding the Primary Residential Area. The church and school have been on the site since the late 1980's and have proved to be compatible with the adjacent properties. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request subject to the conditions below. ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 12 Page 4 Conditions 1. All conditions attached to the Conditional Use Permit granted by the City Council on April 25, 1988 remain in affect. 2. The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the submitted plan entitled "Preliminary Site Layout for St. Michael Lutheran Church Building Addition Virginia Beach Virginia" prepared by NDI,L.L.C. Basgier and Associates Division, dated June 14, 2004. 3. There shall be no encroachments into the scenic buffer along Princess Anne Road, previously dedicated to the City of Virginia Beach. 4. The architectural design elements and exterior building materials shall be developed in substantial conformance with the submitted plan entitled "Alterations and Additions to St. Michael Lutheran Church Building 2208 Princess Anne Road Virginia Beach, Virginia" prepared by Daugherty & Associates, dated February 10, 2004. 5. The landscaping shall be developed in substantial conformance with the submitted plan entitled "Landscape Plan of St. Michael Lutheran Church Building Addition Virginia Beach Virginia" prepared by NDI,L.L.C. Basgier and Associates Division, dated February 20, 2004. 6. Condition Number 1 of the August 11, 1998 Modification of a Conditional Use Permit is deleted and replaced with the following: A maximum of 70 children may be cared for at this site. 7. Condition Number 2 of the August 11, 1998 Modification of a Conditional Use Permit is deleted and replaced with the following: The hours of operation shall be limited to Monday through Friday 6:30 A.M. until 6:00 P.M. 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. ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 12 Page 5 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. ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 12 Page 6 Supplemental Information Zoning History Map K-11,12 _Ct l A;.-hfrv% t h j r-rrh map ivot to z3caie013 LOW085 L / oae wz I� i kA L t HISTC)RK AL .i Y A L ' 'ti CULTURAIS 2 CUP: for Church Expansion # I DATE IREQUEST I ACTION 1 04/25/88 Conditional Use Permit for a church Granted 2 10/23/89 Conditional Rezoning from R-3 to 0-1 Granted 3 03/26/90 Conditional Rezoning from R-20 to B-1 A Granted 4 08/13/96 Conditional Use Permit for a preschool Granted 5 08/11/98 Modification of Conditions Granted 6 11/24/98 Modification to a Conditional Use Permit Granted 7 05/25/99 Conditional Rezoning from AG-1/AG-2 & R-20 to A-18 Granted 8 05/25/99 Conditional Rezoning from AG-1/AG-2 & R-20 to 0-1 Granted ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 12 Page 7 Public Agency Comments Public Works Master Transportation Princess Anne Road in the vicinity of this application is Plan (MTP): a four -lane divided facility, which transitions to a two- lane undivided facility just south of this site. Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Volume Present __Ca acit Generated Traffic Existing Land Use — 82 ADT (average weekday) — 93 ADT (Sunday) Princes Anne 22,000 28,200 Road ADT' ADT' Proposed Land Use 3 - 164 ADT (average weekday) —187 ADT Sunda Gverane Daily Trins 2 as defined by existing uses 3 as defined by additional facilities Public Utilities Water: This site has an existing 1-inch water meter that may continue to be used or may be upgraded. Sewer: This site is already connected to City sanitary sewer. Analysis of Pump Station 621 and the sanitary sewer collection system is required to ensure future flows can be accommodated. School Not ap licable — No comments Public Schools Public Safety Police: The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 12 Page 8 crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Fire and Rescue: Comments will be addressed during site plan review process and building permit process. ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 12 Page 9 Exhibits Exhibit A Aerial of Site Location ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 12 Page 10 Exhibit E Proposed Site Plan ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 1-2 Page 11 I LE Exhibit C Proposed Landscape Plan ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 12 Page 12 qoinqD u-mox1in-1 Ixell-'m P'n �-,L IT'i 'f. I , I Exhibit D Proposed Building Elevation ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 12 Page 13 NOldd'JITddV J,IIYVHId aS[11VNOIZIQNI z w 2 w w Ci -j U V) z w w 0 :J U (n 0 JI: 21, —2 ^4 371 1CE zi 7gti 5 9 a2 2 2 S g A 5 -2 i, 26 :i 711, zz z t Exhibit E - 1 Disclosure Statement NOI,Ld'J1IdddUIV12Iad 1SIl TdNOI,LIQNOD ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 12 Page 14 Exhibit E - 2 Disclosure Statement TRUSTEES AND CHITRCH COUNCIL MEMBERS OF ST. MICITAEL LT.1714ERAN CHU'RCH TRU'STFES: 4CZ—vin Allen Jon Tarnayo Roger Whittaker CHURCH COUNCIL MEMBERS: Roaer. 'N'hittaker. President Karen Moyer, Vice President."'Treasurer Al Grimm. Secretary Randy Bittiler David Bohannon Lee Gold Diane Hennett Randy House Pat Johnson Martin Murphy Ann Xlv',-t'i I s Sandra %-"'wse ST. MICHAEL LUTHERAN CHURCH Agenda Item # 12 Page 15 Item #12 St. Michael Lutheran Church Modification to a Conditional Use Permit 2208 Princess Anne Road District 7 Princess Anne September 8, 2004 CONSENT William Din: The next item is Item #12 St. Michael Lutheran Church. This is a Modification to a Conditional Use Permit for a church expansion on property located at 2208 Princess Anne Road in the Princess Anne Road. There are seven conditions. Roger Whitaker: Hello. I'm Roger Whitaker. I'm a member of St. Michael Lutheran Church and representing them here today. William Din: Thank you. Have you read the conditions? Roger Whitaker: Yes. I have. William Din: Is there any opposition to this item being placed on the consent agenda? Okay. Barry Knight is going to explain this item. Barry Knight: St. Michael Lutheran Church is requesting a Modification to a Conditional Use Permit which is basically an expansion off of Princess Anne Road of their church and sanctuary. We think it's a compatible use for the property. They have enough room. The neighbors actually don't have any problem with it. They are actually in favor of it. So, we think it's an appropriate use of this property so we put it on consent agenda. William Din: Thank you sir. Madame Chair, I would like to make a motion to approve Item #12 St. Michael Lutheran Church. This is a Conditional Use Permit for a church expansion located at 2208 Princess Anne Road in the Princess Anne District with seven conditions. Dorothy Wood: Do I hear a second? Eugene Crabtree: I'll second it. Dorothy Wood: Seconded by Gene Crabtree. AYE 10 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE Item #12 St. Michael Lutheran Church Page 2 HORSLEY KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE STRANGE AYE WALLER AYE WOOD AYE ABSENT Ed Weeden: By a vote 10-0, the consent agenda item has been approved by the Board. The undersigned are neighbors whose property adjoins that of St. Michael Lutheran Church, 2008 Princess Anne Road, Virginia Beach, VA I/We are satisfied with the expansion plans at St. Michael Lutheran Church. NAME COMMENTS: ADDRESS og1o31©y Dear Dr. Pearman: As your next door neighbor, we wanted you to know that plans are in place to expand our current Sanctuary and Youth Ministry Facilities. We have applied for a modification to our current Use Permit and a public hearing is scheduled at noon on September 8, 2004. Construction of_the Sanctuary will be on the front property (on Princess Anne Road). Expansion of the Youth Ministry Facility will be on the rear of the present building. Hopefully, construction will begin late this year or early 2005, and be completed in six to eight months. Should you"have questions or concerns, please call and we will be happy to address them. If you are satisfied with our project, please sign in the space below and return to us in the enclosed, self addressed envelope. Your help and support is greatly appreciated. God bless! 4 Roger C. Whittaker President, Church Council 1�p cc: Pastor John Himes Pastor Chris Bowen cr� vl�t ct� Dr. given D. Pearman Date Evangelical Lutheran Church in America . CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Michael D. Sifen, Inc. — Conditional Use Permit (mini -warehouses) MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: An Ordinance upon Application of Michael D. Sifen, Inc. for a Conditional Use Permit for mini -warehouses on property located on the west sided Kempsville Road, approximately 360 feet south of Indian River Road (GPIN 14653810520000). DISTRICT 1 — CENTERVILLE ■ Considerations: The applicant is proposing to construct and operate two enclosed three-story self -storage facilities on this site. The smaller storage facility will include a two- story 3,600 square feet (SF) office/residence and 28,350 SF of storage area. The larger facility will have 104,400 SF of storage area. The hours of operation will be seven (7) days a week, 7:00 AM until 8:00 PM. The office hours will be 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM, seven (7) days a week. Customers will have keyed access during the hours of operation. Onsite management and security will be available 24 hours a day. This proposed use is compatible with the surrounding uses. In addition, the applicant met with the residential neighborhood homeowners' association adjacent to this proposal. Through the site design and the proposal of low - intensity use, the project is also consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies to reinforce and protect the defined suburban character. ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-1 to approve this request with the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the submitted site plan entitled "Preliminary Layout for Kempsville Road Self Storage Virginia Beach, Virginia" prepared by Site Improvement Associates, dated June 29, 2004. 2. The architectural design elements and exterior building materials shall be substantially in conformance with the submitted colored elevations of the Michael D. Sifen, Inc. Page 2 of 2 West Elevation — Storage /Office Building A and North and South Elevations — Storage Building B as well as the colored rendering. 3. The installation of metal building panels or siding on the exterior of the buildings shall not be permitted. 4. The landscaping shall be developed in substantial conformance with the submitted "Proposed Site Concept Kempsville Road Self Storage" Michael D. Sifen, Inc. 5. The installation of chain link fence shall not be permitted on the site. 6. There shall be no electric or diesel powered generators or generators fueled by any other source of energy located outside of any building. 7. The storage units shall be used only for storage of non -hazardous goods. 8. The units shall not be used for office purposes, band rehearsals, residential dwellings or any other purpose not consistent with the storage of goods. 9. Any outdoor lighting fixtures shall not be erected any higher than 14 feet. Consistent with section 237 of the City Zoning Ordinance, all outdoor lights shall be shielded to direct light and glare onto the mini warehouse premises; said lighting and glare shall be deflected, shaded and focused away from all adjoining property. 10. The freestanding sign must be monument style, no greater than eight feet in height with a base to match the base of the buildings. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: 6�-Z, MICHAEL D. C09-214-CUP-2004 SIFEN, INC. Agenda Item # 11 September 8, 2004 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Karen Prochilo The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. Location and General Information REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for mini warehouse facilities on the west side of Kempsville Road approximately 360 feet south of Indian River Road. LOCATION: GPIN: COUNCIL ELECTION Property located at 5305 Indian River Road. 10, Mae c 1,10 Michael D. Si en Inc. Mac t to Scalc [2] R - 5Q r/i o j"U�41 %Q. /gyp ca? r'4ti �, � � ,r r,!; , Grp •, , � ar,� �V �:�' �4 Part of 14653810520000 MICHAEL D. SIFEN, INC. Agenda Item # 11 Page 1 DISTRICT: 1 - CENTERVILLE SITE SIZE: 2.59 acres EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING North: . Shopping center / B-2 Business District LAND USE AND South: . Bank, Carriage Mill Homes Association and ZONING: recreational area / B-2 Business District, A-12 Apartment District, R-5D Residential District East: . Bank, Across Kempsville Road are restaurants and small businesses / B-2 Business District West: • Shopping center and Carriage Mill Homes / B-2 Business District, A-12 Apartment District NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL FEATURES: There are no significant historical or cultural features. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Summary of Proposal The applicant is proposing to construct and operate two enclosed three-story self - storage facilities on this site. The smaller storage facility will include a two-story 3,600 square feet (SF) office/residence and 28,350 SF of storage area. The larger facility will have 104,400 SF of storage area. The hours of operation will be seven (7) days a week, 7:00 AM until 8:00 PM. The office hours will be 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM, seven (7) days a week. Customers will have keyed access during the hours of operation. Onsite management and security will be available 24 hours a day. MICHAELD. SIFEN, INC. Agenda Item # 11 Page 2 Major Issues The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this request. Staff's evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these issues are adequately addressed. • Compatibility with surrounding land uses. • Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. 9 Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site to be part of the Primary Residential Area. The policies of the Primary Residential Area reinforce and protect the predominantly suburban character of that area. Page 91 of the Comprehensive Plan states that "Limited commercial or institutional activities providing desired goods or services to residential neighborhoods may be considered acceptable uses on the edge of established neighborhoods provided effective measures are taken to ensure compatibility and non-proliferation of such activities." Additionally the Comprehensive Plan indicates that land uses for infill sites should complement and reinforce the predominant physical character of the surrounding area. MICHAEL D. SIFEN, INC. Agenda Item # 11 Page 3 Staff Evaluation The proposed use is located between a stable neighborhood of townhouses and two small shopping centers. The established type, size and relationship of land uses, both residential and non-residential, in and around neighborhood areas should serve as the guide when considering future development proposals. Developing a mix of compatible uses either within well -designed structures or well -designed tracts of land should also be considered in this area, provided such action contributes to the quality, attractiveness and livability of the neighborhood. Where residential and commercial uses adjoin one another, the preferred land use relationship should reflect higher density residential and lower intensity commercial uses. Staffs evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials, adequately addresses the `Major Issues' previously identified. (1) This proposed use is compatible with the surrounding uses. In addition, the applicant met with the residential neighborhood homeowners' association adjacent to this proposal. The applicant indicated that the homeowners' association's reaction was extremely positive. (2) This proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies to reinforce and protect the defined suburban character. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request subject to the conditions below. Conditions 1. The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the submitted site plan entitled "Preliminary Layout for Kempsville Road Self Storage Virginia Beach, Virginia" prepared by Site Improvement Associates, dated June 29, 2004. 2. The architectural design elements and exterior building materials shall be substantially in conformance with the submitted colored elevations of the West Elevation — Storage /Office Building A and North and South Elevations — Storage Building B as well as the colored rendering. 3. The installation of metal building panels or siding on the exterior of the buildings shall not be permitted. MICHAEL D. SIFEN, INC. Agenda Item # 11 Page 4 4. The landscaping shall be developed in substantial conformance with the submitted "Proposed Site Concept Kempsville Road Self Storage" Michael D. Sifen, Inc. 5. The installation of chain link fence shall not be permitted on the site. 6. There shall be no electric or diesel powered generators or generators fueled by any other source of energy located outside of any building. 7. The storage units shall be used only for storage of non -hazardous goods. 8. The units shall not be used for office purposes, band rehearsals, residential dwellings or any other purpose not consistent with the storage of goods. 9. Any outdoor lighting fixtures shall not be erected any higher than 14 feet. Consistent with section 237 of the City Zoning Ordinance, all outdoor lights shall be shielded to direct light and glare onto the mini warehouse premises; said lighting and glare shall be deflected, shaded and focused away from all adjoining property. 10.The freestanding sign must be monument style, no greater than eight feet in height with a base to match the base of the buildings. 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. MICHAEL D. SIFEN, INC. Agenda Item # 11 Page 5 38 Supplemental information Zoning History # I DATE IREQUEST I ACTION 1 02/36/91 Reconsideration of Conditional Rezoning from R-6/13-2 Granted to O-1/B-2 2 09/24/91 Reconsideration of Conditional Rezoning from R-6/13-2 Granted to O-1/B-2 3 09/28/93 Conditional Use Permit for Automobile Repair Granted Establishment 4 10/11/94 Conditional Rezoning from R-51D to 0-1 Granted 5 12/07/99 Conditional use Permit for Automobile Rental Granted MICHAEL D. SIFEN, INC. Agenda Item # 11 Page 6 Public Agency Comments Public Works Master Transportation Kemspville Road in the vicinity of this application is Plan (MTP): considered a four -lane divided 150-foot wide right-of- way with bikeway, as designated on the Master Transportation Plan (MTP). There are no current projects to upgrade this roadway at this time. The current traffic volume on Kempsville Road in the vicinity of this application is above a Level of Service "E". Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity_ Generated Traffic 14,800 — Existing Land Use 27,400 ADT' — 332 ADT Kempsville 34,230 Level of Road ADT' Service: Proposed Land "C" — "E" Use — 332 ADT rwciayc v ..y i..,,- Y as defined by existing zoning 3 as defined by proposed use Stormwater: Water quality and water quantity control shall be provided in accordance with the City of Virginia Beach Public Works Standards and specifications. The receiving downstream storm drain system must be reviewed to determine the available adequacy of the system with regard to receiving storm water runoff from the proposed development of this parcel. Public Utilities Water: This site must connect to City water. There are two 20-inch City transmission water mains in Kempsville Road fronting the site. There is an 8-inch City water main in Canterford Lane fronting the site. Sewer: This site must connect to City sanitary sewer. Analysis of Pump Station 448 and the sanitary sewer collection system is required to ensure future flows can be accommodated. There is a 24-inch force main in Kempsville Road fronting the site. There is an 8-inch City gravity sanitary sewer in Canterford Lane fronting the site. MICHAEL D. SIFEN, INC. Agenda Item # 11 Page 7 Schools: Not applicable. No comments. Public Schools Public Safety Police: The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Fire and Rescue: Private fire hydrants must be maintained annually as identified in N.F.P.A. 25. A fire hydrant must be within 400 feet of commercial structure. Portable or auxiliary power supplies will not be allowed on site for tenant use. Gated sites must provide for Fire Department access using the Knox or Supra key system. Electrically operated gates must have a failsafe operation in the event of a power failure. Security for ingress and egress must be approved by the Fire Marshal so that Fire Department access is not obstructed. MICHAEL D. SIFEN, INC. Agenda Item # 11 Page 8 Exhibits dbit A I of Site ,ocation MICHAEL.D. SIFEN, INC. Agenda Item # 11 Page Exhibit B Proposed Site Plan - �,} i F MICHAEL D. SIFEN, INC. Agenda Item #-1.1 Page 10 Exhibit C Proposed Landscape Plan MICHAEL D. SIFEN, INC. Agenda Item# 11 Page 11 UL uJ J u, y9 }lS�bww... 01 \`4 w.. Exhibit D Proposed Building Elevation x,y= GC Z OR 5 G Z ra o v L• � Q P � 4 Z G, Gpp V L x r `� 1k MICHAEL D. SIFEN, INC. Agenda Item # 11 Page 12 a p Exhibit E Rendering MICHAEL D. SIFEN, INC. Agenda Item # 11 Page 13 r Exhibit F J � v > uS ,'� f .Si if T C J -a Os f t t:1 aT+ C O j i.;. 4. C J y _ n % 75 .,, a .s c'•,. cr . p c n :r .f; In IU D o c u ZE 0 tt J N 4_ f�itt lisclosure Statement MICHAEL D. SIFEN, INC. Agenda Item # 11 Page 14 Item #11 Michael D. Sifen, Inc. Conditional Use Permit West side of Kempsville Road District 1 Centerville September 8, 2004 REGULAR Dorothy Wood: Our next item Mr. Strange? Joseph Strange: Our next item is Item #11, Michael D. Sifen, Inc. An Ordinance upon Application of Michael D. Sifen, Inc. for a Conditional Use Permit for mini -warehouses on property located on the west side of Kempsville Road, approximately 360 feet south of Indian River Road, District 1, Centerville. Eddie Bourdon: For the record, my name is Eddie Bourdon. I'm a Virginia Beach attorney. I have the privilege again of coming before this Commission to represent Michael D. Sifen, Inc. I've got some handouts although their similar to what you have already seen but I just want to give these out. I have only one of this building here, but this one is large enough that I think that everyone can see it. This has got to be one of the largest renderings I've seen. The application is one involving a redevelopment project. The property that is involved is actually two different commercial enterprises that are going to go in but the one that requires the Use Permit is the only one that is before you and one that needs any approval. The property is at the southwest corner of the intersection of Indian River Road and Kempsville Road. There had existed a Texaco, I believe, gas station on this corner. The subject property, which is zoned unconditional B- 2. There was a Use Permit for the Texaco obviously. There is a B-2 parcel here with a BB&T Bank. What's happening is that this parcel is going to be redeveloped as a Walgreens pharmacy on the corner, and this property here which is undeveloped B-2 is coming in for a Use Permit for a storage facility, one that is not your typical storage facility. In fact, it is, in my opinion, and I've done a number of these, and I know most of you have seen them. This is the highest quality facility that I have seen come forward. The same applicant did a nice job with the first one of this type at Dillard's Drive off of Laskin Road at the Hilltop Section. I think that anyone who has had the opportunity to go by and view it, and more importantly you can go inside and see what it is like. It's head and shoulders above the typical storage facilities that we have throughout the City. It does require a Use Permit and that is why we are here. We have designed this building elevation of these two buildings, and I think in a very high quality manner. Now the property adjoins the Carriage Mill Town home Community, a very high quality town home community. There is an existing access. The same access that you see on our plan is the existing access that is here today. It provides access to BB&T. The property, as it is developed today, there are a number of curb cuts with the former Texaco station that are going to be closed. There is going to be one entrance here, which will serve the entire three uses, if you will and one curb cut out here on Indian River Road. The existing curb Item #11 Michael D. Sifen, Inc. Page 2 cut on Carriage Mill Road, I think its Canterford Lane that will remain. Along here you have three-story town homes along Canterford Lane with significant backyard space, and were going to retain some of the vegetation. We're going to provide a 20 foot heavily landscaped buffer with a fence adjacent to the rear of these town homes. The development is one that is all self contained. There is a little bit of parking. We've got some parking along here. Again, this is the entrance on Canterford. That is where our parking will be. This is the building you see here with this elevation. There will be fencing here, and this building will be enclosed. This will all be landscaped here, drive aisle and all the way around. Unlike the existing B-2 unconditional zoning this type of use is very quiet, very low traffic generating. The hours of operation upon which people who have things stored here can come and go is limited to 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. There will be no nighttime activities. There also and unlike a shopping center or strip center, there won't be any deliveries going on day and night. There is no dumpster that is being picked up and the contents being put in a back of a truck and removed. It's a quiet, low traffic type of use, and with the landscaping and with the restricted hours we think it's an optimal use for this piece of property compared to the numerous commercial uses that can done by right. We have met with the Carriage Mill Homeowners Association and we received a very favorable reception from that community. We've also met with representatives from Lake James, and their reaction has also been very favorable. We do recognize that there is a long standing issue or concern with regard to traffic at the Am-M, intersection of Canterford Lane and Kempsville Road, and that's this intersection here. We understand that there are bonds that have been posted by I guess developers, BB&T and I believe from across the street where you have a Golden Corral restaurant and some other office uses. I also believe there may be some access coming through to some other development to the east of that. Clearly, we're not generating compared to what you can build on this property by -right traffic increases by any stretch of the imagination. However, we certainly do support any efforts that can be brought to bear with regard to the issue of this traffic concerns that they have here, and certainly would be amenable to paying our share if the light is warranted to go in here. But that isn't our decision but we certainly want to be and will be supportive of the community. We've also agreed because there are some on street parking issues here that affect visibility with these town homes that are parking are in front of our building can be utilized during the evening hours for people to park. I understand that the BB&T has also apparently agreed to do the same thing because some of the issues do involved visibility with on street parking in this section from Kempsville Road to the entrance. As your staff has indicated we believe a very appropriate use and as proffered and as with these beautiful renderings for a very attractive building. It will be a good use for this property. We had a number of people who came from Lake James. One of the young ladies who lives adjacent to some office and commercial, she would love to have this type of development behind her house versus commercial because it is quiet. It doesn't involved activity going on day and night. I'll be happy to answer any questions. I hope that you will agree with the staff recommendation. All of the conditions are acceptable by the way. Dorothy Wood: Thanks. Jan. Item #11 Michael D. Sifen, Inc. Page 3 Janice Anderson: I just had a question. You put the hours in and then they said something about key accessed or not after hours. Eddie Bourdon: That is solely for public safety personnel not for the people whose things are stored there. After hours, no one can go in. There are 24-hour on -site, live-in management. There will someone there 24-7 but it is not open. The original write up indicated that it was. As it was revised, it is not. It is only available for security. That is all the storage facilities it's the public safety folks who have keyed access. Janice Anderson: Okay. In the revised it said customers will have keyed access during non -office hours. Eddie Bourdon: That is not accurate. Janice Anderson: Okay. Eddie Bourdon: It is not available for the customers during the hours when the facility is closed and that is during the evening hours. Janice Anderson: Okay. Eddie Bourdon: I read that differently. Janice Anderson: They added the 7:00 — 8:00 but they still had that one line in there. Eddie Bourdon: I thought it was just for security personnel. It is not open to the public after 8:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. It is closed. Janice Anderson: Closed. Okay. Dorothy Wood: Mr. Din and then Mr. Ripley. William Din: Eddie, renderings don't show any signs. Where would your sign be located? Is there anything on the building at all? Eddie Bourdon: The monument style sign here at the main entrance on to Kempsville Road. We have not rendered it with any signage. I'm sure the office here will put a sign up. We're not planning on putting any signage. Again, there will be a monument sign here on Kempsville Road. That's really the only signage that we're anticipating. If you go to the one on Village Drive the same is the case. We don't have any signage on the building other than just at the office. William Din: You've explained that there is a main entrance there for private access behind the proposed Walgreens, I think there is an access that kind of accesses this area also. Is that correct? Is that only going to be an entrance? Is that going to be an exit? Item #11 Michael D. Sifen, Inc. Page 4 Eddie Bourdon: This entrance, which is on Indian River Road, which is a right in and right -out only, because there is a median break here. This entrance here on Kempsville Road, which is also a right in and right -out only. There are today curb cuts here. It's screened off with fencing. Those will all be closed. You're going to make a much better situation along this corner where you're just going to have an entrance here and an entrance here. This entrance Canterford Lane will remain unchanged. There is a turn lane that starts that encompasses this existing entrance and the existing Canterford Lane. Nothing will change there, and that is where the median break exists, and there lies the issue as it has been communicated to us by the residents of Carriage Mill why they feel that a light is warranted given also significant traffic volumes on the opposite side of Kempsville. We certainly support that idea and will be cooperative in trying to get that. William Din: Okay. Just a couple of more questions. These are going to be environmentally controlled units? Eddie Bourdon: Yes. William Din: Where are they located? Eddie Bourdon: Inside the building. William Din: They're all inside the building? Eddie Bourdon: Correct. William Din: Okay. There are no electrical panels exposed on the outside that's visible from the streets? Eddie Bourdon: Not that I know. All the mechanical is interior to the building. All the security cameras are inside. We would invite anyone to come and visit the site on Village Drive at Hilltop. William Din: I have not seen that site. But you sort of explain what the lighting of the building will be like? I know you have a condition in here about the outdoor lighting but does it have light shining on the building? Is it lit up at night? Don Smith: No. It's just a low level. Eddie Bourdon: This is Don Smith who is one of the principals of the applicant and he is the one who developed this. William Din: Can you state your name? Don Smith: Don Smith. I'm the Vice President of Michael D. Sifen, Inc. Just a low level lighting, which is similar to what we did at Village Drive. It's mounted about 10 Item #11 Michael D. Sifen, Inc. Page 5 feet and shines down and has a reflective covering to keep it from going outside the limits of the property. William Din: Alright. Thank you. Eddie Bourdon: They aren't any whole mounted lights or spotlights from the ground up. Dorothy Wood: Mr. Ripley. Ronald Ripley: I asked this similar question in the informal meeting about the landscaping and I know you talked about it a little bit. What kind of species between the residential area and the proposed building, what type of species are you proposing and what would be the type that would grow with some height? Eddie Bourdon: Leyland Cypress. That is landscaping that is going to grow up. Eventually, a 15-18 feet solid wall of landscaping. To our west is commercial, it's a skating rink I believe that is located directly west. It's on B-2 property. Ronald Ripley: The other thing is the user of the facility comes here how do they get into this building. Tell me about that and I know about the building at Hilltop and it's been awhile when it came through here. Eddie Bourdon: There are actually glass doors that open and you take your stuff in. and out through these doors which you see here on the rendering. This rendering is the building that you see here. This is what is adjacent to Canterford Lane. These are the doors there. The larger of the two buildings you got entrances similar to those here that are located at either end of the building. You also have doors along the sides of the building on the first floor. People can access their units from those doors on the first floor. There are stairwells and their elevators inside the building. Ronald Ripley: So you can access the building all the way around ground floor and you enter like a well to get into a elevator or something like that. Eddie Bourdon: You enter the building and there are walkways and there are elevators that bring you up to second and third floors. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Dorothy Wood: Mr. Strange. Joseph Strange: How many square feet of storage area is there in this area say within a four mile radius? Eddie Bourdon: Joe, I use to know those numbers. The same applicant has storage facility, if you recall at the Williams Holding Property down the street. They're experts Item #11 Michael D. Sifen, Inc. Page 6 at this. They've been doing this for years. They believe there is ample demand in this area for storage facilities. That one was not approved because Council decided to buy the property. It was recommended for approval and so this one is coming in, which is clearly a higher quality facility. I did have the numbers. I apologize to you. I don't have the numbers today. I do have them. The office will be glad to call you and give them to you. I have the numbers of all of them when we did those other applications, fiu-ther to the south. Joseph Strange: Was the figure like 1.5 million square feet? Eddie Bourdon: It sounds a little high. Joseph Strange: Sounds a little high. Eddie Bourdon: It's a lot high actually. I don't think it is 1.5 million square feet. Joseph Strange: If you look at this, this would represent 1/15 of that right there. Would it be over one hundred thousand square feet right here. Eddie Bourdon: That is correct. And those units are these types of units. These are smaller units. They cover a lot of surface area. They're all one-story units. Joseph Strange: What would be the industry recommended amount of storage for a population like for every person, how many square foot does the industry standard figure out? Eddie Bourdon: I don't know what the industry standards are for the number of people. Mr. Strange, I think the demand clearly exists here. You wouldn't have someone being willing to invest this kind of money to build this type of high quality facility if they didn't know there was adequate demand to fill the facility, or they maybe some other facilities that can't compete and then you may have some redeveloped/reuse of other properties that are larger in their land area that they occupy that are also older type of facilities that are more easily taken down. Joseph Strange: In other words, this is not going to replace anything. It's just going to add to the number of storages being put in the area. Eddie Bourdon: Other than the one that this applicant had recommended for approval and came forward to Council and Council decided to buy the property for open space there on Kempsville Avenue near Adendale, I'm now aware of any lack of demand for storage in this area given the large population of the area, given the type of residents that are in the area and given it's proximately to major arterial highways. And given this piece of property, there are people that I have contacted on a regular basis by people in this industry looking for places to put these facilities. You can't find them. This is a piece of property that has a lot of value with additional B-2 zoning that is on it. If I'm a Item #11 Michael D. Sifen, Inc. Page 7 neighbor of this piece of property, I personally would welcome this with open arms as have a majority of the people, if not and I think there may be one person who has concerns about it but if it is going to be behind me, I must rather have this then a commercial shopping center. Joseph Strange: If you thought there was adequate storage already there for the community, would that change your mind or would you just say hey, we're just want to put some other people out of business? Eddie Bourdon: The applicant is the one who makes the determination as to whether they're willing to spend the capital and Mr. Sifen is native Virginia Beach resident. He has been in this business for decades. He knows the business. He built these facilities in northern Virginia, in Richmond and elsewhere around the Commonwealth of Virginia and in Virginia Beach. That is the one at Hilltop. Joseph Strange: Thank you. Dorothy Wood: Are there any other questions for Eddie? Thank you. Mr. Bourdon, would you move that down? Eddie Bourdon: I'll be glad too. Dorothy Wood: Thank you sir. Before our speakers start, can I ask you to notice the lights that are on the podium. The yellow or white light comes on you have about 45 seconds left to speak. The red light comes on we ask that you stop speaking. It's probably better if we explain that to people before they start then waiting like I did today until most of the speakers are gone. Thank you. Joseph Strange: Speaking in support is Judy Kershner. Judy Kershner: Hi. I'm Judy Kersher, President of Carriage Mills Homeowners Association. I bought my town home in 1991. Since then, as my letter indicated we have been boxed in and built in by businesses. We don't have or at least most of us don't and you are going to hear from our minority opposition on this, we don't have any real objection to this storage facility because I would rather see a storage facility than a shopping center. What we do have an objection too is that we have repeatedly asked traffic engineering to provide us a safe way out on the only exit and entrance to Carriage Mill. We're small. We're only a 131 units but when you add BB&T Bank's customers, and when you add, even if it is only 15 or 20 a day, the traffic for a storage facility, which in all probability is not just going to be a car, it's going to be a truck or a trailer to an already situation that is bursting at the seams, it is not unusual for us to see accidents. Not only at Canterford and Kempsville, but also at Canterford and the bank's lane that comes out because our people don't have enough room to park. They park on that curb and if you get a bank customer starting out to Canterford and somebody turning in from the right hand turn lane onto Canterford, you got an accident. And, normally it is a Item #11 Michael D. Sifen, Inc. Page 8 fender bender. Nevertheless, we need to do something. We are prepared to support this project if we can get a resolution on this traffic. Yes, we're concerned about property values but we're much more concerned about human life. And that is what we're dealing with here. Okay. Done. Dorothy Wood: Thank you so much. Judy Kershner: Are there any questions? Dorothy Wood: Are there any questions? Thank you for noticing the lights. I appreciate it. Judy Kershner: Thanks. Joseph Strange: Okay. Also speaking in support is Atkina Cherrison. Atkina Cherrison: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. My name is Atkina Cherrison. I am secretary for the Board of Directors for the Carriage Mill Homeowners Association. I'm here to represent the several residents who have spoken to me personally in regard to this proposed development. The majority has expressed support for the self -storage units. There were literally three residents who came to me complaining about the appearance of the units, and they're expressing their fear there might be a decrease in property values. By enlarge most are pleased with the proposed development. They don't fear light pollution and they look forward to the development as long as security measures are kept in place and followed once the development is built. Some concerns expressed include the obstruction of view at the exit of the development and to the neighborhood on to Canterford Lane. And, we spoken to Mr. Bourdon and Sifen and we wish there would be low-lying vegetation at that entrance. That would help with the obstruction of view being obliterated and that along with the residents use of the businesses parking spaces after the business hours, I believe resolved concerns for the residents that I talked too. Additionally, as Mr. Bourdon and President Judy Kershner had mentioned, there is a great concern about the safety about the exiting of our residents as well as the customers from the storage units, from the proposed pharmacy that is coming and the BB&T Bank. We wish them to exit safely. The federal congestion and litigation and air quality fund paid for a study recently. As a result, the EPA wishes to facilitate the movement of vehicles along that Indian River corridor and as such, they want to slow traffic on Kempsville. In that vein, we're talking about traffic that already exceeds capacity and volume that is both sides north and south on Kempsville. In that vein, we would like to see the speed limit reduced to 35 mph between Indian River Road and Albright on Kempsville. We would like a traffic signal at Canterford Lane and Kempsville. Even though the Sifen Development is only going to bring approximately 15 customers a day, it does add to our traffic volume. We believe that it inquiringly adds to potential risk for our residents leaving the neighborhood. If the Planning Commission would to support such a signal, Carriage Mill residents would welcome the addition of the storage units near our neighborhood. In speaking to the commercial property owners about the adding Item #11 Michael D. Sifen, Inc. Page 9 of the traffic signal, everyone says, "go around, lets go, let's have a traffic signal", it will bring more business to us safely. However, no one wants to pay for it. Dorothy Wood: Thank you so much. We appreciate you coming down. Atkina Cherrison: Thank you. I'm sorry. Are there any question? Joseph Strange: That's the last person signed up speaking in support. We do have one person in opposition. Cindy Meier. Cindy Meier: My name is Meier. I'm a resident of Carriage Mill. It is hard to put oppose or against. The facility I don't have a problem with. What I do have a problem with is the traffic. As a result of this, there will be one curb cut on Kempsville Road where people will enter, the bank, the storage units and Walgreens. A while back, after I had gotten a new car, I made a right turn into the right turn lane, with my signal one because I would still be going into Canterford Lane to get into Carriage Mill. Somebody coming out of the bank assumed that my right turn meant I was going into the bank and they started to proceed forward, and I almost had my car run into. Every time I come there, I have to really watch these people. Now were going to have three businesses going in or coming out. Somebody on the Commission asked a question about whether you can access Canterford Lane by going by Indian River Road and I think we were told at a meeting that yes, people can come in to Walgreens and go all the way back so that might be a homeowner that thinks I'm going to get through and make a short cut and go all the way through and that's adding on to going through the bank and exit out there. The City has refused a traffic light at this intersection. We have requested, requested and requested. That is what they say. There is not enough difference between the intersection of Indian River Road and Kempsville Road, and if they do it is going to back it up immensely. Indian River Road and Kempsville Road is probably one of the most congested intersections in the City of Virginia Beach. I understand that we do need a traffic light. I don't know how it is going to work with Indian River Road and Kempsville Road. The other thing is also now people will be entering on to Canterford Lane again from the storage unit. Canterford Lane is very narrow. It's got one parking lane. We have the town homes. There is just not enough room for everybody to get through there. That is all that I have to say. Thank you very much. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Are there any questions? Mr. Bourdon. Eddie Bourdon: As I mentioned, my vocal remarks, we certainly are supportive and will be supportive of every effort to get a traffic signal at that intersection. The one thing that I wanted to mention today along Canterford Lane there is a solid fence, that I believe was put in when the town homes were developed, which we have agreed to, with the approval of the Association to remove, that and the vegetation around that wall is today an impediment to visibility. We got an extra big setback here in this area between our building and Canterford, which we believe is over 40-feet will be low level landscaping. We're not going to have anything that is going to block the view of folks coming here or Item #11 Michael D. Sifen, Inc. Page 10 here. It is accurate that with the Walgreens with the reducing the number of access points the opportunity will exist for residents, which we think and we're not advocating but will probably happen, to cut through here from Indian River Road to get into the neighborhood as opposed as going around and coming in. That is a possibility. We don't perceive it to be anything that is going to be beneficial from this perspective because you're in the right turn lane here and if you're trying to cut this way you can't cut across. It doesn't really serve much purpose to go out here if you're leaving the neighborhood because you can come here and take a right turn on Kempsville or come across. But the opportunity will exist to go through here with this development. Again, what we're providing to that versus a shopping center on this piece or other commercial uses, restaurants, etc., in terms, you still have the same accessing you have a significant amount of traffic over and above the low level traffic that is relied with this particular view. With that, again, we agree to all the conditions that have been recommended by staff. I want to reiterate that the facility is closed between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. because certainty I want to make clear that is not the case. I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Bourdon. Are there any questions for Mr. Bourdon? Ronald Ripley: I got just one question. Will this building lend itself to any adaptive reuse if warranty wasn't there? Eddie Bourdon: It has the appearance of an office building. They can certainly use it in that fashion. Ronald Ripley: Where would the parking be? Eddie Bourdon: You would have some issues with parking. You would have to deal with some issues with parking. Dorothy Wood: Are there any other questions? Thank you Mr. Bourdon. Eddie Bourdon: Thank you. Dorothy Wood: Discussion? Robert Miller: What I've heard I think the key issue and that everyone is concerned with including the developer would be the issue of getting people in and out of there safely. I think the distance is what I'm going to guess is between the intersection of Kempsville Road. There is a tremendous amount of traffic going in and out of Golden Corral. I think there is an Appleby's? Is that the other one? So, it does seem like something that does deserve a little more attention. This use is obviously a use given all the other possibilities which general the very least amount of traffic. I think that in itself is beneficial and the neighborhood obvious seems to support that. I completely support the proposal. I think what we need to do and continue to do is suggest on to Council and in fact to Public Item #11 Michael D. Sifen, Inc. Page 11 Works that somebody in traffic take a look at how can we possibly put something in there. I'm just assuming, I don't live down that way but the Golden Corral is number one in America. I'm assuming that have acted and Appleby's is a fine facility. The residents deserve an opportunity to be able to come in and out of there safely. I think with the entranceways at the bank and the entranceway for this and I understood what you said about that. I always think back about my very first accident at Ward's Corner and I wasn't suppose to be there. I ran into a schoolteacher, which is absolutely the impediment of disaster. It was someone pulling into a driveway and then I assumed they were moving forward and I ran into them. So, you just have to be real careful when you do that. If you have to call your dad or your mom out, it's kind of good to tell them how you ended up there when you were suppose to be 15 miles in the other direction. That is some personal information to break up the afternoon. Bill Macali: It could have been a lawyer. Dorothy Wood: Mr. Strange. Now tell us about your accidents. Joseph Strange: My daughter did have an accident. I'm going to oppose this. It is hard to oppose because it is nice property. There is no question about it. To bad we couldn't have to replace some of the other storage places that we put out in Centerville. It would have been a nice situation. And it is hard to oppose something when the City really doesn't opposing it. I just have a different vision other than storage units. And, according to the information that I've been able to accumulate there is between one at a quarter million square feet of storage within a five -mile radius. The industry standards that I have range from 6 to 8 square foot for every person within that radius. And, the number of square feet that we have already exceeds that. If you figure a population growth in that area about 8,000 people in the next five years, we're still going to have plenty of storage space. So, is this a nice looking project? I think it is a nice looking project. Is it going to take a community, a district that I think is already struggling for somewhat of an identity. We don't have an oceanfront. We don't have a bay. We don't have the aesthetic value of living in a rural area like Princess Anne. We don't have many things that draw people to the Centerville area. When people visit an area, they stop and eat. They do some shopping. They do these things. I don't think this is going to draw anybody into Centerville from outside the Centerville District. I don't think it serves any type of need that we have down there in that area. I don't think it is going to bring any business into the area from outside the area. And, that is not my vision of Centerville. If your looking for an application that is not going to create a tremendous amount of traffic, maybe you have an application here for that. If you're looking for something that the building looks nicer than most maybe you have an application for that. But if you're looking for something this is going to fill a need there is no need. Even though we're not involved in competition and we shouldn't be here making decisions based on people competing with each other. We do know what happens when we overbuild. When we build shopping centers and strip shopping centers that go out of business. Now we're left with something there that there is no money being generated there. There is no money to take care of the place. Now, we have a dilapidated looking situation in the community. I Item #11 Michael D. Sifen, Inc. Page 12 don't think this would be one of them to be honest with you because of the high scale situation. I think it is going to create that in the Centerville District. For that reason, I can understand why people are support it but for that reason I will be opposing. Dorothy Wood: Is that a motion? Joseph Strange: This is a motion to deny the application. Dorothy Wood: Is there a second to Mr. Strange's motion? Hearing none. Is there any other discussion? Is there any other motion? Eugene Crabtree: I make a motion that we approve the application as submitted. Dorothy Wood: Second? Robert Miller: Second. Dorothy Wood: A motion by Mr. Crabtree, seconded by Mr. Knight to approve the application. AYE 9 NAY 1 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY ABSENT KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE STRANGE NAY WALLER AYE WOOD AYE Ed Weeden: By a vote of 9-1, the application of Michael Sifen, Inc. has been approved. Dorothy Wood: Thank you all for coming. o CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Lake Smith Development Associates, L.C. — Change of Zoning District Classification MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: An Ordinance upon Application of Lake Smith Development Associates, L.C. for a Change of Zoning District Classification from B-2 Community Business District, A-12 Apartment District and R-2.5, R-10 and R-15 Residential Districts to Conditional R-51) Residential Duplex District, A-12 and A-18 Apartment Districts with a PD-112 Overlay District on property located on the north and south sides of Wesleyan Drive, approximately 890 feet east of Cypress Point Boulevard and Broad Meadows Boulevard (GPINS 1468847648 — part of; 14688318360000). The Comprehensive Plan designates this site as being part of the Primary Residential Area, suitable for appropriately located suburban residential and non- residential uses consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. DISTRICT 4 — BAYSIDE ■ Considerations: The applicant proposes to rezone 116 acres of the existing Brock Farm in the Bayside area of the city to develop attached dwellings with garages, single-family detached dwellings, four-plex villas and garden style dwellings, all in the form of condominium ownership. The northernmost portion of the farm, approximately 100 acres, is proposed for the development of single-family dwellings under the existing zoning and is not a part of this rezoning request. The site is one of the few remaining undeveloped areas within the northern portion of the city. The farm has been in existence for at least one hundred years and is now sandwiched between a planned unit development and single-family subdivisions, and is bisected by Wesleyan Drive. In 1973, a rezoning of the farm was approved by the City Council permitting the development of 91 single-family dwellings, 392 attached dwellings (on the northern section of the site), 347 multiple -family dwellings and 3.5 acres of commercial area (on the southern section of the site). By rezoning the site, the applicant seeks to change the mix of development allowed under the existing zoning. The rezoning will result in a reduction of the number of units on the northern parcel and an increase in the number of units on the southern parcel through the conversion of the 3.5 acres of Lake Smith Development Associates, L.C. Page 2 of 2 commercial to residential. The requested rezoning will permit a more creative use and development layout for the parcel than currently exists. The submitted master plan depicts five residential villages that are interconnected with pedestrian trails, nature paths, walkways, and footbridges. A single roadway, Ridgely Manor Boulevard, will provide access to each village from Wesleyan Drive. The main entrance from Wesleyan Drive will be distinctively landscaped with deciduous, evergreen and ornamental trees, shrubs and flowers. Decorative estate style brick and rail entry features grace the main entrance to Ridgely Manor and each individual village entrance. Approximately fifty percent of the development is dedicated to community open space and recreational amenities. Each village will have its own community center with a pool. The storm water management facilities will have aerator fountains for aesthetic quality. Pedestrian walkways and trails wind through the common open spaces and protected woodland areas. The trails also provide connectivity to surrounding areas and the proposed city park to the south of the development. The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding uses. Within this area of Bayside is a mix of single-family homes, town -homes and multiple -family dwellings. The applicant is proposing a high quality development that will complement the surrounding neighborhoods. The existing zoning does not allow for creative use of this site and would result in development detrimental to the surrounding area. One of the greatest benefits of the rezoning is the elimination of commercial zoning in an area that probably possesses too much commercially zoned land, providing instead much needed quality housing for young professionals and step-down buyers. ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-0 with 1 abstention to approve this request as proffered. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: Ur' D04-210-CRZ-2004 LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, L.C. Agenda Item # 1 September 8, 2004 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Faith Christie The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. Location and General Information REQUEST: Change of Zoninq District Classification from B-2 Business, A-12 Apartment, R2.5, R-10 and R-15 Residential Districts to Conditional R-5D Residential, Conditional A-12 and A-18 Apartment with a PD- H2 (Planned Development) Overlay District LOCATION: Property located on the North and South sides of Wesleyan Drive, 890-feet east of Cypress Point Boulevard and Broad Meadows Boulevard •t;%'his O �w�-. l ��,` i ..G„,i c•., c� � ice. IIU�• •�aIIIIIQ I; i '��p•� =�i = i1111 LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page GPIN: 14688476480000 — part of; 14688318360000 COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 4 - BAYSIDE SITE SIZE: 116 +/- acres EXISTING LAND USE: Unfarmed land, a single-family dwelling and several outbuildings. SURROUNDING North: • Fallow farmland and Lake Smith / R-15 Residential LAND USE AND . Wesleyan Drive, Bayside Middle School, and the ZONING: South: Williams farm / R-10 and R-7.5 Residential Haygood Point, Bayside High School, and East: Haygood Square / R-10 and R-7.5 Residential • Cypress Point and Bayside Middle School / PD-H2 West: Planned Unit Development and R-10 Residential NATURAL The majority of the site was previously farmland. There are several RESOURCE wooded areas, adjacent to Lake Smith on the northern parcel, and AND along the eastern side of the southern parcel. The applicant proposes CULTURAL to retain as much of the wooded areas as possible to be integrated FEATURES: into the site as nature amenities. The shoreline along Lake Smith is owned by the City of Norfolk, and is maintained as a part of its water supply reservoir system. Nontidal wetlands impacts are subject to review by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and / or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. If non -tidal wetlands exist on the site, the applicant will have to provide copies of permits from the above agencies prior to site plans being approved by the City of Virginia Beach. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 2 Summary of Proposa Y k' The applicant proposes to rezone 116 acres of the existing Brock Farm in the Bayside area of the city to develop attached dwellings with garages, single-family detached dwellings, four-plex villas and garden style dwellings, all in the form of condominium ownership. The northernmost portion of the farm, approximately 100 acres, is proposed for the development of single-family dwellings under the existing zoning and is not a part of this rezoning request. The site is one of the few remaining undeveloped areas within the northern portion of the city. The farm has been in existence for at least one hundred years and is now sandwiched between a planned unit development and single-family subdivisions, and is bisected by Wesleyan Drive. A rezoning of the farm that permits the development of 91 single-family dwellings, 392 attached dwellings (on the northern section of the site), 347 multiple -family dwellings and 3.5 acres of commercial area (on the ----- southern section of the site) was -- approved in 1973. The applicant' seeks to change the mix of -- development approved under the existing zoning by rezoning the site.-� The rezoning will result in a -~ J reduction of the number of units on j the northern parcel and an increase in the number of units on the southern parcel through the =�' H,.. elimination of the 3.5 acres of �~ , commercial area. The requested rezoning and planned overlay district will permit a more creative use of the fP, parcel than currently exists. i---> ) The submitted master plan depicts five residential villages that are interconnected with pedestrian trails, nature paths, walkways, and footbridges. A single roadway, Ridgely Manor Boulevard, will provide access to each village from Wesleyan Drive. The main entrance from Wesleyan Drive will be RIDGtr i'*NOR Conoeptuai Mawr Silo Plan .,dr�ju „.......__.._._...._.. May 20, 2004 LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 3 distinctively landscaped with deciduous, evergreen and ornamental trees, shrubs and flowers. Decorative estate style brick and rail entry features grace the main entrance to Ridgely Manor and each individual village entrance. Approximately fifty percent of the development is dedicated to community open space and recreational amenities. Each village will have its own community center with a pool. The storm water management facilities will have aerator fountains for aesthetic quality. Pedestrian walkways and trails wind through the common open spaces and protected woodland areas. The trails also provide connectivity to surrounding areas and the proposed city park to the south of the development. As previously stated the applicant proposes five residential villages. North of Wesleyan Drive will -be the villages of Farrcroft, Grace Hill, Belmeade and Westbriar; south of Wesleyan Drive will be Southmoor. Farrcroft will contain 172 dwelling units within four - unit brick villa building types. The architectural design is similar to many of the applicant's developments in the City. The buildings are brick and faux cedar shake. Grace Hill, also will be four -unit buildings, and will contain 112 dwelling units. The architectural design of Grace Hill mimics a "big house" design. The four unit buildings resemble a very large home. The buildings have a coastal home look and are of faux cedar shake. Westbriar is the attached dwelling unit (townhome) section of the project. There will be 174 town -home style units with garages. Belmeade will contain 158 single- family type homes. The applicant provided six building styles that will be available to purchasers. Southmoor will contain 280 garden style units. The buildings will be three- story with standing seam metal roofs. The exterior of the buildings are brick and synthetic cedar shake. Curved porch railings give the feel of a New Orleans style design. Major Issues The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this request. Staff's evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these issues are adequately addressed. • Compatibility with the surrounding neighborhoods and uses. • Impact upon city services. • Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations. LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 4 Comprehensive Plan v The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site as part of the Primary Residential Area (Cypress Point Area, Site 2). The land use planning policies and principles for the Primary Residential Area focus strongly on preserving and protecting the overall character, economic value and aesthetic quality of the stable neighborhoods located within the area. The established type, size, and relationship of land use, both residential and nonresidential, in and around these neighborhoods should serve as a guide when considering future development. The Comprehensive Plan policies and Map recognize the special qualities associated with this last remaining large undeveloped peninsula parcel in the Bayside area. Many opportunities exist to provide a high quality community with a variety of housing types and recreational amenities. Proffers a The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to "offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable," (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item'"# 1 Page 5 PROFFER # 1 The Property shall be developed substantially as shown on the "Ridgely Manor at Lake Smith — Conceptual Master Site Plan", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for the Dragas Companies, a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (hereinafter, the "Master Plan"). PROFFER # 2 The principal entranceways to the Property shall be from Wesleyan Drive. The streetscape along the northern side of Wesleyan Drive, and the entrances to Ridgely Manor Boulevard and to each northern residential village, shall be designed, landscaped and constructed substantially as depicted on the exhibit entitled, "Ridgely Manor at Lake Smith" — "Perspective View at Ridgely Manor Entrance" and Perspective View at Typical Entrance", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for the Dragas Companies, a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. The streetscape along the southern side of Wesleyan Drive shall be designed, landscaped and constructed substantially as depicted on the exhibit entitled, "Southmoor Village at Ridgely Manor" — "Perspective View at Southmoor Village Entrance", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for the Dragas Companies (hereinafter collectively called the "Entrance Plans"). The Entrance Plans have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. PROFFER # 3 The five (5) residential "villages" within Ridgely Manor, as depicted on the Master Plan, shall be developed substantially as shown on those exhibits entitled: (a) "Farrcroft at Ridgely Manor, 4 - Plex Brick Villas, Conceptual Site Plan", dated May 20, 2004; (b) "Belmeade at Ridgely Manor, Luxury Detached Single Family Condominiums, Conceptual Site Plan", dated May 20, 2004; (c) "Grace Hill at Ridgely Manor, 4 — Plex Master Down Villas, Conceptual Site Plan", dated May 20, 2004; (d) "Westbriar at Ridgely Manor, Attached Condominiums with Garages, Conceptual Site Plan", dated May 20, 2004; LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 6 (e) "Southmoor at Ridgely Manor, Conceptual Site Plan", dated May 20, 2004 (hereinafter, the "Conceptual Site Plans"); These Conceptual Site Plans have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. PROFFER # 4 The party of the first part shall record a Master Deed of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("Restrictions") governing the Property. Each of the five (5) residential villages shall be a condominium and the Restrictions shall establish a Master Homeowners Association which will be responsible for maintaining all "Open Space Easements", including trails and other improvements as depicted on the Conceptual Site Plans. PROFFER # 5 When the Property is developed, Belmeade at Ridgely Manor shall feature no more than one hundred fifty-eight (158) single-family residential condominiums, each unit containing no more than three (3) bedrooms. The architectural design and building materials utilized will be substantially as depicted and described on the exhibit entitled, "Belmeade at Ridgely Manor — Architectural Elevations", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for The Dragas Companies (the, "Belmeade Elevations"), which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. The colors used may vary from those on the Belmeade Elevations; however, all will be earth tones. PROFFER # 6 When the Property is developed, Grace Hill at Ridgely Manor shall feature no more than one hundred twelve (112) residential condominium units in twenty-eight (28) buildings, each unit containing two (2) or three (3) bedrooms. The architectural design and building materials utilized will be substantially as depicted and described on the exhibit entitled, "Grace Hill at Ridgely Manor — Architectural Elevations", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for The Dragas Companies (the, "Grace Hill Elevations"), which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. The colors used may vary from those on the Grace Hill Elevations; however, all will be earth tones. LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 7 PROFFER # 7 When the Property is developed, Westbriar at Ridgely Manor shall feature no more than one hundred seventy- four (174) attached residential condominium units with garages, each unit containing two (2) or three (3) bedrooms. The architectural design and building materials utilized will be substantially as depicted and described on the exhibit entitled, "Westbriar at Ridgely Manor — Architectural Elevations", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for The Dragas Companies (the, "Westbriar Elevations"), which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. The colors used may vary from those on the Westbriar Elevations; however, all will be earth tones. PROFFER # 8 When the Property is developed, Farrcroft at Ridgely Manor shall feature no more than one hundred seventy- two (172) residential condominiums in forty-three (43) buildings, each unit containing no more than two (2) bedrooms. The architectural design and building materials utilized will be substantially as depicted and described on the exhibit entitled, "Farrcroft at Ridgely Manor — Architectural Elevations", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for The Dragas Companies (the, "Farrcroft Elevations"), which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. The colors used may vary from those on the Farrcroft Elevations; however, all will be earth tones. PROFFER # 9 When the Property is developed, Southmoor at Ridgely Manor shall feature no more than two hundred eighty (280) garden style condominium units, each unit containing one (1), two (2), or three (3) bedrooms. The architectural design and building materials utilized will be substantially as depicted and described on the exhibit entitled, "Southmoor at Ridgely Manor — Architectural Perspective View", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for The Dragas Companies (the, "Southmoor Elevations"), which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. The colors used may vary from those on the Southmoor Elevations; however, all will be earth tones. LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 8 PROFFER # 10 The dimensional requirements applicable to development of Southmoor at Ridgely Manor shall be as follows: Minimum Setback from Wesleyan Drive: 30' Minimum Setback from Newtown Road: 30' Minimum distance between buildings: 20' Maximum Building Height: 65' Except as modified hereby, all other requirements of the A- 18 Zoning District, in effect as of the date hereof, shall be applicable. PROFFER # 11 Certain dimensional requirements applicable to development of Belmeade at Ridgely Manor shall be as follows: Minimum Setback from a Public Right of Way: 40' Minimum Distance from Front of Dwelling to Edge of Curb (interior streets): 12' Minimum Distance from Side of Building to Edge of Curb (interior streets): 12' Minimum Distance between Buildings: 15' PROFFER # 12 Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. Staff Evaluation of The proffers are acceptable. They insure that a high Proffers: quality project will be developed on the sites. The agreement limits the density within each section of the property, provides architectural vision for each village, and sets required setbacks and building distances within the planned development. City Attorney's The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer Office: agreement dated August 23, 2004, and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 9 Staff Evaluation Staff recommends approval of this request. Staffs evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials and the proffers, adequately addresses each of the `Major Issues' identified above. The proposal's strengths in addressing the `Major Issues' are (1) The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding uses. Within this area of Bayside is a mix of single-family homes, town -homes and multiple -family dwellings. The applicant is proposing a high quality development that will complement the surrounding neighborhoods. Staff concludes that the existing zoning does not allow for creative use of this site and would, if developed under that zoning, result in development that would be detrimental to the surrounding area. Under the existing zoning, the applicant could develop this portion of the northern parcel with 91 single-family dwellings, 392 townhomes and 152 multiple - family units. The proposed rezoning would result in 158 single-family homes, 174 townhomes and 284 four -unit style homes. The applicant's proposal decreases the density on the northern portion of the site. On the portion of the development south of Wesleyan Drive, under the existing zoning, the applicant could have developed the southern portion of the development with 195 multiple -family units and 3.5 acres of commercial uses such as drive-thru restaurants, retail uses, offices, convenience stores and gas pumps, mini -warehouses, and any number of the other uses permitted within the B-2 Community Business District. Staff concludes that one of the greatest benefits of the rezoning is the elimination of commercial zoning in an area that probably possesses too much commercially zoned land, providing instead much needed quality housing for young professionals and step-down buyers. (2) It is likely that the applicant's proposal may reduce the demands on City services since the streets, landscaping, open spaces, and refuse removal will be private and maintained by the Homeowner's Associations. Additionally, the types of units offered do not typically cater to homeowners with children, with the exception of the single-family village; therefore, there will not be an undue burden placed upon the school system in that area. (3) The proposed Conditional Rezoning request is consistent the majority of the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan for this site. The request focuses strongly on preserving and protecting the overall character, economic value and aesthetic quality of the stable neighborhoods located within the area. It will provide a high quality community with a variety of housing types and recreational LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item# 1 Page 10 amenities. A single entrance to the site provides an internal circulation system for the villages that will minimize traffic conflicts. The plans incorporate planning elements such as connectivity, visual and functional open space, pedestrian networks and landscaped streetscapes. Vehicular and pedestrian accesses are distinct and clearly separated. The majority of the parking areas are either behind buildings or buffered from the public right-of-ways with extensive landscaping. Natural site amenities, such as significant stands of trees, have been incorporated into the overall design of the site as passive recreational amenities. Stormwater management facilities are designed as open space and landscaped amenities. The proffer agreement, proffered elevations and proffered village site designs will bind the applicant to the high quality development of the parcels. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all anplicable Citv Codes. LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 11 map is cart i or 2 Supplemental Information"""A' Zoning History LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 12 Map i DeveloMap � Not to Scole rE ►�-ovvv -oSee ,. Map — part I of 2 pagggo i�74f, JIG fn UWAR S�ft # I DATE IREQUEST I ACTION 1. 4-2-73 Rezoning (R-S 3 Residence Suburban and R-R 1 Rural Approved Residence to R-S 2 Residence Suburban; R-S 3 Residence Suburban to C-L 3 Limited Commercial; R-S 3 Residence Suburban and R-R 1 Rural Residence to R-M Multiple Family Residence) and a Conditional Use Permit for cluster units 2. 3-10-98 Conditional Use Permit (Monopole Tower) Approved 3. 9-23-97 Conditional Use Permit (Monopole Tower) Approved 2-8-94 Conditional Use Permit (Communication Tower) Approved Public Agency Comments Public Works LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 13 Master Transportation Plan (MTP): Wesleyan Drive is a four -lane divided minor urban arterial. Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Existing Land Use 18,340 27,400ADT 0 Wesleyan Drive ADT' Proposed Land Use 3— 5,877 Average Daily Trips 2 as defined by no existing development on the site. 3 as defined by 738 condominiums and 158 single family dwellings Should the site be developed with the current zoning designations, the following traffic would be generated: Single-family Dwellings (91 units) — 953 trips / day (R-15 and R-10) Residential Townhouse (392 units) — 2,050 trips / day (R-2.5) Residential Multiple -family (347 units — 2,48 trips / day (A-12) Commercial site (3.5 acres) —1,925 trips / day (B-2) Total — 6,796 trip / day Public Utilities Water: A 24-inch City water main exists in Wesleyan Drive in front of this site. The water main continues northeast through the site to Crossborough Road. There is a 10-inch water line in Course View Circle terminating near the western property line. An 8-inch water line exists in Pond View Circle terminating near the northwestern property line. An adequate public utility easement will be required over the 24-inch City water main located on the site. Sewer: There is a 10-inch sanitary sewer force main in Newtown Road. A 12-inch gravity sanitary sewer exists in Course View Circle terminating near the western property line. An 8-inch gravity sanitary sewer exists in Pond View Circle terminating near the northwestern property line. The portion of the site south of Wesleyan Drive is not located within an existing pump station service area. Sanitary sewer systems and pump station analysis of receiving pump stations is required to determine if potential flows can be accommodated. LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 14 Public Schools School Current Enrollment Capacity Generation 1 Change 2 Luxford Elementary530 570 73 -73 Ba side Middle 1289 1282 35 -44 Ba side High 1982 1860 �JJ 156 t.. ♦L... nwL...rl -36 "generation" represents the number of students that the aeveiopmem will duU LU —1 2 "change" represents the difference between generated students under the existing zoning and under the proposed zoning. The number can be positive (additional students) or negative (fewer students). The existing zoning would generate an increase of 317 children within the school system (146 elementary, 79 middle and 92 senior high school) Public Safety Police: In an effort to reduce opportunity for crime, the applicant shall review and incorporate safety by design concepts and (design) strategies contained in the CVB Planning Department's, "Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design - General Guidelines for Designing Safer Communities" booklet. A copy of this booklet can be obtained by contacting either the Planning Department or the Police Department's Crime Prevention Unit. For safety and security purposes, the pedestrian pathways, walkways, hiking and nature trails, and foot bridges should be designed to maximize sight lines and surveillance opportunities by normal users (residents), while keeping with the natural appearance of the woodland preservation and conservation areas. Landscaping within eight (8) feet of pathways, walkways and natural trails should be maintained low (shrubbery - under three feet) and/or have canopies raised (trees - seven feet). Plant selection and its maturation are important to consider in this regard. All lighting on the site (all five villages) should be consistent with those standards recommended by the Illumination Engineering Society of North America along with requirements of the City of Virginia Beach Lighting Ordinance. Lighting should be directed/deflected down at the ground, and not out horizontally or up in the air. Fire and Rescue: Fire hydrants must be located within 500-feet of residential structures. Private fire hydrants should be maintained LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 15 annually as identified in N.F.P.A. 25. The minimum fire lane width must not be less than 20-feet. Additional fire lanes may be required after occupancy of the site. On -street parking may be restricted due to the width of the roadways. LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 16 Exhibits LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item #-1 Page 17 Exhibit B - 1 Proposed Overall Site Plan tyW yse.3,�a: .:ttuu nC 3333uta z�nr. wt,, wto ea Pnapowxi 2uNe�y n.tL At11 wIPM323'T�xYv N.St) wl pOtf2 03May Cort+nuNiy f)pM� SPac<: 36R2.3 Ac1d(1.1% RITIGF�L OR Conceptual Master Site Plan ,3L1ic3ci5 ...... May 20, 2004 LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page_18 m R IV A r r m � m O Q �1 E p Ot�mt�.r�mc N I V s N M to s a z „ m ., mCL �gO1DNNw y�r�tV rrN� s. r M 1 N � � 3 ID * a�� •tom M u R C c � c c = E � alas .1 a es+tetimhm i eaid,mMMr Exhibit B - 2 Proposed Overall Site Plan (North Detail) m a � 0 P N a �Z �mn a=n09 MIJ� agC Kn O � < �o T m � Oyf�t O�V � � f = 0 LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. AgendaItem# 1 Page 19 a � 7 N N ID O • m m f7 T T O m � a i � �eamt+a+l o �p m L � x W O oZ O L' 'No tl X T r r N to!- ti i 4k rz�►nama m Is M b N N ak z N N CA N 0 j O S = = W e IL CL 01 d QNmaka=' w Exhibit B - 3 Proposed Overall Site Plan (South Detail) CT K1 N �+� m ` 111 a io�m �„ b '/►am w W �� Z 2 � .tNi m � � o f0U, �• j Y aw j Oz40 m 3 i m xW40 0 C C w F C C O LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 20 FARRCROFT Exhibit C-1 Proposed Farrcroft Village Site Plan �,,^tYCi'Tat:Jr11 5 C Ran LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 21 Exhibit C-2 Proposed Farrcroft Village Building Elevation -• FOURPLEY EO ?y LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 22 LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 22 EVERGREENTREES— JROWERING ORNAMENTAI 7REES �m 'DECIDUOUS CANOPY--.REEs COMMUNITY CONNECnVrTY JR ACIWTry. LA -, 4" ALTERNATE TERMINXTING RIDGLEYMANOR BOULEVARD W,'MULn-LAYER I AND EVERGREEN BEL,MEADE c., EARTH S, FLOWERING RN U, rY CONNECTI —HIKING I NATURE,TRAIL —WOODLAND -pReSE,RVA'TION SONGBIRD HABITAT LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 23 In 0 M v 0 G Exhibit D-2 Proposed Belmeade Village Building Elevations -- Luxury Detached SF Condos 0 ro v 0 �+� 4 LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 24 Exhibit E-1 Proposed Grace Hill Village Site Plan Sisr.OaW P��tnxW Ye t. od. V sr CTURE CONSISTS OF ARTICULATED EARTH SHAPING SFT, TO'0 FT, IN HEIGHT VWMULTI. AYER DECIDUOUS, FLO'A'ERING AND EVERGREEN PLANTINGS GRACE %ILL „N Conceptual Site Plan May 20. 2004 rirxTac LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 25 Exhibit E-2 Proposed Grace Hill Village Building Elevation — Fourplex Master Down LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda- Item # 1 Page 26 WE STBRIAR ,4-,,c Exhibit F-1 Proposed Westbriar Village �( Site Plan UrvJ Use nt YtwwaKw: N+RG�nYCwresR' 'x,M J.c., t(t15` o-.5neat.Na. T'4nw+f+IPrYnN' M/IJ.}K 1..vAv'!SA iMvaw YaM Arvp: e:nn.w�.«h cs:•�w.w: i:m xr as pss�%):XSu?RTT7 PwM�N kuw/mi: PwkmN (YinMMei'. .(.3,S Xn'✓in_......_.__....._ . .................._.,..; =LOWEPo'JG Conceptual Site Plan LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 27 Exhibit F-2 Proposed Westbriar Village Building Elevation — Attached Condos With Garages 2 LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 28 W/'S FT:ARCHRECTURALMETAL FENCE SOUTHMOOR VILLAGE at Ridgdv Manor rirsa� Conceptual Site Plan Exhibit G-1 Proposed Southmoor Village Site Plan LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 29 Exhibit G-2 4) U tQ L tl! d 0) t6 L 0 O E O cn T tC _U U d Q N L d a Proposed Southmoor Village Building Elevation — Garden Style Condos Z� �a fl0 oCC Z D O w UJ vm O m zw w Z ID i LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. AgendaItem# 1 Page 30 0 Exhibit H-1 Proposed Ridgely Manor Entrance Features V Tj LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. AgendaItem# 1 Page 31 E_ DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Exhibit E -1 Disclosure Statement APPLICANT DISCLOSURE If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: t. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) Lake Smith Development Associates, L.C.: Dragas Management Corp., a Virginia corporation, Managing Member: Helen E. Dragas, President/CEO, John C. Buckley, Senior Vice President, Robert C. Makin, Treasurer, Joyce B. Witt, Secretary Helen E. Dragas, Member, Anita D. Weaver, Member, Mary D. Shearin, Member & Jennifer D. Steadfast, Member 2. List all businesses that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity I relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) 1 I i ❑ Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant. If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization, complete the following: r 1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) Doris Backus Brock 2. List all businesses that have a parent -subsidiary' or affiliated business entity relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary) X Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, j1 or other unincorporated organization. L— R Cnn nevi o f r innnnfnc Conditional Rezoning Application Pace 12 of 13 Revised 2r19+2004 LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 32 DISCLOSURE STATEME Exhibit E - 2 Disclosure Statement ADDITIONAL_ DISCLOSURES List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural services, real estate services. financial services, accounting services, and legal services: (Attach list if necessary) Kaufman & Canoles. P.C. Sykes, Bourdon, Ahern & Levy, P.C- MSA, P.C. "Parent -subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code § 2.2-3101. 2 "Affiliated business entity relationship' means "a relationship, other than parent -subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity. or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities: there are common or commingled funds or assets: the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act.. Va. Code § 2.2-3101. CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. i I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for public hearing. I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. l Lake Smit 9,evelopmet t Associates, L.C. fres(c By: ��� �; � � Helen E. Dragas, �e��er Applicar.'s Signature Print Name CcS yi } Doris Backus Brock P opert,y, Or rer's Signature (if different than applicant) ,- Print Name Conditional Rezoning Aopiioation rage i3 Cf 13 Revised 2:'. k2004 z 0 L= LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. AgendaItem# 1 Page 33 Ridgely Manor at Lake Smith Conditional Rezoning Application List of Potentially Affiliated Business Entities May 29,,2004 Dragas Management Corporation Draizas Associates, L.C. Draclas Associates 11. L.C. Dragas Associates 111, L.C. Dragas Associates IV, L.C. Dra-g-as, Associates V, L.C. Draaas Associates VI, L.C. Dragas Associates VII, L.C. Dragas Associates VIIL L.C. Dragas Associates IX, L.C. Dragas Associates X, L.C. Dragas Associates XI, L.C. Hampshires Associates, L.C. Grove Associates, L.C. Dragas Associates HIV, L.C. Draaas Associates V. L.C. Fan -croft Associates. L.C. Belmeade Associates, L.C. Southmoor Associates, L.C. Westbriar Associates, L.C. Grace Hill Associates, L.C. North, Shore Associates. L.C. Exhibit E - 3 Disclosure Statement LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 34 Exhibit F Conceptual Site Layout Plan Of North Shore at Ridgely Manor NOT PART OF THE REZONING REQUEST - PROVIDED FOR INFORMATION ONLY Supplemental Information Site Data Site Area: *102.0 Ac Existing 7oning: P-15 Proposed Use: Residential (Min. 15.000 sf lots) Proposed it of Lots: 179 $CTI?ACW� Front: 3(r Side: 10' & 30' (adj. to street) Rear: 20' BMP Total: 8.59 Ac. (8A-1. of site) Open Space Total: 7.98 Ac. (7.8% of site) Nis P.C. Lardsrxv Achitemm, Planning Sww"ng DATE:07/22104 fti—ing Eywi o Wmal Sov: es MU PRgi. POthf Or LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOC. Agenda Item # 1 Page 35 Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Change of Zoning District Classification North and south sides of Wesleyan Drive, approximately 890 feet east of Cypress Point Boulevard and Broad Meadows Boulevard District 4 Bayside September 8, 2004 REGULAR Joseph Strange: Our next item on our regular agenda is Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. An Ordinance upon Application of Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C, for a Change of Zoning District Classification from B-2 Community Business District, A-12 Apartment District and R-2.5, R-10 and R-15 Residential Districts to Conditional R-5D Residential Duplex District, A-12 and A-18 Apartment Districts with PD-H2 Overlay District on property located on the north and south sides of Wesleyan Drive, approximately 890 feet east of Cypress Point Boulevard and Broad Meadows Boulevard, District 4, Bayside. Eddie Bourdon: Madame Chairman, members of the Board. My name is Eddie ® Bourdon. I'm a Virginia Beach attorney as you all know. It is certain a privilege to come before you this afternoon representing the Dragas Companies and the Company's President Ms. Helen Dragas. This client is one of the most respected, civic minded, awarded winning companies and families in our City and in fact, in our region. Their success at creating and sustaining high quality, well maintained successful residential communities is universally acknowledged. They have won awards at the local, regional and national level. Before Helen Dragas presents the specifics of her vision for Ridgely Manor at Lake Smith, I'd like to provide just a little bit of background information before Helen comes up. This pierce of property, the Brock property is located in the northwest section of the City of Virginia Beach. It totals 216 acres of developable land. It is located on the north side of Newtown Road as you look up at the PowerPoint. Newtown Road is down here in front of Bayside Middle School. The property starts here and extends northward all the way up to this peninsula here. It is a very large parcel of land. It is bisected by Wesleyan Drive, a right-of-way that was dedicated by the former owners of this property. Most of the eastern side of the property is bounded by Lake Smith. The west side of property is bound by the Cypress Point Community and the Traditions Condominium Community. The southern portion of the property that abuts the southern point, Newtown Road in a northern boundary of what I'm characterizing as the southern portion of the property being Wesleyan Drive, is adjoined by a commercial center to the west and by Bayside Middle School to the south. Interesting, I would also note that south of this property on Newtown Road is a 58 acre parcel known as the Williams Farm that the City recently invested some five million dollars in acquiring for open space and park land, and with this development we will be able to connect trails through from that property. This land, which we all refer to as the Brock property, was owned by the Brock Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 2 Family for nearly 80 years. This applicant owns this property. They have closed on the purchase of this property. This is not what you commonly see or commonly find when rezoning applications come forward. Most come forward as contingent approvals that the purchase will go through if the zoning change, the Use Permit, or the variance is approved. However, the Brock property is and has been zoned for multiple types of residential development for over 30 years. The northern 196 acres of this former farm has a combination of zoning, single family residential at R-15, R-2.5 Residential Townhouse District and A-12 Apartment District. Now the northern most portion of the property above what you see up on the PowerPoint, this portion here will be developed at its R-15 zoning as single-family residential homes. If this applicant before you is approved it will be developed in accordance with the plans that you see on Page 33 of your staff s professional evaluation. That is what will happen if this plan is approved. And, they will be half million dollar homes and probably above. The balance of the property on the north side of Wesleyan Drive, which is the subject of this application is just under 100 acres can be developed today by -right, consistent with the existing, unconditional zoning, as 91 single family homes, 392 fee simple town homes, and 152 apartment units for a total of 635 residential units, which can be developed on the northern side of Haygood Road today by -right. On the southern portion of the property, which is 19.83 acres between Haygood and Newtown Roads, we have 3 'h acres of unconditional B-2 along Wesleyan Drive between Wesleyan Drive and the athletic fields at Bayside Middle School. We also have 16.3 acres zoned unconditional A-12 Apartment District upon which 195 apartment units can be developed by right today. So to recap, the portion of the Brock property which the Dragas Companies are before you today requesting rezonings on to facilitate this beautiful Ridgely Manor at Lake Smith Development can today be developed into a total of 830 residential units, 91 single- family, 392 town homes and 347 apartments as well as 3 '/z acres of unconditional B-2 zoning upon which you know any number of commercial developments can take place. These development numbers are accurate. They're accurate because they're based on a conceptual development plan which the Dragas Companies have prepared before they bought the land to assure themselves and the lenders that this property had the value to support the purchase and support development. And, it is these by -right plans, which are the alternative development for this property to the quality proposal that you're going to hear about from Ms. Dragas. Please also note that these plans that can be developed today have open space of approximately 10 percent of the site versus the 50 percent from the plans you'll be hearing about today. I had the privilege of coming before this body last November at your last public hearing before you recommended the Comprehensive Plan to the City Council, and at that meeting I made reference to the fact that I believe that it was not a good idea to add some language that you all added to that plan, not you all but staff, about the Brock property. I've seen it in some of the letters and correspondence that you all have seen. And, you've also seen letters and correspondence in favor of this plan. But unfortunately that language in dealing with density of this property created an unreasonable, unfillable expectation to some people that could not possibly have not been met which I cited at that time. But, I would just simply suggest that what really is important here is to look at quality. Density is not the key thing. It is quality, because density is what is already going to happen on this piece of property. It's Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 3 a question of quality. I think at the end you all will concur with your staff that what you have before you is an excellent proposal. I'll ask Ms. Dragas to come forward and give you the details. Thank you. Helen Dragas: Good afternoon Madame Chairperson, honorable members of Planning Commission. I'm Helen Dragas, President and CEO of the Dragas Companies. I am truly honored and fell privileged to be able to bring before you today the Ridgely Manor Rezoning Application. Over three decades ago, my father George and his brother Mark, founding partners of our company, adopted a very simple and yet very powerful Mission Statement for our organization. It occupied my mind when we set out to design plans for this special piece of land. The Mission Statement that they wrote is simply this "to create communities of enduring beauty and sustainable value". If this were not our Mission Statement, perhaps we might have taken an easier route with this property. As Mr. Bourdon has stated, it is already zoned for a similar number of residential units. But the current zoning will not allow us to promote that mission. The current zoning frankly would result in a community of mediocre beauty and questionable sustainable value, one that might be undistinguishable in 20 years from other neighborhoods of townhouses and apartments for which the property is zoned. I would like to use my time to simply highlight how the Ridgely Manor proposal before you today accomplishes these two objectives, enduring beauty and sustainable value. We felt that to create a community of enduring beauty we needed to preserve as many of the natural features as possible and to protect the environmentally sensitive areas of the site that are adjacent to Lake Smith. The application meets these objectives through its proper conservation areas and treed buffers, areas that we could otherwise clear-cut by right. To permit the objective of enduring beauty we have proffered very sophisticated and stately entrances on Wesleyan Drive and into each individual community. The landscaping and earth berms along the frontage on Wesleyan Drive and down the central corridor boulevard will be stunning. We have bound ourselves to architectural elevations and building materials that are a substantial improvement over the materials and architecture that could be used on the property today. Even on the portion of the property not included in this rezoning, the northern most 102 acres of the farm, we have stipulated that the homes to be built there have architectural restrictions and extremely high quality building materials. The resulting North Shore Ridgely Manor promises to be one the City's finest waterfront neighborhoods. To ensure that we met our objective of sustainable value, we propose to replace all the townhouses and apartment zoning with condominium form of ownership. Ed Weeden: Ms. Dragas, can you wrap it up please? Helen Dragas: Ensuring professional management and mandatory maintenance. Dorothy Wood: I'm sorry Ms. Dragas. We do have a three minute limit. Helen Dragas: I'm sorry. I thought I got ten as the applicant? Dorothy Wood: Mr. Bourdon took the ten. Item # 1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 4 Eddie Bourdon: I took ten? Dorothy Wood: Seven. She gets another three then. Helen Dragas: Have I used those? Dorothy Wood: No. You have another three minutes. Helen Dragas: Thank you. Okay. Dorothy Wood: I'm sorry. Helen Dragas: That's quite alright. Anyway, we replaced the townhouses and apartments with condominium ownership. By eliminating the two apartment complexes that the current zoning will allow we are promoting the long term value retaining benefits of homeownership instead of rental houses. Our proposal promotes sustainable value by preserving over 50 percent of the land area as open space, which as the Comprehensive Plan states is the glue that holds the City together as it ages. To contribute to our objective of sustainable value we felt that our proposal needed to do a better job than the existing zoning in areas of impact to the City. It needed to be a contributor to the City coffers rather than a drain. It certainly does that. In the most conservative estimate our proposal reduces the number of schoolchildren that will come from the property by 52 percent. It reduces the amount of traffic that will come from the land by almost 1,000 trips per day, or about 14 percent. All the individual community streets will be privately maintained. There will be no public garbage collection, no public storm water maintenance in these condo communities. The sales prices of the condominium homes will be significantly higher than the values built under a by -right development resulting in a more substantial revenue base for the City. We believe all these improvements amount to more than 1.6 million dollars per year to the positive in the properties' physical impact to the City of Virginia Beach, an initial capital savings to the schools of over $2 million dollars, again, sustainable value. This property, the beautiful Brock Farm, is one of the few remaining sites of any size in Virginia Beach not impacted by AICUZ zones, wetlands, flood plain, Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act restrictions or zoning limitations. We would not be here requesting to build 896 homes if the property was zoned for agricultural use. It is zoned predominately for multi family and commercial use. We are not seeking to add residential units on the portion of the land zoned for residential use. Our plan actually slightly reduces that unit count. We are here today because we would like to make this property that we own better than the way we found it. Not only better next month or next year, but better 40, 50 and 60 years from now. We are asking the City for the ability and the zoning to allow us to make it enduring and sustaining. Thank you. Dorothy Wood: Thank you Ms. Dragas. Are there any questions for Mrs. Dragas? Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 5 Ronald Ripley: A couple of questions. The B-2 property, did you say you had alternative uses in there? W hat other uses did you consider? Helen Dragas: It is now B-2. We just took a look at the commercial development patterns in the area. We see a lot of distressed retail in the general area. We felt that by requesting to convert to residential we could incorporate the benefit of those units into the overall elevation of quality of the plan. Ronald Ripley: So, you didn't see any other use for the B-2 at this point? Helen Dragas: We are residential developers. I didn't consider it as B-2. I consider the whole property as to what can we do to fulfill our Mission in creating enduring, sustainable communities. Ronald Ripley: You made a comment about schools. Why would the schools be less impacted? Helen Dragas: Condominium communities by City historical statistics generate fewer school children per unit than do townhouse and apartment zoning. We're also converting about 40 acres of R-15 to condominium communities so the school generation numbers are figured that way. We used the school city factors. Our actual historical generation is actually about two thirds of that number so the 52 percent, I think is a very conservative estimate of savings. Ronald Ripley: So in your other communities you have less children than they typically have? Helen Dragas: What the City's factors are. Yes sir. Ronald Ripley: Okay. No one explained recreational amenities. Can you spend some time on that? In looking through the plan it looked like it was pretty extensive. Helen Dragas: They are pretty extensive. Very extensive conservation area along the shore line of Lake Smith where the majority of the recreation areas are located. Each individual community does have its own pool, clubhouse and trellis arbor recreation area in addition to some open lawn space and that type of thing. But the whole community will share the amenities along that shore line, which are comprised of hiking organic material trails. There are some pavilions and more passive activity areas there. It's meant to be a low impact nature preserved type of amenity. And, the residents of the southern community would be able to use those amenities on the northern piece of the property and vice versa. The trail system also goes through each individual community around all the stormwater retention ponds. I believe it adds up to somewhere like 3-5 miles of trails. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Thank you. Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 6 Dorothy Wood: Ms. Dragas, I see a model over there. Is this yours by chance? Helen Dragas: Yes it is actually. That model is an architectural model of the product that would be constructed on the south side of the property. It is one that we decided to do a model of because it was not one that we had constructed before, and we wanted neighbors to be able to take a look at it, and Planning Commission and City Council members to see what it would actually look like. It is a community of three story buildings constructed of brick, cedar shake siding. You can maybe from your distance barely make out a curved rail system on those balconies. That architectural theme is carried to the entrance along Wesleyan Drive, which is also brick instead of New Orleans style rail system there. It's got a standing seam metal roof as well in the front. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Janice Anderson: You mentioned what the increase in density but actually its increasing density only because you're including that B-2 area. Helen Dragas: That's correct. There is no increase in density at all. A number of the units on the portion of the property, that is zoned for residential use, which is all of the property except 3 %z-acres. There is an overall increase of 66 units, all of which are located on the 31/z-acre parcel. I would also like to point out which I haven't before, the plan calls for a reduction of 86 multi -family units on the north side of the property. We have added 85 multi -family units to the south side of the property. So overall, there is no increase in the number of multi -family units that we are requesting. Janice Anderson: Okay. On the south side, the architect and we just saw that building, that is all going to be for sale and not for rent? Helen Dragas: Yes ma'am. It is all for sale, a condominium form of ownership. The property with the exception of that, on the side of the road, with the exception of the 3'/z- acres is already zoned for apartments. So, the alternative on this side Wesleyan Drive would be 195 apartments, three-story, and a commercial, probably a retail strip shopping center. Janice Anderson: Thank you. Helen Dragas: You're welcome. Thank you. Dorothy Wood: Joe? Joseph Strange: Janice mentioned the issue. I'm satisfied. Dorothy Wood: Are there any other questions for Ms. Dragas? Ron. Ronald Ripley: One question to be clear. The landscaping that we saw on the plans that Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 7 is along the right-of-ways look to be pretty wide and extensive and probably if the City has to maintain them it's probably pretty expensive. Does the Condominium Association maintain anything? Helen Dragas: Yes sir. The Condominium Association will maintain those along Wesleyan Drive and also down the only public street on our community, which is Ridgely Manor Boulevard, the corridor street heads north up the peninsula. Ronald Ripley: Thank you. Helen Dragas: You're welcome. Dorothy Wood: Kathy and then Joe. Joseph Strange: Are the streets the single homes going to be maintained by the Condo Association? Helen Dragas: Single family detached condominium or the R-15 portion of the property? Joseph Strange: The single family. Helen Dragas: On the part that we're not rezoning, which is the R-15, the northern part of the peninsula, those will be public streets. Those are fee simple houses. They will be connected to Wesleyan Drive by this one corridor road, Ridgely Manor Boulevard that will basically bisect the northern portion. Dorothy Wood: Ms. Katsias? Kathy Katsias: I see that you have 5 groupings of different homes. Do you have some renderings? Helen Dragas: Yes. We have all the renderings here. Kathy Katsias: Can we just go through those? Helen Dragas: Sure. Kathy Katsias: Do you have time? Dorothy Wood: Do you have any more models? Helen Dragas: In my truck I do. I thought the one that would be the most sinuous product for us. Dorothy Wood: Gene? Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 8 Eugene Crabtree: I just have one question. It's something that I want to get on the record. I do understand that you are going to encourage your engineers and your people to make this a bike friendly community that will adhere into our bike plan, which we addressed earlier. Helen Dragas: Yes sir. We met with our engineers yesterday morning and discussed the possibility of widening our sidewalks to accommodate the bike trails. Eugene Crabtree: I just wanted that on record. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Helen Dragas: Those are the elevations. Kathy Katsias: I just want to see the elevations. Helen Dragas: This is the entry rendering for the main entrance to the northern portion of the property. And, also it depicts a typical entrance to each of the four villages on the northern side. This landscaping is all proffered with earth berms and deciduous trees and various levels of plantings. This scheme of the berms and the large trees will be incorporated all the way down Ridgely Manor Boulevard, which is about 2,200 feet of roadway. Thank you. Ronald Ripley: How are along the front? Helen Dragas: This is a scale and these people and they are about six feet. I'll say they're about 10-12 feet high. Eddie Bourdon: Did you want to see individual villages? Helen Dragas: There are five villages. Kathy Katsias: There are five. Okay. The price points of each of the villages? Dorothy Wood: Would you come back to the microphone and talk please because I don't think Ed can pick you up. Helen Dragas: There are five villages. Now all of these estimates are in today's dollars. By the time we build these communities they should be higher than this. I've also tried to be conservative so that we can realistically fulfill our word here. But, we have estimated that the southern portion of the property, which the building you just looked at, would start selling at $130-150 thousand. Then we have a four-plex community very similar to our Red Mill Village project, which I know you all are familiar with, but it would start at $175 thousand. Those are brick and cedar shake condominium villas. We have another four-plex that is all master bedroom down that we expect and that's the Gray filled Item # 1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 9 community that is up on the slide right here. We expect to sell to mostly to retiree, and we estimate conservatively that those would start at $200 thousand. They're about 1,900 square feet. To the north of those we have a townhouse community, which is this elevation that we're looking at right here. Again, brick and cedar shake, synthetic cedar shake, that we estimate would start about $225 thousand. And, then the last community is a single family detached condominium. It's a very popular product. It gives the people single family detached home without the maintenance of a yard, and these you can see are very heavy brick and cedar shake siding, standing seam metal roofs, decorated entry garages. We estimate easily these will sell for $300 thousand to start. Most of these are actually located on Lake Smith or on a retention pond so given the waterfront location, I think they'll probably be over $350 thousand actually to start with. Kathy Katsias: So you're going to stagger construction. How is your construction scheduled? Helen Dragas: Our plans at this time are to start on the northern side of the property on the east side of the Ridgely Manor Boulevard Corridor Road. That is where most of our recreational amenities and nature trails and conservation areas are so we wanted to establish those as quickly as possible. We'll start with two communities on the northeast side and then stagger the next three communities by opening dates of about six months apart. So, we estimate that it will take us approximately 5 years from start to finish to build out the entire community. Kathy Katsias: And the single-family homes will start? Helen Dragas: Their intention is to start immediately as well. We need to construct at least a temporary access for them to get back to the property. One of the stipulations of our agreement, in addition to the architectural restrictions, is that they would not take any construction traffic through the Cypress Point neighborhood. So, we are constructing a temporary construction road for them before we even start on the main spine road, as I called it, and then they're start their development work as soon as possible as well. Kathy Katsias: Thank you. Helen Dragas: You're welcome. Dorothy Wood: Are there any other questions for Mrs. Dragas? Thank you very much. Helen Dragas: Thank you. Dorothy Wood: I think we some speakers. We have a lot of speakers that are here to speak for the application. I just wanted to remind you that you each have three minutes. Joseph Strange: Okay. The first speaker is P.J. Padrick, speaking in support. Item # 1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 10 P.J. Padrick: Good afternoon Chairperson Wood and members of the Commission. My name is P.J. Padrick, and I'm the President of the Northwest Beach Partnership. The Northwest Beach Partnership is just what it says it is. A partnership between civic leagues and homeowner associations gathered together to provide a unified voice concerning development and other civic issues in our area. Our membership is 20 communities strong and growing. Currently representing almost 10,000 households in the northwestern section of Virginia Beach. We provide a forum where issues are discussed and voted upon. In the case of this project the final vote was not unanimous however. According to our by-laws though, majority rules. Because of this several of our members have decided to speak today on behalf of their individual civic leagues or homeowners associations. Discussion was vigorous as we sorted through our strong negative reactions due to currently unmet infrastructure needs and the unwillingness of the developer to modify the density of the plan. In the end it became clear that there were only two options available to us, and that is support the proposed rezoning or risk having the property developed under the current zoning. Let me get right to the point. The vote of the Northwest Beach Partnership on the Brock Farm/Lake Smith Development Association proposal is to support, not oppose the application for rezoning, but also to express strong concerns primarily on density to this Commission and ultimately to our City Council. The Partnership presented a letter to Mrs. Helen Dragas detailing these concerns and a copy of this letter and her reply is included in your package from us today. In summary, we recognize the Dragas Companies reputation for integrity and for building high quality aesthetically pleasing homes. Although we would have preferred to see more deference paid to our desires the overall sentiment of the Northwest Beach Partnership is that the proposed development is far superior to what could be built under the current zoning. We appreciate the opportunity to express our support and concerns about the project and look forward to working with Mrs. Dragas in the future for the benefit of our community. Dorothy Wood: Thank you very much. Any questions? Thank you very much. Joseph Strange: The next speaker is Raymond Foberg. Dorothy Wood: Welcome Mr. Foberg. Raymond Foberg: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. I wanted to qualify my remarks by saying that my wife and I have been privileged. Ed Weeden: State your name for the record please. Raymond Foberg: Raymond Foberg. I'm sorry. My wife and I have been privileged for the last 231h years to live on the immediate shore of Lake Smith in Haygood Point. We are here today in support of the proposal that Dragas Company has brought forth. Lake Smith and its immediate environment including the birds, etc, provide an absolute natural gem in the City of Virginia Beach. Even though it is owned by Norfolk. The people, such as myself, that live on the immediate shores have taken personal care of that lake for Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 11 many years. Many years in my case and more years in some cases. We hope to retain all that the lake presents including its serenity, and the benefits that it provides to all the neighbors. Because it is apparent that we have some time constraints we are now working under or the developers are we now have two options, which have pretty much been addressed. I agree with those and the first choice to develop as the current zoning is would be detrimental in my opinion to not only the lake but also the neighborhood and also to Bayside. To develop under the proposed zoning would be much more preferable than developing otherwise. Even though the proposal is not perfect in the eyes of my wife and myself but for the folks who just spoke. Nevertheless it provides a far more benefit than the existing zoning. Mrs. Dragas has agreed to some of the changes that have been requested already in writing. The bottom line is that my wife and myself, and I speak for us only but I suspect I should speak also for many of our immediate neighbors are in definite support of the rezoning. Thank you very much. Dorothy Wood: We appreciate what you do to keep the lake clean. Thank you. I think we all do. Would you please answer Mr. Ripley's question? Raymond Foberg: Absolutely. Ronald Ripley: There is a laser pointer right there. Is it possible that you could point out .� the property where you live? Raymond Foberg: Right there. Ronald Ripley: Okay. Thank you very much. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Are there any other questions? Thank you sir. We appreciate you coming down today. Raymond Foberg: Thank you. Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is John Hamilton. Dorothy Wood: Welcome sir. John Hamilton: Good afternoon. My name is John Hamilton, and I have been a resident of Traditions at Cypress Point for the past four years, and for the past two years I've been the Treasurer of the Homeowners Association. During the past 3'/2 months, our homeowners association has had a number of communications and meetings with the Dragas Companies and specific with Helen Dragas. In late May, Helen called me to inform that her company had put a contract on the Brock Farm property, and they intended to develop it, and she would be happy to meet with our homeowners and board to discuss those plans. We invited Helen to join us, and she did so on June 22. We met for over two hours at the President of our Homeowners Association residence, and she discussed in detail each of the condominium communities that they proposed to develop. Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 12 We then invited Helen to attend our regular board meeting, which she did on July 12. At that meeting she gave a thirty -minute presentation to approximately 40 of our homeowners. Incidentally, our community is a 162-units, and we are located immediately to the west of the site. We're north of Wesleyan Drive and just east of Cypress Point Boulevard. We're basically along the 8 h hole of the golf course and the east border of our property, eight of our buildings, 48 of our homeowners are adjacent to the Brock Farm. After answering all the questions at the July 12th board meeting, we put out our bi-monthly newsletter and had an insert, which described the proposed development. That newsletter, of course goes to all 162 of our homeowners. In late August, another board member and I met with Helen at her office to discuss the need for a fence separating our border, and Helen agreed to do that. After all of these meetings we have received no objections from our homeowners, and therefore we are here to support the proposed redevelopment as been asked for, and I also have a letter from our President of our Homeowners Association, Mr. Veeck, which I believe you all each have a copy of. Dorothy Wood: Any questions for Mr. Hamilton? A good Notre Dame graduate I believe. John Hamilton: Yes ma'am. That's a sad subject right now though. Dorothy Wood: Thank you sir. Joseph Strange: Okay. Our next speaker is John Dickerson. John Dickerson: Thank you Madame Chairman, ladies and gentlemen. My name is John Dickerson. I live at 1180 Pond Cypress Drive, Virginia Beach. That is part of Cypress Point. My property adjoins the proposed Ridgely Manor to the west. My house would be adjacent to the proposed lake on the west prior portion of the Ridgely Manor conceptual site plan. First I would like to state that I do support the application. The proposal will clearly be an enormous improvement to what would be allowed by the current zoning on the property. As you are all aware the current zoning on the property would allow a mixed use of single family residential townhouse rentals, apartment rentals and commercial uses. Helen Dragas has ensured the eight or so homeowners along Pond Cypress Drive and the proposed lake that she would work with us to ensure reasonable distance between the back of our houses and the new development. She offered to make some changes to the site plan to provide some backyard to the eight of us. Some of these eight houses are structured to the property line. Mine is one. We appreciate her effort in ensuring a smooth transition with the new development. The proposal that Mrs. Dragas has offered the City includes many amenities above what would be offered with the current zoning. I feel that this proposal would benefit the entire Bayside area. Thank you for the opportunity. Dorothy Wood: Thank you sir. Are there any questions? Thank you very much for coming down today. Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 13 Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is Ashley McLeod. Dorothy Wood: Welcome Ms. McLeod. Ashley McLeod: Hello. How are you all doing today? Nobody ever asks you that do they? I'm Ashley McLeod, and I'm President of the Campus East Community Association. The way I would describe my situation is in between a rock and a hard place. We don't want more density in the area. We prefer that this not be built. But, the rezoning is better, and so we have to be in support of it. The reasons why as an Association, we would be opposed to more in the area simply boil down to this. Every homeowner that I preside over, "Ms. Ashley, we need more recreation, can you please do something about more recreation"? Mr. Crabtree, I want to talk bike trails with you. So, the frustration that we have is that we need more recreation in the community. We need more police. We closed our swimming pool and Rick Holmes reported on it. It was in the newspaper reported by Susan White. I was quoted again this last Saturday regarding other issues. We closed our pool this summer in order to pay for off duty police officers because our community does not feel safe. So, basically the jest of this boils down to is in that Third Precinct area, we need to be assured by the City that our needs are going to be met. So, when you bring in this many more, which I'm fine with the proposed what's coming in, we also need you as a team effort to communicate with the City Council, and I'm going too but they need to back us up in other directions. We need more recreation, and we need more police protection. Now one of the things that I'm thrilled about and I'll tell you. Mrs. Dragas let us know that there was going to be a condo association and a homeowners association. That is so vital because those that don't have that have to make sure that the upkeep is there. So, I'm very, very pleased to hear that. I'd like to comment on the schools because her statistics are wonderful. And, I'm sure that she can show that the condominiums do have a decrease in the number, but I want to make sure that you all are aware. The Bayside Middle School is not finished with its wing yet. It is supposed to be done but it wasn't. It should be done in January. They have 25 portables right now. But do you know that when that is completed and they open in January, they will still have portable units. So, my concern is and I have a first and second grader so that is going to affect me in five years. Right now that part that is zoned for apartments that they are asking to rezone for condominiums, and I appreciate what they're doing because apartments are not what we want. I much prefer that I have that space for that middle school to go and grow because they're going to need it, because you're bringing in more. The elementarys are overcrowded. Even Luxford, which is at full capacity, and they haven't finished Witchduck Woods development and this is going to feed into it too. Dorothy Wood: Stay for questioning will you please? Ashley McLeod: Certainly. Dorothy Wood: I think you realize that the City is working with Williams Farm. That would certainly be recreation. Virginia Beach Foundation is working trying to get some Item # 1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 14 recreation. I know that you need this in this community. I think a lot of people in the community are working to help you get this. Ashley McLeod: As far as the middle school, keep that in mind. Dorothy Wood: Thank you so much for coming down today. Ashley McLeod: I appreciate it. Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is Michele Gauldin. Michele Gauldin: Good afternoon Chairperson and Commissioners. Thank you for allowing me the time to address the Commission. My name is Michele Gauldin. I'm the President of Wesleyan Forest Civic League in Bayside. We represent 82 homes. In expressing our concerns with the item before you, we do want to express that we realize and appreciate the beauty and quality and work of the Dragas proposal. As it is a superior plan to what could be developed. But we have some grave concerns, and that is density, density and density. How much air can you put into a balloon before it bursts? Realizing there are questions really need also to be addressed to City Council which we plan to do. There is one particular item that I would like to address to this Committee. I'd like your attention to be drawn your Planning Department report, Page 10, Paragraph 2. This particular paragraph deals with the effectiveness and demands on City services, and we take exception with the view of the Planning Department, however, because it does not address the police, fire or EMS services. We feel that this is very important. I have expounded upon the specifics of that in a letter that is in the back of the package that the Northwest Beach Partnership. It is included in that package. Public safety services are stretched to the limit in our area. And, in some cases there is recruitment problems so we don't know how much the police department can even plan to adequately staff or increase services because they are having recruitment problems as well as EMS is. So, we know there are other objections, and we really feel that most of our objections is not against the development, but against certain services that the City would provide. We do look forward to being partners with Ms. Dragas and also partners with all the residents that would be moving in there. In brief, we do support this with our concerns. Thank you. Dorothy Wood: Are there any questions? Thank you. Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is Ron Lee. Ron Lee: I would like to defer to the President of our civic league, who is also here. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is Susan Anders. Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 15 Dorothy Wood: Welcome. Susan Anders: Good afternoon. Thank you. Chairman Wood, members of the Planning Commission. Thank you for this opportunity to address you. My name is Susan Anders. I am the President for the Cypress Point Civic Association, and we're also members of the Northwest Beach Partnership. While the Cypress Point Civic Association as the community most directly impacted by this development has decided to support the proposal overall, it is with less than total enthusiasm and some reservations. We take issue with the lawyer Eddie Bourdon's contention that quality is more important than density. We think they are both important. On the positive side, we are pleased that the development plan proposes a distinctive community with many amenities and enhancements. We're aware that the developers have a fine reputation for integrity and for building quality communities. We appreciate the concessions that the developers have agreed to make and proffer including the following six. Agreeing to upgrade South Moore Village by making it a gated community, enclosing the Newtown Road entry to thru traffic. Secondly, agreeing to upgrade the brick and wrought iron wall that borders the Wesleyan Drive side of South Moore Village to enhance curb appeal. Thirdly, working with the individual residents of Cypress Point on Pond Cypress Drive whose homes are adjacent to West Briar Village to maintain their home quality of life. Fourthly, agreeing to remove the access to Cypress Point and Course View Circle. Fifth, upgrading the price and quality of units in South Moore Village to whatever the market will bare at the time they are built. And lastly, it appears that the Dragas Companies are willing to stipulate in the general condominium documents that there will be no more than 20 percent rental units at one time. On the other hand, most Cypress Point residents were aware that the Brock property was designed as a high priority for acquisition under the Open Space plan and the recently revised Comprehensive Plan called for the gross density not exceeding three dwelling units per acre on the property. Recently battles close to the troublesome Par 5 have added to this sediment that we are struggling to maintain a safe and viable community. We clearly realize that the proposed development is a far better alternative than what could be built by -right. We appreciate the assurance of Ms. Dragas to work and communicate with us as the project progresses for the overall benefit of our community. We look forward to this collaboration. It is hoped that by working together we can achieve what is truly best for the community. Therefore, we do endorse this proposal. Dorothy Wood: Thank you very much. Susan Anders: Thank you so very much. Joseph Strange: That is all that I have signed up supporting this application. Did I miss anyone? Now we're going to go to the opposition. The first speaker is Mike Mastice. Dorothy Wood: Welcome sir. Item # 1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 16 Mike Mastice: Thank you. Madame Chairperson and distinguished members of the Planning Commission, I'm Mike Mastice, President at Lakeview Park Civic League speaking on its behalf. There are some concerns that we have with the proposed development of Lake Smith by the Dragas Companies. Not to side track off the subject but to say that Helen Dragas has been informative, cooperative with us, the Lakeview Park Civic League, we are confident that Dragas Companies can build a good quality product. The concerns are elevated density, subsequent impact it will have on the City's utilities and roads and not to mention Lake Smith. We are very impressed with the forward progressive thinking demonstrated in your plans for this property as stated in the Comprehensive Plan policy document adopted by you all on September 2, 2003. I'm not going to bore you with the details since you have written and adopted this document, more specifically Page 101. This property represents the last single parcel of its kind north of Virginia Beach Boulevard. We have a unique opportunity to demonstrate our forward thinking in the development of this property to both the City and the regional area. With a parcel of this importance we need to ask ourselves. Is this the best that we can accomplish? Will this adequately represent our City's progressive developmental policies in the Comprehensive Plan? Will we be able to show this area to our sister cities and others and say with pride, "this is a model we should use for the future that states this is a well -planned community"? If we cannot answer these questions with a resounding yes, then we need to take some time and reevaluate this issue. I'll leave you with this. Keep in mind there are not only two ways to do this project. Thank you for your time. Dorothy Wood: Would you please show using this pointer. Mike Mastice: It's off the map. Okay. Dorothy Wood: Off the map. Mike Mastice: We're on the opposite side of where Terry Peterson where Helen Dragas sold the northern most property. We're on the northern side of Lake Smith. Dorothy Wood: Where would it be now? Mike Mastice: Right here, this whole group right in here. Dorothy Wood: So you're quite a ways from the area. Mike Mastice: That's correct. Dorothy Wood: Thank you very much for coming. Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is Lynn Nelson. Dorothy Wood: Welcome Ms. Nelson. Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 17 Lynn Nelson: Hi. I am too in the Lakeview Park. Dorothy Wood: Can you give us your name? Lynn Nelson: My name is Lynn Nelson and I am too also in the Lakeview Park neighborhood. Can I please qualify because I had some folks that are with us today in our neighborhood state, we are not honestly quite a ways a way, we are literally directly across the lake from this particular development. Lakeview Park is probably best known in the Bayside Borough as having the largest lot sizes. We are zoned R-40, and we are very pleased to say that we have one acre or more lots per household. Though it does not make us happy we do understand that the Brock Farm does have to be developed. May I please say that I am not so much in opposition of what Ms. Dragas is doing, because it is very good, as I am a little concerned about how it has come about, many of us have asked the same question. Why do the members of the Council take the time and effort to adopt a Comprehensive Plan if it is not going to be followed? And what I mean by that is that in 2003 as was just mentioned, the Brock Farm was to be developed and then no more than three units per acre. I can only assume that this decision was made with full knowledge of the current zoning as it is now. That one was adopted back in 1973. Thirty years ago was it realized what the Bayside Borough would be facing right now with the over density and the development that is already in place. The Comprehensive Plan is really the tool that it was meant to be to change the historic decisions that do not seem to be in the best interest of the City or the citizens in present day, then why wasn't this property down zoned to fit the plan. That is my biggest question. Ms. Dragas has presented a plan that is upgraded from the current zoning. We respect her position in offering the development of her reputation. We have been told numerous times, and you have heard today, that to develop the plan as it is currently zoned is not desired by anybody. Whatever happened to the art and the tool of negotiation? Rather than taking the time to research and discuss why there is such a distance between the Comprehensive Plan and what it calls for and what's being presented, we're being offered with nothing or no other alternatives. I'm very sorry to see that residents are being forced to take a position of not making waves because the only other alternative is a lesser quality. Over density is over density. I'll stop at that. Dorothy Wood: I think there are probably several people here who mentioned the Comprehensive Plan and down zoning. I'll ask Mr. Macali if he would please speak about that for me. He's our legal representative. He has all the answers for. Lynn Nelson: Thank you very much. Bill Macali: Madame Chair, down zoning is something which is used extremely, I would say extraordinary rarely, not only in Virginia Beach, but throughout the entire state of Virginia and for good reason. The legal standards which are applicable to a down zoning of this type, which is a down zoning of one particular parcel of property rather than a comprehensive city wide down zoning are extremely difficult to justify. To make a long story short, it's highly doubtful that any significant down zoning of this site to a density Item # 1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 18 at which the speaker suggest and the Comprehensive Plan suggest is something, which a court would uphold. I think that if our legal recommendation were to be weighed, it would be highly against down zoning as a tool to control development on this site. Dorothy Wood: Thank you so much Mr. Macali for explaining it to everyone here. Lynn Nelson: Thank you ma'am. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Lynn Nelson: Members, I appreciate your time. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is Jerry Thompkins. Dorothy Wood: Welcome Mr. Thompkins. Jerry Thompkins: Thanks. I'm Jerry Thompkins, Vice President of Lake Smith Terrace, Haygood Point and Governor's Square Civic League, three communities comprising v approximately 900 plus homes. The card that I filled out front had for and against, and I need one right in the middle for both. I'm the spokesperson so here is what we came up with. I live on Haygood Point Road, right on Lake Smith. Residents of the three communities do not support all of the Dragas development plans for the Brock Farm. Properties located at Wesleyan Drive due to, here we go again, there's that word, the high level of density. I'm just reporting what I got out of this. The civic league held a special meeting on August 17 with a 125 plus residents in attendance to hear the presentation,which was excellent by the way. The civic league board met on August 31 to finalize the following statement and a resolution. To secure full support from this community, the following conditions are requested for the Planning Commission to consider. We support the development on the north side of Wesleyan Drive but recommend the following changes to the plans on the south side. A, require the south side developments be reduced to a two level not a three level condo units to match the levels of condos on the north side. A balanced community design for both north and south view is essential for a panoramic view of an integrated community appearance since both sides are part of the Ridgely development plan. B, here we go. Reduce the density. The number of condos on the south side development that front Wesleyan Drive by reducing the number from 10 to 6 condo units. C, require the entryway of the south side development to match the north side. That is, full brick face for the same reason recorded earlier. I request the Planning Commission to reduce the home density from the south side that will make our community much more agreeable to the development. Thank you from our communities and the 900 plus owners. Dorothy Wood: Sir, do you realize that our application is for the entire land. This is Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 19 what we have to vote on the entire package or not the entire package. We can't just can't break out a portion of it as you probably realize. Jerry Thompkins: Yes, but she knows that too. Yes, it's true. Thank you. Dorothy Wood: Are there any questions for him? Thank you sir. Joseph Strange: Our final speaker is Dr. Steven Bushman. Dr. Steven Bushman: Good afternoon. My name is Dr. Steven Bushman, and I represent the Lynnbrook Landing Civic League. Lynnbrook Landing is on the south side of the Williams Farm, which is right across the street from this property development. A couple of things that I would like for you to bear in mind, and I wish I had the outer slide of that. There is property in this case that is right behind the Bayside Middle School. In the future, if that middle school needs additional property this is the window for the City to obtain it. So, between the Planning Department, Director Scott, and the School Department, that should be one of your concerns. The other issue that I have is that new residential construction in a blighted area like the Northwest Beach area of the Bayside District is not even a good patch. That area needs vital infrastructure. If it had the people to live there it would infuse it with the vitality that makes it a vibrant crime reduced area. So, you get a local reaction like occurred earlier this year with the Nusbaum project behind the Wal-Greens drug store, a gated community in which I was personally in favor. I did a slide show in behalf of it. It was much like South Beach. I don't know if you got to see the slide show. And, the local community stomped on it. It was first deferred, then it was withdrawn, and eventually Nusbaum Management project was abandoned. That's the sentiment of the community in its anguish responding to the City's appearance to lag behind in the development of vital infrastructure. So, please what we don't need first is the cart. We need the vital infrastructure then bring all the residents in you want. Alright. That's all that I have. Dorothy Wood: Thank you Doctor, we appreciate it. Are there any questions for him? We appreciate you coming down today. Dr. Steven Bushman: Thank you. Dorothy Wood: Mr. Scott would you please address the issue of the Comprehensive Plan which was referred by so many people. Robert Scott: I think that the Comprehensive Plan and what it has to say about property, I think the most important part of some of the overriding these. If an application were to come forward without any proffers or without any assurance of what was going to be built upon or without any indication on the level of quality, I think the numerical applications of density ought to be held on the standard of good guidance. However, this application to our eyes has two very important things. It gets rid of some commercial property on a main thoroughfare that I think is not well located. When we look at this Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 20 area one of the things that we see it is somewhat commercialized. I think that is a very positive. It should be noted that the increase in density to the extent of this application will bring you an increase is due totally to the fact that conversion is taking place. The second is that the proffers that come with this application take the density that is on the property and puts it in a much more orderly fashion. And, provide the Planning Commission and City Council and hope for the community with a very precise sentiment of what's going to happen, and how it is going to happen what it is going to look like when it is done. And, I think in there is some assurance that there is a level of quality in there that's going to be an addition to the community. All those things in our view make this area closer to the goals as stated in the plan on an overall basis. I think this property if it was rezoned as proposed to you would be closer to complying with the overall goals of the plan then it would if it were not rezoned. Now, I think that the people who have come up and spoken about the issue of infrastructure raise some good points about the increase in density. But there are some needed improvements in our schedule, and our Capital Improvement Program that will be done in this area, the acquisition of the Williams Farm, which is very close to this property. And, with the acknowledgement that there is a need for open space has taken a need to provide that open space, a significant piece of open space that will be contributing, I think, to the overall development of this area. So, the City does have plans and not just plans. They might have taken actions acquiring that property a need to bring a demand to our supply of open space. So, taking that as a whole it appears to us that it can be said in our feeling accurately that this application will forward the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Dorothy Wood: Thank you very much. Any discussion? Eddie? I didn't know which one of you wanted to come up. Helen Dragas: I'm not letting him take my time again. I just like to thank the Planning staff, Mr. Scott's department and particularly Faith Christie for all the work that they did on the application. I'd like to echo their sentiment about the proposal furtherance of the Comprehensive Plan. In each of your packages there are seven pages of support for the proposal that are found within the Comprehensive Plan. Although we didn't meet the objectives of that one sentence about density because the property is already zoned, I do feel like we've gone a long way towards meeting the Comprehensive Plan. I'd also like to thank the individual neighbors and all the civic leagues for the time they've taken to meet with me. It's been an enriching dialogue for me. I've learned a lot about the Bayside District, about their achievements, their concerns, their history, the development turns, and what they would really like to see. And, although I haven't been able to make every single individual happy I feel like it's been good for us both and that we look forward, given the City Council approval and your recommendation, hopefully to be partners with them for quite a long period of time. Thank you. Dorothy Wood: Any questions for Ms. Dragas? Would you please answer Barry's question? Item #1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 21 Barry Knight: A couple of questions raised in this public forum and before us also, can you explain, I think you want a thoroughfare between their neighborhood, and yours and I believe I heard that there is going to be a natural buffer in there but there are a few spots that are a little sparse. Helen Dragas: Okay. Are you talking about a road or just landscape buffer or both? Barry Knight: Landscape buffer. Helen Dragas: Landscape buffer. We have watched the perimeter boarder of our community to the west with the Traditions Condominium and the Cypress Point neighbors I'd say all but maybe two of them that border our property. We have an agreement with the Traditions Condominium to fill in the gaps in the natural buffer that are there and upon the request install a fence for a physical barrier, or if its determined they would like that. And, you heard from one resident who explained, Mr. Dickerson, who explained our efforts to try to give them much additional backyard space. They've become accustomed to using some of the Brock Farm property, unfortunately maybe some misrepresentations were made to them when they bought their homes about the property line, so we're working with them to move our improvements east so that we can leave as much as that area, which is really attractive, I was out there yesterday, for their use. Barry Knight: Lake Smith, explain to me I think there is a conservation easement between the lake and the shoreline and some of the property you purchased. Can you explain that to me? Helen Dragas: It's not actually a conservation easement as my understanding as it is a property line, but the City of Norfolk owns from the top of bank or the main high water or one of those measurements, ten feet into the property. Our proffered plans and the rezoned portion of the property, or the proposed rezoned portion of the property, we have designated that area and much farther in as a conservation area that we will not disturb. The northern portion of the property that will be built under it's current zoning the developer will leave as many trees there as he can and will not be able to cut down those trees in that ten foot buffer area unless the individual buyers go to the City of Norfolk for a permit to do that. Barry Knight: Do you have a rendering of the entrance to the south side of the property? Helen Dragas: Yes I do. Barry Knight: Can I see that? I've heard some questions about it, and I just wanted to see it again. I think that's all I have. Dorothy Wood: Ms. Dragas, we received a letter about the birds, the woodpeckers and the hawks in the area, would you please tell me and I think you mentioned about a natural Item # 1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 22 trail and probably not being a bird watcher, I'm not real sure but I think it would probably help the birds. Can you tell me about your natural trail? Helen Dragas: Sure. As I said, the trail system throughout the community is about three miles as a conservative estimate. It's about three miles lone. I've learned a lot about birds in the last couple of months as well. I'm going to address birds and total wildlife if I might. We've made arrangements to have the wildlife trapped and relocated that's on the property now and efforts are underway to go ahead and get that initiative started. We will have that big conservation area that will remain undisturbed. Our hope it will be a habitat for birds and wildlife as well. In addition, and Ms. Padrick who spoke representing the Northwest Beach Partnership has been very educational to me about what we could do on the property to minimize the impact of wildlife, and she's also getting us involved in designating this site as a nature wildlife habitation area. I've may not have said that exactly right but she's getting us that information. It's going to help us with our application on that as well. Janice Anderson: There's other wildlife there? Helen Dragas: I understand there are two foxes, some squirrels, possums and raccoons. They're attempting to trap them. We've been asked to remove all the snakes in particular. Dorothy Wood: Are there other questions for Ms. Dragas? Thank you. Helen Dragas: Thank you. Dorothy Wood: Discussion? Who would like to start? Jan. Janice Anderson: I'll go ahead and start. I looked over the proposal, and I will be in support of that application. There are several things that are very appealing. It's merely the design. I'm not too worried about the density since the increase in density is only due to the fact that the three acres of commercial area is going to be zoned residential. And, I don't believe that would not be a viable commercial area, the three acres. There is commercial area that is very close by that's been vacant for a period of time, so and then actually with the neighborhood being a B-2 district, you can have restaurants or something that would be much more disturbing than a residential area there. So, I'm not concerned with the density being increased. I have heard concerns about the police and fire services. They are definitely being stretched. I don't think this should be totally bore upon this applicant. I think that needs to be addressed to your local representatives there and definitely, I think it has been heard that they definitely need more services there. But, as stated the development could be developed and put these number of places in without this nice design. What is generally appealing to me is the recreational amenities that this application gives to the community. I think that's what this area definitely needs more of. Along the shoreline is where it is preserved and that is trails. Instead of being single family or sole ownership of the property all along the shoreline can be available to Item # 1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 23 all the residents. Its not just pools and clubhouses they provided in that community, they have hiking trails, nature trails, pavilions, lakeside picnic areas, observation decks to look over the water. I think the project has overall has these nice amenities around it. I believe the applicant has worked with the neighborhoods and made some changes that they could. And of course, not everybody is going to be happy but that is always a nice to hear. And, with regard to the comments with regard to less density or down zoning, I believe the paper and you've seen all the headaches they've had in Loudon County with that city down zoning so much of their properties, so I don't think that is even an avenue for this city to down zone this area or would be appropriate either. I am very pleased with the five communities set up. It gives diversity and this is a large track being developed. It gives a lot of diversity for different uses. It's not a big box development where you have everything the same for such a large area, so I think that brings it very attractive. For those reasons, I would support it. Dorothy Wood: Ron. Ronald Ripley: I drive that route everyday. I live in the Thoroughgood area, and my office is on Newtown Road, so I ride by this property every day. When I think about schools and land uses around it with the potential and when the acquisition took place for the Williams Farm, I think that is going to help satisfy all the needs for open space, which is what this area really needs. But that is a tremendous move for the City to acquire. I think it's going to relieve the pressure for open space. And also the need for the schools that have more land, in my mind for elementary and those schools in the immediate proximately, my mind the school is going to be spending money, not in this area on land but on really on increasing classrooms. That's the problem that we have in the City with the schools, and in my mind they need to increase that which would help the problems with the schools. As we definitely have a need for it. The trailers and you go up to Princess Anne and they got 21 trailers or so up there. I mean it is just too many trailers and if they don't spend money wisely, I think that is where you spend it. When I looked at this property and the application that we have in front of you, I looked at the existing zoning and the way it was laid, and I hope that this new zoning, proposed zoning and all the conditions that have been added to it to ensure that it is going to be quality and being laid out as you see it, it's obviously important, I think, to go with the rezoning. I think the commercial land in that area. All these people live in this area and they know they got vacant spaces that are up in that area, all along Newtown Road and the other section of Wesleyan Drive and Diamond Springs. The shopping center, the Food Lion sat vacant for the longest time. There is a Mattress Discounter in there, which is not exactly a very corporate citizen, but certainly they have not much retail quality of life in that area, and adding another 3'/Z acres of commercial, at least 10,000 square feet per acre would be another 30,000 square feet of already over retail area. That's not a real viable solution. I think the applicant by extending the residential that's proposed in that area is a good logical use of the commercial and I'm supportive of that. The surrounding land uses are compatible too I believe. We got schools around it. You got natural ravines. To the west you have multi family that's medium density which is an extremely project. In fact, I know this Commission gave it an award, and I see they are in support, and I'm pleased Item # 1 Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 24 to see that, and the single family to the north, abutting single family of nice high quality all around the side of this property. I think it's the right fit. I look at this and Jan mentioned the recreation amenities that are in this property, and I think the developer has set forth a really good proposal for recreational amenities, and I see that as really relieving future pressure on things like the development of the Williams Farm. The William Farm has a tremendous demand for recreational space in the area. Living in this community you're going to have the benefit of some very nice recreational amenities. You're probably to be less likely to go use the Williams open space as readily as you would the amenities that are immediately available to you in this community that is proposed here. I see that as a real positive. That is why I was real concerned about the schools. I'm familiar with the condominiums that Ms. Dragas's company has developed, and they proved it to this Commission on a number of occasions the reduced number of school children that they produce because you end up with less in a household in a condominium. You don't end up with a lot of people who have children don't necessarily live in condominiums. They intend to live in a single family and go through the stages as we all do. I think that generally speaking this property will be less impact on its infrastructure. For that you get a better quality project and you got a quality developer. You have proffers that are certainly as Mr. Scott mentioned that gives the community certainty as to what they can expect. You will see that. There is no question in my mind this is quality that is proposed here on the ground when this project is developed. And for that, I'm going to support it also. Dorothy Wood: Is that in the form of a motion sir? Ronald Ripley: I'll motion to approve it. Eugene Crabtree: I'll second it. Dorothy Wood: Are there any other comments? Robert Miller: Madame Chair? Dorothy Wood: Yes sir. Robert Miller: I need to abstain from the vote. My firm is working on the project. Dorothy Wood: Before we vote, I'd like to thank all of you that came down here today. It's such a pleasure for us to see that people are interested in government and in their communities. Thank you. I just came back from Ecuador where you can't have a driver's license unless you vote. Seeing all of you here today makes me really proud to be in Virginia Beach. Thank you. AYE 9 NAY 0 ABS 1 ABSENT 1 ANDERSON AYE Item # I Lake Smith Development Associates, L.L.C. Page 25 CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER RIPLEY AYE STRANGE AYE WALLER AYE WOOD AYE ABSENT Ed Weeden: By a vote of 9-0, the application of Lake Smith has been approved. Dorothy Wood: Thank you. James and Loreen Yano 1809 Delaney St. Virginia Beach, VA 23464-6504 Sept. 5, 2004 Virginia Beach Planning Commission Virginia Beach, VA Dear members of the Planning Commission: There is a window of opportunity that is rapidly closing. That opportunity is to create a sanctuary in Virginia Beach that could be a showcase for the city. The piece of land in question is Brock Farm on Lake Smith. Lake Smith has the distinction of being home to an incredible number of birds, some of them rarely seen by the vast majority of residents and visitors. We are talking about bald eagles, both adult and juvenile; osprey; red-tailed hawks; red -shouldered hawks; great homed owls; green herons; great blue herons; egrets; Eastern bluebirds; red - bellied woodpeckers; downy woodpeckers; pileated woodpeckers; arctic terns; cormorants; loons; American kestrels; wood ducks; northern shovelers; green -winged teals; mergansers; ruddy ducks; American wigeons; kingfishers; spotted sandpipers; and a host of other more typical avian residents. In short, the Lake Smith environment is an invaluable resource. There are already homes on Lake Smith; however, taking away the last bit of wild area, namely that land known as the Brock Farm, will destroy this bird sanctuary forever. Virginia Beach has an unenviable reputation for destroying that which is green in favor of housing, but taking away this particular bit of green will significantly degrade the quality of life for all in the area. What will put Virginia Beach on the map and make it a drawing card for birdwatchers up and down the east coast is a wild area that is actually accessible to visitors. Millions upon millions of people in this country consider themselves birdwatchers. It is the single most popular nature -oriented activity. This is the opportunity to do something that will benefit the community on many levels — from economic to environmental, from recreation to conservation. Don't miss this opportunity. Protect Brock Farm from development. Sincerely, dim ed Lory lex 0 �' To: Ms. Faith Christie Department of Planning City of Virginia Beach From: Kenneth and Grace Yung 700 Harris Point Drive Virginia Beach, VA 23455 Date: August 30, 2004 Re: Lake Smith Development Associates, L.C. (#D04-210-CRZ-2004) We want to let the Department of Planning of the City of Virginia Beach know that we oppose the proposed development in its current format on the property north of Wesleyan Drive (GPINS 1468847648 — part of; 14688318360000). We believe that the proposed high -density housing will create undesirable impacts in the Bayside area regarding basic services. Regarding traffic, part of the existing route (Wesleyan Drive) used by residents of the Bayside area to get on I-64 and I-264 is a single -lane road in both directions that is heavily congested during the busy hours when residents get to work in the morning and back from work in the afternoon. Traffic is particularly congested when students of Wesleyan College and Norfolk Academy exit from the campus in the afternoon. According to a news report in Virginian -Pilot, the City of Virginia Beach has no plan to widen this single -lane road within the foreseeable future. Given that Wesleyan Drive is split between Virginia Beach and Norfolk, we doubt very much any plan to improve the road would go through smoothly. Another concern is the potential undesirable impacts of the development on Lake Smith itself. We notice from the developer's master plan that a pedestrian bridge will be built on the west side of Lake Smith (behind Bayside High School) near to the proposed 158 detached single family condominiums. We are particularly disturbed by the plan to build such a bridge. Based on our long-term observation, the area of the proposed bridge is the habitat of 2 herons and an egret from Fall to Spring of each year. In summer, about a dozen herons rest in this particular spot and the nearby area throughout the day. In addition, numerous turtles rest near the shore for the warm sunlight throughout the year whereas a large group of carps gather in this particular spot during their spawning season in April. The construction of a pedestrian bridge will definitely mean a severe disruption to this habitat when pedestrians gather on the bridge to watch or catch something. And it is beyond doubt that some pedestrians will dump trash items into the lake. In addition, this pedestrian bridge, if constructed, will very likely become a frequent spot for midnight gatherings or parties. The loud noise will adversely affect the residents on the other side of Lake Smith in the Haygood subdivision across from the bridge. Obviously one can expect police to be summoned to the place very frequently. This is going to create bad publicity for the new subdivision and the Bayside district. Based on the above reasons, we therefore request that the proposed development be revised to low -density single-family housing only. Also, we request that the pedestrian bridge will not be constructed at all and any construction within 20 feet of the lake front will not be allowed. Page 1 of 2 Faith Christi - 08 September 2004 Public Hearing: Lake Smith Development Associates, L.C. Zoning Change From: "Rich Jarrett" <MRichmondJ@cox.net> To: <planadmn@vbgov.com> Date: 9/6/2004 10:03 PM Subject: 08 September 2004 Public Hearing: Lake Smith Development Associates, L.C. Zoning Change CC: <fchristi@vbgov.com> Members of the Virginia Beach Planning Commission: 1 am a resident of -1042 Grand Oak Lane and owner of a parcel of property directly adjacent to the North side of Wesleyan Drive that is under consideration for a change in zoning. I have reviewed the Lake Smith Development Associates proposal for development of this property as well as your letter of notification that a change in zoning is under consideration. Based on the information at hand, I would request that the following items are addressed at the public hearing of the Virginia Beach Planning Commission on 08 September, 2004: 1. The 2003 Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan specifically addresses development of the property, approximately 190 acres, located south of Lake Smith between the Cypress Point and Haygood Point neighborhoods (formerly the Brock Farm property). Page 101 of the 2003 Comprehensive Plan states, "this area should be developed with a range of housing types and values, as well as recreational amenities, neighborhood support commercial uses and exceptional overall design quality. While residential clustering is encouraged to maximize open space opportunities, the sites gross density should not exceed three dwelling units per acre." The development proposal under consideration encompasses half of the 190 acres described by the Comprehensive Plan, or roughly 100 acres. Based upon the guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan, the total number of dwelling units that is appropriate for this development would be approximately 300. However, the proposal being considered for Lake Smith Development Associates, L.C. encompasses 722 dwelling units — nearly 2.5 times the density recommended by the Comprehensive Plan. Based upon the City of Virginia Beach's well thought master planning documents, the proposed development is well in excess of ideal density requirements for the area. 2. The 2003 Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan Technical Report for the Bayside Planning Area also provides technical direction for land use in this area. Of note, the technical report on page 152 states, "According to the 1996 Virginia Outdoors Planning Standards, the Bayside Planning Area population has a demand for approximately 636 acres of open space to adequately serve its citizens. The planning area currently has 122 acres currently set aside as City -owned parks, elementary and middle school parks and quasi -public parks, leaving a need for an additional 514 acres to provide adequate recreational and open space opportunities." The property under consideration for a rezoning request is one of the last remaining parcels of open space in the Bayside Planning Area. Considering the deficit in open space for this Planning Area noted by the Comprehensive Plan, it would be in the Planning Commission's interest to consider how this last remaining parcel of open space is being developed and considerations to include open space for the community in the overall development as part of the rezoning request. Based upon a review of the development site plans, it appears that there is only minimal consideration for open space, and no consideration of public areas of open space that would meet the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan Technical Report for the Bayside Planning Area. 3. Based upon an average size household of two tenants per unit under development, the proposed development has the potential to add as many as 1400 new vehicles to the area that will use Wesleyan Dr. as primary access. Of particular concern is the already congested corridor connecting Wesleyan Dr. with Northampton Blvd. Without immediate roadway improvements to widen Wesleyan Dr. in the vicinity of Virginia Wesleyan College, the current high traffic situation that exists along this primary access file://C:\WINNT\Temp\GW } 00055.HTM 9/9/?.004 Page 2 of 2 road to 1-64 will only continue to deteriorate. I have been a resident of the Bayside area since 1998, and believe it to be one of the nicer areas of Virginia Beach. It is centrally located, a short commute to major areas in Norfolk, Virginia Beach, and Chesapeake, and is far less dense in the scope of development relative to other areas of Virginia Beach. The proposed development at Lake Smith will greatly change the landscape in this area, and significantly change the density of development for the surrounding community. Many of the features that make this community attractive to homeowners — low density development, relative low density traffic on area roadways, and adjacent areas of open space will immediately disappear once this development is completed. I believe the Virginia Beach Planning Commission is well aware of all of these concerns since they are very well documented in the 2003 Comprehensive Plan. I encourage the Planning Commission to address the high density development that is being considered for this property and discuss alternatives for development that would be in accordance with the objectives set forth in the Comprehensive Plan for Virginia Beach development. Very Respectfully, Michael R. Jarrett Jr. 1042 Grand Oak Ln Virginia Beach, VA 23455 (757) 343-4994 mrichmondj@ 1996.usna.corn file:HC:\WINNT\Temp\GW } 00055.HTM 9/9/9.0014 Page 1 of 1 Faith Christi - Fwd: Lake Smith Development IMMMMM From: <SwiftRLB @ aol.com> To: <fchristi @vbgov.com> Date: 9/7/2004 11:25 AM Subject: Fwd: Lake Smith Development CC: <swhite@vbgov.com> Faith Christie and Planning Commission, Please read and consider the attached e-mail before the Wed., Sept. 8th meeting. Thank you! Rebecca Howard file://C:\WINNT\Temp\GW } 00056.HTM 9/9/2004 From: <SwiftRLB @ aol.com> — To: <planadm@vbgov.com> Date: 9/7/04 11:06AM Subject: Lake Smith Development Attention: Faith Christie and Planning Commission Members Regarding the sale and development of the Brock Farm situated on Lake Smith, why would the Va. Beach Planning Commission have zoned this 200 acre prime waterfront property for apartments and townhouses, as we are being told by Helen Dragas? When residents of Haygood Pt. objected to the intense density, Ms. Dragas stated that the alternative would be the original zoning of apartments and townhouses. Of course, this area has been plagued with many problems connected to the many apartments and townhouses that already exist in this area, and the last thing that nearby residents want is more of the same. At issue is why such a zoning in the first place. And if the Planning Commission can acknowledge how unwise such a zoning now is, can't it change that zoning to something other than such a high density of condos and condo homes that is now being requested by the Dragas Company? The only "saving grace" in the Dragas plan is the tree buffer that has been designated along the lake. We sold a home in the jet fly over Linlier neighborhood in order to find a quieter, more peace ful and esthetically pleasing home and yard. Our home sits on a narrow finger of Lake Smith which is abundant with trees and wildfowl, including herons, ospreys, and even eagles. We were recently told by a prominent contractor that this property is as peaceful and beautiful and as great a natural preserve as any he's seen in all of Tidewater. Before purchasing our Haygood Pt. property, we were also told by two different realtors that the Brock farm could not be sold and developed for many years due to legal reasons. To think that the trees and wildfowl that now exist are going to be destroyed in order to build apartments, townhouses, or high -density condos saddens all of us in the Bayside area. Isn't the current Newtown Rd. Elementary School situation enough indication of how improperly this area has been zoned? Helen Dragas is to be commended for at least leaving a wide tree buffer in the land that she plans to develop. We oppose the high density condos and condo homes she plans on the north and south sides of Wesleyan Dr., but what is the alternative, apartments and townhouses? We ask that you be responsible to the Va. Beach citizens in this area who have worked so diligently to make their neighborhoods so beautiful and safe while existing beside crime -infested neighborhoods that are the result of poor city planning. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Ray Bossola and Rebecca Howard CC: <SwiftRLB@aol.com>, <wallacea@cox.net> Northwest Beach Partnership Board Munbers: P.J. Padrick -President Bruce Weer - e Vice President, Dave Tirado - 2nd Vice President, Kale Warren - Treasurer, Michele A. CWdun - Secretary Ernak northvvestbeachpartners@ver¢on.net Planning Commission Meeting September 8, 2004 Letters and statement Members 26 Cypress Pointe Northwest Beach Partnership HOA Board Members: PJ Padrick -President, Bruce Weller - e Vice President, Dave Tirado - 2'J Vice President, Kale Warren - Aragona Village Treasurer, Michele A. CVklun - Secretary, Ewa northywestheachpartners�gyer¢on.net Civic League Crystal Point September 8, 2004 HOA Cypress Point Good afternoon Chairman Ripley and members of the Commission. Civic Assoc My name is P. J. Padrick and I am the president of the Northwest Beach Diamond Lake Estates CHIC League partnership. The Northwest Beach Partnership is just what it says it is - a "partnership" between civic leagues and homeowner associations, gathered Springs/CLar Diamond"partnership" to provide a unified voice concerning development and other civic issues in Civic League our area. Cgand Lake Civic League Our membership is 20 communities strong and growing, currently representing almost 10,000 households. We provide a forum where issues are discussed and LaJCVrdem Civic League voted upon. In the case of this project, the final vote was not unanimous, however, according to our bylaws, majority rules. Because of this, several of Lake Edward Area our members have decided to speak today on behalf of their individual civic Civic League leagues or homeowner associations. Lake SmTh Terrace_, Haygood Point a CZ,overnor Square Discussion was vigorous as we sorted through our strong negative reactions Civic: League due to currently unmet infrastructure needs and the unwillingness of the Lake Sn*h developer to modify the density of the plan. In the end, it became clear that Civic League there were only two options available, that is, support the proposed rezoning Lakeview Park or risk having the property developed under the current zoning. Civic League Let me get right to the point -- the vote of the Northwest Beach Partnership Lai -, son Forest Civic League on the Brock Farm/Lake Smith Development Association proposal is to SUPPORT, not oppose, the application for rezoning, but also to express Lynbrook Landing Civic League concerns - primarily on density - to the Commission and ultimately to our City Council. The Partnership presented a letter to Mrs. Helen Dragas detailing Newsome League Farms Civic Le these concerns and a copy of this letter and her reply is included in your package from us today. Traditions at Cypress Point HOA In summary, we recognize the Dragas Companies' reputation for integrity and Wesleyan Chase for building high quality, aesthetically pleasing homes. Although we would Civic League have preferred to see more deference paid to our desires, the overall Wesleyan Forest sentiment of the Northwest Beach Partnership is that the proposed Civic League development is far superior to what could be built under the current zoning. Wesleyan We appreciate the opportunity to express both our support and our concerns Pines/Campus East about the project and took forward to working with Mrs. Dragas in the future (:.omnxmity Assoc for the benefit of our community. Witchduck Lake Are there any questions? Condo Assoc Member Northwest Beach Partnership26 Cypress Pointe HOA Board Members: P1 Padrick -Chairperson Aragon \Ike Bruce Weller - e Vice Chair, Dave Tirado - 2"' Vice Chair, Kale Warren - Treasurer, Michele A. Galdun - Secretary Civic League Emat northwestbeachpartners@verizon.rtet Crystal Point 1�®IDS HOA September 1, 2004 Cypress Point Helen Dragas Civic Assoc I CEO Dragas Companies 4538 Bonney Road Diamond Lake Estates Civic League Virginia Beach, VA 23462 Dia^nord Springs/Cwdenwood Re: Lake Smith Development Association, L.C. Proposal Civic League Dear Ms. Dragas, Cgand Lake Civic League The Northwest Beach Partnership (NWBP) is a conglomerate of Civic LaJ CVrdens Association, Civic Leagues, Homeowner Associations and Neighborhood Civic League Watch forming with the purpose of having a unified voice on issues concerning the Lake Edward Area residents of the northwestern area of Virginia Beach. To date we are Civic League comprised of 19 member organizations representing just under nine thousand Lake Snth Terrace, households. They are listed on our letterhead. Haygood Point a Caovernor Square Civic League We would like to preface this discussion by saying that we recognize that your proposal is preferable to the currently zoned possibilities and we are aware of Lake Snth your reputation for integrity and for building attractive, high quality homes. Civic League We would like to be able to enthusiastically support the project, however there Lakeview Park are some concerns as listed below: Civic League Lawson Forest The Lake Smith Development Association, L.C. proposal exceeds our desired Civic League density levels as well as the density level that is recommended in the Virginia Lynbrook Landing Beach Comprehensive Plan adopted by City Council on December 2, 2003. Civic League With this in mind we would like to counter propose the following: Newsome Farm • Looking at the Lake Smith Development Association, L.C. Civic League proposed development on the north side of Wesleyan Drive, Wesleyan Chase named Ridgley Manor at Lake Smith, there are 4 Villages: Civic League Farrcroft, Grace Hill, Belmeade and Westbriar. These four Wesleyan Forest villages total 616 residential units. We propose a reduction of Civic League 10% in total units. Wesleyan Pines/Campus East 0 On the south side of Wesleyan Drive there is one village named Community Assoc Southmoor with a total of 280 garden -style units. Regarding Witchduck Lake these units, we request the following: Condo Assoc 1. A reduction of 6 (six) buildings equaling 84 units that the Lake Smith Development Association, L.C. proposes for the section of the property zoned B2, which runs between Wesleyan Drive and Bayside Middle School. [As a side: we would like you to consider the sale of this piece of property to the city for open space or the school board for the extension of their fields.] 2. Upgrading the appearance and quality of the units to match the appearance and quality of those on the north side of Wesleyan Drive. This would also raise the proposed price of the units to be in line with the north side. 3. The upgrades in the quality of Southmoor should include the appearance of the fencing and entryway to full brick to match the north side. 4. We would like a proffer that states that within the condo association regulations a maximum of 10% rental would be allowed in all of the villages, but this is especially important in Southmoor Village. This proposal was set forth and unanimously passed by the member organizations of the Northwest Beach Partnership and supporting groups at a meeting held August 30, 2004. The President of Northwest Beach Partnership, Mrs. P.J. Padrick, was authorized at the meeting to be the spokesperson for the Partnership in this matter. She is authorized to present our requests and will report back to Northwest Beach Partnership your response and/or your willingness to negotiate further on these issues. We wish to thank you for your time and your willingness to hear our concerns. We are hoping we can continue a positive dialog in these and other matters that may arise in the future. Respectfully, Northwest Beach Partnership •Jar VV/ V`2 1LLV11 11.aY 1'raai R e: 465890NNEVROAo VIRQINIACEACM, VIRQINIA2a462 (757)49901e1 FAX (757) 499-5680 .&.dra a mag -s September ii 2004 Mrs. P.J. Padrick Northwest Beach Partnership By facsimilie #464-5292 Dear Mrs. Padrick, I would like to thank you for meeting with me an `Christine on Friday regarding the R.idgely Manor at Lake Smith proposal for the Brock arm property. I think many relevant points were made during our discussion. First, I would like to point out that I clearly understand your community concerns regarding thb forthcoming development of the property. I understand that your members have a heig�tend sensitivity to the issues of development, density, and quality because you feel tha., the Bayside area has more than its share of neighborhoods that have not retained their value over time and have developed into other problems. We discussed at length the false expectations raise within the community by the references made to the Brock farm in the City of Virginia �each's Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is a "guide" for future development for the City. The Comprehensive Plan is not a tool utilized in the review of Powable zoning uses. If we end up developing the property as it is currently zoned, thq Comprehensive Plan's goals and policies will not be consulted. The current zoning on the property has been in place since 1973. This seems to be an issue misunderstood by many people, but we can certainly agree that the vision for the Brock farm as descri* in the Comprehensive Plan had the reckless effect of raising expectations tb= cannot, iand'Aill not, be met no matter what the result of the City Council vote. I feel very strongly that my rezoning proposal goel as far as is economically possible towards ensuring that the same course of events d'pcs not transpire on the Brock property. This is why I proposed the rezoning in the first Glace — to provide a community of sustainable value and enduring beauty, rather than simp�y develop a neighborhood that is indistinguishable from much of the Bayside product. Tl'e property, if it is developed under its current zoning, could bear many of the same characteristics of these areas which cause you concern. This, I'm sure, is why the City planni4g staff has unconditionally recommended the approval of the rezoning. uml uol u4 mun LL; 4a r&A i a i %z t=aoou Lnn%,no MUR1t7_iVL. Wi vuo As a result of the meeting today, I agreed to makei.the Southmoor portio*► of R.idgely Manor a gated ,community for adA;d security and for enhanced property values, assuming that it is approved and built with 280 units and that the City approves its gating. I will also construct a,1ow brick skirt on the entrance_fcat�re to minimize the view of the parked cars on the parking lots that front on Wesleyan Dave. While I recognize that the Southmoor parcel is the object of most of your conccrns, T again remind you that if the rezoning application is not approved, we will be forced to�build it under its current zoning. I would encourage you and your colleagues to focus on the improvements offered over the existing zoning, as opposed to the shortfalls compared to the Comprehensive Plan, which beers no relationship to reality. The Ridgley tiianor proposal far exceeds the requirements of the allowed zoning in every category: bu4ding material quality, architectural interest, landscape quality, open space preservation, building setbacks from Wesleyan Drive, and most importantly to your members, in the sales prices of the homes. Ridgely Manor was offered in the spirit of improving your community over what could be; I hope you will come to see it as such. The Dragas Companies enjoys a reputation and a respect within the development communit not experienced by many others. We want to live up to our reputation. by beconxxing I asters with you in elevating your community. Annually, we put aside a percentage of our operating profits into a charitable foundation for the purpose of giving back to otu. community. Already, we. are working on annual donations to the Virginia Beach Library Foundation with stipulations that the money be used for early childhood reading programs in ..he Bayside area. For the last couple of months, I have been working with a dep t chair at Bayside. High School and others to form the first regional chapter of a n iuual non-profit called Girls on the Run,'whose mission is to redace the number of adolescent pregnancies, eating disorders, substance and alcohol abuse, and confrontation l ;ith the juvenile justice system among at -risk girls ages 8 to 13. We are working cn gair#g facility approval so that our first program, in 2005, night be held in the Bayside area. iThese are two examples of ways in which I believe we can be an effective partner, b4ging, meaningful resources into the community. Remember, my investment will be th* single largest in your district — no one has a more vested stake in its improvement_ The solution to your concerns lies not in opposing fur proposal, a denial of which would only increase the potential for the problems of your area to be multiplied. Your solution lies in forming effective partnerships and workingtogether to make progress towards solving them. I am seeking the opportunity to d Iiver our finest work to date to the Bayside area. I hope that your support accompanies tii� application to City Hall on October 12". e. ut!/uo/ua mute Li:40 rae ta:4aaaoou Vnn%_Ko XUu A-- W--j"v I apprzciate the opportunity to make some comm.t;nts to iou. I look forward to a friendly relationship as your neighbor and a; your partner, in helping the northwest portion of the city ackieve its highest potential. Sincerely, Helen E. Dragas Chief Executive Officer 4904 Olive Grove Circle Virginia Beach, VA 23455 Virginia Beach Planning Commission City Hall -Municipal Center Virginia Beach, VA 23456 September 8, 2004 Dear Planning Commission, I am writing to you as a long standing citizen and resident Aragona Village Civic Association. My work schedule does not allow me to attend today's public hearing, but I wanted you to read my concerns regarding the planned Brock Farm Development in the Bayside area of northwest Virginia Beach. I am reluctantly willing to support the Dragas-Brock Farm Project with three (3) specific reservations: 1- Please lower the density allowed by the current zoning for this property as indicated by the project maps and by various city records. It seems as though too many people will be living in a very concentrated area of limited remaining open space in this part of the city. 2- I am concerned that there will be inadequate city services -(fire, rescue, and police) available to respond in a timely manner for future residents of this planned high density development. 3 - I am concerned that there is inadequate city infrastructure -(sewer, water, street size, existing road capacity; existing public school capacity, etc) planned for this high density project. Other citizens will be speaking today who can better articulate my other concerns on this matter. Thank you for your time and attention. Sincerely, James M. Speckhart Page 1 of 2 Northwest Beach Partners From: "Kale S. Warren" <kalewarren@earthlink.net> To: "NWBP" <northwestbeachpartners@verizon.net> Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 6:21 PM Subject: CYPT's Proposed Statement on Dragas Development To: Northwest Beach Partnership From: Cypress Point Civic Association Date: September 6, 2004 Subject: Lake Smith Development Brock Farm Proposal While the Cypress Point Civic Association, as the community most directly impacted by this development, has decided to support the proposal overall, it is with less than total enthusiasm. On the positive side, we are pleased that the development plan proposes a beautiful community with many amenities and enhancements. We are aware that the developers, the Dragas Companies and Terry -Peterson, have a reputation for integrity and for building quality communities. We are grateful for the concessions the developers have agreed to make, including: • Working with individual residents of Cypress Point on Pond Cypress Drive whose homes are adjacent to Westbriar Village to maintain their home quality of life, • Agreeing to remove access to Cypress Point at Course View Circle, • Agreeing to upgrade Southmoor Village by making it a gated community, closing the Newtown Road entry to through traffic, • Agreeing to upgrade the bricktwrought iron wall that borders the Wesleyan Drive side of Southmoor Village to block view from Wesleyan Drive of vehicles parked within, • Upgrading the price and quality of units in Southmoor Village to whatever the market will bear at the time they are built. We are also grateful for the assurances of Helen Dragas to work and communicate with us as the project progresses and in the future for the overall benefit of our community. We look forward to this collaboration. On the other hand, eighty percent of respondents in a community poll here in Cypress Point strongly expressed a desire for a reduction in density, especially in the Southmoor Village. After all, most were aware that the Brock Farm property was designated a high priority 9/6/2004 Page 2 of 2 for acquisition under the Open Space Plan that and the recently revised Comprehensive Plan called for gross density not exceeding three dwelling units per acre on the property._ Recent battles to close the troublesome Par Five Bar have added to the sentiment that our area is struggling to remain viable as a safe, livable section of Virginia Beach. School crowding has caused the School Board to begin work on a new elementary, school to be located on the Williams Farm property, and Bayside Middle School is in the process of renovation to reduce the number of portables. Many of the students there and their families dream of more open space and a recreation center close to where they live. We clearly realize that the proposed development is a far better alternative than what could be built by right. By working together we can achieve the best results for all, and therefore we have decided to endorse this proposal. 9/6/2004 Page 1 of 1 Northwest Beach Partners From: "Steven Bushman" <bushmanbreeden@cox.net> To: <northwestbeachpartners@verizon.net> Cc: "N" <padyj44@aol.com>; "Michele A. Galdun" <michele.galdun@verizon.net>; "Kale Warren" <kalewarren@earthlink.net>; "David Tirado" <VVdchduckLakeNW@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 9:41 PM Subject: Lynbrook Landing- Brock Farm Development Vote. Dear Michelle & P. J.: I would like you to record the following as the vote for the Lynbrook Landing Community regarding the Brock Farm Development - The Northwest Beach Partnership should Support the Brock Farm Property Development Proposal with exceptions as prior expressed in the September 6, 2004 Issue 6 of the Northwest Beach Partnership E-mail that I received today from Michelle. I was thinking of participating in the Planning Commission's consideration of this matter tomorrow afternoon. If you could use my support, please give me a call tomorrow morning so that I can plan accordingly, thank you. Best of luck to us,... and thank you all for your hard work. Respectfully, Steven Bushman, League 612 Bridgewater Arch, Virginia fax- 2486, pager: 521-6163 bushman breeden(c _cox. net President of the Lynbrook Landing Civic Beach, VA 23462-7166, tel: (757) 5104, 9/8/2004 Page 1 of 1 Northwest Beach Partners From: "AL WALLACE" <alwallace@cox.net> To: "'Northwest Beach Partners'"<northwestbeachpartners@verizon.net>; "'Kale Warren'" <kalewarren@earthlink.net>; '"David Tirado'" <WitchduckLakeNW@aol.com>; "'P.J. Padrick'" <Padyj44@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 1:45 AM Attach: RESOLUTION - DragasDevelop - Sep06-2004.doc Subject: CIVIC LEAGUE POSITION ON DRAGAS DEVELOPMENT PLANS Michele, From the Lake Smith Terrace, Haygood Point and Governor Square Civic League, the attached Word file is the Civic League Resolution that the Board voted on at last Tuesday's (Aug 31 st) meeting. The resolution does not support the Dragas development due to home density issues and will be presented to the Planning Commission on Wednesday. The First Vice President Jerry Tompkins will do the honors since I work daytime. I am also pursuing an email vote on the resolution to involve the rest of the membership. Al Wallace President y 497-2187 9/7/2004 Lake Smith Terrace, Haygood Point and Governor Square Civic League Board Meeting: 7:OOPM Tuesday, August 31, 2004 Dragas Development Plans for the Brock Farm Properties Residents of the Lake Smith Terrace, Haygood Point and Governor Square Civic League do not support the Dragas Development Plans for the Brock Farm properties located at Wesleyan Drive due to home density as presented by Helen Dragas of the Dragas Companies at the August 17, 2004 special civic league meeting and contrary to the guidelines established in Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan Policy Document dated July 2003 (page 93: Cypress Point Area Site 2). The following conditions are requested to secure the community's full support of the Dragas project. We support the development on the north side of Wesleyan Drive but recommend the following specific changes to the Dragas development plans: a. Require the south side development to be reduced to two level (vice three levels) condos to match the level of condos on the north side. A balanced community design for both north and south view is essential for a panorama view of an integrated community appearance since both sides are part of the Ridgely development. b. Reduce the.dens (number of condos) in the south side development that affront Wesleyan Drive by reducing the number of condos from ten to six, in addition to changing the number of levels from three to two level condos as Stipulated in the previous paragraph in order to match the north side development. c. Require the entranceway of the south side development to match the north side, that is, full brick face, for the same reason reported above. THE LAKEVIEW PARK CIVIC LEAGUE RESOLUTION by a quorum of the membership of the Lakeview Park Civic League on July 19, 2004: Whereas: The Bayside District suffers from a deficit of 514 acres of open space. Whereas: The Bayside District is rapidly approaching maximum density that can be supported by the current city infrastructure. Additional development will negatively impact the already over -stressed water, sanitary sewer, traffic, and school systems currently in place. And whereas: The proposed development differs from the vision that the City of Virginia Beach Planning Commission and the City Council have for this area as stated in the Comprehensive Plan Policy document dated December 2, 2003. Now it is unanimously resolved that the Lakeview Park Civic League: A. Opposes any high -density development in accordance with the current zoning assigned to the property known as Brock Farm. B. Are concerned about the current high -density development proposed by the Dragas Companies. This development represents a substantial increase in dwelling units thus adversely affecting the Primary Residential Area as assigned by the Comprehensive Plan. C. Wish to see the Dragas Companies submit a development plan that coincides the vision stipulated in the City of Virginia Beach's Comprehensive Plan for the Brock Farm Property. This resolution authorizes the officers and the representatives of the Civic League to represent this position at all public and private meetings as being the official position of the Lakeview Park Civic League on this issue. Page I -of 1 Northwest Beach Partners From: <Mvainc1@aol.com> To:<northwestbeachpartners@vedzon.net> Cc: <Wlliam.Ketchum@navy.mil>; <s.hauksson@worldnet.att.net>; <Bjdna@aol.com>; <Mvainc1@aol.com>; <kackerman3 a@cox.net> Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 7:39 AM Subject: RE: Traditions at Cypress Point. Good Morning Michele; Thanks for including me in your notes. The residents and Board of Traditions at Cypress Point have met with Ms. Dragas on two occasions - once at a special Board meeting and once at a regular meeting. She explained the development and was asked questions. We have privately discussed a few minor items with Ms. Dragas and had them corrected. We believe that the development she proposes is better than the previously zoned plan. We believe the Dragas plan will keep or improve the values of the neighborhood on the North side. We shared some concerns about the southside development similar to those you state. We would, I believe, always be in favor of increasing the price of the southside as this would uphold prices of the entire development. The Board voted to approve and support the Dragas development as proposed. We too would have preferred to see the land open or developed by Bobby DeFord. Since neither is the case, the plan as proposed will have our support. Al Veeck President of the Unit Owners Assoc. Traditions at Cypress Point 9/8/2004 Michele A. Galdun President Wesleyan Forest Civic League 490-9572 wesleyanforest.claverizon.net Virginia Beach Planning Commission 2405 Princess Anne Rd. Municipal Center Bldg. #2 Virginia Beach, VA 23456 September S.2004 RE: Lake Smith Development Association, L.C. D04-210-CRZ-2004 Agenda #1, September 8, 2004 Dear Chairman Ripley and the members of the Commission, I am Michele A. Galdun, President of the Wesleyan Forest Civic League and Coordinator of their Neighborhood Watch, representing 82 homes. I am here today as the Representative and spokesperson of my Civic League to express our views on the Proposed Zone Changes, requested by The Dragas Company, for what is commonly call the Brock Farm development. Frankly, we reluctantly support the proposal, with concerns. We do realize that Ms. Dragas has proposed a high quality, attractive community that has the potential of not only maintaining the value of surrounding communities, but may, through a ripple effect enhance the quality of outlaying communities, thus strengthening the livability within this whole area. We also realize that the Dragas proposal is much preferred over anything that could be built under the current zoning. Having said this we must now turn to our grave. concerns .about the. density of any proposed development within the Northwest area. It is the feeling of many residents that any added households at this time would further tax the city services and infrastructure within our area. We realize that our concerns need to be expressed to our city council in so much as the Planning Commission can not control the enhancement of such services. However we wish to address some of these specifically, feeling that you may not have considered the full impact of the effect on our community. The following is a list of items we would like the Commission to considered: We take exception to the report prepare for you by the Planning Department staff, wherein on page 10, paragraph number 2 it states "It is likely that the applicant's proposal may reduce the demands on City services since the streets, landscaping, open spaces, and refuse removal will be private and maintained by the Homeowner's Associations. Additionally, the type....." That sounds nice however, we feel it is misleading in some much as those types of city services provide and address cosmetic concerns and not Public Safety Concems The concern for the public safety of all residents should not be taken lightly, yet we feel the Planning Department has not fully address this issue. Specifically absent are comments that Planning Commission 9_8_04.wps 9/8/2004 would address the following points: Our police department - one of the finest in the nation - is currently experiencing a shortage of some 28 Officers. At the same time they are faced with a nationwide shortage of available applicants to fill the spots. This problem, nationwide is so profound that many departments are having problems merely retaining the desired number of Officers, let alone recruiting enough to be able to hire additional officers. Considering an additional 1075 residents, will the city be able to hire enough additional officers that may be need to maintain acceptable response times and level of service? From time to time the fire department has discussed plans for a new station in the Northwest Beach area. There was even property purchased, at the comer of Wesleyan Drive and Baker Road, for a station. Yet I have not seen any station plans or even a listed proposal for a new station within the Northwest area. Yet, we are one of the most densely populated areas of the city. Typically when there is even a false alarm in some neighborhoods, all available trucks from Davis Comer respond, because the community is so densely populated that if a real fire exists then all trucks would be needed. There is. also the increase use of Fire Trucks being used as first responders for medical emergency calls. At the present time the fire department seems to be able to adequately respond to the current needs, and God love them for it. However, what is the likelihood that the over due much needed station would be built by the time this development is finished? EMS citywide is having problems meeting the current needs of the residents. The EMS struggles with funding, retention and recruitment problems. Although many changes to EMS are being worked out and instituted there is no way to measure the effectiveness of those changes at the current time. This is most troubling to us in so far as we are a community that has a disproportional amount of residents that are or may be in need of those services. Within our community we have many residents who are elderly or disabled. In addition, the 3rd police precinct's northwest end has one of the highest rates of domestic violence calls, which often involve the use of EMS. Alone these should cause concern, but add to those considerations, we also have the highest amount of senior citizen housing and/or assisted living communities in the city. EMS, on any given day, could become overwhelmed with dismal results. Lastly on this point is the unique problems increasingly experienced by Condo Association, especial those of moderate to lower income, during down turns in the economy. I am referring to the failure of some associations to be able to enforce the contracts either because of lack of funding or contractual problems. This has become such a problem within our state it was addressed by our legislators in January 2004, in House Bill No. 443. This point should not be inferred as a lack confidence in Ms. Dragas' proposal, but a lack of confidence in our City to adequately support communities so as to prevent decline or failure. If you doubt my claims you merely need look to some of the Associations that have failed or become ineffective, specifically Northridge Town Homes, Grand Lake Town Homes and more recently Newpoint Square Condos. These communities started with Associations that failed Planning Commission 9_8_04.wps 9/8/2004 2 or became ineffective, resulting in a significant decline in the property, spirit and livability of those communities. It has been solely due to the commitment and hard work of the citizens' of those communities that stopped the decline and in some cases turned the community. In all likelihood this will not happen to Ms. Dragas' proposed Communities for two reason, the high quality and higher starting prices of the units and Ms. Dragas, I believe would not allow this to happen. However, I must look to the future, what happens 15 years from now, when, during an economic down swing, the Southmoor Village Assoc starts running out of money? Who will tow the cars from fire lanes? Who will landscape? Who will maintain the streets, storm water maintenance and lighting? In short who will take out the trash? I believe that the Planning Commission, in the future needs to address the issue of public safety much more diligently. There are other issues of contention that would be best addressed to City Council or with this commission at a later time. In summary, the Wesleyan Forest Civic League supports the proposed zoning change now before this commission, acknowledging that the proposal is superior to what could be built under current zoning. However, we do so with a warning of grave concerns about the density and its' impact on Public Safety. In closing I would like to extend my appreciation to Ms. Helen Dragas for her willingness to dialog with the residents. We are looking forward to a continued dialog and would welcome a partnership with her and the new residents. I thank the Commission for this opportunity to address my community's concerns. Respectfully, Michele A. Galdun President Wesleyan Forest Civic League Planning Commission 9_8_04.wps 9/8/2004 3 Traditions at Cypress Point Unit Owners Association September 6, 2004 TO: Members of the Virginia Beach Planning Commission SUBJECT: Brock Farm Development/Zoning Gentlemen and Ladies of the Planning Commission TRADITIONS AV Cyt4 ss Aa"I The Unit Owners Association Board of Directors has met with Ms.y Dragas on two separate occasions - once as a Board and once at a Unit Owner's general meeting. She has presented her plan to rezone and develop the property known as the Brock farm which is adjacent to the Traditions property on the East side. With the information she presented along with architectural drawings, the Board at the general membership meeting held July 12, 2004, voted to approve the concept and manner in which she is going to develop the Brock Farm property. While we would desire that the property remain open, we realize this is unrealistic based upon the need for housing in Virginia Beach. This being said, we would ask that you grant Ms. Dragas' request for a variance and approve her plan for development of the property. Any questions can be directed to me at 757-508-6232. Thank you for your consideration in this matter_ C dially, /�c Alan C. Veeck President, Unit Owners Association Traditions at Cypress Point 0-4, 1— • 4s34 9--t j Raid • V:-�3"d, V:,;.:,c • 23462-3919 00) 494-2200 • f :& 00 411-5122 James M. Pendergast 5376 Club Head Road Virginia Beach, VA 23455 E Mail: Pendergast3@cwx.net September 4, 2004 Mr. Chairman and Members of the Virginia Beach Planning Commission Operations Building, Virginia Beach Municipal Center Virginia Beach, VA 23456 Dear Mr. Chairman and Planning Commission Members: Regrettably, a prior scheduled medical appointment prevents me from attending and speaking in support of the Rezoning request in conjunction with the proposed Ridgely Manor development at Lake Smith in the Bayside District. Please consider my written comments in lieu of my personal remarks. As one of the initial home owners in and a 17-year resident of Cypress Point I am writing to provide my most enthusiastic endorsement of the . proposed Rezoning to enable development of the Ridgely Manor development project on land adjacent to the Cypress Point sub -division. The planned proposal offered by the Dragas Companies will put in place an extremely high quality residential development that will benefit residents of Cypress Point who desire to see their own financial investment in the community appreciate. Approval of this proposal will also benefit residents throughout the City because of the increased property taxes that will accrue to the City as a result of this first- class proposal. At the same time citizens will benefit from the favorable school loading impact that will result from the presence of this high -quality project, as compared with what otherwise may result in the future under current zoning. Significant, too, is a side benefit to the City from ultimate construction of this development. This high -quality development proposal will reap significant revenues from the upscale homes planned for the northern portion of the property in question. At the same time, the plan provides for construction of a number of badly needed "affordable homes" that will be located in the midst of the project. This enables individuals with average incomes, such as teachers, police and firemen to enjoy the benefits of "upscale" neighborhood living, as opposed to being isolated to less desirable neighborhoods of the City. At a recent Cypress Point Civic League presentation by Ms. Helen Dragas to discuss the planned development, a small number of residents raised concerns over the prospect of "affordable housing" so near their own Cypress Point homes. This is a sad commentary on the attitudes of some individuals that sends the message those who teach our children, and protect us from fire and crime are somehow not desirable individuals to have as neighbors. It was refreshing that only a few voiced those concerns. To my way of thinking, the ability to plan a development that permits inclusion of both high -end and "affordable housing" only makes the proposed plan all the more valuable to this City, and is all the more reason why the requested re -zoning ought to be approved. I encourage you to recommend such to the City Council. I appreciate the opportunity to share these thoughts and views. (Ret.) James and Loreen Yano 1809 Delaney St. Virginia Beach, VA 23464-6504 _ Sept. 5, 2004 Virginia Beach Planning Commission Virginia Beach, VA Dear members of the Planning Commission: There is a window of opportunity that is rapidly closing. That opportunity is to create a sanctuary in Virginia Beach that could be a showcase for the city. The piece of land in question is Brock Farm on Lake Smith. Lake Smith has the distinction of being home to an incredible number of birds, some of them rarely seen by the vast majority of residents and visitors. We are talking about bald eagles, both adult and juvenile; osprey; red-tailed hawks; red -shouldered hawks; great homed owls; green herons; great blue herons; egrets; Eastern bluebirds; red - bellied woodpeckers; downy woodpeckers; pileated woodpeckers; arctic terns; cormorants; loons; American kestrels; wood ducks; northern shovelers; green -winged teals; mergansers; ruddy ducks; American wigeons; kingfishers; spotted sandpipers; and a host of other more typical avian residents. In short, the Lake Smith environment is an invaluable resource. There are already homes on Lake Smith; however, taking away the last bit of wild area, namely that land known as the Brock Farm, will destroy this bird sanctuary forever. Virginia Beach has an unenviable reputation for destroying that which is green in favor of housing, but taking away this particular bit of green will significantly degrade the quality of life for all in the area. What will put Virginia Beach on the map and make it a drawing card for birdwatchers up and down the east coast is a wild area that is actually accessible to visitors. Millions upon millions of people in this country consider themselves birdwatchers. It is the single most popular nature -oriented activity. This is the opportunity to do something that will benefit the community on many levels -- from economic to environmental, from recreation to conservation. Don't miss this opportunity. Protect Brock Farm from development. Sincerely, c�`��ed m ory 0 , In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF-5934 TO: FROM: ON Leslie L. Lilley William M. Macali 0 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE DATE: September 10, 2004 DEPT: City Attorney DEPT: City Attorney Conditional Zoning Application Lake Smith Development Associates, L.C. The above -referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on October 12, 2004. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated August 23, 2004, 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. WMM/nlb Enclosure cc: Kathleen Hassen LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES, L.C., a Virginia limited liability company TO (PROFFERED COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS) CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia THIS AGREEMENT, made this 23rd day of August 2004, by and between LAKE SMITH DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES, L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, party of the first part, Grantor; and THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia, party of the second part, Grantee. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the party of the first part is the owner of two parcels of property located in the Bayside District of the City of Virginia Beach, containing approximately 116 acres as more particularly described as Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 in Exhibit "A' attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference which parcels are herein referred to as the "Property"; and WHEREAS, the party of the first part 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 Property from B-2, A-12, R2.5, R- 10 and R-15 to Conditional R-5D, A-12, and A-18, all with a PD-H2 Overlay; and WHEREAS, the Grantee's policy is to provide only for the orderly development of land for various purposes through zoning and other land development legislation; and GPIN: 1468-85-3608 1468-83-1836 PREPARED BY: SYKES, BOURDON, AHERN & LEVY, P.C. 281 INDEPENDENCE BLVD. PEMBROKE ONE, FIFTH FLOOR VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23462 -1- 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 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 Grantor's rezoning application gives rise; and WHEREAS, the Grantor has voluntarily proffered, in writing, in advance of and prior to the public hearing before the Grantee, as a part of the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map, in addition to the regulations provided for the R-5D, A-12, A-18, and PD-H2 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 Grantor, for itself, its successors, personal representatives, assigns, Grantee, and other successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement by or exaction from the Grantee or its governing body and without any element of compulsion or quid -ro quo for zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit, or subdivision approval, hereby make the following declaration of conditions and restrictions which shall restrict and govern the physical development, operation, and use of the Property and hereby covenants and agrees that this declaration shall constitute covenants running with the Property, which shall be binding upon the Property and upon all parties and persons claiming under or through the Grantor, its successors, personal representatives, assigns, grantee, and other successors in interest or title: 1. The Property shall be developed substantially as shown on the "Ridgely Manor at Lake Smith- Conceptual Master Site Plan", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for The Dragas Companies, a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (hereinafter, the "Master Plan"). -2- 2. The principal entranceways to the Property shall be from Wesleyan Drive. The streetscape along the northern side of Wesleyan Drive, and the entrances to Ridgely Manor Boulevard and to each northern residential village, shall be designed, landscaped and constructed substantially as depicted on the exhibit entitled, "Ridgely Manor at Lake Smith" — "Perspective View at Ridgely Manor Entrance" and "Perspective View at Typical Entrance", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for The Dragas Companies, a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. The streetscape along the southern side of Wesleyan Drive shall be designed, landscaped, and constructed substantially as depicted on the exhibit entitled, "Southmoor Village at Ridgely Manor" — "Perspective View at Southmoor Village Entrance", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for The Dragas Companies (hereinafter collectively called the "Entrance Plans"). The Entrance Plans have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. 3. The five (5) residential "villages" within Ridgely Manor, as depicted on the Master Plan, shall each be developed substantially as shown on those exhibits entitled: (a) "Farrcroft at Ridgely Manor, 4-Plex Brick Villas, Conceptual Site Plan", dated May 20, 2004; (b) `Belmeade at Ridgely Manor, Luxury Detached Single Family Condominiums, Conceptual Site Plan", dated May 20, 2004, utilizing the "ALTERNATE CONCEPT FOR TERMINATING RIDGELY MANOR BOULEVARD" as depicted; (c) "Grace Hill at Ridgely Manor, 4-Plex Master Down Villas, Conceptual Site Plan", dated May 20, 2004; (d) "Westbriar at Ridgely Manor, Attached Condominiums with Garages, Conceptual Site Plan", dated May 20, 2004; and (e) "Southmoor at Ridgely Manor, Conceptual Site Plan", dated May 20, 2004 (hereinafter, the "Conceptual Site Plans"); These Conceptual Site Plans have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. 4. The party of the first part shall record a Master Deed of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("Restrictions") governing the Property. Each of the five (5) -3- residential villages shall be a condominium and the Restrictions shall establish a Master Homeowners Association which will be responsible for maintaining all "Open Space Easements", including trails and other improvements as depicted on the Conceptual Site Plans. Membership in the Master Homeowners Association shall be mandatory for each of the five (5) residential villages. 5. When the Property is developed, Belmeade at Ridgely Manor shall feature no more than one hundred fifty-eight (158) single family residential condominiums, each unit containing no more than three (3) bedrooms. The architectural design and building materials utilized will be substantially as depicted and described on the exhibit entitled, "Belmeade at Ridgely Manor — Architectural Elevations", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for The Dragas Companies (the, `Belmeade Elevations"), which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. The colors used may vary from those on the Belmeade Elevations; however, all will be earth tones. 6. When the Property is developed, Grace Hill at Ridgely Manor shall feature no more than one hundred twelve (112) residential condominium units in twenty-eight (28) buildings, each unit containing two (2) or three (3) bedrooms. The architectural design and building materials utilized will be substantially as depicted and described on the exhibit entitled, "Grace Hill at Ridgely Manor — Architectural Elevations", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for The Dragas Companies (the, "Grace Hill Elevations"), which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. The colors used may vary from those on the Grace Hill Elevations; however, all will be earth tones. 7. When the Property is developed, Westbriar at Ridgely Manor shall feature no more than one hundred seventy-four (174) attached residential condominium units with garages, each unit containing two (2) or three (3) bedrooms. The architectural design and building materials utilized will be substantially as depicted and described on the exhibit entitled, "Westbriar at Ridgely Manor — Architectural Elevations", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for The Dragas Companies (the, "Westbriar Elevations"), which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach as Department of Planning. The colors used may vary from those on the Westbriar Elevations; however, all will be earth tones. 8. When the Property is developed, Farrcroft at Ridgely Manor shall feature no more than one hundred seventy-two (172) residential condominiums in forty-three (43) buildings, each unit containing no more than two (2) bedrooms. The architectural design and building materials utilized will be substantially as depicted and described on the exhibit entitled, "Farrcroft at Ridgely Manor — Architectural Elevations", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for The Dragas Companies (the, "Farrcroft Elevations"), which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. The colors used may vary from those on the Farrcroft Elevations; however, all will be earth tones. 9. When the Property is developed, Southmoor at Ridgely Manor shall feature no more than two hundred eighty (280) garden style condominium units, each unit containing one (1), two (2), or three (3) bedrooms. The architectural design and building materials utilized will be substantially as depicted and described on the exhibit entitled, "Southmoor at Ridgely Manor — Architectural Perspective View", dated May 20, 2004, prepared for The Dragas Companies (the, "Southmoor Elevations"), which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. The colors used may vary from those on the Southmoor Elevations; however, all will be earth tones. 10. The dimensional requirements applicable to development of Southmoor at Ridgely Manor shall be as follows: Minimum Setback from Wesleyan Drive: 30' Minimum Setback from Newtown Road: 30' Minimum distance between buildings: 20' Maximum Building Height: 65' Except as modified hereby, all other requirements of the A-18 Zoning District, in effect as of the date hereof, shall be applicable. 11. Certain dimensional requirements applicable to development of Belmeade at Ridgely Manor shall be as follows: Minimum Setback from a Public Right of Way: 40' Minimum Distance from Front of Dwelling to -5- Edge. of Curb (interior streets): 12' Minimum Distance from Side of Building to Edge of Curb (interior streets): 12' Minimum Distance between Buildings: 15, 12. 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 and allowed and accepted by the Grantee as part of the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, shall continue in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes the zoning of the Property and specifically repeals such conditions. Such conditions shall continue despite a subsequent amendment to the Zoning Ordinance even if the subsequent amendment is part of a comprehensive implementation of a new or substantially revised Zoning Ordinance until specifically repealed. The conditions, however, may be repealed, amended, or varied by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and executed by the record owner of the Property at the time of recordation of such instrument, provided that said instrument is consented to by the Grantee in writing as evidenced by a certified copy of an ordinance or a resolution adopted by the governing body of the Grantee, after a public hearing before the Grantee which was advertised pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. Said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with said instrument as conclusive evidence of such consent, and if not so recorded, said instrument shall be void. The Grantor covenants and agrees that: (1) The Zoning Administrator of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, shall be vested with all necessary authority, on behalf of the governing body of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, to administer and enforce the foregoing conditions and restrictions, including the authority (a) to order, in writing, that any noncompliance with such conditions be remedied; and (b) to bring legal action or suit to insure compliance with such conditions, including mandatory or prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages, or other appropriate action, suit, or proceeding, W (2) The failure to meet all conditions and restrictions shall constitute cause to deny the issuance of any of the required building or occupancy permits as may be appropriate; (3) If aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Administrator, made pursuant to these provisions, the Grantor shall petition the governing body for the review thereof prior to instituting proceedings in court; and (4) The Zoning Map may show by an appropriate symbol on the map the existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the Property, and the ordinances and the conditions may be made readily available and accessible for public inspection in the office of the Zoning Administrator and in the Planning Department, and they shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and indexed in the name of the Grantor and the Grantee. -7- WITNESS the following signature and seal: Grantor: Lake Smith Development Associates, L.C. a Virginia limited liability company By: Dragas Management Corp., a Virginia corporation, Managing Member (SEAL) H en E. Dragas, Presid nt STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this JWtday of August 2004, by Helen E. Dragas, President of Dra as Management Corp., a Virginia corporation, Managing Member of Lake Smith Develo ment Associates, a Virginia limited liability company. A Notary Public My Commission Expires: i1l-300% EXHIBIT "A" METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION OF THE NORTHERN PORTION OF PROPERTY OF DORIS BACKUS BROCK (GPIN= 1468-85-3608) PARCELI ALL THAT certain tract, piece or parcel of land consisting of approximately 92.485 acres, more or less, with the buildings and improvements thereon and the appurtenances thereunto belonging, situate, lying and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and being known, numbered and designated as "PARCEL A", as shown on that certain plat entitled "SUBDIVISION OF RIDGELY MANOR PROPERTY FORMERLY OF DORIS BACKUS BROCK (DB 138, PG 502) (WB 13, PG 477), VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA' dated July 20, 2004, made by MSA, P.C. and duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia ("Clerk's Office") as Instrument Number .?00L408 2 L4 METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION OF THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF PROPERTY OF DORIS BACKUS BROCK (GPIN 1468-83-1836) PARCEL 2: Beginning at a pin set, located on the southern right of way of Wesleyan Drive, being the dividing line between Parcel C Subdivision of Cypress Plaza Shopping Center (MB 207, PG 52) and GPIN 1468-83-1836 (the Subject Property), thence continuing along Wesleyan Drive North 88' 32' 13" East, a distance of 414.30 feet to a pin found at a point of curve; thence along a curve to the right having a radius of 1,104.42 feet and an arc length of 563.54 feet to a pin found, being the point of tangency; thence continuing along the southern right of way of Wesleyan Drive South 62' 13' 39" East, a distance of 682.93 feet to a pin found; thence South 27' 46' 21" West, a distance of 3.00 feet to a pin found, thence South 62' 13' 39" East, a distance of 33.28 feet to a pin set at a point of curve; thence along a curve to the left having a radius of 1,190.42 feet and an arc length of 80.74 feet to a pin set; thence South 51° 54' 32" West, a distance of 62.48 feet to a point; thence South 71° 31' 06" East, a distance of 92.48 feet to a point; being the eastern boundary of the Subject Property and the northern boundary of the Subdivision of Property of Meekins Hawkins' Estate (MB 52, PG 14), being Taylors Branch; thence continuing along said boundary these eleven (11) courses: South 55' 46' 23" West, a distance of 229.99 feet to a point; South 70' 31' 23" West, a distance of 211.00 feet to a point; South 49' 57' 23" West, a distance of 70.18 feet to a point on the north side of Haygood Square (MB 127, PG 36); thence continuing along Haygood Square North 62' 07' 44" West, a distance of 22.65 feet to a point; South 71' 47' 50" West, a distance of 150.68 feet to a point; South 30' 55' 50" Los West, a distance of 177.80 feet to a point; South 13' 04' 50" West, a distance of 176.70 feet to a point; South 02' 42' 10" East, a distance of 137.45 feet to a point; South 74' 52' 10" East, a distance of 4.52 feet to a point on the northwest corner of Parcel `A' (MB 304, PG 94); thence along Parcel A South 11' 51' 49" East, a distance of 91.84 feet to a point; thence South 08' 33' 07" East, a distance of 158.69 feet to a pin set located on the northern right of way of Newtown Road; thence along Newtown Road South 87' 57' 39" West, a distance of 366.69 feet to a pin found, being the dividing line between GPIN 1468-73-5688 (Property of The City of Virginia Beach School Board) and the Subject Property; thence departing Newtown Road and continuing along said dividing line North 05' 39 02" East, a distance of 1,361.25 feet to a pin set; thence South 88' 2T 02" West, a distance of 806.42 feet to a pin found, located on the dividing line between GPIN 1468-64-9438 (Cypress Plaza Shopping Center) and the Subject Property; thence continuing along said dividing line North 05' 38' 02" East, a distance of 228.95 feet to a pin set at the point of beginning. The Subject Property contains 862,768 square feet or 19.806 acres as shown on plat entitled "Boundary Survey of Property of Doris Backus Brock (DB 138, PG 502) (WB 13, PG 477) Virginia Beach, Virginia dated April 2004" prepared for MSA, P.C. as recorded in the Clerk's Office as Instrument Number 20040701012357. CONDITIONALREZONE/DRAGASBROCEPROPERTY/PROFFER2 -10 Cond. Zoning Change: from AG to R-15 PDH2 �4\��25-14z.Z. yG� T CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH /TeWL17;1H L: L' ITEM: Real Investments Associates, L.L.C. — Change of Zoning District Classification MEETING DATE: October 12, 2004 ■ Background: An Ordinance upon Application of Real Investments Associates, L.L.C. for a Change of Zoninq District Classification from AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional R-15 Residential District with a PD-1-12 Overlay on property located at the southeast intersection of Bernadotte Street and Seaboard Road (GPINS 24046029260000; 24046101620000; 24045182260000; 24045163450000; 24045076090000). The Comprehensive Plan designates this site as being part of Princess Anne (Transition Area). DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE ■ Considerations: The applicant is proposing to develop a 14 lot subdivision on 14 acres of property that are currently zoned for agricultural use. The proposed plan includes 12 residential lots on the north side of the property that are between 12,000 and 20,000 square feet in size and 2 larger lots, consisting of 1.27 acres and 1.76 acres respectively, on the south side of the property. To develop the property as proposed, the applicant is requesting a change of zoning to R-15 Residential with PD-H2 Overlay District. The PD-1-12 Land Use Plan specifies setbacks, lot dimensions, lot coverage and consistent fencing requirements for all of the lots. The bulk of the open space is located as a buffer along the frontage of Seaboard Road. Landscaping and a pedestrian trail is located within the roadside buffer. All open space areas will be owned and maintained by the Property Owners Association. This is consistent with the Princess Anne (Transition Area) Design Guidelines that recommend roadside buffers with trails for new residential development. The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because they concluded the proposal is appropriate for the site, the proposal meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, staff recommended approval, and there was no opposition. Real Investments Associates, L.L.C. Page 2 of 2 ■ Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to approve this request as proffered. ■ Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting DepartmentlAgency: Planning Department City Manager: 14 J12-212-CRZ-2004 INVESTMENTS ASSOCIATES,LLC Agenda Item # 24 September 8, 2004 Public Hearing The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision regarding this application. Location and General Information REQUEST: Change of Zoning District Classification from AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional R-15 Residential District with PD- H2 Overlay LOCATION: Property located at the southwest corner of Bernadotte Street and Seaboard Road Asap ,—IZ S l 3�,Unk�1fE7R(s I R-15 J A GPIN: 2404602926; 2404610162; 2404518226; 2404516345; 2404507709; 2404508567 COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 7 - PRINCESS ANNE REAL INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. Agenda Item # 24 Page 1 SITE SIZE: 14 acres EXISTING The site is a combination of four buildable parcels and portions of two LAND USE: other nonconforming parcels. Four single-family dwellings could be developed on the buildable parcels under the existing Agricultural zoning. SURROUNDING • Princess Anne Middle School / B-2 Community LAND USE AND North: Business District ZONING: South: • Agricultural parcels / AG-1 Agricultural District East: • Single-family Dwellings / R-20 Residential District • Agricultural parcels and Single-family Dwellings / AG-1 Agricultural District and R-10 Residential West: District NATURAL RESOURCE This site consists of grassy fields with some emerging woody AND vegetation. There is one mature oak tree at the back of the site that CULTURAL will be preserved with this development. There is no floodplain or FEATURES: wetland area on this site. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. Summary of Proposal The applicant is proposing to develop a 14 lot subdivision on 14 acres of property that is currently zoned for agricultural use. The proposed plan includes 12 residential lots on the north side of the property that are between 12,000 and 20,000 square feet in size and 2 larger lots, consisting of 1.27 acres and 1.76 acres respectively, on the south side of the property. The applicant is requesting a change of zoning to R-15 Residential with PD-H2 Overlay District. The Land Use Plan specifies setbacks, lot dimensions, lot coverage and consistent fencing requirements for all of the lots. The Land Use Plan also states that horses can be boarded for the homeowner's use; the Land Use Plan also specifies that the open space area behind Lots 13 and 14, labled on the site plan as "Pasture," may REAL INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. Agenda Item # 24 Page 2 be used by the residents for the pasturing of horses. The PD-H2 District requires 15 percent of the total acreage to be open space. The submitted plan includes a note indicating that 7.01 acres of the site are "open space", which the note further indicates is 50 percent of the total site acreage. Thus, for the purpose of the PD-H2 and the Princess Anne (Transition Area) Matrix calculations the percentage of open space is 50 percent. The bulk of the open space is located as a buffer along the frontage of Seaboard Road. Landscaping and a pedestrian trail is located within the roadside buffer. All open space areas will be owned and maintained by the Property Owners Association. This is consistent with the Princess Anne (Transition Area) Design Guidelines that recommend roadside buffers with trails for new residential development. The subject site is a combination of four conforming parcels and portions of two nonconforming parcels. The four conforming parcels are separated into two southern parcels containing a total of 7 acres and two northern parcels containing a total of 7 acres. They are separated by a 15 foot wide flag lot, a fifty foot wide strip of property, and another 15 foot wide flag lot. The applicant is proposing to improve the existing nonconforming situation by combining the fifty foot wide lot with the southern parcels. This will be accomplished by swapping a 15 foot strip with the owner of the southern flag lot. A new 15 foot flag strip will then be created directly adjacent to the 15 foot flag strip that is associated with the northern flag lot. In the end, the property proposed for subdivision will still be separated into southern and northern parcels by the two flag lots. To make this even more complex, the current access off Seaboard Road to the two flag lots is not located on the property designated as the flag, but instead has always been located on the fifty foot strip. This existing driveway will remain with an ingress/egress easement granted for the two flag lots. This existing driveway will also be used to access Lots 13 and 14. A one foot no ingress/egress easement will be platted along the remainder of this site's frontage on Seaboard Road. Lots 1 through 12 will access from a cul-de-sac street leading to Bernadotte Street. Major Issues The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this request. Staff's evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these issues are adequately addressed. REAL INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. Agenda Item # 24 Page 3 Consistency with Comprehensive Plan policies and the Princess Anne (Transition Area) Design Guidelines Compatibility with the surrounding area in terms of land use. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan Map depicts this area of the city as Princess Anne (formerly the Transition Area), planned for appropriate growth opportunities consistent with the economic vitality policies of the City of Virginia Beach. This area serves as a land use buffer between the urban northern portion of the city and the rural southern portion of the city. Land uses and densities within this area should not be a continuation of either form but a transition from one to the other. Staff evaluated the proposed development using the Comprehensive Plan Policies for Princess Anne (the Transition Area), including the Transition Area Matrix and the Design Guidelines (a copy of the Matrix is included at the end of this report). Proffers The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to "offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable," (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. REAL INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. Agenda Item # 24 Page 4 PROFFER # 1 When development takes place upon that portion of the Property which is to be developed, it shall be as a single family residential community of no more than fourteen (14) building lots substantially in conformance with the Exhibit entitled "SEABOARD ACRES, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN", dated 1/26/04, prepared by WPL, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning ("Concept Plan"). PROFFER # 2 When the Property is developed, approximately 7.01 acres of open space as depicted on the Concept Plan shall be dedicated in fee and via easements, as specified on the concept Plan, to the Property Owners Association. The Property Owners Association shall be responsible for maintaining the open space. No structures shall be erected in the open space areas except as depicted on the Concept plan. PROFFER # 3 When the Property is developed, the landscaping, fencing and open space improvements shall be constructed substantially as depicted on the Concept Plan. PROFFER # 4 The community identification signage shall be constructed and installed substantially in conformance with the "sign details" on the Concept Plan. PROFFER # 5 When the Property is subdivided it shall be subject to a recorded Declaration of Protective Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("Deed Restrictions") administered by a Property Owners Association which shall be responsible for maintaining all common area, community owned open space areas, pedestrian trails, easements, including the open space easements, and the sign features. PROFFER # 6 All residential dwellings constructed on the Property shall have visible exterior surfaces, excluding roof, trim, windows, and doors, which is no less than eighty percent (80%) brick and/or hardi-plank. Any one-story dwelling shall contain no less than 2400 square feet of enclosed living area excluding garage area and any two-story dwelling shall contain no less than 2600 square feet of enclosed living area excluding garage area. The front REAL INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. Agenda Item # 24 Page 5 yards of all homes shall be sodded. The Deed Restrictions shall require each dwelling to have, at a minimum, a two (2) car garage and a driveway (including apron) with a minimum of four hundred ninety (490) square feet of hardened surface area. PROFFER # 7 When the Property is developed, the lots depicted on the Concept Plan shall be subject to the following requirements: (a) Minimum lot size 12,000 square feet (b) Minimum lot width 50 feet (c) Minimum front yard setback 30 feet (d) Minimum side yard setback, when not adjacent to a street 10 feet (e) Minimum side yard setback adjacent to a street 30 feet (f) Minimum rear yard setback 30 feet (g) Maximum lot coverage 30% (h) Horses are permitted to be kept on Lots 13 and 14 and within the open space designated "Pasture Area". Except as modified herein, the setbacks and restrictions applicable to lots in the R-15 Zoning Category shall apply to lots 1 through 14 of Seaboard Acres. PROFFER # 8 The Grantors recognize that the subject site is located within the Transition Area identified in the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Virginia Beach, adopted on December 2, 2003. In addition to integrating significant open space with a low density, high quality, housing component as specified in the Comprehensive Plan, the party of the first part agrees to contribute the sum of Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars ($750.00) per lot to Grantee to be utilized by the Grantee to acquire land for open space preservation pursuant to the Grantee's Outdoors Plan. If the funds proffered by the party of the first part in this paragraph are not used by the Grantee anytime within the next twenty (20) years for the purpose for which they are proffered, then any funds paid and unused may be used by the Grantee for any other public purpose. The party of the first part agrees to make payment for each residential lot shown on any subdivision plat prior to recordation of that plat. REAL INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. Agenda Item # 24 Page 6 PROFFER # 9 Further conditions may be require by the Grantee during detained Site Plan and /or Subdivision review and administration of applicable City codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City code requirements Staff Evaluation of The proffers are similar to those associated with other Proffers: recent developments proposed for Princess Anne (Transition Area). City Attorney's The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer Office: agreement dated January 29, 2004, and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. Staff Evaluation Staffs evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials and the proffers adequately addresses each of the 'Major Issues' identified above. This proposal is consistent in the Comprehensive Plan's recommendations for the Transition Area. The Transition Area Matrix was used to evaluate the proposal's consistency with land use and design goals for Princess Anne. The result was a score of 0.97 dwelling units per acre. This score translates to a total of 13.58 units. The proposal shows 14 units, equivalent to 1 dwelling unit per developable acre. The Comprehensive Plan provisions for Princess Anne (Transition Area) note that developments within this area should strive to achieve at least 50% open space, which this proposal does provide. The Transition Area Technical Advisory Committee (TATAC) expressed that the open space should be outside of the lot area and should be made as accessible to the public and residents of the community as possible, which this proposal again provides. The fact that this site is separated by property owned and controlled by others (two lots at the southern end of the site) is a significant impediment to the creation of a plan that truly achieves the vision established by the Comprehensive Plan for Princess Anne. The division of the site as it currently is established to provide access to the two lots in the REAL INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. Agenda Item # 24 Page 7 rear precludes the proposed development from becoming one cohesive plan with quality open space integrated throughout as has been seen in other plans approved for the Transition Area. In sum, the proposal as submitted is acceptable. The factors listed above cause the proposal to rate less than the potential maximum on the evaluating matrix, but due to the uniqueness of the site brought on by factors such as the strip down the center and the land uses that adjoin the site, Staff concludes that the granting of 14 units is appropriate. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request as proffered. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. REAL INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. Agenda Item # 24 Page 8 Supplemental Information Zoning History Cond. Zoning change: trom AL, to K-15 ruriz # I DATE IREQUEST ACTION 1 08/27/86 Downzone to AG Agriculture Granted 2 02/01/00 Rezone from AG Agriculture to R-20 Residential Granted 3 03/25/97 Conditional Use Permit (Church) Granted 4 04/25/00 Conditional Use Permit (Borrow Pit Expansion) Granted REAL INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. Agenda Item # 24 Page 9 Public Agency Comments Public Works Master Transportation Plan (MTP): Seaboard Road is currently a two-lane undivided collector. The ultimate right of way for Seaboard Road is shown as 110 feet on the Master Transportation Plan. The future widening of Seaboard Road, south of Princess Anne Road, has not been scheduled in the Capital Improvement Program. Approximately 25 feet of additional right of way may need to be acquired along the frontage of this site to accommodate the future widening. Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Existing Land Use -10 Seaboard Road ADT 1 ADTO Proposed Land Use 3 - 134 /' vY '"G wally . "Wo 2 as defined by agricultural use 3 as defined by 14 single-family dwellings Public Utilities Water: There is a 12-inch water main in Bernadotte Street fronting this site. There is a 12-inch water main in Seaboard Road fronting this site. Sewer: There is an 8-inch sanitary sewer main in Seaboard Road fronting this site. This site must connect to city sewer. Sanitary sewer flow calculations and pump station analysis of Pump Station 621 will be required to determine if new flows can be accommodated. Public Schools School Current Capacity Generation 1 Change 2 Enrollment Princess Anne 969 886 4 3 Elementary REAL INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. Agenda Item # 24 Page 10 Princess Anne 1526 1438 2 1 Middle Kellam Senior High 2346 1850 „ as 3 . 0,e ��h 1 3 "generation" represents the number of students that the develop iLem Wu. a- 2 "change" represents the difference between generated students under the existing zoning and under the proposed zoning. The number can be positive (additional students) or negative (fewer students). Public Safety Police: The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Fire and Rescue: Provide an all weather road surface (DOT 75,000 #s) for Fire Department access for homes built on Lots 13 and 14 REAL INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. Agenda Item # 24 Page 11 Exhibits Exhibit A - 1 Aerial of Site Location REAL INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. Agenda Item # 24 Page 12 Exhibit A - 2 Amrial of ration REAL INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. Agenda Item #24 Page-_13 Exhibit B Proposed Site Plan n. k REAL INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. Agenda Item # 24 Page 14 Exhibit C Disclosure Statement —, � 4 u •. G i Wq ' Z' p aY c_.. ._ 4^ V 0.� CS M � 57 y 4 J i• } h; r � C i s '" 5� x .-2 ,poG tl J 1 C L• LG ffiffi •�y W � E Q � �' � y C �' m C C G ' '3 Y ✓ v p • YS �"�yiyyy C; z x tl n3:'% a}tly ..a V{ CL tl C' Y V _ j C F .� r C W �.. .• G ^; J C? G ' r g Y r v » wy j L R V � _ J F Uj Uj 1 tli Yi J �q�** p R E T (a tl' U] ` C �' r Lk 9 A'tl j C a� RT Gopo 0. ..^ s.� a .'G t S fo o ,c f mom'. ^. ui me m 'tea �� v c `p'2-1G3 ... e ¢ r,� NOIJ.d'JITddV 9NINOZUU1dN01ZIQN0) REAL INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. Agenda Item # 24 Page 15 Transition Area Matrix Allowable maximum residential density for any rezoning in the Transition Area under the policies of the Comprehensive Plan is 1 unit per acre. The maximum density can be achieved through adherence to the Evaluative Criteria provided below and further explained in the Design Guidelines for the Transition Area. Each section of the Evaluative Criteria below ties to the Design Guidelines through the graphic icon 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 will `score' the proposed development for its consistency with the Evaluative Criteria below. The scores are then totaled and the total is `plugged' into the formula below to determine the recommended maximum density for the development. PROJECT: Seaboard Acres revised PROJECT DATE: 01/26/04 MATRIX REVIEW DATE: 08/25/04 Evaluative Criteria Total Comments Natural Resources Degrees to which the project 1.80 preserves and integrates into the overall project the natural resource amenities on the site. Amenity Nature and degree of the 3.90 amenity Design Degree to which the project 4.55 incorporates good design into the project (A) TOTAL: (B) TOTAL / 11 possible points (C) TOTAL / 11 * 0.5 = (D) Line (C) + 0.5 du/acre = (E) Line D * total developable acres( 14 ) _ Line A -- total number of points from the worksheets on the following pages. Line B -- total divided by the total number of possible points, which is 11 10.25 .93 .47 .97du/acre 13.58 units Transition Area Matrix Page 16 of 22 FAData\PLN\Boards\Planning Comm ission\Agendas\Agendas_Old\2004\2004_09\24_ReaIInv_CRZ.doc Line C -- total from Line B multiplied by 0.5, which is the amount between the baseline density of 0.5 dwelling units per acre and the possible 1 dwelling unit per acre (du/ac). Line D --total from Line C added to 0.5 du/ac (the baseline density) to obtain the maximum density for the site. Line E -- total from Line D multiplied by the number of developable acres on the site, thus providing the maximum number of units for the site. . (11 Natural Resources 71 Existing forests, wetlands, meadows, cultivated fields, and Total related features a) Are natural resources protected? YES X (0 to 1 Comments: Yes point) .90 There is one significant oak tree that is proposed for preservation that should be left outside the property boundaries of Lots 6 and 7 and located within common open space. The remainder of the site is open farmland. Approximately 2 acres is indicated as open space subject to a pasture use. NO [1 (0 points) b) Are natural resources integrated into project? YES X (0 to 1 90 Comments: Yes point) • The large oak tree proposed for preservation should be located within open space and remain visible from Seaboard Road. • The remainder of the property is farmland of which 50% is open space. NO ❑ (0 points) NATURAL RESOURCES TOTAL 1.80 Insert in appropriate box on page 1 Transition Area Matrix Page 17 of 22 FAData\PLN\Boards\Planning Commission\Agendas\Agendas—Old\2004\2004_09\24—Reallnv—CRZ.doc (2) Amenity A feature that increases the attractiveness or value of the site consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the Transition Area. Total a) Is the amenity, if present, visually or operationally available to those who do not own property in the development? YES X (0 to 1 point) 1 Comments: Yes • The amenity of over 200 feet of a landscaped buffer with a pedestrian trail along Seaboard Road and an open space area subject to a pasture. NO ❑ (0 points) b) Does the amenity consist of recreational components? YES X (0 to 1 point) 1 Comments: Yes • The pedestrian trail proposed within the roadside buffer would be considered a recreational amenity. NO ❑ (0 points) Transition Area Matrix Page 18 of 22 FAData\PLN\Boards\Planning Commission\Agendas\Agendas_Old\2004\2004_09\24_Reallnv_CRZ.doc c) Are improvements made that provide visual or physical access to the natural resources on the site OR are improvements made to create a new amenity to the property? YES X (0 to 1 point) 1 Comments: Yes A new amenity is created through the roadside buffer and trail component as well as the pastureland open space. NO ❑ (0 points) d) Is there connectivity linking any open space and/or amenities between this development and adjacent existing or future developments? YES X (0 to 1 point) 90 Comments: Yes • The proposed trail has provided a connection to a future trail as well as to the existing public right-of-way. NO ❑ (0 points) AMENITY TOTAL Insert in appropriate box on page 1 3.90 Transition Area Matrix Page 19 of 22 FAData\PLN\Boards\Planning CommissionWgendas\Agendas_Old\2004\2004_09\24_Reallnv_CRZ.doc (3) Desian Creation or execution in an artistic or highly skilled manner consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the Transition Area. Total a) Are natural or manmade water features incorporated into the development in a way that they serve as amenities? YES X (0 to 1 point) 75 Comments: • Due to the size of the site and the constraints of the site presented by the strip owned by others that goes through the center, locating a storm water facility that serves as a substantial amenity is difficult. NO ❑ (0 points) b) Is there an attempt to integrate the amenities as an integral part of the overall development? YES X (0 to 1 point) .90 Comments: Yes • There is an attempt to integrate the trail system and open space as part of the site and neighboring properties. NO ❑ (0 points) Transition Area Matrix Page 20 of 22 FAData\PLN\Boards\Planning Commission\Agendas\Agendas_Old\2004\2004_09\24_Reallnv_CRZ.doc c) Does the development retain or create views or scenic vistas that can be seen from the road? YES X (0 to 1 point) 1 Comments: Yes • The 200+ feet landscaped buffer retain along the right-of-way and the open space pasture land assists in maintaining the existing view. 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? YES X (0 to 1 point) 90 Comments: Yes • There is a mixture of lot sizes. The proposed lots are clustered. NO ❑ (0 points) Transition Area Matrix Page 21 of 22 FAData\PLN\Boards\Planning Commission\Agendas\Agendas_Old\2004\2004_09\24_Reailnv_CRZ.doc e) Does the development use roadway and "hard infrastructure" that is appropriate for its design? Is it consistent with the vision and recommendations of this area as expressed in YES X (0 to 1 1 the Comprehensive Plan? point) Comments: Yes • The proposed roadway section used in the clustered lots will be an appropriate street section with enhanced landscape islands. • The remaining two larger lots will utilize an existing drive. NO ❑ (0 points) DESIGN TOTAL 4.55 Insert in appropriate box on page 1 Transition Area Matrix Page 22 of 22 FAData\PLN\Boards\Planning Commission\Agendas\Agendas_Old\2004\2004_09\24_Reallnv_CRZ.doc Item #24 Real Investments Associates, L.L.C. Change of Zoning District Classification Southeast intersection of Bernadotte Street and Seaboard Road District 7 Princess Anne September 8, 2004 CONSENT William Din: The last item I have on consent agenda is Item #24 Real Investments Associates, L.L.C. This is a request for a Change in Zoning District Classification from AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional R-15 Residential District with a PD-H2 Overlay on property located at the southeast intersection of Bernadotte Road and Seaboard Road in the Princess Anne District. Eddie Bourdon: Thank you very much. Again, Eddie Bourdon, a Virginia Beach attorney representing the applicant. I want to thank the staff as well as the citizens of the Foxfire Civic League with whom we have worked on this application for many months. We appreciate everyone's patience and cooperation. Thank you for placing us on the consent agenda. William Din: Thank you Mr. Bourdon. Is there any opposition to this item? If not, Barry Knight will speak on it. Barry Knight: This is a piece of property that is located in the Princess Anne District and specifically in the Princess Anne area, which was formally known as the Transition Area. This piece of property is very unique. What the applicants propose to do is kind of highlight the nice large farmhouse in the back and the property on the north end proximity of it to be more dense to mix in with the Foxfire Development and the property on the southern end be larger lots to more mesh with the rural cumbered area, if you will. This item has been deferred a couple of times because it didn't quite meet the Transition area guidelines and to give them both credit they have not met the Transition guidelines. We think it's a very nice plan. Therefore, we put it on the consent agenda. William Din: Thank you Mr. Knight. Madame Chair, I would like to make a motion to approve Item #24 Real Investments Associates, L.L.C. This is for a Change in Zoning District Classification from AG-1 and AG-2 to Conditional R-15 Residential with a PD- H2 Overlay on property located at the intersection of Bernadotte and Seaboard Road in the Princess Anne District. Dorothy Wood: Do I hear a second? Eugene Crabtree: I'll second it. Dorothy Wood: Seconded by Gene Crabtree. Item #24 Real Investments Associates, L.L.C. Page 2 AYE 10 ANDERSON AYE CRABTREE AYE DIN AYE HORSLEY KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE MILLER AYE RIPLEY AYE STRANGE AYE WALLER AYE WOOD AYE NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 ABSENT Ed Weeden: By a vote 10-0, the consent agenda item has been approved by the Board. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF-58844 TO: FROM: M Leslie L. Lilley William M. Macali W" Conditional Zoning Application Real Investments Associates, L.L.C. DATE: September 10, 2004 DEPT: City Attorney DEPT: City Attorney The above -referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on October 12, 2004. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated January 29, 2004, 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. WMM/nlb Enclosure cc: Kathleen Hassen PREPARED BY: W10 SY ES. BOURDON. ffil AuRN & LRvY. P.C. REAL INVESTMENTS ASSOCIATES, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company BRUCE B. GALLUP NON -MARITAL TRUST MUNDEN FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company CHRISTOPHER J. KEYLOR and CARLYN KEYLOR, husband and wife TO (PROFFERED COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS) CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia THIS AGREEMENT, made this 29th day of January 2004, by and between REAL INVESTMENTS ASSOCIATES, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, party of the first part, Grantor; BRUCE B. GALLUP NON -MARITAL TRUST and MUNDEN FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, parties of the second part, Grantors; CHRISTOPHER J. KEYLOR and CARLYN KEYLOR, husband and wife, parties of the third part, Grantors; and THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia, party of the third part, Grantee. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the parties of the second part are together the owners of five (5) parcels of land located in the Princess Anne District of the City of Virginia Beach, "Parcels 1 through 4" and "Parcel 5" in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and porated herein by this reference, said parcels along with Parcel 6 are referred to her herein as "The Property; and WHEREAS, the parties of the third part are the owners of a parcel or strip of located in the Princess Anne District of the City of Virginia Beach designated as el 6" in Exhibit "A", which parcel along with Parcels 1 through 5 are herein to as "The Property"; and GPIN: 2404-60-2926 2404-61-0162 2404-51-8226 2404-51-6345 2404-50-7609 (Part of) 2404-50-8567 (Part of) 1 PREPARED BY: NO SYKES, BO'URDON, Nil ANEPN & LEVY, P.C. WHEREAS, the party of the first part as the contract purchaser of the Property has initiated a conditional amendment to the Zoning Map of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, by petition addressed to the Grantee so as to change the Zoning Classifications of the Property from AG-1 and AG-2 to Conditional R-15 Residential District with a PD-H2 Overlay; and WHEREAS, the Grantee's policy is to provide only for the orderly development of land for various purposes through zoning and other land development legislation; and WHEREAS, the Grantors acknowledge that competing and sometimes incompatible uses conflict and that in order to permit differing uses on and in the area of the Property and at the same time to recognize the effects of change, and the need for various types of uses, certain reasonable conditions governing the use of the Property for the protection of the community that are not generally applicable to land similarly zoned are needed to cope with the situation to which the Grantors' rezoning application gives rise; and WHEREAS, the Grantors have voluntarily proffered, in writing, in advance of and prior to the public hearing before the Grantee, as a part of the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map, in addition to the regulations provided for the R-15 Zoning District by the existing overall Zoning Ordinance, the following reasonable conditions related to the physical development, operation, and use of the Property to be adopted as a part of said amendment to the Zoning Map relative and applicable to the Property, which has a reasonable relation to the rezoning and the need for which is generated by the rezoning. NOW, THEREFORE, the Grantors, for themselves, their successors, personal representatives, assigns, grantees, and other successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement by or exaction from the Grantee or its governing body and without any element of compulsion or quid pro quo for zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit, or subdivision approval, hereby makes the following declaration of conditions and restrictions which shall restrict and govern the physical development, operation, and use l 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 N PREPARED BY: 0.1 SYKES, BOURDON, 01 AHERN & LEVY, P.C. representatives, assigns, grantee, and other successors in interest or title and which will not be required of the Grantors until the Property is developed: 1. When development takes place upon that portion of the Property which is to be developed, it shall be as a single family residential community of no more than fourteen (14) building lots substantially in conformance with the Exhibit entitled "SEABOARD ACRES, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN", dated 1-26-04, prepared by WPL, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning ("Concept Plan"). 2. When the Property is developed, approximately 7.01 acres of open space as depicted on the Concept Plan shall be dedicated in fee and via easements, a specified on the Concept Plan, to the Property Owners Association. The Property Owners Association shall be responsible for maintaining the open space. No structures shall be erected in the open space areas except as depicted on the Concept Plan. 3. When the Property is developed, the landscaping, fencing and open space improvements shall be constructed substantially as depicted on the Concept Plan. 4. The community identification signage shall be constructed and installed substantially in conformance with the "sign details" on the Concept Plan. 5. When the Property is subdivided it shall be subject to a recorded Declaration of Protective Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("Deed Restrictions") administered by a Property Owners Association which shall be responsible for maintaining all common area, community owned open space areas, pedestrian trails, easements, including open space easements, and the sign features. 6. All residential dwellings constructed on the Property shall have visible exterior surfaces, excluding roof, trim, windows, and doors, which is no less than eighty percent (80%) brick and/or hardi-plank. Any one story dwelling shall contain no less than 2400 square feet of enclosed living area excluding garage area and any two-story dwelling shall contain no less than 2600 square feet of enclosed living area excluding garage area. The front yards of all homes shall be sodded. The Deed Restrictions shall require each dwelling to have, at a minimum, a two (2) car garage and a driveway (including apron) with a minimum of four hundred ninety (490) square feet of hardened surface area. 3 PREPARED BY: M SYKES. ROURDON. M A14ERN & LEVY. P.0 7. When the Property is developed, the lots depicted on the Concept Plan shall be subject to the following requirements: (a) Minimum lot size 12,000 square feet. (b) Minimum lot width 50 feet. (c) Minimum front yard setback 30 feet. (d) Minimum side yard setback, when not adjacent to a street 10 feet. (e) Minimum side yard setback adjacent to a street 30 feet. (f) Minimum rear yard setback 30 feet. (g) Maximum lot coverage 30%. (h) Horses are permitted to be kept on Lots 13 and 14 and within the open space designated "Pasture Area". Except as modified herein, the setbacks and restrictions applicable to lots in the R-15 Zoning Category shall apply to Lots 1 through 14 in Seaboard Acres. 8. The Grantors recognize that the subject site is located within the Transition Area identified in the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Virginia Beach, adopted on December 2, 2003. In addition to integrating significant open spaces with a low density, high quality, housing component as specified in the Comprehensive Plan, the party of the first part agrees to contribute the sum of Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars ($750.00) per lot to Grantee to be utilized by the Grantee to acquire land for open space preservation pursuant to Grantee's Outdoors Plan. If the funds proffered by the party of the first part in this paragraph are not used by the Grantee anytime within the next twenty (20) years for the purpose for which they are proffered, then any funds paid and unused may be used by the Grantee for any other public purpose. The party of the first part agrees to make payment for each residential lot shown on any subdivision plat prior to recordation of that plat. 9. Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan and/or Subdivision review and administration of applicable City codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City code requirements. Any references hereinabove to the R-15 Zoning District and to the requirements and regulations applicable thereto refer to the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance of 4 PREPARED BY: SYKES. BOURDON, M AHERN & LEVY. P.C. the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in force as of the date of approval of this Agreement by City Council, which are by this reference incorporated herein. The above conditions, having been proffered by the Grantors and allowed and accepted by the Grantee as part of the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, shall continue in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes the zoning of the Property and specifically repeals such conditions. Such conditions shall continue despite a subsequent amendment to the Zoning Ordinance even if the subsequent amendment is part of a comprehensive implementation of a new or substantially revised Zoning Ordinance until specifically repealed. The conditions, however, may be repealed, amended, or varied by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and executed by the record owner of the Property at the time of recordation of such instrument, provided that said instrument is consented to by the Grantee in writing as evidenced by a certified copy of an ordinance or a resolution adopted by the governing body of the Grantee, after a public hearing before the Grantee which was advertised pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. Said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with said instrument as conclusive evidence of such consent, and if not so recorded, said instrument shall be void. The Grantors covenant and agree that: (1) The Zoning Administrator of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, shall be vested with all necessary authority, on behalf of the governing body of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, to administer and enforce the foregoing conditions and 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; 5 PREPARED BY: Mfg SWES. BOURDON. M AHERN & LEn P.C. (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. 6 �� PREPARED BY: !�]l7�] SMS. POURDON. ON A M & LRV`I. P.C. WITNESS the following signature and seal: GRANTOR: Party of the First Part REAL INV a Virginia I� STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to -wit: ENTS ASSOCIATES, L.L.C., d Iiabjlit�`company o�ard R. Sykes, Jr., anaging Member SEAL) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 30th day of January 2004 by Howard R. Sykes, Jr., Managing Member of Real Investments Associates, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company. otary Public My Commission Expires: )Irv. 'Spy Zp ps- 7 WITNESS the following signature and seal: GRANTOR: Party of the Second Part BRUCE B. GALLUP NON -MARITAL TRUST B l .L .. (SEAL) Wanda K. Gallup, Trustee STATE OF FLORIDA y CITY/COUNTY OF �1�L� , to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of February 2004 by Wanda K. Gallup, Trustee of the Bruce B. Gallup Non -Marital Trust. L My Commission Expires: 1p 01 ,Ymw� MICHELE KDWoryAsusn. Notary Public - s Commission a �rf,�; ;; Bonded By Nation PREPARED BY: 0.12 S i i S. BOURDON, M AHERN & LEVY, R.C. �To ary Publ' t 8 WITNESS the following signature and seal: GRANTOR: Party of the Second Part MUNDEN FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company By: SEAL) Evely ''Munden, Member r STATE OF- CITY/GE) NT-Y OF \i -� i - J2 F� , to -wit: p-,arch The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of FebrLt 2004 by Evelyn Munden, Member of the Munden Family Partnership, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company. My Commission Expires: 5 /31/61 PREPARED BY: 010 SYKES. BOURDON, Oil APRN & IEvy. P.C. r Notary Public 9 WITNESS the following signatures and seals: GRANTOR: Party of the Third Part Christop er J. Keylor (SEAL) (; a�lyn Keyl?ar STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of May 2004 by Christopher J. Keylor and Carlyn Keylor, husband and wife. IMy Commission Expires: 11-30-d-W 4 PREPARED BY: OW SYKES. BOURDON, MR AHERN & LEVY, P.C. Notary Public 10 EXHIBIT "A' Parcels 1 through 4 ALL THOSE certain lots or parcels designated as Lots A, B, C and D on a plat entitled "Subdivision of Property of Seaboard Associates, Deed Book 1181, at Page 70, Princess Anne Borough, Virginia Beach, Virginia", which plat is duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Map Book 167, at Page 14. Less and except that portion of Lot D containing 365 Sq. Ft./0.008 acres taken by the City of Virginia Beach by Certificate of Take recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 2829, at Page 1062 and as shown on plat recorded in Map Book 190, at Page 31. GPIN: 2404-60-2926 2404-61-0162 2404-51-8226 2404-51-6345 Parcel 5 ALL THAT certain parcel designated as "50' Road Easement (to be reserved for Ingress - Egress)" on a certain plat and survey thereof made by Hassell & Folkes, Surveyors and Engineers on June 16, 1970 entitled, "Subdivision of Property owned by James E. & Pattie D. Brickhouse, Seaboard Magisterial District, Virginia Beach, Virginia", which plat is duly recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Map Book 84, at Page 30. Less and except the northernmost 15 feet which is described as follows: Beginning at a point along the western right of way line of Seaboard Road at its intersection with the northern property line of the "50' Road Easement", thence South 33° 06' 45" West 694.06 feet to a point; thence South 56° 33' 15" East 15 feet to a point; thence North 33' 06' 45" East 691.88 feet to a point along the western right of way line of Seaboard Road; thence along the right of way of Seaboard Road North 48' 32' West 15.16 feet to the point of beginning. GPIN: 2404-50-7609 Parcel 6 All that certain strip, piece or parcel of land located in the Princess Anne District of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, being a portion of that certain lot designated "2 3.719 Acres" on that plat entitled, "SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY OWNED BY JAMES E. & PATTIE BRICKHOUSE", dated June 16, 1970, prepared by Hassell and Follies and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, PREPARED BY: in Map Book 84, at Page 30 (hereinafter "The Subdivision Plat"). Said strip of land is more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point at the intersection of the IMA14&LEVROURDON, western right of way line of Seaboard Road and the southern boundary line of a parcel � t�41�N & LEVY. P.C. designated "50' ROAD EASEMENT' on The Subdivision Plat, which point represents the 11 PREPARED BY: QI3 SYKES. BOURDON. dIM FERN & LEVY, P.C. iorthernmost corner of lot "2 3.719 Acres" as depicted on The Subdivision Plat; thence South 481 32' East along the right of way line of Seaboard Road 15.16 feet to a point; ;hence turning South 33' 06' 45" West, 684.51 feet to a point; thence North 56' 53' 15" Nest, 15 feet to a point; thence North 33' 06' 45" East, 686.71 feet to the point of )eginning. SPIN: 2404-50-8567 (Part of) ,ONDREZONE/REALINVESTMENTSASSOCIATES/PROFFER5 REV.5/24/04 WA N. APPOINTMENTS BICYCLE and TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINORITY BUSINESS COUNCIL PARKS and RECREATION COMMISSION REVIEW AND ALLOCATION COMMITTEE (COG) SOCIAL SERVICES BOARD TOWING ADVISORY BOARD VIRGINIA BEACH PERFORMING ARTS THEATRE ADVISORY COMMITTEE O. UNFINISHED BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS Consider regular Sessions of City Council scheduled for November 2, 2004, "Election Day". 2 z OF OUR NA,'t%o RUTH HODGES SMITH, MMC CITY CLERK PHONE (757) 427-4303 • FAX (757) 426-SM Honorable Mayor Members of City Council City of Virgiriia Beach 7 October 2004 The 2004 Presidential Election is scheduled for November 2, 2004. CITY HALL • BLDG. 1, STE. 261 2401 COURTHOUSE DRIVE VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23456-9005 Since the first meeting of City Council in November is scheduled for the Second, this is to ascertain your pleasure in ample time to make any necessary adjustments.. Should you decide to reschedule or cancel, we will need to publicize the action for City Staff to be preparing their documents in accordance with your schedule and the citizens who may have or will plan to speak to City Council on the "open mike"policy. There may be other items which require meeting advertising deadlines and may be effected by any change in schedule. This is placed on your Agenda for October 12, 2004, to provide that consideration on the part of our governing body. Respectfully, cc: City Manager Ruth Hodges Smith, MMC City Attorney Planning Director Management Services Director Q. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS v O I M B L C E S L DATE: October 5, 2004 D C M R C A W I D J L A N R H N I PAGE: 2 1 E Y O A D D E M U L W Z N N D O E I E S O AGENDA E E E A O R V D V O O ITEM # SUBJECT MOTION VOTE L R S N X F E T A N D 4 Ordinance to AMEND § 17-3 of ADOPTED, BY 10-0 Y A Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y ADD- City Code to increase membership of CONSENT ON THE LIBRARY BOARD K APPOINTMENTS BICYCLE/TRAILS ADVISORY RESCHEDULED B Y C O N S E N S U S COMMITTEE APPOINTED: MINORITY BUSINESS COUNCIL Dr. Tim Miller 10-0 Y A Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Daniel Pearsall 2 yr terms PARKS and RECREATION COMMISSION RESCHEDULED B Y C O N S E N S E S REVIEW AND ALLOCATION RESCHEDULED B Y C O N S E N S E S COMMITTEE (COG) SOCIAL SERVICES BOARD RESCHEDULED B Y C O N S E N S E S TOWING ADVISORY BOARD RESCHEDULED B Y C O N S E N S E S L/MM ADJOURNMENT 6:38 PM PUBLIC COMMENTS Non Agenda Items Seven Speakers 6:3 8 PM — 7:00 PM CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS V O 1 M B L C E S L DATE: October 5, 2004 D C M R N R C H A N W I I D J L A E Y O A D D E M U L W PAGE: 1 1 Z N N D O E I E S O E E E A O R V D V O O AGENDA ITEM # SUBJECT MOTION VOTE L R S N X F E T A N D I BRIEFINGS: A PERFORMING ARTS THEATRE Marcy Sims, Director, Department of Libraries B LOCAL ROAD PROJECTS and FUNDING Dean Block, Director, Department of Public Works 10-0 Y A Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y II/IIU CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION CERTIFIED IVNNI- E F-1 MINUTES APPROVED 10-0 Y A Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y INFORMAL AND FORMAL SESSIONS G-1 MAYOR'S PRESENTATION GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS Patricia A. ASSOC (GFOA) AWARD Phillips, Director, Department of Finance ADDED PUBLIC HEARING ON FY 06 Operating Budget and CIP 4 Speakers H/I/ Ordinance to AMEND § 2-224.9 of City ADOPTED, AS 10-0 Y A Y Y Y Y Y Y T Y Y J-1 Code to increase membership of AMENDED, BY MINORITY BUSINESS CONSENT 2 Ordinances to ACCEPT/APPROPRIATE ADOPTED, BY 10-0 Y A Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y grant from the U.S. Depart of Justice (COPS)/ CONSENT U.S. Depart of Transportation to Police: a. $405,686 radios b. $15,000/City's $3,750 re DUI c. $12,000/City's $3,000 re seat belt usage 3 Ordinance to AUTHORIZE/DIRECT Deed ADOPTED, BY 9-1 Y A Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Of Release/Exchange for ARP easement CONSENT release of reserved site in exchange of another for John W. and Mary E. Freeman, Jr. on Fitztown Road (DISTRICT 7 — PRINCESS ANNE)