HomeMy WebLinkAboutJANUARY 25, 2005 AGENDA
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
ACOMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME@
CITY COUNCIL
MA YOR MEYERA E OBERNDORF, At-Lar!!e
VICE MAYOR LOUIS R. JONES, Bayside - District 4
HARRY E. DIEZEL Kempsville - District 2
ROBERT M. DYER, CentelO'ille - District I
REBA S. McCLANAN, Rose Hall - District 3
RICHARD A. MADDOX, Beach - District 6
JIM REEVE, Princess Anne - District 7
PETER W SCHMIDT, At-Large
RON A. VILLANUEVA, At-Large
ROSEMARY WILSON, At-Large
JAMES L. WOOD, Lynnhaven -District 5
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
CITY MANAGER - JAMES K. SPORE
GTYATTORNEY- LESUEL.L~LEY
CiTY CLERK - RUTH HODGES SMITH, MMC
25 January 2005
1.
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS
A.
Stumpy Lake Management Contract Options
Cindy Curtis, Director, Parks and Recreation
B.
AICUZ Task Force Recommendations
Robert Scott, Director, Planning
*
CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS
II,
REVIEW OF AGENDA ITEMS
III.
INFORMAL SESSION
A.
CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf
B.
ROLLCALLOFCITYCOUNC~
c.
RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
CITY HALL BUILDING
2401 COURTHOUSE DRIVE
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456-8005
PHONE:(757) 427-4303
FAX (757) 426-5669
E- MAIL: Crycncl@vbgov.cOIn
- Conference Room -
2:30 PM
- Conference Room -
4:00 PM
IV. FORMAL SESSION
F.
G.
H.
1.
1.
6:00 PM
A.
CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf
B.
INVOCATION:
Steve Christenson, Senior Chaplain
Virginia Beach Correctional Center
c.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
D.
ELECTRONIC ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNC~
E.
CERTIFICA TION OF CLOSED SESSION
MINUTES
1. INFORMAL AND FORMAL SESSIONS
January 11,2005
AGENDA FOR FORMAL SESSION
PUBLIC HEARING
1.
Portable Storage Container Fee
PUBLIC COMMENT
1.
Briefing--Rudee Inlet Jetty Extension
Dean Block, Director, Public Works
2.
Public Comment--Rudee Inlet Infrastructure
CONSENT AGENDA
K.
ORDINAN CES/RESOL UTIO NS
1.
Ordinance to AMEND Chapter 7 of the City Code re:
a. § 7-59-.4 ADDED re riding of wheeled devices or vehicles in Town Center
b. §7-59.5 AMENDED re "exemptions"
2.
Ordinance to APPROPRIATE $225,000 from the General Fund balance and AUTHORIZE
the City Manager to enter into a financial-sponsor agreement for the 2005 Nationwide PGA
TOURIVirginia Beach Open (Sponsored by Councilman Harry E. Diezel)
3.
Resolution SUPPORTING the Governor's prioritization of funding re the BUS RAPID
TRANSIT (BRT) and REQUEST the support of the City's General Assembly Delegation
for funding of such system. (Sponsored by Councilman Richard A. Maddox)
4.
Resolutions to REQUEST acceptance from the VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (VDOT) re Urban maintenance
a.
b.
Corrections to the road inventory re payments
Additional streets re payments
5.
Resolution re Joint Land Use Study (JLUS):
a. DECLINING to proceed with legislation seeking eminent domain authority over
property in accident potential zones
b. REQUESTING the General Assembly enact legislation concerning noise attenuation and
disclosure
c. DIRECTING further action by the City's Representatives on the Regional Joint Land
Use Study Policy Committee re the AICUZ Task Force's recommendations
L.
PLANNIN G
l. Ordinances re City Zoning Ordinance (CZO):
a. AMEND § 232(b)(1) re height requirements for communication towers in all zoning
districts
b. AMEND and REORDAIN § III to define "portable storage container" and ADDING
§ 208 regulating the use and placement of these containers
RECOMMENDATION:
APPROV AL
2. Application for a VARIANCE in behalf of DORA SCOTT re §4.4(b) of the Subdivision
Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet all the requirements of the (CZO), at 2324
South Stowe Road
(DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE)
RECOMMENDATION:
APPRO V AL
3. Application of EXOUSIA INTERNATIONAL CHRISTIAN CENTER, INc. for a
Conditional Use Permit re establishing a church at 5049 Haygood Road
(DISTRICT 4 - BA YSIDE)
RECOMMENDATION:
APPRO V AL
4. Application of JEREMY W. MILLS tIa SOUTHSIDE ARCHERY for a Conditional Use
Permit re recreational facility for an indoor archery range and pro-shop at 2202 Commerce
Parkway (DISTRICT 6 - BEACH)
RECOMMENDATION:
APPRO V AL
5. Applications of HOME ASSOCIATES OF VIRGINIA, INc. at Diamond Springs Road and
Shurney Lane (DISTRICT 4 - BA YSIDE)
a.
Discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Diamond Springs Road
b.
Change of Zoning from R-IO Residential District to Conditional A-12 AfJartment District
with a PD-H2 Planned Development Overlay
RECOMMENDATION:
APPROV AL
6. Applications of ABSOLUTE HOSPITALITY, INc. at Northhampton Boulevard and
Burton Station Road
(DISTRICT 4 - BA YSIDE):
a.
Change of Zonin:¿ District Classification from 0-2 Office District to Conditional 1-1
Light Industrial District to allow hotels
b.
Conditional Use Permit for a hoteVmotel
RECOMMENDATION:
APPROV AL
M.
N.
o.
P.
Agenda 1/25/05blb
www.vbgov.com
7. Applications of 7-ELEVEN, INc. at Dam Neck Road and South Rosemont Road
(DISTRICT 3 - ROSE HALL)
a.
Chan:¿e of Zoning District Classification from R-5D Residential Duplex District to
Conditional B-2 Communitv Business District to allow a convenience store with fuel
pumps.
b.
Conditional Use Permit for fuel sales
RECOMMENDATION STAFF:
RECOMMENDATION PLANNING:
DENIAL
APPROV AL
APPO INTMENTS
Bikeways and Trails Advisory Committee
Community Policy and Management Team - CSA At Risk
Development Authority
Francis Land House Board of Governors
Health Services Advisory Board
Historical Review Board
Investment Partnership Advisory Committee
Minority Business Council
Parks and Recreation Commission
Towing Advisory Board
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
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: Virginia Relay Center at
1-800-828-1120
* * * * * * * * * * *
PUBLIC NOTICE RE FEE FOR PORTABLE STORAGE CONTAINERS
On January 25, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, 2nd
Floor, City Hall Building, 2401 Courthouse .Drive, Virginia Beach, Vir-
ginia, the Virginia Beach City Council will hold a Public Hearing con-
cerning a proposed ordinance to amend and reordain Sections 111
and 208 of the City Zoning Ordinance, defining "portable storage con-
tainer" and regulating the use and placement of portable storage con-
tainers. Such ordinance, among other things, imposes a fee in the
amount of Fifteen Dollars ($15.00) for permits allowing portable stor-
age containers to be located on certain property, as set forth in the
ordinance. The establishment of such fee is authorized by Virginia
Code Section 15.2-2286 (A) (6). The ordinance and information con-
cerning the documentation and justification for the fee is available for
examination by the public in the Planning Department, Room 115,
2405 Courthouse Drive, Virginia Beach, Virginia.
r7N~~~
Ruth Hodges Smith, MMC
City Clerk
12499907
Beacon Jan. 2 & 9. 2005
-.,-"...--,,-
P.Ol
, " . .., "..:--"':'.; :,':',""'.~
TO: 427s626 '
,: ;.'" ,.:', J:~r(~!¿:;L;_!?;~H:;~~'
~.2"2
:J
]
!
City oî Virgirìia Beach
/!ICHAFIØ MACOCIX:
CQLIÞo'tIUWI- DtSnIIC'r 1- aEIQI
January 11, 2OQ~
PtØE:
!"AX:
œu.:
(7ISl) ~
(7S1) 'A2WdI
(7ðJ) eI/HIDDO
Vice-Mayor Louis Jones
hmes K. Spore, CitY Manager
vir¡inîa Buch Clty Council
2401 Courthouse Road
vitg:iDi;:\ Bc;äeh, Y A 23456
Re:
Rudu Inlet Jetty ExúmwlI
D~àr Vi,çc-Maygl' Jon¡; ) and Mr. Spore;:
As you :Lre :¡W9Te. the CUlrelit CIP Projeet for th~ R1oJdet 1nJ~ Infrastructw-e
Improvcment$ (CIP #8-006) ccmttmplatcs that the nom jetty i~ to be extended for 9. distanCe of
100 feet. A number of sport fishemeo> as well as other cìtizcns woo ~~Iarly use Rudee Inlet.
have conveyed t<:J me 1h~r wm;ems ove¡- the hea.lth and safety ð3pCÇtos of the RlUke Inlet
iD~1IuGtU1"C:, and have funbcr e~~d the belief that Ule City would realize significant
bend1ts by extending tho jetty an additiona] 100 fed:. In this ~garrL it ig my und~tmcling that
the additibtW 1 CO-foot ext~on of the j~ cotlld be a.cc;omplished at a cost of approximately
$900,000- The&~ citizens have mo statedtheù-deJir~ fl) b~ givm the oppørtgnìtyt Along with any
other interested persons. to ~prcss their view$ to the City Council at a. public hearing
As a r~ult of tlJ~ info!l'óå1 tommunications, a:nd given the faci: that the present C1P
Project presen~ a. umque Clpp( rtlmity to provide a. m~ - uee~d benefit at a very reasonable
cost. I would very much appreciate it if the public - bothpro:ponents of the jetty?$ extensio~ and
~ersons who may Qot necessarily share that view .. wcrc{O 'be allowed to state their \IÎ~ on the
matter at a p~blic 1æating. For that reason, I would request that the City Manager sch~ulc a
public hear:iD.g at the Council meeting of January Z5, 200$, and that the hearing be advertised in
the newspaper and on the City's web site. .
Thanking you for your cQO$jÓ~tiOIl of this re
1909 ATl.AIllì'IC AVé.N\Æ. VIRGINII. 6EACH. VA ~3451
- J/"'.-.
K.
0 RDINAN CESIRESO L UTI 0 NS
1.
Ordinance to AMEND Chapter 7 of the City Code re:
a. § 7-59-.4 ADDED re riding of wheeled devices or vehicles in Town Center
b. §7-59.5 AMENDED re "exemptions
2.
Ordinance to APPROPRIATE $225,000 from the General Fund balance and AUTHORIZE
the City Manager to enter into a financial-sponsor agreement for the 2005 Nationwide PGA
TOURIVirginia Beach Open (Sponsored by Councilman Harry E. Diezel)
3.
Resolution SUPPORTING the Governor's prioritization of funding re the BUS RAPID
TRANSIT (BRT) and REQUEST the support of the City's General Assembly Delegation
for funding of such system. (Sponsored by Councilman Richard A. Maddox)
4.
Resolutions to REQUEST acceptance from the VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (VDOT) re Urban maintenance
a.
b.
Corrections to the road inventory re payments
Additional streets re payments
5.
Resolution re Joint Land Use Study (JLUS):
a. DECLINING to proceed with legislation seeking eminent domain authority over
property in accident potential zones
b. REQUESTING the General Assembly enact legislation concerning noise attenuation and
disclosure
c. DIRECTING further action by the City's Representatives on the Regional Joint Land
Use Study Policy Committee re the AICUZ Task Force's recommendations
.;~~~.
r.:.z~~þ
<','6',".,"";¡-"':V
::t!. -.. .z',
t~::- }Jj
'-::'~~i'
~.;..,;:;..:::;;.:.~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM:
An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 7 of the City Code Pertaining to the
Riding of Wheeled Devices or Vehicles in Town Center
MEETING DATE: January 25, 2005
.
.
.
.
.
Background: The sidewalks and plazas of the Town Center, which were
designed as a high density, pedestrian-friendly environment, are
experiencing conflicts between pedestrians, skateboarders and bicyclists
and riders of other wheeled devices.
Since the completion of Phase II, the Town Center Project, which includes
the Town Center Plaza and sidewalks, has been vandalized and damaged
due to skateboarders and BMX bike riders using the Plaza and sidewalks to
do tricks and stunts. The plazas associated with future projects in Town
Center and the building adjacent thereto may suffer the same damage if no
action is taken to curtail these activities. The City Manager's Town Center
Advisory Board and City Staff have recommended this ordinance to the
City Manager and City Council for adoption.
Considerations: Amending Chapter 7 of the City Code will facilitate
enforcement and give clear guidance to citizens as to the operation of
these wheeled devices in the Town Center.
Public Information: Public information for this item will be handled through
the normal Council agenda process.
Recommendations: Approve the ordinance to amend Chapter 7 of the City
Code pertaining to the riding of wheeled devices or vehicles in Town
Center.
Attachments: Ordinance
Recommended Action: Approval of attached ordinance
Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Economic Development ~
City Manager: ~~ ìL . è:{jb(ì1¡,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 7 OF THE CITY
CODE PERTAINING TO RIDING WHEELED DEVICES OR
VEHICLES IN TOWN CENTER
SECTION ADDED: § 7-59.4
SECTION AMENDED: § 7-59.5
8
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
9
BEACH, VIRGINIA:
10
That Section 7-59.4 and 7-59.5 of the City Code are hereby amended and
11
reordained to read as follows:
12
ARTICLE III EQUIPMENT AND OPERATING RULES
13
. . . .
14
Section 7-59.4. Regulations pertaining to riding wheeled devices or
15
vehicles in Town Center.
16
.@}
It shall be unlawful for any person to ride on any sidewalk or plaza in the
17
Town Center an all-terrain vehicle bic cle electric ersonal assistive mobili device
18
electric power-assisted bicycle. electric-powered wheeled device. qas-powered wheeled
19
device. moped, roller blades, roller skates. scooters or skateboards. or a pedal-powered
20
vehicle that is muscle-powered or anv other muscle-powered device.
21
ßù
For purposes of this Section. the term "Town Center" means the area
22
bounded by and includinq the sidewalk on the south side of VirQinia Beach Boulevard.
23
the Norf.Q!.k Soutnern Corporation property line, the sidewalk on the east side of
24
Independence Boulevard, and the sidewalk on the west side of Constitution Drive.
25
COMMENT
26
27
New section 7-59.4 prohibits the riding of wheeled devices or vehicles in the Town Center
area as defined in subsection (b). The purpose for the regulation is (i) to protect the sidewalks
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
and plazas and the buildings adjacent thereto from damage caused by the operators of these
wheeled devices and vehicles; and (ii) to preserve the pedestrian-friendly quality of the area.
It should be noted that the riding of skateboards, roller blades and roller skates on streets
is prohibited by Section 21-464 of the City Code. However, electric and gas-powered wheeled
devices, bicycles, electric power-assisted bicycles, mopeds and low speed vehicles may be
operated on the City streets. Additionally, wheelchair and wheelchair conveyances for the
disabled, baby carriages and strollers are exempt under Section 7-59.5 below.
37
Section 7 59.4. 7-59.5. General provisions applicable to Section,! 7-59.1
38
through 7 59.4 7-59.5.
39
(a)
For purposes of sections 7.59.1 through 7.59.3 7-59.4, the term "scooter"
40
is a muscle-powered device having two (2) or more wheels, a platform on which the
41
rider stands, and a steering mechanism such as handlebars.
42
(b)
The provisions of sections 7-59.1 through 7 59.37-59.4 shall not be
43
applicable to the use of baby carriages, strollers or related modes of transportation of
44
infants, or the use of wheelchairs and wheelchair conveyances used for the
45
transportation of disabled persons or electric personal assistive mobility devices, electric
46
power-assisted bicycles or electric-powered seated scooters used for the transportation
47
of disabled persons for which either a (i) state-issued placard for the disabled has been
48
issued and is prominently displayed thereon or (ij) special decal has been issued by the
49
city pursuant to section 7-25 and is prominently displayed thereon.
50
(c)
The prohibitions set forth in sections 7-59.1 through 7 59.3 7-59.4 shall not
51
be applicable to city employees or city contractors on official business, or to employees
52
of any franchisee or permittee authorized to provide services at Town Center, or on the
53
beach, boardwalk and adjacent bicycle path, oceanfront parks and plazas, while on
54
duty, or when authorization is granted by the city manager or his designee for special
55
events.
2
55
56
57
58
59
60
COMMENT
Section 7-59.5 was former Section 7-49.4. Minor amendments reflect the renumbering
resulting from the addition of new Section 7-59.4.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this -
day of January, 2005.
61
62 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
~: ~. \\\\\\\~
66 Economic Developme~
67
68
69
70
71
72 H:\GG\Proposed\9471.ord.ver1.doc
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
"\
CA-9471
R-3
January 12, 2005
3
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: Appropriate $225,000, and authorize the City Manager to enter into a financial
Sponsorship Agreement between the City of Virginia Beach, PGA TOUR, INC., Tim
Miller Foundation, and TPC of Virginia Beach, LLC. for the Nationwide PGA
TOURNirginia Beach Open.
MEETING DATE: January 25, 2005
. Background: In 1999, the PGA Tour and a host organization, the Boys and Girls
Clubs of South Hampton Roads, entered into a five-year agreement (from 2000 through
2004) to host the BUY.COM Virginia Beach Open at TPC Virginia Beach. When the
agreement was signed, the City desired to be associated with that event through
financial sponsorship. In 2003, the Boys and Girls Clubs of South Hampton Roads, with
the permission of all parties, assigned their host organization responsibilities to the Tim
Miller Foundation, a Virginia non-profit, non-stock corporation. In 2003, the PGA TOUR
reached an agreement with Nationwide Insurance to replace BUY.COM as the tour
sponsor; thus, the name of the golf tournament is now the Nationwide PGA
TOURNirginia Beach Open. Over the five year contract period from 2000-2004, City
sponsorship levels were as follows: 2000 & 2001: $150,000 per year; 2002 & 2003:
$175,000 per year; and in 2004: $200,000.
. Considerations: The City desires to enter into a financial sponsorship of the
2005 Nationwide PGA TOURNirginia Beach Open in the amount of $225,000 that may
be renewed for four additional one-year terms at the sole discretion of the City, with
formal approval of the City Council.
. Public Information: Public Information will be handled through the normal
agenda process.
. Alternatives: The City could decline to enter into a financial sponsorship of the
Nationwide PGA TOURNirginia Beach Open.
. Recommendations: To appropriate $225,000 from the T.G.I.F. Fund Balance
for financial sponsorship of the 2005 Nationwide PGA TOURNirginia Beach Open, and
to authorize the City Manager to execute the 2005 Sponsorship Agreement, with up to
four additional one year terms, between the City of Virginia Beach, PGA TOUR, INC.,
Tim Miller Foundation and TPC of Virginia Beach, LLC.
.
Attachments: Ordinance
Summary of Terms
Recommended Action: Adopt ordinance and execute the 2005 Sponsorship Agreement.
Submitting Department/Agency:
Requested by Councilmember Harry Diezel
H:\PA\GG\ORDRES\ARF'S\Nationwide PGA Tour ARF.doc
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
REQUESTED BY COUNCILMEMBER HARRY DIEZEL
AN ORDINANCE TO APPROPRIATE $225,000
FROM FUND BALANCE IN THE TOURISM
GROWTH INVESTMENT FUND TO THE FY
2004-05 OPERATING BUDGET OF THE
CONVENTION AND VISITOR BUREAU TO
PROVIDE FINANCIAL SPONSORSHIP OF THE
2005 NATIONWIDE PGA TOUR/VIRIGNIA
BEACH OPEN
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
BEACH, VIRGINIA:
1.
That $225,000 of fund balance in the Tourism Growth
19
Investment Fund is hereby appropriated to the FY 2004-05 Operating
20
Budget of the Convention and Visitor Bureau for the purpose of
21
providing
financial
sponsorship
for
the
2005
Nationwide
PGA
22
TOUR/Virginia Beach Open.
23
2.
That estimated revenue in the FY 2004-05 Operating
24
Budget from appropriations of fund balance is hereby increased by
25
$225,000.
26
3.
That the City Manager is hereby authorized to enter
27
into a financial sponsorship agreement for the 2005 Nationwide
28
PGA/TOUR Virginia Beach Open.
29
30
31
32
33
34
Requires an affirmative vote by a majority of the members of City
Council.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia,
on the day of , 2005.
Approved As To Legal
Sufficiency:
CA9488
R2
January 19, 2005
H:\PA\GG\ORDRES\Nationwide PGA Tour ord.doc
Sponsorship Agreement Between the City of Virginia Beach,
PGATOUR, INC., Tim Miller Foundation and TPC of Virginia Beach, L.L.C.
For
Nationwide PGA TOUR! Virginia Beach Open
SUMMARY OF TERMS
Sponsor:
City of Virginia Beach
Host Organization:
Tim Miller Foundation, a Virginia non-profit, non stock corporation
Facility
Operator:
TPC of Virginia Beach, LLC., a Virginia limited liability company
Promoter:
PGA TOUR, INC.
Event:
Nationwide PGA TOUR! Virginia Beach Open to be held April 18-25, 2005
Premises:
Tournament Players Club of Virginia Beach golf facility
Term:
One year from the date of full execution of the Agreement. The Agreement
may be renewed for 4 additional one-year tenns at the sole option and
discretion of the City Council and with fonnal Council approval.
Responsibilities of City:
.
Will provide funds to Host Organization in the amount of $225,00 to sponsor and fund the
event payable as follows:
. $25,000 payable within 15 days of complete execution of the Agreement
. Balance of $200,000 within 60 days of the Event upon receipt of invoice
Responsibilities of Host Organization:
.
Will provide funding for the Event in the amount of $250,000 through sponsorships
Will provide 5 pro-am teams to the City in the official tournament pro-am
Will provide 1 sky-box or hospitality tent free of charge to the City
Will provide 250 "good any day" clubhouse badges to the City
.
.
.
Other Terms: Either party may tenninate the Agreement with 30 days prior notice for failure to cure
any default or breach. The Agreement is subj ect to the appropriation of sufficient funds by the City Council.
¡f~~~,'. IA~,:~'
~~L.- " ~~
:"'1.- "'2,)
~~....~.~
~'.Ÿ
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM:
Resolution Supporting the Governor's Prioritization of Funding
for the Bus Rapid Transit System in the City of Virginia Beach
and Requesting the Support of the City's General Assembly
Delegation for Funding of Such System
MEETING DATE: January 25,2005
.
Background:
The City Council has identified Bus Rapid Transit ("BRT") as a critical first step in
improving public transportation and traffic congestion in the City. The Governor
has prioritized the City's proposed BRT program by providing $10,000,000 in
funding in the second year of the proposed State biennial budget.
.
Considerations:
To have the Resort Area portion of the BRT system in place by the time the
City's new Convention Center opens in 2007, $10,000,000 additional funding is
necessary. This resolution expresses the gratitude of the City Council for the
funding proposed by the Governor, and it requests that the members of the City's
delegation to the General Assembly initiate and support an amendment to the
proposed budget that would provide the additional funding.
.
Public Information:
This item will be publicized as part of the City Council's agenda
.
Attachments:
Resolution
Recommended Action: N/A
Submitting Department/Agency: City Councilmember Richard Maddox
City Manager:
H:\P A \GG\ORDRES\ARF"s\brtarf.doc
REQUESTED BY COUNCILMEMBER RICHARD MADDOX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE GOVERNOR'S
PRIORITIZATION OF FUNDING FOR THE BUS RAPID
TRANSIT SYSTEM IN THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AND REQUESTING THE SUPPORT OF THE CITY'S
GENERAL ASSEMBLY DELEGATION FOR FUNDING OF
SUCH SYSTEM
8
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Virginia Beach has
9
identified Bus Rapid Transit ("BRT") as a critical first step in
10
improving
public
transportation
and
traffic
congestion,
11
particularly in,
but not limited to,
the Oceanfront and Town
12
Center areas of the City; and
13
WHEREAS, the Governor's proposed budget provides that,
14
in the
second year
of the biennial budget,
the
Commonwealth
15
Transportation Board shall allocate $10,000,000 for a bus rapid
16
transit system in Virginia Beach; and
17
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to express its thanks
18
and support for the Governor's prioritization of funding for the
19
City's proposed BRT system; and
20
WHEREAS,
additional
funding is needed in the second
21
year of the current biennial budget in order to enable the City,
22
by the time the City's new Convention Center opens in 2007, to
23
commence operation of the initial Resort Area portion of the BRT
24
system, which system will eventually connect the Oceanfront with
25
the Town Center and additional destinations west of the Town
26
Center; and
27
foregoing reasons,
it
the
City
is
WHEREAS,
for the
28
Council's desire to request that Virginia Beach's delegation to
29
the General Assembly initiate and support an amendment to the
30
proposed budget that would provide an additional $10,000,000 of
31
BRT funding in the second year of the biennial budget, so as to
32
enable the City to begin purchasing buses; and
33
such an amendment would further support the
WHEREAS,
34
prioritization
in
his
this
project
given
by
the
Governor
35
proposed budget;
36
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE
37
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
38
39
1.
That the City Council hereby expresses its gratitude
40
and support for the Governor's prioritization of the City's BRT
41
project by including $10,000,000 of funding for the project in
42
of the proposed biennial budget,
and hereby
the
second year
43
requests the City's local General Assembly delegation to support
44
such funding proposal;
45
in order to enable the City to establish the
2.
That,
46
initial
City's
2007,
City
of
program
by
the
the
phase
BRT
47
Council requests that the City's local delegation to the General
48
Assembly seek an amendment to the proposed budget that would
2
49
provide an additional $10,000,000 in funding for the City's BRT
50
program in the second year of the biennial budget,
for a total
51
allocation of $20,000,000 in the second year of the biennial
52
budget; and
53
3.
That the City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a
54
certified copy of this resolution to each member of the City's
55
local delegation to the General Assembly.
56
57
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach,
58
Virginia, on the
day of
, 2005.
CA-9493
H:\GG\OrdRes\brt.res.doc
R-5
January 18, 2005
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
V )J~ 1/ /I!uJ
City Attorne~s Office
3
"-
tE)
~," .~fj
.'~ ~""
"-.- .. ~,,~~
CITY OF VíRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
~
ITEM: Resolutions re Acceptance of Streets for Urban Maintenance Payments
MEETING DATE: January 25,2005
.
.
.
.
.
.
Background:
The 1985 General Assembly established legislation requiring City Council
resolutions for all new streets to be submitted to the Virginia Department of
Transportation for Urban Maintenance payments and for all corrections to the road
inventory.
Considerations:
The first resolution requests the addition of 22.20 lane miles of new streets which
will be eligible for urban maintenance funds beginning July 1, 2005. The 22.20 lane
miles are classified as local/collector streets. At the present rate of $8,518 per lane
mile, the city will receive $189,099.60 per year based on the current VDOT
reimbursement rates.
The second resolution reflects a net decrease of .57 lane miles of local/collector
streets in the urban streets inventory. This decrease is the result of the
reconstruction of streets to add lanes and/or lengthen and the deletion of streets.
The 2.06 lane miles that are being deleted from the streets inventory at the present
rate of $8,518 per lane mile will result in a loss of $17,547.08. The 1.49 (due to
rounding purposes) lane miles that are being added/replaced to the streets
inventory will result in an increase of $12,691.82. The combined total for
local/collector streets in the urban streets inventory for additional lanes and/or
lengthened and deleted lanes is a net loss of $4,838.22 per year based on the
current VDOT reimbursement rates.
The city will net a total increase of $184,261.38 in revenue for urban maintenance
funding beginning July 1, 2005. A list of streets is attached.
Public Information: The item will be publicized as part of the Council's agenda
Alternatives: N/A
Recommendations: Approval
Attachments:
Resolutions (2)
Form U-1 (street inventory)
Recommended Action: Approval
5 ubm ¡tting Depa'h."tI Agency: Publ Ie Warks
City Manager: ~ ~ ~
I //-
H:\PA\GG\ORDRES\ARF's\VDOT MAINTENANCE art.doc
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO ACCEPT
CORRECTIONS TO THE ROAD INVENTORY FOR
URBAN MAINTENANCE PAYMENTS
WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation requires
7
City
Council
resolution
prior
accepting
corrections
or
to
a
8
deletions to the revised road inventory for urban maintenance
9
payments; and
WHEREAS,
City
personnel
have
reviewed
the
revised
road
11
inventory prepared by the Virginia Department of Transportation
12
and have determined that some inaccuracies exist; and
13
WHEREAS,
corrections
the
revised
road
inventory
have
to
14
been made as shown on Exhibit A (attached); resulting in a net
15
decrease of .57 lane miles, and
16
WHEREAS,
a representative from the Virginia Department of
17
Transportation has inspected and approved these corrections;
18
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
19
OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
20
That
the
City
Council
hereby
the
Virginia
requests
21
Department of Transportation to accept the corrections listed on
22
Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by reference, and to
23
begin paying urban maintenance payments to the City of Virginia
24
Beach based on the established rate.
25
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach,
26
Virginia, on the
day of January, 2005.
Approved as to Content:
City
i~a.~
epartm nt of Public ks
CA9465
January 18, 2005
R-2
H:\PA\GG\ORDRES\VDOT Corrections ord.doc
10
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO ACCEPT
ADDITIONAL STREETS FOR URBAN MAINTENANCE
PAYMENTS
WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation requires
8
a City Council resolution prior to accepting additional streets
9
for urban maintenance payments; and
WHEREAS, the 22.20 lane-miles of streets listed on Exhibit
A (attached) have been constructed in accordance with standards
12
established by the Virginia Department of Transportation; and
13
WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach has accepted and agreed
14
to maintain these streets; and
15
WHEREAS,
the
Virginia
Department
of
Transportation
has
16
inspected and approved these streets;
17
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
18
OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
19
That
the
City
Council
hereby
requests
the
Virginia
20
Department of Transportation to accept
the
streets
listed on
21
Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by reference, and to
22
begin paying urban maintenance payments to the City of Virginia
23
Beach based on the established rate.
24
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach,
25
Virginia, on the
day of January, 2005.
Approved as to Content:
f~ Q .im~~
Depart nt of Public s
Approved as to Legal
S7rJ¡;Y~,#~
City Attorney's Office
CA9490
January 18, 2005
R-2
H:\PA\GG\ORDRES\VDOT Additional Streets.doc
Form U.1
(Rev. 1-1-87)
URBAN DIVISION
VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
Code of Virginia
Page 1 of
New Street
LOCAL
MUNICIPALITY
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
B09
~------~ ~...- .-~~--- ....----- -- .--'------------ - --------.
STREET NAME TERMINI R/W PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES
ROUTE NUMBER FROM TO (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES
--_.---------~-- ..._, -. .~-- -~_...--_. .---- --~-- .-
REON CT E CUL-DE-SAC BEECHWALK DR 50 30 0.07 2 0.14
-----...---------.---- --~------_._---_.... -------.--" ._-_.._--------~- ---..----.-- ---. .._----" ----- - ,------ --. 0.381
PANDO RIA AV ELLIS AV W CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.19 2
------------- --~,_--~'----"'-' ------. ...--- ---- - ------------ ------ -- -----..-
PANDORIA CT END OF CUL-DE-SAC END OF CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.15 2 0.30
---------...---- --,------_. -------- --- -.- --_.._~ - -- -""----------'"
ROCKY RUN CT S CUL-DE-SAC ROCK CREEK LA VARIES 30 0.13 2 0.26
__nO ...----..--- ......---. ------.----...--------...---- - ---..------------..- ------- ---- ------- -- ----..--..---- - ..--- -.-- --.--.
BRITTINGHAM CT FERRY PT CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.08 2 0.16
--------------~----- -- --..-"----- f--------_..- - ------ ----.... ---..-
CAROTHERS AR TAYLOR RD CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.16 2 0.32
-.----.---- --'-'-----------"----" .--------- --- --.._------- --,--"------ f--_..--- .--- ---~ _n
CHABOT WY OAKTON MEWS S CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.10 2 0.20
---------------... ---~----_...----------' - ----------- - ---------- ---------.----- ---.. .. -.. --.... ----
CHISMAN CT E CUL-DE-SAC FERRY POINT RD 50 30 0.07 2 0.14
- -_..--" --------- ~..._---------'-----"- -_._....~------ --..------- - ._____mn ----------.. -.--- .__n--_-
OAKTON MEWS S CUL-DE-SAC TAYLOR RD 50 30 0.11 2 0.22
.--------- -..-.-----'---' -----------~ - --.. ----.--. - - ---.. -----..------- ---.-"--- ..-----.. ----
TAYLOR RD WHITEHURST AR CARTERET AR 50 30 0.43 2 0.86
---_.....------------ . .------------ -----------"""'----------'--- --..---....---...... - -------. ---------..----- ------- ----- -------- --___nn--- ------
THOMPSON WY OAKTON MEWS WHITEHURST LANDING RD 50 30 0,22 2 0.44
-----, .-
WHITEHURST AR TAYLOR RD TAYLOR RD 50 30 0.12 2 0.24
-~-- ----- --~_. ..-.. .~..
FUNC.
CLASS
(TPD USE
ONLY)
C04
----..---- --
C04
C05
C09
C09
C09
C09
C09
C09
C09
C09
.COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND MAP ATTACHE
SIGNED I. J}.~ ~13JOS
MUNICIPAL OFFICIA ~
SIGNED -
RESIDENT ENGINEER
-----------.
DATE
Submit to
Resident Engineer in Triplicate
CLASSIFIED
TPD ENGINEER
DATE
FormU-1
(Rev. 1-1-87)
URBAN DIVISION
VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
Code of Virginia
Page 2 of
New Street
LOCAL
MUNICIPALITY
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
C10
---------- -- ------
STREET NAME TERMINI RIW PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES
ROUTE NUMBER FROM TO (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES
~-- --------~- ------ _m--__- ~---- ~ -~-----------------
SAND PEBBLES DR INDIAN RIVER RD LAKE CHRISTOPHER DR 50 30 0.08 2 0.16
I
------,----- ---------------~---------- - --- --- ------ -- ------ ---~-- -- ---- ___m_---- I
SIMON CT ALBRIGHT DR CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30 0.06 2 0.12
---------- ------- -------- --~- ---------
WEBLIN FARM RD CUL-DE-SAC CUL-DE-SAC 50 29 0.28 2 0.56
------------------ ------ ------ ----- -- ------
ROLLINGWOOD AR CRESTHAVEN LA CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.16 2 0.32
----------------- ____m_m---n----- ---- ---- ---------- --- ------ ------ n___m___-
WAKEFIELD CT E CUL-DE-SAC WAKEFIELD DR 50 30 0.10 2 0.20
--- ----- ----------------------- ----______n--
DOCKSIDE CT SNUG HARBOR DR S CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.07 2 0.14
----~--- --~--------~------------------- - _--__n_- -n-------- n ,----- --------
PIERSIDE CT SNUG HARBOR DR CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.08 2 0,16
-----,------,- ------- ----- -- ----- ----- -------
RIVERSIDE CT RIVERSIDE DR CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.10 2 0.20
-- -- -- ----- ----------~ -------- ------------- ------ ----- -------
RIVERSIDE DR LYNNHAVEN PW CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.25 2 0.50
--------- ----------- _m_--- -------- ~-- ---------- - -----------
SNUG HARBOR DR INDEPENDENCE BL S RIVERSIDE DR 50 30 0.10 2 0.20
--------n----- -------------------~----------- n______m- ,---- ----- --_--un -n------------ _n______---------------
STACE CT WOODBRIDGE TL CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.04 2 0.08
-_n--- --
STACEYWOOD CT LITTLE NECK RD CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.13 2 0.26
--- ------
C10
FUNC.
CLASS
(TPD USE
ONLY)
---
------
----
------
------
-----
- -----
------
------------
---
------
D05
D09
E04
F09
F09
F09
F09
F09
F10
G05
.COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND MAP ATTACHE
SIGNED~-"'-'- AcJ- )h,,!oS'
MUNICIPAL ~~--~~
SIGNEQ
RESIDENT ENGINEER
--------
DATE
Submit to
Resident Engineer in Triplicate
CLASSIFIED BY. TPD ENGINEER
DATE
FormU-1
(Rev. 1-1-87)
URBAN DIVISION
VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
Code of Virginia
Page 3 of
New Street
LOCAL
MUNICIPALITY
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
G08
---..---- ------------------------------ ---- --- -------
STREET NAME TERMINI R/W PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES
ROUTE NUMBER FROM TO (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES
- -----~ --------~---- ----------- -- ----
SANDY SPRINGS CT FORESTER LA N CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.04 2 0.08
------ --- ------,------------------ ..-------- - ---,------- --- ------ ------------
SANDY SPRINGS LA FORRESTER LA S CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.09 2 0.18
--- -..-..-- ----- ------ -- --
RIVERSIDE CI RIVERSIDE DR CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0,04 2 0,08
----- ---'
COMPETITOR CT BUCKNER BL N CUL-DE-SAC 70 36 0.08 2 0.16
-------------------------------- --- ------- ------ ----,-- - ----- --- ------
HEFFINGTON DR NORTH LANDING RD CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.14 2 0.28
--- - ---- -- ---- -- - - ---- ------.. ----- ------- ----
ARDITO CT MAGIC HOLLOW BL CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.05 2 0.10
------------- _U- --- ----- -------- ------ ------ --- --- -- ------ - ---- --- - - ----- --------
BRACKEN CT SALISBURY DR CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.03 2 0.06
----- ------------------------ --------- ---_u--- -------
NICHOLSON CT SALISBURY DR CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.04 2 0,08
-- -- ---------- -- - -- --_..---- --------- -..--.. ------- ----
SALISBURY DR MAGIC HOLLOW BL N CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.23 2 0.46
--- ----- ------- -.. ---_u ------- ------- -----..-- -----
STURBRIDGE CT SALISBURY DR W CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0,04 2 0.08
---------- ----------------------------- -------------------"'---- - -------- --------- ------ - ------- -------
HOOF CT S CUL-DE-SAC STALLS WY 50 30 0.06 2 0.12
PURPOSE DR DAM NECK RD N CUL -DE-SAC 50 30 0.15 2 0.30
FUNG.
GLASS
(TPD USE
ONLY)
G08
G09
G10
G14
H09
HO9
HO9
H09
H09
H10
H10
.COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND MAP ATTACHE
SIGNED P..4, ~~ ¡h/pj
MUNICIPAL OFFICIA ~fTft~
SIGNED_~
RESIDENT ENGINEER DATE
-------
Submit to
Resident Engineer in Triplicate
CLASSIFIED
TPD ENGINEER
DATE
FormU-1
(Rev. 1-1-87)
URBAN DIVISION
VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
Code of Virginia
Page 4 of
New Street
LOCAL
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
MUNICIPALITY
H10
-~ --- --~~
STREET NAME TERMINI R1W PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES
ROUTE NUMBER FROM TO (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES
-~- ----- ---~--- -~-- --- - -- ----- -----
SADDLE CT S CUL-DE-SAC STALLS WY 50 30 0.06 2 0.12
-~--~-~----------------- - ----~---~U- - -~ -~--~------ ------ --oo -- _n_~__- _,__on ----------- ---..--- ..---------
TOTEM TL OCONEE AV CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.06 2 0.12
~-- ~--~--- ------ - - ------
AVENGER DR VIKING DR LYNNHAVEN PW 50 30 0.12 2 0.24
~-- ------- --~- ------- --- -~-- ---~------ -- ----_U~- -
ENGAGEMENT CT TAYLOR FARM RD N CUL-DE-SAC 60 40 0.09 2 0.18
--- --- - ~---~-- - -------- ---- --~--- - -------------- n~_--__- --- ----- ---~------ -~----- ----~----
SHIFLETT CT CHERIE DR CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.11 2 0.22
---- ----....--- -- ---- -------_.._~- n--' ----- -----
ENCOUNTER CT E CUL-DE-SAC TAYLOR FARM RD 60 40 0.09 2 0.18
~---- - ~-------~--- -~----~, -~-~~ -~---- ---------
SQUARE DANCE CT CHRISTOPHER FARMS DR W CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.11 2 0.22
- ------ ~----- --------------_u- -----~- ---------
CAMBERWELL CT S CUL-DE-SAC JUSTICE WALK LA 50 30 0.04 2 0.08
-- ---- ----~~-- --~-- ---- ------ ------
JUSTICE WALK LA NETTLE FORD WY HOLLAND RD (NB) 50 30 0.15 2 0.30
-~- - ----- -oo------- -- -------- _--__on ,-~-- -------------
NETTLEFORD WY S CUL-DE-SAC N CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.22 2 0.44
------~------ -----~--------- --,---------- ----- ,~---- -------- ..-- -- ,---~-- ---------
CATERPILLAR CT MAJEST LA N CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.06 2 0.12
-----
EGYPTIAN LA LEGENDARY DR EGYPTIAN LA 60 36 0.32 2 0.64
FUNG.
GLASS
(TPD USE
ONLY)
106
108
109
109
110
111
112
112
112
113
113
.COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND MAP ATTACHE
SIGNED L!r1..~~ L h 7 )p ~
MUNICIPAL OFFICI ~
SIGNED.
RESIDENT ENGINEER
-~------~
DATE
Submit to
Resident Engineer in Triplicate
CLASSIFIED BY-TPD ENGINEER
_~n--"-----
DATE
Form U-1
(Rev. 1-1-87)
URBAN DIVISION
VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
Code of Virginia
Page 5 of
New Street
LOCAL
MUNICIPALITY
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
113
--------- n ------~--- ~-- --- -,- -~ - ---
STREET NAME TERMINI R/W PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE FUNG.
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES GLASS
ROUTE NUMBER FROM TO (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES (TPD USE
ONLY)
------------ --- -, --------------..-______n-- ---- ------ ---______n'- ----
LEGENDARY DR SIGNATURE CI CADENCE WY 50 36 0.48 2 0-96
-_u_---~ --------- ----------- -- -,_..- __n~---------______n___--- ,----- n-------- ---- ----- ---,--- __n- - -______n - --______n
LOOKING GLASS CT MAJESTY LA N CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.06 2 0.12
- ------- -- ----- -------- ---- ----~- n_-~ - _____n-
MAATCT S CUL-DE-SAC EGYPTIAN LA 50 30 0.04 2 0.08
-~--- f------------~----- ----- ----- --------- -----
MAJESTY LA LEGENDARY DR W CUL-DE-SAC 50 36 0.22 2 0.44
--------------- --------------'- ---------------'- ----- - - - -------- - --- -----,--- - --------- ,---- -------- ,--- -- - -----
WONDERLAND CT E CUL-DE-SAC MAJESTY LA 50 30 0.09 2 0.18
------ --~--- -------- --- --- --------- -------- - - __.on --- -- ------- -,-----
TRAWLER CT CALYPSO LA CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.05 2 0.10
-- --------- ------... -------- _n__- --- _n_____'- ... -------_u_-- - ------
SEVEN KINGS RD TOWERBRIDGE LO TOWERBRIDGE La 70 36 0.46 2 0.92
- ------- ----- - ------------ ------ ------ ------ -------- --------- - -~-------
SOMERS BY LA TOWERBRIDGE LO TOWERBRIDGE LO 70 36 0.40 2 0.80
---------- ----- -------- - -- ------- ,___n_____n_- ----- ---_u_---- -------
ARKLOW RD CAPEL MANOR WY S CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.16 2 0.32
- -----~--------------'------~- -_..--- ~---- --------- - - ,___n_---- ---
CAPEL MANOR WY DULWICH PL DULWICH PL 50 30 0.52 2 1.04
----------------- ---,-~------- ----n---- --_u -______n__------------- __n_____n__,----__,___n_--~--------- ------______n___---- _____n- - -
CHILDERIC RD SEABOARD RD CAPEL MANOR RD 50 30 0.38 2 0.76
-- --------- ---- n ----------------- ---- ------ ------ .._~- ---
DULWICH PL ARKLOW RD CAPEL MANOR WY 50 30 0.19 2 0.38
---~---,-- ---- ----~-- --- -
113
113
113
113
J05
J11
J11
J12
J12
J12
J12
*COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND MAP ATTACHE
SIGNED_i~~ J ¡ 310£--
MUNICIPAL OFFICIA ~Ê
SIGNED
RESIDENT ENGINEER
----------
DATE
Submit to
Resident Engineer in Triplicate
CLASSIFIED BY.. TPD ENGINEER
DATE
FormU-1
(Rev. 1-1-87)
URBAN DIVISION
VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
Code of Virginia
Page 6 of
New Street
LOCAL
MUNICIPALITY
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
J12
----~~---- -~-~--~------ - ------- ----- _.---------------
STREET NAME TERMINI RfW PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES
ROUTE NUMBER FROM TO (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES
~-----~-----~--_. ~-~--- - ~------- ------- ----- ---_u_-
HAREWOOD CT CHILDERIC RD W CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.03 2 0.06
-_u~ -------- -- ---,,------~~--------------------------_....--._--_..._- - -~_.---,----- ------,------ ----- - u - ---- - -- ------ ,,----
OSTERL Y CT CAPEL MANOR WY S CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.04 2 0.08
~-- - -----.- --------~._~- ---- --._-~_.- --~-_. .-~- ---..------- ------~-- --~-,,--
SAGES CT CAPEL MANOR WY W CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.04 2 0.08
-- -------- -----..------------. ------ _._-----~-
SESSILE OAK CT CHILDERIC RD E CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.05 2 0.10
--_..._-_._--~---~- ~---~-~._~......_,-- ------------------ ---.----- ----..-.-- ----~- ...,--- -- ----
COUPLES CT S CUL-DE-SAC HERON RIDGE DR 50 24 0.28 2 0.56
--- ,------_. _._--~--- - .---------
HERON RIDGE DR W CUL-DE-SAC N CUL-DE-SAC 50 24 0.90 2 1.80
--...--------- ------, ,-~..._--------------------------- ----- -~--~- - ---- ------
HERON RIDGE LA SEABOARD RD HERON RIDGE DR 50 24 0.16 2 0.32
---~---~ -~--------_.-...- ------~- ,~------. ----- ----..--. --- ----
LYNX CT E CUL-DE-SAC HERON RIDGE DR 50 24 0.06 2 0.12
----~------- ,-- ----------~----~_... ------------- .._- ----~----------- ----------------
LYNX DR HERON RIDGE DR W CUL-DE-SAC 50 24 0.30 2 0.60
._--~,-------_.._-- - ------, -----~-- --------~~
RYAN CT S CUL-DE-SAC HERON RIDGE DR 50 24 0.08 2 0.16
~------ ---------~-----._---~ -------------- -.-- -~- ---..-- -~- ---- -..--- -
DISTRIBUTION DR SOUTHERN BL W CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.12 2 0.24
__m_-
BOX ELDER AR OLD DAM NECK RD N CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.17 2 0.34
.---
FUNC.
CLASS
(TPD USE
ONLY)
J12
J12
J12
J13
J13
J13
J13
J13
J13
L07
L10
*COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND MAP ATTACHE
SIGNED .ßN4,. ~ /trio 5
MUNI IPÃL OFFICIA OAT<
SIGNEQ
RESIDENT ENGINEER
DATE
Submit to
Resident Engineer in Triplicate
CLASSIFIED
TPD ENGINEER
DATE
Form U-1
(Rev. 1-1-87)
URBAN DIVISION
VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
Code of Virginia
Page 7 of
New Street
LOCAL
MUNICIPALITY
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
STREET NAME
TERMINI
---- ~_.,..--- ----~
RIW PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF
TO (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES
------- --~~ --------- ----- -,----
50 30 0.12 2
._------~- - .----_._,-,-- ---...----- -..----------.-------
ROUTE NUMBER
FROM
L11
TENNYSON CT
TENNYSON DR
CUL-DE-SAC
.COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND MAP ATTACHE
SIGNED MJ)~ ~fOS
MUNICIPAL OFFICIA A
SIGNED.
RESIDENT ENGINEER
LANE
MILES
0.24
FUNC.
CLASS
(TPD USE
ONLY)
Submit to
Resident Engineer in Triplicate
CLASSIFIED
DATE
TPD ENGINEER
DATE
Form U-1
(Rev. 1-1-87)
URBAN DIVISION
VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
Code of Virginia
Page 1 of
ADDITIONS/REPLACE DELETIONS
LOCAL
MUNICIPALITY
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
B09
_._~~ ~--- ---- _._-_._-~-- _._--~-- .._..__.~
STREET NAME TERMINI RIW PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES
ROUTE NUMBER FROM TO (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES
-_.~-_.- -~_.- ._---,-- - -.---....- - ---.----.
AMHERST CI AMHERST LA CUL-DE-SAC 30 0.04 2 0.08
-_.---,-------- - ---------------.-.- -------------.-.----,-- -------~----- ---_.._-----_...-,- -----..-- ------------
AMHERST LA AUBURN DR PROVIDENCE RD 36 0.22 2 0.44
~- ------------ -.-,--- ---.-.- ------ -_.~
SIMON ST ALBRIGHT DR SCHOOL PROPERTY 50 30 0.21 2 0.42
~-~------ -- ----. --- -- --------
BROAD MEADOWS BL NEWTOWN RD WESLEYAN DR 50 36 0.34 2 0.68
------~--- ---~----------- ------ .- - ------.-- ----...-" ------- - --.-----.-- ---.- --- -------- -.-
CYPRESS POINT BL WESLEYAN DR CLUB HEAD RD 60 35 0.40 2 0.80
-------- ------------ .._-~---------- -------- --.-----.-- ----. -- ------- -,
AYLESBURY DR S DEAD END BAKER RD 50 30 0,20 2 0.40
~---------------_.------ ------., ---- .--"'-------------- - ------------- --- ------- .-------
BIRCHRIDGE CT L YNNBROOK LD CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30 0.12 2 0.24
-------------- ----.-.,-------.- ---------.- -.--- ----- ----, ----,---
BRIANAV BROAD ST CLOVER ST 50 30 0.76 2 1.52
--.-- - -- ------------. .- -- n-_-_-- ~-_._----- ------ ---------- ------....---
AMISH CT PARLIAMENT DR E CUL-DE-SAC 100 0.03 2 0.06
---- ---.,... -----.-----.. _--n__---- _.__.,..~_._----_. ,.------ --, ------- -,----- -------
BRATTLEBORO AR BIRKS LA BIRKS LA 50. 30 0.29 2 0.58
~-------- ----- --------....--------- ----.--------- ,..-- --------.------- ------- -----..---.-
BARWOOD CT ARCHDALE DR CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.03 2 0.05
---,_. - ----~-----------_. ----- - - ----------- --~---
AMBERLEY FOREST RD LYNNHAVEN PW LYNNHAVEN PW 50 30 0.42 2 0.84
--- - - -~-------~-- _.,- -~--
FUNC.
CLASS
(TPD USE
ONLY)
B09
C10
D05
D05
D06
D06
D06
D07
E09
E11
F10
'COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND MAP ATTACHE
SIGNED _!lA..., ~~..L ~ P s- -
MUNICIPAL OFFICIA i5tr
SIGNEQ
RESIDENT ENGINEER
DATE
Submit to
Resident Engineer in Triplicate
CLASSIFIED BY. TPD ENGINEER
-----
DATE
FormU-1
(Rev. 1-1-87)
URBAN DIVISION
VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
Code of Virginia
Page 2 of
ADDITIONS/REPLACE DELETIONS
LOCAL
MUNICIPALITY
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
G10
--- -------------------- ------ --- ___on ----- --
STREET NAME TERMINI RlW PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES
ROUTE NUMBER FROM TO (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES
__d_""- -------------- ---,-----~----------------- -,----- -- ----- ----.. --------------------
STALLS WY N CUL-DE-SAC W CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.29 2 0.58
-----_..---,-----'- --,-_.._------ ---- --,_.._-- -- -_.._-,--------------------------- ----- ------------------ ---,--------------
ALLEGHANY LO CURRITUCK DR CURRITUCK DR 66 30 0.43 2 0.86
---~- ---_.._~-- ------,..-- -- ------ ,---------~
SABRE ST LYNNHAVEN PW L YNNHAVEN RD S 50 30 0.53 4 2.12
,--- --------- --------------- - ------- -- ----- _n_--- I
BARTOW PL HITESHEW PL WEBSTER PL 50. 30 0.07 2 0.14
--,----- ------ ---- -- - ---- ---- -- ------------------ ------------- -------- ------ _~_....__n -- n -- -------- ------ ------
AGECROFT RD S DEAD END EPPINGTON DR 50 30 0.78 2 1.56
______n___- ---- ------ -------, ------- ~----- --- - ----- ,---- ..-----_____-n--------"----
BREEZY PINES LA MANSION CROSS LA WINDY PINES BD 50, 30 0.04 2 0.08
-------------------- ---- u_------------~---_.._----"--- - ----------.. ------ ----------,- ------------
BODNAR LA LOWER GREENS DR DEAD END 50 30 0.06 2 0.12
-------_w -------- -- -- ___--_n n__-------- ____n ------------- -------- - - - ----- d___- --- --- ------- -------
AMERICUS AV BIRDNECK RD W DEAD END VAR 0.27 2 0.54
-------------- - ------------------- -- ------------ ..----------- ___non_u - n__------- --_......- -------- ------ __n
H13
------
FUNC.
CLASS
(TPD USE
ONLY)
w--_.._-,
---
~---
___d-
--- __--_n_--
------------
----
_n____-
108
K07
K11
K11
K12
L06
.COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND MAP ATTACHE
SIGNED A A, ,,- - ^..+ I? ft'.s
MUNI~-- ff~
SIGNEQ
RESIDENT ENGINEER
------- - ~
DATE
Submit to
Resident Engineer in Triplicate
CLASSIFIED
DATE
TPD ENGINEER
FormU-1
(Rev. 1-1-87)
URBAN DIVISION
VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
Code of Virginia
Page 1 of
DeletionlTo be replaced
LOCAL
MUNICIPALITY
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
B09
~---- --- ----- ---- -
STREET NAME TERMINI R/W PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES
ROUTE NUMBER FROM TO (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES
---- -~----~~-- ------------ --------------- ---------------- ----~-
AMHURST CIR AMHURST LA CUL-DE-SAC 30 0.04 2 0.08
-------~-~----------- _--____m--_- --~----~------ ---------- -------------- __n_------ -----~----- --------------
AMHURST LA 0.19 MS PROVIDENCE RD AUBURN DR 36 0.03 2 0,06
c------- ---~- -------- -- --~-- ---- ~--~-----------
AMHURST LA PROVIDENCE RD 0.19MS PROVIDENCE RD 36 0.19 2 0.38
~-- ------- -~-~------~---~---- ----- ------- ------- - -~---
SIMON ST RUEGER ST SIMON CT 50 30 0.19 2 0.38
----- ------- - --~ ~~----------- - -----------~-- ----oo-------------"--~ ----- ----- -- -------, -----
BROAD MEADOWS BL HENDERSON PL DEFORD RD 36 0.16 2 0.32
---~--, -- c-- --- -~--------------~ ----- -~---- --- ----
BROAD MEADOWS BVD 0.03MN DEFORD DR CLUBHEAD RD 60 35 0.42 2 0.84
f---- ---- --- --~- ------------ - -------- -~----- ------ u_-----,--------
BROAD MEADOWS BVD DEFORD RD 0.03MN DEFORD DR 24 0.03 2 0.06
----- -- --~--------~------- ---------- -,-------- ---------- --- ---,---,
BROAD MEADOWS BVD NEWTOWN RD HENDERSON PL 50 36 0.11 2 0.22
-- - ,---- -----~ ~-------------------- ------~---------- --~--------- --------- ~- ----- - ----oo--~-~---
AYLESBURY DR DAVIS WAY CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30 0.18 2 0.36
----------oo--- --------~------~---------oo------- --~---- _--___m--____------------- ----~---------------'--' ---------
BIRCHRIDE CT L YNBROOK LANDING CUL-DE-SAC 30 0.11 2 0.22
------------~- ---~----- ------------- ------------~----~------~- ------- -------~------------~- ----~------- ------ ---- ----~---
AMISH CT RT 165 CUL-DE-SAC 100 75 0.03 2 0.06
--
BRIAN AV WORDSWORTH LA BROAD ST 50. 24 0.80 2 1.60
FUNC.
CLASS
(TPD USE
ONLY)
----------
--~---
~--------
---~-------
-----------
------ ----
----~, -----
_noo__--_-
-----,---
-~--------- -
B09
B09
C10
D05
D05
D05
D05
D06
D06
D07
D07
ATTACHE
SIGNED.
RESIDENT ENGINEER
-----~-
DATE
Submit to
Resident Engineer in Triplicate
CLASSIFIED BY --~~--------------------~--
TPD ENGINEER DATE
Form U-1
(Rev. 1-1-87)
URBAN DIVISION
VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
Code of Virginia
Page 2 of
Deletionrro be replaced
LOCAL
MUNICIPALITY
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
D07
----------~---- -------- ---~
STREET NAME TERMINI RfW PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES
ROUTE NUMBER FROM TO (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES
~----- -- ---------------~--- - ----~- - ---~-- -----
BRIAN AVE EUCLID RD DEAD END 27 0.09 2 0.18 !
_..._--------~- -------------------------- ___~_m-------~-' - ------ - -- ---------- ---~.. ---- -~- ___~I
BATTLEBORO ARCH BIRKS LA BIRKS LA 50 30 0.29 2 0.58
---- ~~ ~~~---~~---~---~---- --~ ---"'- -----~- -----
BARNWOOD CT ARCH DALE DR CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.03 2 0.06
----------- ------ --- f---~---- -~- ~-- ----,- ---
AMBERLEY FOREST RD LOLLY LA LYNHAVEN PW 30 0.24 2 0.48
--------~--- -- ,----- ,------------------ --,----~~,--- -----~-- - ____d__- --- _____m__---'" ---
STALLS WY CUL-DE-SAC DEAD END 50 30 0.07 2 0.14
---~--~---- - ~- - "'+---~---------- --- ------ ------ -----
SABRE ST S. LYNN HAVEN RD 1150' E S. LYNNHAVEN RD 71 60 0.22 4 0.88
----- ----~-- -----~_____n_-- ----- -~-----,- --- -_u- ---- -------,- ..._---'
ALLEGHANY LOOP ALLEGHANY ST ALLEGHANY ST 66 30 0.43 2 0.86
----- -~---- ---~---- "'------ -- ---- -- u_- - -- "'---- -------~~-- ------- ------"'--~-"'-~--
BARTON PL WEBSTER PL HITESHEW PL 50 23 0.11 2 0.22
~ -~----- ---------------~-,~--------,---- --~-- ------ -~-
AGECROFT RD 320'S REDMILL BV DEAD END 50 31 0.14 2 0.28
------ _m- -"'----- ------------ -- --~- ---~~ ---...------ ----- ----'- ---
AGECROFT RD REDMILL BLVD EPPINGTON DR 50. 30 0.57 2 1.14
--~,----~' - __md____-------------- -"'----- ___~__n_------ ---- ----------------- --------- ---- ---- ----------
BREEZY PINE LA COUNTRY MANOR LA COUNTRY MANOR LA 50 30 0.04 2 0.08
BREEZY PINES LA MANSION CROSS LA .02MW KILBURTON PRIO 50 30 0.09 2 0.18
E09
FUNC.
CLASS
(TPD USE
ONLY)
----
----------
------
------
-----------
----------
------- -
-------
-------
-------------
--"'----
----- ---
~--
E11
F10
G10
H08
H13
K07
K11
K11
K11
K11
.COUNCIL RESOLUT.ION AND MAP ATTACHE
SIGNED ilL !b~ / ~ ~
MUNICIPAL OFFICIA W
SIGNED.
RESIDENT ENGINEER
-----------
DATE
Submit to
Resident Engineer in Triplicate
CLASSIFIED BY TPD ENGINEER--
DATE
FormU-1
(Rev. 1-1-87)
URBAN DIVISION
VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
Code' of Virginia
Page 3 of
DeletionfTo be replaced
LOCAL
MUNICIPALITY
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
K12
------~---~-- ~----------~--- ---- ----- - --_._-~. - -------
STREET NAME TERMINI RJW PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES
ROUTE NUMBER FROM TO (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES
-,-~------ ----- .----- ----- -------- -~-" -------..
BODNER CT LOWER GREENS DR CUL-DE-SAC 50 30 0.03 2 0.06
-------------- --------------_.-------------- ...------- -------- ~ _--___,n_--_- -- - -- n_- __n-_--- ------..---
AMERICUS AVE 0.02MW BIRDNECK CIR 0.09MW BIRDNECK CIR 16 0.07 2 0.14
-------,.._-- -- ______n__- ---- ----------
AMERICUS AVE 0.09MW BIRDNECK CIR 0.15MW BIRDNECK CIR 24 0.06 2 0.12
--~--- -.------- ______n_--- ------- -~---- ------ n- --~ ----------
AMERICUS AVE 0.15MW BIRDNECK CIR DEAD END 14 0.12 2 0.24
____n___--~ ----~..----- ---- ----------- -~-----_..----- ~.. --..--- --------- - ---------- --- - ------------ -
AMERICUS AVE BIRDNECK CIR 0.02MW BIRDNECK CIR 30 0.20 2 0.40
n_- -------_..- ____n_- ----- ----- __~_--n~- --~- ------------
L06
L06
L06
L06
.COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND MAP ATTACHE
SIGNED Alt. f'1uM...~ ¡1.3ßS-
MUNICIPAL OFFICIA 1Jf:J:-E
SIGNED.
RESIDENT ENGINEER
DATE
Submit to
Resident Engineer in Triplicate
CLASSIFIED BY TPD ENGINEER
- ~~------ -
DATE
FUNC.
CLASS
(TPD USE
ONLY)
URBAN DIVISION
VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
Code of Virginia
FormU-1
(Rev. 1-1-87)
DELETIONS
LOCAL
R1W
WIDTH
(FEET)
STREET NAME TERMINI
ROUTE NUMBER FROM TO
------~---_. --_u_- --.-. -.---- ----------..---.------- ----
C09 ALTON CT ALTON DR DEAD END
------- .--- ._____00_' --m.-.------.-----------,------n ----
H13 ALLEGHANY ST CURRITUCK DR PULASKI LO
..-------. _00____00___-- ___on - ..--------.- ---------_,.___00__-
111 BREEZY POINT CI 0.01E COUNTRY MANOR LA 0.02E COUNTRY MANOR LA
. ---.------ - I STEPHENS RD
K04 ALANTON ES CUL-DE-SAC
'COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND MAP ATTACHE
S IG N ED L ,{~i1:;'(J;yðÏ1--- i: i~ ~ -
Submit to
Resident Engineer in Triplicate
Page 1 of
MUNICIPALITY
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
PAVEMENT
WIDTH
(FEET)
--- -----_u.
50
50.
-----.--"--- .,
CENTER-
LINE
MILES
79
30
30
32
NUMBER
OF
LANES
.- on_--_m-
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.09
SIGNED_____~----- ---
RESIDENT ENGINEER
LANE
MILES
2
2
2
2
------'-- -
FUNC.
CLASS
(TPD USE
ONLY)
0.04
0.04
0.06
0.18
DATE
CLASSIFIED BY_____-----------
TPD ENGINEER DATE
FormU.1
(Rev- 1.1.87)
URBAN DIVISION
VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
Code of Virginia
Page 1 of
DELETIONS
URBAN COLLECTOR
-------------
STREET NAME
ROUTE NUMBER FROM
- u_-------- -- ---------------
K04 I ALANTON DR SPUR ALAN TON DR
MUNICIPALITY
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
TO
RIW I PAVEMENT I CENTER- I NUMBER I LANE FUNC-
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES CLASS
(FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES (TPD USE
ONLY)
- ----
16 I 0.87 I 2\ 1.74
TERMINI
WOODHOUSE RD N
'COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND MAP ATTACHE
SIGNED_)). A J\... --~, NL ~/b!?Js___-
MUNICI~-:~'L- ~iTf~
SIGNED______--
RESIDENT ENGINEER
----------
DATE
Submit to
Resident Engineer in Triplicate
CLASSIFIED
TPD ENGINEER
DATE
w
1
J&9!m!
- New Streets
- Streets
~
~
Street Additions
Reon Ct
()
City of Virginia Beach (~j\
Public Worl<slTechnlca I Services. GIS ~
!
J
I?
DO
\11 N'if:::>Nna
Q:PJ Cd eo g9 0
¡:::¡ 0
0 C D
g Coc:JC::f\ a Ö GO
B do cf
\11 SNMoa
G.:b Qf c::J qjJ ~ p:J c::J c::J
ß IJ ¿.
EJ
0
."
~ Q
~.:<
g 0
~;;;
n ...
š(Q
~. 2:
- I\)
&' tXJ
~. CD
'" I\)
In 0
(;¡::T
CiS
."",
Dam
:s:J
Q.Q.
00
;;
0>
.....<
..
fM,:~
~ ..Ii
C/)
;t
CD
CD
.....
~
2:
~
-.
0
::s
tn
~! I:
CD ::e ~
Cii sa Q.
ëÐ
CD
-
f/I
-
"c-~-'-
~.z
'"
z.~
~
= Po o'll Hlnr4 0 \
~~ 'ð6 'ð6 I; \
q-p-~-~ if \
---'--"-,-_c_.,--_:__:~ \
c::¡:}
c::J
0
S\'IÙ~I'IEY LA
O\þ,!lltONO SPRINGS RD
(/
-
Q)
I~(/
c -
... 3: Q)
- Q) ~
~ í i
CI)
t:
,0
,¡::
'-
~
q:
.....
CI)
e
èi)
...
0
c
=
a::
~
u
&
f/)
.l: (5
0 '
IV g¡
( ) ,II
II) ¡
IV f/)
1= ~
'ë> ~
:> ~
..... ~
0 -
~~
õ ,g
æ
D
()
11
W*E
S
Leaend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Chisman Ct
Brittingham Ct
City of Virginia Beach
Public WorkslTechnlcal SeIVIces - GIS
0
W*E
S
Leaend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Carothers Ar
Chabot Wy
Taylor Rd
Thompson Wy
Whitehurst Ar
Catton Mw
City of Virginia Beach IfJ1J\
Public Worl<slTechnlcal Services - GIS ~
."
g (')
i~
- 0
~<
g cã"
~ ~!:
õi II)
co tD
< ( )
¡¡ II)
':' g.
GJ
¡¡;
<>
~
<>
fA CI)
m ;t
= (tj
Q. (þ
"'0 .....
(þ :b
g: 8:
CD ;::;:
en Õ'
C ==
... en
~! I:
CD E ==
Cñ Y2 Q,
ã!
CD
-
UI
-
,,-,,-".
~.z
'"
~
5!: ()
If -.
:E.:<'
0 0
~$;
5~.
g 2.
- III
&'m
:< ( )
[ III
, 0
G)::T
ëi5
~ I
thth CD
-.-. a I
33:þ !QZ CD
00 Q. ... CD CD
::s::s Q; m:e =
nth ;:t iñ ~ Q,
;.;. PI"..... ãJ
0 CD
:= -
fn en
~.z
'"
0
'0
c::
~ C')
~~
~ ~
~ cã'
~ :j'
¡¡; Dj'
~ aJ
ñ- ( )
.. III
~ 0
G) ::T
(ñ
:e C/)
CD ;t
0" CD
= CD
== ......
." :Þ
SÞ Q.
3-. g;
~
.....
:::a 0
Co ::s
(I)
~
(>
1;$
~ ! II;
(1) =E :s
(jj ~ Q.
ëD
(1)
-
(f
-- '
~.z
m
"'D
~ Q
~~
g 0
~ <:
~ =r
SIC
S :2:
ëij D)
~ IJJ
¡O¡" CD
.. D)
CII 0
Q::T
iñ
~ (I)
0 =;t
= CD
-. CD
::s .....
ca :b
~
08:
0 ....
Q, ::!'.
:þ 0
'"'I: ==
(I)
t:;:¡
c;:J
f::::¡
~ ¡ ~:
~ en =
VI - CL
@
CD
-
VI
~.z
m
\1
<po
~
New Streets
Streets
Legend
D r[J
Street Additions
Wakefield Ct
~
o()
[k¡ûb
[:]
Q
[!J ~ ærll::
[:]~~
ow .-f1
giJ~ (Ø ° L;J ~
m:!:
(¡J---~~ t1
City of Virginia Beach
Public Workslfechnlcal Services - GIS "~
W*E
S
I
W_E
S
Leaend
New Streets
-- Streets
Street Additions
Amberly Forest Rd
Riverside Ct
Riverside Ci
Riverside Dr
Pierside Ct
Dockside Ct
Snug Harbor Rd
City of Virginia Beach ~
PublicWorksifechnicalServices-GIS ~
~
51:0
If -.
:¡:~
5! 0
~~
[~.
Ii! 2.
- II)
real
<! CD
!2" II)
':' g.
G)
ëñ
en
;;t
en I
;r .-...
n :b
CD Q.
(') sa:
". ....:.
-.
g
(n
8
I(
CD
ø z
œ ~ CD
m. en =
(I)-a.
œ
C1)
-
(I)
:E
",'
O<:úC:J
I?
U
~
1)
<>0 / t?
c!Jj
o!} (] l)
(j l~o;Á. 0
{} J-~
V / !}
!/ /{J ()
~ /. .. ~ 00
$ ¿}> / I/;
./
y> 0 t;::} t:¿ DJ
D ()
Q:¡
jJ (')
./
DO.!]
r~ tJ,'. ,:
fJi;! f
5 !)
CIJ
£
.ð Ð
t::¡:¡
dJ
0
"'-'-" I ~
-"
~
°0
0
\J
W.E
S
Legend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Staceywood Ct
() 0
[1 MONTGOMERY
U "---
DC]
[)
City of Virginia Beach
Public WorkslTechnlcal Services- GIS "~,)'f
Leaend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Sandy Springs La
Sandy Springs Ct
City of Virginia Beach
Public Worksffechnlcal Services - GIS
s
W.E
S
(
\
í,
Leaend
- New Streets
--- Streets
Street Additions
Competitor Ct
MICwJ:\- LA aOUVE DR
City of Virginia Beach
PublicWorksfTechnical Services - GIS
~
~ (.'O~~~Q~
' ~- ~1'
(D
8
[)
0<:::::'
0
D
'!J
g (')
~~
~ 0
~S;
scë3
š 2:
¡¡¡ 11)
.. OJ
:< CD
~ 11)
':' g.
G')
¡¡;
&Jf}!JØ1
CJ
%
CD
:R
:=
(Q
S'
:=
C
~
CI)
~
CI
C1)
.....
~
a
"'"
~
o'
::s
en
ø
ß
C;:D
7P
$a
ø
CD
-
fII
¡ ~:
en :=
- Q.
ø
CD
-
fII
ü
G
~
(¡
ill
13
'ü[;J
= £:j]
\?~
ð[]
ç;p 0 ö
.0.
~
[3
tJ
GJ
01:1 €>NION'VI H.J.1:ION
r::o
CJ c::1J
c
CJ
0
ø
& EJ
D
co
IJ
{}
c
-.-
0
E:J
c:J
0
<80
Cf I:!.
:¡;
".
Q
~ 0
m
Cf
ç:
~.z
'"
(jLJOLJ
DodD
W"E
S
Leaend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Nicholson Ct
Bracken Ct
Sturbridge Ct
Ardito Ct
Salisbury Dr
City of Virginia Beach
Public Wor1<sfTechnlcal ServiceS - GIS
W.E
S
Ie'
\"
Leaend
-
New Streets
-- Streets
~
RIDERS LA
~
~ø
~,", " ,':':,'.::' g
~
Street Additions
Stalls Wy
Hoof Ct
Saddle Ct
--~
~---- ------
---- ---------
~~ '
----- -s> ill
f? ,i} t:'t
h DlÞþ, .oø ÔQ
~
City of Virginia Beach
Public WorksITechnical Services - GIS
I
0
\)
"
~ (?
~if
<:,,<$
()<> Q
~ 'b
/),.
o()
<::3
~
0
ø
()
0
<::>
~
~
£0
~ -.
~~
it 2.
¡;¡<
§ cã'
~ 2:
- m
rem
:2 CD
~ m
~ g.
G)
õi
(I)
;;t
CD
~
....
:b
2:
"".
=:!'
O'
==
(n
I(
(JJ z CD
i ~ CD
!R. en ~
en - Q.
¡
CD
-
en
"D
c
...
-g
en
CD
C
...
~
ø
<>
f1 <)
<)
<:,
~
'b'þ
~
~
(;)
()
~
<:>
~
()
~
~<>
~
~ .. <>
a
0
0
~
'"
;>
;tJD
~o
~
^V\f) ~
0 0
\\\ 0
'\
r:::::>
I::> NOlillH
0, ~
D~
o~D. R
~M ~
~~ 1
~ ,).+~
o~o ~ C==:J
1f
C::J
"2
!lo
~ -.
:\Öi.:<'
0 0
~~
5" eg.
g 2.
- DI
&1m
:i! CD
: DI
.g.
C)
ëñ
e
(I)
;:t
CD
r} 1\
S' :t.
38:
-f ~
- -.
()
::s
en
'<
I(
CD
ø z
CD ~ CD
~ en :=
( ) - Co
CD
( )
-
( )
'"
;¡
<".',.;7
¿:>
~ a \ D~ c:;:¡
0 0 c:::::J
0 0
qj < 0 0
0 I' ßD ~ 0
0 \ [ \ ~ r¡ r: #¡
«::)
0 'l=:J I I I if
ßO C?
0
G
(J
~
0
lJ
,
¡j
I
SABRE sli~1
0
C:\c:d \ 0 0 0
r 1 0 n
CJ
AVENGER DR
0
(I
"
w
s
~
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Sabre St
Avenger Dr
I)
City of Virginia Beach ~ ' ....
Public WorkslTechnlcal SelVlces. GIS'!.
~
W.E
S
Legend
New Streets
--- Streets
Street Additions
'~
"'" <)
~~~~
-,
'Q
Engagement Ct
Encounter Ct
P~'::!::.~~~E CT
C't tV' .. B h ~~;~~
I Y 0 Irglma eac . .;..&:t~
Public Worl<slTechnical Services - GIS ~J
LYNNHAVEN MALL La
W*E
S
\~ .
Legend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Shiflett Ct
City of Virginia Beach
Public WorkSITechnical Services - GIS
E3J
0
c:¡,
""
t;;°~
Q
W.E
S
Legend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Square Dance Ct
City of Virginia Beach
Public Workslrechnlcal Services. GIS
/)
t::J
~
PRINCESS ANNE RD
~ø
<>
0
'~
l)
t:::J °o()
c;{}
()
()
<>
O;:¡
¡/ìo
<>
\\
Dc.
W_E
S
Legend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Camberwell Ct
Justice Wal k La
Nettleford Wy
City of Virginia Beach
Public WortœlTechnlcal SeIVIces- GIS
\)
.",
"
C\p
{;J
0
o'
C^DEN~E Wy
W.E
S
í
\'
",
Leaend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Caterpillar Ct
Egyptian La
Legendary Dr
Looking Glass Ct
Maat Ct
Majesty La
Wonderland Ct
City of Virginia Beach
Public Workslfechnlcal Services - GIS
w.u
s
\
¡
",
Legend
New Streets
---- Streets
Street Additions
Trawler Ct
[;J
City of Virginia Beach
Public WorkslTechnical Services - GIS "=
C', 'I" .
Leaend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Somersby La
Seven Kings Rd
EDMENTON DR ......
~
a
z
~
UJ
(9
z
2
City of Virginia Beach
Public Worl<sfTechnical Services - GIS J
\
\ ,
(]
D
OJ]
Q
0
HAREWOOD C'f
'\,D
t:;:] 0
C:J
e:;
0
c 0
W.E
S
Leaend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Childeric Rd
Harewood Ct
Sessile Oak Ct
Arklow Rd
Dulwich PI
Caple Manor Wy
Sages Ct
Osterly Ct
City of Virginia Beach ~
Public Wor1<slTechnical SeNices - GiS ~
aD
~;!
"0
Q
(')
0
~
r-
III
(I)
(')
-I
Ç)
0
t:J
()
!;) CJ
(!/J
0
Ð
D ~
'6P
r::::r:J
W.E
S
LeQend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Heron Ridge Dr
Heron Ridge La
Lynx Dr
Lynx Ct
Ryan Ct
Couples Ct
City of Virginia Beach
Public Worksfrechnical Services - GIS
Q¡ 0 r::J
[!, 0 Q U- g
Do O°!!¡ ~
iJ a t:J ~éjI 5:
"'0 r-
iJlO CO ~
>0 'b-in
",0
ð 0
0
0
t::r
SOUTHERN BL
~
..
..a
D
\)ß
CI
0
",~<; """':',
~
~
;:::
~
I \I
!!J
0
D
r;:J
D ß 0
0
0 0
Ii
m
>
J;;!, 0
0
é) ~ /JIiI~. a If
g
CJ
a
0
11
Ü I? C
000 DC:¡
LORETTA LA
D D
r==J c=J LJ
~-_nJD 01 ';
SOLmtERN BL
G 0
DD d]
(/)
DoDD W~
JENSEN DR C?o I
. Dm
-
[b fU1flf1f1JlfL,
Q CJ~
JACKSON ST
CJ
CJ
<>
..
w-
s
Legend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Distribution Dr
City of Virginia Beach ¡'!!I!\
Public Worl<slTechnlcal Services - GIS ~
."
~ (")
õ -,
~.:t
~ 0
~ -
;¡¡ <
~ cã'
~' 2:
- Q
~ OJ
õ' en
.. Q
~ g.
G1
¡¡¡
C/)
"""
OJ èti
~ ~
m :b
is: Q.
~ 9:
..... ::!"
,. O'
... :::
(I)
8":'.'
~ ".
~ ~ I:
s. (J) ::J
tII - C.
ëÞ
CD
-
tII
~.z
'"
w
Legend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Tennyson Ct
City of Virginia Beach #f\.
PublIcWotksITechnlcaISe/Vlces-GIS r~
,.
"
""J I)
--....
Leaend
New Streets
-- Streets
Street Additions
Amherst Ci
Amherst La
City of Virginia Beach"
Public WorkslTechnical Services - GIS
W.E
S
\
\,
WESLEYAN DR
c:::J c:::J c:=J
Broad Meadows By
[] ~í ~
JUSTIN CT
NEWTOWN RD
Iù 0
'"
C
õ
w
Leaend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Broad Meadows By
City of Virginia Beach tŒ~
Public WotkslTechnlcal Services - GIS ~
<>
~
<:>
CI
~
Q)
.....
.S
,f
,
l!!
~
(J
WESlEYAN DR
(;¡
w
s
Leaend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Cypress Point By
City of Virginia Beach
Public WorksfTechnlcal Services - GIS
I~O
q,
W.E
S
\
i
Legend
New Streets
-- Streets
e;f
Street Additions
Ayelsbury Dr
~
City of Virginia Beach
Public Worksrrechnical Services - GIS
W+E
S
Leaend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Birchridge Ct
--'~
GJJij![} f!jJ[j l1.a
".,.
City of Virginia Beach
Public Worksffechnical SelVices - GIS
Cia
co
[)
~
!Z()
15" -.
:::~
0 0
~<
~ -.
".ü3
~ 2:
- III
~tD
i ::
,0
C)':r
¡¡;
CI)
;t
(D
CD
....
:b
8:
....
C!'
O'
=
en
r ~ (
CD
CD
-
UI
III
..
¡r
::s
»
<
~.z
'"
;p
~9.
~~
Q 0
~ -
::¡ <
~ cã.
" -.
~. 2.
- III
W a:J
~. CD
" III
" 0
':;T
G1
¡¡¡
CI)
=::t
:Þ ~
3 .....
-. :b
~ 2:
0 =t
.. ......
C)
:::
en
~! I:
(\) == ::s
$. (J) Co
(f -
ã!
$.
(f
YODER LA
B
<:)
~
0 (J
~<::>\
()
w
s
Legend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Brattleboro Ar
City of Virginia Beach flj\
Public WorI<sfTechnlcal Servlces- GIS ~
(J
t::¡
0
<?
<>
c
~ ~
~
<>
<J
13
\~
'"
9r7
o~
t:l .~ ()
;p
sr ()
1) -.
~~
!2 0
~ <
~ cã'
~' 2:
¡¡; II)
~ CD
15' CD
co II)
" ()
GJ ::T
ëij
m
~
~
0
c.
0
....
8>
CI)
;t
CÐ
CÞ
......
~
8:
"",
::!"
0'
==
(I)
II
CÞ
CfJ Z
~ ( ) CÞ
m :E :=
Cii ~ C.
ã!
( )
-
en
>,-.-
~.z
'"
0
ø
ø
~
(I
\)
(j
ø
"
ø
0
\) 0
0
ø \)
~
08P
"
ø
0
\>
~~'."M""
W$E
S
0
\,
Leaend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Alleghany Loop
City of Virginia Beach "",
Public Workslfechnical Services - GIS
~/)
~ø
'D
c ß
¡:::¡E3
0
o[Z
s:G
t;J éD c:;J õ l:J
¡;¡ j2
~ ß m
0 rD
~ 0 oþ'
~ d1J ~c
MICHIGAN AP (J {}
0
['] ITJ [!!J 0 EÞ- c "?
0 0 0 crill
'iJ [] r;:¡ E?
~ 0
mdll2l:'
OHIO~ ,IT] a dJ
D' ED I (,'
ß ill I olj
ruB [J 0
0 CEJ
0 G!J
ŒJo
CJ r::J
c::JO 1:3
d1~
lfJ,', ',',';; I 0,','
;;ul7J
D ~L)
m
!< 11',"
z "
z'
ç:O
00
[JI:':]
1{;1 0
r. G ,0
u ~coA~ ~
(I [1
cf' r;:¡D p,
0 ŒJ ¡¡¡LU
c:J 0
[3 0 Œ2J ~[j []
=~ 2
CII 0 [Jib OGJ
0
~[JJ
~ŒJ
>GÐ
~og
VIRGINIA BtACH BL
CI r;]
0
O, D
EJ ~
] A ~..n'1.D
00 HIi>es~W ~ ø L;J LJ CI EJ <:>
, -- r:\
0 p-¡""" A r=1~ Û
{j¡ LclJ O ]J Q ""'" '"
q] C ,', " ~ 0
0 ' ,. ,.[] iR~ OJ m
C] Q.'\,' c
~ ;;u'
01 " " ~ [[ R'l," r:r-.., ' ;J! 0','"
i:3 ~ (kI L:J ~ '
D
0 Q:::I q .0,
(2J D BaB'" ~ L:J 'ill
;¡¡] 0, [J U 0, i¡jI
LJ[3c:J°OD EffOOCTI 00 tf1
INDIANA AV
[J Ç]~[JClr;:J I I] D 0 Qj!J CI
0 'th
OlD IJ G' 1.J
e:Pr:pg d riP [j £:) 0 ~ .
NEWYORKAV, 0
0 DOc;::] Q G:JÇJ 'd a
0 III
[] DB a 0
EJ IJ [] " D [] C}¡t:!J
OCEANA BL
0
l3
0 0
0
m a
~ 0 0
OJ
r c
zE1lJ EO
D
0 CJ
IIJ
[)
0
'D
@
0
CJ
ê
0
a
m
~{]
a
m;L~
[J
[]
[]
[J CJ
[] œ
[J ŒJ
[J Q]
0 cflJ
;:,;;:,:'!;;;;~!,;;\~;;;';;"::~';;;"';;;:;'!\\:'I'I blR
I;¡'(~~ Fi,~(;\'%~
1'/ ',\-1":, ,,'\.:~>~il F,i,:;fUi~
1",):-,::;,~:,:;}'1"I;" :'II!¡,",(f;'i¡?'),;';;:',,'~/1
I 'ë,; ",',,:;'(.',1
In¡~:~:1 ~
Ô c:![5}
SOUTHERN BL
[(J
ITI
DE[!
1';\1,';-\';;:,;181
u
IíÈill
ITJD
II
D I []
C\
~I 0
~
O~I 0
0
'"'
cr
eo Do
tt
DC
~o
<E!J D
ID I ß7
~ Ç'J.
EJ,.~.. 1m L1
æJ ~
c:J
~' I-
.,.,° ~,,;",;
" Ii:iì:J
Jil 0'
0
\1
D
DID
SD (fI 0 Q TIJ I ~
1tiI""."\ß]",, °,,' ,',I!1J,¡;P,'
00
°L~ [J 0
Glbo
0, ~ f3' gU3
' I3J e NO
0 C3 OOEi 0
CI 5:0
Do
[J
I:',:,:,>',
LJ
b
:ill_\}-
[?
þ
~
IV,'
aLd.
¿¡=
Leaend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Bartow PI
Q
City of Virginia Beach
Public WorksfTechnical Services - GIS
W_E
S
¡
1
:",
W*E
S
Leaend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Agecroft Rd
City of Virginia Beach .~
Public WorksfTechnical SelVices - GIS ~
D
3D
~] g
t:!JJ
CJ
[f1D
~
(j
[j
W.B
S
\,
\,.
Leaend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Breezy Pines La
City of Virginia Beach
Public Worksffechnical Services - GIS ,\,_.
W.E
S
~\r:Jê.SS ~~~~ ~
~~\\'
<;¡
0
æ ËtJ
0
0
B (\
\òq?
Ð
ø~
BODNAR LA
~
Leaend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Bodnar La
#7",\
'X
~~D
~
"
City of Virginia Beach
Public WorksIfechnlcal SelVlces. GIS
... .""""'" RO N ... ~-
~_._-----
BLOOM P'!t_-
--~
-~!!~~!!~~.!~~~.cH Bt C
~ ---
()
0
264
Q
C1
a
a
{]
AMERICUS A V
-
D
CJD3
0
1] 00 L3
~ "'""1J m....."""""," ~ n G-
C3~,',";'s~~.',.scLÞ" ',',"""Œi="""',"",',a~í]'.'. ",' []~ LI coo"~ 'b.[},
- -0 'UJ " -J , -J 'I.J
a '¡~, d 5
!ZJ" B '" ~ . B 0
~(~~I !hØD~~ ODDoDJløooo
~. ~ ~-~
:'" J:Q:§JE,:O """'. D.', 1JC1~ fJ 0 [] ':'-",. [] 0
~ o~ " ~.
- ~'" D ~
CI
D
L1
----I
.,g. ŒI
0
D
ö
= ~ n 9?
có ~ /ß fJ~Q W .,~'
(rffi
0
0
r£]
CI
LeQend
New Streets
Streets
Street Additions
Americus A v
City of Virginia Beach
Public Workslfechnical Services - GIS
ê!:
~
%> <3
<Y
0 <>
«~
~
<\/
....,
en Q) .-
ã) !:þ 0
~ ~ ...
J - en .... r::: Ie
c en ã) CI) 0 .-
Q) 3: II) Q) .....,- 0
CD "-...., c..
Q) z êi5 ",J! >.
..J I .c.J Q) N
.::: Q CD
§ !
Q m
<8
en
.ciS
0 .
1\1 B
Q ~
m ðJ
1\1 -
'2 B
'êJ :ê
.- ~
~~
0 0
~3:
C3 ~
æ
~
€>
t:;J
D
Cl
l) <:)
,
~
~~. ~t ' ~&,~i
<>' :r."1 - h'
<5: .. W.
<,~\~ . ::>
'I., 1o...:"'!!IIIF /. .;.Þ
~~.<;9'
~~~
'"
\..
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
~
Resolution re AICUZ Task Force Recommendations/Joint Land
Use Study (JLUS)
MEETING DATE: January 25,2005
ITEM:
.
Background: On December 9, 2003, the City Council established the Task
Force on Land Use in Air Installations Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ) (the "Task
Force"). In January 2005, the Task Force adopted, in a document entitled "JLUS
Outcomes - Suggested Discussion Points," twenty-four (24) recommendations to
the City Council concerning issues relating to community planning and jet noise.
Such recommendations are not self-executing, but instead are subject to further
consideration and action by the City Council.
On January 18, 2005, the City Council held a public hearing concerning the
recommendations. The great majority of public commentary was in opposition to
Item 11 of the recommendations, which pertained to legislation in the General
Assembly that would authorize the City to acquire, by eminent domain, property
in accident potential zones. Such legislation had been introduced prior to the
public hearing because of General Assembly deadlines for the pre-filing of
legislation, and with the understanding between the City and the patron of the
legislation that the legislation would be withdrawn if the City Council did not
support it. Other legislation, which concerns noise attenuation and disclosure
requirements for residential property transaction in noise zones or accident
potential zones, was not opposed by any member of the public at the public
hearing, and has been introduced in the General Assembly.
.
Considerations: The Resolution:
(1 )
Declares that the City Council will not give further consideration to Item 11
(eminent domain authority) and will not seek legislation concerning such
authority over property in accident potential zones;
(2)
Requests the General Assembly to enact the above-referenced legislation
concerning noise attenuation and disclosure in residential real estate
transactions; and
(3)
Authorizes the City's representatives on the Regional Joint Land Use
Study Policy Committee to go forward with the conceptual principles
embodied in the AICUZ Task Force's recommendations, with the
exception of Item 11, and work with the Navy and other regional
participants on the Committee to prepare a draft Joint Land Use Study for
further consideration and action by the City Council.
.
Public Information: No special form of advertising or other public notice is
necessary.
.
Recommendations: Adoption of the resolution.
.
Attachments: Resolution
Recommended Action: Approval
Submitting Department/Agency:
City Manager:
~t:-, bo~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
A RESOLUTION DECLINING TO PROCEED WITH
LEGISLATION SEEKING EMINENT DOMAIN AUTHORITY
OVER PROPERTY IN ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES,
REQUESTING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO ENACT
LEGISLATION CONCERNING NOISE ATTENUATION AND
DISCLOSURE, AND DIRECTING FURTHER ACTION BY
THE CITY'S REPRESENTATIVES ON THE REGIONAL
JOINT LAND USE STUDY POLICY COMMITTEE
CONCERNING THE AICUZ TASK FORCE'S
RECOMMENDATIONS
12
WHEREAS,
on
December
9,
2003,
the
City
Council
13
established the Task Force on Land Use in Air Installations
14
Compatible Use Zones
(the "AICUZ Task Force")
and charged
15
it with the duties,
among others,
to participate in the
16
Joint Land Use Study, a cooperative regional effort with the
17
Cities of Chesapeake and Norfolk and the United States Navy
18
to
develop
a
series
of
policies
relating
to
community
19
planning and jet noise; and
20
WHEREAS, on January 6, 2004, the City Council adopted
21
Resolution No. 3031, entitled "A Resolution Committing the
22
City
to
Particpate
in
a
Joint
Land Use
Study with
the
23
Office
of
Economic
Adjustment
of
the
Department
of
24
Defense," which Resolution provided,
among
other
things,
25
that "subject to the City Council's review and approval of
26
the report and recommendations contained in the Study, the
27
City shall implement such recommendations of the Study as
28
are appropriate"; and
29
WHEREAS,
the
City
Council
has
designated
three
30
representatives
of
the
City
to
serve
as
members
of
the
31
Regional Joint Land Use Study Policy Committee (the ~Policy
32
Committee"),
which
consists
of
representatives
of
the
33
Cities of Chesapeake,
Norfolk and Virginia Beach and the
34
United States Navy; and
35
WHEREAS,
on
January
3,
2005,
the
AICUZ
Task
Force
36
adopted, in a document entitled ~JLUS Outcomes - Suggested
37
Discussion Points," twenty-four (24) recommendations to the
38
City
Council
concerning
issues
relating
to
community
39
planning and jet noise; and
40
WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach scheduled and held
41
a public hearing on January
18,
2005,
to
receive public
42
comment on the aforesaid recommendation; and
43
WHEREAS,
because
of
the
procedural
requirements
44
governing the introduction of legislation in the Virginia
45
General Assembly,
certain proposed legislation
concerning
46
noise attenuation, disclosure requirements for the sale and
47
rental
of
residential
real
estate
and
eminent
domain
48
authority was pre-filed with the General Assembly prior to
49
the January 18, 2005 public hearing, with the understanding
50
between
its
patron
and
the
City
that
enactment
of
the
2
51
legislation would be sought only with the approval of the
52
City Council; and
53
WHEREAS,
the
patron
of
the
legislation
concerning
54
eminent domain has withdrawn the legislation from further
55
consideration by the General Assembly; and
56
WHEREAS,
at the
aforesaid public hearing,
the
great
57
majority
of
public
commentary
concerning
the
twenty-four
58
(24)
recommendations
was
overwhelmingly
in
opposition
to
59
Item 11, which states:
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
Subj ect to the establishment of: a)
Funding source from combined local, state
and federal sources, b) Eminent Domain
authority, c) An appropriate relocation
plan; and d) A reuse plan consistent with
the OPNAV guidelines, condemnation of
houses in APZ-1 systematically over time;
and
69
WHEREAS,
no
public
comments
were
received
in
70
opposition
the
legislative
proposals
concerning
noise
71
attenuation
(Item 22)
and disclosure requirements for the
72
sale and rental of residential real estate (Item 21);
73
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
74
THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
75
FIRST:
76
That the City Council hereby declines to adopt or give
77
further consideration to Item 11 of the AICUZ Task Force's
3
78
recommendations, and declares that it will not seek further
79
legislation authorizing it to exercise the power of eminent
80
domain over properties located in Accident Potential Zones;
81
SECOND:
82
That the City Council hereby requests that the General
83
Assembly enact Senate Bill No.
1160,
authorizing the City
84
to adopt and enforce building regulations relating to the
85
provision or installation of acoustical treatment measures
86
applicable
to
certain
nonresidential
buildings
and
87
structures;
Senate Bill No.
1161,
requiring the owner of
88
residential real property in a the City to provide written
89
disclosure to a purchaser that the property is located in a
90
noise
zone
or
an
accident
potential
zone,
or
both;
and
91
Senate
Bill
No.
1162,
requiring
the
landlord
of
rental
92
property
in
the
City
to
provide
written
disclosure
to
93
tenants that the property is
located in a noise
zone or
94
accident potential zone, or both;
95
THIRD:
96
That
the
City's
representatives
on
the
Policy
97
Committee
are
hereby
authorized
to
go
forward
with
the
98
conceptual principles embodied in the recommendations
set
99
forth in the "JLUS Outcomes - Suggested Discussion Points,"
100
with the exception of Item 11,
and work with the Navy and
4
101
other regional participants on the Committee to prepare a
102
draft Joint Land Use Study for further consideration and
103
action by the City Council.
104
105
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia
106
Beach on the
day of
, 2005.
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
CA-9494
OID\Land USE\ordres\AICUZTFrecommend.res
January 20, 2005
R-1
Approved as to Legal Sufficiency:
11J~ M.ß!uJ
City Attorney's Office
5
L.
PLANNIN G
1. Ordinances re City Zoning Ordinance (CZO):
a. AMEND § 232(b)( 1) re height requirements for communication towers in all zoning
districts
b. AMEND and REORDAIN § 111 define "portable storage container" and ADDING
§ 208 regulating the use and placement of these containers
2. Application for a VARIANCE in behalf of DORA SCOTT re §4.4(b) of the Subdivision
Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet all the requirements of the (CZO), at 2324
South Stowe Road
(DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE)
3. Application of EXOUSIA INTERNATIONAL CHRISTIAN CENTER, INC. for a
Conditional Use Permit re establishing a church at 5049 Haygood Road
(DISTRICT 4 - BA YSIDE)
4. Application of JEREMY W. MILLS tIa SOUTHSIDE ARCHERY for a Conditional Use
Permit re recreational facility for an indoor archery range and pro-shop at 2202 Commerce
Parkway (DISTRICT 6 - BEACH)
5. Applications of HOME ASSOCIATES OF VIRGINIA, INc. at Diamond Springs Road and
Shumey Lane (DISTRICT 4 - BA YSIDE)
a.
Discontinuance. closure and abandonment of a portion of Diamond Springs Road
b.
Change of Zoning from R-IO Residential District to Conditional A-12 AfJartment District
with a PD-H2 Planned Development Overlay
4. Applications of ABSOLUTE HOSPITALITY, INc. at Northhampton Boulevard and Burton
Station Road
(DISTRICT 4 - BA YSIDE):
a.
Chanf!e of Zoning District Classification from 0-2 Office District to Conditional 1-1
Light Industrial District to allow hotels
b.
Conditional Use Permit for a hotel/motel
5. Applications of7-ELEVEN, INC. at Dam Neck Road and South Rosemont Road
(D1STRICT 3 - ROSE HALL)
a.
Chanf!e of Zoning District Classification from R-5D Residential Duplex District to
Conditional B-2 Communitv Business District to allow a convenience store with fuel
pumps.
b.
Conditional Use Permit for fuel sales
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: City of Virginia Beach - Amendment to Section 232 of the City Zoning
Ordinance (Height of Communication Towers)
MEETING DATE: January 25, 2005
.
Background:
An Ordinance to amend Section 232 of the City Zoning Ordinance pertaining to
height requirements for communication towers in all zoning districts.
.
Considerations:
Section 232(b)(1) of the City Zoning Ordinance requires that "no tower may be
located closer than two hundred (200) feet from an existing residential structure,
regardless of the district in which the structure is located." This setback distance
is required regardless of the height of the tower. This amendment was
recommended by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Incorporating the height of the
tower into the distance of the tower from residential structures is logical in making
sure that the tower does not hit the structure should it fall.
The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda since the
amendment provides for a more logical method of determining the setback of a
tower from adjacent residential structures, Staff recommended approval, and
there was no opposition.
.
Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 11-0 to
approve this proposed amendment.
.
Attachments:
Staff Review
Ordinance
Planning Commission Minutes
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval
Submitting Departmentl Agency: Planning Department ~
City Manager:~ It. 'ð-ß ~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
Agenda Item #14
December 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.
14.
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
An Ordinance to amend Section 232 of the City Zoning Ordinance pertaining to height
requirements for communications towers in all zoning districts.
Section 232(b)(1) of the City Zoning Ordinance requires that "no tower may be located
closer than two hundred (200) feet from an existing residential structure, regardless of
the district in which the structure is located." This setback distance is required
regardless of the height of the tower.
This amendment was recommended by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Incorporating the
height of the tower into the distance of the tower from residential structures is logical in
making sure that the tower does not hit the structure should it fall.
Staff recommends approval of the amendment.
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
Agenda Item 14
Page 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 232 OF THE CITY
ZONING ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO HEIGHT
REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMUNICATIONS TOWERS IN ALL
ZONING DISTRICTS
SECTION AMENDED: §232
WHEREAS, the public necessity, convenience, general welfare
7
and good zoning practice so require;
8
9
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
BEACH, VIRGINIA:
10
That
Section 232
of
the City Zoning Ordinance
is hereby
11
amended and reordained, to read as follows:
12
13
ARTICLE 2. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES APPLICABLE TO
ALL DISTRICTS.
14
Sec. 232.
Communication towers.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
(a)
Application.
Each application for a conditional use permit
for
communication
shall
include
the
following
tower
a
information in addition to the general information required by
this ordinance:
. . . .
(b)
Special Requirements.
(1)
If the tower does not meet or exceed the structural
requirements
"Structural
in
EIA222-D,
set
out
as
Standards for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting
Structures" ,
published
Electronic
Industries
by
the
Association, effective June 1, 1987, as the same may from
time to time be amended or revised,
then the minimum
27
setback requirement from the base of the tower to any
28
property line abutting a residential use or district
29
shall be equal to one hundred and ten (110) percent of
30
the height of the tower. A report certifying that these
31
structural requirements will be met must be submitted
32
with the conditional use permit application. Where the
33
tower meets the structural criteria outlined above, the
34
minimum side and rear yard setback shall be fifty (50)
35
feet
residential
and
and
agricultural
districts
in
36
twenty-five
(25 )
districts.
feet
in
all
other
37
Additionally, no tower may be located closer th.::m t~:o
38
hundred
(200)
an
feet
existing
residential
from to
39
structure than a distance equal to one hundred twenty-
40
five per cent (125%) of the total height of the tower and
41
all antennae, regardless of the district in which the
42
structure is located.
43
COMMENT
44
45
46
This amendment was recommended by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Incorporating the height
of the tower into the distance of the tower from residential structures is logical in making sure that the
tower does not hit the structure should it fall.
47
48
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia, on this ---- day of , 2005.
CA-9304
OID/ordres/proposed/czo232ord.doc
R2 .
October 19, 2004
APPROVED AS TO CONTENTS:
~ 1I.~.o~
Plann~epartrnent
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
~~~
Clty Attorne~s Office
Item #14
City of Virginia Beach
An Ordinance to amend Section 232 of the City Zoning Ordinance
pertaining to height requirements for communications towers
in all zoning districts
December 8, 2004
CONSENT
William Din: Our next item is Item #14. This is the City of Virginia Beach. This is an
Ordinance to amend Section 232 of the City Zoning Ordinance pertaining to the height
requirements for communications towers in all zoning districts. Ms. Lasley.
Karen Lasley: Thank you. This amendment is on your agenda at the request of the
Board of Zoning Appeals. Currently, any communication 'tower that is constructed in the
City has to have a separation of at least 200 feet from any residential home. The main
purpose of that requirement was to provide separation between the uses and to make sure
that no tower collapsed on top of the house. We think that the setbacks should be
proportional to the size for the tower. 125 percent is recommended here today. That
means if you have a 1O0-foot tower it has to be 125 feet from a home and so on
proportional to the size of the tower. The Board of Zoning Appeals has been asked to
approve several variances and they feel that the 125 percent requirement is a better
approach for this regulation.
~
William Din: Thank you. Is there any opposition to placing this item on consent? I
would like to make a motion to approve the following consent item, Item #14 the City of
Virginia Beach. This is an ordinance to amend Section 232 of the City Zoning Ordinance
pertaining to height requirements for communications towers in all districts.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Din. Do I hear a second?
Donald Horsley: Second.
Dorothy Wood: A motion by Mr. Din and seconded by Mr. Horsley.
ANDERSON
CRABTREE
DIN
HORSLEY
KATSIAS
KNIGHT
MILLER
RIPLEY
WALLER
AYE 11
NAY 0
ABSO
ABSENT 0
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
Item #14
City of Virginia Beach
Page 2
WOOD
AYE
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 11-0, the agenda item has been approved for consent.
~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Amend and Reordain the City Zoning Ordinance by
Amending Section 111 to Add a Definition of the Term "Portable Storage
Container" and Adding a New Section 208, Regulating the Use and Placement of
Portable Storage Containers
MEETING DATE: January 25,2005
. Background: An Ordinance to amend Section 111 of the City Zoning Ordinance
to define "portable storage container" and to add a new Section 208 regulating the use
and placement of portable storage containers.
. Considerations: This amendment pertains to the use of portable storage
containers within the City of Virginia Beach. Currently, the Zoning Ordinance does not
regulate such containers in the residential and apartment districts. In all other districts,
use of such containers requires a conditional use permit for bulk storage.
Subsection (a) sets forth regulations applicable in all zoning districts. Those
regulations restrict the number, size, location and signage of portable storage
containers and require them to be in good condition when in use.
Subsection (b) applies to portable storage containers in Residential and
Apartment Districts and on lots in the RT-3 and RT -4 Resort Tourist Districts where the
principal use is residential in nature. The regulations allow one portable storage
container to be used for a total period of 16 days in any period of 6 consecutive months,
and also allow a portable storage container under certain circumstances involving
construction activity on the site. In addition, the locational requirements in Subsection
(a) are modified in cases in which it is not physically possible to place a portable storage
container in conformity with the restrictions in Subsection (a).
Subsection (c) allows portable storage containers without restriction, and without
a permit, when used in connection with bona fide agricultural activity in Agricultural
Districts. When used otherwise, the requirements pertaining to Residential Districts
apply.
Subsection (d) allows portable storage containers to be used for construction
activity and for relocation purposes in Hotel, Office and RT-1 and RT-2 Resort Tourist
Districts.
Subsection (e) allows portable storage containers in Business and Industrial
Districts to be used for the same purposes as in Hotel, Office and RT-1 and RT-2
Districts (Le., construction and relocation) and also pursuant to a conditional use permit
for bulk storage where allowed by district regulations (B-2 Community Business and 1-1
City of Virginia Beach - Red Wing Golf Course
Page 2 of 2
Industrial Districts). In the 1-2 Industrial District, portable storage containers are allowed
as bulk storage, which is a permitted principal (of-right) use.
Subsection (f) contains requirements for permits, and establishes a fee in the
amount of $15.00. The fee is not required for portable storage containers to be on a
site for no longer than 72 hours or, by operation of subsection (c), in Agricultural
Districts when used for bona fide agricultural purposes.
. Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion to approve the
ordinance as amended by a recorded vote of 10 - 1.
.
Attachments:
Ordinance
Planning Commission Minutes
Permitting Options Memo
Correspondence
Recommended Action: Approval
Submitting Departmentl Agency: p~ning Department*---
City Manager:~ \L, ð-ß
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN THE CITY
ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING SECTION 111 TO
ADD A DEFINITION OF THE TERM "PORTABLE
STORAGE CONTAINER" AND ADDING A NEW SECTION
208, REGULATING THE USE AND PLACEMENT OF
PORTABLE STORAGE CONTAINERS
1
2
3
4
5
6
Section Amended: City Zoning Ordinance § 111
Section Added: City Zoning Ordinance § 208
WHEREAS, the public necessity, convenience, general welfare
7
and good zoning practice so require;
8
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
9
BEACH, VIRGINIA:
10
That
Section 111 of the City Zoning Ordinance
is hereby
11
amended and reordained,
and a new Section 208 is hereby added,
12
to read as follows:
13
Sec. 111. Definitions.
14
For
the
of
this
ordinance,
words
used
in
the
purpose
15
present
tense
shall
include
future;
words
used
in
the
the
16
singular number include the plural and the plural the singular;
17
the use of any gender shall be applicable to all genders;
the
18
word
II shall II
is mandatory;
the word
is permissive;
the
II may II
19
word IIlandll includes only the area described as being above mean
20
level;
and
the
word
includes
individual,
a
IIpersonll
an
sea
21
partnership, association, or corporation.
22
In addition, the following terms shall be defined as herein
23
indicated:
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
. . . .
Portable storage container.
A portable, weather-resistant
receptacle
designed and used for the
shipment of
storage or
household goods,
building materials or merchandise.
The
wares,
term shall not
include yard waste containers provided by the
City pursuant to City Code Section 31-35 or containers having a
storage capacity of
than one hundred fifty
(150)
cubic
less
31
feet.
32
. . . .
33
COMMENT
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
The amendment defines the term "portable storage container." It specifically
excludes City yard waste containers and containers with a storage capacity of less than 150
cubic feet.
ARTICLE 2. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES
APPLICABLE TO ALL DISTRICTS
A.
REGULATIONS RELATING TO LOTS, YARDS, HEIGHTS, OFF
STREET PARKING AND OFF-STREET LOADING
. . . .
Sec. 208.
Portable Storage Containers.
Portable storage containers located outside of an enclosed
52
building or structure shall be allowed only as specified in this
53
section and subject to the following regulations:
54
(a)
General
requirements.
The
following
requirements
55
shall apply to portable storage containers in all districts:
2
56
57
(1 )
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
Except in the I -2 Industrial District or as may
be
authorized
by
conditional
permi t
use
in
a
district in which bulk storage is allowed as a
condi tional use,
no more than one
(1)
portable
storage container shall be allowed on a zoning
lot, and no portable storage container shall have
dimensions
than
sixteen
feet
(16')
greater
length,
eight
feet
(8' )
in width or eight
one-half feet (8-1/2') in height;
in
and
(2 )
No more than two signs having a maximum area of
twenty-four
(24 )
feet
sign
square
per
displayed on any portable storage container;
(3)
provided
in
Subdivision
(3)
Except
as
may
be
of
Subsection
(b) ,
portable
storage
container
no
shall be located
(i)
closer than five feet
(5' )
to any side or rear lot
line,
(ii)
on any
or
portion
of
lot
behind
the
a
except
nearest
portion of the principal building adj acent to a
public
lots
where
there
street.
On
is
no
principal structure,
portable storage containers
shall
comply
with
the
front
yard
requirements of the zoning district; and
3
setback
100
79
(4)
80
81
All portable storage containers in use on a lot
shall be in a condition free from rust,
peeling
paint and other visible forms of deterioration.
82
(b)
Residential,
Apartment
and
and
RT-4
Resort
83
Tourist Districts.
In Residential and Apartment Districts and
RT-3
84
on lots in the RT-3 and RT-4 Resort Tourist Districts on which
85
the principal
86
containers
87
sixteen
(16)
88
except that:
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
use
is
residential
shall
allowed
for
be
in nature,
portable
storage
no
longer
than
total
a
days
in any consecutive six
(6 )
- month period,
(1 )
(1)
portable
One
storage
container
shall-
of
be
allowed during bona fide remodeling or expansion
of the principal structure and for an additional
period of twenty-four (24) hours before and after
such
activity,
but
not
to
exceed
total
of
thirty (30) days in any six (6) - month period;
(2 )
(1 )
portable
One
a
storage
container
shall
be
allowed when used in connection with bona fide
construction
an
activity
additional
period
on
the
site
and
for
hours
before and after such activity; provided that in
Residential
Districts,
shall
of
twenty-four
(24 )
this
subdivision
4
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
apply
construction of
new principal
only
to
a
dwelling; and
(3 )
of
site
conditions
portable
If
by
reason
a
storage container cannot be located in conformity
with
provisions
Subdivision
(3 )
of
the
of
Subsection (a),
such container may be located on
a driveway, so long as no required parking space
is obstructed and such container is not located
closer than ten (10) feet to the paved portion of
any street; provided, however, that for a maximum
period
(72)
portable
hours
of
seventy-two
a
storage container may be placed wi thin ten
(10 )
feet of the paved portion of a street or in a
required parking space if site conditions prevent
it
being
located
conformity
the
in
with
from
provisions of this subdivision.
On lots in the RT-3 and RT-4 Resort Tourist Districts on
which the the principal use is commercial in nature,
portable
storage units shall be allowed in accordance with the provisions
of subsection (d).
(c)
Agricultural
Districts.
Agricultural
On
lots
in
Districts on which the principal use is a bona fide agricultural
activity,
there
shall
restrictions
the
of
be
no
upon
use
5
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
portable storage containers in connection with such agricultural
activity,
and no permit shall be required.
On lots where the
in
the
relocation
of
commercial
establishment
located,
or
to
be
a
located, on the site.
(e)
Business and Industrial Districts.
In Business and 1-
principal
is
other
than
agricultural,
where
portable
1
Industrial
Districts,
portable
containers
shall
be
,6
143 pursuant to a conditional use permit for bulk storage where
144 allowed by district regulations. In the 1-2 Industrial
145 District, portable storage containers shall also be allowed in
use
or
storage
containers
used
other
than
for
purposes
are
connection
with
bona
fide
agricultural
activity,
requirements of Subsection (b) shall apply.
(d)
Hotel,
Office
and
Tourist
and
RT-l
RT-2
Resort
Districts.
In Hotel,
Office and RT-1 and RT-2 Resort Tourist
Districts,
(1 )
portable storage container shall be allowed
one
when used in connection with bona fide construction activity on
the site and for an additional period of twenty-four (24) hours
before and after such activity.
In addition, one
(1) portable
storage container shall be allowed for a period not exceeding
sixteen
(16)
days when used in connection with the moving or
storage
allowed as provided in Subsection (d), and in addition thereto,
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance pertaining to
bulk storage yards.
(f)
Permits.
Portable storage containers in all districts
shall be allowed only upon issuance of a permit by the Zoning
Administrator.
Permits shall be displayed on the outside of the
container
be
plainly visible
from
the
in
such
as
to
manner
nearest street.
The fee for permits shall be Fifteen Dollars
($15.00) ,
shall
fee
if
portable
be
that
there
except
no
a
storage container is to be located on a site for no longer than
seventy-two (72) hours.
COMMENT
The amendments establish restrictions on the usage of portable storage containers.
Subsection (a) sets forth regulations applicable in all zoning districts. Those regulations
restrict the number, size, location and signage of portable storage containers and require them to
be in good condition when in use.
Subsection (b) applies to portable storage containers in Residential and Apartment Districts
and on lots in the RT -3 and RT -4 Resort Tourist Districts where the principal use is residential in
nature. The regulations allow one portable storage container to be used for a total period of 16
days in any period of 6 consecutive months, and also allow a portable storage container under
certain circumstances involving construction activity on the site. In addition, the locational
requirements in Subsection (a) are modified in cases in which it is not physically possible to place a
portable storage container in conformity with the restrictions in Subsection (a).
Subsection (c) allows portable storage containers without restriction, and without a permit,
when used in connection with bona fide agricultural activity in Agricultural Districts. When used
otherwise, the requirements pertaining to Residential Districts apply.
Subsection (d) allows portable storage containers to be used for construction activity and
for relocation purposes in Hotel, Office and RT-l and RT-2 Resort Tourist Districts.
Subsection (e) allows portable storage containers in Business and Industrial Districts to be
used for the same purposes as in Hotel, Office and RT-l and RT-2 Districts (i.e., construction and
relocation) and also pursuant to a conditional use permit for bulk storage where allowed by district
regulations (B-2 Community Business and 1-1 Industrial Districts). In the 1-2 Industrial District,
7
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
portable storage containers are allowed as bulk storage, which is a permitted principal (of-right)
use.
Subsection (t) contains requirements for permits, and establishes a fee in the amount of
$15.00. The fee is not required for portable storage containers to be on a site for no longer than 72
hours or, by operation of subsection (c), in Agricultural Districts when used for bona fide
agricultural purposes.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That this ordinance shall be effective as of March 1, 2005.
Adopted by
the
Council
of
the
City
of
Virginia
Beach,
Virginia, on the
day of
, 2005.
CA- 922 9
OID/ordres/portablestorageordin.doc
R-12
January 11, 2005
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
~tment
~7Jj;° LE~ ¡¡¡;;;r ,
City AttorneY'~ffice
8
Item #17
City of Virginia Beach
An Ordinance to amend and reordian Sections 111 and 201 of the
City Zoning Ordinance to define "portable storage container" and
u ate t e use acement of portable storage containers
November 10, 2004
REGULAR
Joseph Strange: The next application is Item #17 City of Virginia Beach. An Ordinance
to amend and reordain Sections 111 and 201 of the City Zoning Ordinance to define
"portable storage container" and regulate the use and placement of portable storage
containers.
Karen Lasley: Hi again. I'd like to thank Mr. Din and Mr. Strange for working with us
to put some final touches on this ordinance. Basically, they have made two changes since
this was on your agenda last month. Number one. They have broadened the options
regarding where a container can be located on a lot. They have opened it up to more lots
to smaller lots and to townhouses. Number two. They have lowered the pennit fee from
$25.00 to $15.00. Mr. Din and I did some quick brainstonning over the break and I think
we got a good solution to the pennitting question. If you would like me to explain that
briefly, I think to make it easiest for all parties involved, I could have printed up two
colors of pennits for containers. One color would be just for the 24-hour units. They are
only going to be on display for only 24 hours. We could not charge for those. We sort of
have to treat them like a moving truck that comes in. I can give those container
companies ahead of time. They can fill out the day and the location and display it on the
container without a charge. At least that way there will be a pennit on it so that will help
us keep track of them. They can notify us via email where those 24-hour pennits are
being used every week. Number two, we print up a different color for the containers that
are going to be on the site for a longer period. Those would be charged $15.00. The
container companies could come down once a week, once a month, whatever they wanted
to do and buy blank ones a head of time. Then when they put a container on the site they
fill in the date and the location and then they could just email us that infonnation. I think
that would be an easy good solution for everybody. Are there any questions about
anything on this?
Dorothy Wood: We thank you Karen. You've worked so hard on this.
Karen Lasley: Well thank you all. You worked hard too.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Din, Mr. Strange and thank you very much.
Karen Lasley: I appreciate all the interested parties who went to all the meetings and
helped us a lot.
John Waller: Let me ask a question. On the notice or whatever they put on the POD,
they fill in like a little like a building pennit.
I
Karen Lasley: Yeah.
John Waller: If somebody has to police it.
Karen Lasley: That would be the zoning inspectors.
John Waller: Can people, neighbors, anybody else around them all the time and they
don't like them.
Karen Lasley: They do what?
John Waller: People probably don't like these things in the neighborhood but there's a
necessity for them and if you can get and you can keep them for a while.
Karen Lasley: For a limited time.
John Waller: Why couldn't you put a big sign there and say remove by such and such a
date or a building inspector, or a policeman or whoever comes by and remove them like
they did way back with the RV's and boats were a big problem parking in the middle of
the street.
Karen Lasley: That is basically what these permits will do. They have the date on it and
when it went in and when it had to come off.
John Waller: You could drive by and see it?
Karen Lasley: Right. The inspectors can keep track of them more easily. Good. Okay.
Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: I bet it's not going to work if we say since we've worked so hard on it
because we won't have any speakers.
Karen Lasley: I don't think that is the case.
Joseph Strange: Speaking in opposition, we have Les Watson.
Dorothy Wood: It was worth a try Mr. Watson.
Les Watson: Ma'am?
Dorothy Wood: It was worth a try.
Les Watson: It was worth a try. Madame Chair, members ofthe Commission. My name
is Les Watson. I'm a local attorney and it would be fine with me if you would call me
Eddie. Call me R.J. Call me Eddie. Madame Chair, I hate to whine but I'm getting
ready to. We have been studying this ordinance. I had surveys all over the tables at my
office and we have concluded after looking at dozens and dozens and dozens of surveys
that if this ordinance is adopted the way that it is suggest, the way it is proposed, we don't
z
believe we can do business in Virginia Beach. Here is why. The ordinance says that you
must setback ten feet from the side and rear line. Let me go through the zoning
classifications with you. R-5S is a 5-foot setback. So the house is going to be 5' from
the line. R-5Ris 5'- 8', R-5D is 8', R-7.5 is 10', R-lO is 10', R-15 is 10', R-20 is 15', R-
30 is 15', and R-40 is 20'. So, our equipment will not let us put a unit any closer than
three feet from a house without potentially damaging the house. The POD is 8 feet wide.
That is eleven feet. Unless the house is more than 21 feet from the sideline we can't put
it on the side yard. Period, we just can't do it. Now the ordinance does provide that if
you apply it to the Zoning Administrator and the zoning department can vary that rule but
they can vary it if you demonstrate that you have mature landscaping or you demonstrate
that you have a six-foot privacy fence. That is going to take a trip to the office with
photographs or a visit by a zoning inspector to the property. You can't put one on the
side yard under the existing ordinance. The only way you can vary it is by a positive
demonstration to the Zoning Administrator. So, we think that would be a huge problem.
Not only for the applicants, the people who need to use these who are working folks. We
have other people who can probably run it by better than I can and make more sense than
I can. If I could, just have one second?
Dorothy Wood: Yes you can sir. As an attorney, you have 10 minutes.
Les Watson: Thank you very much.
Dorothy Wood: But we would like for you to be a little short.
Les Wood: I'm doing my best. So, we think that and you're going to hear more details
from the following speakers so I'm not going to speak for the full time. You're going to
have Jacqueline Cosentino, who is the General Counsel for POD and the National Vice
President of Risk Management and Regulatory Matters. She goes allover the country and
deals with folks who do exactly what you do and she tells me that if this were active, this
would be the strictest ordinance in America. We don't see any reason for the strictest
ordinance in America to exist here in Virginia Beach. We have no complaints virtually.
We're unaware of any public outcry. We don't really don't understand the importance
for this ordinance and particularly the one that is the strictest would be the strictest in
America. We're developing as a small lot community. I drove Ms. Cosentino around
Virginia Beach this morning in coming to the informal session because we were looking
at Virginia Beach. Under this ordinance we don't think we can work here. You can't put
them in the rear yards because everybody has to a 20-foot rear yard setback. So three
from the house, plus eight feet for the POD, so you have to have at least 21-foot rear
setback. Now some houses, of course, aren't built on their setbacks but everybody who
owns a lot in Virginia Beach is entitled to build to their setbacks so we have to respond to
the ordinance based on what people are entitled to do. So, we think that's a problem. We
think that this would rob the citizens of Virginia Beach of the opportunity to avail
themselves of this really tremendously convenient service. Here is what it really does for
people. The people who work, people who may have the opportunity, ifthey're moving
to save themselves some money. Not by having us undercut the competition but by
having the ability to save money by using their own labor to pack the materials and to get
their belongings put away and prepared for a move instead of having to hire someone to
do it. That is what we really do. We create an opportunity for that. The lion share of our
?
business is in residential areas. So, you couple all of these things, we heard the
arguments to the contrary and we think Ms. Cosentino is going to tell you that they are
not based on fact. They're based on conjecture. The instances that we heard in some of
these meetings were of concern about emergency vehicles not being able to get in. PODS
are shorter than Audis for instance. An average Audi is 2 Yzlonger than a POD. We do
have opportunities under the statute to put them in the front driveway for 24-hours. But
as Ms. Cosentino will tell you from personal experience, working folks who are taking
care of their kids and performing their jobs need time other than work time and childcare
time to load the things. I'm going to stop talking and others will fill in. I'll be happy to
answer any questions.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Miller has a question for you.
Robert Miller: You're a person of great wisdom since you're an attorney.
Les Watson: I wish I were as smart as either one of them.
Robert Miller: You're a person who brings solutions instead of just problems. What
would you propose is the solution? I'm sure there is a lot of influence we will get but
since you've described the problem very well, what would you say is the solution?
Les Watson: We don't think that permits ought to be required upon installation. We are
happy to notify the Zoning Department every time we put a POD on property, we'll take
responsibility for doing that. We think that the setback requirements are just too difficult
to adhere too.
Robert Miller: So no setbacks? That is what you're saying.
Les Watson: Our dream would be no setbacks. Chesapeake adopted no setbacks and we
get no complaints in Chesapeake. We would like to be able to put them in the front, stay
10 feet away from the curb. We can do that. Stay 10 feet away from the pavement if
there is no curb and we can do that. The vast majority, as my clients will tell you, the
vast majority ofthese PODS are in place for 16 days or less. This is not the end ofthe
world by the time of radiation. We know sometimes that people don't look at that but
they're there for 16 days.
Dorothy Wood: A lot of them are there for longer than that.
Les Watson: We are happy to require permits and we would be happy with 60 days as a
maximum. But as Mr. Peterson will tell you of the few that are there for longer periods,
the majority of these are there because of disasters. People houses caught on fire. They
had trees fall through and had to put their furniture in there. You will hear this from
people who are on the ground. I think it is time for me to shut up.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Watson, since your meeting with these gentlemen, what have you
all come with as a compromise? Maybe that would be easier.
Les Watson: Compromise? We would love to have another opportunity. Madame
4
Chairman, this is an admission against interest. It ~asn't until the Sunday afternoon after
the meeting when I was working on some other things when I had a bunch of plats set out
on a conference table in my office. I had a bunch of houses and I was trying to figure out
how to put some parcels together, I said, great Caesar. I was looking at for this purpose.
You couldn't put a POD on anyone ofthese houses under the current ordinance. We
have, for your convenience suggested some possibilities that we would love to have the
opportunity to discuss at length with the Zoning Administrator. There are all kinds of
things that I could say about Karen. She is the best Zoning Administrator.
Dorothy Wood: I was wondering if you came up with any compromise?
Les Watson: As a matter of fact.
Bill Macali: You didn't finish the sentence. She's the best?
Les Watson: One ofthe lapses on this ordinance, and this is not something you can hold
against somebody. Why don't I step back and let you hear from a couple of these folks
briefly. I'll be available for any questions.
Dorothy Wood: Will you answer Mr. Strange's question please?
Les Watson: Absolutely.
Joseph Strange: Did I understand you to say that the only way that you can put one in a
driveway was if you only left it there for 24-hours?
Les Watson: In the front driveway. You can't put them in front of the house. The
ordinance says you can't put them in the front line of the house.
Dorothy Wood: The best Zoning Administrator, I think is going to differ.
Les Watson: I'd love to think that I was wrong about that.
Karen Lasley: Section 6 lays out the setbacks.
Les Watson: Right.
Karen Lasley: But Section 7 says that if you can't meet those and it doesn't say that you
have to come to me. We're trusting you and you can look at the side of the house and see
whether it will fit there. You go ahead and do Section 7, which allows you put it in the
driveway.
Les Watson: The normal circle is 24-hours.
Karen Lasley: No. That's like the third option. If you can't provide the two required
parking spaces and be 10 feet from the curb or pavement then you go to the 24-hour
option. They're trying to ensure that you can put a container in a townhouse
development for a short period.
~
Les Watson: But I can only repeat that it is only for 24-hours.
Karen Lasley: It is really a safety hazard.
Les Watson: Excuse me for disagreeing.
Joseph Strange: You can leave it there for 16 days under Section 201(6).
Dorothy Wood: If you have a pennit.
Karen Lasley: Section 201(6) is the meeting the setbacks. And (7) lets you do it for the
sixteen days if you still have to required parking spaces and are ten feet from the curb so
that you got the visibility. So it is safe.
Les Watson: The lot is 12 feet long and the required parking space is 18 feet long. Okay.
If the POD is touching the house, most houses are built on 30-foot setbacks. If the POD
is touching the house and the car is touching the POD, then maybe you could not take up
a required parking space but we don't see that happening because you couldn't open the
door of the POD. Otherwise, you would be hanging out in the right-of-way.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you.
Les Watson: Yes ma'am.
Joseph Strange: Okay. Rob Peterson.
Dorothy Wood: Welcome Rob. You realize that each of you will have three minutes to
speak.
Rob Peterson: I was going to ask you if I could have your grace to present a little bit
longer.
Dorothy Wood: No sir. We have a lot of people.
Rob Peterson: I understand.
Dorothy Wood: Your attorney had ten minutes. Now each person has three minutes.
Rob Peterson: I'll be more than happy to answer some questions then if that would be
okay. The 24-hours, ifthat goes into effect.
Ed Weeden: Please identify yourself for the record.
Rob Peterson: I'm sorry. My name is Rob Peterson. I'm from PODS, Portable on
Demand Storage. Twenty-four hours in townhomes, which is kind of news to me. I
wasn't expecting to speak on this. We may as well not service those areas. We won't. It
is not enough time. Our business or the residences use to use us a matter of convenience
~
and that is no longer convenient if you have to unload a POD in a 24-hour period nor
would our scheduling allow it since the popularity of our product has grown so much.
We just couldn't schedule it for them. I would also like to say that on the permit issue
itself, PODS and our residents use our service are against the permit regulation altogether
due to the fact that the majority of Virginia Beach residents are using PODS on one
location for an average period of under 16 days, which is proposed in this ordinance. We
see no valid reason for them to have to get a permit. Essentially what you would be
doing is you would be punishing the people that do not go beyond the 16 days for the
majority that are under the 16 days. Let me prove a point. I did a study in September and
I studied 150 of our Virginia Beach customers that were done with our service within the
month of September. Of those 150 residents, 138 were finished with the use of their
POD in an average period under 16 days. So, were looking at 12 people in what we think
is fair would be beyond the 16 days for those people to have to then get a permit and pay
the fee. Why punish the first 138 people for the minimal amount of people that are going
beyond that time limit. I would also like to discuss that we also people that use multiple
PODS. Now somebody needing two PODS, you're talking about two permits, three
permits. If they had multiple residences in Virginia Beach, you're talking up to six
permits. Up to 7-8 permits depending on how many PODS they use. Okay. Also, those
same people we would like the number of PODS to be two for that customer also.
Because when they have a lot of property they can put two PODS on their property and
they would be able to load those PODS in a given situation within a weekend and have it
out of their.
Ed Weeden: Sir, you're about out of time.
Rob Peterson: I'm sorry. I just wish I had a little more time because there is a lot of
information that is necessary.
Dorothy Wood: Would somebody sponsor him Mr. Miller?
Robert Miller: I was going to ask him a question.
Rob Peterson: Please.
Robert Miller: Which would probably lead to talk about all the rest of these things.
Rob Peterson: Give me the opportunity.
Robert Miller: There seems to be a product that you developed, this list, which was just
handed to Mr. Watson.
Rob Peterson: Yes.
Robert Miller: To some irony, I see you named your company Keep It Simple Storage
Company. It seems like we will be changing that name pretty soon to keep it
complicated. The pieces that you've identified here are in response to the ordinance that
you saw that we developed. Is that correct?
Rob Peterson: That is correct.
t
Robert Miller: Okay. So when you're talking about and you specifically identified
residential apartment districts, you have obviously excluded other business districts,
office districts, and commercial districts in this context. Is there a reason why that was
excluded?
Rob Peterson: Yeah. I was going to get to that at another point of what I would like to
speak about because business people, under this current ordinance, business and
industrial areas they are not allowed to use a POD at all because you're not allowed to
put them in a parking area. If you put it in a parking area, you're not allowed to do that.
Customer can't be serviced. That is why I didn't identify it in there. Business people
have moving needs just as much as our residential clientele does as well.
Robert Miller: So the statement in number 4 allow business and industrial districts is an
attempt to resolve that side is what you just stated.
Rob Peterson: That is correct.
Robert Miller: Would you also explain and I think some of the struggles that we're
having to change the dimension ofthe POD. This evidently describes your particular
product itself?
Rob Peterson: Yeah. Those are maximum sizes. They are nonnally an inch in variation.
The roof is sometimes a little bigger. It sticks over the unit.
Robert Miller: As I understood last time, they come in multiple sizes so this is the
maximum that will be allowed?
Rob Peterson: That's the maximum size. Yes sir.
Robert Miller: Then the size on this thing, 28 square feet and 6 inches long, 3 feet wide
and 4 inches high. I assume that is on your product?
Rob Peterson: Yes. That is also the external measurement. The internal measurements
are a little smaller I think.
Robert Miller: On the signs.
Rob Peterson: Yes. The sign. Let me put it to you this way. The logo dimension would
be 8 foot by 3 foot. The sign itself is a little longer so it could be mounted a couple
inches on each side. That is why there is a difference.
Robert Miller: I must be getting much older since my birthday. What?
Rob Peterson: If you look at the sign it's on a piece oflight corrugated plastic. Now the
sign itself, the physical dimension of that sign is what is written down on there. Then the
logo that fits on the sign is a little bit smaller.
Kathy Katsias: You're talking about the lettering.
ð
Rob Peterson: The lettering. Yeah.
Robert Miller: Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Are there any other questions for Rob? Thank you very much.
Rob Peterson: Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: The next speaker.
Joseph Strange: The next speaker is Tracy Peterson.
Tracy Peterson: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen of the Virginia Beach Planning
Commission. My name is Tracy Peterson. I represent Keep it Simple Storage Company,
the local franchise of PODS. The reason for my appearance here today is to act as a
voice of your residents who choose to use our service. We have implemented a system at
PODS that surveys our customer's satisfaction and allows us to consider their present and
future needs. We receive an abundance of emails and letters each day. In the interest of
time however, I've chosen a representative sample. The following comments that I will
read are excerpts from the letters that I have distributed to you. Their comments are
based on their concerns about this proposed ordinance. This is from one of the letters. I
am writing this to you as an extremely satisfied and recent PODS customer. I sold my
home in Virginia Beach in March 2004, and utilized two storage PODS during the
construction of my home in Chesapeake. I am the mother of three small children and
also a Navy wife who works a full time job. My husband has been deployed since
February and will not return until later this month. Consequently, I pretty much had to
handle the move myself which was no small task. Without PODS, I couldn't have done
it. I needed the flexibility of being able to take my time of unloading my former home in
Virginia Beach and eventually loading my current home. With my husband gone I
needed to be able to coordinate both ends of the move around several days that friends
and long distance family could be here to help. WithPODS, all I had to do was have
them deliver to my driveway, wait for friends to help load them, and then have to call to
have it picked up again at my convenience. I was not rushed or stressed one bit in what
would have been otherwise a trying time. Furthermore, my belongings were only
handled and moved twice rather than four times thus reducing the risk of damage or
destruction. PODS provided an invaluable service. Please take my situation into
consideration when you review your pending legislation. This is a huge military
community and surely there are others like me who would be at real disadvantage without
the service the PODS provide. Don't be the reason people are unable to take advantage
of this convenience.
Ed Weeden: Ma'am, your just about out oftime.
Dorothy Wood: You're time is up ma'am in just a few minutes. You can go until the red
light goes.
Tracy Peterson: Okay. Another person was making reference. I used a total of four
q
PODS to pack out a 3,300 square foot house over a period of five weeks. In this case,
one POD was on the property for approximately three weeks and the other three PODS
were on the property for about 20 days with a maximum of two at anyone time. The
availability of PODS for the professional movers was critical to this successfully staying
on schedule for the home closing.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you.
Tracy Peterson: Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Are there any questions for her? Okay.
Joseph Strange: The next speaker is Timothy Roethel.
Dorothy Wood: Good afternoon Mr. Roethel. We're happy you're with us today.
Timothy Roehtel: Thank you. First, my name is Timothy Roethel. I work for PODS. I
want to thank you for this opportunity to appear before you. I stand here in opposition of
this draft ofthis particular ordinance. I agree with Mr. Watson, who said that I don't
believe there is a public outcry against the use of PODS. I believe that most of the
opposition comes from an opposing industry. I think that is our main opposition. I
would also like to say that this ordinance in its current draft would no longer allow us to
service our business and industrial customers for two reasons. First, this ordinance would
not allow these customers to place a POD in a parking area. Secondly, these customers
would need to obtain a Conditional Use Permit for bulk storage, a process that could take
weeks. Most customers order PODS and schedule deliveries with as little 24-hour notice,
especially during the time of an emergency. They are not afforded the luxury of time to
apply for and wait for a permit to be issued. We've demonstrated that we have been good
corporate citizens and work with many organizations, and institutions in this area. We
have donated PODS to churches and schools for fund raising events and emergencies like
fires and floods. We've provided our services to organizations like the Salvation Army
for their moving and storage needs. The American Cancer Society for fund raising
events, the Habitat for Humanity, the Boy Scouts of America, and hospitals for storage
and renovations. Recently, we donated PODS to two different local churches to assist
hurricane victims in Haiti. These institutions and the Virginia Beach Business
Community normally placed these PODS in parking areas, an area designated off limits
by this ordinance. A POD only takes up one parking space. Please reconsider the
restriction so that we can continue to provide our services to these valuable organizations,
institutions, and businesses. Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Are there any questions? Thank you sir.
Timothy Roehtel: Thank you.
Joseph Strange: Okay. The next speaker is Don Bilbo.
Dorothy Wood: We1come sir.
\0
Don Bilbo: Good afternoon. My name is Don Bilbo. I have Bilbo Construction in
Chesapeake, Virginia. These people are my customers. They have become my friends.
We kind of went through this motion out in Chesapeake before it came to Virginia Beach
about these ordinances. And it was sound and fury signifying nothing. As we went
through the ordinance, these people are such good corporate people in the City that they
respond to complaints right away. Permits? I can tell you about permits as a builder. It's
not a good process. Not allowing contractors to use these things more than 30 days, right
now there is a shortage of building materials. You need to order material in advance. I
repeat some of the things. These are very convenient services for the citizens. I had a
friend who had a stroke and was in the hospital for over 6 months. His wife had to move
out of his house. She was able to have a POD, have friends help her load it up and move
it a new house. This is a temporary situation. Most people use them less then two weeks.
They'll pack them up. The main storage facility doesn't like them because the same
reason the candle maker didn't like the electric light bulb. It's a better idea. They're
bringing the mini-storage to you. They bring it out with a professional driver. You can
pack it. You can carry it to your new house or like a lot of those service people that are in
the area here, you can pack your household goods and they will take it to their climate
control warehouse and they will store it for nine months. They will take it across country
for you. There are many national restaurants and chains that are using PODS to move
their executives to different parts of the country. I would just say this and that I would
challenge you to try it without a permit. If you have a lot of complaints these people will
respond to the complaints. They're anxious to please. They have an image they want to
project to protect and I think if you get to know them is you will see that they are who
they say they are.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you.
Don Bilbo: Thank you for hearing me this afternoon.
Dorothy Wood: This is not only for PODS. I think everyone is talking about PODS. I'm
sure PODS is a very good corporate citizen. We also have MODS and any number. The
ordinance is certainly not aimed at PODS and I think that everyone is thinking that.
Don Bilbo: Some ofthe other ones are actually CONEX boxes, which are a little bit
harder to place in a driveway because they crack them up.
Dorothy Wood: Right. Like Pack Rat and there are lots of them sir. There are a lot of
different ones and were certainly not picking on PODS. There has been one on Bonney
Road for the last three or four weeks at least, since Mini-Max. There are loads of them
sir. It is not just one brand. We certainly don't mean to be picking on them. I'm sure
they are very good corporate citizens.
Don Bilbo: I understand. And once again, I just like to say like the construction sites.
You have these things on your schools also. The City uses these things. They use them
for fires and stuff like that. If a person had a fire and they had to put their household
effects leftover this is the natural thing to do it.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you.
1\
Don Bilbo: Thank you.
Joseph Strange: The next speaker is Jacquelyn Cosentino.
Dorothy Wood: Welcome Ms. Cosentino. Thank you for coming today.
Jacquelyn Cosentino: Thank you. Good afternoon Madame Chair, Commission. My
name is Jacquelyn Cosentino-Georges and I'm in house counsel for PODS and Vice
President of their Regulatory Affairs and Risk Management. I've been with the company
for five years. I've enjoyed driving around your community. You have a very lovely
City here. It's been a real pleasure. I'm here for two reasons. One to show our corporate
alliance to our Virginia Beach franchise; and two confirm our corporate alliance to your
City. PODS are a successful and it is a very fast growing company. We've been in
existence for about 6 Yz years. We have over 75 franchises in over 8,000 cities and over
42 states and have 45,000 PODS in commission. We serviced over 225 satisfied
customers and 12,00 ofthose are going between New York and California everyday.
But we're here today to discuss the proposed ordinance that you have here in Virginia
Beach. My work history has given me an opportunity to be part of drafting of the various
municipal ordinances and even legislative drafts. I found that education and general
awareness of the proposed industry to be regulated is critical in order to develop a
proposal that is equitable to all parties, the parties to be serviced, the parties that are
servicing and the parties that are affected by the service. When the service industry that's
going to be regulated comes into play and you're evaluating that service, you have to take
a lot of things into consideration. Sometimes those include the single working mom
that's moving from point "A" to point "B". The family recovering from a fire waiting for
the insurance adjuster or the contractor to complete their job, the college student moving
away from home for the first time, the military family in a state of flux due to their
reassignment, and a community, such as Port Charlotte in Florida that was devastated by
a Category 4 Hurricane. Regulations are created that address each and every one of the
needs of any of those individuals. The regulations that come into play here, that I want to
address that include the placement. For example, we oppose setbacks due to the lot sizes,
which vary the prohibition of driveway placements, and the prohibition that frequently
eliminate the usage due to the limited side and back yard availabilities. We're concerned
about the duration of use. We want to be allowed a reasonable time so that a single mom
that is working five days a week, two jobs, can accommodate the moving process. We're
concerned about the number of units that are placed on a location. We like two units.
Sometimes a house that is 2,500 square feet needs the two PODS. Ifthere are moving
from New York to California or Virginia Beach to Phoenix sometimes two PODS will
accommodate. It will take two PODS to accommodate the contents of their home.
Permits become really problematic for us and I'll tell you why. Do you put the permit to
the POD or do you put it to the house? If you put it to the house and if they move from
Point A to point B, should they buy two permits? If you add the cost of the permit to the
cost of the POD, have you not completely eliminated the fact that we're competitive to
U-haul or to the other modes of moving that are out there. We have less then a half
dozen communities that use permits right now. The communities that use the permits are
for two reasons. One, they use it to generate revenue. We got a community that charges
$100.00 for a permit. Clearly, they don't want us out there. The other communities that
(z.
have permits do it for a very simple reason. They are concerned about street placement.
We're talking about Boston. We're talking about Washington, Dc. We're talking about
Chicago. We're talking about San Francisco. Regulations that are created as a result of
fear from a competing industry or fear of what might be the notorious slippery slope fry
in the face of adversity. They don't help the people that are mentioned, the mom's, the
military, and the Port Charlottes. Currently PODS provides a unique mechanism to
service the needs of many people providing a single resource for several types of
services. The demand for these services, are obviously not being met by the traditional
resources because if they were PODS would not be experiencing the rapid growth that we
are. The portable storage industry is here to stay and PODS provides a great and reliable
service that response to this need. I know you're not talking about just PODS. I'mjust
simply saying that PODS is one element that is out there. We believe that we provide a
reliable, clean, quick, and complete service. PODS, is both the moving and storage
company. A hybrid, if you will. What the patent device ensures that the contents will
remain safe within the movement. We service the individuals for both long and short
moves. We service individuals for both short and long storage terms. We provide
businesses an opportunity to store excess inventories, especially during the Christmas and
holiday seasons. We allow commercial contractors and we renovators an opportunity to
store their goods and materials during repairs and renovations. We're a terrific
alternative for lots of other people that are out there. We successfully coexist in many
cities with many storages and short and long distance moving services. They even
acknowledge the positive aspect of our business. Additionally, our interaction with code
enforcement officials has been very positive. We have a high regard for those individuals
as they enforce municipal codes. We maintain an open and direct line of communication
and are willing to accommodate their desires at each and every move. To further
demonstrate our awareness of the importance of this issue, PODS corporate provides
extensive training prior to a franchise purchasing our business. This training includes an
introduction to working with municipalities and creating ordinances. The training also
involves the importance of working with code enforcement, being available to them, and
being an allie with code enforcement. Our philosophy is to be a positive factor in
communities and provide a necessary service. Our Virginia Beach franchisee has been in
our possession for 2 If2 years. There are reports that consistently indicate that above
satisfactory and excellent results. There customer service responses have remained
positive with outstanding comments in all cases. The Virginia Beach franchisee responds
to complaints have consistently been expedient with the general concern to solve the
problem and reduce the repeating occurrences. They have consistently demonstrated the
desire to be a positive factor in the community and work with code enforcement. I give
Chesapeake area an example.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you so much. I think we had a little problem with the timer. I
appreciate it. Are there any questions? I just wanted to say one thing. This is not been
driven by any other competing industry in Virginia Beach. We've had so many calls. I
know I've had calls personally and as I mentioned earlier I know there have been several
PODS. Since this has come up, I've been watching and on Bonney Road, which is a nice
commercial area and behind one shopping center or office building, there have been two
PODS since we've started this. I think this is really what are people are concerned about
and I don't think it is a competing industry. Of course, they have an interest also.
(~
Jacquelyn Cosentino: Typically what happens with that and because I am involved in
that department directly, when code enforcement people call and their concerned about
POD placements, we get an immediate message out to the franchisee. At that moment,
our franchisee will respond both to the customer and to the code enforcement person. It
historically happens that POD can be picked up typically within 8 hours, it not 24-hours,
at the latest. We're extremely responsive. We're extremely sensitive to code
enforcement issues. Quite frankly, if we had been called on these two particular units, if
anybody was concerned about it, we would have been making a direct call to the
franchisee and expecting them to respond. Their failure to respond ends up being
financially detrimental to them because when we audit them and we see that they are not
complying with code enforcement or to complaints that are out there, we have the ability
to raise their royalty rates. So, it's a direct affect on their bottom line.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you very much.
Joseph Strange: Okay. Our next speaker is in support. RJ. Nutter.
RJ. Nutter: Thank you very much. I know time is limited and you're at the end of along
day. You still have Cityview to do. But I want to put things in perspective for you. I
didn't come here today to argue or propose to you things that were different when we sat
down and worked out with Mr. Din and Mr. Strange. The purpose of your deferral a
month ago was try to get the two industries together and the neighborhood interest and
the City interest in one room in front of a committee you appointed to work out, what you
believe would be the best interest of the City. Not in the best interest of the self-storage
industry, the PODS industry, a civic association, or even the City itself. And, what's
regrettable here is that is actually what has transpired. They are trying to say that we
don't like the result. And I understand that. I'm even sympathetic to that but I do think
that it doesn't give any justice to the process that the Commission followed in this deal.
And that is this. My industry is the self-storage industry. It has competitive interest
certainly in this process. But the biggest reason why they contacted me was because
many of them live here. Many of them almost work here. And, they were getting tired of
seeing storage containers throughout residential areas. And, not only was it putting in
residential where they were prohibited from being, which is an insult to their business
operation. It was also in their neighborhoods. They were getting complaints from their
neighbors. They were upset about it. So, that is what led to this. And, I think what we
have here is a situation where our industry is agreeing to terms of an ordinance that are
longer than we prefer to see. They are in areas where we would not prefer to see them in.
I'll give you some examples. And, even with a permit fee that is less than it should be
but were resigned to the fact that $15.00 is just as fair as $25.00. We resigned to the fact
that 16 days is longer than we prefer but understandable. We've been trying to make it
work with them. At the same time, we understand that we felt like we wouldn't oppose
them going into townhouses areas even though they were taking out a parking space for a
short period of time. We understand that we think that it is fair that if a moving van can
be there for a day it's fair to allow for a POD to be there for a day. So we've allowed
them into areas where we cannot compete in. Our ordinance doesn't allow us into any of
those areas. Not one. Not one day, not one dollar. We can't pay $100.00 a day to be in
those areas. Not one. We said we wouldn't object. I just want to let you know that we,
14-
quite frankly, are allowing competition by this ordinance, not prohibiting competition.
The second thing that I want to stress to you is what is missing from this process is
exactly what Mr. Strange told us when we left his offices that day. He said we're going
to come up with a solution that's really neutral to your industry and your industry. Our
interest isn't that, our interest is what is best for the City, the residential areas that we
have to protect. That is what we're going to decide this on. And, I think that is exactly
what you have here. I do a lot of land use work, as you know. Not much of it is frankly
with the self-storage industry. But I can tell you that we've worked for years to protect
residential areas. And, while all of the things that they may be saying are true but they
have an excellent track record with satisfied customers and it's a service and a
convenience. The other side ofthe equation is that they didn't tell you about the mothers
and the children and the families that are right next to those people who have to endure
having that in their backyard for longer than two weeks. We didn't talk about that part
and that's the other side of the equation. That is why self-storage has worked so well
because it takes its ability to store, create and pack up more than any of us can possibly
use in our homes and have to put it somewhere. Somehow we have been able to do that
in our lives. What happens is that when we can't, we run out of places to put it. The idea
for most of us is to don't put it in residential areas. Take it outside. Put it in a storage
area where you can have access to it. It's safe and it's not in a residential area. This is
the first encroachment back into those residential areas for that activity. So, 16 days is
more than enough time for someone to do a legitimate time and move that activity.
Everyone agrees to that. We're fine with that but I don't want you to believe that this is
anyway an infringement upon that industry. It is in fact an allowance for them to operate
with regulations that protect the neighborhood and residential areas. I'm in support of it
even though there are provisions that we would prefer to be different. We feel like the
Commission has done a great done job of striking the proper balance in this process.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Nutter.
R.J. Nutter: Yes ma'am.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you so much.
RJ. Nutter: My pleasure.
Dorothy Wood: Is there anyone else? There are no other speakers.
Ed Weeden: There are no other speakers?
Dorothy Wood: No.
Dorothy Wood: Ma' am, did you want to speak?
Sandra Williamson: I sent a letter last week and many of my neighbors.
Dorothy Wood: Ma' am, you have to come up to the podium.
Sandra Williamson: I'm sorry.
It:;>
Dorothy Wood: Certainly.
Sandra Williamson: My name is Sandra Williamson. I did not intend to speak today
because I wrote a letter, which I hope is part of your packet. I don't know what the
scheme is. Several of my neighbors, and several other people I know have sent letters
and petitions so when I heard that the two claims went public outcry against these and I
would demur from that. We didn't want to make a public outcry. We communicated
with you by letter and other written fashion.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you.
Sandra Williamson: Thank you.
Joseph Strange: She's in favor of the ordinance is that right? Sandra came to our
workshop by the way. She was in our workshop.
Dorothy Wood: Karen, the applicant.
Karen Lasley: Are there any questions for me? Is there anything that I can clear up?
Dorothy Wood: You get three more minutes as the applicant.
Karen Lasley: Well, one point that I remember that I didn't agree was with the 30-foot
setback. There is room to have the two required cars and the POD for a majority oflots in
Virginia Beach. They're going to be fine going in the driveway.
John Waller: I have a question. I don't like the PODS sticking like we said. I just have a
problem with it. But, what's to keep somebody, me, you, anybody from going into
business themselves and making a nice plywood unpainted box with a couple of hollow
wood doors on it and leaving it in front for how long you want it? Is there any restriction
as to what type of construction these things have to be? They can get mighty, might bad.
Plywood. Unpainted
Karen Lasley: That would be a structure.
John Waller: There is nothing in that code that says that you have to meet all the same
requirements. What are the requirements are these?
Bill Macali: The zoning requirements.
John Waller: Oh.
Bill Macali: You're talking about building your own?
John Waller: Well five of us sticking around and making a lOx something box.
Karen Lasley: You can only have it for 16 days and it's got to meet all the requirements
if you want to do that.
ii,?
John Waller: A pile of trash can be there for 16 days. It could be.
Karen Lasley: A pile of trash in a container. Sure.
John Waller: If you make one just like that, the same size.
Karen Lasley: Sure.
John Waller: Two by two. Half-inch plywood. Hollow core doors. Unpainted.
Plywood roof. It could happen.
Karen Lasley: I would work with our building code administrator on that and if she were
to determine that it was a structure then it would have to meet the setbacks and go in the
back.
John Waller: It could happen. Anybody could build one of these things and put them out.
Karen Lasley: I'll tell you what. We'll watch that and I'll report back to you
periodically. If that becomes a problem we'll find a solution. It hasn't been. I think we
got some tools in place to take care of that.
Dorothy Wood: Karen, Ron has a question for you also.
Ronald Ripley: Just a comment to be a 24-hour exception here.
Karen Lasley: Right.
Ronald Ripley: That just seems to be a little short. It seems and I don't know hardly
anything about his business but it seems that it takes time to deliver the POD. Have you
consider a longer period of time?
Karen Lasley: We did. What were really concerned about is that we also worked with
the Fire Marshall and there very concerned about taking up required parking spaces
because that makes it and especially with something like a container that can't be moved
in an emergency. It pushes the parking out into the streets. They can't get emergency
vehicles through. It also and this is a good example. You know the homeowner on the
left, which had nothing to do with putting the POD in the lot he can't safely back out of
his driveway- He's impacted. It's a safety. There are some serious safety concerns when
you can't meet that 10 foot setback and when you can't keep the two required parking
spaces on site. So, the 24-hours, I mean it gives you the time to load it up. You can
move these. They have storage facilities. You have to pay extra to store it on their
property but that is an option. Sir.
Eugene Crabtree: Karen, going back to along with what Ron said and of course, I felt all
along you need a script for moving purposes and now I referring to the lady who would
be a military family because the husband is deployed and she is going to do it. I came to
also thing that 24-hours is a little short time for someone to be able to get and in some
circumstances, but at the same time, I agree that we should not leave these on property
for storage purposes. The units are used for moving purposes and all maybe we should
extend that time just a little bit. When you first said it, I thought 24-hours might be all
'1
right. There are extenuating circumstances, and to do that and put it under the no fee type
thing for moving purposes. I think we've come along way with that and I commend you
for it and putting that into the ordinance. It may be some inconvenience.
Karen Lasley: You kind of have to balance it out it against the safety. I'm sorry but I
don't have a picture of one ofthese at a townhouse. It's a real problem.
Eugene Crabtree: I agree with you from a safety standpoint. We got to balance it
someway.
Karen Lasley: Sure.
Joseph Strange: I have a question.
Karen Lasley: Sir.
Joseph Strange: What is the general ordinance about any type of detached storage. Is
that like a shed in your home? Do you have to have a permit for that?
Karen Lasley: If it is under 150 square feet you don't have to get a permit but you do
have meet setbacks. There was an amendment to the zoning ordinance passed a couple of
years ago that allows the smaller sheds to go with five foot setbacks from the rear and the
side, so five and five for a small shed. If it's adjacent to a street that doesn't apply but
you do have to meet the 30-foot front yard setbacks for the 20,which ever it is.
Joseph Strange: Would you ever be allowed to put sheds in driveway?
Karen Lasley: Only if it meets the front and side yard setbacks. I had one case where
that actually happened in a neighborhood. Somebody put a shed in front of their house,
but I think maybe to irritate their neighbors. It is possible on a very large lot where the
house is set further back than the front yard setback. But it rarely happens. I only know
of that one.
Dorothy Wood: Jan.
Janice Anderson: Thank you. On the change here, in the residential areas, so far as
construction is concerned, that is up to 30 days right?
Karen Lasley: That is with a building permit.
Janice Anderson: Now under the business and industrial, you say they can have it if it is
bulk storage. They can get a permit that way or they can do it with a construction
activity.
Karen Lasley: Right.
Janice Anderson: Twenty-four hours before and after. Is that limited to 30 days or is that
unlimited?
lb
Karen Lasley: That is unlimited in the commercial districts but they can't have them just
for storage like over Christmas. We feel that type of use degrades our commercial areas
and if they need extra storage, they need to expand their building and meeting the
building codes and setback and the design guidelines are the primary concern.
Janice Anderson: Okay. So far as any concern with building materials as long as that is
in the business or industrial area they can stand.
Karen Lasley: As long as they have an active building permit. Yes.
Janice Anderson: Right. Okay. Then the original permit you had that they were not
allowed at all in the Resort District.
Karen Lasley: That hasn't changed in this draft.
Janice Anderson: That doesn't address it. It doesn't specifically say. I think of the first
draft.
Karen Lasley: It says it is only allowed in these districts and that is not included so they
would not be allowed in the R T Districts.
Janice Anderson: Okay. The first draft specifically said that they wouldn't be allowed
and I kind of brought it to your attention. What about referring to the Resort District if
there residential use, just like you do with agricultural. There are some residential
neighborhoods in the Resort District so if you can address that and ifit's a residential use
in the Resort District then it could be applied under the residence, just like you referred to
it in agricultural.
Karen Lasley: That would be a good change.
Janice Anderson: Yeah. Thank you.
Karen Lasley: Do you want that maybe in just the RT-3 and RT-4? RT-3 and RT-4 and
leave them out ofRT-2 and RT-l?
Janice Anderson: I just know that they're existing residential in some RT. I don't know
specifically which ones.
Karen Lasley: Maybe RT-3. There's a little bit in RT-2 and maybe one or two left in the
R T -1, not much. I think the R T -1 and R T - 2, as you know is kind of our oceanfront that
we want to keep the design criteria high.
Janice Anderson: High criteria like the main neighborhoods are.
Karen Lasley: Lets do RT-3 and RT-4. There is not much RT-4 out there. We can look
at that. Okay.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Miller.
l'f
Robert Miller: The huge difference that I see in this is the difference is what I would
recall permanent, which would be sheds. Certainly we don't want to compare 150 square
foot shed, five-foot setbacks. I think that's already over with and done. We don't need to
go back into that. Construction seems to be another issue that brings out there and has a
big piece from residential to commercial construction we talked that we had trailers all
over these places, which I call comboxes, metal boxes usually at every site including City
projects. I see that has become this and we have this permanent thing. We have this
semi-permanent in any case a year and sometimes longer, which is construction. Then
we have more temporary needs, which certainly in the case of disasters it makes absolute
sense to me to be able to provide a lot of flexibility and do things.
Karen Lasley: You're right. I think in a disaster we can declare a state of emergency and
we all can have PODS.
Robert Miller: But I also see in the cases of moving. I don't see people taking more than
16 days to pack. That seems very reasonable. I don't see them taking more than 16 days
to unpack. Some of us take a lot longer than that.
Karen Lasley: You can hide it in your garage.
Robert Miller: But we are just focused in on this thing so tightly and the thing that I hear
consistently from and if there is an opposition of the mini-storage is that 16 days is okay
with them. They really don't care about 16 days. And, the PODS people and or Mini-
Max and all these other persons don't seem to care about 16 days and it seems to be okay
with them. Sixteen days seems to be okay with you. So, why are have rattled this thing
around to 27 pages of legal to try to get it to satisfy every condition I can think of? I do
see that the biggest problem with these on a day-to-day basis is the next door neighbor or
the person that is not using the service feeling like I've been imposed upon. But I love to
see some of my neighbor's trucks and or cars and or whoever is driving them not be
around. They seem to become more permanent for a lot longer time. I think we've just
made too much out of this. I much prefer the 16 days and dealing with 16 days. I do not
like the 24-hours. I think that is putting in and for you, I'm sorry I can't empathize with
your job. You're the greatest in the United States of America or as the world knows. I
just don't see us gaining any ground here other than we're always coming back every 16
days. If the PODS are behind Helen Dragas's office and no one wants to say whose
office it is. Hi Helen. They need to be moved. If they have been there more than 16
days and I keep coming back to the fact that if we tell people that you have a permit to do
this and the industry is held accountable for 16 days. We've joked about what happens
with a port-a-potties. Is that what you were joking about? Yeah, there was a port-a-potty
in the picture. How many days does a port-a-potty get? I don't know.
Karen Lasley: Mr. Scott has experience with that. He says he doesn't want to talk about
that.
Robert Miller: We just seem to be regulating ourselves into oblivion here. I'm not
comfortable with it at all. I'm sorry. You being the greatest in the world, you are
absolutely going to put me down for this, but construction trailers, the comboxes all over
zo
the place. If this was not a POD, I have this funny feeling. This looks like a construction
site. I don't know what the port-a-potty thing is. It might be a combox. Is that
regulated?
Karen Lasley: I don't know what a combox is.
Robert Miller: A metal box about that size. Like those things like you see on the back of
a trailer that ships merchandise.
Karen Lasley: I think that would meet the definition of portable storage containers. That
would come under this.
Robert Miller: So we could roll in and say that you have to get this out of here in 16
days. We don't do it at construction sites either. If! lived next door to a house being
built, I mean I'm going to have that house being built for a year and some cases longer.
I'm not happy with where this organization. I know. Maybe everybody else is. I'm glad
it's a democracy and I'm glad it's my birthday. What ever happens, I'm still okay with
on it. Eat cake and have fun.
Dorothy Wood: Do you want to make a substitute motion?
Robert Miller: I don't think there is a motion yet is there?
Joseph Strange: I'd like to make some comments.
Dorothy Wood: There is Joe, then Will.
Joseph Strange: First of all, just generally speaking the difference between this and a
mini-storage when it gets down to it is that people are coming into people's
neighborhoods. This is not like a little mini-storage. These people and I hate to use the
words but I got nothing against it. I don't own anything. I don't have any money
invested. But people are coming into people's neighborhoods and they are sticking
buildings up in driveways and they are sticking them in certain places. That is what this
is all about. It is not about money. It's not about anything else except to use the word
loosely "very intruding" in the people's neighborhoods. And this is what this is all about.
So the question is, to me, how long should these people be allowed to intrude into a
neighborhood? Surely, when we talked at the meeting there the people who had the mini-
storages they were not happy with the 16 days. They wanted fewer days but they agreed
that they would take 16 days if that is what it took. The 24-hours, if you remember, they
didn't have any hours. They had no hours. They couldn't put there period. So it wasn't
a matter of reducing something down from 16 days to 24-hours, it was a matter of taking
a situation where they couldn't even have a storage unit there period. Okay. We said hey,
it's a person and a lot ofthat was for safety reasons. I mean these spaces weren't big
enough to do anything with. It's not like a moving unit, which you can move it out of the
way. These things are sitting there. So, just to get to far offtrack about the 24-hours
versus the 16 days, the 24-hours was again, where we said lets be lineate. Let these
people at least have the unit there so they won't suffer because a person can't get a
moving van in there for a few hours and load up something. But we said this 24-hours
ZJ
was giving somebody something it wasn't taking something away from them. The
ordinance, as far as the permits are concerned the City felt like they needed some money
to enforce this. You can't say hey, were going to give the City something else to enforce
and not give them any money to enforce it with. That's kind of where the fees and the
fees were at $25.00, which we said hey, maybe if we can allow and at this point to get a
permit someone had to go down to the office and they had to get a permit. We said hey,
why not let the portable container people get the permits for us so they don't have to go
down and get them. Maybe we can cut the cost of the fees a little bit. Again, it was
reduced from $25.00 to $15.00. It didn't go up it came down. I think everyone needs to
hear that side of it that there was a lot of concessions made in that meeting to appease
portable container storage. And so far today, all we've heard from is the PODS people. I
mean we've heard the PODS people say man if this was in one of our franchisees, this is
what we would have done. But, these other places they are not franchises. They're not
going to move anything. They have no control over them. I think this ordinance is surely
not against the PODS people. It's not against the mini-storage people. None of us have
an invested interest in any of these things. It's just a matter oftrying to regulate an
intrusion into people's neighborhoods.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Will.
William Din: I think my comments are along the same line. When Joe and I went into
this meeting with the City and the representatives of the two industries, it was not our
intent to keep any business out of Virginia Beach. Okay. It was not our intent to over
regulate this business. It was an attempt to try to reach a compromise where we could
meet all the concerns of not only the City's concerns where they have concerns of safety,
public access, and aesthetics, but also the residents concerns aesthetically is it fair to keep
somebody to keep a container in their yard and may be an eyesore that you objected too.
So, we went into this thing with a compromising attitude to see if we could reach
reasonable ordinance that could accommodate the different interests of the City, whether
it was a business, whether it was a resident or whether it was the City government. So,
our ordinance is going to be unfair to somebody. I think we tried to put something down
here that was at least tried to be comprehensive, reaching out, and looking at the different
areas that had to be regulated and where it was going to be used. Our ordinance tried to
be fair to everyone in some respect but I think not having an ordinance would also be
unfair to many people from the City for the reason why we met. We saw there was a
need for that. So, again, our intend when we met was to try to reach a reasonable
ordinance that could regulate this industry, not just for the PODS people, but also for any
industry that came into this. I'm not trying to justify this but that was some ofthe
reasoning that we went into it. It's not going to be perfect but I think we needed to start
someplace and there are some areas that we do need to tweak on. Maybe the 24-hour
permit is one of those areas. I agree. So, I just want to make those comments.
Dorothy Wood: I appreciate your time and Joe's time. You are very busy businessmen.
You've given up your time over and beyond Planning Commission. To me, I do
appreciate it and I'm sure all of your fellow Commissioners. Gene.
Eugene Crabtree: I agree with Will and simply with what he just said. Somebody is
going to be unhappy. I just wanted to ask Karen if it would be unreasonable if since
Z2-
some people say 24-hours is insufficient. What if we were to change that 24-hours to 48
so it would encompass a weekend so that people who work who might have weekends off
could use this as for a 48-hour period over the weekend? I don't know of anybody that
would rent a V-Haul truck for more than 48 hours to move in. I just wondered if that
would satisfy some people if we did that?
Karen Lasley: That is an option you had. We did consider that. You have that option.
Eugene Crabtree: That would encompass a weekend. It could cover a weekend.
Karen Lasley: I could tell you that the Fire Marshall wants it at zero.
Eugene Crabtree: I agree with Will and Joe. Somebody is going to be unhappy no matter
what we do but we do need regulations of some type.
Dorothy Wood: Don.
Donald Horsley: The only problem with this 24-hour deal and 48-hour is that the
logistics of getting these PODS in and out of the neighborhood. It's a situation that is not
very doable. It's going to take them into the next day. I would be assured ofthat.
Things just don't happen that fast.
Karen Lasley: That would just basically be the weekend from the practical standpoint.
We don't have a lot of zoning inspectors out on the weekend. It's going to turn into 48-
hours anyway. Another small point that might help this particular company, we put in
the maximum sign at 21 square feet because we thought their sign was 7 x 3. If it's 8 x 3,
you might want to consider changing it to 24 square feet. Our intent was to allow that size
sign. Okay. Jan.
Janice Anderson: I believe it would be appropriate to probably defer this and come up
with some changes. As Will said, this is a great start but I do believe it needs some
tweaking. And, I think with the comments I don't know if everyone wants to hammer it
out here.
Karen Lasley: I just heard that you just want to go from 24-hours to 48-hours and then
change the sign from 21 square feet to 24 square feet. Was there anything else except for
Mr. Miller who wants to totally redo it? That would definitely take a deferral.
Bill Macali: The RT-2.
Karen Lasley: Add in the R T - 3. We can make those changes before Council for you.
Robert Miller: Since I'm going to be the one. Take your best shot. I'd like to make a
motion that we defer this for 30 days.
Janice Anderson: I'll second it.
Dorothy Wood: Karen, has that created a hardship for you? Council?
z?
Karen Lasley: No ma'am.
Dorothy Wood: Okay.
AYE 10 NAYl ABSO ABSENT 0
ANDERSON AYE
CRABTREE AYE
DIN AYE
HORSLEY AYE
KA TSIAS AYE
KNIGHT AYE
MILLER AYE
RIPLEY AYE
STRANGE NAY
WALLER AYE
WOOD AYE
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 10-1, the application for the City of Virginia Beach for the
portable containers has been deferred.
'Lt
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
An Ordinance to amend and reordain Sections 111 and 201 of the
Cit . nance to define "portable storage containers" and
regulate the use and cement of portable storage containers
December 8, 2004
Dorothy Wood: The next one please.
Joseph Strange: The next item is Item #19, City of Virginia Beach to reordain
Sections 111 and 201 of the City Zoning Ordinance to define "portable storage
containers" and regulate the use and placement of portable storage containers. Our
first speaker before us is R.J. Nutter.
~
R.J. Nutter: Thank you. I was expecting a presentation by staff. I apologize. I
appreciate the opportunity to be before you this afternoon. I always appreciate
your indulgence. I represent the Hampton Roads Self-Storage Association. We
have worked long and hard with the committee and I want to thank so muèh Mr.
Strange and Mr. Din for their hard work in getting this package to you. My
association supports this package, and while there are proposed improvements, I
think that could be made to it, I would ask you to look to one proposed
improvement in my mind. But I think the package overall is very sound, and does
what I think our industry was trying to do which is to make sure that these facilities
are used for the moving business and not for the storage business. They present an
eyesore to the residential areas because I believe, and just like Mr. Strange said that
in essence your injecting a business in a residential area so regulations should be
such that in fact, protects the neighborhood without regard to protecting my
industry or their industry. I think that should be the goal of this ordinance. One
provision that we would propose to change with the current ordinance provides that
we can have or the container industry could have a container for a period of 16
days, twice a year or once every six months. I think we should consider putting that
as once a year as opposed to once every six months. I would ask you to consider that
change. Otherwise, I would tell you that the overall provisions. Some we prefer not
to support but I would tell you in the spirit of compromising we're prepared to
support. So, I'm also happy to tell you that you have a number of other speakers
here today from civic associations who have seen the impact of these facilities, and
these containers within residential areas, and I think you will be hearing from them
shortly. Finally, I would like to tell you because this is a component of this and I
don't want it to be missed.
Ed Weeden: R.J.?
R.J. Nutter: One minute?
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 2
Ed Weeden: 45 seconds.
R.J. Nutter: 45 seconds. The reason why we have such a strong feeling about this is
because my clients operate over 30 mini-storage facilities throughout the City. We
pay approximately $60,000 a year in taxes on each one. We go through a Use Permit
on each one. We pay thousands of dollars, millions of dollars to construct each one.
None of them are in residential areas. That has been a good, good trend for the City
to keep storage out of residential areas and out of harms way. We think that is the
way the City should continue to hold on too.
Dorothy Wood: Thanks R.J.
R.J. Nutter: Thank you very much.
Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is Debbie Westbrook from Homeowner &
Realtors.
~
Debbie Westbrook: Good afternoon. Debbie Westbrook. I'm a homeowner and
I'm also a realtor. I'm also the President of the Belamy Civic League. I come to you
because we work very hard to keep our city clean and tidy. Keeping our boats and
trailers tucked away and proper storage. I work with a lot of sellers and buyers. I
think the ordinance about keeping a restrictive time line on these units is a definite
must. We work very hard to keep our neighborhoods cleaned up. We have a lot of
tourists and visitors, homeowners, shopping. We have people selling their homes
and listing and we don't want to have clutter in the neighborhoods. The old fashion
way of moving, where you order the van service to come in and load your services.
It works. It's fine. The PODS add an additional industry, which I think is a
positive one but I think it does need to be mandated and regulated in some regard. I
don't see anything more than 7 days. In working with sellers and buyers, I don't see
the need of having a unit more than 7 days in front of a home. Most people organize
when they're moving and selling. They box up and then they need several days to
load up. I think, 7 over a weekend period, is sufficient. I do think that somebody
needs to regulate the services because you always have people abusing. When the
civic league was inactive for a short time a number of years ago, we had 20 some
odd boats and trailers that were not being mandated behind the front line of the
house in respect to the code enforcement. So, I think that someone needs to keep
track of this. I'm very seriously concerned about the trashing of neighborhoods.
Town homes and condos, it's a different story. We have limited parking. A lot of
them have one parking place reserved, two parking placed, reserved and we have a
lot of issues.
Ed Weeden: Ms. Westbrook, you have about 45 seconds.
Debbie Westbrook: Okay. Thank you. We have a lot of concerns about where we
could put the units. I think that perhaps those types of facilities, town homes,
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 3
condos, would maybe need to use a different source other than the PODS the
storage unit.
Dorothy Wood: Would you please answer a question from Mr. Miller and Mr.
Ripley?
Robert Miller: Do you have a specific problem at this point or obviously your
giving us information with regard that you would see future uses of them? Do you
have any issues right now?
Debbie Westbrook: I support the PODS usage for the neighborhoods. I think it's a
great service. I do think that it needs to be regulated and mandated very strongly.
Robert Miller: But you don't have an issue with a problem with one in your
neighborhood?
Debbie Westbrook: No. Not so ever. I think there needs to be a timeline of7 days.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Ripley.
..:=...
Ronald Ripley: You still have to talk about maybe something different for a
townhouse? If you have a townhouse you have one or two parking spaces in front.
What would be a reasonable time for one of these PODS or portable storage units,
I'm sorry, to be in front of the property?
Debbie Westbrook: I would say maximum of24 hours. It's a very difficult thing
with parking. A lot of it is a hard commodity to come by. And where would one put
one? So, maybe it lends itself to another type of service and not a POD, would be
my suggestion.
Ronald Ripley: Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you very much.
Debbie Westbrook: Thank you.
Joseph Strange: The next speaker is Robert Moore.
Robert Moore: My name Robert Moore. I'm an owner of a portable storage called
Pack Rat. I'm also the owner of Two Men in a Truck. I'm very familiar with
moving and storage. I believe it's mandatory or necessary for 16 days. I agree with
all the provisions except the permit, Subdivision #9. Okay?
Dorothy Wood: Did you see the streamline Option B Permit that was presented to
us today.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 4
Robert Moore: No. I have not.
Dorothy Wood: Perhaps Ms. Lasley can show it to you?
Robert Moore: Okay.
Dorothy Wood: I think it would be a lot easier for you.
Robert Moore: Okay.
Dorothy Wood: Are there any questions for him? Thank you sir.
Robert Moore: Okay. Great. Thank you.
Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is David Iteda.
Dorothy Wood: Welcome Mr. Reda.
David Reda: Thank you. The real strong speakers are coming up. I got called first.
....z::::::..
Dorothy Wood: Well, I'm sure you're strong too sir?
David Reda: David Reda. R-E-D-A. This regulation seems to be overly restrictive
in terms of where you can place these units. We'll call them PODS but there are
others in the market, and that basically means that what we're left with is putting
them in the driveway. Then when you go to that Paragraph #7 of the regulation, it
says that we can put it on the driveway if it doesn't take up a parking space for 16
days but if it does then for 24 hours. I'd like to ask you all to reconsider that. I
know the Fire Marshall has been involved in this and has spoken on the issue and
has made a plan to say that he has less of a concern then perhaps Paragraph #7
would suggest. I would hope you all would reconsider this and permit one of these
units to be placed on a driveway for 16 days whether or not it took up a place to
park as long as that doesn't create a parking problem with a displaced vehicle. The
other comment that I wanted to make is that I'm an owner of a mini-warehouse.
Not locally but in South East Georgia on the ocean. We have some PODS located
around us and we don't find them to be competitive. Most of the folks that come to
us stay for four months minimum, usually four months to six months. Ifwe get
commercial business it tends to be longer. These PODS that are down there tend to
be used on a shorter basis. They tend to anywhere from a day to a month or two
months depending. Sometimes if it is a moving scenario we see they are very brief.
If it is a renovation because someone wants to redo their kitchen or redo a bedroom
or add an addition and they need a place to store their stuff for a few days then it
might be a little longer. I think 30 days.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 5
Ed Weeden: Mr. Reda you have about 45 seconds.
David Reda: I think 30 days is a little too short for renovation purposes. I'd like for
you all to consider 60 days. That is all that I have.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you so much for coming down.
David Reda: Thank you very much.
Joseph Strange: Okay. Our next speaker is Demaris Yearick.
Dorothy Wood: Welcome. We're happy that you came.
""""'"
Demaris Yearick: Thank you. I'm Demaris Yearick and I'm the President of the
Virginia Beach Beautification Commission. rm here because our organization very
strongly supports adopting an ordinance to regulate the portable storage containers.
We like the current proposal except we agree with Mr. Nutter that we would like to
see a permit only being issued once a year. To be very brief, I think a picture is
worth a thousand words. I have a picture for all of you of what we have been
looking at in our neighborhood for about 5 or 6 months now, and there is no end in
sight. It really has been a blight on our neighborhood. I feel like this ordinance will
prevent things like this from happening. So thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Mr. Miller has a question.
Robert Miller: You were going to give us a copy of the photograph. Which
neighborhood and is it a portable storage unit?
Demaris Yearick: It's a POD. It's in Bay Colony and it's for a home renovation.
Robert Miller: You do understand that this ordinance would not disagree with that.
It would still allow that to be done.
Demaris Yearick: For some time. In other words, doesn't it limit it?
Robert Miller: The length of the construction.
Janice Anderson: No. Only 30 days.
Robert Miller: Oh, 30 days.
Demaris Yearick: That is what I was wondering.
Robert Miller: Okay.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 6
Demaris Yearick: We feel like the 30 days is excessive too but 30 days is better than
a year, which is what we're looking at right now. Thank you. We appreciate your
consideration.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you for coming down.
Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is Nancy Johnson.
Nancy Johnson: Hello.
Dorothy Wood: Welcome Ms. Johnson.
-.
Nancy Johnson: Thank you. Nancy Johnson from 1148 Crystal Lake Drive,
Virginia Beach on behalf of Bay Colony. I'm on the civic league board as well as
Chairman of our Stewardship Committee. That committee is totally concerned with
the preservation of the integrity of the beauty of our neighborhood, which also
includes naturally Chesapeake Bay applications and Board of Zoning Appeals
applications. I receive the calls when people are concerned about an issue because
supposedly I can help them direct their concerns and express their views in the city.
I've had calls about portable storage units, and I'm not able to tell people anything
because there have been no regulations. So, when people call with the frustration
that there is a unit on our street as we had on our street for along period of time
during a house renovation. There were no regulations so I couldn't say a thing. It's
there. That's the way it is and there are no regulations. We support totally
regulations and modest as they are of portable storage units. They serve a purpose
and that is great. New technology and new ways of handling things are marvelous.
But we must have some regulation and this to us, seems very modest. In our mailing
in November for Christmas mailing, during the civic league, we said from the
stewardship report that the city wants to have some controls over portable storage
units, time limits and modest permit fees. The civic league supports the City's
efforts to protect the appearance of our neighborhood. I might add that it is with
great pleasure and joy that we are able to support an effort of the Planning
Commission. Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you so much.
Nancy Johnson: And also, please do not extend the limit rather shorten the time
limit.
Dorothy Wood: Would you please answer any questions? I guess there are none.
Thank you.
Nancy Johnson: Thank you.
Joseph Strange: Speaking in opposition we have Les Watson.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 7
Dorothy Wood: Welcome Mr. Watson.
~
Les Watson: Madame Chair. My name is Les Watson. I'm a local attorney and I
represent the franchise holders for the PODS group here and in Southeastern
Virginia. I didn't know whether to sign up as an opponent or supporter. We agree
with Ms. Yearick and we support regulation ofthese units. There is no question
about that. We believe that regulation is important. What these units do and I've
said this before, what these units do is allow people to employ their own labor in
order to save themselves money. If you're a working couple or a single individual
and you have kids to take care of it take a while to load up your belongings if you're
going to be moving. We think 16 days is an appropriate time and we would ask that
you consider allowing us to place these for 16 days in an appropriate place without a
permit. For any place longer than a permit for longer than 16 days we are happy to
get a permit. Sixteen days is a huge percentage of our business. Most of our PODS
are there for much less than 16 days. Sixteen days gives you three weekends. That is
why it is an important number. And, if this ordinance and I realize this is not
something that concerns you specifically but if this ordinance were enacted as it is
written of the 7,080 communities in which PODS are located, this would be by far
the most strengeous one. We think that Chesapeake enacted a reasonable
ordinance. It was 16 days without a permit. We think you will hear from the
owners of the franchise that they have had no complaints since the adoption of the
Chesapeake ordinance.
Ed Weeden: Mr. Waton, you have about 40 seconds.
Les Watson: Thank you very much. And, I do want point out one other thing. I
agree with Mr. Reda that in a construction project when you got a valid building
permit almost nothing happens in less than 30 days. It takes me that long to put up
a mailbox. We ask that you consider changing that limitation with a valid building
permit to 60 days, and Mr. Miller, I mislead you earlier. I told you that the POD
that was in front of the Operations Building had been there since the end of
October. It wasn't placed there until the 15th of November.
Dorothy Wood: Are there any questions ofMr. Watson?
Robert Miller: What percent of the business that you all have, I believe your client
PODS. Is that right?
Les Watson: Yes sir.
Robert Miller: Is residential and what percent is commercial?
Les Watson: I'm going to let Mr. Peterson, who is the franchise holder answer
those questions because he's got those numbers exactly.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 8
Dorothy Wood: Thank you.
Robert Miller: Do you know how many units you currently have out in the City of
Virginia Beach?
Les Watson: The maximum number we've ever had out as I recall was somewhere
between 125 and 150. They turnover every three weeks or so. What we do is we put
them out and we either move them to another destination or we bring them into the
warehouse. We're not in the "on site" residential or commercial storage. That is
not what we do.
Robert Miller: Sometimes, like me when you ask for something, you get it. How
long has this been going on at Crystal Lake?
Les Watson: That one has been there a long time. Ms. Demaris is sitting right here.
I can't say that it hasn't been there for a long time. She and I live right around the
corner from each other.
Dorothy Wood: More than 16 days?
...a:::...
Les Watson: It has been there. And we would be please to support an ordinance
that would prevent that situation from happening. We think that 16 days without a
permit, 60 days when bon a fide use in connection with a valid building permit and
24-hours on either side of that to get rid of it. The only other thing that I neglected
to mention and I hope you will indulge me a second here. We support the Fire
Marshall's analysis of the situation. What he told us when we sat down with him
and I don't think he was quite that specific this morning. What he said was if
you're five feet from the building and you're ten feet from the pavement and you
don't force a car into an illegal parking space I don't have a problem with it. The
number of days was not particularly relevant to him. He said the risk factors are so
incontestimal if you don't block the doors, and if you don't come any closer than 10
feet to the pavement, there really wasn't an issue. He talked to you about the width
of the streets generally. I think you will probably hear more about that. He didn't
have a problem with 16 days even if you took a required parking space so long as
the car you were supplanting was not moved to an illegal spot.
Dorothy Wood: Les, did you see Karen's new streamline for issuing permits?
Les Watson: I did. We really don't like permits.
Dorothy Wood: I know that.
Les Watson: It is a wreck for us because we do all the billing out of Florida. That
means they have to keep different records for Virginia Beach then they do for
everyplace else in the whole country. We understand that we're competition for
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 9
existing people but we don't think that. We are happy. We are delighted to notify
you every time we place a POD. We'll fax you the notice of the location, the
address, the placement on the property, and the fact that we have alerted the
customer to all the placement and storage requirements. We'll be delighted to do
that.
Dorothy Wood: That's a cost I believe.
Les Watson: It costs us more money. We don't like that. To be perfectly honest,
but it is a billing nightmare for us, which is an issue well beyond the actual cost of
the POD.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Are there any other questions for him? Mr. Horsley.
Donald Horsley: In situations like this, if the limit was 30 days, what are these
people storing in here? If you're renovating, are they taking things out of their
homes and put it in storage until they get their homes renovated? Why don't they
move it to the facility?
"""""'"
Les Watson: Because the workmen are in and out of there everyday. Instead of
taking stuff back and forth to a warehouse and putting it on the street twice a day,
they're storing it on site.
Donald Horsley: You said they're storing construction materials in these?
Les Watson: I believe. I don't know for sure but I believe it.
Donald Horsley: I thought it was household goods they were taking out of the house
while the renovations were doing. That is what I thought they were using it for.
Les Watson: I am not sure but I know that there is a major renovation of that
house going on. The owner started renovating, I believe before he moved in. I
believe its construction stuff. It's a huge renovation of a waterfront home that has
been going on for a long time. That would not be permitted under the ordinance as
we suggested it.
Dorothy Wood: Would you please answer Mr. Waller's question?
Les Watson: Yes sir.
John Waller: I have a problem with, I guess, the time that they're there. I think it is
too much time. I think if we did get one in place there is nothing that would prevent
someone from abusing the structures. You can make them out of plywood,
unpainted, put on a label and leave them in there for Lord knows how long. And it
would be an eyesore and a blight on the community. There is nothing to prevent
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 10
anyone from coming in and putting out any kind of structure or any container.
They could do anything. In fact, there are companies out there now that are doing
just that.
Les Watson: You're right. You know Mr. Waller, right now I can build alSO
square foot storage shed, ugly as a mud fence on my property if I stay five feet away
from the side or rear property line. PODS would have to be ten feet away from the
property line, which makes it impossible except in R-40 zoning for us to use them
there, but I can do that today. I could build an awful looking shed.
John Waller: You can't do it in the front yard.
Les Watson: I can't do it in the front yard. That is correct. But, because of the ten-
foot restrictions that you put on the other three sides, I have no place else to put it.
~
John Waller: Well, it's just a question and they're going to be a blight. I don't care
if it's your building or a plywood building or whatever. Ifit is sitting in the front
yard somebody is going to abuse it. And it is going to be a mess. I would think that
one way to slow it down a little bit is to give them a particular time limit. Sixteen
days, I think is to long. Seven days is a max that I would suggest. Somebody could
put that stuff down, load it up and be gone just like they used to do with the trailers
or trucks. They weren't any big problem. I think it's a big problem to put these
things throughout the neighborhood. It is. Yau' re going to have a lot more
complaints than you heard today.
Les Watson: As I say, I think Mr. Peterson will tell you as recently as this morning
he spoke with Mr. LeChance, who is the gentleman in Chesapeake who is
specifically in charge of enforcing Chesapeake's regulations. I think Mr. Peterson
will tell you that as of this morning Mr. LeChance said they had no complaints since
the ordinance had been adopted. I think that is pretty telling. Mr. Peterson will tell
you that. I do want to take one more minute for the purpose ofthanking Mr.
Strange and Mr. Din, particularly Mr. Macali, and Ms. Lasley. They have been
extraordinary generous with their time, more then we would have had any right to
expect they would be and we appreciate it.
Dorothy Wood: We have been talking about PODS.
Les Watson: Yes we have. Haven't we? It brings us right up to date.
Dorothy Wood: Always happy to have you with us.
Les Watson: I'm always pleased to be here. Thank you.
Joseph Strange: Okay. Our next speaker is Rob Peterson from PODS.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 11
........
Rob Peterson: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen of the Planning Commission.
Madame Chair, my name is Rob Peterson. I'm from PODS, Portable on Demand
Storage. I would first like to start by saying that we should differentiate between
the two kinds of customers that we service. First, one being the customer that uses
us for under a 16 day time period. Those are the people that are the bulk of our
customers, 90 percent of them are rnoving and they fall into the category of the
usage of 16 days. What we would like to do for the first 16 days is supply you with a
report that could be generated on a daily basis by my company or any other
company that delivers portable storage containers. Everybody is favorable to that.
After the 16-day time period, now you're looking at the people that are getting into
construction renovations, things of that nature. At that point, they should be able to
apply for a permit and if they can justify and legitirnize the use of a construction
project they should be allowed to have the POD for what I'm asking for is 60 days.
This ordinance was born out of complaints. It is my understanding of it. And what
I did over the last couple of days, my self and some of my empl09yees went out into
the neighborhoods. We asked some questions. I'm not going to say what those
questions were because you're reading them. What it is and it is what we propose.
We asked, not our customers, but we asked the people who lived across the street,
down the block, anybody who could see the POD, we asked them if there were
something put in place, would you be satisfied with a POD in your neighborhood?
They said yes. Most people had no problem with a POD. The only people that may
have said something about it was there was a lack oflegislation right now. That is
why we have people that are down here from the civic associations that are saying
there are PODS out there for six months, four months. I'm not going to dispute
that. There are a handful of them that are out there for that length of time. Due to
the lack of legislation, and my hats off to Karen Lasley for having to answer to these
questions all the time.
Ed Weeden: You have about 45 seconds.
Rob Peterson: Thank you. One of my customers brought to my attention that they
were told by the city they could have a POD for 6 months. That is not what we're
looking to do. That is fuel in the fire. That is telling people the wrong information
and that is not what we're looking to do. We want to give the public what they
want. I think you want to give the public what they want. I looked into my
Chesapeake ordinance and the people that are taking PODS in the City of
Chesapeake, the residents they are near 100 percent compliance. There are no
PODS that are out there beyond the 90-day maximum period. The people are
calling. They are reporting their deliveries. They're asking for permits. They're
getting permits or they're being denied the permit but they're in near compliance. I
think that is a major issue that we need to consider here. I think you want to be a
little more strict and I can appreciate that. What we propose is 16 days without a
permit, and after that a permit up to 60 days for construction purposes only.
Ed Weeden: Mr. Peterson, your time is up.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 12
Rob Peterson: I thank you very much. I'll answer any questions.
Dorothy Wood: Rob, did you see the new streamline permit that Karen has so
graciously came up to help you?
Rob Peterson: Yes I did. Once again, like Les said, we're against permits.
Dorothy Wood: I know you are, but I just wanted to make sure that you saw them.
Rob Peterson: I took a quick look at it to tell you the truth.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Miller. I'm sorry, first Ms. Anderson.
Janice Anderson: With regards to the 16 & 30 days. If someone rents a POD from
you do they rent it for a specific amount of time so when it leaves your facility you
know that you're going to pick it up within the 16 day period or when it leaves you
know you're going to pick it up within 30 days?
Rob Peterson: No. Not always. Most people will book their first move if they know
where they're going. Let's say they have a closing on a house and they know those
dates, they will schedule it accordingly. Sometimes they're closings get delayed.
Sometimes it is in storage for a little longer then they anticipate. No. They
sometimes they will only book their first move. Sometimes they book all four moves
or three moves. Whatever the case may be. It's their choice whether they're going to
bring it in to the warehouse or if they're going to keep it out there on site. What this
regulation is asking them to do is get packed up in a 16 daytime period which the
percentage of the people are well under already. They're well under the 16 days on
an average basis. I hope I answered your question.
Janice Anderson: Let's say you bring a POD to my house. How do you know that
I'm going to have it done in 16 days?
Rob Peterson: I don't. I don't know you're going to have it done in 16 days. But,
historically, when I go back and review the records that I'm telling you that the
people that are using the POD, the 90 percent of the people that are using are using
it for moving and storage. They don't want it in their driveway for any longer than
you want to look at it. They want to get done. They want to get packed up and they
want to get on with their lives.
Janice Anderson: Then how can we do the 16 days but permit the 30 days when we
don't know what the people are going to be use it?
Rob Peterson: Good question. In Chesapeake, when a customer calls and gives the
zip code because everything is based on zip codes in the city where they're moving
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 13
to, the first thing the call rep is going to see when the zip code is put into the system
is a regulation of the city. The city like in Chesapeake's regulation will tell them
even before they even book their POD, because they may decide not too if they don't
want to comply with the ordinance. They'll tell them that they have 16 days to use
the POD for moving purposes only. After that if you're going to keep it longer you
need to get a permit from the city. Do you still want to book your POD? That is
what they're asked. So they are told right off the bat. Like I said, Chesapeake has
near 100 percent compliance right now. We're very impressed with that. I'm
constantly in contact with the people in zoning over there.
Janice Anderson: With regard to like your proposal of 30 days ifthey were going to
go pass the 16 that a permit would be issued then, you're proposing that your
company would help issue those permits?
Rob Peterson: If you wanted us too?
Janice Anderson: The streamline proposal that they would be purchased by you, a
head oftime and you actually issue them from there.
Rob Peterson: If you wanted us to we could help with that. Sure. After the 16 days.
Yes.
"""""'"
Janice Anderson: Thank you.
Rob Peterson: You're welcome.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Miller and then Mr. Waller.
Robert Miller: Rob, what is the percentage of your business is residential and what
percentage is commercial?
Rob Peterson: I would have to say that 95 percent of our business is residential.
. Robert Miller: Alright. When you do a commercial delivery is that on the same
purposes and basis that someone and I don't understand that is a commercial entity
moving. What's going on there?
Rob Peterson: Sometimes commercial entities are moving, which we're allowed to
do according to this ordinance. What we're not allowed to do according to this
ordinance is a store like UPS can't use us for seasonal packages when they have too
many. The larger part of the business that uses us would be like a restoration
company that may give a POD to their residents where they're going to do some
repairs to the home.
Robert Miller: Something like this? Storing materials for the construction.
I
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 14
Rob Peterson: I wouldn't say for the construction. It's for the damaged home. The
person still wants to live in the home so they will unload the contents of the home.
Then the work can be done and they could still live in the home. Sometimes they do
it one room at a time.
Robert Miller: Ron just handed me this. It's the information that you all put out.
It says that the costs of your units are based on a monthly rental.
Rob Peterson: That's correct.
Robert Miller: Obviously it is to your advantage for someone to call you at the 15th
of the month and say come pick it up and then you move your business on to the
next rental. Would you modify this to be per 16 days? Is that how that would be
done?
.-.
Rob Peterson: We wouldn't do that. No. There are a lot of reasons why we've
elected to go with a monthly. Ifwere on a pro-rated basis we would be up against
the same situation that V-haul and Ryder on are where everybody wants to get the
most bang for their buck. We're going to be looking at delivering numerous PODS
at the end of the month. Not being able to service a lot of people. It has also been
shown that most of the people wants the convenience of that time to have that little
extra time to give them the benefit of packing and not having to lose time off from
work so they could pack one room at a time. They might want to paint the house
before they complete their move, things of that nature. People have been very
happy with the fact that we charge them. They're paying a monthly fee. After the
first month if they go into additional time then they can get pro-rated for that
second month.
Robert Miller: Maybe I'm not understanding you. You're saying you're agreeable
with the ordinance that would say 16 days. If I'm going to come to you and say that
I'm going to rent this unit from you, you're going to tell me that.I can only have it
for 16 days but your rent rate is going to say per month.
Rob Peterson: Okay. I'm sorry. 16 days we're in agreement with it because
normally somebody is moving from one home to another. So they could have it for
16 days at one home, 16 days at another home or 16 & 14 or up to sixteen. Many
people are not using it. They're using it to move from one home to another or they
may use it for one home to pack it up, put it in the warehouse and then their going
to bring it back to another home a month or so later.
Robert Miller: I'm still not sure or really clear on this. We'll just go on. When you
go and the other question that I'm looking to in my mind is this 24 hours in a
townhouse at some point. How do you differentiate between apartment,
townhouses, and residence, and it would seem like to, it is a monthly rental. It
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 15
doesn't make any difference. Is there a reality check to what's going on there as to
whether or not you can actually position this POD in one ofthose units in a parking
place or an apartment or a commercial?
Rob Peterson: Absolutely. My drivers are trained and they are told that nothing is
suppose to stick out into the street. It has to be off the sidewalk. It's got to be safe.
Ifwe can't make it safe for you, we're not putting down. We've denied already the
fact that we're not going to put them on the street. We have had some conditions
where the city actually issued them a permit to put it on the street. We don't want
to do that. 24 hours for us is impossible. We can't work with a 24-hour period. We
wouldn't be able to service those people. It is virtually impossible especially if
you're looking at somebody perhaps moving fi-om out of state. Let's say they're
moving from Florida. They're moving into a townhouse and they have two PODS.
They get one delivered. It's the weekend. We may not be able to pick it up because
our schedule is so congested and we can't get it until Monday. Then they need their
second POD. They're out of time on the first one. They can't even move in.
"""""'"
Robert Miller: It seems like when you were talking a moment ago about and I
thought you were talking about renovations. You were talking about a situation
where more of a Florida issue and so forth. I think we're almost trying to cover to
many pieces in this ordinance. Do you understand what I'm saying? If someone is
doing a renovation of a house you're saying 60 days is adequate.
Rob Peterson: Yes.
Robert Miller: Our ordinance is saying 30 days. So, whatever this renovation is
and I've had a house, which we renovated and I can't even imagine that is close to
the right amount of time. Without disrespect, I just don't see how that functionally
works to move either parts of the house, whether it be furniture and so forth,
totaling out or storing construction materials unless it would be something that
would be really quick. Are you also kind of expanding into the other pieces of your
business? After a storm or something like that I think there would be an
emergency. I would certainly be in favor of and whole Council would be in favor of
having some kind of emergency ordinance that would allow for a lot of flexibility
and things like that which would allow for our census to be able to maneuver. For a
renovation or a construction project, 60 days doesn't really make much sense to me
either. It almost seems like I'll got get 60 days and then I'll come back and get a
permit. When I build a house it took over six months. When you renovate a house,
you're talking every bit of that 5 or 6 months depending on the conditions and what
you're trying to do. Is there a reality to this? Is this something that we're just
joking about this?
Rob Peterson: Not at all. I would certainly like to have more time to reach more
people to make the service valuable to them. We're agreeing to knocking it down to
60 days?
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 16
Robert Miller: You're actually going to pick this up in 60 days and pick up these
people's furniture and household goods and their construction materials and take it
back to your warehouse? It almost seems like were not honestly dealing with this.
Rob Peterson: Well, I think you're talking about a police issue now. Once the time
expires. I'm missing your point.
Robert Miller: You're obligated.
Rob Peterson: I'm obligated to go pick it l!p. Planning is going to call and there has
been a complaint on this and you need to get that POD. I'm going to call the
customer, which I have done and you need to secure your items inside that POD
because we're coming to get it because the city told us too. I hope I answered your
question sir.
Dorothy Wood: You said Rob that most people use it for and I think you told Mr.
Crabtree last month for two days or five days. Anyways, you said that most people
use it for moving on a short period of time. From what I understand from what Mr.
Miller just said are they still paying for the month?
..E::A
Rob Peterson: Yes.
Dorothy Wood: That is going to make them want to keep it more because you're
paying for a month.
Rob Peterson: But don't misunderstand. Most of the time there is a lapse from
point "A" to point "B". They're going to live their mom for a little while the house
is being built.
Dorothy Wood: They're paying for the month.
Rob Peterson: Ifwe had a situation like that and the customer didn't want to pay
they wouldn't use us.
Dorothy Wood: So then you might as well go on with a permit if your charging
them for a month then it is going to be a month.
Rob Peterson: No. I'm sorry. We're looking for up to 16 days. We're looking to
cover the point from one day to sixteen days without a permit because most people
are completing the first leg, if you will ofthat move within 16 days.
Dorothy Wood: But they're paying for a month. So you're taking it up to their
house for one month?
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 17
Rob Peterson: No. I'm taking it to them for the time they need to pack it and then
I'm going to pick it up.
Dorothy Wood: They're paying for the month.
Rob Peterson: Bring it to another location, which will conclude the month or it will
come into the warehouse for additional time.
Dorothy Wood: One more question. You said things like this are for household
items and the last people said it was for construction items. This is why they have to
stay so long. We reaJIy need to know if this is for household items or constructions
items?
Rob Peterson: It's for predominately household items.
Dorothy Wood: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions? Mr. Strange.
Joseph Strange: I think I'm going to help clear up something here. When you say
30 days what that means is that you would take this out to somebody's home. They
would load it up but you would still take it out to your storage place and keep it for
another 21 days for that month.
.....;::;:,.
Rob Peterson: If they wanted us too.
Joseph Strange: If they wanted you too. Right. In other words, they would still if
you left it in the driveway for 7 days or 16 days and then you took it out to your
storage place and kept it out there for the remainder of the 30 days, they're still only
paying you for 30 days.
Rob Peterson: That's correct.
Joseph Strange: I just want to clear that up is how the 30 days come in. The 30
days is just because you don't put it in the driveway it doesn't mean they have to
leave it in the driveway for 30 days.
Rob Peterson: I'm sorry. Yes. Absolutely.
Joseph Strange: I think there was a little confusion.
Rob Peterson: There was a little confusion. I apologize.
Joseph Strange: The next thing is if a person was doing some renovation at that
point you're saying that this is primarily used to store furniture. Is that what I'm
hearing you saying?
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 18
Rob Peterson: Yes. When they're doing a renovation usually they are emptying the
contents of the room or rooms. They're renovating. They put the contents into the
POD. They do the renovation. They put the things back into their house. They
want their things close by. Sometimes they don't want to haul it off to another mini-
storage unit because it may get damaged in transport. It takes some additional time
to get a truck, bring it over there, make multiple trips, and things of that nature.
Joseph Strange: The fact is if they were going to store their products in it or
something, they could store it in the unit. You could pick it up, take it your storage
place and it could sit there until they finished the renovation and then you would
bring it back.
Rob Peterson: Yes. That is correct.
~
Joseph Strange: I wanted to make sure that it was kind of plain. Personally, I see a
difference between someone just using this unit to move, which is one way to use it.
The second way of using it is for renovations, which usually in a renovation situation
you have an established neighborhood where you have people.living in the
neighborhood. The sight of the neighborhood is important. The purpose of
renovating of a home it doesn't usually create a situation in the neighborhood as
opposed to someone with new construction. I'm making all these points because I
think there are three different situations that you're dealing with here whereas,
again, if a person is going to build a new home in the neighborhood, it is going to
take six months to build it, there maybe a POD unit sitting there during that
construction time would not be that unsightly because its unsightly anyhow because
he's bu9lding a house. You have frames up there. I mean it's kind of an unsightly
situation until the home is built. So, the way I see it you're looking at three different
entirely situations where these PODS could be used and each one is a little bit
different. Maybe each one of them needs a little bit different regulation.
Rob Peterson: Yeah. You're adding something like that into it. Sure. If you were
going to do a building project and you wanted it to be longer and you wanted it to
differentiate between the other two. It's a multi faceted business. There are a lot of
uses that you could do with a POD. It certainly is beneficial to the neighborhood.
I'd like to look at it if my neighbor had a POD and he was doing some kind of
renovation on his home and he needed it and it was going to help his process to get
his house completed in a faster period of time, I'd be happy to see the before picture
of that house and the after of that house knowing that POD was part of that
completion and it got done in a nicer period of time for the customer. This is
essentially has become part of a building project from time to time. It's not a big
part of the company. It's not a big part of the clientele that we service but they
certainly are involved time to time.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Waller has a question for you.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 19
Rob Peterson: Yes sir.
John Waller: Apparently you got your act pretty much together and you've done
enough of it to where everything goes pretty smoothly. This is more less britton
around like you can do or what you're company can do. It's the guy that comes in
out of the dark and builds a little shed and leaves it there and he's not aware of
anything except that he can put this container out in front of his house for however
long he wants it to be there without a permit. This is my concern. Whether it's
your POD or someone else's, it's going to be a problem that the communities are
going to have face up with. They're not going to have a whole lot of problem with
your product but they're going to have a big problem with some of these other stuff
that's coming up. That is why I'm opposing any length of time at all for them to do
that.
~
Rob Peterson: I can understand your concern. But, again, I think it's not always
our opinions. It's what the public wants and needs. The public is okay with having
a POD. Sixteen days is not forever. Sixteen days is doable for moving and storage.
Let them have 16 days. I did the survey that is being passed around. I have over
200 signatures of the neighbors of the people that are using PODS. They're saying
yes, lets regulate it. Let's make it fair. Give them 16 days. I put in there up 60.
These people said okay. If they're doing a renovation project they're going to make
their home look nicer, I'm for it but make sure it goes away in 60 days.
John Waller: You've had yours there for 16 days and ifit wanted to stay longer you
got to get a permit. Right?
Rob Peterson: The City would have to approve the permit.
John Waller: They can say, hey, a guy wants to bring a box the same size as yours
but it's made out of paint and plywood and plop it down there.
Rob Peterson: I think one thing would stop them from doing it is the cost of starting
up a business like that. We're talking trucks and personnel. Not to make it
financially worth it to you. The other thing is in the ordinance itself it does say you
need to keep your units in a clean fashion, painted, free of rusted paint and things of
that nature. You have to do it or you're not in compliance. The expenses to run this
business are astronomical. To think that you would want to put one or two boxes
out there and think you'll make a living at it. I don't see where that would happen.
Trucks, labor, insurance, warehousing. You have to put your boxes somewhere if
it's not going to be used. You have to put it somewhere. To put a few pieces of
plywood together, I wouldn't rent them. I don't think you would rent them. I
wouldn't want my valuables in there either.
John Waller: You can build it yourself and do it. Get whoever was doing your
renovation and he could build it.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 20
Rob Peterson: I guess that could be possible.
John Waller: Go get a permit and put in a box there.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Crabtree has a question I believe.
Eugene Crabtree: I'm speaking strictly of moving purposes. No construction, none
ofthat. I understand that you don't prorate your rates. If I did something and I
load it in three days and I ask you to come pick it up and move it ten miles across
town and sit down and unload it in 10 days, I'm still going to pay a month's fee. Is
that correct?
Rob Peterson: That is correct.
Eugene Crabtree: That means that anyone who ventures in is going to pay a
month's fee whether or not he keeps it two days or whether he keeps it 30 days, and
you don't prorate it.
Rob Peterson: That's correct.
~
Eugene Crabtree: Does your competitors prorate?
Rob Peterson: I do not know.
Eugene Crabtree: Because were talking about people other than just yourself.
Rob Peterson: I can't answer that.
Eugene Crabtree: Okay. What percentage of your customers keep those things,
and keep their materials in there for 30 days? Lets say over 20 days even. How
many people that rent them from you to move their household effects within the
city, within this Tidewater area keep them more than 20 days?
Rob Peterson: In front of their home?
Eugene Crabtree: No. I'm not talking about on ground time. Ifwe limit it to
ground time even 24-hours, once they put their material in there and you pick it up,
how long does that material stay in there before they take it back out no matter
where it goes?
Rob Peterson: I'm not really following your question. 20 days, 16 days, 15 days.
Eugene Crabtree: You come to my home and sat it down and I load it in 48 hours.
You come back and pick it up and I want you to move it from here to Chesapeake.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 21
Okay. You take it from here to Chesapeake and I unload it. On an average, how
many days does that take?
Rob Peterson: People could?
Eugene Crabtree: I'm not saying what people do.
Rob Peterson: How many people do that?
Eugene Crabtree: How many people keep your units for 30 days within this area?
Rob Peterson: I would say and I'd be pretty close to being realistic probably 30
percent turn it over in a month.
Eugene Crabtree: So you're making a 70 percent monthly profit on these people.
Rob Peterson: That means they're using it in a 30-day period. You're asking me 20
days. I would have to do some research.
Eugene Crabtree: I thought when we were talking about the time before and when
we talked about 24 hours, 48 hours, 72 hours, as it stood on the ground in front of
somebody's property, I though~ it stayed there and you picked it up and moved it to
another property, and they only kept if for another 72 hours, that you prorated it
and that is all that you charged them.
Rob Peterson: No, we don't do that.
Eugene Crabtree: You charged them for a month. As long as they have to pay for
it they might was well keep them for a month.
Rob Peterson: Not necessarily. People want it off their property. It is still
financially worth it to them to use our service and get it done, rather then the
aggravation of what my competitors are offering to rent a truck. They don't want
to do it. They want a POD. They want it done. Sometimes they do it in a week.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you Rob. Do you have any more questions Gene?
Eugene Crabtree: No. That's it.
Rob Peterson: Thank you for hearing me.
Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is Timothy Roethel.
Timothy Roethel: Good afternoon Madame Chair, ladies and gentlemen ofthe
Planning Commission.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 22
Dorothy Wood: State your name please.
..:::::;::::,.
Timothy Roethel: My name is Timothy Roethel. I work at PODS. First of all I
would like to say that I appreciate all the hard work of Karen Lasley and the
recommendations of the Planning Commission. I'm here to ask those of the
Planning Commission to reconsider some of the recommendations being made in
this ordinance. First off, the 24-hour restriction, I think that is overly restrictive for
those that are in condominium housing. I think if they're required to have two
parking spaces and if a portable storage unit only takes up one of those parking
spaces, that leaves one parking space for their car. That is more than enough
parking that they should be able to move in an adequate amount of time. As far as
the permit for 16 days, no permit is what we're asking for up to 16 days. The
purpose, and the reasoning behind that is if somebody is moving that would give
them 16 days, on one property to load the unit. They have up to 16 days to load it.
They don't have to use those 16 days. So say for example, they only use 7 days on
that one piece of property. Then we go to that property and we pick up the unit up
and we move it to the next property. It's on the next property. They unload it in a
period of 7 days. So, they have only used it for a total of 14 days, and then we pick
the unit up empty. They may have only used it for a period of 14 days but it is still
more cost effective to them to use our unit then it is to use another moving. I tried
to clarify that. Again, I thank you for taking all the time you have to clarify some of
these issues. If anyone has any questions?
Dorothy Wood: Thank you so much.
Timothy Roethe1: Thank you.
Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is Don Bilbo.
Dorothy Wood: Welcome.
Don Bilbo: Good afternoon. My name is Don Biblo and the name of my company is
Don Bilbo Building Contractor. Part of my interest of being here, in addition to fair
play, is that I've built several warehouses for the PODS people. And, there are
more PODS in their warehouses then there are at the people's houses. These are
humidity controlled warehouses and they bring them back and store them. There is
one on the drawing board for Virginia Beach. I would say I worked with the PODS
people in Chesapeake, where I'm a little bit more familiar is that there is an
ordinance out there that is not quite as restrictive. I think you can get a comfort
level to the citizens so that these things are used properly. Nobody wants to see a
messy neighborhood or stufflike that. This gentleman keeps asking about building
a shed. You need a building permit for that. I would also say that on a construction
job, I can take everything on a construction job and put it in front of a house, and
put a tarp over it. Now what's the better solution to have the stuff in a POD or have
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 23
junk all over the place? A POD is a very valuable tool for a contractor. Many
commercial contracts require that you keep building material in a dry place with
mold problems and stufflike that. I did a soft count on your municipal campus
here. There are over 35 units that have been there more than 30 days on this
campus that I can tell you that the contractors could not be doing the projects they
are doing the jobs without using a valuable tool like this.
Ed Weeden: Mr. Bilbo, you have 45 seconds.
Don Bilbo: I think that a residential contractor should be able to use the valuable
tool. I am disappointed as a businessman that one business has instigated this to
stem competition. I watched planning a lot in my city. I had never seen this done
before. Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you sir. Are there any questions?
Bill Macali: Madame Chair to clarify something.
Dorothy Wood: I wish you would sir.
.&4.
Bill Macali: Under no circumstances was this ordinance instigated by any
competitors. It was driven by the staff.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Macali. I appreciate it.
Robert Miller: You said on the campus of the city complex here there were how
many?
Don Bilbo: There are over 35 on a soft count.
Robert Miller: 35 what?
Don Bilbo: Containers. They are not PODS containers but they are containers that
this ordinance would cover.
Robert Miller: They are?
Don Bilbo: Yes sir.
Robert Miller: These are not CONEX boxes.
Don Bilbo: They are CONEX boxes. A CONEX box is cut. Several of the PODS
competitors do not have the fiberglass boxes. They have CONEX boxes. Okay.
The CONEX boxes there are over 35 CONEX on this campus.
Robert Miller: But no PODS?
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 24
Don Bilbo: I believe there is one POD out here. I'll also mention that the city has
used some of the units for storage also because they're doing renovations. Thank
you.
Robert Miller: Thank you.
Joseph Strange: The next speaker is John Coor.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Coor.
~
John Coor: My name is John Coor. I'm a recent owner of new franchise called
Smart Box, which is smaller than a POD unit. We're based out of Richmond,
Virginia. I want to address a couple of things that have come up in conversations
today. My boxes are little different. They're not quite as big as PODS. They are 8
feet long. They are 5 feet wide and 7 Y2 feet tall, which is a fairly standard size in the
moving industry. That size box has been used a lot. A lot of its benefits is that it is
small. It attracts and it is useable in a smaller setting, apartments, condominiums.
Part of the allure of coming down in this neck ofthe woods from Richmond was the
fact that you have all these high rise buildings and apartment buildings that are
here. I'm not saying because PODS has done an excellent job. They have educated
the public on how to use these things. They are here in a public forum to help with
this process and some regulation. But also the reason why I got involved in this
business what that it addresses 50 percent completely more ofthe market then is
already being addressed. Down here, lets face it, you all build to build. I've never
seen anything like it. I don't know how to explain it. For me it reminds me of
having a northern Virginia thing and you are going to have these issues with moving
and storage. They are only going to get bigger. The way I see it. I really think
there is a need for this. Our boxes are smaller and so far that are business has gone
a lot into townhouses and into apartment complexes. We've also found that very
quickly after they fill them they want us to have it back in our storage bin, very
quickly. We've leased a 44,000 square foot facility in Virginia Beach. Yes. We have
quite an investment in this, trucks and trailers. We have a moffett. If you don't
know what a moffett is, it's a really cool forklift that puts these boxes exactly where
you want them. The reason why this is important is because our customers could
want them behind their house. My case and the reason why I'm even in this
business was I own a couple of apartments in Richmond.
Ed Weeden: Mr. Coor, you have about 45 seconds.
John Coor: Thank you. There was a smart box behind one of my apartment
buildings. One thing that I also want to address about this and your idea of the
permit, 16 days is more than adequate. I feel that is great. But a fee would affect a
lot of the people that we're trying to help. That would bump our cost significantly
to somebody who we think is our biggest customers, which are your military base
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 25
and people who have smaller homes, townhouses and condominiums. That is why
that would be excessive and a burden on our customers. Do you have any
questions?
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Ripley.
Ronald Ripley: Do you charge a monthly charge for the whole month?
John Coor: Yes sir we do. And we found, quite frankly that some people do use it
for 27 days. Some people use it for 14 days. Correct. Is that an issue? V-haul
doesn't do that. We'll use them as some sort of comparison. Yes. They make you
confine it into a 3-day period of time or you pay more. Well;you could have this
industry decide to go that route but we think would be and I'll use the term "usury"
laws. It may affect that. An appropriate time and an effective structure is 30 days
especially in the moving industry when you do need a time lag your move from here
and your move from there. We, quite frankly would like to have these boxes in our
warehouse. That is what we bought iffor. That is what we're equipped for. That is
what we had worked with the ordinances for fair warehouse to do such. We think
it's actually a better situation for the community because instead of it being
someplace else exposed it will be in our warehouse.
...=-.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you.
John Coor: Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Horsley.
John Coor: How long does it usually take people to get these loaded up and then
picked back up?
John Coor: Our experience here so far has been fairly quickly. I'm going to say
this so far 6-9 days. Sixteen days is obviously is probably more relevant for people
given them a three weekend period of time, which I think is wonderful. You're also
talking about permits. If you're talking about permits then you have to have
somebody to police it. It seems, like to me that is what we would try not to be doing.
That we all have an accordance or an issue that we all want to follow.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you. He just asked a question. Are there any other
questions? Mr. Crabtree and then Mr. Strange.
Eugene Crabtree: You feel like 72 hours on the ground for moving purposes on the
weekend is adequate.
John Coor: No sir. I do not.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 26
Dorothy Wood: Thank you sir.
John Coor: Can I express why?
Dorothy Wood: Yes, but just that.
John Coor: People down here have different timetables. The work schedule and I
notice the traffic down here is incredible at night and people work on shifts and off
shifts. I think that would be a burden on the consumer.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Strange has a question.
Joseph Strange: I'll reserve my question.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Knight.
Barry Knight: If a customer calls up and they tell you that they would like one of
your boxes delive..-ed, first of all two parts, and they want it delivered, what would
be the total cost, if you're on a monthly basis plus delivery, plus taxes. Just roughly.
~
John Coor: My boxes are smaller than PODS. They are 8'x 5'. They're 40 square
feet. If you rent one or five from me, my delivery charge is the same. It's $49.00. It
doesn't matter how many you get. One of things and we found and we're talking
about weather because we have experience. We had Gaston in our neck of the
woods and it was a major disruption to people who would never thought they
needed self-storage.
Dorothy Wood: He just asked about fees.
Barry Knight: I just wanted to know delivery fee and what were your monthly
fees?
John Coor: $60.00. $49.00 for delivery whether it's one or five.
Barry Knight: $49.00 & $60.00.
John Coor: Yes sir.
Barry Knight: And then if you stored it and then you brought it back to the people.
John Coor: We charge $49.00 each time we deliver it to you.
Barry Knight: Okay.
John Coor: So when it goes back into the warehouse it doesn't cost any money. We
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 27
deliver it and when they said to come pick it up, four days later or 6 days later, we
come pick it up and take it to our warehouse.
Kathy Katsias: Delivered back is another $49.00?
John Coor: Delivered back is another $49.00.
Joseph Strange: Is the storage in the warehouse considered part ofthat 30 days at
no extra charge?
John Coor: No sir.
Dorothy Wood: No extra charge?
John Coor: Correct.
Barry Knight: I'm just trying to get a feel for these $15.00 permit fee.
John Coor: Can I address that?
Dorothy Wood: No.
~
Barry Knight: From what I understand it is ten percent and you said by policing
you have to charge to police this thing. We can give all city services out just for
taxes but I'm just trying to get a percentage of what $15.00 is and far as the
accounting procedures you are going to have someone on site do accounting
anyways. I don't bother with that too much. I just want to clarify the $15.00, a big
portion of the fee.
John Coor: But it is.
Dorothy Wood: Okay. Thank you. Did he answer the question?
Barry Knight: I made my statement and in my mind it isn't that large. Enough
said.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you sir.
John Coor: Is there anything else? Thank you for your time.
Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is Rad Bareford.
Rad Bareford: My name is Rad Bareford and I'm with Smart Buys. How are you
all? Thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak.
Ed Weeden: Speak into the mic.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 28
~
Rad Bareford: My name is Rad Bareford. I'm with Smart Buys. Mr. Waller good
to see you again. Twenty five percent of monthly storage would be the cost oflevy of
a tax such as that on us. Since October 2004, Smart Box has put a million dollars
into the Virginia Beach economy. We have 44,000 square foot warehouse in the
Diamond Springs Industrial Park. We are planning on spending another $500,000
in the next four months, all in Virginia Beach. We own the rights from North
Carolina to Williamsburg. We got to expand in the next 4 or 5 months with
multiple warehouses. The market will define what are cost structure is. Twenty-
five percent additional levy or tax or government burden on the customer imposed
by this panel is not reasonable in my opinion. We worked with Toys for Tots and
we do a lot of volunteer box replacements and I don't know if permits would be
needed for those. Because this is such a transient community, people are going to be
moving. They are either going to rent a V-haul and load the V-haul and move it or
we can have our professional drivers show up, drop a box off, come pick the box up
and store it. Right now, our price structure is set. There is a fixed delivery point.
There is a 30-day storage and redelivery charge. Sixteen days would be wonderful
time frame for us to work in because are boxes are not set up to withstand long term
exposure to the weather. It is simple enough. Twenty-fours in a town home would
be tough in my opinion. Again, to me it strikes me as basic economics. I did the
research in October on the self-storage industry in Hampton Roads. They are
running at 93 percent capacity, when supply seeks demand, prices go up. It would
be wonderful to be in the self-storage industry in Hampton Roads with 93 percent
occupancy. Its unbelievable and I think it is wonderful. But, our prices are still less
than fixed self-storage so long as were not with any unreasonable additional 25
percent burdens.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you.
Rad Bareford: You're welcome. Thank you all.
Dorothy Wood: Would you please answer Mr. Miller's question?
Robert Miller: How many boxes do you have?
Rad Bareford: Right now we have 289.
Robert Miller: Are all of them in use?
Rad Bareford: No sir. We have about 8 customers right this second.
Robert Miller: Eight?
Rad Bareford: Yes sir. Toys for Tots are using several. We have several
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 29
customers. We had a customer Friday. We delivered it Friday and picked up
Saturday morning. They were good to go.
Robert Miller: So you anticipate using 289? Is there some kind of anticipating of
using 289 a month?
Rad Bareford: We can hold 1,800 in our current facility. We're going to need
additional facilities shortly.
Robert Miller: 1,800?
Rad Bareford: Yes sir.
Robert Miller: You're anticipating using 1,800 of these boxes a month?
Rad Bareford: Yes sir. We have a Richmond and Fredericksburg. Richmond, as of
Friday, 85 percent oftheir boxes of the 560 they had out, 85 percent of them were in
storage. So they had 60 on delivery.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you very much.
Rad Bareford: Thank you all.
."-",
Dorothy Wood: I guess that is all the speakers. Mr. Watson, three minutes to wrap
it up, since you're the attorney or Mr. Reda? Which one of you? Sorry, R.J. I
didn't see you.
Bill Macali: Madame Chair, I think Ms. Lasley is the city's representative and has
the chance to rebut.
Dorothy Wood: Okay. Thank you. Hi Karen.
Karen Lasley: You heard enough about PODS. Are there any questions that I can
answer for you or help you sort through anything?
Robert Miller: How are you going to police 1,800 plus the 500 boxes that they have.
It's just beginning to be a number. This is astronomical.
Karen Lasley: We'll do the best that we can. I think that is a good argument that
we need the permit visible so a zoning inspector can drive by and hopefully see from
the street that it is placed properly. He can see on the permit when it arrived and
when it is scheduled to go. They have to check each one twice. I'm trying to set it
up to make it as simple for them as possible so I can get some handle on it.
Robert Miller: I know you'll do the best that you can.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 30
Karen Lasley: We're willing to give it a try.
Robert Miller: It's more than overwhelming. The numbers are adding up and
we're heading into a whirlwind. When you talk about the townhouses and the
apartments is there any reality to any possibility with dealing with 24-hours other
than the self-leasing of the business people themselves? There is no other way really
is there?
Karen Lasley: Well, we have one person working on the weekends but it will be
tough to enforce the 24-hours on the weekend.
Robert Miller: Thank you.
Karen Lasley: We can make changes to our weekend schedule if we need to do so.
Dorothy Wood: Are there any more questions for Karen?
Eugene Crabtree: I'd like to ask R.J. a question, if I could please. He may not
know the answer.
R.I. Nutter: I'll be happy to try. Yes sir.
~
Eugene Crabtree: R.J. there is a lot of discussion about the costs and the prorating
and this and that and the other versus the standard storage units. Do you know on
an average about how a storage facility goes? I should but I don't.
R.I. Nutter: I'm afraid that I would have to tell you an estimate. I wouldn't be able
to do that.
Eugene Crabtree: I just wanted to know.
R.I. Nutter: That is alright. I apologize. I'm sure my members would know that
because they have different sizes as you know as well.
Eugene Crabtree: I'm just concerned ifit was about the square footage.
R.J. Nutter: I understand.
Eugene Crabtree: Thank you.
R.J. Nutter: Madame Chairman, ifthey are going to have a chance to wrap.
Dorothy Wood: I don't think anyone is going too.
R.J. Nutter: That's fine.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 31
Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Is there anything else for Karen?
William Din: I think I would like to ask Karen a question. Can you also refresh us
on why the City thinks we need a permit and the cost of this permit? .
Karen Lasley: The cost at $15.00 is very minimal. I estimate, and this is a real low
estimate, that if everything is perfect and we can do it on a drive by, it probably is
going to cost the City $19.00 per container to make sure this ordinance is enforced.
I don't think the taxpayers should have to pick up that tab. What else did you ask
me?
William Din: Why do you think the City thinks a permit is needed in this situation
for any use whether it's less than 16 days or 24 hours? A reasonable cost of$15.00
is that reasonable for the City?
Karen Lasley: Just to help recoop the cost and to make enforcement easier.
William Din: Okay.
...:::..
Robert Miller: We talked this morning about commercial and residential. I think I
had been spinning in my thinking and as I marked up I looked back over the
markings that I gave you on the ordinance. I had always felt that the emphasis and
my conversations have been the encroachment into the residential communities of
these storage units, but you and I talked this morning, and you had as much of a
concern about commercial issues and maybe more so. I won't phrase it. I'll let you
decide. But, I felt like that was something that was not in our thinking. Can you
explain to me where perhaps the commercial side if you had problems with?
Karen Lasley: For me the concerns are about equal. I think that containers can
degrade our commercial areas. It's much cheaper for a large box store to put 50
containers out back, and store an extra warehouse of materials, and extra goods in
those containers than it is to add onto the commercial building. I don't think that
does anything for the aesthetics or the quality of our commercial areas except
degrade them. I have had some bad experiences with containers in commercial
areas. So, I'm concerned about both.
Robert Miller: On construction, we did not regulate the CONEX boxes that are
present on all the construction sites.
Karen Lasley: On construction, ifit is in a non-residential district you can have it
there with a building permit for 24-hours before construction and 24-hours after.
It's pretty open.
Robert Miller: For the length of construction then.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 32
Karen Lasley: For the length of construction. So the containers over on the jail
project. That's fine because that is not zoned residential.
Robert Miller: In a residential?
Karen Lasley: In a residential area, it is limited to 30 days in this ordinance.
Robert Miller: No. I'm sorry. If you had a CONEX box, or a box at a construction
site, or if a house, would that be regulated in anyway, shape or form?
Karen Lasley: Yes. This would limit it to 30 days.
Robert Miller: Unless they have construction. We currently have houses under
construction with something other than it says PODS on the side of it but it is
construction and there it is sat there and we need to come change it.
Karen Lasley: What are you calling a CON box?
Robert Miller: CON box, a metal box usually.
Karen Lasley: It's a tractor-trailer container.
~
Robert Miller: Exactly.
Karen Lasley: This covers that. It would limit that to 30 days in a residential area.
Robert Miller: So that would be limited to 30 days?
Karen Lasley: The reason we did that was because we had a lot of complaints in
residential areas where they stay there in the front yard rusted and huge for a year
or two.
Ronald Ripley: Karen, I'd like to be clear also. On a commercial project we have
this larger box or a regular that is like we have here. As the subcontractors get
these big contracts they have to store their equipment there instead of in a facility.
In residential and I think we had this conversation about multi-family owned
property. Is that the case also too? If you have a large apartment project going on,
you will have 30 days?
Karen Lasley: The way this is written that would apply to apartment zoning and
residential. Yes.
Ronald Ripley: You have the same situation as with commercial construction that
deals with commercial contractors with a hundred air conditioning units that
they're putting in.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 33
Karen Lasley: This classifies it as residential so you would have to adjust that.
Ronald Ripley: We wouldn't want them on the road as much. If you had to deliver
and pick it up it could be a lot more trouble and lot more inconvenience to keep in
on the area.
Karen Lasley: I understand.
Ronald Ripley: Okay.
Karen Lasley: You have to make an adjustment.
Dorothy Wood: I think what he is saying is that if you were building an apartment
like the big boxes that are offices and you have them on construction sites.
Karen Lasley: A trailer is different. You're talking about the semi-trailer boxes
taken off the truck and stored.
~
Robert Miller: I'm not sure I agree with the trailers as different. I guess you can
just put wheels on it so it could be there right throughout the construction?
Dorothy Wood: There are a lot of them on this campus?
Karen Lasley: I guess that would be a way to get around it. If you're worried about
big apartment construction, you need to make an adjustment.
Dorothy Wood: It's looking like the 31 st Street hotel. They have a construction
trailer that is probably been there since they started the building. All big sites have
them and I don't know how long that's been there.
Robert Miller: A year.
Dorothy Wood: A year. See what we're saying?
Karen Lasley: Yeah.
Dorothy Wood: That is where they have their offices and bathrooms.
Kathy Katsias: That's a commercial site.
Dorothy Wood: But she said commercial sites too.
Karen Lasley: The way this is written, in residential apartment and resort tourist
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 34
districts they would not be able to have them for big construction projects for more
than 30 days.
Dorothy Wood: Where would they have their construction office?
Karen Lasley: Well, they could have a construction trailer with an office in it. That
we do separately, but not storage of material in a container.
Dorothy Wood: To store their material.
Karen Lasley: Yes.
Dorothy Wood: Ron, I think you had your hand up. Didn't you?
Ronald Ripley: No, I didn't.
Dorothy Wood: Gene.
-=:..
Eugene Crabtree: Karen, it seems as though a lot of our discussion. We're never
going to satisfy everybody. I don't care what we do. On line 62, which is in part
one, which concerns 30-days. There seems to be some controversy there on that 30
day versus 60 days. Am I correct?
Karen Lasley: Controversy. There are people that want 60. Yes.
Eugene Crabtree: You got 30 days and some are asking for 60 days. Some want it
longer than that. Then we're talking and there was some discussion on Line 119 &
120 about occupying parking spaces.
Karen Lasley: Correct. Required parking spaces.
Eugene Crabtree: If the wording that says "so long as no required parking spaces
are obstructed" was removed, that would better satisfy some of the things that
people have asked for, would it not? I'm clarifying what some of the people are
asking.
Karen Lasley: What you had us to do was put in another section that says if you
can't meet that requirement and you have put it in a required parking space that is
when you get it for 24-hours.
Eugene Crabtree: Well the 24 hours is also the last thing that I wanted to clarify.
Karen Lasley: Okay.
Eugene Crabtree: Because we've had 16 days asked for. Most of the people and
most of the people that work in the industry say that 24-hours is unreasonable. 72
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 35
hours would cover a period say from a Friday until a Monday morning and
obviously it would be over a weekend, which would enable single families. People
will pack their stuffbefore and have everything ready to go. They would be able to
load it and we're just talking about on the ground. We're not talking about how
long the actual container people will have it in their possession. We're talking about
on the ground on the property. So if we were to amend this to 30 days, and if we
were to amend the required parking space, and we were to amend the 24-hours to
72, would that be, in the middle of the road to better satisfy all parties? We're not
going to satisfy everybody.
Karen Lasley: I guess I would leave that your judgment.
Dorothy Wood: Ms. Anderson.
Janice Anderson: What about the definition of portable storage container? I know
we went over this at the beginning and I guess that is where I thought the yard
waste containers were construction containers too, and that they were not controlled
by that section.
Karen Lasley: That was just the yard waste containers put out by the city.
~
Janice Anderson: Now those big metal construction containers that everybody puts
debris in.
Karen Lasley: Like when you're taking off an old roof?
Janice Anderson: Right. Is that covered by this section or not?
Bill Macali: If it's a portable weather resistant receptacle designed and used for
storage or shipment of building materials it is included in the ordinance.
Janice Anderson: My problem is and I didn't think it was covered. I think if
everybody else got that same impression and that is where I'm kind of stuck now
because that is not realistic. I think everybody knows that if someone is building a
house next to me they're not going to do it in 30-days. And, I would rather have the
debris container next to me then all their debris in my front yard. I mean, they have
to put the debris somewhere. These are houses going up. I'm sorry I got the
misunderstanding that was not covered by this section. And, I think the wording of
it was that it was for storage and shipment of building things. I didn't think it was
debris from building sites. I was almost there on one part but now that there doing
all these construction units, I'm not real comfortable putting that kind oflimit on
there. I just don't think its practical care for people. They cannot build a
residential home in 30-days. I wish my contractor could have done it.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 36
Karen Lasley: Do you see a difference between maybe a new subdivision versus
infill ?
Janice Anderson: No.
Karen Lasley: That is where we hear the complaints when its an existing established
neighborhood and people come in with all these containers for long periods of time.
Janice Anderson: A lot of times they're upgrading too. If you live in the old
neighborhoods they're taking down the old house and then there putting up new
construction and it improves the neighborhood. So, you're going up in the value.
Karen Lasley: Okay.
...;;:::".
Janice Anderson: But, I was coming to some compromise with regard with the
other usage but with, and I'm kind of back to square one now that we got a mess
with construction items. Just like Mr. Miller mentioned and Dot you got the
construction down at the Oceanfront for hotels. They can't do it in 30-days. That's
R T -3 District. You can put residential apartment in the Resort District in with the
hotel, office, business and industrial district, which are allowed to have them as long
as they have an active building permit.
Ronald Ripley: I was going to suggest that. I agree.
Karen Lasley: You can put that in there.
Robert Miller: But that will allow this.
Karen Lasley: If they had an active building permit, yes it would.
Robert Miller: I just want to make sure that we're all on the same page.
Joseph Strange: Why wouldn't there be a distinction between new construction and
remodeling? It seems like to me there would be a big distinction.
Karen Lasley: I think that might help, especially in residential areas.
Joseph Strange: That's right. That's what I getting at. New construction uses
limited for unsightly situation that won't any of that whereas if you're remodeling
you're not looking at an unsightly situation like you are new construction.
Dorothy Wood: You need to try to work it out. We certainly don't want to go
through this again.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 37
Karen Lasley: We can make that change before we pass it on to Council.
Janice Anderson: You might fix everything up because even with the discussion
before us, somebody is doing rernode1ing they can have it, load their furniture up
and move it to the storage unit. So, the remodeling, I think is the way to handle it
besides new construction.
Karen Lasley: Is that remodeling only in residential not in apartment? We have
apartment and as long as they have the building permit?
Donald Horsley: That is the question we asked the gentlemen a while ago about
what were they storing in these containers. He said they were storing construction
stuff in these containers also. A remodeling job is not going to get done in 30 days
most of the time either. I don't know if we have to watch that or not.
...:::::..
Karen Lasley: I think remodeling jobs are done mostly in existing neighborhoods
where it is more disruptive to have the container there for long periods. And, with a
remodeling job there is room beside the house or the garage to store things. If they.
need a container, they can fill it with household items and send it to the warehouse
and then bring it back when they're finished.
Donald Horsley: I was hoping that was the answer that I was going to get a while
ago whether they were putting any household items in here and storing them on site.
Well, they could be picked up and carried to the warehouse. If they're storing
construction materials in them you can't do that back and forth everyday either.
Karen Lasley: Okay.
Donald Horsley: We're getting contradicting answers of what's really in these
boxes.
Karen Lasley: So, if it's new construction for residential, as long as they have a
valid permit, 24 hours before and 24 after. If it's a remodeling or additions, stick
with the 30 days?
Eugene Crabtree: 60 days.
Joseph Strange: Is this our discussion time? I think those points need to be made
and they were made by Don Bilbo. He said that no one wants a trashy
neighborhood. Okay. Les Watson said this is not for onsite storage. Okay. This is
for moving. Rob Peterson said they don't want these things in their parking spaces.
You don't want them there yourself which is a recognition that people don't want
them there. And so, I think if we use these three statements here as a guideline and
then use a little bit of common sense with the commercial construction, I think we
should be able to come up with something pretty close to something that we have
right this minute with just some exceptions on long term construction projects.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 38
Dorothy Wood: Maybe you could word it.
Joseph Strange: I'm not the one who is going to come up with these numbers. I'm
not in that business.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Crabtree.
Eugene Crabtree: Can we make a motion that covers these things that Karen has
talked about plus a couple oflittle items here and there and put it to a vote?
Dorothy Wood: What were your other items?
~
Eugene Crabtree: Well, on the construction sites, I think you pretty well have to
construct the sites and anything over 16 days you pay a $15.00 permit. I would say
on Line 62 that 30 days is probably sufficient. I would like to amend it on Line 119
& 120 to remove that one statement so long as no required parking spaces are
obstructed and I would like to change 24 hours to 72 hours on Line 140. With the
changes that you have to construction and renovation that you already made, if I
could make a motion to amend those two things and to include what you have down
on the other and that we put it in the form of a motion.
Dorothy Wood: But we wanted to streamline.
Eugene Crabtree: Yes ma'am.
Dorothy Wood: But we want the permitting?
Eugene Crabtree: Yes ma'am. I'm not removing the permitting no longer than 16
days.
Dorothy Wood: I'm talking about all permitting because Karen has to pay people.
Eugene Crabtree: She said there would be nothing after 24 hours without a permit.
Karen Lasley: I still want the permit but we wouldn't charge for the short-term
permit.
Eugene Crabtree: I just want to change that 24 hours to 72 hours. I want to change
where you place the container where it says as long as no required space is
obstructed.
Bill Macali: There is a legal impediment to that. There is another provision in the
City Zoning Ordinance, which does say that each required off street parking space
shall be unobstructed. We basically can overlook that for 24 hours or something
short term.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 39
Eugene Crabtree: Alright. Then we can't amend that statement. Then it comes
down to changing the 24 hours to the 72 hours but with the other provision with
renovations and constructions as so stated by you and the Board.
Dorothy Wood: I just need for you to go over the motion.
Eugene Crabtree: I don't remember all of the wording.
Karen Lasley: What I can do to is make the changes and send them out to you right
away before Stephen has to send it to City Council to make sure we got it right.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Miller. Did you want to say something?
...=..
Robert Miller: A couple ofthings and I'll probably be against some of the motion
anyway. This is one of the reasons why I don't like ordinances that way we have to
try and ,construct because they begin to reach so many pieces and it is not Karen's
fault. It's not anyone's fault. It is just very, very difficult when you start saying
what about this and what about that. We're trying to cover any contingent,
everybody possibility and every situation. I know we're not going to cover
everything. You already know that too because you've been doing this to many
years. You've seen all the loopholes. This will have new loopholes. I think as long
as the construction site is handled to me. This is bad and this sits here for six
months or whatever the length of the time of the construction and perhaps longer.
But if we say that is not allowed and we say that trailers are allowed. Please don't
misunderstood. I think the misunderstanding was I don't want to say trailers are
not allowed but we're going to end up with trailers. Sometimes you get what you
ask for. So, there will be something there because the contractors who use these, as
Don say's there going to use some kind of box or something to store materials or
equipment or whatever they're working with so they can get in and out without
having to store it in a house. I think the construction site needs to be separated from
this in all aspects of it. I just don't think we're going to do a real good job with that.
In the ordinance, I'll go away with a few of the things that I tried to get done before.
From the commercial side you had on Line 86, you had ten days. I would think that
from continuity, I would prefer to do that for hoteVoffice business, industrial
business. I think that is ten days. I would prefer that to be 16 days there. The ten
foot setback, I would prefer that to be in conformance to where a shed is allowed,
which I believe is five feet. .
Karen Lasley: If it is under 150 square feet.
Robert Miller: Policing this is just a walking nightmare. Somebody is going to have
to figure out where the property line is. Are they five feet away? Are they eight feet
away? Are they ten feet away? I don't perceive something that is going to be done.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 40
On the ordinance itself, that is all that I got to say. I don't like the permit fee but I
will use that in my discussion.
Dorothy Wood: We are having a discussion sir.
Robert Miller: I'll make a motion then.
Dorothy Wood: Gene has a motion on the floor. If you would like to repeat the
motion that's on the floor, I'll ask Karen.
Karen Lasley: To sum up the changes, as I understand them. Alright. In the
section that starts on Page
~
Ronald Ripley: Before you start, I just want to make this point. For the section that
talks about residential apartment in the Resort Tourist District, the part about
construction where it says that a portable container can be used in connection with
such construction activity may be for a period not to exceed 30 days or once in any
six month period. I really feel you need to have that time period for construction.
First of all, to me if you're doing a house if you have a six month time period limit
the container could be out there it would probably be reasonable. You're not going
to bring that container out after you have your site in. You have your foundations
in and things and then it would be the later part of the house that you need the stuff
out there. So, if it had six months or four months or something like that then it
would be realistic. In the Resort Tourist District we're looking at a mixed used now
in the resort. There are some other zonings that do permit you to do that.
Karen Lasley: That zoning only applies in R T -2, R T -3 and R T -4 when the principal
use is residential. That was the change that Ms. Anderson wanted last time.
Ronald Ripley: Okay. That covers that. My point is that if you can construct this
part to permit a period not to exceed, I would say four months or five months that
would provide enough time for a contractor to build his house.
Karen Lasley: I thought you wanted, and I was only going to leave in this section in
residential, not apartment, residential, if you're doing a remodeling or an addition,
we'll keep it at 30-days. But I was going to move everything else ifit's residential
new construction and ifit's apartment new construction or remodeling, I was
changing it to this section that starts on Page 4, where you can have it there as long
as you have an active building permit. Right?
Ronald Ripley: That takes care of that.
Dorothy Wood: That's good.
Karen Lasley: Okay.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 41
Ronald Ripley: I'm sorry to interrupt you. I just wanted to clarify.
Karen Lasley: That is what I was going to say. Do you want me to say it again?
Ronald Ripley: Yeah.
Karen Lasley: Okay. The first change would be on the section that starts on Line
51. I'm sorry. I'll make it say that in the residential districts only if you're doing
remodeling and additions only, not new construction, you can have a container on
the site for 30 days maximum. Okay. Then for all the other districts including
residential new construction, apartment new construction and remodeling and all
the other districts, hotel, office, business and industrial, and the resort tourist
districts: if you have a building permit you can have a container on the site during
construction. Okay. Alright. Do you want me to chance on Line 86 as Mr. Miller
requested the ten days to 16-days? The 10 days is in non-residential districts when
you're only going to use a container during moving or relocation. And the ten days
actually came from the industry. That is what they were happy with. You wanted
16 just to keep it consistent?
Robert Miller: That comes from commercial realtors?
~
Karen Lasley: We had another meeting with the PODS company. You want it 16 to
keep it consistent? Is everybody okay with that? Okay. Good deal. The setbacks
for containers on Line 100 change that to five feet to be in keeping with what we do
for storage sheds. That is five feet no matter what size. And, then on Line 123, the
24-hours you want changed to 72? We didn't talk about it. Do you want me to take
out required parking spaces?
Ronald Ripley: No. The policy says we can't do that.
Karen Lasley: Then the 24 hours the way we've written it only applies when the
only place that you have on site to put your container is in a required parking space
and you can't get it ten feet away from the pavement. So you're going to have
trouble seeing around that container when you back out. And you're going to be
taking up your parking place and mostly everybody has got two cars so you're going
to have a car in the street.
Eugene Crabtree: We need to change that to 72.
Karen Lasley: 72.
Kathy Katsias: Is there a charge on that?
Karen Lasley: That would be up to you but for the 24 hours we weren't going to
charge.
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 42
Dorothy Wood: Gene is this your motion as you remember making it?
Eugene Crabtree: Change Line 140 to 72.
Karen Lasley: Are you okay with me requiring the permit to be on the 72-hour
container if I don't charge for it? I got it. Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: I have a motion. Do I have a second so we can discuss it? Seconded
by Barry. Okay. Thank you Karen.
Karen Lasley: Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Any discussion? I think that sounds pretty good to me.
...::=:::.
Robert Miller: I want to discuss this one more minute. I'll be brief. I can't
remember all of this. I think we're not really being very realistic with the additions
and renovations because they do feel like remodeling and additions are just going to
be as extensive of a construction phase as any new construction can be. The new
thing in the commercial areas and one of the concerns was and listing this morning
that there are people out there taking advantage of this. I think that is something
that would be very policable. I should say more policeable. And that is something
that I would really like to emphasis is that this not be continue to process in
commercial areas. I would expect PODS people and others, Smart Box to be
responsible enough looking at those. The only other thing that I have to say is I
really think we're walking into a spinning wheel. We have way to many possibilities
here as we tried to go through the possibilities and probabilities; I have a feeling
that the Committee went through at least this many and a whole lot more. I know
that staff has been through even more. I don't see how we're going to possibly
police this. I do think that the $15.00 is maybe it does justify a paying somebody to
drive around and look for these things. But if the PODS people don't pick up their
stuff up or Smart Box people in 16 days, I do not believe we will catch enough of
these to spit at. I think the community will call us occasionally. They may call us in
12 days. I have no idea. It's just absolutely going to be difficult to run this thing
and run it in a manner that makes sense. I don't like this ordinance. I don't like the
idea that we're getting into these people's businesses so much. I don't mind the fact
that I think things like this. I certainly don't like decisions. But I will tell you that I
can't imagine a house being constructed that wouldn't have a private waste just like
in that picture. Somebody's construction trailer sitting right in front of these two
and two more trailers sitting there that were not PODS. All I can say is to the
PODS people is take your signs off so nobody will know who you are.
Dorothy Wood: We have a motion by Mr. Crabtree and a second by Mr. Knight.
AYE 10
NAY 1
ABSO
ABSENT 0
Item #19
City of Virginia Beach
Page 43
ANDERSON
CRABTREE
DIN
HORSLEY
KA TSIAS
KNIGHT
MILLER
RIPLEY
STRANGE
WALLER
WOOD
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
NAY
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 10-1, the application of the City of Virginia Beach to
amend the definition of portable storage containers has been approved by the
Board.
Dorathy Wood: This is just a recommendation, as you all know. You're more than
welcome to go to City Council and talk with them and work with them for a couple
of months. Thank you all for coming down.
...=::..
City e>f Virgi:cìia Beach
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
ZONING ADMINISTRATION 'DIVISION
(157) 427-8074 - , -
FAX (757) 427-4649
December 1 2004
MUNICIPAL CENTER
BUILDING 2 - ROOM 100
2405 COURTHOUSE DRIVE
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23456-9039
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Karen Lasley, Zoning Administrator
RE: Portable Storage Containers, Permitting Options
Option A - Standard
1.
The homeowner must come to the Planning Department with a survey of
their property and indicate on the survey where the container will be
parked.
2.
The homeowner fills out a short permit application form indicating the
property address and when the container will be arriving. The date that the
container must be removed is added by staff. The homeowner pays the
$15.00 fee and is given the permit to be placed on the container when it
arrives. On the permit, staff fills in the property address, date of arrival,
and required date of departure.
3.
The container permit information is entered into the permit system and a
printout of each permit is provided to the Zoning inspection staff.
4.
The Zoning Inspector monitors the site to ensure that the container is
properly placed and removed on time.
Option B - Streamlined
1.
The storage container company comes to the Planning Department as
often as it desires and purchases as many blank container permits as it
desires. For example, PODS can come in once per month and purchase
500 blank permits.
2.
When the container is delivered, the delivery driver will locate the
container in conformance with the regulations. The driver will fill in the
permit with the appropriate address, date of arrival and required date of
departure and attach it to the side of the container facing the street.
3.
The container company will provide the Planning Department with a daily
list of all containers placed in Virginia Beach, including address and date
of placement. The container permit information is entered into the permit
system and a printout of each permit is provided to the Zoning inspection
staff.
4.
The Zoning Inspector checks each site to ensure that the container is
placed properly and removed on time.
24 Hour Permits - Streamlined
1.
Special 24 hour permits will be made is a different color than the regular
permits. Space will be provided to fill in the address, date of arrival and
time of arrival. These permits will be given to the container companies at
no cost.
Steps #2 through #4 - same as Option B, above.
12/7/2004 9:24 PM FROM: Fax TO: 426-5667
PAGE: 002 OF 002
..::;:
26 Cypress
Pointe
HOA
Arrh1rst Homes
Ovic Leaeue
Ara§ona ViUa§e
Ovic Lea~ue
Crystal Point
HOA
Cypress Poirt
Ovic Assoc
llimond Lake
Estates
Ovic Leaeue
rlamondSprin§sl
~denwood
Ovic Leaeue
~and Lake
Ovic Leaeue
HI;J qprd~
Ovic Leaeue
lake Cypress
Ovic Leaeue
lake Edward
Area
Ovic Lea~ue
Lake Snith
Terrace,
Hay§ood Pårt 8;
q,overnor Square
Ovic Leaeue
LakeSnith
Ovic Lea~ue
lakeview Park
Ovic Leaeue
lawson forest
Ovic Leaeue
Lynbrook
L andn§
Ovic Leaeue
Newsome farms
Ovic Leaeue
Tradtions at
Cypress Poirt
HOA
Wesleyan Chase
Ovic leaeue
Wesleyan forest
Ovic League
Wesleyan Pines
Campus East
Community Assoc
Witchduck Lake
Condo Assoc
Northwest Beach Partnership
Board Members:
P.] Padrick -President
Bruce Weger - tt Vice President, Dave Tirado - 2rd Vice President, Kale Warren- Treasurer, Mchele A. ~dun - Secretary
Email: northwestbeachpartners@verizmnet
Virginia Beach Planning Commission
RE: Dec. 8,2004 Agenda Item 19
Change in Virginia Beach Code concerning Portable storage Units
December 8, 2004
Dear Chairman Wood and Members of the Commission,
The Northwest Beach Partnership voted to support the ordinance to
amend the Virginia Beach City Zoning Ordinance Sections 111 & 201,
defining" portable storage containers" and regulating the use and
placement of portable storage containers.
The need for this change has become apparent in some of our
communities. We feel that the long-term use of such containers is both
unsightly and a potential hazard to the welfare of the community.
We thank the Commission for allowing us the opportunity to comment on
this matter.
Respectfully,
Northwest Beach Partnership Board
757 -490-9 572 northwestbeachoortners@verizon.net
, /~ J uè:: U ~\ \"1(, \~C t-- V (J D~
-=+¡ (I./! . C:~ct '
t l\~ \ti-\
Dec 2004
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
The city of Virginia Beach is proposing an ordinance that will regulate the use of
Portable Storage Containers. We understand there needs to be some regulations regarding
Portable Storage Containers. Since you are a neighbor of a container user we would like
your opinion on the uses of containers. We believe the following uses are fair; by signing
this form you are showing you have no opposition to these uses in your neighborhood.
1) 16 days time limit on property without a permit.
2) After 16 clays a permit is necessary for a period of up to 60 days for renovation
and restoration purposes only, governed by a permit and $15 fee.
3) No more than 2 Portable storage containers not to exceed 16 days for moving
purposes only, otherwise 1 container only for construction activity.
=
ADDRESS & DATE
'"
.s; -::;"7 c2.. /'"7,r Cì I ¡4 J- I /) J!lA I L
.$'/0 ~í £llë _5:})~/'1. lJl?/I/&
-H'~ (""-"v ():- \ .c-" ~\,(..~\,--\vv ;'\:i',~l
"\:-":l-,_-",l\ 7" \J\ '.....i\~' v,'»
\-"\~\('Û
, ¿,.\ t, ,'V \
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
Dec 2004
The city of Virginia Beach is proposing an ordinance that will regulate the use of
Portable Storage Containers. We understand there needs to be some regulations regarding
Portable Storage Containers. Since you are a neighbor of a container user we would like
your opinion on the uses of containers. We believe the following uses are fair; by signing
this form you are showing you have no opposition to these uses in your neighborhood.
1) 16 days time limit on property without a permit.
2) After 16 days a permit is necessary for a period of up to 60 days for renovation
and restoration purposes only, governed by a permit and $15 fee.
3) No more than 2 Portable storage containers not to exceed 16 days for moving
purposes only, otherwise 1 container only for construction activity.
~
-
2.:3"3:zs-
ÌI " ;' ." " ,-
..L'("' (,.,-'"J (,:.-:- \) P,..'t'¡o.S~'t" ,{ (¡'J '>
'~'¡--:'-\....\'."J' \',
h I v\, ( ir'\
\:....\ ¡). v
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
Dec 2004
The city afVirginia Beach is proposing an ardinance that will regulate the use af
Portable Starage Cantainers. We understand there needs to. be same regulatians regarding
Portable Starage Cantainers. Since yau are a neighbar af a co.ntainer user we would like
yaur apinio.n on the uses of cantainers. We believe the fallowing uses are fair; by signing
this farm yau are shawing yau have no oppasitian to. these uses in your neighbarhaad.
1) 16 days time limit o.n property withaut a permit., .
2) After 16 days a permit is necessary for a periad af 1;1P to 60 days for renavation
and restoratian purpases anly, gavemed by a~rmh and $15 fee.
3) No. more than 2 Partable starage cantainers nat to. ~xceed 16 days far mo.ving
purpases only,atherwise 1 cantainer anly far canstructian activity.
~
NAME & SIGNATURE
ADDRESS & DATE
<12q
92'3 At1esJ~
iv<
-
\ 'ð\f ß
/:)57
I j( S-
f Lfoì
¡I t Vi¡¿J 1)1\./
¡hIO\
L v1-.r lid ¡tv!
¡v-, '
-t\.lC1 ~ CH"-t c:X. íJ .f.. tjE'K ~:\ <- IV Û ~ ç
l1 \~\ ~L\
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
Dec 2004
The city of Virginia Beach is proposing an ordinance that will regulate the use of
Portable Storage Containers. We understand there needs to be some regulations regarding
Portable Storage Containers. Since you are a neighbor of a container user we would like
your opinion on the uses of containers. We believe the following uses are fair; by signing
this form you are showing you have no opposition to these uses in your neighborhood.
1) 16 days time limit on property without a permit.
2) After 16 days a permit is necessary for a period of up to 60 days for renovation
and restoration purposes only, governed by a permit and $15 fee.
3) No more than 2 Portable storage containers not to exceed 16 days for moving
purposes only, otherwise 1 container only for construction activity.
.::::=::>
j,c¿V ~
Lt
'-17/6 V
\)c.~ch fZ.ll/ó~
1;)/1 J 0'1
12-/) ICy
(~/{)ìIN
I~ \ 1 ~
/&/7/vl(
/~/1/o ;/
\L\Î\à~
t~IJ(d1
\.l.../"l/o~
IZ!7/1c..{
IZ/7/t:A{
rl-7-D¥
.
j~, ì'ò Lj
GJ.
,-4. ,(' ,('. -A., t'\- ¡j ¡) í~ePcíc¥- \)ùQ<:,
~\:\-v\.ll 'J\ . ,
,
" \( i 'L+
\¿,.,~.. \J '.
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
Dec 2004
The city of Virginia Beach is proposing an ordinance that will regulate the use of
Portable Storage Containers. We understand there needs to be some regulations regarding
Portable Storage Containers. Since you are a neighbor of a container user we would like
your opinion on the uses of containers. We believe the following uses are fair; by signing
this form you are showing you have no opposition to these uses in your neighborhood.
1) 16 days time limit on property without a pennit.
2) After 16 days a permit is necessary for a period of up to 60 days for renovation
and restoration purposes only, governed by a permit and $15 fee.
3) No more than 2 Portable storage containers not to exceed 16 days for moving
purposes only, otherwise 1 container only for construction activity.
=
ADDRESS & DATE
-
:'\ ," /
!tit;... 1- f¡~ Òt"\J A', ,~"f¥C~- \lUv')
. ~ '-..'", -.....'
\L\~\ (¡vi.
Dec 2004
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
The city of Virginia Beach is proposing an ordinance that will regulate the use of
Portable Storage Containers. We understand there needs to be some regulations regarding
Portable Storage Containers. Since you are a neighbor of a container user we would like
your opinion on the uses of containers. We believe the following uses are fair; by signing
this form you are showing you have no opposition to these uses in your neighborhood.
1) 16 days time limit on property without a permit.
2) After 16 days a permit is necessary for a period of up to 60 days for renovation
and restoration purposes only, governed by a permit and $15 fee.
3) No more than 2 Portable storage containers not to exceed 16 days for moving
purposes only, otherwise 1 container only for construction activity.
. "',
NAME & SIGNATURE
ADDRESS & DATE
...2 T4Ij-"'/
°1 >~t.J(
2 L/i) J
t9- oj Y~J
2';~~2.
I ) &VVVl ° .°Lr) (
I¿¿ I~ ~.
¥ l~jG 1 ^ Z _5 \.) ~ ~
~, \C1 '- (\.1'1 6f \J f\ q8f(~ Vù) (
l l\\<\ tL-\
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
Dec 2004
The city of Virginia Beach is proposing an ordinance that will regulate the use of
Portable Storage Containers. We understand there needs to be some regulations regarding
Portable Storage Containers. Since you are a neighbor of a container user we would like
your opinion on the uses of containers. We believe the following uses are fair; by signing
this form you are showing you have no opposition to these uses in your neighborhood.
1) 16 days time limit on property without a permit.
2) After 16 days a permit is necessary for a period of up to 60 days for renovation
and restoration purposes only, governed by a permit and $15 fee.
3) No more than 2 Portable storage containers not to exceed 16 days for moving
purposes only, otherwise 1 container only for construction activity.
.=:::::!.
.,
w
¿ì-b-O'f
c
/2--6-ùy
J 7{
n;A t/If {
¡'¡,yL,eR.S 'JV/~ CLo
12.f(plOLf
/ /
I,-/t; G / ö '-/
I
'7....L/1 Î
/L/.-z~
/ (/3 ¡:.
1\ \~'l '- C'-'t'-{ ù~ \~ f\ B~\:\" 90wS
\ ì \~\t;Û
\ ~, \
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
Dec 2004
The city of Virginia Beach is proposing an ordinance that will regulate the use of
Portable Storage Containers. We understand there needs to be some regulations regarding
Portable Storage Containers. Since you are a neighbor of a container user we would like
your opinion on the uses of containers. We believe the following uses are fair; by signing
this form you are showing you have no opposition to these uses in your neighborhood.
1) 16 clays time limit on property without a permit.
2) After 16 days a permit is necessary for a period of up to 60 days for renovation
and restoration purposes only, governed by a permit and $15 fee.
3) No more than 2 Portable storage .containers not to exceed 16 days for moving
purposes only, otherwise 1 container only for construction activity.
-=
NAME & SIGNATURE
ADDRESS & DATE
k({¡
-
JI 1C1, - ('\-,;V h'Ç \\ PI ~Þ^t~, -~ "'C;í) S
I.' '"-, \.. \ ¡ v \ v .' / ;::'r\...
¡)~. "()
\ V\,)\] \
Dec 2004
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
The city of Virginia Beach is proposing an ordinance that will regulate the use of
Portable Storage Containers. We understand there needs to be some regulations regarding
Portable Storage Containers. Since you are a neighbor of a container user we would like
your opinion on the uses of containers. We believe the following uses are fair; by signing
this form you are showing you have no opposition to these uses in your neighborhood.
1) 16 days time limit on property without a permit.
2) After 16 days a permit is necessary for a period of up to 60 days for renovation
and restoration purposes only, governed by a permit and $15 fee.
3) No more than 2 Portable storage containers not to exceed 16 days for moving
purposes only, otherwise 1 container only for construction activity.
.=::::::::.
NAME & SIGNATURE
ADDRESS & DATE
5éX./'5 Sfu:-. k. tu~ VrL
5ø1J.3 .5 ~k.tð/ý )),
5 ë13<:)
(;) d-d-O
-
/:l . Á- .
/:.(:;~~.~¿/? /ß(c:Ø/tÄ -.-
. /\òl'v~ tUGU(L.
~I-..-e~~ L~lÅ.X
¡Qo ~ t--v L u )Cr-'-I
S'
lloul{
/
,rL\,(/-'- .,"'C-\V\ (.' IJ A \:)~..It\- \O\)~
LJ; ,\ '-".. '" ' '..1 "C ' 1
\ l\~LL{
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
Dec 2004
The city of Virginia Beach is proposing an ordinance that will regulate the use of
Portable Storage Containers. We understand there needs to be some regulations regarding
Portable Storage Containers. Since you are a neighbor of a container user we would like
your opinion on the uses of containers. We believe the following uses are fair; by signing
this form you are showing you have no opposition to these uses in your neighborhood.
1) 16 days time limit on property without a pennit.
2) After 16 days a permit is necessary for a period of up to 60 days for renovation
and restoration purposes only, governed by a permit and $15 fee.
3) No more than 2 Portable storage containers not to exceed 16 days for moving
purposes only, otherwise 1 contaip.er only for construction activity.
-=
-
qii .'"\. , , ^.... l
!t,'( ("\."",~ OP ~A \J.,BP(t\-- \(01.\)
\'-\.....\.1. " ,..'J ~
\1\~\(j~
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
Dec 2004
The city of Virginia Beach is proposing an ordinance that will regulate the use of
Portable Storage Containers. We understand there needs to be some regulations regarding
Portable Storage Containers. Since you are a neighbor of a container user we would like
your opinion on the uses of containers. We believe the following uses are fair; by signing
this fonn you are showing you have no opposition to these uses in your neighborhood.
1) 16 days time limit on property without a pennit.
2) After 16 days a pennit is necessary for a period of up to 60 days for renovation
and restoration purposes only, governed by a permit and $15 fee.
3) No more than 2 Portable storage containers not to exceed 16 days for moving
purposes only, otherwise 1 container only for construction activity.
~
NAME & SIGNATURE
ADDRESS & DATE
13
1'13
/y)
fh t,f--
/( t.. &/Ø;'
¡ZJ;)
i J --7 -04
':fL., I(:'À¡ - (' I . ~ 1 ( " \ ~ ^ 1'\ ~Î\t 1:-\- - \) Ù\) ~
, 1:[ - ,~\~r',¡ V t- '.J.n \./~, ' I 1
'\
~ l\~ \t:J..\
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
Dec 2004
The city of Virginia Beach is proposing an ordinance that will regulate the use of
Portable Storage Containers. We understand there needs to be some regulations regarding
Portable Storage Containers. Since you are a neighbor of a container user we would like
your opinion on the uses of containers. We believe the following uses are fair; by signing
this form you are showing you have no opposition to these uses in your neighborhood.
1) 16 days time limit on property without a permit.
2) After 16 days a permit is necessary for a period of up to 60 days for renovation
and restoration purposes only, governed by a permit and $15 fee.
3) No more than 2 Portable storage containers not to exceed 16 days for moving
purposes only, otherwise 1 container only for construction activity.
.c=.
NAME & SIGNATURE
ADDRESS & DATE
U//-
dS(ß
{ rc. 2 S"! S 3
$<../
VeÅ t/ /. ;J ;;q&~
, r ""'v\' (
,;j)..',f:;, ("'~ (" ,'- \,~, ;'BlY'i-"(' \ .';>
-"-';\"'\- \:c! VI:' \);\ ',' ,'.",
\ '\
\ ( "
tJ.,\~ \)4
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
Dec 2004
The city of Virginia Beach is proposing an ordinance that will regulate the use of
Portable Storage Containers. We understand there needs to be some regulations regarding
Portable Storage Containers. Since you are a neighbor of a container user we would like
your opinion on the uses of containers. We believe the following uses are fair; by signing
this form you are showing you have no opposition to these uses in your neighborhood.
1) 16 days time limit on property without a permit.
2) After 16 days a permit is necessary for a period of up to 60 clays for renovation
and restoration purposes only, governed by a permit and $15 fee.
3) No more than 2 Portable storage containers not to exceed 16 days for moving
purposes only, otherwise 1 container only for construction activity.
-=
NAME & SIGNATURE
ADDRESS & DATE
-4' (I" Q--_v. t-t--- ¡ ,"I ¡\rv-i ¡ ,"'/í"\(
'-l'- \~\- ~ \. ¡ v,:::" "J 1'1 \')~~t< - '~vv ')
\
y~...\ ~\ b '--\
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
Dec 2004
The city of Virginia Beach is proposing an ordinance that will regulate the use of
Portable Storage Containers. We understand there needs to be some regulations regarding
Portable Storage Containers. Since you are a neighbor of a container user we would like
your opinion on the uses of containers. We believe the following uses are fair; by signing
this fonn you are showing you have no opposition to these uses in your neighborhood.
1) 16 days time limit on property without a pennit.
2) After 16 days a pennit is necessary for a period of up to 60 days for renovation
and restoration purposes only, governed by a pennit and $15 fee.
3) No more than 2 Portable storage containers not to exceed 16 days for moving
purposes only, otherwise 1 container only for construction activity.
~
ADDRESS & DATE
.-- -~ðè-iffFí(r~t~;¡e. ~ 4-!xcö 9-
FROM:
FAX NO. :
Dec. 062004 10:42AM P2
-.i. '/'- "'- r :1 ~ ~ ,,¡ \ \""\, '\~
,1 i"" (-\y"'; {',' \. (\ \I.J,\I'¡ t->-\... (): ¡
..h \ I""'\.. \.\ ' J,\:- V Ìi ',L..J"',\-..I, \. c.'
'\"'\ \(.\1 ¿J.
,'/' (;\V \.
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
Dee 2004
The city of Virginia Beach is proposing an ordinance that will regulate the use of
Portable Storage Containers. We understand there needs to be some regulations regarding
Portable Storage Containers. Since you are a neighbor of a container user we would like,
your opinion on the uses of containers. We believe the following uses are fair; by signing
this form you are showing you have no opposition to these USes in your neighborhood.
1.) 16 days time limit on property without a pennit.
2) After 16 days a permit is necessary for a period of up to 60 days for renovation
mId restoration purposes only, governed by a permit and $15 fee.
3) No more than 2 Portable storage containers not to exceed 16 days for moving
purposes only, otherwise 1 container only for COnstruction activity.
..=..
ADDRESS & DATE
~':7 ~fj
5:íì7 \JÇ1ßa,J ~T\l4 Bé=A<4
~
A\c;~ C\t'\.J\ bt" \.)/\ ~'f(~-?{jO)
..- ~,
, \r \ .
\.w ~ \\::¡l'\.
Dear Virginia Beach Resident,
Dec 2004
The city of Virginia Beach is proposing an ordinance that will regulate the use of
Portable Storage Containers. We understand there needs to be some regulations regarding
Portable Storage Containers. Since you are a neighbor of a container user we would like
your opinion on the uses of containers. We believe the following uses are fair; by signing
this form you are showing you have no opposition to these uses in your neighborhood.
1) 16 days time limit on property without a permit.
2) After 16 days a permit is necessary for a period of up to 60 days for renovation
and restoration purposes only, governed by a permit and $15 fee.
3) No more than 2 Portable storage containers not to exceed 16 days for moving
purposes only, otherwise 1 container only for construction activity.
.;:::z::¡"
1
/'I'1¿
J
Juno e-mall rof waY4@juno.com pnmea on Wednesday,' AUgust L', LUU4,/: U PM
¡J(""-"""'~ (1,'\:1:"'\ ".0"
~ n -(ll t v, \ ~, .'-?t,,;:\-!, - t uJ)
\).\~\ÙL\ Proposed Ordinance
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN SECTIONS 111 AND 201 OF THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE
TO DEFINE "PORTABLE STORAGE CONTAINER" AND REGULATE THE USE AND PLACEMENT OF
PORTABLE STORAGE CONTAINERS
Sections Amended: City Zoning Ordinance Sections 111 & 201 WHEREAS, the public necessity, convenience, general
welfare and good zoning practice so require; BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:That Sections 111 and 201 of the City Zoning Ordinance are hereby amended and
reordained, to read as follows:
Sec. 111.
Definitions. For the purpose of this ordinance, words used in the present tense shall include the future;
words used in the singular number include the plural and the plural the singular; the use of any gender shall be applicable
to all genders; the word "shall" is mandatory; the word "may" is permissive; the word "land" includes only the area
described as being above mean sea level; and the word "person" includes an individual, a partnership, association, or
corporation.
In addition, the following terms shall be defined as herein indicated:
Portable storage container. A portable. weather-resistant receptacle designed and used for the storage or shipment Qf
=
h.Q!!~hol.d goods. wares or merchandise. The.term shall not include yard waste containers¡;!Iovided by the City pur~uant.ill
Ç.i'!y_Çode Section 31-35.
COMMENT
The amendment defines the term "portable storage container." It specifically
excludes City yard waste containers.
Sec. 201. Yards.
(gL.
Porlabl(j!SlQrçzg~ ContçzineY.§. N..Qtwith~W1di~any_.Ç9IJtm.ry ,12T.Q,y_i~lim,Qf .tÞ.i!>. O.:rdi,Q~pçe.129rt~Þlc;: .stQrage
çoJl~imm; l()ç~t~.c:t 9\!t$ig~ 9.(~,fi1l1y-eru;losed _þ'yjIdip,g,Qr. structure shall be allQwed (!Ply in. AgrisYl :1lral.Re~¡QC;:Ilti!!.1.
Â12m:Pnent. Office. Business.iIDgJndustrial Districts, subject to the following restrictions:
nL-."
In Residential and Apartment Districts. no more than one ill..po~ble.. ~tQrng~ ç()n1IDn~r shAll .b~
al19w~d_9JULZOn¡J1,g,l9t.JUldfor no longer than a total of fourteen ..o~}A~jn any consecllJiy~. ~,i;¡{ {61. - IJl.QIltbp~riQcl.
prQvided"Þ9\Y!;YJ;ktbat during bon~fide-constI'!lction activity on suchlms.-and fQ!'.~. ~!i.g..i1¡91l.aJ~ri,ç!g 9ftwenty-four
<2& hours before. and.after such construction, a port!!Qle storagec ontainer used in connectio1l.. with such _construç,tiQTI
~ct¡yity.m...aY.r~IJl.~iIllQL~..~riQ.d..not exceeding a total of thirty (30) days once in any snL(,6}:mQ.nth peri9.d;
(2L ,n-._n__--._l.n Agricultural, Distdç~ on IQ~_. w'þ.5;r.~ ,tb~ pripçi¡ml J,1~~,i&.JL b..9J1~f19J;
agrjçYlwt:!!..la"çtiYlty, tb~r~~b~ll b~U1Q,r~strjcti911S uPQn 1b~,\!S~mQf129,~Þ1~ ,stQrag.~ .çonUijn.~rs in cQl1n~ctiQIl with slJch
') nf' ~
Juno e-mail for way4@juno.com printed on Wednesday, August 25, 2004, 7: 13 PM
r ~Vi- ¡",:'iV C, ~ '\JJ\ ¡~!~\¡;.r¡"¡,'~ i~! \'J(
,( ~\-~I l ~l/,-,¡"" t.~,;>
\)\<&\\)u.-~.griÇlli1Ural activity. and no permit shall be required. On lots where them:iJ]çiø!lJ,l~~.~.Q1hg
tþ.J!~LWj:ultyral. or ,where portable storage. containers are used for-P-Ul:poses other than in connection with bQ~_fl@
~gricultural activity. the reQuirements pertaining to Residential and Apartment Districts shall appl)!.
ffi---.
In Office. Business and Industrial Districts. portable storage containers shall
be allowed only pursuant to a conditional use permit for bulk storage where such use is permitted: .provided. however,
tllii.1.Q.yring .þona fide construction activity on a lot. and for an additional period of twemy-four (24) hours befQ!:~. and
after such construction. portable storage containers used in connection with such construction activity shall Qe permitted
without ~ conditional use permit.
(4)
No portable storage container shall have_illJIl~sion~.greater than sixteen..Jeet
(16'1IDJeI!gtb~gb!,fi:et (8:) in width or eightJ~~t (8') in height.
ca... ~ --.--.-..-. No portable storage container shall Q~ located (i) closernt.hID:l ten f~~.lt9')JQ
!mY side or rear lot line. provided. however. that the Zoning Administrator may allow a.,reduced setback jfmatw~
l~ngs.ç!!lli.ng,or a solid fence at least six feetŒlin height provides adequate screening. orill on ~..Y.mmiQJLQfJi 19t
~
~~c.eø.Q..c;:.hind_the nearest portion of the princi¡mLbuilding adjacent to a public street. On lots w.þere ther~j~ no princiILal
s.IDJcture. portaþles.torage co!ltIDners shall comply.with the front~d setback requÎI:ements -().f. the _~~ming_!li..sg:jçt, tn
:ßusiness andlPdusJrial Districts..no portable stor~ container shall be located in any parking area,
(§} -. -, ---,-__--~Qrtable storage containers shall be allowed oIDY"ppon iS~\lJm~.J>i!1. ~lJJ1.j!bY
tbe ZoDing,Admi.nis.!r~tor, 'The fee. fQr sMc..bpc;:n:nit~ltallÞe Tw~nty-:fiY~P..QUars iU~ .OQ1
CJll\1M:E.NT
The amendments establish restrictions on the usage of portable storage containers. In
particular, subdivision (1) limits the number of such containers on lots in Residential or Apartment Districts to
one container, which may remain on any zoning lot for a period of 14 days or less, once in any 6-month period.
Portable storage containers are also allowed during periods of bona fide construction on in Residential and
Apartment Districts, but for no more than a total of thirty (30) days in any 6-month period.
Subdivision (2) allows portable storage containers, without restriction, in Agricultural
Districts on lots where the principal use is agricultural in nature (where the containers are used in connection
with the agricultural activity). On other lots in Agricultural Districts, or where the use of portable storage
containers is not for agricultural purposes, the regulations are the same as those that apply in Residential and
Apartment Districts.
Subdivision (3) allows portable storage containers in Business and Industrial Districts only
(1) pursuant to a conditional use permit for bulk storage, and (2) during periods of bona fide construction without
a conditional use permit.
Subdivision (4) limit the size of portable storage containers. Subdivision (5)
prescribes setback and other locational restrictions. Subdivision (6) provides that a permit is required for any
portable storage container and prescribes a fee in the amount of $25.00.
~ of::\
November 22, 2004
City of Virginia Beach Planning Commission
2405 Courthouse Drive
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23456
RECEIVED
NOV 2 3 2004
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Re: Portable storage containers
The petitions I enclose here were signed on November 15, 2004, by city residents attending a
Cypress Point Civic Association meeting. Folks in this neighborhood are very concerned about
this issue.
. .
j~ cf);, Ô1~~
Sandra L. Williamson, Chair
Portable Storage Container Committee
Cypress Point Civic Association
1189 Pond Cypress Drive
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23455
518-8086
williamson23@ao1.com
. III IS !o~
Petition RECE'VE1J
. . Nay 2 3 2004
We, the undersigned Residents of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, sup'port the
regulation of portable storage containers in residential and ar?..~t~Rfficts.
Specifically, we endorse, and request the Planning C~~b'Pi5'6W, Itne'(ållowing:
1) A limitation of no more than one container on a zoning lot and for no more than a
total of 16 days in any six-month period. 2) A requirement that a permit for such use
must be issued by the Zoning Administrator and that this permit be displayed so as to
be plainly visible from' the nearest street.
Phone
(-¡rl)
r 5" - C J '1..2.
(1
- ---'"
"'"
llllS¡~
Petiti.on.
We, the undersigned Residents of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, support the
regulation of portable storage containers in residential and apartment districts.
Specifically, we endorse, and request the Planning Commision support; the following:
1) A limitation of no more than one container on a zoning lot and for no more than a
total of 16 days in any six-month period. 2) A requirement that a permit for such use
must be issued by the Zoning Administrator and that this permit be displayed so as to
be plainly visible from the nearest street.
Printed Name Sianature Address Phone
',;. .. ~~4~F/~~r J; /(/6 II ~ 5 k~ () (1,V-£ el.? '5I:it -tJ 3~ I
J ;.' ~~ {f; t N 1 f't
':MW ~/:AN{ (\~I". ~H~'" ..9 SA.l.r I J.11.~ .f~ FJ & A. b fJ... d-~ !! - $ ~ð-¡
~.-
\\1\ ~~J~~ uJi 1\,4 k\~ 1 ~ \j , v
,~?-I ~rrH- c,1I{;; GR-tl ~ ~2. o2-2Ç
JOE B () tJ C fh<1ï:: D J' ,~J _"b~ J rz,z¡o SM líli COVE cIRcL¡:; £199- ()33 7
J ~fHJAlk e...{i'tHlJ. ~ ~, f ) - /.J-q/J ,<fA ~~ ~. ~ - 34P-63~
7'G CL~
/'
L./c 1-1 ¡",-Á I v~ /~ Y°'9 ¡) (v¡J/JS~ /¡ l,,/¡I""¿ t. Ý7~())//
71 ¡, _Jj ,
J 11'. j , J "" \, - l'1..l¿; I"'J.&J~'" í'fi,~- c:'¡""" iJlfJ 777Ç'
I ~j ~ vll¡J u
L./,ìt; n. tI. J)u ¡/¡J .... )t il?> lMl"k/J7? f'I.ìf¡ji (', /;t- (,tv:! - Ç36j-
f?p6A-J P. I'rtJdq,ê- ~ -'. ~ 'L-, ..¿ ) /;;(.OL/ 6ALILh 4J¿ Cr/?c/,r S- £"'1--0 i d-d...
:1(&0\ ¡J!\ '-- ~~~d.\J- ~V"E- ~\l.ti€..
r.bv~tJ \ \. '1~ L~wSo tJ ~~ ~~(o'5
~\;,.J-,;:; ~;'(:j,¡~¡P (7) v~~~ I.;... (/ i a,(h~' Ú. a qQ -1 ~ ' t¡-
rë:l~t; 1 U~ 1
Karen Lasley - Issuing blank permits for portable storage containers
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
<Williamson23@aol.com>
<klasley@vbgov.com>, <wmacali@vb.gov>
11/16/200411 :00 AM
Issuing blank permits for portable storage containers
Did I understand correctly, when I attended the Planning Commission meeting on November 10, that the Planning
Department is currently agreeable to distributing fists full of blank permits to companies that install the containers
-- that these companies would then be "on their honor" to write on a permit the date when a container is installed
and the date when it's to be removed?
Last night, at the Cypress Point Civic Association meeting, I mentioned this in my presentation of what's presently
happening with respect to proposed regulation of these bins. If my notes from the November 10 meeting are
scrambled, and I passed on misinformation to my neighbors, I'd like to know, please: three individuals came up to
me at the close of the meeting to ask whether this isn't like putting the fox in charge of the hen house. Moreover,
they asked, wouldn't this put the onus on citizens to verify for themselves that the dates on the permits conform
with reality? Of course the same questions had occurred to me. I think this may become an issue if these
regulations EVER reach the City Council.
Incidentally, two of my neighbors who, on theír own bat, got more than 40 signatories to a petition supporting the
proposed regulations and sent them to the Planning Commission in advance of its November 10th meeting, set
out more petitions at last night's civic league meeting. An additional 27 people signed them. I'll forward these
petitions to the commission later this week.
I have no idea how the folks at P.O.D.s and their attorney might construe "a public outcry." Perhaps 70 people
would fall short of the mark. But several of us are working at increasing the number of residents' voices that
Planning Commission members should hear -- and maybe take into account -- before their meeting on December
15th.
Regards and many, many thanks for all you're trying to do - and please feel free to "share" parts or all of this
message with anyone else, including Planning Commission members.
Sandra Williamson
file://C:\WINNT\Temp\GW} 00005.HTM
12/612004
"~I~/J ~;;a
...,.. ...., .~. ...... ...... _.-- ........_..V~l~1.~é2Ø~,5 .., ,.. ...- ,.,
, -------------------..-----
--- --- ---------------.-------- -----..-
.-
-- ¡;!- - . ~.'o,/_iÞ~i~~s.- - -
-----::"-¡J¿¡;ift~, - .. -- - ~-~~ ~ - ..
_~~~mry ~~~=,
-- --~..~~:-~.:---=-5=t-.;~~f;:..~-
.......n_..---..n::::z::,-"n~~~~7~7:7 --,
~=-~~i~:;~f¡~'~'- ~.' o?~~~~~
H
. . ,., ,.. ...', . ....... ... .- _:.~~ . ,.. ..'.':-_s~i~þ¡;Zj~ ¿~~~~,
," ..-.--------
,. m.. ---,
,,-_.. -",-",.",,"-'-"""'-'
.."""" " ,.. '.."" ""--"""-'- -"---'--"
......"'" - ...
473-q&r1
Petition
9/7.)
We, the undersigned Residents of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, support the
regulation of portable storage containers in residential and apartment districts.
Specifically, we endorse, and request the Planning Commision support, the following:
1) A limitation of no more than one container on a zoning lot and for no more than a
total of 16 days in any six-month period. 2) A requirement that a permit for such use
must be issued by the Zoning Administrator and that this permit be displayed so as to .
be plainly visible from the nearest street.
Printed Name
t<o\'u~\l ~, Le~
Phone
£tì~ 4&lj
199-
Petition
We, the undersigned Residents of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, support the
regulation of portable storage containers in residential and apartment districts.
Specifically, we endorse, and request the Planning Commision support, the following:
1) A limitation of no more than one container on a zoning lot and for no more than a
total of 16 days in any six-month period. 2) A requirement that a permit for such use
must be issued by the Zoning Administrator and that this permit be displayed so as to
be plainly visible from the nearest street.
loot p~~\~ ßr-i~Ç
44. ~ 3@,4S
~~o - \ q ~ z.
tf97- o(dô "3
Petition
We, the undersigned Residents of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, support the
regulation of portable storage containers in residential and apartment districts.
Specifically, we endorse, and request the Planning Commision support, the following:
1) A limitation of no more than one container on a zoning lot and for no more than a
total of 16 days in any six-month period. 2) A requirement that a permit for such use
must be issued by the Zoning Administrator and that this permit be displayed so as to
be plainly visible from the nearest street.
Phone
Virginia Beach Beautifiqation Commission
P. o. BOX lÖS2¡ SÊAPINES STATION, VtRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA
C
"BEAUTY IS GOOD BUSINESS"
October 5, 2004
IÇaren Lasley
Zoning Administrator
Operations Building 2
2405 Courthouse Drive
Virginia Beach, VA 23456
Dear Ms. Lasley,
- ,---
J am writing on behalf of theÝirginia Beach, Beautification Commission which strongly supports
the proposed o!dinåncè tó iegulate the use and placement of portable storage containers on
residential pråperties. These. unsightly portable storage units are appearing with increasing
frequency i~our neighborhoo~s ~~:~~, ~em~ining for longer an~ longer amounts of time. .
These contaIners are truly haY1J1ga'~egative Impact on the "curbsIde appeal" of our area and thIS
situation will only worsenun.l~~~iègulations are imposed. !
..
We would appreciate your forwarding a copy of this letter to members of the Planning
Commission before the public hearing on October 13, 2004. Your asssistance is appreciated.
V try ~urs, ,
DemariS~¿:~ V~~~~h Beautification Commission
t
,
A
,
/'
Jeanette Davis
4991 Cypress Point Circle
Virginia Beach, VA 23455
Septernber17,2004
Ms. Karen Lasley
City of Virginia Beach
Planning Department
2405 Courthouse Drive, Rm. 115
Virginia Beach,V A 23456-9039
Subject: PODS
Dear Ms. Lasley:
. . I would like to file a complaint about the City allowing the use of those awful
PODS I am seeing more and more of in Virginia Beach. I was embarrassed each time I
had to drive by three (3) in my own neighborhood at least twice a day for six-weeks!
I live in Cypress Point and one of these ugly PODS was parked in the driveway
of a home adjacent to the entrance to the Cypress Point Golf & Country Club. These
container boxes trash up our neighborhood and remind me of something you might find
in the poorer sections of town. In my opinion, they should fall under the same
restrictions as trailers, boats or trt1cks with advertising being parked in driveways or op.
the street.
I, for one, hope that the proposed ordinance allowing PODS does NOT pass. If
it does pass, there must be strict guidelines regarding WHERE they may be parked and
for HOW LONG!
~æþ
Jeanette A. DaviS
September 18, 2004
Brandi Gerhart
5239 Breezewood Arch
Virginia Beach, VA 23464
Ms. Karen Lasley
City of Virginia Beach
Planning Department.
2405 Courthouse Drive, Rm. 115
Virginia Beach, VA 23456-9039
Subject: Portable Storage Containers
Dear Ms. Lasley:
I would like to complain about, portable storage containers that seem to be
permanently parked around the city of Virginia Beach. There is currently a Mini Max
storage container located in the parking lot of Lighthouse Tackle, 4661 Shore Drive. I
have noticed this particular storage container sitting at this location since April 6, 2004.
This storage coFitainer has been allowed to sit there for over six months.
Are storage containers going to be allowed to sit around Virginia. Beach
indefinitely? If so, it's only a matter of time before you see one in every neighborhood
and possibly on every street comer. Once the city sets a proposed time for the use of
these storage containers, who will be responsible for policing the issue?
There is no denying the convenience of portable storage containers, but I believe
the City is being too trusting and too lenient with these companies. In time these
containers will start to pollute the city just like abandoned cars. Once it reaches that
level, it will take years to clean up the problem.
October 6, 2004
City of Virginia Beach Planning Commission'
2405 Courthouse Drive
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23456
Re: Proposed regulations governing the use of portable storage containers
Dear Commission Members:
I have carefully studied the proposed regulations, particularly with respect to the use of these
containers in residential and apartment districts. I also attended the Planning Commission
workshop on September 13th when these regulations were discussed by Planning Department
officials, interested parties, and concerned citizens.
The limitations on the number of such containers on a residential or apartment lot and the time
they may remain there - I refer to section .(g)(l).,... are fair and equitabl~. Equally sensible. are the
limitations on their size and specific location laid out in sections (g)(4) and (g)(5). .
Contrary to the assertions on September 13th by repre~entatives of companies that supply these
containers, I see no reason why obtaining a permit trom the City of Virginia Beach for their use.
should be regarded as onerous. Container companie~ themselves could arrange for these permits
as part of their customer service, much as building contractors performing home repairs already
do. But if the container companies believe this would challenge or complicate their normal
business practice, individuals could use the telephone or the Internet to apply for the permits, as
Planning Department officials noted at the workshop. Moreover, a permit fee would cover the
cost of enforcing the proposed regulations.
Registering the installation of portable storage units would also make available to the public
infonnation that is not currently available to us. In my neighborhood, earlier this year, there was
a PODS unit in a driveway directly across fÌ"om the principal intersection in our neighborhood. It
was there for six weeks, and when - after three or four weeks had gone by - a neighbor called the
PODS company in Chesapeake to ask how long it would be there she was told "it's none of your
business."
I beg to differ: Having one of these portable storage containers next to your house or on your
street does impact you and your neighbors. It means that for however long the container is on
site, there is commercial signage in a residential or apartment area. These are not the kind of
drab-colored bins typically used to store and then carry away construction debris. There's nothing
discreet about them: their long sides are emblazoned with advertising for the company that put
them there.
In sum, I wholeheartedly support the proposed regulations. I think they strike a balance between
private and commercial interests. Such regulations are surely needed when dealing with finns
that unethically infonn their customers that the City of Virginia Beach has proposed an ordinance
"that would prohibit the usage of PODS" in the city, thus generating a flood of mail to the
Planning Commission. Please consider the source of that mail and listen instead to those of us
who have a stake in the long-tenn viability of the City and care deeply about its appearance.
Sincerely,
)~~ 8. . ci)A"¡þ~~
Sandra L. Williamson
1189 Pond Cypress Drive
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23455
.' .
williamson@aol.c:om
518-8086
n ---- -----l
September 15,2004
RECEIVE\)
.. .
Joyc~ Burdon
1904 Thoroughbred Drive
Virginia- Beach, VA 2345-3
Ms. Karen Lasley
City of Virginia Beach
Planning Depamnent
2405 Courthouse Drive, Rm. 115
Virginia Beach, VA 23456-9039
SEP 2 0 2004
DEPÞ.RTMEW ii' '"'LANNING
Subject: PODS
Dear Ms. Lasley:
I would like to register a complaint with the City about the unsighdy PODS I've
. seen around town. They are an eyesore and are downright UGL YI Presendy, there is one in
a driveway at the end of my cul-de-sac that has been there for considerable time. I live in
what I consider to be a nice neighborhood, and these containers $itt;ing. in .11earby driveways
are the last thing I want to see when I am at home. I have also heard many of my.IÍeighbors
complaining about these containers. Our community has a horpeowner's .~sociation, and
their regulations do not allow for unsighdy things such as trailers, boats or trucks with
advertising to be parked in driveways or on the street. I have contacted my homeowner's
assoCiation representative, and she says they will address the PODS issue at their next board
meering. PODS fall into the category of unsighdy things, so I'm sure the association will vote
in favor of a guideline that will prohibit PODS in our neighborhood. I think you will find
that once our homeowner's association passes this guideline, there will be many others in the
City of Virginia Beach that will do the same. . "
I know some say that PODS serve an important stOrage need, but I say these people
need to use the stOrage facilities that are in commercially designated areas. That's the reason
they were zoned that way in the first place-tO keep stOrage containers out of our
neighborhoods and to keep the neighborhoods from looking like trash dumps.
So, for the record, I am in direct opposition to all PODS. But, if the proposed
ordinance passes to allow PODS, I strongly urge you to enforce a 24-hour time period that
these units can be kept. They should have to follow the same kind of guidelines that the City
uses for their large yard debris containers.
Sincerely,
dl~
""\
--:6 k-)"L d õì------"
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A LIMITEO LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
222 Cenlral Park Avenue
Suite 2000
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23462
www.troulmansanders.com
TELEPHONE: 757.687.7500
FACSIMilE: 757.687.7510
R. J. Nutter, II
rj. nutter@troutmansanders.com
Direct Dial: 757-687-7502
Direct Fax: 757-687-1514
September 17, 2004
llXF ACSIJI4ll:..E (757) 427-4649
Ms. Karen Lasley
Zoning Administrator
City of Virginia Beach
Building 2, Room 100
2405 Courthouse Drive
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23456
RE:
Proposed PODs Ordinance
Dear Karen:
Over the course of the last week, I have had an opportunity to review in greater detail the
proposed amendments to Section 111 and Section 201 of the City Zoning Ordinance pertaining
to portable storage containers.
A couple of hypotheticals were raised by my client which I then compared to the tenns of
the draft ordinance. It is with the intent of closing,what may be perceived as "loopholes" that I
transmit this letter with suggested amendments to the draft ordinance.
Hypothetical No.1 Does the ordinance prevent the placement of portable storage
containers along major roadways as displays or advertising for their companies? While Section
201(g)(3) would appear to prohibit this, such interpretation is predicated on the definition of
portable storage containers. A portable storage container is defined as "a receptacle designed
and used". Is it possible to argue that a displayed receptacle was not a portable storage container
because it was not being used for the storage or shipment of hgu~eþold goods, wares or
merchandise? You might consider substituting "andlor" for (~~d'» within the proposed
amendment for Section 111 of the ordinance.
Hvpothetical No.2 Is a container that is larger than 8 x 8 x 16 prohibited? Section
201(g)4) appears to prohibit this, however, I would recommend that the draft ordinance contain
. >.,
ATLA~,TA . HONG KONG . LONDO!,:,~.~.' ';~9L$. . RALE,IGH - RICHMOND
" . , 'TVSONS CORNER. VIRGIN:l.,~:,B;~' .,' WAsHINq:I:ON, D.C.
,. " ,':~,:¡j,,::,:;L ,"
J
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
September 17, 2004
Page 2 '
an affinnative statement to the effect that any containers greater than any dimensional size not
set forth in that paragraph are prohibited in all districts.
Hypothetical No.3. If a portable storage container is used solely for the storage of
contractor's equipment and materials, would that use be prohibited under the draft ordinance?
The proposed amendment to Section 111 defines a portable storage container as one that is used
for the "storage or shipment of hous~hold goods, wares or merchandise." This could have
multiple interpretations and may in fact 'be liinited to "household goods, household wares or
household merchandise." I believe some clarification to this portion of the ordinance would be
in everyone's best interests.
I would be interested in your thoughts on these issues as I believe it is the intent of the
ordinance to prohibit the display of containers when they are not being used for storage, to have
the tenDS of the ordinance apply to portable containers used in the construction industry; and to
prohibit trailers wIth dimensions greater than those specified in the ordinance. .
cc:
William M. Macali, Esquire
Mr. John Aspinwall
273344_l.DOC
:tì-:-
~ {DOÞ- O~r
Lv-UY~U
-
3
~
¡:
~
~
'.' .' Most Expensive:' .'.
Source: Collers Intemational
Paying to Par~
Average unreserved monthly
parking-garage rates. 2003
'. . least. Expensive
;siêF!T'::"\"';>$~'.
;NJ.tpJj5b~Jei~~t ~¡~:j'g ;;;~r-~;f ;J~
, . ;t,Jml1
",'"
'--.:' ' "J:: '.. ", '"
,,--'
" , '
", ;..0', "-:', ",-
.- ¡:,: "-',0:";' , -- -: ,':'" "
',,"
--
-', ""',
',: " ..:
"', >..'
"',",' ""
/'" ""
",,--,",
"\ ,-,
.. "."
'rive,' añdpe()plë aië còriÙ' ~ andthœetypeúf structilrèS
plainirigaböunhem in the,are'foundinthe:tear of,
néighbòrhQQck" , " ",\' ,prop()rtiés,"Hvl indsáys. "
, In fact, users who placê. "ThisisSomèthing)Veri~,
them in the street are viú- ,to put our hands atound,
.. latirig thecounty'sexistfug "and figure out what tódo."
zoning laws. Arid althoúgh ' ~Brad Ambiim '
:¡
0
0
¿;
«
~
~
z
~
~
«
0
~
0
2
June 2004
GOVERNING
19
, ,",>
::{gi:~t '
---'
RECEIVED
9/17/2004
Karen Lasley
Virginia Beach Planning Department
2405 Courthouse Drive
Virginia Beach Va. 23456-9039
SEP 2 0 2004
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
Dear Karen,
Please take a few minutes of your time to read this brief letter regarding the pending
PODS ordinance. Of particular concern to us is the issue of requiring a permit upon initial
delivery of a Pod. As a viable alternative to requiring a permit, I've attached a form that
shoWs all Pod deliveries in the city of Virginia Beach for yesterday 9/16. This form could
be faxed or E-mailed on a daily basis to the Zoning Department within 24 hours of
delivery to supply you with the smIle information that you would have from numerous
permits. The information supplied on this form would be 100% accurate and would
completely e11minate any possibility of incorrect information supplied to you by written
permit. After Mondays' meeting I feel there were some valuable points to the permit
issue that were not discussed that I hope will be considered before re-drafting this
ordinance.
1) On a daily basis we have 5 - 10 cancellations or schedule changes. People who
are in closing proceedings for their homes often encounter delays to their closing
dates. Residents who had previously acquired a permit would now have to
somehow refund or amend their permit to have it changed to reflect their tentative
closing date. Sometimes they change their closing dates numerous times before
they actually move to their new residence; this means numerous adjustments to
their permit.
2) Many residents often under estimate their storage needs and at the last minute,
may order additional Pods for same or next day delivery. This would require
additional permits and additional fees and these customers may not have time to
acquire another permit. Residents over estimating their needs and canceling their
Pod order would then need to cancel and have their permit fee refunded.
3) Residents who use multiple Pods moving from one location in Virginia Beach to
another location in Virginia Beach would need permits for each address. We have
residents who have used up to 5 pods. Simple math shows permit fees up to $250
for this type of customer. These customers would lose the convenience of using
PODS simply because they are residents of Virginia Beach.
Keep it Simple Storage Co. 1-888-776-7637
4816 Pods Way Local 757-545-7220
Chesapeake, VA 23320 WWW.PODS.com Fax 757-545-7224
PODSe and PODS"" are service and trademarks of PODS, Inc.
4) ~ODS is rapidly expanding into many major cities and states. Many corporations
are choosing to use PODS for their employees because of our reasonable long
distance rates. Customers relocating to Virginia Beach would find it extremely.
difficultto get a permit before completing their move. They often have their Pod
delivered to their new home before they have physically relocated in Virginia
Beach.
5) Virginia Beach residents could rent a V-Haul, leave it in their driveway for an
indefinite period of time, and there are no permit regulations that restrict their use.
PODS serve the same purpose as a rental truck, and we feel it would be unfair to
make our customers; your residents get a permit for this same use.
6) We would agree to reduce the initial time period to 16 days without a permit. As
previously discussed 95% of our customers use Pods within this time period,
therefore there is no need to req~ a permit to enforce an ordinance that needs
no enforcing. We would be wasting residents and taxpayer money to support this
code and we would be placing undue burden on the cities Zoning Department to
enforce this ordinance. Customers that use Pods for an extended time period
should then be able to extend for an additional 90 days for reasonable purposes
via a permit.
As you know the City of Chesapeake adopted an ordinance that regulates PODS. I
sincerely request that you contact their Zoning Department and consider using their
version as a model for the Virginia Beach ordinance.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
IU ¡>~
Rob Peterson Partner PODS
cc: Les Watson
..
PODS
Virginia Beach Deliveries
9/16/2004
Customer
Pod
Address
Boardwalk Amusements, Joel Cald", 566B27 2400 London Bridae Rd , Virginia Beach VA 23451
Callahan, Archie 841B27 2034 Ealina Cres , Virginia Beach VA 23454
Godfrey, Laurie 313B4 707 Avlesburv Dr , Virginia Beach VA 23462
Harper, Mildred 858B27 2875 Rose Garden Wav , Virginia Beach VA 23456
Martin, John 986B27 4600 Valley Forae Ln , Virainia Beach VA 23462
Milam, Lisa 387B27 4116 Wales Dr Apt # 202, Virainia Beach VA 23452
Moritz, Nicole 547B27 1956 Clifton Bridae Dr , Virainia Beach VA 23456
Parks, Benita 91B27 1724 Live Oak Trail, Virainia Beach VA 23456
Peerless Carpet Care & Restoration, 988B27 2401 Raynor Ct, Virainia Beach VA 23456
Perez, Phillipe 972B27 4100 Peridot Dr , Virainia Beach VA 23456
Pope, David 117B27 2'009 Thoroughbred Dr, Virginia Beach VA 23453
Reed, Garv 60B27 5777 Accomac SQ , Virginia Beach VA 23455
Rodriauez, Noemi 758B27 819 Stephanie Ct Virainia Beach, Virginia Beach VA 23462
Scala, Nancy 898B27 936 Truro Ct, Virginia Beach VA 23452 I
H
, .' ,0 ""';f'~';'
>~'(::; ."J>t§)ffif "
".'" .
. '.' ':."
"""'-r"','" ":..", '
';'.u' :~f.:i¡ijt-
.,<Ji!;, - -':,Ci'Ç""
'.' "',-,
":"'<:C
..------
City of Virginia Beach
City Manager's Office
Interoffice Mail
FROM:
Mr. Robert Scott, Planning Department
James K Spore, City Mana9~
March 12, 2004
TO:
DATE:. .
SUBJECT: P.O.D.S.
!n the past few months, our office has received several concerns from residents regarding
the new P.O.D.S. (portable on demand storage) units being kept in driveways in front of homes
for weeks or months at a time. Attached are copies of the most recent letters we have received. -.
Residents are told they can be kept for up to six months and there are no regulations addressing
their use or location.
I understand staff has done some preliminary work in developing regulations for these
portable storage units. Therefore, I would like this matter brought forward as soon as possible
so it can be addressed before it becomes a major issue.
Thank you.
JKS/KDH/mkm
c:
Mr. Steve Thompson
vMs.. Karen Lasley
Attachments
':~l¡~£;~: .
Broad Bay Island Civic League
ÎvD fr
2012 Blua~erry ~oað
Virginia Beach, Va. 23451
Marcl1 6, 2004,
Mr. James Spore
City Manager
2401 Courthouse Drive
City Hall, Building I
Municipal Center
Virginia Beäcñ, Virginia
r'..:""""-~;",-""""-",,,,,,,,-,-
,rf:;;"::ì."r:,;:;;""'-"'.-;
n'n..__.,,-,~.::..- "-
" ,
...
" .'
.. :<:
. I';"
II-' '"' 1 - . ,.',
""",,. """'0' " "
",rUl 'i/.'v'4. :,,/::¡
, -.j i
23456
.:~-..".._.. r
L.- . L'.IiiL':~JŒ~ :':"_J
Dear ~r. Spore:
'Our neighborl1ooð is besieged witl1 P.O.D.S (Portable on ðe-
.mand storage) in front yards of homes. These are very un'sightly.
After checking t~e current zoning ordinances and not finding a
code that governs these units; a member of our Civic League cal-
led Shireen. Bainchi-Jones, ~oning ~dministration, to obtain City
pôsition. ~fter a l1esitation and then asking someone else, she
said there would be a six month maximum time limit. This is un-
acceptable to our Civic League.
We realize that P.O.D.S. are a.new concept. We therefore
request a new code be developed to deal with them. P.O.D.S.
should betreateò tl1e same as a boat trailor, motor homes, etc.
Th.is means that the maximum time they are to be left in front
yards should be restricted to ~8 hours or less.
ant
Please kee~ me informed to City's position on this irnport-
subject.
;;¡;; ~
L/~icharð Morris, 'President
Copy:
Council of Civic Organizations
gw
----
. ,,-..
"""5"'.L V.L.L
Kathleen Hassen - peDis IN YARDS
!,~;,;.....-._--~-"!>e;¡~~"""'~"W'~".;;W-'=~--"'~._""X"jft~...."I><'~.^S-~"'Y"'~"";,,'\'$~""---~(----""?U!'-~--..,"'(m--.""¡¡;'L<""';~-"""""';¡~-
From: Jim Ryan <jryan15@cox.net>
To: <mmumpowe@vbgov.com>
Date: 3/1012004 12:30 AM
Subject: POD's IN YARDS
.- ------..-------- ...--------.---..-- ...- '----'---'--"'-----"""---""-"------ -'-----""'-- -..-.-------------.--.- "--'-'- '-_U"-'-'---"--'u----"-'-'
I have a problem with the City's code "if there is one" that allows the new
moving and storage systems called "POD's" to
be left on private property in front yards for up to 6 months. I can't keep
a boat, that is much nicer looking
than a big white POD, in my front yard overnight. I have requested the
code/ordinance number that allows this .
from several of your departments but it does not seem to exist. Could you
please email me a copy of it or
tell me where it is located in the city code? My neighborhood looks bad
enough without POD's that look like
mobile homes sitting in front yards. Ever have one on your street?
Very Respectfully
JIM RYAN
3641 ALCOTT RD.
VIRGINIA BEACH VA
23452
486-2211
file:/IC: \Documents%20and%20Settings\khassen \Local%20Settings\ T emp\GW} 00009 .HT... 3/11/2004
9/07/2004
Karen Lasley
Virginia Beach Planning Department
2405 Courthouse Drive
Virginia Beach Va. 23456-9039
Dear Karen,
I would like to take this opportunity to extend an invitation to you and your associates to
visit our facility to see our operation first hand. We believe that in order for you to fully
understand our business and how we service the Virginia Beach community, that it would
be beneficial to you and your staff to see our operation and meet our personnel before any
decisions are made on the proposed PODS ordinance.
The current draft of this ordinance would not allow many Virginia Beach residents or
people moving into or out of Virginia Beach to use PODS for their moving and storage
needs. Our ability to service these citizens would be in jeopardy. After reviewing this
ordinance we would like to see some revisions to these provisions. For simplicity, I will
follow the numerical order of provisions as written for this ordinance, as I present
argument for each one.
1) This regulation limits our customers to use of one Pod. We request to change this
to two Pods. The largest Pod can hold the contents of an average 1800 square foot
home, or a two to three bedroom home. Many homes in Virginia Beach are quite
large, four and five bedrooms, and may require using additional Pods. Many
properties can easily accommodate more than one Pod at a time without raisirig
any safety concerns or related placement issues. Residents are likely to do their
move in a limited time frame, so loading one Pod at a time would not be an
option. We would also like to extend the initial time period from 14 days as
written to 23 days. One of the conveniences of using PODS is to relieve the stress
that moving has on peoples lives. By allowing them 23 days and up to three
weekends to load their household contents, customers do not need to lose valuable
time from work, school, etc. in order to complete their move. We also understand
and appreciate neighbor's concerns about the length of time a Pod stays at a
residence. Our experience shows that three weeks is a reasonable amount of time
for a Pod to remain on location without raising neighborhood complaints.
Keep it Simple Storage Co. 1-888-776- 7637
4816 Pods Way Local 757-545-7220
Chesapeake, VA 23320 WWW.PODScom Fax 757-545-7224
PODSe and PODS'" are service and trademarks of PODS, Inc.
1
2) Leave as written.
3) Virginia Beach businesses have moving and storage needs just like residential
customers. I can not understand why these customers would need to acquire a
conditional use permit before using a Pod. My understanding of a conditional use
pennit is that it may take up to 6 months to be granted approval. Customers often
order Pods for same day delivery, or with as little as a few days notice in advance
of delivery. This restriction would make it impossible for these businesses to use
our service. Please keep in mind PODS is a temporary often urgent solution to
moving and storage needs. We request that this provision be removed or revised
to permit use for a period of time without a permit.
4) Pods can vary slightly in their overall dimensions. I request using the term
general, basic, or usable when referring to these (8'x8'xI6') specifications.
5) As per our phone conversation I believe it is mutually understood that these
setback requirements need to be reconsidered. Virginia Beach residents
predominantly request Pods to be placed in their driveway. However, there are
times residents do not have established driveways and need to place their Pods in
alternative areas on their property, such as side or back yards. The placement area
is usually determined by the entrance 1 exit doorway from which the customer
plans to load the Pod. If they have adequate space to place the Pod, why not let
the customer decide where on the property the Pod is placed as long as it is done
so safely. In Business and Industrial Districts, Pods are normally placed in a
parking. space, or parking area. Most times there is po alternative.
6) The requirement for residents to obtain a permit upon initial delivery of their Pod
is arguably the harshest restriction imposed on our customers. We believe the
requirement for a resident to obtain a permit to use a Pod is based in part on a
desire to control the amount of time a Pod should be allowed to remain on any
one particular property. We agree there does need to be some time limits set. It
has never been the intention of PODS to turn people's driveways into their own
private mini-storage facilities; keeping Pods for months on end without regard for
the aesthetic quality of the neighborhood. Personally, if my neighbor had a Pod in
his yard for an extended period of time merely for storage convenience I'd be
concerned also. However, ifhe was using the Pod to renovate or repair his home,
any reasonable person could understand the need for the Pod to remain there for a
longer period of time. Factually, 95% of our customers are residential and use our
service for moving and short term storage. Normally they complete their move
between fwo homes, within one month. By requiring a permit and a $25 fee for
that permit, 95% of our customers, your residents, who already are using Pods for
a reasonable time period, are being penalized. The other 5% of our customers use
Pods for restoration or renovation projects, sometimes due to a fire, flood, or other
unpredictable emergency. Another point to consider, there are no permits required
to put a V-Haul rental truck in your driveway. A rental truck could conceivably
remain indefinitely in a residential driveway. Why then would the same person
choosing to use PODS need to obtain a permit? We suggest allowing customers to
keep up to two Pods for the first twenty three days or such longer periods as
permitted in the proposed ordinance without a permit, after which if they can
prove they are using the Pod for a legitimate reason; restoration due to fire or
flood, home renovation, seasonal business use, or other emergency, that they
should than obtain a permit with a $15 fee for use of the Pod for an additional 90
days. Once again, please keep in mind Pods are temporary.
2
We are looking forward to meeting with you on September 13th, to discuss these issues at
greater length. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
¡¿T/- Ivtz~~
Rob Peterson
Partner PODS
3
Sep 09 04 09:31a
Brooks Transfer
7574682636
p. 1
MOVING
.
STORAGE
TRANSFER AND STORAGE CO., INC.
SEJMNG INDMCUALS AND FIRMS SINCE 1S78
PACKING
.
CRATING
VIA FAX 427-4649 (2 nus. total) -
September 7, 2004
Ms. Karen Lasley
Planning Department
2405 Courthouse Drive
Virginia Beach, V A 23456-9039
Dear Ms. Lasley:
I want to thank you for the infonnation you sent me regarding the impending regulation of portable storage
containers. I have reviewed the draft ordinance and ask that the City of Virginia Beach take a few matters into
consideration. As an owner-operator of two moving and storage entities, my specific concerns are as folloVlo'S:
t . Portable storage con1aÍners are built in various sizes, at least six come to mind, to acrommodate various
uses. Given this fact, I hope that consideration is made for the consumer that may need more than one
container. For example, r had a customer that choose to have M"O different sized containers; an
8'(length) x 5'(width) x 8' (height) and a lO'(length) x 8 (width.) x 8'(height) in order to keep certain
items separated during a home renovation project Furthermore, this ruling will cause hardship on those
companies that utilize the smaller containers (8' x 5' x 1.5'), which a majority of the time deliver
multiple units. ] request that the maximum number of one (1 ) container ruling be eliminated
2. This is a service that came nom the demands of conswners wishing to perform moving and storage
services themselves and at their leisure. A fourteen (14) day I thirty (30) day ruling may not give
consumers the flexibility of being able to utilize this service. I request that the timeframe be extended to
mirror what a neighboring city has recently enacted which is up to sixteen (16) days or up to ninety (90)
days if the container is being utilized in conjunction with a construction 1 renovation project.
3. How was the maximum sixteen feet (16 ') derived? I propose that this be increased to twenty feet (20')
due to this being the length of the standard shipping container.
4. If a portable container cannot be "placed in any parking area" in a Business and Industrial District then T
believe we are eliminating that segment of our business. Certainly, we would not put the conlainer on
an un-improved area. Most businesses operate either out of a building that they own, or are tenants of a
building that a property-management fimi manages. I believe that it should be up to either one of these
parties to make the decision to allow or disallow onsite portable storage containers.
5. I believe that it is \Ulfair for a consumer to be forced to pay for a permit for short tenn projects. Again, I
want to reference, and voice my support for, the newly enacted regulation of a neighboring city in which
a permit is not required for containers that are utilized up sixteen ( 16) days. For the longer tern use (90
days in conj unction with construction projects) a pennit is required. I certainly can support such a
measure.
.4GEln FOR
UNITE~
Van Lines
REP~YTC a
200WYLDEROSE CT.
MIDLOT-fIAN. V.RGINIA23113
804-379-5684
REPLY TO ¡;¡
1376 LONDON BRIDGE ROAD
VIRGINIA BEACH. VIRGINIA 23L:ó::
757.427-9500
W'NW.brookstransfer.com
4
Sep 09 04 09:31a
Brooks TransFer
7574682636
p.2
I thank you for the opportunity to voice my concerns. This is a rapidly growing industry and I applaud the
efforts to ensure that community standards are not sacrificed. I look forward to meeting with you and your staff
on Monday September 13,2004 at 5:00 p.m.
37b)v
Jeff Brooks
President, Brooks Transfer & Storage Co.. Inc.
Manager, Aardvark Mobile Moving & Storage, LLC
5
Page 1 of 2
Karen Lasley - Portable Storage Ordinance Notes
-"-""¡"-"'-'-
M_,~~"
-." """","","'N--.. j"~"'j¡,I...",,.,.,. '~,_.~" -^
-",~.,.""--""""""",-;¡¡¡¡¡¡w,,,-~-
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
<mryan@minimaxusa.net>
"Karen Lasley" <KLASLEY@vbgov.com>
9/10/2004 12:18 AM
Portable Storage Ordinance Notes
Karen,
Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments before the workshop.
Below are specific areas that we have concerns about and want to work
to address.
Unlike some of the large self storage competitors we want to do what is
best for the citizens, the city and our industry. As we have seen the
self storage operators attempting to do in Chesapeake it appears that
they are also attempting to "hijack" this ordinance at the expense of
the citizens of Virginia Beach, and use the ordinance to stifle
competition. At the Planning workshop in Chesapeake the self storage
operators worked to "steer" the process in a direction that made the
business uneconomical for mobile storage competitors.
We look forward to working with the City of Virginia Beach to draft
legislation that is fair and equitable for all parties.
Sincerely,
Michael Ryan
MiniMax
377-4282
1. Not allowing more than 1 Portable Storage Unit at a time is unfair to
people who are moving. We are in agreement that the length of time the
unit is there in the case of a "move", an that the setbacks need to be
taken into consideration, and the size of the driveway are valid points.
2. 14 days on site is not fair to customers. We believe that the length of
time needs to be reasonable.
3. Not allowing Portable Storage Units to stay longer than 30 days during
construction unfairly penalizes customers. If a homeowner has a valid
remodel going on many customers want their belongings close by. The
argument was made in Chesapeake that "they can go to the Portable Storage
Unit or have it redelivered" which are both veiled attempts to stifle
competition. Is there regulation on "portable toilets" or "trash
containers", and the length of time they can stay at a job site, and if
not then why should Portable Storage Units have a time limit which hurts
the customer? We believe that 6-9 months depending on the nature of the
remodel is reasonable.
4.) Regarding Conditional Use Permits for bulk storage(as related to
Portable Storage Units) we disagree. We need further clarification on this
issue.
5.) Our Portable Storage Unit are 8' 6" tall, we request that the
ordinance be amended to accommodate 8' 6" tall.
6.) We are in disagreement the 10' lot line setback requirement. Again,
this is a case where in Chesapeake the self storage operators attempted to
holdback competition.
7.) We disagree with not allowing Portable Storage Units to sit in the
parking lots or Business and Industrial Districts. The vast majority of
business customers want and need this storage, and need easy access to
their Portable Storage Unit.
8.) We believe that it is unnecessary to have "Permitting" and a $25 fee
6
fi Ie: lie: \ Documents%20and %20Settings\klaslev\Local %20Settings \ Temp \GW} 00025 .HTM
9/1 0/2004
Page 2 of 2
for Storage Units. We believe that the industry can be self regulating and
want to work towards achieving this objective.
7
fi lp' / /~-"D()C'.l1mp.nts% 20and %20Settin2:s\klaslev\Local%20Settin,gs \ Temp \G W} 0002 5 .HTM 9/10/2004
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - Portable Storage Containers, Proposed Ordinance
U"--,',-" ,- - ,=.,,- ~' ,~"~... .~- '""~--'-- ,
,-~. -"'~~.,...- ....
..' ,-~,
.~_._--, -""~'~
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
CC:
"Janet & Paul Johnson" <janetpauljohnson@cox.net>
<klasley@vbgov.com>
8/25/2004 9: 18 AM
Portable Storage Containers, Proposed Ordinance
"Reginald S. Early" <rsearly@cox.net>, "Jack Garrison" <jg777@cox.net>
Ms Lasley, This is in response to your letter of August 19, 2004, in which you provided a draft ordinance
regarding storage containers. Our Thalia Civic League will not meet again until September, but I will make your
information available to our members then. This is my personal response to your letter.
I'm pleased that the city is taking this issue on; however, the draft doesn't seem to provide a clear enough
definition of what a storage container actually is. The draft allows for an old truck or van, or perhaps an old
mobile home to be used for storage, with no time restrictions, because those vehicles are not" . . . receptacle
designed and used for the storage or shipment of household goods, wares, or merchandise."
Please consider if there is some way to prevent the use of such vehicles as storage at residential sites.
Thank you, Paul Johnson
13
f", 1 PO' / /r.\ Df'\f'l1mpnt<:Ofn? O:mòOfn ?OSettin Q's\k laslev\Local%20Settine:s\ T emp\GW} 00025 .HTM 8/26/2004
portable storage ordinance
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - portable storage ordinance
_li"wo>, ,-~"_.".._.
"""'~-"~
'~"" -~O"~- ., ""'...- "',,---
-- ,a
,,'..: "A,..",,"~ .-. '=è_~~..._4
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
"Bragg, Mark W." <BraggMW@DBVI.State.VAUS>
<klasley@vbgov.com>
9/10/2004 9:41 AM
portable storage ordinance
I have reviewed the proposed ordinance changes and it concerns me that it does not appear to address those
that have portable storage units currently, units that are greater than 16' by 8' in size and by what criteria a
portable unit could be deemed a permanent structure. I have a shipping container ( in a residential area) that is 8'
by 20' that was converted to a wood working space many years ago that has a hip roof and foundation yet by
some measure could still be considered a portable storage unit. I would appreciate your including these concerns
in your discussion at the workshop. Thank you
* CONFIDENTIALITYIPRIV ACY NOTICE - The documents included in this transmission may
contain information that is confidential and/or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or
the employee or agent responsible for delivering the information to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or action taken in reliance on the contents of
these documents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this document in error, please notify the
sender immediately to arrange for return or destruction of these documents.
14
f",1"". / /r.' Tì~f'l1rnpnt~% ?n~nr1%70Sp.ttinP"~\khl~1f'.v\T .ocal%20Settim!s\TemD\GW1 00025.HTM 9/1 0/2004
------------
--
Phone Message from Al Balko, fonner City Council member and current member ofthe
Board of Zoning Appeals:
The amendments regarding PODS look good. I am in favor of having the 30-day time
limit on how long a POD can remain on a residential lot during constmction. We do not
want them to be able to stay forever.
15
Naval Aerospace Medicine Institute
AVT Class 04020
340 Hulse Road
Naval Air Station Pensacola, FL 32508
850-452-4659
clc: VA Pilot Editor
n__- Original Message _nn
From:
Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2004 5:36 PM
Subject: PODS: ordinance issue
Dear Pods customer,
First I would like to thank you for being a PODS
customer. Currently the City of Virginia Beach has an
ordinance proposed that would prohibit the usage of
PODS in Virginia Beach. If it is adopted by
legislation in its current draft, it would make it
impossible for PODS to service the Virginia Beach
area. We are asking you for some help. Please take a
few minutes to send an e-mail, letter, or call the
Planning Department in support of PODS. Simply let
them know how valuable our service is to you. Tell
them of your PODS experience, and the many benefits
offered by PODS. We have a scheduled meeting on
September 13th with the Planning Department and would
appreciate your e-mails, etc. before that date. I've
also attached contact information for the Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission votes on the final
draft proposed by the Planning Department. We
sincerely appredate any and all support from you. The
contact information is listed below.
Planning Department
2405 Courthouse Drive Rm 115
Virginia Beach Va. 23456-9039
Att: Karen Lasley
Fax- 757-427-4649
E-mail- klasley@vbgov.com
Also- planadmn@vbgov.com
Phone- 757-563-1264
Thank you,
Rob Peterson, Partner PODS
757-545- 7220
~___f1_1~ '¿/C' \T)_()C'.llm~nt~% 20an d %20Settimls\klaslev\Local %2 OSettings\ Temp \G W1 00026 .HTM
Page 2 of 5
8
9/3/2004
Keep it Simple Storage Co.
1-888-776-7637
Pods Way
4816
Local
757-545-7220
Chesapeake, VA 23320
WWW.PODS,com
Fax 757-545-7224
PODS@ and
PODSTM are service and trademarks of PODS, Inc.
Planning Commission Members
Revised: December 10, 2003
NAME! ADDRESS/PHON E
REPRESENTS
TERM OF APPOINTMENT
BEGINNING DATE
EXPIRATION DATE
Anderson, Janice P.
2102 Mediterranean Avenue
Virginia Beach, VA 23451
425-1230(0) 422-4498 (H)
Beach
District No.6
4 years
01/01/2003
12/31/2006
Crabtree, Eugene F.
212 Waverly Drive
Virginia, VA 23452
340-6144
Rose Hall
District No.3
4 years
01/01/2002
12/31/2005
Din, William W.
716 Walton Drive
Virginia Beach, VA 23464
424-9207; 396-9977 (W)
Kempsville
District No.2
4 years
4 years
01/01/2002
file:/ IC: \Documents%20and%20Settin,gs\klasley\Local%20S ettings\ Temp \GW} 00026 .HTM
Page 3 of 5
9
9/312004
01/01/1998
12/31/2005
12/31/2001
Horsley, Donald H.
3169 Land of Promise Road
Virginia Beach, VA 23457
421-3625
At Large
4 years
4 years
01/01/2002
01/01/1998
12/31/2005
12/31/2001
Katsias, Katherine K.
4500 Holland Office Park,
Suite 318
Virginia Beach, VA 23452
490-3585
lynnhaven
District No.5
4 years
01/01/2003
12/31/2006
Knight, Barry D.
1852 Mill Landing Road
Virginia Beach, VA 23457
426-7741
Princess Anne
District No.7
4 years
01/01/2003
12/31/2006
Miller, Robert 5., III
MSA, PC
5033 Rouse Drive
Virginia Beach, VA 23462
490-9264
At large
4 years
4 years
01/01/2002
01/01/1998
12/31/2005
12/31/2001
Ripley, Ronald C.
4101 White Acres Road
Virginia Beach, VA 23455
473-8575; 473-8575 (W)
Bayside
District No.4
4 years
4 years
01/01/2003
01/01/1999
12/31/2006
12/31/2002
Strange, Joseph E.
1425 lake James Drive
Virginia Beach, VA 23464
(0)479-3950 (H)424-1643
Centerville
District No.1
4 years
file:IIC: \Documents %20and%20Settings\klasley\Local %2 OS ettings\ Temp \GW} 00026 .HTM
Page 4 of 5
10
9/3/2004
01/01/2004
Unexpired term thru
12/31/2007
12/31/2003
Waller, John S.
Waller, Todd & Sadler Architects, Inc.
1909 Cypress Avenue
Virginia Beach, VA 23451
417-0140
At Large
4 years
01/01/2004
12/31/2007
Wood, Dorothy L.
3809 Thalia Drive
Virginia Beach, VA 23452
340-8411
At Large
4 years
4 years
01/01/2004
01/01/2000
12/31/2007
12/31/2003
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
httD:/ /Dromotions. yahoo.com/new mail
fi Ie:/ /C: \Documents%20and%20Settings\klaslev\Local %2 OS ettings\ Temp \GW} 00026.HTM
Page 5 of 5
11
9/3/2004
David & Katharine Best
704 Wolf snare Crescent
Virginia Beach, VA 23454
September 6, 2004
Karen Lasley
Planning Department
2405 Courthouse Drive, Room 115
Virginia Beach, VA 23456-9039
Dear Ms. Lasley,
We understand that a proposed ordinance regarding PODS is coming to the
Planning Commission September 13th. As drafted now the ordinance would not allow
the use of PODS in Virginia Beach. We strongly urge the Planning Department to
reconsider.
We are presently using a POD which enables us to sort out and clean out a
garage that has accumulated various items for over 21 years. We needed a new garage
door but could not get one until the garage was cleared, and we had nowhere to go with
our belongings. If it weren't for the POD we honestly don't know what we would have
done. We've had it for one month now and anticipate needing it one more month.
We were first aware of PODS following hurricane Isabel when we saw
numerous storage containers around town while repairs were done on homes and
businesses. They are an invaluable resource for those who need to store property safely
when there is no other place to temporarily keep it.
We can foresee problems when PODS are rented for long periods of time and
become part of the "landscape." However, it seems there are more RVs than PODS that
accent neighborhoods. At least PODS are well maintained and in a clean and neat
condition. .
We honestly don't see how you can sensibly and reasonably consider passage of
an ordinance prohibiting a business that is not harmful, provides a needed service and is
being used nearly nationwide. If any directive were to be passed it should be to limit
the time a POD could be sitting in a driveway, i.e. six months. If extra time were
needed then the lessee might be required to apply for an extension.
As we look at pictures of Frances as she bombards Florida and the damage that
is being done it doesn't take much to imagine the same destruction happening here - it
has! PODS serve a purpose! We urge you to approach the PODS ordinance with an
eye on reality.
Sincerely,
David W. Best, M.D.
Katharine Best
Page 1 of 5
Karen Lasley - PODS vs City Ordinance
~'~..,"m'" """~;-".,,."-<. ..~<t."_...,,,~,. ~~~"",~¡."""",,=._...~."..r
""'"u*" , .".,.,,"", "."",,¡¡"¡OO¡¡
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
CC:
Sir Ian Magic <magician137@yahoo.com>
<klasley@vbgov.com>, <planadmn@vbgov.com>
9/3/2004 12:47 AM
PODS vs City Ordinance
<kissco@pods.hrcoxmail.com>, Ian Magic <magician137@hotmail.com>
Planning Department
2405 Courthouse Drive Rm 115
Virginia Beach Va. 23456-9039
Att: Karen Lasley
Dear Madam,
I really don't know what would be better for a
military member that is moving every 2-3 years of
service with his family (dependents) and the hussies
of getting from one place to another if there are no
alternative of getting it done in an easier way and
with lower prices, or...
Facing the trunk rental plus $$$ doing-it-your-self,
plus $$$ moving, $$$ uploading, $$$ renting a
warehouse apart, adding also that you have to then
download it in the warehouse pack it in and then drive
back the truck to then start moving your family.
Ending in more consupmtion of time and resources
(specially financial).
The convenience that PODS had offered me was a
solution from heaven. I needed a prompt service that
could allow me to come to another city to be trained
while my wife and kid traveled to another city, and my
household goods stay in VA Beach PODS Warehouse,
another place while all this is happening. After I
came back from Kuwait someone told me about PODS and I
used it and I am relly satisfied with their quality of
service and care for their customers' needs and also
to follow the laws of the place.
If this city ordinance takes place many people like me
will be very affected to do their job: to protect our
freedom. I will be forced to stop my training, go bac
to VA, rent a truck, move it to I don't know where and
delay my orders.
Please support your troops. Thank you.
God bless America.
Very respectfully,
/s/
HM3 Ivan R. Mago, USN
BEQ 3470 Turner Street Room # 203-(
Naval Air Station Pensacola, FL 32508
Room: 850-912-3400 Ext. 20330
Cell: 305-206-5176
Personal Emails: magician137@hotmaiLcom ,
idjmago@netzero,com
School House:
file://C: \Documents%20and %20Settings\klasley\Local %20Settings\ Temp \GW} 00026.HTM
9/312004
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - PODS
....",
...
" '
--.
'n.
" . , "'"
w"""'",,---
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
< PKeenan02@aol.com>
< klasley@vbgov.com>
9/3/2004 8 :49 AM
PODS
I understand that Virginia Beach is looking to eliminate POD usage. As I recently moved, I feel that my experience would be valuable. I
would not be able to afford a moving company and I could not take off from work to pack and move. My house I was selling was settling on
a Friday and I could not settle on my new place until Monday. I certainly did not want to rent a few UHauls for that entire timeframe. PODS
was the answer. I was able to have it delivered a week prior to moving. My kids packed what was ready each day while I was at work.
PODS picked up the storage unit on Thursday and held it until I was ready to move into my new place. Again I was unable to take off from
work so my children unpacked the POD and then they removed it. I rented it for the 30 day timeframe, however, did not need it for the
duration.
I moved within Chesapeake and they allow the POD to be at your house no longer than 16 days. I agree that it is unsitely to live a POD
sitting at a residence for an extended period of time.
Let PODS remain with a time limit.
file:IIC: \Documents%20and%20Settings \klasley\Local %20Settings \ Temp \GW} 00026 .HTM
9/3/2004
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - PODS
=--',.~'- -""P-r"._""-',,"_"'«~$n'- .",,- -,~.o,~"""-,~~~,=~..,.~,, '."=""'"..~",.,,"~~, . .,"'. .~.~...-.~-,-"",=.,~>,.'"-"",""-""..,.,;¡"¡,.¡~",,,,,,
From: "Theresa Bassing" <tbassing@medtemps.com>
To: <klasley@vbgov.com>
Date: 9/3/2004 8:20 AM
Subject: PODS
Dear City of Virginia Beach:
I recently had the need for PODS services. I sold my home and my new home was not yet finished. I had 2
PODS delivered to my home and filled them up with my possessions and they were picked up and stored a few
days after they had been dropped off. Did you know that at many of the storage unit facilities, there is a waiting
list? I don't know what I would have done if' did not have PODS services. I think PODS is an excellent service
and they should be allowed to continue to service the Virginia Beach area. 'fyou want to regulate something, just
have a limit on the number of days the POD can sit at a location. I can't think of any reason why people would
have a problem with this service and I think you are going to put people in a bind if they don't have it I wonder if
there is someone behind this who wants to build a new mini storage facility. They would be the only one to profit
Sincerely,
Theresa Bassing
2075 Tazewell Road
Virginia Beach,VA 23455
file:/ IC: \Documents%20and %20Settings\klasley\Local %20Settings \ T emp\G W} 00026 .HTM
9/3/2004
Message
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - PODS
-¡¡¡.
-
-'
~.
"-_.! .
".
- ~~,.... """"""""""""""""""
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
"Janice Roussel" <jmr81 O@eastern.dss.state.va.us>
< klasley@vbgov.com>
9/3/20048:21 AM
PODS
To Whom It May Concern:
I think it is a shame that the City of Virginia Beach is even thinking about BANNING PODS. That is a bit
extreme. We just recently moved from one section of the City to another and I can't tell you how happy we were to
use the PODS. It helped out tremendously in our stressful time of moving. It took so much of the stress away.
I believe that POD has employed many City of Virginia Beach citizens. It would be a shame that they would lose
their jobs. We had 2 houses to move, so we met several drivers and they just loved their jobs. They didn't have a
bad thing to say about the company. Every employee I dealt with was very knowledgeable and courteous. I
understand that some people may be abusing the PODS and have them sitting in their yards for long periods of
time. I don't agree with that. I think the City should come up with some rules or follow what the City of
Chesapeake did, but not to totally ban them. In numerous survey's they have cited moving as one of the most
stressful times in ones life. Utilizing PODS certainly makes it a smoother transition. I will hope you take that into
consideration and think about the citizens of the City.
Janice Roussel
2525 Belmont Stakes Drive
Va. Beach, Va. 23456
r,lp' / /í" \ TInr.nmf'.nts%20and%20Settin2:s\klaslev\Local%20Settings\ Temp\GW} 00026.HTM
9/3/2004
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - I support Pods
~,'=m=~,I!JI!t,¡:".._.~ \,\""",'~'-"~""It'\.
,~".~.,-p,'-~_ø.. ""
,_.="~ -" .._=~-_-.-
From: frank worrell <:fi:-ankremax@yahoo.com>
To: <klasley@vbgov.com>
Date: 9/3120042:26 AM
Subject: I support Pods
I find even the thought of telling a needed legitiment business they cannot operate in our city. I used
them twice. They were very professional. .
What is city hall's problem?
Get a clue.
Frank Worrell
761 Whistling Swan drive
Va Bch 23464
Frank Worrell
Realtor
REIMAX Central Realty
828 Greenbrier Pkwy
Chesapeake Va 23323
800-243-2397
www.hrhouses.com
fi Ie: IIC: \Documents%20and %20Settings\klaslev\Local %2 OS ettings\ Temp \GW} 00026 .HTM
9/3/2004
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - PODS
~-_.
_.
=~""=""
~~""<~"'"I"'t"=""=-=.""=--," ,"" ." """'~
--- . ~='-'='<'f"W=--
From: <KentuckeAngel@aoLcom>
To: <klasley@vbgov.com>
Date: 9/2/2004 11 :55 PM
Subject: PODS
To whom it may concern,
I am a handicapped individual. Pods made my move
extremely easy. Without my pod, I would have been faced with
a move that I couldn't have made.
Please do something right. KEEP PODS IN VA BCH.
Thanks
Jeannette Weisbrodt
fí 1 f'.: / If'-: \Documents%20and%20Settings\klaslev\Local %20Settings \ Temp \GW} 00026.HTM 9/3/2004
Message
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - PODs
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
CC:
"Sean & Jess Riggins" <seanandjessriggins@cox.net>
<klasley@vbgov.com>, <planadmn@vbgov.com>
9/2/2004 10:20 PM
PODs
<kissco@pods.hrcoxmail.com>
To whom it may concern:
I recently became aware of potential legislation that would prohibit the use of PODs in the City of Virginia Beach.
I am writing this to you as an extremely satisfied and recent PODs customer. I sold my home in Virginia Beach in
March of 2004 and utilized 2 storage PODs during the construction of my home in Chesapeake.
I am the mother of 3 small children and also a Navy wife who works a full-time job. My husband has been
deployed since February and will not return until later this month. Consequently, I pretty much had to handle the
move myself, which was no small task.
Without PODs, I couldn't have done it. I needed the flexibility of being able to take my time unloading my former
home in Virginia Beach and eventually loading my current home. With my husband gone, I needed to be able to
coordinate both ends of the move around several days that friends and long-distance family could be here to help.
My only other option (aside from paying thousands of dollars to professional movers) would have been to rent a
Uhaul (which would have limited me to 1 day), load up my belongings, get them to a self-storage unit, unload all
of my belongings and then do it all over again in reverse when I moved into my new home. Why go through this
when there is a better and less expensive way?
With PODs, all I had to do was have them delivered to my driveway, wait for friends to help load them, and then
call to have them picked up again at my convenience. I was not rushed or stressed one bit in what would have
otherwise been a very trying time. Furthermore, my belongings were only handled and moved twice, rather than
four times, thus reducing the risk of damage or destruction.
PODs provided an invaluable service and I would use them again in a New York minute if I ever had the chance,
and will recommend them to anyone I know who is anticipating a move.
Please take my situation into consideration when you review your pending legislation. This is a HUGE military
community and surely there are others like me who would be at a real disadvantage without the service PODs
provides. Don't be the reason people are unable to take advantage of this convenience.
Cordially,
Jessica F. Riggins
757 -966-1194
fi 1 f'.' I If'.: \Documents%20and%20Settings\klaslev\Local%20Settings\ Temp \GW} 00026 .HTM
9/3/2004
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - PODS
-".;¡,-"""",,"~.,., ,=m "',,,r """';H,,'~' 1,.+, m~".. ^~~, ""W'"..,.
,.,'co", ~!I¡'...""",,'" "",~~-h., j' ""'",,- '" ,,-.
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
IItndavids@netzero" <tndavids@netzero.com>
<klasley@vbgov.com>
9/2/20048:14 PM
PODS
Good evening,
My name is Tamika Davidson, I am writing on behalf of a recent e-mail I received concerning the prohibition of PODS usuage in the city of
Virginia Beach. I have used PODS more than once and have seen many of my Virginia Beach neighbors use PODS as well. This company
brings many benefits to their customers and is instrumental in moving their customers to your beautiful city of Virginia Beach. I encourage
you to please do not vote in favor of prohibiting PODS usuage in our city of Virginia Beach.
Sincerely,
Tamika Davidson
4906 Woods Edge Rd.
Virginia Beach, VA 23462
fi If>.: I If'.: \ Documents%20and %20Settings\klaslev\Local %20Settings\ Temp \GW} 0002 6 .HTM
9/3/2004
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - PODS
.0=
-.'- .
-_..
.~
--,,-- - "'~
-...,.,....
. -'.~-- -",-^ --=. ,
,-
~..-
From: Angie Miller <angim672002@yahoo.com>
To: <klasley@vbgov.com>
Date: 9/7/2004 1:35 PM
Subject: PODS
---.
_m____--'--'
I am writing because I have heard that there is an ordinance being proposed to regulate the usage of
PODS in Virginia Beach. And in it's current draft, the usage of PODS will be impossible for Virginia
Beach to be serviced. I would like to know why, first of all and secondly, I think that it would be unfair.
I personally have used this company last year and had a great experience. My husband and I have three
(3) children in Virginia Beach Public Schools and both work full & part-time. If! did not have this
company, I don't know what I would have done. We sold our house and bought a new one but were
without a home for five (5) weeks in between and stayed with a relative. We do not have a pick-up truck
and did not want to have to move twice, renting moving trucks and storage units. You obviously have no
idea what a great help this company has been and still remains to be. Not only to my family, but
to many, many people who are Virginia Beach Residents and have used or intend to use PODS and
would be lost without them.
I urge you to stop this proposal. If not for the many people who have used PODS, but for the many who
will need them in the future.
Sincerely
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
fi1 e:1 IC: \Documents%20and%20Settings\klasley\Local %20Settings \ Temp \GW} 00025 .HTM
9/712004
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - PODS Ordinance issue
"*,,,,""'; lil.h.4\,: -,~
. ,
'.,
"'"
^._,~....~.... to.. """~'W"'~'~"';.m.'à!';""""_-"~"W,-
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
Christopher Stuckey <cstuckey@tmail.com>
< klasJey@vbgov.com> I < planadmn@vbgov.com>
9/3/20043:35 PM
PODS Ordinance issue
It has recently come to my attention that the city of virginia beach is
considering passing a ordinance that would not allow PODS to operate
within the city. I feel it is my civil duty to tell you my story in
hopes that it could shed some light on the value of such companies. My
name is Christopher Stuckey. I am a 23 year old graduate of Old
Dominion University. I have been married a little over a year and have
a little girl due in Jan. I just was recently promoted in my job and
have to move to williamsburg. With just me and my wife moving would
have been a real burden because she isn't able to help out much. PODS
allowed me to have a storage unit on my property over the course of a
month and enabled to pack my belongings on my lesiure versus renting a
uhaul and rushing to move in one weekend. I hope this sheds some
prospective on the value of a company such as PODS. After moving into
my new apartment with their help, I would never hope to move any other
way.
Concerned Customer
Chris Stuckey
Rich/232
file:/ /C: \Documents%20and %20Settings\klasley\Local %20Settings\ Temp \GW} 00O26.HTM
9/3/2004
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - Proposed Ordinance relating to PODS{9/18/04)
_=~_An~
_.~,>'"~~'"..
-.-",'
'wv~'w~'-'
"""""""""'-',"", -
-
-
~-"".. ,,'^---'=-'-"'F'Pi""""'=~-""
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
CC:
"Forrest Sullivan" <fmsullivan@cox.net>
<klasley@vbgov.com>
9/8/2004 4:33 PM
Proposed Ordinance relating to PODS{9/18/04)
<planadmn@vbgov.com>
We are currently doing renovations to our home; the builder has estimated a completion in approximately three
months.
The POD arrived clean and is a convenient less expensive solution for the temporary short term secure storage
of four rooms of furniture. Instead of hiring someone to move our possession to a storage unit where it would be
necessary for the furniture to be loaded and moved to storage and then loaded and moved for the return trip,
placing wear and tear on our fumishings, with the help of family we were able to do the move ourselves.
We have had several PODS throughout our neighborhood and find it far less objectionable than other things for
which there are already ordinances that are not always enforced.
If better control is needed perhaps a city permit should be required with a limitation on the time a POD could be
used.
fi Ie:/ IC: \Documents%20and%20Settings\klaslev\Local%20Settings \ Temp \GW} 00025 .HTM
9/8/2004
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - PODS
i'OIW.."'«
"_. --
..-.."", ~'~;~,
,-' -"~¥,c_n__'~""'---_1iW"""-'>1-
From: <JETEINC1 @aoJ.com>
To: <klasley@vbgov.com>
Date: 9/3/2004 5:48 PM
Subject: PODS
Planning Department
2405 Courthouse Drive Rm 115
Virginia Beach Va. 23456-9039
Attn: Karen Lasley
I recently obtained a PODS unit in August for my business. I am a retailer in the Pembroke area, and
needed more space for my growing business. My business tends to be seasonal and back to school
season is busy for me. I order inventory months in advance and have in recent years stored them in my
garage. But this year I was able to transport my merchandise from my garage to the store front. The
PODS is kept in the back of my building and not visible ITom the street. And it holds all my
merchandise for the season. The PODS was very convenient for in transporting the merchandise from
one location to another and my inventory will be depleted at the end of the month and I will no longer
need the PODS. I feel this service is much benefited for the area and for businesses that need temporary
storage if the tenns are kept short. I would hate to see this service discontinued for the Virginia Beach.
Christina Rusnak
JETE' INC
4668 Pembroke Blvd
Va Beach, VA 23455
fi 1 e:// C: \Documents%20and%20Settings\klaslev\Local%20Settings\ Temp \GW} 00025 .HTM
917/2004
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - re:PODS
>w;;r" ,.",;,~ -,~.,"'-%"-""='~
> .-> ..,"",..,,--~...
., -.. ,-~".> ~, ...--
. "~"'-'>~~>' .,.,"."i~- - ~~
....
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
CC:
"Kevin & Nadine" <gilkes@cox.net>
<klasley@vbgov.com>
9/3/20044:30 PM
re:PODS
<kissco@pods.hrcoxmail.com>
Hello!
My name is Nadine Gilkes and I am writing in reference to the possibility of a City Ordinance prohibiting PODS in
our area. Unless you have had the experience and convenience of PODS, then I can understand the
unimportance of it to you. I can only imagine how much MORE hectic, and stressful my move would've been
without it. I was able to "rent" it for a month, meaning I could pack at my leisure, and still continue to carry on my
everyday activities. Not only did it make it less STRESSFUL and ORGANIZED, but I also was able to unpack at
my leisure. Most people have to rent a U-Haul and PACK/UNPACK their entire house in 2 days leaving a huge
unorganized mess. I am hoping the they will still continue to service our area for our future move. This city is
FULL of military families and I think we owe it to them to make their lives as simple and easy as possible. It may
sound ridiculous, but unless you have a military background, you have no idea what it is like packing and
unpacking every 2-4 years. I hope you take my opinion in consideration.
Sincerely
Nadine Gilkes
Virginia Beach, Va.
file:/ IC :\Documents%20and %2 OS ettings\klasley\Local %20Settings \ Temp \GW} 00025 .HTM
9/3/2004
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - PODS AND VIRGINIA BEACH
""'="" ~..~,~~ ,~"
"~_._.
:Me
.-..""",="".,.,..,"",.",..,-~""", "',.,-~;;,.. "',.,,'--~-,=.-
From: "Sam Piazza" <topekaclg8@cox.net>
To: <klasley@vbgov.com>
Date: 9/3/2004 3:52 PM
Subject: PODS AND VIRGINIA BEACH
Karen, I am a PODS customer. If it wasn't for their business, many Va. Bch residents would
not be able to prepare to move out/into the area. The convenience of this business makes
moving less hectic and stressful. I am not aware of the reasoning why they are trying to ban
the PODS from Va. Bch. Thanks, A POD customer.
fi Ie ://C: \Documen!s%20~d%2 OSettings\klaslev\Local %2 OS ettings \ Temp \G W} 00026 .HTM
9/3/2004
Page 1 of 1
Karen Lasley - regarding POD ordinance
,-~'" .~""'-=""~ -~-- ,.~,-""~ '~""Â..,*¡-~-~~-_':'%""""~"~'==~---""""i'>"'-"¡;t¡¡¡¡!1I¡¡¡"¡;Œ"'m,C.s;';:;¡¡¡.::JiI
From: Heidi Kinnes <hkinnes72@yahoo.com>
To: <klasley@vbgov.com>
Date: 9/11120049:26 PM
Subject: regarding POD ordinance
-,-----.--.----.
-----'
..-.--.-..----,-----.----..--.---.--.--..--.
Dear Ms. Karen Lasley,
This letter is to infonn you and the planning committee that I am customer of PODS as well as many of
my family members. It is my understanding that the city of Virginia Beach is considering an ordinance
that would prohibit the use of PODS in the Virginia Beach area. I want to stress my extreme prejudice
against such an ordinance. For families like ours, PODS was a blessing and allowed us to move our
belongings safely and without the hassle and high costs of moving trucks and/or moving companies.
This was the first move this family survived with not one item broken, scratched or dented. Another
benefit of using PODS was the dependability and promptness of delivery and pick-up of the POD. Not
to mention my husband and I were able to pack and unpack the POD at our convenience without having
to rush hastily or missing time from work.
In addition I would like this committee to realize, after hurricane Isabel hit, it was the use of PODS in
the Seaford and Poquoson area that kept the belonging of families safe and dry while they rebuilt their
homes and restored their lives. Virginia Beach is just as vulnerable to this type of devastation. What will
the voters in Virginia Beach do when they suffer from a hurricane and need a POD to store their
belongings. PODS help with more than just families who move, they help in disasters as well.
Please vote wisely. Vote against this ordinance, it would be a shame for families in Virginia Beach to
not have the opportunity to use a great company like PODS to help with their moving needs or in the
case of a disaster.
Thank you for your time,
Sincerely the Riden Family.
,-------.----....----...".--
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail- SOx more storage than other providers!
fi lp.1 /r.\ nn('.l1mp.nt~% ?O~nci%20SettinQ:s\klaslev\Local %20Settings\ Temp\GW} 00025 .HTM 9/13/2004
Supplemental Information
Zoning Historv
Scott
AG-I
AG-I
AC-2 o. D
S. STOWE AC-2
éJ~'
D ~
""'= = "I:'
Dc
c cc::>
=
AG-2
AC-'
AC-!
Subdivision Variance
00 DATE
1 8-13-79
2 9-25-90
3 12-9-03
I REQUEST
Subdivision Variance
Subdivision Variance
Subdivision Variance and Conditional Use Permit
(Alternative Residential Development)
I ACTION
Denied
Approved
Approved
DORA SCOTT
Agenda Item # 11
Page 6
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: Dora Scott - Subdivision Variance
MEETING DATE: January 25, 2005
.
Background:
Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in regard to certain elements of the
Subdivision Ordinance, Subdivision for Dora Scott Property is located at 2324
South Stowe Road (GPIN 24003314930000) DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
.
Considerations:
The existing lot consists of 17 acres and has 51.52 feet of width at the right-of-
way. It is the intent of the applicant to subdivide the site into two parcels.
Staff concludes that the request will not be detrimental to adjacent properties,
and will not adversely affect the character of the area. The sites are of unusual
depth, with little to no frontage on a public right-of-way. Strict application of the
ordinance would produce an undue hardship on the site.
The proposal for an additional residential dwelling on this site is in keeping with
the limited, low-density development options outlined in Chapter 6 of the City's
Comprehensive Plan. "From providing a legacy for a future generation of
farmers, to providing habitat for wildlife, keeping taxes low, and maintaining the
rural community, the vision for our rural landscape is important," (Pg. 161).
The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because they
determined a hardship existed, Staff recommended approval, and there was no
opposition to the request.
.
Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 11-0 to
approve this request with the following conditions:
1. The subdivision of the sites shall substantially adhere to the submitted plan
entitled "Preliminary Subdivision of Lot D-1, Sherman Property", dated
1 0/1 0104, and prepared by Mel Smith and Associates. Said plan has been
exhibited to the City of Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the City of
Virginia Beach Planning Department.
Dora Scott
Page 2 of 2
2. A twenty-foot ingress I egress easement for the benefit of proposed Parcel 1
shall be dedicated as depicted on the submitted plan entitled "Preliminary
Subdivision of Lot 0-1, Sherman Property", dated 10/10104, and prepared by
Mel Smith and Associates. Said plan has been exhibited to the City of Virginia
Beach City Council and is on file in the City of Virginia Beach Planning
Department.
.
Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting Depar1rnentl Agency: Planning Department+---
City Manager~ ~ .~ ~
DORA SCOTT
Agenda Item # 11
December 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.
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
GPIN:
COUNCIL
ELECTION
DISTRICT:
Location and General Information
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
Property located
at 2324 Stowe
Road
14789829780000
7 - PRINCESS ANNE
AC-'
AI
i C-/:R / ----------
'------>!'--:'_<_,!I! AC-' --
Subdivision Variance
.--------
,
L__-
AC-'
~-
o. D
S-STom; ~.
AC-2
--
AG-'
DORA SCOTT
Agenda Item#11
Page 1
SITE SIZE:
17 acres
EXISTING
LAND USE:
Single-family dwelling
SURROUNDING North:
LAND USE AND
ZONING: South:
East:
West:
. Single-family dwellings / AG-1 and AG-2
Agricultural Districts
. Open fields / AG-1 Agricultural District
. Open fields / AG-1 Agricultural District
. Open fields / AG-1 Agricultural District
NATURAL
RESOURCE
AND
CULTURAL
FEATURES:
The site consists of a wooded area along the rear of the parcel, and
open cultivated fields. The site is within the Southern Watershed
Management area. There are no cultural features associated with the
site.
AICUZ:
The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS
Oceana.
Summary of Proposa
Existing Lot: The existing lot is 17 acres and has 51.52 feet of width at the right-of-
way.
Proposed Lots: It is the intent of the applicant to subdivide the site into two parcels.
The applicant's parents currently reside in the existing single-family dwelling on the site.
Her parents have agreed to give the applicant one acre of land so she may construct a
single-family home on the property.
1te.m Reauired Parcel 1 Parcel 2
Lot Width in feet 150 "0"* 51.52*
Lot Area in square feet 43,560 696,960
43,560** (1 acre) (16 acres)
DORA SCOTT
Agenda Item # 11
Pagë2
*Variance required
**Section 402 (b) of the City Zoning Ordinance allows "any lot fifteen (15) acres
or larger meeting the requirements of Section 200 (a) of this ordinance lawfully
created on or prior to the effective date of this ordinance may be subdivided of
right into a total of two (2) building sites provided that each lot satisfies all state
and local development regulations".
Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site to be within the "Rural Service Area.'> The
area is characterized as low, flat land with wide floodplains and altered drainage. The
Comprehensive Plan recognizes this area as agricultural/rural with uses related to
farming, forestry, rural residential and other rurally compatible uses.
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.
B.
Strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship.
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.
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.
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.
C.
D.
DORA SCOTT
Agenda Item # 11
Page 3
E.
The hardship is created by the requirements of the zoning district in which
the property is located at the time the variance is authorized whenever
such variance pertains to provisions of the Zoning Ordinance incorporated
by reference in this ordinance.
Staff's 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
(1 )
(2)
The approval of the request will not be detrimental to adjacent properties,
and the character of the neighborhood will not be adversely affected. The
sites are of unusual depth, with little to no frontage on a public right-of-
way. Strict application of the ordinance would produce an undue hardship
on the site.
The proposal for an additional residential use on this site is in keeping with
the limited, low-density development options outlined in Chapter 6 of the
City's Comprehensive Plan. "From providing a legacy for a future
generation of farmers, to providing habitat for wildlife, keeping taxes low,
and maintaining the rural community, the vision for our rural landscape is
important." (Pg. 161). Considering the size of the existing site, 17 acres, a
subdivision variance for an additional single-family residential structure
would be in keeping with the continued vision for the Virginia Beach rural
landscape.
Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request.
Conditions
1. The subdivision of the sites shall substantially adhere to the submitted plan
entitled "Preliminary Subdivision of Lot D-1, Sherman Property", dated 1 0/1 0/04,
and prepared by Mel Smith and Associates. Said plan has been exhibited to the
City of Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the City of Virginia Beach
Planning Department.
2. A twenty-foot ingress / egress easement for the benefit of proposed Parcel 1
shall be dedicated as depicted on the submitted plan entitled "Preliminary
Subdivision of Lot D-1, Sherman Property", dated 10/10/04, and prepared by Mel
Smith and Associates. Said plan has been exhibited to the City of Virginia Beach
City Council and is on file in the City of Virginia Beach Planning Department.
DORA SCQTT
Agenda Item# 11
Page 4
3. The applicants shall install an all weather road surface, twenty-feet in width,
located within the existing stone drive, beginning at the end of the unnamed 50-
foot public right-of-way to both single-family structures for Fire Department
access.
NOTE:
Further conditions may be required during the
administration of applicable City Ordinances.
DORA SCOTT
Agenda Item # 11
Page 5
Public Agency Comments
Public Works
Stowe Road in the vicinity of this request is a rural
road. Traffic counts are not available at this location.
Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Present Generated Traffic
Volume Capacity
Existing Land Use ;¿
Not Not - 10
Stowe Road Available Available
Proposed Land
Use 3 - 20
.
Average Dally Trips
2 as defined by a single-family home
3 as defined by two single-family homes
Public Utilities
Water and
Sewer:
Public Safety
Police:
The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the
Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for
crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention
Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and
strate ies as the ertain to this site.
Fire and Rescue:
An all-weather road surface for Fire Department access is
necessary.
The proposed structure must be located within 150-feet of
the all weather surface road.
DORA SCOTT
Agenda Item # 11
Page 7
Exhibit A
Aerial of Site
Location
DORA SCOTT
Agenda Item # 11
Page 8
, . .
is,
it",,-, ~ ,,'~ "-".
¡ '" ", ~.....~ ",
""'~ ~ '.
" '.. ,'" ~ "",,-~rft.. "r'
" ';,"" v' ....~~
~~~ ~~~ '-"
'. ~:~':-.. ..... >'. "',: ,', ~
"'. ~'i""'!" (---'>""-"" ~~-~,
'. ~ -- "~!, ""'" ~~~.,
", ",," / .~ ' "", ""o~
, '- '" . ~.' '",,:~ "- . >", '
~~.rt'þ. " .....' -::"""~. z~!!n
, ",,~;c>~':q '-", "-.'~ .=~~
"" ~~~~ ""'~'" "-< . ~£i"g
""'" ".,"."...'1;' ",,~ ~
" Q~ ~', !Ìo
""" ""~" '-. '.... ~_. -.,"
, " i:':-- "-. ~~ ,.., '... ,--"',,>-
". .~¡.~ '. " /' 7~ "-""
"-, ~ ~- ~ ". ~ .. "",
'-"'" ~...'" ""'" í ..,...,-"'~- "~:,,-,, '" ~i
'... ',j5-a :,,~,'" ",r,
"-""'- (:, " ¡ If;: ~ :1:~~ .i~:t~ì
~,~ "'~/ }¡!~. fJ~" ¡; ,:,?',~J "l
~ ", <'-.' i.. ~;~ ¡¡I !
b ~ i!Ì ,."..". "'I"" i£~~ ~~, /~;
.~ ~~ ~ 1:;J~, C,," -, '",~,"~, :,~ / ~'
.' io ~ ~= ~.. " ",""'¡ .
;;!; i I~; §~ ~~ "k:ä~ ,:> ' i ¡h~"
I:Ui ~ hi: ~H i ¡r~<,,- ,'",' / d~g~
lell!I¡i!~ m j;¡1 I'~_".L!;'¡
~1~§!i~~5~1~ i~l~ >:~~~~ "
i!~!:II,iii;~ ~u,¡ ~~..~ ~
"~d91 rip!; ~ iH i It~'
III !:å š~ ~ ¡;! ; Hi} ¡ ~~
I~â nd~ h~~ ~ ~i ~ 2~~
.õíil! ~~! ..I! . 1i~¡ ~ h ~
--
Z iiiI.~
-----
~
c::
~
>- c::..
0::: 0.. ~
« ~.~
z ~ ~ ~;
~ ((! i ~:
..::; <: ~... - ",
:::i ~ i7i ~ ~
w ¡;, - ;;~
g: í 1>
Q
...
0
....
u
u
n
¡,.
~;-f
~.--." ..' . 10 .
If,~ . Q
Il~ ,} §
I f ~¡~~
I ~ ~
n
" iš
~ ~~!" i~~!!§
6 i E ¡;¡~ ~I "aill!i:;
ï b; oW "II "1!~1I!3
I! ~.¡¡.-~ il ;I~ ~. ¡hi
¡ i~1 I~ 1:.1.
~ ~~¡ ~; I"!i
I ~ä~ I~ a§
¡ :!~I ill ~I
¡Î ~j/I! ~ ~il
; ~ il! I! ¡Ii
¡¡I ~¡: ~ b ¡¡I§
.~ ..~I! ~~ .d ..Ii
Exhibit 8
Proposed Site
Plan
~ It ~
. 'f!!
,. ij:i~
~ ".;... ..~~;a f
, ~' ~"{.~
~ ~I Ë,š~é,
. :: ¡U!~..
¡j ~!;j m~{~
~~" ~g¡d
, 3
Ilï
, ~
I
!
~i ~ ~
¡i ~ I
~
DORA SCOTT
Agenda Item # 11
Page 9
»
(C
<1>0
5.0
:~
"'U<1>C/)
~3(')
<1>: : :0
~~-I
o~-I
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If tho a¡¡phnnt is "vyp(iln!Í(HI. pilt!n"".hip, lifft!, h(l';;'\O,,$. or úth<> (HI""'ÚIPi)"Hcd
ahm. cürnpld(llÍ1O k>!k1Wln~r
tho <'pphc,¡N Him'" tot:owod hy tho "",nos o! ¡¡II "the,m;. m(¡mhm". !!"':!"'}~.
pat!"(m,, utc bd(1\'f' (AttilCh list d mJCOSSiJry)
/lIlt
1.
2. liS! all bu$lno~,s(i$ thai hav611 pafcnt.sobsìdiary' Of atfihalet! b(l$Încss entity"
'.vith tho applicant: (AtlilClllí$l if nOCiJ$MfY)
.J¡{ ChO.f,k how ,f th!! artpli<;ant is NOT a corpomtÌl)1). P¡\IIOOfShip. firm. hUBino%, Of
. ~tlWt onincotpnmte( orq;miwtion.
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
C"mpltJW I¡¡is st1c1!CIf1 only Ii prcpørt\' C>WIJdt is c¡,(ffH(!n! fwm ",('{'Ibm/.
I! I"" !HÙPOtty c;Wn'" i~ a ÙHpOt\\M", paltr\EJIßhip. finn. bÜ'{H\O5$. r,: ('Ihor
tm,ncofpot1\Wd ofglli1il(ltiOfl. çotflptolû tho fo!lowing'
1. Usllho propOfty !)"'l1m name followod hv tho """,.),; ,i "II "HI,;",,;. mombels.
paftn()f$, '.'Ie. bIllow: fAtUclJ
IV)
" Lr:;tallhu""",s,.";;.thall¡;w""IU""¡t.,,ubsidliüy',,,;\thk\hdì"""I\n:;"
wl"""t\:;"'P with II\!! appl.Gi!I)(: (ArMelllist ¡f !:t>""i<f;,Jtyì
~;h"!;k hmn if tho
.""f"'"
ownCf ,~, NOTa co'porati<HI. pMtnotshlp, linn. htJ$ìn{>$s.
'-<lqcr"iza"'JIj
.-.
'Z
0
Þ-4
5
~
~
ô
r'"
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
Unt all known cOl1tmc!ot$ or hO$!f1<)fiSûS that havo °' ",Ii! ptov!do &Ctvico$with rcsl !1cl
to ,he mqlI\J$Md pmp",ty lise, indu(!Înq but not limited II) Itw ptovìdüt5 d <lmhrtfH::runti
[\(INter",. mat ,,¡¡lalii ßc,(\'i,"IS. Imandal ~¡Otvk;ûs. acçounting "eJVIW5, and 1"9<'\1
selViCfi3' (Attm:h 1>',1 if nOCU5$aty)
, "Patonl.wh(~idl{uy rolation$hip" u\(¡lII)(¡ "a lùlationship that (¡xiSI$ whot! OnO
(:otpmation (jiwclly ot inrJitc<.:Uy ow...~ shmos Po$sl1$slng mOH> than 50 percont 01 tho
votinn power of anothat corporation: See Slale und Local Government Conflict 01
Intam£l$ Act. Va. CQ<I\> § 2.2.3101.
" "Affiliated hl/sinus$ fJl'lli!y mlationshìlf m¡¡ans "3 ml¡t\iollship. olhel' than
parcnH,ubsidiar¡ relationship, Ihat exists who" (I) (H>\! 1)U~In<,s~ l11\tity has Ii
çtjtl\mllinq ".,o¡oer$t1ip inlorCM in tho Olt101 hu9noss entity, (il! a conlm!lin!) 0",1\01 in
Olli! "nt~y i$ "tso II cunlfolhng OWI">f in Ihe other "'\lity. or (Hi) thelO i5 shnröd
INH\3w"ment Ct (~(}nlrol bolwenn tho IfU¡,¡iIH",S <'.nlitiu$ Fueln,,; th"t 5hould be
co"';I{ ctüd III \.lutmllllni"B tho oxistonco 01 "n aff!Ii"!"'! ous.ness untity felatiOnship
i.,dud" IhM IIIIJ $arH(¡ pmsot\ Of substantia!!,! th(> san'" p'~.(,n own {)t mana!}o tho Iwo
\)"\.\:11:;: ,¡\f:m ¡1(Ü (:Common'" comminUle! It/m!" ,,'1 ~s~",t<,. ttln busi,""" on!ili,,;! shn",
tho \.1M ,j/ tho $om" d¡,,;o:; ()f WnpbY'lC$ ,1' nlh""";H' ""tltù ,u;¡¡,"'iû'. WSOUfCO$ Of
.1 00 i\ ""J"lill b,,~'i;;, m thetl) IS olhor\'":.,, " crO'iO wolk,ng wlatinrdtlp
the "111:'"", Set' Hhto and toeal (;""""""on( Conl!¡et oj Intom5($ Act, Va.
;;>-:
~
......
CI':J
E
~
~
~
Cod" § ??,:!WI
CERTtFICATION: I "-,,My that tho inf(mnnlion r:ont'lil1"¡¡ howln i$ltHÜ and arx;umlo.
I ,I!\dNw\nrJ that, upon f(\Ç()ipt of noti1icnt!cn ipostcard) Ih3t the <!I-'phcation tH\$ !Jù<H!
$dwdutod tor publiG hearin\!. I mil t(!gponsiiM. "H dWlil!inq find pO~Mlg Iho mquiwd
",.¡" on tho Bllbjfil,t plOpOlly at len,;t 30 d;IYs pIlOt to Ihû sch'Jduled public homing
to th\! ;¡\"tl'üd,,)t)S in tl1ls p;¡Ckl'lgo
em
en -. ><
Dr en ::r
r+ (') -.
CÐÕC'
3 en -.
CÐ c:: ~
=.C;;O
Item #11
Dora Scott
Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in
regard to certain elements of the Subdivision Ordinance
Subdivision for Dora Scott
2324 South Stowe Road
District 7
Princess Anne
December 8, 2004
CONSENT
William Din: The next item is Item #11, Dora Scott. This is an Appeal to Decisions of
Administrative Officers in regard to certain elements of the Subdivision Ordinance,
Subdivision for Dora Scott, on property located at 2324 South Stowe Road in the
Princess Anne District. Welcome.
Dora Scott: Thank you. My name is Dora Scott, and I'm the applicant. We have read
the conditions and agree with them.
William Din: Thank you. There were originally three conditions. We have deleted the
third condition. There are only two conditions associated with the application.
~
Dora Scott: Thank you.
William Din: Okay. Is there any opposition to placing this on consent? If not, Mr. Barry
Knight will discuss this item.
Barry Knight: This is a subdivision variance where this is couple has lived in the south
end of Virginia Beach all of their life. They actually live the Creeds Section now. They
want to move up the road a little ways about a mile and a half to live in front of their
parent's house so they can keep an eye on her and move back on family property. We
think it's an appropriate land use so therefore we put it on the consent agenda.
William Din: Thank you Barry. I would like to make a motion to approve the following
consent item, Item #11 Dora Scott. This is an Appeal to the Decisions of Administrative
Officers in regard to certain elements of the Subdivision Ordinance for Dora Scott on
property located at 2324 South Stowe Road in the Princess Anne District with two
conditions.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Din. Do I hear a second?
Donald Horsley: Second.
Dorothy Wood: A motion by Mr. Din and seconded by Mr. Horsley.
Item #11
Dora Scott
Page 2
AYE 11 NAY 0 ABSO ABSENT 0
ANDERSON AYE
CRABTREE AYE
DIN AYE
HORSLEY AYE
KATSIAS AYE
KNIGHT AYE
MILLER AYE
RIPLEY AYE
STRANGE AYE
WALLER AYE
WOOD AYE
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 11-0, the agenda item has been approved for consent.
-=
AG-I
AG-
~
/
lAG-I
Subdivision Variance
Scott
{
¡
L-
--
AG-I
AC-2 D. a
S. STOWE AC-2
(j~;
D ~
== '!.'
Dc
oc:::J
AC-I
AG-2
007
R-7o5
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: Exousia International Christian Center, Inc. - Conditional Use Permit
(church)
MEETING DATE: January 25, 2005
.
Background:
An Ordinance upon Application of Exousia International Christian Center, Inc. for
a Conditional Use Permit for a church on property located at 5049 Haygood
Road (GPIN 14689229530000). DISTRICT 4 - BAYSIDE
.
Considerations:
The applicant proposes to establish a church on the site within the existing
building. Sunday services will begin at 9:30 AM with Sunday School and Church
services at 11 :00 AM. Bible study classes will be conducted on Wednesday
evenings at 7:30 PM. Youth group meetings will occur on Saturday evenings at
7:00 PM. Church office hours will be Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 4:00
PM..
The applicant indicates the church has 100 members. The required parking for
100 members is 20 spaces. The submitted plan depicts 22 parking spaces. One
space will have to be re-striped for handicap accessibility.
The Comprehensive Plan policies recognize the need to preserve, protect, and
enhance the overall character, economic value, and aesthetic quality of the
surrounding neighborhoods. With appropriate restrictions, this church use will not
disrupt or adversely impact the adjoining predominately residential area. The
Plan policies also support development proposals that fulfill a legitimate public
need for compatible neighborhood support uses and activities.
Staff concludes the church is compatible with the adjacent neighborhood if the
conditions recommended for the use permit are adhered to. Reuse of the existing
commercial building for a small church poses significantly less impact to the
adjoining area than would the more intense commercial uses permitted by-right
in the existing B-2 Community Business District.
There was opposition to the request.
Exousia International Christian Center, Inc.
Page 2 of 3
.
Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-1 to
approve the request with the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits and inspections from the
Planning Department - Permits and Inspections Division, and shall obtain a
Certificate of Occupancy before occupying the building.
2. The applicant shall perform the following alterations and repairs to the
building:
a. Perform any necessary roof repairs;
b. Paint the non-brick exterior portions of the building in white or earth
tone colors;
c. Pressure wash the brick exterior;
d. Repair or remove the decorative railing along the roof;
e. Repair and paint the existing gutters, or remove and install new
gutters;
f. Submit elevations or pictures of the proposed new front door treatment
for approval by the Current Planning Division of the City of Virginia
Beach Planning Department.
3. The applicant shall re-stripe the existing parking lot to provide for a minimum
of nineteen (19) 9-foot by 18-foot parking spaces and one (1) handicap
accessible parking space. The handicap accessible space shall be delineated
in accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements.
4. All parking for the members of the church shall be met on site and shall not
spillover into the streets of the adjacent neighborhood.
5. The applicant shall provide a lighting andlor a photometric diagram plan for
review by City staff. The lighting plan shall include the location of all pole
mounted and building mounted lighting fixtures and the listing of lamp type,
wattage, and type of fixture. Lighting on the rear and sides of the building
shall have appropriate shielding to direct light downward and not into adjacent
residential areas. All lighting on the site shall be consistent with those
standards recommended by the Illumination Engineering Society of North
America.
6. The applicant shall maintain the existing landscaping in good order and
supplement landscaping where needed. The applicant shall meet with the
Planning Department I Current Planning staff to determine adequate street
frontage, foundation and buffer planting requirements for the site.
.
Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Exousia International Christian Center, Inc.
Page 3 of 3
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting DeparbnentJ Agency: Planning Department ~
City Manager: ~ '?-' ~~
EXOUSIA INTERNATIONAL
CHRISTIAN CENTER, INC.
Agenda Item # 12
December 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.
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
GPIN:
COUNCIL
ELECTION
Location and General Information
Conditional Use Permit request for a Church
Property
located at
5049 Haygood
Road
14689229530000
4 - BAYSIDE
EXOUSIA INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item # 12
Page 1
DISTRICT:
SITE SIZE:
.49443 acres
EXISTING
LAND USE:
A vacant convenience store and parking area.
South:
East:
. Single-family dwelling I R-7.5 Residential
. Sullivan Boulevard
. Across Sullivan Boulevard are single-family
dwellings I R-7.5 Residential
. Single-family dwelling I R-7.5 Residential
. Haygood Road
. Across Haygood Road is a Fraternal Organization I
B-2 Business
SURROUNDING North:
LAND USE AND
ZONING:
West:
NATURAL
RESOURCE
AND
CUL TURAL
FEATURES:
There are no natural resources or cultural features associated with
the site.
AICUZ:
The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS
Oceana.
Summary of Proposa
The applicant proposes to establish a church on the site within the existing building.
Sunday services will begin at 9:30 AM with Sunday school and Church services at
11 :00 AM. Bible study classes will be conducted on Wednesday evenings at 7:30 PM.
Youth group meetings will occur on Saturday evenings at 7:00 PM. Church office hours
will be Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 4:00 PM.
The applicant indicates the church has 100 members. The required parking for 100
members is 20 spaces. The submitted plan depicts 22 parking spaces. One space will
have to be re-striped for handicap accessibility.
EXOUSIA INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item # 12
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.
. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations for the area.
. Compatibility with the surrounding residential uses.
Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan designates the area as a Primary Residential Area. The
Comprehensive Plan policies recognize the need to preserve, protect, and enhance the
overall character, economic value, and aesthetic quality of the surrounding
neighborhoods. The Plan policies also support development proposals that fulfill a
legitimate public need for compatible neighborhood support uses and activities.
Staff Evaluation
Staff recommends approval of this request.
Staffs evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials,
adequately addresses each of the 'Major Issues' identified above. The proposal's
strengths in addressing the 'Major Issues' are
(1) The Comprehensive Plan policies recognize the need to preserve, protect, and
enhance the overall character, economic value, and aesthetic quality of the
surrounding neighborhoods. With appropriate restrictions, this church use will not
EXOUSIA INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item # 12
Page 3
disrupt or adversely impact the adjoining predominately residential area. The
Plan policies also support development proposals that fulfill a legitimate public
need for compatible neighborhood support uses and activities.
(2) The church is compatible with the adjacent neighborhood. Reuse of the existing
retail/commercial building for a small church poses significantly less impact to
the adjoining area than would the more intense commercial uses permitted by
right in the existing B-2 Community Business District.
Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request with the following conditions.
Conditions
1. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits and inspections from the
Planning Department - Permits and Inspections Division, and shall obtain a
Certificate of Occupancy before occupying the building.
2. The applicant shall perform the following alterations and repairs to the building:
a. Perform any necessary roof repairs;
b. Paint the non-brick exterior portions of the building in white or earth tone
colors;
c. Pressure wash the brick exterior;
d. Repair or remove the decorative railing along the roof;
e. Repair and paint the existing gutters, or remove and install new gutters;
f. Submit elevations or pictures of the proposed new front door treatment for
approval by the Current Planning Division of the City of Virginia Beach
Planning Department.
3. The applicant shall re-stripe the existing parking lot to provide for a minimum of
nineteen (19) 9-foot by 18-foot parking spaces and one (1) handicap accessible
parking space. The handicap accessible space shall be delineated in accordance
with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements.
4. All parking for the members of the church shall be met on site and shall not
spillover into the streets of the adjacent neighborhood.
5. The applicant shall provide a lighting and/or a photometric diagram plan for
review by City staff. The lighting plan shall include the location of all pole
mounted and building mounted lighting fixtures and the listing of lamp type,
wattage, and type of fixture. Lighting on the rear and sides of the building shall
have appropriate shielding to direct light downward and not into adjacent
EXOUSIA INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item # 12
Page 4
residential areas. All lighting on the site shall be consistent with those standards
recommended by the Illumination Engineering Society of North America.
6. The applicant shall maintain the existing landscaping in good order and
supplement landscaping where needed. The applicant shall meet with the
Planning Department / Current Planning staff to determine adequate street
frontage, foundation and buffer planting requirements for the site.
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.
EXOUSIA INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item # 12
Page 5
Supplemental Information
2
R-7o 5
007
2 9-23-97
2-8-94
I REQUEST
Rezoning (R-S 4 Residence Suburban to C-G 2 General
Commercial)
Conditional Use Permit (Communication Tower)
Conditional Use Permit (Communication Tower)
I ACTION
Approved
[!] DATE
1 2-12-62
Approved
Approved
EXOUSIA INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item # 12
Page 6
Public Agency Comments
Public Works
Master Transportation
Plan (fv1TEf
Sullivan Boulevard in front of this request is a 2-lane
undivided local collector roadway. Traffic counts are not
available for Hayqood Road at this location.
Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Present Generated Traffic
Volume Capacity
Existing Land Use ¿
Sullivan 4,465 6,200 ADT - 1,476
Boulevard ADT1 1
Proposed Land
Use 3 - 18
Average Dally Trips
2 as defined by a 24-hour convenience store (weekday)
3 as defined by a church (weekday)
Weekend Volumes
Existing: 1,726 - 24-hour convenience store
Proposed: 153 - church
Public Utilities
City water and sewer are available to the site.
I Water and
Sewer:
Public Safety
Police:
The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the
Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for
crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention
Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and
strate ies as the ertain to this site.
Fire and Rescue:
Additional building code requirements may be required
with regard to fire protection and the means of egress. Fire
code permits may be required at occupancy, contact the
fire department for permit information.
EXOUSIA INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item # 12
Page 7
obtained from the "Building Official" prior to occupancy.
The occu ant load si n must be osted prior to use.
EXOUSIA INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item # 12
Page 8
Exhibit A
Aerial of Site
Location
EXOUSIA INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item # 12
Page 9
I
~
0
","-i
:r
::0
"-
~
,'. ,
I
i
i
'-~
, i nu SULLIVAN
--- +&.------- --_..:...~;~.~" ----,~.--==--ø-'z....'-=-- ..,-,:=....!.'.:!.!.'-
-'.-I'1,~,~. '. ," ""'.'a.M.'T-ZIC'
I ' Ilyof Virl¡¡ni.
, a.aOh. bra" dl,. '
PARCEL A, BLOCK 45 ~~.~h :dini;'.;.ae\~'I~.nl
SUBDIVISION Newlawn Rd, an~on of.
OF
ARAGONA VILLAGE
SECTION 9, PART 3
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA
SEPTEMBER17,2004
EXCLUSIVELY FOR
EXOUSIA INTERNATIONAL CHRISTIAN CENTER INC
"
-
BLVD.
80' R/W.
Exhibit 8
Existing
Site
Plan
EXOUSIA INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item # 12
Page 10
Exhibit C
Existing
Building
EXOUSIA INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item # 12
Page 11
Exhibit D
Existing
Site
EXOUSIA INT:ERNATIONAL
Agenda Item#..t2
PagEf12
m
><
0
c
en
»
»-
ccZ
ro-l
::Jm
0.::0
t\) Z
-»
"Uro-l
1»3-
cc 0
ro::tt:z
..........»
WNr
OSURE STATEMENT
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If Iho ()pplica"l is a CÙII}t)I"tion. p'trtnN$hip. "'In, btr5~1e5$, 01 othN unll\cÖlporatod
orgllnîzation, compteto tho fo!lowing'
I. l.í511he 1Ipplicanll,,"n¡¡ followed by the names of aU OlflCüIS, tUmnbors, hl",tO<J~\.
pattnNs, (Hc, bolow' (AIt,lcl) /151 il t!t>Ci>SSlIIY)
f'j"",~" J, ..",Lc,,\
.1. !:..".,
I"
¡>,I'li!
al! busit)(J$ses Ihat have a paront,subsidiary' or aHíliated hu~;n"&$ entity"
relationship wilh tho applicant: (Attach lisl il necessary)
,'f'
0 Ch",:k h(!lo it tho applicant 1'1 NOTa wlpomtion, pmtnordÜp, hnn, bl"'"'lWS, or
oth", Uf\intolporatC(f orgal1i2mion,
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
('",¡¡phM ti1¡"oiI'OÙ)¡) ,.",1,' ¡I l'IY'PNt,'(!W1Wr i" dill/'INII fmm,1Ji1,¡ic;ml.
II :I'" pmp"'I;' OW"", ,$ a eorpOl!ltion, pi\lln""'1111', IInll, ""SII'05:;' 01 oti""
(;,lIl\<OIP<'I"t",j "r(lan".)""n. cnmplHi> the followi"g:
1. LiBt tho plope"y ol'll\or "amù followùd by Ihe n(lmo~ 01[111 o!fico"., m(1OIIbOr5,
\1",,1",,:;. p""fMrs. ot('.. b"lo'/" (AttllCl,lht ¡1/Jr!(~WSlllyj
n ".
~; I "" ,)III",,)m():;,)o~, thai havc", p;.,m¡t-sub"i<iiaIY' or aIWI"iclibu",ncsli on\lIY?
r<:\aliund'¡p with 11", ;'1'1'"""",1: (AWld'!"'! II IIt,""';:;illY)
i:
0 (."u'~ I)() () ,( Ih) P">!.>"'" (;,""'" I') NOT a WI JOI all')I\' p;.III"er~hp. firm. b\lt;ì"'.'~)5.
. 'I ot""! ""i"Ci':lI"";I:"" "C<i""",;¡ti;",
.,' ,. "". """,m","'.,
~
.......
5
.......
~/
~,
~~.
~
~~
~
CI:J
;:::J
~
C>
.......
F t
~
Z
C>
t....:)
."',..,,===-~~~=="--,,='",.,""
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
li$t all known contractors or businesses thaI have or will provldo services wilh respcct
10 the rcquoslod )topCJ1y 0$0. including bul not lìmllod to tho providers of architùctural
servìcù5, r"al eslalù sùrvicos. Iínal1clat sorvìcas. nccounlin¡¡ $orvíces and legal
(Attach lisl il
I "PMonl.subsidlary relalionshlp" meun$ "Ii ro~lIìOIl&hll) that úXi~t5 when bno
corporation Ifiraclly Or ihdlrcclly owns shates þ(>5s0S5ing 10010 Ihall 50 pNcOllt 01 Iho
voting powor of anolhet corporation," Sðe ~1310 (1f11i Local Government Conllìcl 01
Info/osls Act, Va, Coda § 2.2,3101,
.. "Aflrlìatod bus~1t!ss colìly tùlalionship- moans "a relaliC)nshíp. othor than
pmcnt'subsidl1lry mlatiol15hlp, that oxists whùn (i) ono b\l5iness eolìty has a
conlroillnq OWllol&l1ip intolO$t in the othor b\l9io06$ onlìly, (ii) II conlrollin!) owlwr;n
"no enlily is aho a col11rollín[ owner In 11\<'1 othm onllly, or (if;j Ibr",) b sh",od
rnnnilg"mcnt r) "",\lrol botwt\C1I Iho busin""" Ol\titì"", Fact"", thaI should 1)0
"ú,,:-,idNùd '" dül<!"'H"inglho uxislür\ce 01 an alllHated bu"",o% cnhty ICllltiOr\shíp
include IhA! II", """'0 porson or subsmntlnl1y tho "31110 porson own or monago Ihe Iwo
enlilies; the"" aro common or commlnglod funds or ¡¡SSelS; the b\lsiness enti!ics ,,;haro
Iho US!! 01 Ih., :¡arnt> of!ìce5 ()I omployeo9 or otht)lwÎso shalO m;\ivihf'.$, rOSDurcos 01
"ol$()nl)ol olin ro\JIllar 1)(\$1$: Or th"", is o!lwrwi"o " do"" wDr,i,,\! Ii>l.1lìon5hip
bølwo!Jn 11m ""!III""," 8úIJ 51<110 and Local G<>WlltlnOnl Gon!l";1 of IlIlorosls Act. Va
C()tju § ;',2.3101.
CERTIFICATION: I c'~ltify Ihallhr,) 10101111<\11011 ççntmnel homin is 11110 and accurate,
t u"del~fand Ih"l. upon I<)('.oipl ot notifiçatioll (poS!f:wd) Ihllllh" i\pplicati(m has I>o,..n
xhcd"lcd for pub"'; hoa,illg. I am responsIble IOf (bl[l;I\lI1\1 and posting the røquíl(Id
sign 01\ th'J $ubject properly at least 30 doys priot to the>. ~.çhødul,,¡j public hí!1uinq
,n:;I,,";llol"; in thl(; pi\ckngn,
cncm
Pt> -. ><
A) ø ::r
CD 2. -.
3 ~ g:
CD C r+
::S"'m
Pt>CD
Item #12
Exousia International Christian Center, Inc.
Conditional Use Pennit
5049 Haygood Road
District 4
Bayside
December 8, 2004
REGULAR
Joseph Strange: The next application is Item #12 Exousia International Christian Center,
Inc. An Ordinance upon Application of Exousia International Christian Center for a
Conditional Use Pennit for a church on property located at 5049 Haygood Road, Bayside
District.
Pastor Craig Young: Good morning. I'm the representative for Exousia International
Christian Center.
Dorothy Wood: Would you please introduce yourself please.
Pastor Craig Young: I'm Pastor Craig Young.
.=.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Pastor Young.
Don Leneski: Good afternoon. I'm Don Leneslå. I'm the owner of the property.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Leneski. If you would like to have a seat and as soon as
the pastor finishes we'll call on you.
Don Leneski: Okay.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you sir.
Pastor Craig Young: We have read the conditions and we wholeheartedly comply.
Dorothy Wood: Are there any questions for the Pastor? Mr. Ripley.
Ronald Ripley: Yes. I have some questions. Were you at the infonnal meeting this
morning when we talked about this?
Pastor Craig Young: No, I wasn't.
Ronald Ripley: Did you say your last name was Pastor Young?
Pastor Craig Young: Yes.
Item #12
Exousia International Christian Center, Inc.
Page 2
Ronald Ripley: Okay. My concern is, and I think the staff and we have revised
conditions. Did you receive them?
Pastor Craig Young: Yes, I received them.
Ronald Ripley: Let's just kind of go over those.
Pastor Craig Young: Sure.
Ronald Ripley: We have a picture of the building that you're looking at here. The use
that you want to put here, and I think is fine. Nobody has a problem with that.
Pastor Craig Young: Thank you.
Ronald Ripley: We want you to pay attention to what you do to the building. It's an
improvement to the neighborhood. Your congregation is probably in the neighborhood, I
assume.
Pastor Craig Young: Some of them. Yeso
.-=
Ronald Ripley: Okay. We want it to be a real improvement to the neighborhood.
Something everybody can look at with pride. Hopefully, that is what your going to do.
Pastor Craig Young: Of course.
Ronald Ripley: When we saw the original conditions and just talked about re-striping the
parking lot, and you're going to paint the building. What the Commission would like to
see you do is to try to make the building look better, and these other things that were
added, perfonning any necessary roof repairs, painting the non-brick, repair any of the
pickets and those types of things, enhance the landscaping. The most important, that I
think when you get to entranceway, what do you find to do with that?
Pastor Craig Young: Where the wood is on the front of the building is there primarily
because there is glass behind it. The doors actually were broken down because this is a
building that has been sitting empty for quite a long time. So, the owner put wood up
there to keep people from going in and out of the building and all kinds of different
activities taking place. The owner has agreed to put up brand new doors that actually
coincide with the front of the glass that already exists behind the wood.
Ronald Ripley: So, the existing commercial framing and glass that is there is going to be
fixed so that it is back to where it would be a glass look looking in?
Pastor Craig Young: Of course. My philosophy on the House of God is that the House
of God should look better than our homes. So, we do not want to worship in any place
that does not reflect the God that we serve, who is great. And so, we plan to bring class
Item #12
Exousia International Christian Center, Inc.
Page 3
and elegance, and also excellence to this building to enhance the community. Weare a
community minded church. This is one church of seven in which I'm over in different
states. And in each state we have developed mentoring programs, GED programs. We
feed the hungry. We clothed people. We work in the prisons to stop crime because we
believe that crime is a sin problem. I'm also a Chaplain with the Hempstead Police
Department. So, I'm very well connected with the streets, gangs, and drug life, and
everything else. We come to this community to do nothing but be a blessing to this
community, and help it in which everyway we can. We realize that we're between two
schools, and so we want to make an impact on the children. So we come to do nothing
but be a blessing in this community.
..=.
Ronald Ripley: There are a lot of kids walking up and down this street coming from the
school. The City has made major improvements across the street with this park. They
bought about 50 acres. It's going to be a major park. There is another project going in
pretty much across the street. That is going to help upgrade the area. The reason why we
asked you to come up, and we probably normally would have consented this, we just
wanted to make sure that you focused on that. My office is in that area. I drive by this
property all the time. I don't want to be riding by and seeing a building like that, so what
we want you to do is really get your plans clear. Get with the staff and Mr. Scott's office
and make sure that they're comfortable with it and that way you will know that you're in
good shape, and proceed.
Pastor Craig Young: My contractor is also in the back and all of these things that you
have requested that we do we had already decided to do. As far as taking down all those
railings, that is really an eyesore.
Ronald Ripley: Good. Madame Chairperson, I'll be glad to make a motion when ready.
Dorothy Wood: I think we have some opposition. I also believe the owner of the
building wanted to speak.
Joseph Strange: He's not signed up to speak.
Don Leneski: I don't have to other than I support what the Reverend said.
Dorothy Wood: Would you please come up and give us your name just for the record
sir?
Don Leneski: My name is Don Leneski. I think what the Reverend had already stated, I
totally agree with and would actually be an enhancement for the community.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Leneski.
Don Leneski: You're welcome.
Item #12
Exousia International Christian Center, Inc.
Page 4
Dorothy Wood: Are there any questions for him? We're very happy to have you in our
community Pastor. Thank you for what you're doing.
Pastor Craig Young: Thank you so much.
Dorothy Wood: Would you have a seat please?
Joseph Strange: Our first speak in opposition is Todd Kaeding.
Dorothy Wood: Welcome Mr. Kaeding.
Todd Kaeding: Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Please state your name sir.
Todd Kaeding: My name is Todd Kaeding. I want to let you know where I live.
Dorothy Wood: You see the pointer there sir?
Todd Kaeding: I live right here.
~
Dorothy Wood: Right across the street pretty much.
Todd Kaeding: Right. I've seen a lot of things going on in that building.
Dorothy Wood: I bet you have.
Todd Kaeding: My main concern is traffic and noise.
Dorothy Wood: Yes sir.
Todd Kaeding: They say that parking is supposed to accommodate a hundred people. It
sounds like they are already maxed out with the parking spaces that they have, so how
could they even grow?
Dorothy Wood: I guess we'll have to ask the Pastor.
Todd Kaeding: I don't want them to be parking on the streets. It says it is not going to
overflow into the roads. I just want to make sure that doesn't happen.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you sir.
Todd Kaeding: Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Would you answer some questions please. Mr. Miller has a question.
Item #12
Exousia International Christian Center, Inc.
Page 5
Robert Miller: Was that the only issue that you were concerned with, and obviously the
condition of the building we've taken into accountability. Have you seen the proffers
that we gave the owner, which we asked them to do the repairs and improvements?
Todd Kaeding: Right.
Robert Miller: Obviously that should be something that is helpful to you.
Todd Kaeding: The looks of the building.
Robert Miller: The biggest thing that you were concerned was to make sure that the
parking doesn't end up on the street in front of your house and in the neighborhood.
Todd Kaeding: That is correct.
Dorothy Wood: We understand that sir.
Todd Kaeding: It's been quiet for such a long time.
.=.
Dorothy Wood: Are there any other questions for him? Thank you very much for coming
down. You're children are so well behaved. It's wonderful.
Todd Kaeding: They're my neighbors.
Lisa French: We're neighbors.
Dorothy Wood: I'm sorry.
Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is Lisa French.
Dorothy Wood: Lisa, your children are well behaved.
Lisa French: My main concern is basically the same thing.
Dorothy Wood: Would you please state your name for the record?
Lisa French: I'm sorry. Lisa French. I live right back here on Sullivan Circle in the
back. This house. We're concerned too about the traffic, and the cars that are going to
be fitting in that parking lot. They have parking for 20 cars. From what I understand on
the internet the church is already at 100 people, and that is five people to a car. Churches
want to grow. They want to get more people in. They want it. So where is the room
going to be for them to grow? If they're not parking in that lot they're going to be
parking on our court, and the court across the street, and the road. We all have children.
We all have children wandering around playing in the courts. Weare very farnily-
orientated. It's just been really nice and calm. I have no problem with the church. I just
Item #12
Exousia International Christian Center, Inc.
Page 6
worry about the size, and the size of the property, and where they're going to go. Every
now and then they're going to be meeting two nights a week, Saturday night, and then
half a day on Sunday. It's not just on the weekend. It's going to be during the week. My
son walks back and forth to school. He goes to the high school. They practice. They
have games. There is always kids walking around, and lots of kids walking home from
the middle school, and just the added traffic. We're all concerned about that. Okay.
That is it.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you so much for coming.
Joseph Strange: Our next speaker in opposition is Rodney Hooker.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Hooker? Ms. Hooker? Have you signed up?
Karen McDonald: I'm sorry. We apologize. We did not.
Dorothy Wood: Okay. Would you please come up and state your name?
Karen McDonald: My name is Karen McDonald.
~
Scott McDonald: I'm Scott McDonald.
Karen McDonald: Weare owners of property directly next to the church that is supposed
to go in. The concerns that we had have already been addressed. In addition to that is
this property being purchased or rented? I don't understand that.
Dorothy Wood: I don't know ma'am. It doesn't really matter.
Karen McDonald: That doesn't matter. Okay. My concern is with the landscaping we
have a fence that is currently there from the current owner that has dilapidated and is
falling down. I wasn't sure if the landscaping incurred additional fencing because we
have half of it that is tom down and the other half is up.
Scott McDonald: The other half is a chain link fence.
Karen McDonald: We we're just concerned about is there going to be fencing to divide
the properties?
Scott McDonald: Or could they put a privacy fence up along that area?
Karen McDonald: Since we're directly right there. Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you for coming.
Joseph Strange: What property are you?
Item #12
Exousia International Christian Center, Inc.
Page 7
Karen McDonald: Weare right next to it.
Dorothy Wood: Are there any other questions?
Ronald Ripley: Yeah. The fence that you're referring to, the fence on your property line,
is that completely down or partially down?
Scott McDonald: There is a row of bushes that goes along the whole fence. They're
pretty tall bushes. The front part right in here is a little piece of privacy fence. All the
boards or most of the boards are missing off of that. From here back is all chain link
fence.
Ronald Ripley: Is that fairly in good condition?
Scott McDonald: The chain link fence is in good condition, but if they trim down all the
bushes then there is going to be a direct view into the backyards from the church. I don't
know what kind of activities are going to be going on out there.
Ronald Ripley: What about the fence on the northern property line? Is that a chain link
also?
..=.
Scott McDonald: I would assume so. I don't know about the property line there.
Karen McDonald: Part of the fence is like an eight foot like it, was there from 7-Eleven.
I think when it was initially that and that is the worry some. The other is like only four
feet.
Scott McDonald: It's rental property for us. We don't live there right now. So, we're
concerned with our tenants as far as being able to rent it in the future.
Ronald Ripley: Okay.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you so much for coming. Pastor Young, I guess we need to talk
to you again.
Pastor Craig Young: May I address the tenants?
Dorothy Wood: Please sir.
Pastor Craig Young: First of all, I'm very glad you came today to make me aware.
Dorothy Wood: Pastor, would you please identify your name again?
Pastor Craig Young: I'm Pastor Craig Young, Pastor of Exousia International Christian
Center. I'm very glad that you came today to make me aware of your concerns. My plans
Item #12
Exousia International Christian Center, Inc.
Page 8
were to walk the neighborhood, introduce myself to everyone, and find out what concerns
you did have as far as our church coming into your neighborhood. There is a correction.
This church is not a 100 members. It has the capacity to handle 100 members because of
the parking spaces but it is only 30 members at this particular time. So, this church is not
big. The meetings that we will have basically are youth meetings that take place on
Saturday evenings when we will probably show movies to the kids. We don't have
meetings during the daytime. They're usually in the evening. There is a lodge across the
street should it ever come a time where the church actually gets that big where I would go
over and make arrangements with the lodge owner if I have to pay to rent spaces on
Sunday mornings so we do not park in front of your house. We have not come to irritate,
ITustrate or aggravate. We've come to give blessings in any way our church can help you
or reach out to you in any kind of way. We will. As far as a fence is concerned, if that
what makes you happy then we'll do that. We're here to bless this community not do
anything, but do that.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Are there any questions for the Pastor?
Robert Miller: Thank you. I think what they're saying is that along the fence line there
are existing bushes would be kept manicured and conditioned to the size that they are
with the chain link fence making sure that is well maintained. If there is a piece oflower
level privacy fence if that would either be repaired or if it doesn't do any benefit, and I
wasn't sure how much benefit it was to anyone, it might just be removed. I think if you
just take those into consideration.
..::::::ë>..
Pastor Craig Young: Surely.
Robert Miller: I'd like to make a motion to approve.
Dorothy Wood: A motion by Mr. Miller and seconded by Mr. Ripley to approve.
ANDERSON
CRABTREE
DIN
HORSLEY
KATSIAS
KNIGHT
MILLER
RIPLEY
STRANGE
WALLER
WOOD
AYE 10
ABSO
ABSENT 0
NAY 1
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
NAY
AYE
Item #12
Exousia International Christian Center, Inc.
Page 9
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 10-1, the application of Exousia International Christian Center
has been approved by the Board. .
Pastor Craig Young: Thank you so much.
Dorothy Wood: Listen sir, you said aggravate, frustrate and what was the other word?
Pastor Craig Young: Irritate.
Dorothy Wood: Irritate. Thank you.
..;.-=.
Page 1 of 1
Ed Weeden - 5049 haygood rd.
;!il,Ji:::_~ ~=-~ ~-- ~;,;¡;;;::,x,,; ;~!r::r~,J,,¥,.."'" ,. "","'1f1Z';:;:ë;,!".1;_€L",='-~~; ~.1¡k.!, "if~"",."~\"..;,,,,",~ ~"",\; "~
From: <Pontiacpaul1 @aol.com>
To: <eweeden@vbgov.com>
Date: 12/8/20048:46 AM
Subject: 5049 haygood rd.
MY NAME IS HARRY PAUL MCKINNEY. I LIVE AT 700 LINDA CT. .I STRONGLY OPOSE THE CHURCH ,I
FORSEE PARKING ISSUES. CHURCHS GROW AND IT WILL BE TOO LATE IF ITS THERE
ALREADY. PLUS I DO NT CARE FOR THE EXTRA TRAFFIC I WILL CREATETHANK YOU.
¿:¡::::".
file:/ /C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\eweeden\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW1 0000 I.H... 12/812004
-10
I#J Cof>diûo""Iz""ing -1œc0<å0d Proffer<
1-2
1-2
1-2
¿¡~~
r~~;"i2~
/~. <, .~~,,~)
~J
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: Jeremy W. Mills T/A Southside Archery - Conditional Use Permit
(recreational facility of an indoor nature)
MEETING DATE: January 25, 2005
.
Background:
An Ordinance upon Application of Jeremy W. Mills tla Southside Archery for a
Conditional Use Permit for a recreational facility of an indoor nature on property
located at 2202 Commerce Parkway (GPIN 24070475050000). DISTRICT 6 -
BEACH
.
Considerations:
The applicant proposes to operate an archery pro-shop and indoor archery range
in 3,300 square feet of an existing building. The indoor archery space will occupy
1,700 square feet and be separated from the pro-shop. The indoor archery
allows customers a controlled environment to sight-in, tune and shoot archery
equipment. The hours of operation for the range will be 2:00 PM until 1 0:00 PM
Monday through Friday and 10:00 AM until 10:00 PM Saturday. The applicant will
have up to three employees.
Staff concludes that the addition of this operation within the existing structure will
have negligible impact on the surrounding uses.
The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because they
felt that it was an appropriate use for the existing building, Staff recommended
approval and there was no opposition.
.
Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 11-0 to
approve this request with the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits, inspections and approvals
from the Fire Department and the Permits and Inspections Division of the
Planning Department before occupancy of the building. A certificate of
Occupancy of the use shall be obtained from the Permits and Inspections
Division of the Planning Department.
2. No archery activities shall be permitted outside of the building.
Jeremy W. Mills T/A Southside Archery
Page 2 of 2
.
Attachments :
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting Department! Agency: Planning Departmen~
City Manager: ~ ~ ,~ IJ""¡.
JEREMY W. MILLS
(SQUTHSIDE ARCHERY)
Agenda Item # 5
December 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.
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
GPIN:
COUNCIL
ELECTION
DISTRICT:
Location and General Information
Conditional Use Permit for an indoor recreation facility.
Property
located at
2200/2202
Commerce
Parkway.
1-2
'~
/ ;;'::::!:A~i::","'m',,'"W';;,,>-'~""=-'::'::::-:::: I
IIlR STATION """ :/
J-2' / 1-2
" us, (;OVERNMt.'>:'
~'"
I'ROI'ERIY
, .' ¿'\
,-"-',,--
"IC"""','7.~"~.""~,,,,,
CU/"!"'k,""("mmo^:'"!k<"."..",,."":!jä'i:~'
240704750500000
6-BEACH
JEREMY W. MILLS T/A SOUTHSIDE ARCHERY
Agenda Item # 5
Page 1
SITE SIZE:
Part of a 17.31 acre parcel.
Proposed lease space is 3,300 square feet of an existing building.
EXISTING
LAND USE:
The 17.31 acre site is zoned B-2 Community Business District. There
are three existing office buildings on the site.
SURROUNDING North:
LAND USE AND
ZONING:
South:
East:
West:
NATURAL
RESOURCE
AND
CULTURAL
FEATURES:
. Across 1-264 and Virginia Beach Boulevard are
retail shops & restaurants I B-2 Community
Business District
. Across Southern Boulevard is undeveloped land
owned by the U.S. Government I 1-2 Industrial
District
. Undeveloped land owned by the U. S. Government
I 1-2 Industrial District
. Across S. Great Neck Road is a plant nursery I B-2
Community Business District
There are large stands of mature trees along the northeast corner of
this property. There are no cultural features on this site.
The site is in an AICUZ of greater than 75 dB Ldn surrounding NAS
Oceana. The U. S. Government acquired certain rights over this
property through a Grant of Easement dated August 20, 1979.
AICUZ:
Summary of Proposa
The applicant proposes to operate an archery pro-shop and indoor archery range in
3,300 square feet of an existing building. The indoor archery space will occupy 1,700
square feet and be separated from the pro-shop. The indoor archery allows customers a
controlled environment to sight-in, tune and shoot archery equipment. The hours of
operation for the range will be 2:00 PM until 10:00 PM Monday through Friday and
Saturday 10:00 AM until 1 0:00 PM. The applicant will have up to three employees.
JEREMY W. MILLS T/A SOUTHSIDE ARCHERY
Agenda Item# 5
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.
. Consistency with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan for this area.
. Compatibility of the proposed use with the surrounding uses.
Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as being within Strategic Growth Area 6 -
North London Bridge Area. The plan recognizes a need to provide a range of-
commercial activities and services and to accomplish it within an attractive and well-
maintained physical environment. AICUZ provisions impose some restrictions in this
area on the type and extent of proposed development. When opportunity is available
continue upgrading the quality of land use through redevelopment of underutilized tracts
of land.
Staff recommends approval of this request. The addition of this operation within the
existing structure is expected to have negligible impact on the surrounding uses.
Conditions
1. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits, inspections and approvals from
the Fire Department and the Permits and Inspections Divison of the Planning
Department before occupancy of the building. A certificate of Occupancy of the
JEREMY W. MILLS T/A SOUTHSIOE ARCHERY
Agenda Item#S
Pagê 3
use shall be obtained from the Permits and Inspections Division of the Planning
Department.
2. No archery activities shall be permitted outside of the buidling.
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.
JEREMYW. MILLS T/A SOUTHSUJEARCHERY
Agenda Item# 5
Page 4
Supplemental Information
Zoning History
Map IJ-7
Mðp Not to Scale
\
~. DOOO
1 -2
(#) Conditional Zoning - Recorded p,of(ers
:.::::: ::;;>~,:;;?}7---:
7
, I
1-2 '" /
u.s. GOVERNMENT \ (J
PROPER1Y .
,~~ \;
CUP- Indoor Commercial Recreational Facility
1-2
}-2
[[I DATE I REQUEST
1 08/11/98 Conditional Use Permit for motor vehicle sales & service
2 06/10/97 Conditional Use Permit for outdoor recreational facility
3 06/28/94 Conditional Use Permit for church
4 10/12/93 Conditional Use Permit for motor vehicle sales & service
I ACTION
Granted
Granted
Denied
Granted
JEREMY W. MILLS T/A SOUTHSIDE ARCHERY
Agenda Item # 5
Page 5
Public Agency Comments
Public Works
Master South Great Neck Road in the vicinity of this request is a 2-lane
Transportation divided Minor Suburban Arterial. Currently, Capital Improvement
~ Program Project 3.137.000 is underway, connecting London
Bridqe Road to South Great Neck Road.
Traffic Street Name Present Present Generated Traffic
Calculations: Volume Capacity
Level of
Service "Cn -
13,600 ADT 1 Existing Land Use 2: 24 ADT
Level of
South Great 17,000 ADT 1 Service "D" -
Neck Road 15,000 ADT 1 Proposed Land Use 3 : 45
Level of ADT
Service "E" -
16,200 ADT 1
Average Dally Trips
2 as defined by office use
3 as defined by specialty sports shop
Public Utilities
Water and
Sewer:
This site is connected to Ci water and sewer.
Public Schools
I School
I Not applicable - No comments
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 strate ies as the pertain to this site.
JEREMY W. MILLS T/A SOUTHSIDE ARCHERY
Agenda Item # 5
Page 6
Fire and
Rescue:
No fire de artment concerns with this CUP.
JEREMY W. MILLS T/A SOUTHSIDE ARCHERY
Agenda Item # 5
Page 7
xhibit A - 1
Aerial of Site
Location
JEREMY W. MILLS T/A SOUTHSIBE ARCHERY
Agenda Itern:#5
Paga8
Exhibit A - 2
Aerial of Site
Location
JEREMY W. MILLS T/A SOUTHSI6E ARCHERY
Agenda Item#5
Page 9
z
.'
.-l.!v'-?,':/:-¡~:'-::.?;~.~"
{;I(2/
, "
,~
~:\~~'
'.~
~'<:
~' (¡
",<.
1:)"-
~~
'c <{
~
"
;.~:;¡
,,<;,
~~
()
;;;fQ
.. ',,'
,¡<"~
\~ ~ö;:i>'" ..: ~~~i:~¡":~ 4'~'¡'--;:~:
t~ . a '. :Jt~~~v:::::£
~ ~ ~"; '.~',-:.- ~\ ,; \'\\\ "",J~,"-
\.. \; \/'"': ' ~,f~,:.'.v~f .
'¡;L ':" '.' ";,....~-;:~._"'--~---;;::,
'7
\
~
0
l.>-
t>/.
<:3
~
~
-4'
\Ù
'r-
';:)
0 \" '.
t>l. .." ,j
.e!. ----" ' ":~ \~\\
7 .~
-ll\<
\~ ",I\IX~.; ..
\~'11;;\ \
-
~
~
"
'.
.c
,
...!JV.::?/i,-dO
"'-
:::
" c
'-"
\
, ::,
'c .,
.s~
";:
~,
"'
f.
í
,/,,<:\
.v,/
~"'~ ~J:~' '~~~"':"c.,",ì,
-----:..--::::~~~ "
~,\ :
,..
-;~~i...;~.
Exhibit 8
Proposed Site
Plan
JEREMY W. MILLS T/A SOUTHSIDE ARCHERY
Agenda Item #5
Page 10
Exhibit C
Exterior
Building
Photograph
JEREMY W. MILLS T/A SOUTHSJE>E ARCHERY
Agenda IternI#5
Pa9è11
c...
m
::0
m
~
-<
~
~
r
r
(j)
-;
5>
(j)
0
c
-;
:I
'þ(J)
cc---
(1)0
:]m
c..'þ
n>
-0-::0
n>ct°
cc3:I
(I) m
~=It::o
NO1-<
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If the applicant is it corporatit>n. partnership. firm. bu5i,)Os:<. 01 other un;ncmp{)lulcd
organization. compiútl1thr'> lollo\\1l\g:
1. U$I Iho applicanl name followod by the namO$ of nil oflicors. members. tfuSh;IQS.
paltnQIS, ete below; (Allaä IÍI,IIf 116CCSifflty)
2" Ust al! h\minossüs Ihat have a paronl-subsldlary' or aflilìated businoss entllY'
relalionship wilh Ih9 applicant: (AII¡¡cll/ìsl ìl1!ecossary)
0 Check hOll> if It\(j applicant is NOTa corporatìon. partnership, Iilm, busine5s, or
othUl wlillCOlpüWI9d ürg¡u1Ization,
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
" Cm!!¡>lato 11!1~, ;;ouiOt1 OIlly if prap<?IIY owner Is different from applicant,
If Itw pmporty ,".VII"r ,~ ;¡ G()fpOriltion, pal1nelship, lirm. business, ()f olhür
un"'CO'I)f)IaWd Grfp"iZCttiO'l, ,completo Ihe following'
I. Lisl the prüpo,ty owner lIal11O foHowed by Ihe narlllm of all 01110)"";, "HJrnbms.
truslfJOS, parlnms, (jle below: (Attach lisl if t/oclliisary)
CX~\:\..\O\'\ \~, ~:J?A~{'-VA O)l<-r,)D~'\
?" U,,! ilil t>"SiTW5S0!; thai havo a paref1I-$lOO!;i(tìary' or alfiliatùd btbi"GB5 onlily'
mlatlonship Wllh the applicant: (A/lile/Ili$! if ncCt'-.$5ðIY)
0 CiWfK hc'" ,III\!' property ownQ( 1$ NOTa GOrPOrH\io". parlnmship, firm, bu!)Ìnm¡s,
01 nU"," urune"'I)<)!aln« or""niza\1on,
f" ~"" ",., Vi' 1" ;", ".-em!n""
~
....-.c
5
~
~
f :
iä
þJ
~
;:::>
~
C>
....-.c
r :
~
C-'
DI
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
Usl all known conlraclOls 01 businesses that have or wí1t proviòo SBlVÎCOS wilh respoct
10 the requested properly USl). innluding hut not l!mitù<IIO tho providors of ,ltchlteclural
services. real estate services. financial services, accounling $ervíces and logal
6orviccs: (Attaçh lisl il necessary) ",' ,," ,/
-:~~'~~~~:tJ::~~!~;:~,~~ C AXä/>/,é
;'
..-..,-----
, .Pamnt-sliosidIaIY lelulionship" OlOlIns "a roh\1ionship thlll mÜ,ns when one
corpomtion diIHGHy or indimclly owns shares p05sossing mom than 50 "orcont of Iho
voting power 01 tn10ther corporation,' See State <lnd Local Governmenl Conflict of
Intemsts Act, Va, Code § 2,2-~HOf,
r "Aflílialod busino$$ enlily relationship" means "8 relationsl,;p, other than
pMont-slibsidiary relationship. Ihal exists when (i) one business òntity has a
coni rolling ownemhip inlerosl in the olhm businos!¡ (¡ntity, (ii) 11 controllin! ownor in
ono entity h; al;¡o ¡¡ coni rolling own'" In tho olhor entity, '" (i¡i) thmo is ,h"lUd
manI19"f1\()T)t Or œntml ""twoon tho businoss onllties, Factors that shollir! be
congluored in ûulon"ining 1110 oxi,,!Ol1co 01 an utlì!íalt'd 1.>\I""11}$5 ünlíly rülMionship
includo Ihat tho samo pomon or subslantially tho sarno person own or manago Iho two
entities; them are common or commingled funds Ot assets: the business enlitios share
the use 01 tho (;ame o fiçe$ úI employoes or Olhl)lwi$o r.haro adivilíe$. rO!;OUfCI)S or
plJlsonn()1 on a T()(jular bilsi~; 01 thoro ;$ othol\vis() " dc,so ""'lkin9 rola!í{>f\rJ)ip
belwoolllhø l1nlíf¡o~,." S<'Q Stale and local Govornment Conflict of Intorer.l:> Act. Va.
Coda § 2,2-3101.
CERTIFICATION: I Gertify thallho infOlUlation Gontainod Ì111IW!1 i~, lruo and ilGCumto,
I understand thaI. upon wcei!>t of n,)tifìcation (postcald) thai tho apl)lication hM bOon
schodulud for public: hoari"g. I am responsible for nl>1aininiJ and p,,&hng ¡he required
sign 011 11)0 subjuçt pro Julty (\t loast 30 days plior 10 the schedulod public hoaring
'lI:cm~I"lg \0 tho in<:;truclio"s,i!);I!1i¡¡ puckago,
Ii.
P(",
C"C'\t'",.""",,<,' ",r(,,),N, ì, L"",':,~,,',,,","~!-,','-,,',P\",',',I,,\"
.A""'\"", "il'-c ",...Jt:,
P,;m N"n'~
em
en -, ><
¡ttn:T
- (') -.
CDÕC"
3 tn -.
CDCr+
=- ãJ C
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL AIH STATION
1750 TOMCAT
VIRGINIA aEACH. VIR
N REf'. Y REf',,~ TO
Z 8
5726
Ser 33/0513
November 16, 2004
Ms. Karen prochilo
City of Virginia Beach
Department of Planning
Municipal C~'ter, Building 2.
2405 Courthouse Drive
virginia Beach, VA 23456..9040
DEPARTMENT
Room 115
Dear Ms. prochilo:
Thank you for the opportu..-d.ty to review the Conditional Use
Permit Application for~arded by your Planning Commis.sion Routing
Slip dated October 1, 2004, concerning .Jeremy Mills tI a
Southside Archer/.
A Real Estate Contracting Officer at the Naval Facilities
Engineering Command, Mid-Atlantic has completed a thorough
review of the proposed Conditional Use Permit Application.
I have reviewed and support the attacheà copy of the Review
and Findings which determined that the use of the property for
the pro shop falls under "retail sales defined as the sale of
goods in s~4l1 quantities directly to the cons'~er not for
resale" and the indoor archery range would fall under
"nonspectator recreationH and would be allo'wed. as long as the
facility does not exceed the 76 feet above mean sea level height
restriction and does not allo\-l wholesaling at the pro shop or
spectators in the indoor archery range.
Be aware that our determination is based on your
representations of the ~se of the property. Any change in use
from that represented will render this determination void.
Also be advised that the Navy will periodically conduct ranèom
reviews, in the field, of properties encumbered by covenants and
restrictions to ensure that the interests of the United States
are protected.
If there are any questions, please contact Mrs. Patty
Hankins at 322-4928.
very respectfully,
Enclosure:
Real Estate
Findings
Exhibit E
Supplemental
Information
JEREMY W. MILLS T/A SOUTHSIDE ARCHERY
Agenda Item# 5
Page 13
Item #5
Jeremy Mills T/A Southside Archery
Conditional Use Pennit
2202 Commerce Parkway
District 6
Beach
December 8, 2004
CONSENT
William Din: Our next item is Item #5. This is Jeremy W. Mills T/A Southside Archery.
This is an application for a Conditional Use Pennit for a recreational facility of an indoor
nature on property located at 2202 Commerce Parkway in the Beach District. There are
two conditions associated with this item.
Jeremy Mills: My name is Jeremy Mills. I'm the applicant.
William Din: Have you read the conditions?
Jeremy Mills: No I haven't.
-=
William Din: I think Barbara will be able to help you and show you the conditions.
We'll just move you until you're ready on, this thing.
LATER
William Din: Mr. Mills, would you come back up? This is the Southside Archery. It's
for a Conditional Use Pennit for a recreational facility of an indoor nature and it's in the
Beach District.
Jeremy Mills: Right.
William Din: Have you read the conditions?
Jeremy Mills: Yes, I have.
William Din: Do you agree with those?
Jeremy Mills: Yes, I do.
William Din: Thank you. Is there any opposition to placing this on consent? If not, Ms.
Anderson would you please?
Janice Anderson: Yes. Thank you. The applicant is proposing to operate an archery pro
shop in an indoor archery range in the existing building off Southern Boulevard.
Approximately half of the lease space will be used for the pro shop and the other half
Item #5
Jeremy Mills T/A Southside Archery
Page 2
would be for the indoor archery range. It's mainly just for use to try the equipment that
he is selling or figure out how to use the equipment that he is selling. The indoor range
and there will be no outdoor activity at all with regard to archery use. We believe that it
is an appropriate use within the existing building there. It would not have any negative
impact with the other businesses in that area. We would recommend approval.
William Din: Thank you sir.
Jeremy Mills: Thank you.
William Din: I would like to make a motion to approve the following consent item, Item
#5 Jeremy Mills TIA Southside Archery. This is for a Conditional Use Permit for a
recreational facility of an indoor nature at 2202 Commerce Parkway in the Beach District
with two conditions.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Din. Do I hear a second?
Donald Horsley: Second.
~
Dorothy Wood: A motion by Mr. Din and seconded by Mr. Horsley.
ANDERSON
CRABTREE
DIN
HORSLEY
KA TSIAS
KNIGHT
MILLER
RIPLEY
STRANGE
WALLER
WOOD
AYE 11
NAY 0
ABSO
ABSENT 0
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 11-0, the agenda item has been approved for consent.
r
~~*~.....:~...~
ft.! .. ."ß
~ol . .. . ~>,
~~ :...
'.\~¡ lJJ
~~~.f.t
~~..
~
"
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
~
ITEM: Home Associates of Virginia - Change of Zoning District Classification
from R-10 Residential District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District with a PD-H2
Planned Development District Overlay
MEETING DATE: January 25, 2005
.
Background:
An Ordinance upon Application of Home Associates of Virginia, Inc. for a Change
of Zoning District Classification from Conditional A-12 Apartment District with a
PD-H2 Planned Development District Overlay on property located on the
northeast corner of Diamond Springs Road and Newtown Road (GPINS
1468436927; 1468436223). DISTRICT 4 - BAYSIDE.
.
Considerations:
The applicant proposes to rezone eight parcels of R-10 Residentially zoned
property to Conditional A-12 Apartment with a PD-H2 Planned Development
District Overlay and develop the site into a consolidated project of single-family
detached dwellings. A small portion of Diamond Springs Road will also be
incorporated into the site through a Street Closure request.
The applicant proposes a total of forty-five single-family detached dwellings. The
applicant is proposing three different models for the project. Each unit will be a
minimum of 1700 square feet of living area. The proposed units will be two-
stories, constructed of brick, cedar shake and lap vinyl siding. Each unit will have
a one car garage and two exterior parking spaces. The project will be a
condominium form of ownership.
There will be a single entrance to the site from Shumey Lane; there will not be
any access to the site from either Diamond Springs Road or Newtown Road. The
entire perimeter of the site, with the exception of the entrance, will be landscaped
with Category IV screening, which is a mix of shrubs and trees.
The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because the
proposal is consistent with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan,
Staff recommended approval, and there was no opposition to the request.
----I
Home Associates of Virginia - Change of Zoning
Page 2 of 2
.
Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 11 - 0 to
approve the rezoning 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 Departmen~
City Manage~s k. Òß ~
HOM E ASSOC IA TES
OF VIRGINIA, INC.
Agenda Item # 17
December 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.
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
GPIN:
COUNCIL
ELECTION
Location and General I nformation
Chanoe of Zonino District Classification from R-10 Residential District
to Conditional A-12 Apartment District with a PD-H2 Planned
Development District Overlay
Property
located on the
northeast
corner of
Diamond
Springs Road
and Newtown
Road
1468436927; 1468436223
4 - BAYS IDE
; ;rßIt~~~~1 ~~?::~ '.'~'.,
,~',;:{ '-.. .,:,:,',"",.",..>.:'.,
HOME ASSGeiJ\TES~.~RZ '.'~í./,
Ag~ñqa,.lte""'17 ',;; ..
, ..' '1
DISTRICT:
SITE SIZE:
5.224 acres
EXISTING
LAND USE:
The site is wooded and occupied by several vacant single-family
dwellings.
SURROUNDING
LAND USE AND North:
ZONING:
South:
East:
. Shumey Lane
. Undeveloped property / R-1 0 Residential District
. Newtown Road
. Offices / B-2 Business District
. Multiple-family dwellings / A-12 Apartment District
. Diamond Springs Road
. Multiple-family dwellings and a Shopping Center /
A-18 Apartment District and B-2 Business District
West:
NATURAL
RESOURCE
AND
CULTURAL
FEATURES:
Currently the site is wooded and occupied by several vacant single-
family dwellings. There are no natural resources or cultural features
associated with the site.
AICUZ:
The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS
Oceana.
Summary of Proposa
The applicant proposes to rezone eight parcels of R-1 0 Residentially zoned property to
Conditional A-12 Apartment with a PD-H2 Planned Development District Overlay and
develop the site into a consolidated project of single-family detached dwellings. A small
portion of Diamond Springs Road will also be incorporated into the site through a Street
Closure request.
The applicant proposes a total of forty-five single-family detached dwellings. The
applicant is proposing three different models for the project. Each unit will be a minimum
of 1700 square feet of living area.The proposed units will be two-stories, constructed of
brick, cedar shake and lap vinyl siding. Each unit will have a one car garage and two
exterior parking spaces. The project will be a condominium form of ownership./~/'::<":":>:"'<', ,
~~!S:~~'~::~,~~?,:'i':,,:~\~ ~.;,'~.:~~,:,'" ;
f'._.'... _. ,'.',T','""..,.<:, '
HOME ASSae:IÄTES--,~RZ .,::;"
Ag~ríCJa"terrl¡~17 ,.' ,
,,' ""'~~~,~,€
There will be a single entrance to the site from Shurney Lane; there will not be any
access to the site from either Diamond Springs Road or Newtown Road. The entire
perimeter of the site, with the exception of the entrance, will be landscaped with
Categroy IV screening, which is a mix of shrubs and trees.
The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this
request. Staff's evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these
issues are adequately addressed.
. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations for the area.
. Compatibility with surrounding land uses.
. Quality appearance of the site and proposed structures.
Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan Map depicts this site as a 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.
,!¿~~~JRÊ;:1;>.i~,
",';:';.' : ::: . ."
HOME ASSG.e:IATES'-' RZ :,}
A~~ripa.Ue< ,'17: .'
'",.' ".", "'3
, ,."
"
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," (§1 07(h)(1 ». Should
this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve
as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning.
PROFFER # 1
PROFFER # 2
PROFFER # 3
PROFFER # 4
PROFFER # 5
PROFFER # 6
When the Property is developed, the "PRELIMINARY
LAYOUT FOR GEORGIO COMMONS", dated 01-7-04,
prepared by Site Improvement Associates, Inc. ("Concept
Plan"), which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City
Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department
of Planning, shall be substantially adhered to so that there
shall be coordinated design and development of the site in
terms of vehicular circulation, parking, landscaping,
building location and building orientation to better foster a
sense of community.
When the Property is developed, vehicular Ingress and
Egress to the Property shall be limited to one (1) entrance
from Shurney Road. There shall be no vehicular access
from Diamond Springs Road or Newtown Road.
When the Property is developed, all landscaping shall be
planted and maintained substantially as depicted and
described on the Concept Plan.
When the Property is developed, a landscaped entrance
feature shall be constructed with a monument style sign
extemally illuminated from ground level.
The total number of single-family detached dwelling units
permitted to be constructed on the Property shall not
exceed forty-five (45). Each dwelling unit shall contain a
minimum of 1700 square feet of living area and each unit
shall have a one (1)-car garage.
The architectural design of the residential buildings will be
substantially as depicted on the exhibit entitled "BUILDING
ELEVATIONS FOR GEORGIO COMMONS FOR HA V,
INC.", prepared by Porterfield Design Center, which has.
been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on
file with the Virginia Beach Department of p'anni~:~~:;.§~îll.¿.;;""
;,,;, -~w;;;:";';k.;,~<i:!J"
HOME AssqeJATES-/~RZ
Ag~O^c1a, It~I11;' ,17
PROFFER # 7
Staff Evaluation of
Proffers:
City Attorney's
Office:
("Elevations"). The primary exterior building materials shall
be brick, cedar shake and lap vinyl siding. The colors used
may vary from those on the exhibits but all will be earth
tones.
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 proffers are acceptable. The proffers insure that the
site will be developed in a coordinated approach in terms
of site design, parking layout and circulation, landscaping,
and building location and orientation within the site. The
structures will be constructed of high quality materials thus
ensuring quality-building appearance. A single vehicular
entrance insures minimal traffic conflicts. The proposed
landscaping around the perimeter of the site will be
visually pleasing, soften the appearance of the
development, and provide privacy for the residents of the
project.
The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer
agreement dated April 29, 2004, and found it to be legally
sufficient and in acceptable legal form.
Staff recommends approval of this request.
Staff's evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials
and the proffers, adequately addresses each of the 'Major Issues' identified above. The
proposal's strengths in addressing the 'Major Issues' are
(1) This development represents another positive enhancement in this area of the
City that has faced and steadily overcome many challenges. Development
,;;jC~~lt;~,
HOME ASSG,øìA:fES'-:,~RZ .;;,
A~~âalterTIi,:~;:Jß.
.. .;'.. ');~~~~~Ã
provisions proffered with this request ensure it will be the kind of quality
development the Comprehensive Plan policies seek to achieve for this area.
(2) The proposed development is consistent and compatible in density, building
quality, and community character with the other similar "moderate to high-
density" residential developments found in the adjacent area.
(3) The following will contribute to the quality appearance of the site and proposed
structures: the functional site and building design, use of attractive and durable
building materials, significant landscaping and buffering provided along the site's
perimeter, and along the requested street closure's frontage on Diamond Springs
Road, attractive entrance signage and treatment, open space / green space, and
safe access and circulation.
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
a licable Ci Codes.
..:~~~~~~[~~1,
HOME Assoe,fÅfES--1~RZ .::).',
Ag~ripa Ite
".' .
Supplemental Information
ZoninQ History
I ACTION
Approved
Approved
[I] DATE
1. 3-11-03
2. 12-12-
88
4-25-88
I REQUEST
Conditional Use Permit (Church)
Rezoning (R-10 Residential to A-12 Apartment)
Rezoning (R-10 Residential to A-12 Apartment)
Approved
~,'.':; ":,<:c::';:,,:~::~:::.,
HOME Asso~'i,i\TE$
Ag~ri'åa. Ite
-., '
"j' ."
Public Agency Comments
Public Works
Master Transportation
Plan (MTP):
Diamond Springs Road in front of this application is a
four lane divided 120-foot right-of-way with a bikeway,
as depicted on the Master Transportation Plan (MTP).
Shurney Lane will need to be improved to a minimum
3D-foot wide pavement section with curb and gutter
alonq the frontaqe of this site.
Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Present Generated Traffic
Volume Capacity
Existing land Use 7
Diamond Springs 22,000 28,200ADT -153
Road ADT1 1
Proposed land
Use 3 - 421
Average Dally Tnps
2 as defined by based on R 10 zoning / 16 single family homes
3as defined by Conditional A-12/45 units
Public Utilities
Water:
There is a 10-inch water main in Newtown Road in front of the site,
and a 12-inch water main in Diamond Springs Road. The site must
connect to City water.
Sewer:
There is a gravity sanitary sewer manhole approximately 50-feet
from the northern comer of the property, in the Shumey Lane right-
of-way. City sanitary sewer is available to the site. Sanitary sewer
pump station analysis for Pump Station 362 is required to determine
if ro osed flows can be accommodated.
Public Schools
School Current Capacity Generation 1 Change 2
Enrollment
Newtown Road 886 680 14.5 9
Elementary
Bavside Middle 1289 856 8.2 5
, ,:,//"::2;.,~,'.",;.,,',,'..""", ",
:~:~:'>\- ' , .,', .
",(,. ";,:,;;'>,:;,ç;.<,,,,",::,v
, '", .0:: ". ." ," ,.;"J/.: ,:,:-.;.., ""
, . . -',
HOME ASSG9JATES ,-:-CRZ ' :: "
Ag~rida Item lÞ;, ~:- ,.'
. '..8, ",,;
I Bayside High 11982 11860 19.2
1 "generation" represents the number of students that the development will add to the school
2 "change" represents the difference between generated students under the existing zoning and under the proposed zoning.
The number can be positive (additional students) or negative (fewer students).
15
Public Safety
Police:
In an effort to reduce opportunity for crime, the applicant
should review and incorporate safety by design concepts
and (design) strategies pertaining to residential
development that are contained in the CVB Planning
Department's, "Crime Prevention Through Environmental
Design - General Guidelines for Designing Safer
Communities" booklet. A free copy of this booklet can be
obtained by contacting either the Planning Department or
the Police Department's Crime Prevention Unit. In
particular, the applicant should contact the Police
Department to discuss site design issues related to
lighting, parks and playgrounds, and the visibility of
building addresses.
Fire and Rescue:
A minimum fire lane width not less than 20-feet is required.
Under some conditions the authority having jurisdiction
may require a greater width. No on-street parking is
permitted.
Install a cul-de-sac or hammerhead at the southern end of
the street to facilitate emer enc a aratus maneuverin .
HOME
Exhibit A
Aerial of Site
Location
. ,~:~i~~~!!§if~.~).
HOME ASSGeJATES-.~~RZ' ':"¿
Ag~d.a,ltei/tZ
^ ^.' ^ . -"?~ ",J~B
\
I
\
\\..,
~\
OJ
ð
~..'..'.
0
V~
\
\
¡
I
,
WJ
I
W~
I
I
!
f
¡¡.
¡j
J
.p
'"
;;\
I- ,... «r;..
5 Z~6
>- o¡¡f,..,
< .;:E 5~
...I :::£.0
>-~O;i
~GO~
<"'-0"'"
z _mg
':i '~':5 :
:J OZ
1Lt I.íJ 8-'-",
~C)~,;,¡
Il.....
""
~
Exhibit B-1
Proposed Site
Plan
~~II
i~""
¡,;. b." "
.:.: II. q
!!iilill
~¡¡iitll!
!'
~J~li¥ii
~ ¡flt!t ,'.'
~'I' ~! âf~ ,~.~ ~
i...'J "";"o!""'" "'..""'"
&1 ,j. S-.e. ê;s as-'"" s.
~.: ~'.,~, . ~
:¡.8 ~~, S'S"S','S'.'S$'1S'S'.
~~~" l~ ¡¡¡¡ ¡ .¡. ¡ ~ is
~. ii~'!. ~.~ .~I ~., .~
, ."7~.i i¡¡ i l ¡,~ i î..
I..~ '.. ~~~f;..~:::~.::}
":0
';2
oz:
',~
,0..-
p~...
ã "í
v~.c.
,~~~
~¿,~
~~
(.)
,~
<c(
~
.
0
0 ..-
N, '.,
j~
g
~
,
0 J
¡,!
;ï:;
I..' ~I
::: -
..
'is
0 t>
0' (þ
~!
rtlW 8 ,[.
iL'!
:~o
RO¡..t)
/s;§~~!J~~~;
HOME ASSg~IATES--' " ';::='
A~~n:d~U~ ,
,..',i.?B;
"..
>'
" ..
" . ",,', , ..
Exhibit C - 1
Proposed
Building
Elevation
."
Exhibit C - 2
Proposed
Building
Elevation
/~;;~~£~\;,
HOME ASSGeiA18S7,,~~RZ ";'~'y
q.::~ )
Ag~riqa.ltern~I\'.11. > > ~
"', '/:"~'~'~~~;:~'~.'
,
"',
.. ..'..
Exhibit C - 3
Proposed
Building
Elevation
,<"(i"':.'~;3^:'~';~~~~", .
,{:.~>',::'\1::~:¡~::':"'\":':""'{:1~.~.
HOME ASSQØ:lATES-...~RZ . ~ ~,:
"" . '^. ",c,.
A§}erìda Ite" 17-.
. '",p,
~ . ¡~ f~~¡
.b}l" .,
! ~,~-- j¡
¡
'" ..., .-".,
'^'-""""
\.
¡
t
ï
\
)
~,,-,\
.
. .,
-""""......
SNOI'InOO CIOOJC3O
"'"
JI1Q<r.-
nil
','"
"I'
!üi¡¡¡1
¡¡¡wm
HU¡in
~H "".,
¡flH.".
:U!U;;
11
11 ¡mmm .
'::. iHi~, ,H!, '6
i~H1h' "
!' ,"" '.~'.~I."I' fl,!
, HtWHi lit
-1- ,~i~
.. ....,: . ¡'I.
\.
t~
.
"
Exhibit D
Proposed
Landscape
Plan
$~I".",.~,'-,
"
.'
¡¡
,;~~~f~~~.~~,
HOME ASSae1ATES"7.:~RZ;:;:>.',
Ag~riâalternnn'11 ,'-
,'., ...:f'/ .9
, '~'"
'^,
.-,
i
otSCLOSURE STATEMENT
APÞLtCANT DISCLOSURE
If the applicant IS 8 corrX)laUon, pl'lrtnertltllp, firm, bu&I"~fI, or 6100r uni11corpòrated
organlzutkJfl,oomplet& too foll()Wing:
1. 1J$1 thC) applicunt name follow«J by the nafn(!$ of 1111 offl/;èrs. mømbers, f.fUåtOOS.
pmtoers, etc, below: (Attach list" neCI;JSsðry)
"1~!!~".11!~ K!fJ1!!.ÇlU1.L! !x4lIJJ!!,._.t!lÇ,....~ tWiiL&PXMfJtU9PJ. .",. ~-""-"-"-' -~,
:!,~~!..!~. Ar!:'!~;~~,LE~!!!~I,~~'!!_R.?.b:?,'::!;_~~.J'rod"':.d.!:t..~r('.!!~'}.t.!JI.!:~1~. CaruHuaJ-
2, LIst 911 buslnos!{es tMthavO 8 that have a paronl-subsidi¡jry1 or affilfated busiOOs$
(¡ lmy1 relationship with the applicant (Attacf, list ìf fmcesswyJ
....,'" .<.w,.~-'",.,.,' '",.' '~'-""~_""'.^""_'_"""'~~'~"""',..~~^",._~.__.-'.'-
'. '. """",.",.""",-,--~'~_."'-"'-"'--".'~--'-'---"",....,..-,,--
0 Gh¡¡¡çk here if the arlplicant Is HOT 8 carpO/aUon, partnerohlp, firm, bl,lslnøss, or
(llher u"incorporøtM organilatÎOfI.
\'
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Compløte IM<¡ section OOW if properly owncr /$dlfteronl (rortl opplicant,
If Ihe prop~rty oWl\ar Is t't corporation. parln~rshìp. firm. bilsinestl. Of othe!'
Imim;orpomled organization, complete the following:
1 List the properly owner 113meIQIJowedby Ute flan~s of aU olfiœrs, O1ëo\bêrs,
tru$løcs, p~"lnef$, etc, below: (AlIacll fist I' lIecossßfY) ,
, ." . '.. .'., .' ~
J~'~\':~"~£J.2I1!~.i~\:!:~ltOl1Ltt.~J~'!!.Jt~'!.\!.!.:A!tbYrJ.L£:!ffi\lli.flL.!p~.f'I!rJlla. ..
§:"~'!!~E.I!..t..~lI!bcJ)vAt¡~!!.d.:¿i'tdOIl,>:""bn.W, ßrwn 0.'."_--'-
2. U$! nil businesSes. that "avo a Ihnt have n pllrent-fJUbSidí!\/y' or affiliated business
(tntilr relallonshlp wllh the applicant: (Allauh lisl ìf n9œs,~!l1}')'
"'" ...'M"""'. ""M'_'~-'-'-~"-'
0 ChrH:J< hem íf Ihe property o\'lno' Is. NOT R corporation. padnershlp, lirm, business,
or other unincorpomted O/ganllJ'.ltlon.
r&'1'7¡;;;"~;rt-¡;ùgu f;l~õte$ ,
mrod~"'.~.
1'~l)øfl.
_1\')/1-
'1m"
[~~,. .. -DISçLÇ!m~i!~t!!]
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES "
llllt all knOWn conlrtlCl(ltš or bu$ine$S(i$ that have or win prwJde &tJrv!oo$ with lesptiQI
10 1M rtlqoo$led proMfty use, Including tJutnot rltOtted to too pfOl/idut$ of nrcb!ler;tural
services, reolettolo lIervioos, finanti!lIIlGrvk1øll,IIQOOU!\lingsolVíccs, and legal
:»orvk;~s: (Altech list if neC:O$S¡)IY)
r~i~,~~-==~=:'~=~
~srIUIII' lkturdou,Ahefß !}:~Y.!Ll&:_"----,----,<-,~,,",,~<,,wm'.'~'_""->"M""""."
--~----..,_..~M'" '_"M"~",.'_,_"'" .... ,,_...... ...
t 'P.á~t.llUbllklJary fel/Jßon!lhfp' mlltinÍl "8 relðtlooshlp thaI exis!s wh~11 on!}
CQrpOfQtlon ( Irectlyof indirectly owns shares þO$$cssing moro than 5tl pmct!lll oJ ¡hi!
vøtin!) povxtrôf aî\(l\hef oorpO/aUoò." Slite State and Local Government Connie! of
InIGre$tsAc~ Va. Codø§22..310t
t "Affjnaled /)u!lfoo$$ entltyrelationshlþ" means '0 relatlonship,other than
parent-subsidiary relationship. that exlstìì whetl (I) OliO bu$llì(\1Lil enlity has a
contrOllingOWO&f$hlp '!n\$(eìll in Om Ollror bu1l!nßss $fjUty. (Ii) It' conlmlnng owner In
ônØélntJIy Is also .tontrbIII~ owner in the other entity, or (Iii) there 111 $harM
fri¡Jn~ritor COfitrO be:lween th& bUfilne!l1l ei'llitte!l. Fadors ihøt ¡¡hOIfId be
consfdt.#ed. In d.1eJm1it1ng the exlstoñCtlof Bn affiliated busIness entityre!alion.ßhJp
il1Cludøthót the '8""'. pêmmor.substal1t1øllythe 51.'lroopef$pn own Orm8fiRgelhø twO'
enlìtle$; tl1,~îJfo c:ømmj)f pr ct!mrn!nglè(j funds or assets; Ihe bosln/¡'$$ enli1ié$ \!ohare-
1M OSe ôf the ..~ (Jfttce¡ (lr. en'iployoo$ or olhørwise$l1areaç lvitfes. resources or
pllt$órmel øn u reQu~rbn$Ï$: orlhero.i. otlwlWlse II cloS6worldilg.rolatianshlp
belWøeÒ too entities: SæSlate and locidGQV$ftlntet11 Connltt of Inlerost$' Act. Va
Code §2.2.3101.
CERTIFICATION: iceltifýíhat the Informatlôri Còf\I8¡ned herein i!ltlUø'andaOOì fat~.
uO<f(!i'$I8Î1dthat, uponmcelpt of notifk:atlon (postcilrd) Ihat the appficatíon hasboen
stheduìedfor publií:: hêail!\9.1 .m h)!lPOõsibfe fOf obttlinlngUf1dpo.slfng the required
, subject property at k>.ast 30 days prior loth\) scheduled popik; hearing
"nil. \ructÎQI\$.'fI.thiìí Þllcltägn.
øt~~IÍ"Q~f!tl'l.'1m:.
::;;..... ~-,.,~~~~.."
pÎiî!íÑ¡;îñem.-
t\tUt~~..
""".H"'t.
~UtlÐ!!~
mom
- -. ><
1»0-
_0-
(1) - -.
3ß2".
(1) c ....
3,ãJm
Item #16 & 17
Home Associates of Virginia, Inc.
Discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of
Diamond Springs Road
Northeast comer of Diamond Springs Road and Newtown Road
Change of Zoning District Classification from R-l 0
East side of Diamond Springs Road between Newtown Road and
Shumey Road
District 4
Bayside
December 8, 2004
CONSENT
William Din: The next items are Items #16 & 17, Home Associates of Virginia, Inc.
This is for a discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Diamond Springs
Road, beginning at the northeast comer of Diamond Springs Road and N ewtown Road
running a distance of 520 feet in a northerly direction. Item #17 is a Change of Zoning
District Classification from R-10 Residential District to Conditional A-12 Apartment
District with a PD-H2 Planned Unit Development District Overlay. This is on property
located at east side of Diamond Springs Road between Newtown Road and Shurney Road
in the Bayside District.
Eddie Bourdon: Thank you Mr. Vice Chair. Madame Chair, Eddie Bourdon, a Virginia
Beach attorney. I represent the applicant on these two applications. With regard to the
street closure, Item #16, we are in full accord with the recommended conditions. Item
#17 is a proffered conditional rezoning. Thank you for putting us on the consent agenda.
William Din: Is there any opposition to putting this on consent? If not. Ron Ripley,
would you please explain this item?
Ronald Ripley: Before I explain this, I will disclose this. I do own a small interest,
which is located in the office park across the street from this. I do not have any conflict
with this application. I just want to mention that for the record. This application is
5.224-acre site. That does include a small street closure. It is really a peculiar shaped
piece of land. The way the applicant has put this together he should be commended. It
has been a real eyesore for the area. There have been some real problems there. I think
there has been some mischief going on in there. For this to come forward, he should be
commended in my mind. The original application he submitted was a 62-unit plan. The
neighborhood discussed with him what they would like to see for single family. He went
back and actually redid his plan and came back with the single-family detached
condominium plan that we have before us today. The plan itself is a property plan so the
elevations that you see are generally what he can build. The layout definitely fits. He
kind of mapped it out. The developer is a good developer and he will do a fine job in
there. The improvements to this location are good, and it fits with the Comprehensive
Item #16 & 17
Home Associates of Virginia, Inc.
Page 2
Plan. The Commission felt that it deserved to be on the consent agenda with a
recommendation of approval for City Council.
William Din: Thank you Ron. So, I would like to make a motion to approve the
following consent items. Items #16 & 17, which is Home Associates of Virginia, Inc.
This is a discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Diamond Springs
Road, begim1Ìng at the northeast corner of Diamond Springs Road and N ewtown Road
and runs approximately a distance of 520 feet in a northerly direction and that has got
four conditions. This is also a Change of Zoning District Classification from R-I0
Residential District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District with PD-H2 Planned Unit
Development District Overlay on property at Newtown Road and Shurney Road in the
Bayside District. It is also proffered.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Din. Do I hear a second?
Donald Horsley: Second.
Dorothy Wood: A motion by Mr. Din and seconded by Mr. Horsley.
ANDERSON
CRABTREE
DIN
HORSLEY
KA TSIAS
KNIGHT
MILLER
RIPLEY
STRANGE
WALLER
WOOD
AYE 11
ABSO
ABSENT 0
NAY 0
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 11-0, the agenda items havè been approved for consent.
12/7/2004 9:19 PM FROM: Fax
TO: 426-5667
5900 Buckminister Lane
Virginia Beach, VA 23462
urgent
facsimile
To:
Fax Number:
From:
Fax Number:
Business Phone:
Home Phone:
Pages:
Date/Time:
Subject:
Virginia Beach Planning Commission
426-5667
Michele A. Galdun
757 -490-9572
2
1217/20049:19:43 PM
Item #16&17
PAGE: 001 OF 002
Please give each to each member of Commission
for Dee 8, hearing
from Northwest Beach Partnership - call 490-9572
1 page plus cover
12/7/2004 9:19 PM FROM: Fax TO: 426-5667 PAGE: 002 OF 002
26 Cypress
Pointe
HOA
Amurst Homes
Gvic Lea2ue
Araëona Villa¡e
Gvic Leé!2ue
Crystal Point
HOA
Cypress PoUt
Ovic Assoc
ilamond Lake
Estates
Gvic Lea2ue
IAarnoM5prinis/
~denwood
Gvic Leé!2lJe
qaJd Lake
Gvic Leaëue
L~ qprdens
Gvic LeaëlJe
Lake Cypress
Gvic Leé!2ue
Lake Edward
Area.
Gvic Leal!ue
LakeSrrith
Terrace,
Haytood PoUt a
4,overnor Square
Gvic leé!2ue
Lake Snith
Gvic Leé!2ue
Lakeview Park
Gvic leé!2lJe
Lawson forest
Gvic Leé!2ue
LYJDrook
L arônë
Gvic leé!2ue
Newsome farms
Gvic Leé!2ue
T radtions at
Cypress Point
HOA
Wes[eYéJll Chase
Gvic Leé!2ue
WesleYéJlI forest.
Gvic Leé!2ue
Wes(eYéJlI Panes
Campus East
Commurity Assoc
Wttch:iuck Lake
Condo Assoc
Northwest Beach Partnership
Board Members:
P.j Padrick -President
Bruce WeUer - 1'1 Vice President, Dave Tirado - irJ Vice President, Kale Warren - Treasurer, Mchele A. <:¡p1dun - Secretary
Email: northwestbeacrpartners@verizon.net
December 7, 2004
Re:
Items 16 & 17 -- Planning Commission Agenda, December 8, 2004
Application of Home Associates of Virginia, Inc.
Dear Chairperson Wood and Planning Commission Members:
The Northwest Beach Partnership (NWBP) has voted to support with
concerns the project proposed by Home Associates of Virginia, Inc. for
the 5.2 acres between Shurney lane, Newtown Road, lake Cypress
Condominiums and Diamond Springs Road.
Mr. Jim Arnhold, representing the developer, has met with us on several
occasions over the past month and sought our input in the design of this
project. He has reduced the density and increased the quality of this
development as we requested, from 62 townhouse-style and fourplex-
style condominium units to 45 single-family condominium units.
Our members voted to support this project in appreciation for the
changes the developer has agreed to make, and because they believe
it represents a quality use of an awkward piece of land. Their
reservations include the desire that the developer:
1 . Proffer 20% rental restriction on initial sale and condo docs.
2. Provide sidewalks because streets are so narrow.
3. Provide open space recreation area because there are no back
yards or place to meet/play.
4. Proffer the site plan and elevations for 45 single-family
condominiums.
5. Promise selling price no less than $250,000 each.
6. Proffer exterior building materials to include brick, pressed cedar
shakes, high grade vinyl siding.
In addition, we reiterate our concern for lack of adequate infrastructure
to service current residents as well as those soon to reside in our area.
Respectfully,
Northwest Beach Partnership
757-490-9572 northwestbeachoartners@verizon.net
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE
In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF-5939
DATE: December 14,2004
TO:
Leslie L. Lilley
William M. Macali (}A
DEPT: City Attorney
FROM:
DEPT: City Attorney
RE:
Conditional Zoning Application
Home Associates of Virginia, Inc.
The above-referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the City
Council on January 25,2005. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated April 29, 2004,
and have detennined it to be legally sufficient and in proper legal fonn. 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
HOME ASSOCIATES OF VIRGINIA, INC., a Virginia corporation
JOHN S. GEORGHIOU and ANTONIA P. GEORGHIOU, husband and wife
CFTV A, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company
GUSTINE BOWMAN, BLAINE WARDELL BOWMAN and JOSEPH DANIEL BROWN
ALLEN J. GORDON and JOHN W. BROWN
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 April 2004, by and between HOME
ASSOCIATES OF VIRGINIA, INC., a Virginia corporation, party of the first part,
Grantor; JOHN S. GEORGHIOU and ANTONIA P. GEORGHIOU, husband and wife,
and CFTV A, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, parties of the second part,
Grantor; GUSTINE BOWMAN, BLAINE WARDELL BOWMAN and JOSEPH DANIEL
BROWN, parties of the third part, Grantor; ALLEN J. GORDON and JOHN W. BROWN,
parties of the fourth part, Grantors; and THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal
corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Grantee.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the parties of the second part are the owners of two (2) parcels of
property located in the Bayside District of the City of Virginia Beach, containing a total of
approximately 2.3 acres as more particularly. described as "Parcel 1" and "Parcel 2" in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, which parcels along
with the other six (6) parcels listed in Exhibit "A" are referred to herein as the "Property";
and
PREPARED BY:
GPIN: 1468-42-6927
1468-43-6223
1468-43-5652
1468-43-5745
1468-43-5854
1468-43-5967
1468-43-5571
1468-43-5483
II SVIŒS. ROURDON.
Aßt:RN & lM. P.c
1
WHEREAS, the parties of the third part is the owner of four (4) certain parcels
of property located in the Bayside District of the City of Virginia Beach, which parcels
contain a combined total of approximately 2.5 acres which are more particularly
described as "Parcel 3", "Parcel 4", "ParcelS", and "Parcel 6" in Exhibit "A" attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference,- which parcel along with the other four (4)
parcels listed in Exhibit "A" are referred to herein as the "Property"; and
WHEREAS, the parties of the fourth part are the owners of two (2) parcels of
property located in the Bayside District of the City of Virginia Beach, containing a total
of approximately 1.0 acre as more particularly described as "Parcel 7" and "Parcel 8"
in Exhibit" A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, which parcels
along with the other six (6) parcels listed in Exhibit "A" are referred to herein as the
"Property"; and
WHEREAS, the party of the first part as Contract Purchaser of the Property has
initiated a conditional amendment to the Zoning Map of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia, by petition addressed to the Grantee, so as to change the Zoning Classifications
of the Property from R-10 to A-12 Apartment District with a PD-H2 Overlay, along with
an application for street closure of an adjoining 0.150 acre portion of excess right of way;
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 Grantor aclmowledges 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, m addition to the regulations
provided for the A-12 Zoning District with a PD-H2 Overlay 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
PREPARED BY:
lIB SYKIS. ROURDON.
.. AHfRN & LM. P.c
2
amendment to the Zoning Map relative and applicable to the Property, which have a
reasonable relation to the rezoning and the need for which is generated by the
rezoning.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Grantor, for itself, its successors, representatives,
assigns, grantees, and other successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any
requirement by or exaction from the Grantee or its governing body and without any
element of compulsion or quid pro QUO for zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit,
or subdivision approval, hereby makes the following declaration of conditions and
restrictions which shall restrict and govern the physical development, operation, and
use of the Property and hereby covenants and agrees that this declaration shall
constitute covenants running with the Property, which shall be binding upon the
Property and upon all parties and persons claiming under or through the Grantor, its
successors and assigns, grantees, and other successors in interest or title:
1. When the Property is developed, the "PRELIMINARY LAYOUT FOR
GEORGIO COMMONS", dated 01-7-04, prepared by Site Improvement Associates, Inc.
("Concept Plan"), which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is
on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning, shall be substantially adhered
to so that there shall be coordinated design and development of the site in terms of
vehicular circulation, parking, landscaping, building location and building orientation
to better foster a sense of community.
2. When the Property is developed, vehicular Ingress and Egress to the
Property shall be limited to one (1) entrance from Shurney Road. There shall be no
vehicular access from Diamond Springs Road or Newtown Road.
3. When the Property is developed, all landscaping shall be planted and
maintained substantially as depicted and described on the Concept Plan.
4. When the Property is developed, a landscaped entrance feature shall be
constructed with a monument style sign externally illuminated from ground level.
5. The total number of single family detached dwelling units permitted to be
constructed on the Property shall not exceed forty-five (45). Each dwelling unit shall
contain a minimum of 1700 square feet of living area and each unit shall have a one
PREPARED BY: ( 1) car garage.
naSYlŒS. ROURDON. 6. The architectural design of the residential buildings will be substantially
.. AHrnN & tW\'. P.c
as depicted on the exhibit entitled "BUILDING ELEVATIONS FOR GEORGIO
3
COMMONS FOR HA V, INC.", prepared by Porterfield Design Center which has been
exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach
Department of Planning ("Elevations"). The primary exterior building materials shall
be brick, cedar shake and lap vinyl siding. The colors used may vary from those on
the exhibits but all will be earth tones.
7. 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.
All references hereinabove to the R-IO and A-12 with a PD-H2 Overlay Zoning
Districts and to the requirements and regulations applicable thereto refer to the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance of the City of Virginia
Beach, Virginia, in force as of the date of approval of this Agreement by City Council,
which are by this reference incorporated herein.
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.
PREPARED BY:
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
II SYKrs. ROUROON.
Am:RN & li:VY. P.L
4
restrictions, including the authority (a) to order, in writing, that any noncompliance
with such conditions be remedied, and (b) to bring legal action or suit to insure
compliance with such conditions, including mandatory or prohibitory injunction,
abatement, damages, or other appropriate action, suit, or proceeding;
(2) The failure to meet all conditions and restrictions shall constitute cause
to deny the issuance of any of the required building or occupancy permits as may be
appropriate;
(3) If aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Administrator, made pursuant
to these provisions, the Grantor shall petition the governing body for the review thereof
prior to instituting proceedings in court; and
(4) The Zoning Map may show by an appropriate symbol on the map the
existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the Property, and the ordinances and
the conditions may be made readily available and accessible for public inspection in the
office of the Zoning Administrator and in the Planning Department, and they shall be
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia,
and indexed in the names of the Grantor and the Grantee.
PREPARED BY:
- SYI{ES. BOURDON.
m AHmN & LEVY. P.C
5
PREPARED BY:
no SYIŒS. ROURDON.
m AllERN & LM. P.c
WITNESS the following signature and seal:
GRANTOR:
HOME ASSOCIATES OF VIRGINIA, INC.,
a Virginia corporation
By:
(SEAL)
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 30th day of April 2004,
by James M. Arnhold, Chairman of Home Associates of Virginia, Inc., a Virginia
corporation, Grantor.
~7/ /.)1, Y;¡e&ð:ß
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: August 31,2006
6
PREPARED BY:
na SnIS. gO. URDON.
.. AllffiN & LM. P.C
WITNESS the following signatures and seals:
GRANTOR:
(SEAL)
~ 0'" (SEAL)
Antonia P. Georghiou
STATE OF VIRGINIA I:;.
CITY OF !/)~(lJq/~r &Ir', , to-wit:
/
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ;3 day of
írJCl tj 2004, by John S. Georghiou and Antonia P. Georghiou, husband and wife.
I
~
if" Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
41 i(S--j- 3 ~ J-ðC/ r
7
WITNESS the following signatures and seals:
GRANTOR:
CFTV A, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company
BY:~ I~ fr<~
(SEAL)
(SEAL)
STATE OF VIRGINIA Þ7
CITY OF I/íìer )I/ì t( ~~(" , f . to-wit:
I
The foregoing instrum~nt was ackn(:õfe~d .£ef~re :p. this li day of
m;Jr 2004, by. -.,; and 'lJ;, r t:. (°' ,members ofCFTVA,
L.L.C., irginia limited liability co any. I
Þßlt ¿ ~
ð Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
A I~Fú -f 31.)£>0 >~
PREPARED BY:
(;JIB SYIC£S. ROLJRDON.
m AHrnN & LM. P.c
8
PREPARED BY;
~ SYK£S. ROURDON.
m AHŒN & LM. P.c
WITNESS the following signature and seal:
~ ~ h LV ~tt,-J (SEAL)
L \JGustine Bowm~- C'"'7'\
'~'-\ "J-U-'\'\.úß1 ~ -" 'D ~)
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF vf4(;JIoJJIJ -"6e~c-h
, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~ day of
h)Q r 2004, by Gustine Bowman.
cfÞ.. ¿£~- L
otary Public J/
My Commission Expires: ~,. -.IIIA-, .t ~ ~o 7
9
PREPARED BY:
13m SVIŒs. ROURDON.
1\11 AlIfRN & 1M. P.C
WITNESS the following signature and seal:
GRANTOR:
/J1~ V~ ~
Blaine Wardell Bowman
STATE O~ViU~,G}N~ ~'^'
CITY OF ~, to-wit:
(SEAL)
The foregoing instrument was
/J14- f 2004, by Blaine Wardell B
before me this Æ day of
My Commission Expires:
~/ 3d/;Øtj
10
WITNESS the following signature and seal:
GRANTOR:
~ L~ ~ ~~(SEAL)
Joseph Daniel Ð.:.............IUI ~t'o'-V N
-S..-S
STATE
"
CITY OF
, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was ~owledged before me
. 2004, by Joseph Daniel Bo.. n~~'-Ù\)
~~.
. Notary P lic
My Commission Expires: ~\::;.g \ () rr .
this fl day of
PREPARED BY:
6B SYIŒS. ROURDON.
m AlIfRN & U:VY. p.c
11
WITNESS the following signature and seal:
~ ~~ (SEAL)
Allen J. G r n
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 27th day of
May 2004, by Allen J. Gordon.
tl~ÅJj1rMIl~ t- tf1 PauitJ
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
May 31, 2006.
PREPARED BY:
r3IB SYIŒS. ROURDON.
m AHrnN & liVY. P.L
12
WITNESS the following signature and seal:
~
(SEAL)
~i~~~F ~ . (A)-wit:
'7YI~~t foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~ day of
~ 2004, by John W. Brown.
~ ~ ,P~
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: t I - SC - b 7
PREPARED BY:
~ SYIC£S. ROURDON.
m AlIillN & liVY. P.c
13
EXHIBIT "A"
Parcell:
ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements
thereon, situate lying and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, being more
particularly described as follows:
Beginning at a pin on the North side of Bayside Road, now known as Newtown Road,
where the Eastern line of a private road separating the property hereby conveyed from the
land now or formerly belonging to Hudgins, intersects the North side of Bayside Road,
now known as Newtown Road; thence North 8 degrees 55 minutes East 71 feet to a pin;
thence North 5 degrees 00 minutes East 200 feet to a pin; thence North 85 degrees 35
minutes East 160 feet to a pin; thence South 4 degrees 25 minutes West 261.6 feet to an
Oak; thence South 4 degrees 25 minutes West 8.4 feet to a pin on the North side of
Bayside Road, now known as Newtown Road; thence along the North side of Bayside
Road, now known as Newtown Road, to the point of beginning, as shown on that certain
plat entitled "Plat of Property located on Bayside Road - Princess Anne Co., Virginia.
Scale 1" = 50' W. B. Gallup County Surveyor -1/22/45", which plat is duly recorded in the
Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Map Book 16,
at Page 68.
Less and Except that certain piece or parcel of land described as "3989 square feet", as
shown on that certain plat entitled "Right of Way Acquisition Plat Parcel 035 Diamond
Springs Road for the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, Bayside Borough, Virginia Beach,
Virginia", Scale 1" = 50', July 1, 1982, which was conveyed to the City of Virginia Beach by
deed dated August 30, 1983, recorded September 2, 1983 in Deed Book 2280, at Page 2010
in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia.
GPIN: 1468-42-6927
Parcel 2:
ALL THAT certain tract or parcel of land, lying, situate and being in the City of Virginia
Beach, Virginia, and bounded and described as follows:
PREPARED BY:
On the North by the lands of Ossie Jones, on the East by the land of John Clark, on the
South by the land of Walter McRae and on the West by the Public Road, and further
designated and described on a plat entitled "Property of A. Braithwaite Located near
Davis Corner - Princess Anne Co., Virginià', duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the
Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Map Book 27, at Page 71, as "A.
Braithwaite, 1.3 Acres."
na SYIŒS. ROURDON.
Mil Al!illN & LM. P.C
14
LESS AND EXCEPT that portion of the aforesaid property conveyed to the City of
Virginia Beach, by Deed dated May 20, 1983, and recorded June 2, 1983, in the Clerk's
Office aforesaid in Deed Book 2261, at Page 38.
GPIN: 1468-43-6223
Parcel 3:
All those certain parcels of land bounded and described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the East side of road leading into Bay side road which point is on
the East side of said road and is in the dividing line of the lot of land sold to Linwood
Jones and Cora Jones, thence, along the dividing line between Linwood Jones and Cora
Jones and the property hereby conveyed North 83° 42' east 254.5 feet to a station; thence,
same course 8.3 feet to a station; thence, North 2° 6' west 142 feet to a station; thence,
south 89° 37' west 275.4 feet to a point on the east side of the road leading to the Bayside
Road; thence, along the east side of said road South 6° 33' east 170 feet to the point of
beginning. Being tracks designated A and B on a map made W. B. Gallup, County
Surveyor, May 7, 1952 and titled Property of A. Braithwaite located near Davis Corner,
Princess Anne County, Virginia, which plat is recorded in Map Book 32, at Page 25.
LESS AND EXCEPT that parcel conveyed by deed recorded in the Clerk's Office of the
Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 2256, at Page 2145,
GPIN: 1468-43-5652
Parcel 4:
All of that certain lot, tract or parcel of land, with the improvements thereon and the
appurtenances thereunto belonging, situate, lying and being in Kempsville Magisterial
District, Princess Ann County, Virginia, near Davis Corner, shown and designated on a
certain plat and survey thereof, made by W. B. Gallup, County Surveyor, May 7, 1952,
marked "Property of A. Braithwaite," recorded in the Clerk's Office of said County, in Map
Book 32, at Page 25, the property hereby conveyed being designated on said plat as Parcel
"C", containing one-half acre, reference to said plat being hereby made for a more
particular description.
LESS AND EXCEPT that parcel conveyed by deed recorded in the Clerk's Office of the
Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 2256, at Page 2145.
GPIN: 1468-43-5745
PREPARED BY:
mm sYns. ROURDON.
m AH£RN & liVY. P.C
15
Parcel 5:
Beginning a t a pin located 11.68 feet South 86° 41' East from a pin in the Eastern
boundary of Braithwaite Road, said pin being 53 feet North 34° 31' East from a point
which is the Eastern boundary of Braithwaite Road and DeFord Road extended, North 34°
31' East 113.31 feet to a pin, said line being parallel to and 10 feet from the Eastern
boundary of Braithwaite Road; thence South 86° 41' East 168 feet to a pin; thence South
2° 26' East 97.56 feet to a pin; thence North 86° 41' West 236.21 feet to the point of
beginning, as shown on the plat entitled "Property of Christopher Bowman" made by W.
B. Gallup, Surveyor, and duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Map Book 52, at Page 31.
GPIN: 1468-43-5854
Parcel 6:
Beginning at an old pin on the East side of what is known as the Braithwaite Road near
the junction of Braithwaite Road and DeFord Drive; thence North 34° 31' East 410.0 feet
to a pin; thence South 2° 26' East 352.8 feet to an old pin; thence North 86° 41' West 247.9
feet to an old pin on the East side of Braithwaite Road, the point of beginning containing
1.0 acres.
A plat showing this parcel of land and other lands was recorded with the deed from
Anthony Braithwaite and Sadie Braithwaite, husband and wife, to M. C. Moore; said plat
being recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia, in Map Book 37, at Page 49.
GPIN: 1468-43-5967
Parcel 7:
ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements
thereon and all appurtenances appurtaining thereto, situate, lying and being in the
Bayside Borough of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, herein designated as the North
one-half acre, and being more particularly bounded and described as follows:
BEGINNING at a point 635.56 feet distant from the BAYSIDE ROAD and in the dividing
line between the land of "OSSIE JONES", as shown on the plat of "Property of A.
Braithwaite" recorded in Map Book 27, at Page 71, Clerk's Office, Circuit Court, Virginia
Beach, Virginia, and the land hereby conveyed; Thence North 8° 48' West 85.66 feet to a
pin; Thence North 83° 42' East 254.5 feet to a pipe; Thence South 8° 48' East 85.66 feet to
a pin; Thence South 83° 42' West 254.5 feet to a point of beginning.
13m SYIŒS. RûURDON.
MAlIruN & LM. P.c GPIN: 1468-43-5571
PREPARED BY:
16
Parcel 8:
ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements
thereon and all appurtenances appurtaining thereto, situate, lying and being in the
Bayside Borough of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, herein designated as the South
one-half acre, and being more particularly bounded and described as follows:
BEGINNING at a pin on a private road marked "ROAD" on the Plat which is attached to
deed of Anthony R. Braithwaite, et ux, to Lindwood Jones and Cora Jones, his sister,
recorded in Deed Book 242, at Page 493, Clerk's Office, Circuit Court, Virginia Beach,
Virginia, which point is 549.9 feet from the intersection of the Eastern line of said Road
leading into BAYSIDE ROAD with the North line of the said BAYSIDE ROAD, Thence
along the said East line of the said road North 8° 48' West 85.66 feet to a pin, a corner of
the land now belonging to Lindwood and Cora Jones and the property hereby conveyed;
Thence North 83° 42' East 254.5 feet to a pin in the land of Anthony Braithwaite; Thence
South 8° 48' East 85.66 feet to a pin; Thence South 83° 42' West 254.5 feet to a pin on the
Eastern side of the private road marked "ROAD", the point of beginning, containing one-
half acre.
GPIN: 1468-43-5483
CO ND lTI 0 NALREZO NEIH OMEASSOCIA TES/GEO RGI oeo MM 0 NSIPRO FFER
PREPARED BY:
I3ßJ SYKES. ROURDON.
m AllrnN & LM. P.c
17
EXHIBIT "A"
Parcel 3:
All those certain parcels of land bounded and described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the East side of road leading into Bay side road which point is on
the East side of said road and is in the dividing line of the lot of land sold to Linwood
Jones and Cora Jones, thence, along the dividing line between Linwood Jones and Cora
Jones and the property hereby conveyed North 83° 42' east 254.5 feet to a station; thence,
same course 8.3 feet to a station; thence, North 2° 6' west 142 feet to a station; thence,
south 89° 37' west 275.4 feet to a point on the east side of the road leading to the Bayside
Road; thence, along the east side of said road South 6° 33' east 170 feet to the point of
beginning. Being tracks designated A and B on a map made W. B. Gallup, County
Surveyor, May 7, 1952 and titled Property of A. Braithwaite located near Davis Corner,
Princess Anne County, Virginia, which plat is recorded in Map Book 32, at Page 25.
LESS AND EXCEPT that parcel conveyed by deed recorded in the Clerk's Office of the
Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 2256, at Page 2145,
GPIN: 1468-43-5652
Parcel 4:
All of that certain lot, tract or parcel of land, with the improvements thereon and the
appurtenances thereunto belonging, situate, lying and being in Kempsville Magisterial
District, Prince¡¡s Ann County, Virginia, near Davis Comer, shown and designated on a
certain plat and survey thereof, made by W. B. Gallup, County Surveyor, May 7, 1952,
marked "Property of A. Braithwaite," recorded in the Clerk's Office of said County, in Map
Book 32, at Page 25, the property hereby conveyed being designated on said plat as Parcel
"C', containing one-half acre, reference to said plat being hereby made for a more
particular description. .
LESS AND EXCEPT that parcel conveyed by deed recorded in the Clerk's Office of the
Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 2256, at Page 2145.
GPIN: 1468-43-5745
Parcel 5:
Beginning a t a pin located 11.68 feet South 86° 41' East from a pin in the Eastern
boundary of Braithwaite Road, said pin being 53 feet North 34° 31' East from a point
which is the Eastern boundary of Braithwaite Road and DeFord Road extended, North 34°
31' East 113.31 feet to a pin, said line being parallel to and 10 feet from the Eastern
boundary of Braithwaite Road; thence South 86° 41' East 168 feet to a pin; thence South
2° 26' East 97.56 feet to a pin; thence North 86° 41' West 236.21 feet to the point of
beginning, as shown on the plat entitled "Property of Christopher Bowman" made by W.
B. Gallup, Surveyor, and duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Map Book 52, at Page 31.
GPIN: 1468-43-5854
SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY
I, GUSTINE BOWMAN (the "Grantor") appoint VERONICA MOSELEY, of
Chesapeake, Virginia (the "Grantee"), as my true and lawful attorney-in-fact, to execute
and deliver a Conditional Rezoning Application, together with all application materials,
proffer agreements, and exhibits required in connection therewith, relating to my
properties described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and located within the Bayside
election district of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia (the "Application"). The right,
power and authority of the Grantee shall include, without limitation, the right, power and
authority to sign and submit revisions to the Application on my behalf. This Special
Power of Attorney shall apply only to the Application filed by Home Associates of Virginia,
Inc. and shall not apply to any other property or rezoning application, absent the
Grantor's express, written authorization.
The right, power and authority of the Grantor's attorney-in-fact granted in this
instrument shall commence and be in full force upon delivery of the original of this
instrument to my attorney-in-fact and shall remain in full force until the City Council of
the City of Virginia Beach has approved or denied the Application. This Special Power of
Attorney shall not terminate on the disability of the principal and shall be construed in
accordance with §§ 11-9.1 and 11-9.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
Dateæ Q vi¡ :Jj)
(J
. 2004 /)
IfJ' \ 1/ -.., .
/'1'\\ '.'~'I riYVV{\Y"
(' .Iî.D ~ i ~ .
Gustine Bowman :9<> WfVv1
~
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGIN~ '
CITY/COUNTY OF . ~ 4..-
. to-wit:
I, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, certify that
Gustine Bowman, whose name is signed to the foregoing Special Power of Attorney and
who is own personally to -' me or who has provided
/1-< LLtìL - as identification, appeared
before me this ,-:) 0 day of . 2004, and acknowledged the same
before me. (J
.i'"'. .'
;"'fœ9°/~ H~ ~
(J Notary Public
3~ ZC/o1
My Commission Expires: ~'L. ;
¡J
GPIN: 1468-43-5652
1468-43-5745
1468-43-5854
1468-43-5967
RETURN TO:
SYKES, BOURDON, AHERN & LEVY, P.C.
281 INDEPENDENCE BLVD.
P~R.OKF. ONF. 1i'TF'T'H FT .noR
feet to an old pin on the East side of Braithwaite Road, the point of beginning containing
1.0 acres.
A plat showing this parcel of land and other lands was recorded with the deed from
Anthony Braithwaite and Sadie Braithwaite, husband and wife, to M. C. Moore; said plat
being recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia, in Map Book 37, at Page 49.
GPIN: 1468-43-5967
co ND ITI 0 NALREZO NEIH 0 MEASSOCIA TESlGEO RGIO co MM 0 NSIBO WMANPO A
Supplemental Information
Zoning History
[]] DATE I REQUEST
1 3-11-03 Conditional Use Permit (Church)
2 12-12-88 Rezoning (R-10 Residential to A-12 Apartment)
4-25-88
I ACTION
Approved
Approved
Rezoning (R-10 Residential to A-12 Apartment)
Approved
HOME ASSOCIATES - STC
Agenda Item # 16
Page 5
fr;[.'
f;>,: "
..t:;;
(~: . .~
'¡\-:.-~ . IJ.>
't~:::""""",,"::1
....~~.;;~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: Home Associates of Virginia, Inc. - Street Closure
MEETING DATE: January 25,2005
.
Background:
An Ordinance upon Application of Home Associates of Virginia, Inc. for the
discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Diamond Springs
Road, being a cul-de-sac lying on the east side of Diamond Springs Road and
located approximately 381 feet south of the southeast corner of Diamond Springs
Road and Shurney Lane.
.
Considerations:
The applicant proposes to close this portion of Diamond Springs Road, between
Shurney Lane and Newtown Road, and incorporate the closed portion into a
proposed multiple-family residential project.
This request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations for the
area. The applicant has assembled several parcels for a multiple-family
residential project and consolidation of this excess right-of-way will improve the
overall design of the site.
The viewers met and discussed this request and found that there would be no
inconvenience to the general public should this Street Closure be approved.
Staff recommends approval of this request.
The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because
closure of this portion of right-of-way will not result in public inconvenience.
.
Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 11-0 to
approve this request with the following conditions:
1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding
ownership of the underlying fee. The purchase price to be paid to the City
shall be determined according to the "Policy Regarding Purchase of City's
Interest in Streets Pursuant to Street ClosUres," approved by City Council.
Copies of the policy are available in the Planning Department.
Home Associates of Virginia, Inc.
Closure of a Portion of Diamond Springs Road
Page 2 of 2
2. The applicant is required to resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot
lines to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining parcels. The plat must
be submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure
approval.
3. The applicant is required to verify that no private utilities exist within the right-
of-way proposed for closure. Preliminary comments from the utility companies
indicate that there are no private utilities within the right-of-way proposed for
closure. If private utilities do exist, easements satisfactory to the utility
company must be provided.
4. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the
above stated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council. If the
conditions noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not
approved within one year of the City Council vote to close the right-of-way this
approval shall be considered null and void.
.
Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Ordinance
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department
City Manage~b ~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
ORDINANCE NO.
IN THE MATTER OF CLOSING, VACATING AND
DISCONTINUING A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN
STREET KNOWN AS A PORTION OF DIAMOND
SPRINGS ROAD AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN
PLAT ENTITLED "EXHIBIT SHOWING RIGHT-OF-
WAY ACQUISITION FOR GEORGIO COMMONS
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA":
17
WHEREAS, Home Associates of Virginia, Inc, a Virginia corporation, applied to
18
the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, to have the hereinafter described stred
19
discontinued, closed, and vacated; and
20
WHEREAS, it is the judgment of the Council that said street be discontinued,
21
closed, and vacated, subject to certain conditions having been met on or before one (1) year from
22
City Council's adoption of this Ordinance;
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Virginia
Beach, Virginia:
SECTION I
29
That the hereinafter described street be discontinued, closed and vacated, subject
30
to certain conditions being met on or before one (1) year from City Council's adoption of this
31
32
ordinance:
33
GPIN: 1468-42-6927, 1468-43-6223, and 1468-43-5483
34
1
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
All that certain piece or parcel of land situate, lying and being in
the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, designated and described as
"RIW AREA TO BE ACQUIRED = 6,669.28 S.F. (0.15 AC)
shown as the cross-hatched area on that certain plat entitled:
"EXHffiIT SHOWING RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION FOR
GEORGIa COMMONS, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA" Scale:
I" = 50', dated January 7, 2004, prepared by Site Improvements
Associates, Inc., a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
SECTION n
47
The following conditions must be met on or before one (1) year from City
48
Council's adoption of this ordinance:
49
1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding
50
ownership of the underlying fee. The purchase price to be paid to the City shall be determined
51
according to the "Policy Regarding Purchase of City's Interest in Streets Pursuant to Street
52
Closures," approved by City Council. Copies of said policy are available in the Planning
53
Department.
54
2. The applicant shall resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to
55
incorporate the closed area into the adjoining parcels. The resubdivision plat shall be subllÙtted
56
and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval.
57
3. The applicant shall verify that no private utilities exist within the right-of-way
58
proposed for closure. Preliminary comments from the utility companies indicate that there are
59
no private utilities within the right-of-way proposed for closure. If private utilities do exist, the
60
applicant shall provide easements satisfactory to the utility companies.
61
2
61
4. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the
62
above stated conditions within one year of approval by City Council. If all conditions noted
63
above are not in compliance and the final plat is not approved within one year of the City
64
65
66
67
Council vote to close the street, this approval will be considered null and void.
SECTION ill
68
1.
If the preceding conditions are not fulfilled on or before January 24,2006,
69
this Ordinance will be deemed null and void without further action by the City Council.
70
2.
If all conditions are met on or before January 24, 2006, the date of final
71
closure is the date the street closure ordinance is recorded by the City Attorney.
72
3.
In the event the City of Virginia Beach has any interest in the underlying
73
fee, the City Manager or his designee is authorized to execute whatever documents, if any, that
74
may be requested to convey such interest, provided said documents are approved by the City
75
Attorney's Office.
76
SECTION IV
77
A certified copy of this Ordinance shall be filed in the Clerk's Office of the
78
Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and indexed in the name of the CITY OF
79
VIRGINIA BEACH as "Grantor" and HOME ASSOCIATES OF VIRGINIA, INc., as
80
"Grantee. "
81
3
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
81
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this - day
82
of
,2005.
83
THIS ORDINANCE REQUIRES AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF THREE-FOURTHS OF
ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ELECTED TO COUNCIL.
CA-9348
Date December 13, 2004
H:\OIDIREAL ESTATE\Street ClosurelHome Associates ofVa.ca9348.0RD.doc
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
W 9.~ I-/~-(JJ"
Plannin{Department
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
.
i!Ja ()?í- WIztJI¡ )A/
CIty Attorney
4
HOME ASSOCIATES
OF VIRGINIA, INC.
Agenda Item # 16
December 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.
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
COUNCIL
ELECTION
DISTRICT:
SIZE:
Street Closure
A portion of
Diamond Springs
Road being a cul-
de-sac lying on the
east side of
Diamond Springs
Road and located
approximately 381
feet south of the
southeast corner of
Diamond Springs
Road and Shurney
Lane.
4 - BAYSIDE
Location and General Information
0.15 acre (6,669.28 square feet)
HOME ASSOCIATES - STC
Agenda Item # 16
Page 1
SURROUNDING North:
LAND USE AND South:
ZONING: East:
West:
. Woods / R-10 Residential
. Woods / R-10 Residential
. Woods / R-10 Residential
. Diamond Springs Road
. Multiple-family dwellings and a Shopping Center /
A-18 Apartment District and B-2 Business District
NATURAL
RESOURCE
AND
CULTURAL
FEATURES:
Currently the site is wooded. There are several vacant single-family
dwellings adjacent to the right-of-way. There are no natural resources
or cultural features associated with the site.
AICUZ:
The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS
Oceana.
Summary of Proposa
The applicant proposes to close this portion of Diamond Springs Road, between
Shurney Lane and Newtown Road, and incorporate the closed portion into a proposed
multiple-family residential project. The proposed multi-family residential project is the
subject of a separate rezoning request.
Major Issues
The following represent the significant issues identified by the staff concerning this
request. Staff's evaluation of the request is largely based on the degree to which these
issues are adequately addressed.
. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations for the area.
. Determination that there is no inconvenience to the general public associated
with the abandonment of this right-of-way.
HOME ASSOCIATES - STC
Agenda Item # 16
Page 2
Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan Map depicts this site as a 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.
--
Staff recommends approval of this request.
Staff's evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials,
adequately addresses each of the 'Major Issues' above. The proposal's strengths in
addressing the 'Major Issues' are
(1) The request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations for the
area. The applicant has assembled several parcels for a multiple-family
residential project and consolidation of this excess right-of-way will improve the
overall design of the site.
(2) The viewers met and discussed this request and found that there would be no
inconvenience to the general public should this Street Closure be approved.
Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request.
Conditions
1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding ownership
of the underlying fee. The purchase price to be paid to the City shall be
determined according to the "Policy Regarding Purchase of City's Interest in
HOME ASSOCIATES - STC
Agenda Item# 16
Page 3
Streets Pursuant to Street Closures," approved by City Council. Copies of the
policy are available in the Planning Department.
2. The applicant is required to resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines
to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining parcels. The plat must be
submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval.
3. The applicant is required to verify that no private utilities exist within the right-of-
way proposed for closure. Preliminary comments from the utility companies
indicate that there are no private utilities within the right-of-way proposed for
closure. If private utilities do exist, easements satisfactory to the utility company
must be provided.
4. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above
stated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council. If the conditions
noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved within one
year of the City Council vote to close the right-of-way this approval shall be
considered null and void.
NOTE:
Further conditions may be required during the
administration of applicable City Ordinances.
HOME ASSOCIATES -STC
Agenda Item # 16
Page 4
Public Agency Comments
Public Works
No comments.
Public Utilities
Water:
There is a 12-inch water line running parallel to the cul-de-sac. A
maintenance easement may be required during detailed site plan
review.
I Sewer:
I No comments
Public Safety
~ce:
I No comments
I No comments
I Fire and ~escue:
Private Utility Comments
Hampton Roads Sanitation:
A Hampton Roads Sanitation District force main runs parallel to the cul-de-sac. A
maintenance easement may be required during detailed site plan review.
Virqinia Natural Gas:
No comments.
Dominion Virqinia Power:
A primary overhead line exists within the closure area and an easement agreement may
be required.
HOME ASSOCIATES -STC
Agenda Item;#16
page 6
:r:
0
s:
m
»
Cf)
»Cf)
<CO
œ(')
:3-
~~
;::;:m
"'tJ<DCf)
Q) :3 I
<C :tt cf)
<D...,¡,,-I
-....JO>()
O\t-.\.\O\-\Q
'?;i'?-\~rf:'
"""\~\.
't 'ô' \,'~:~ ')~' '
,,"1 "",A' '1' '~ " """',,,t'1.l,>1\IIG ~/\
'C)\"\) \\'SIJ,,"""'/ / "',,;'\\\.' ""","
'"',';"",)",,',,,'~, ,/,/, .,,':>,:/;,,'~ //~,,'~~',,~,'" {~-~!!_~
&{,,///> /////,-' \-------
'~;/'!.~~'//'/ "ill," /,," \
,5-/,",\'I,¡()'///'\
\Y'/7;i~' ">/Ø'% /j ,
<z</:> < /j \
'«(¿~f:~~.'~// \ \
\ \
\1. \
.\\~\
~
HAV, ..C,
lel2 ttJ ![JI\lltlt 1\1A"'",,:. 9.111\7 301
-,. BE-"f. -- 2J46'
(1~1) 431--1461
TE U'RO\tJ,£Nf ASSOOA1Es, þ).
0"'- [HQOt(rRS ,. '"" (;(JI!1IAC\'OOS
168 OOSlf/(S$ p- """'" WIn: \110
, WlaNtA 11(IlOl, V," W62
.,. , II'» 011-'!ODG 'AX !~1 t"-9ISO
"61
?-o¡>.Q
"I',
,.:~.
," "
,""-
'b:\
",
\
\
\!
"~,~,:,'i':;
t. \J
," ¿,
',', \
,
,
\
(\)
50 0 50 100
, --.. ..- "..",.. - ",.., .0..,
scole " " SO' fect
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
GY\
\
\
\
\
\
\
ì
\
\
I
\
I
\
'x
I'
':~\\~'c\
';:ì?,\,
"I,.,
'1"
V,
I
\
\
\
\
\
I
\
(i;)
\
'A
;'\
c.
,::\:,},
"~:\\~
Ç,\
c.'1
'",
\
\
5IT£ SUUIIARY>. "..
. RIW -. 10 У AOOUIIif.U Þ 6.660,28 U, (6\5 AC) W'LJ
z
c-.
~
:z:
EXHIBIT SHOWING
RIGHT-Of-WAY ACQUISll1ON
FOR
GEORGIO COMMONS
VlRGINI A BF "'U ,.nr'.." .
SCAlE: }" ~ 50'
en
c
:;æ
~m
C"o><
CD~::r
0» -.
-"'Ie"
0 CD -.
tn su r+
CDr+-......
C. 0 ,
:I
0
s:
m
»
(j)
»(j)
ceo
roC')
:J-
a'»
Q)~
::+m
-oeD(j)
Q) 3 I
CQ : :t: (j)
ro--,,~
(X)(J) ()
APPLICANT OISCLOSURE
if \tH' apphc-,nt hi a fOfpomtl!!n p,v\IH.",J"p 1>11>;. IHisin(¡<;,¡. CI oIlier unìnt:crp<>riW--î
cn¡'II\?aOrm, (;Gmple(n Em tüìhhViPq
Ust tile nppJ¡nmt !\titHe !oHow<>J hy .be II;lnl"" 0\ all dh{;N~L f!1r,rnh,¡n,. hw;tei'
pmtod<; Ü!(. ¡wlnw (Altar-/¡ ¡hf d "",""rY)]
I\¡H,L,
b,,$I1\(;,.:;Ü<; IIv\1 hii'm ;¡ ibJ! Ln',,) a p;)(i)nl-,.ub$I!'Ii,Hy 01 athhðk,lI b,y,me;;:,
,(¡I¡¡\JO"i,h,p 1'11111 H>ù dPl'h;;ml {AI/dell ""t d m'('(I&s¡tty}
LJ Check here II llli' "pphCJnt Ie¡ NOr iI ¡JApop\tnn- p"'tnerglgp, kin, bw;¡¡¡e%
ölhm IHH1(:orpolated N9;¡n:nl:on
PHOPElny OWNER DISCLOSURE
Compinle lias ~i"dH>rt ¡!Illy ¡( l'tOlHuty U',I!Hil is r(i!fmont (10m [ll'phumt
If the ¡.roPCI\)' owner .'i "{'(¡If"""I,"" ,n'\ners!1ip 'mn. humB"s'\ Of oth."
""FIW;r,¡h;¡¡ ;,,'mp'e!\< \ii"~ hibWHq
I ht )iq¡¡¡¡t'f (>Vii;;." "iIIl\" k)!'U\'iHI by Iht! "'ill"'.'! of ;!!folk,,!:.; ìnÜmh'h
lHislees, pmhwIf", elc t¡nlow (AtliKh 1,51 ¡f H11CeI;$!)!ÿ)
¡.> 11\;1 all hu$m!)s~w$iIIÎl"t hii'iÜ il that have H pawllt-$obßld'ar,' or atflri¡IIc(\ \)\I';",";,i;
entity.! tdationshrp with the applic;ml (Atti'll:/i list if fw<:e$SiltyJ
[] Check hew If the plcpmty (),'iOÙI It NOr ¡¡ (:oJporat¡oil, pmhmt$hrp firm- hUSHlI:1'\S,
OJ olher \lnlí1(ú!p(}f;\fed ("(lImitation
'? SI'i""'>!I>:qd(¡llm"'I'h"
STATEMENT
AODIrtONAt OISCLOSUfŒS
!.Ii,t aU kn()wn ct'JnlmclOf$, G! tHJiWW\iSCG that have oJ wi!! f!1(mdn ,>(;1',.".;<)(; witli .eq,¡:U
to the r"qW)5t(¡<! f!JOpùfly lite, indUlin,\) Iml not ht\lil\ì!Í 10 the f!lOv¡de/,:; of mclliledu",¡
!ì()tv!tØ&, rüHI estate Se1'VJCÚiJ, fÒ¡'iH¡(:t¿;\ $(,¡VH:Ci; i!CùHm!ina SCl'h<>ÜS, and le(Hli
!ielVkes (Altach tist II !Hiei1$$i!lyí <' -
¡evi.
, "ParÜI\!-$Uh$hj¡¡uy I(~¡¡ìli\)nship' nW!HI" "(I mla!¡o1\$hlþ that I,\xist,. when WI"
torporalinn dimctly ót indirectly own!> :;flaW!; possess!I1f1 molc than IiI) I"",,;ünt ü! n",
vnhot¡ power of anotlH)f ({)!¡)(Hat!<m Si'H Sl,¡¡'~ and I (¡cal GOyøtJ1r1HH'! Cnnt;¡,\ Ii!
Inløw$!$ N;I. Va Codø § ;¡ 7. :\ 10,
i 'Affiíialed b(j$iw,'%' 'f,'illy mÍdt.onship HH"<IrIS "<, f(,!"lkmship, other than
pMlml .¡;utwi¡¡iary relationship, Ihal e~i$lf, when (I~ ono fHiSinO¡;<' wIlily bib a
(ol\!w!irnq owtl()!i¡hip H\IN"<,\ :n !ii(' n,hi)! IHISiP('&S tVIHt" (Ì\) II l'(}l1IfoH:nq ."'il"" H'
01\U enmy ,3 a¡50 a i.lonlml!mg O'oVl1fil in Ihe 01,,;,[ 00\111, úf (!!Ii them 15 ~,h;ue(J
f)t (jt control bl3tween the bU$lneSS (\Utlli;:3. 1'<1(;tOI$ that slhm!d {¡i'
in d()!ümurHng the ,,"¡"knee o! ;HI aHHial"d Ù\hlmw3 ent,ly reí:'~Hm:;I¡¡p
inc!ufh, that the ",¡nIl' 1'1'1""11 or ,mh"IHotìalf¡lhe ""me pmson own m ",mHHW fhi,
I.'nHÜ"s; th"', are C()HHIh)t) Of i.I(}mm"'Hi(,d twlth ()¡ W)!$;.!\S; nil) tH¡3¡nÜ'}~ enHt",~ ";1);;;"
the U3ë 01 the ~,Irn{'. o ices or elHfiloy,ms m Olhmwìt" ShaH} ;¡¡;hv¡lím¡, m$OUln'" W
pcrt<mne! on a lOBUlar haßis, ()f tho It) it othclw,s,! a Giese wOJkino rt)!1,!íO05
b(Mroon tho Hnbbes" Sot) Stiltn and Loç¡tt Govümmenl Confltd 01 totem$ts
Codø § 2.2<~10t
CERTIFICATION: t Germy that the information contmlwd !l6mì ) is 11110 and i1(;W"¡,'
I undorshmd Ihu1. u )Ç)lIreæipt of notific<t!itil! (pöstcaldllha! tht'. ðpphcalkm lIa$ belin
¡<:hedul(.'(j for public Imming, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the ,,~quìred
sign 011 11m subícct Illopel!y at leas! 30 day!! prim to tho t.{".heduIÐd public homing
insIHl(;!lons in tlWI p,1clmgc.
"I '{II;!""", !nt, '
PHI NaH'"
Va
em
en -. ><
S'tn::T
pot. n -.
CÐÕC"
3 tn -.
CD C ....
3..ëiDJ
,~
'~ '1'
"~,- H_____l H____----"~'?~Y.Y-"'-~-' .-
<""i"
,;.;::,~,',:""~"'"""H" ,
Ú4n\
',. I
, ; ¡:/ . .'
i\_~,__..
, , <c~:;~~"~---
,
"tP-I<E
: ~~":::i~ :'::~C-;.;~~O:; ~';,.,'" Ac[iml
. ",.. MEA '0 11£ ""'CAiro. <DW" AC
- fO"', m, """A - '~'14 .C
. (~'"NG "',"0 11.10
. ""OI'(I'.LO ,""'0; .-12 >In, ",.. """""
, """"O"",\) ,'"" "' "","""~""'- 1J'<115
. ."<.1'\ NO, """ NO, ""fl."""""
(i) ",o,n.",'..- (R-I.) (0' <Ie>. PC ,..~
(~) ""'.,"'~,- ("-1<1 (D,O .... "'" """!
(~ "'HJ"""'<mI~""Oj (>.".,,~...,.,.!
(~ ""'.4>-""-0000 1""0) (00, 1,." .'" ""!
@ "",-....."..""", (It,I') (:10, "- "" ""')
'I) ""-".n,,,."""'(It"'D) (0""""""
~"'-"'-"""-(>I-'.) 10""""""")
(Æ) ,"'-"""""""(1"'\' IU'~"""'"
"""'f' . """'/10" t2 ".",,"," ."" 2U. ""'15 <)-&2
. "¡,>«:I'm L. 6'."""'. CO"':f"'r .. H'"
;IJ
0
f~
.- .Œvru:!Pm
HAV. II (;,
,6IZ OO¡f(J<.u.r. ru_.'". ""HE '",
V"'(>I<,. Q(AOI. ....r"" "..,
(107) "1-1,"1
:J:
0
s:
m
»
(1)
»(1)
ceO
<1>(')
:::I-
e.»
1»-1
::+m
-0<1>(1)
I» 3 "
ce =It: (1)
<1>~-I
<DO>()
roE M'OOva.ENT ASSOOATI:S, tIC.
"VII. 'N<""'1<~ a ",. <"","""fOIlS
'GO 00"""" PM' ""'1,0;. sonr ICO
W>Q"A 8£1<11. vA. ,.,..,
""..... 'lf$'1 61'.""" m ("~ I/!."'"
\it. ",,'af
- -(~!J'Âr)--'
0"""
.." < . "'"." . <>.""""',
"" , . ""~.. ""11<>">1
"JÆ' , "'<>-". -'>" w, "",,'"
"'" , "'""" . .oj>; ., ""'"
""...,......'"
"-""M: """'..
"IS"',"""""
"""", """'...
&col"
feet
PREUMINARY LAYOUT
FOH
GEORGIO COMMONS
VlHGINIA BlAÇH. "¡HeiNl"
5CAl.E: I" ., )(){¡' DATE: 01-7-04
100 0 100 200
L_-- .ï::c"""":' ...,,",',::":::-:c',.::¡
;r
-03-0
- -. ..,
D)-O-(/)
n:::s'<"C:::sc
Õ ~ ;:0 o õ"'C m
VI -. CD VI .., "C ><
C .... !!! . CD 3 i" ::r
VI .., ::T C. C. D) 3 _w
::TCD~CD3:d'.CDC"
OD)..,:::ScO:::s;:;:
~;CDd'.;::;:::sf+.
:::s D) ~ !. 'j . I !:!!..."
O\þ.v.o~O
cJ'~\~OS
~Oþ.O
~z
(J>
,.> "'-
II' ~,
\. '"
Ü,Ò
(.~.(),
",
tMIIEIt~
HAY, INC.
1611 CÐlIDIIltLl£ 1JIINI'!Kf.. SUIlE 301
VIRGINIA Bt:AClI, W!OOA 2J464
U~7) 4JI'-1461
TE t.I'ROVe.4ENT ASSOCIATES. ~
elII'd. ENGINEERS'" 51"ΠCONIDilCTOO5
166 IIUSlNtSS PAl{!( DRIVE. SUIlt:: 100
\'1'\G1MA O(ACH. VA. 2J462
, (1S/) 671.0000 FAX 1S~I) 611-91811
1167
I¡>O~D
(j)
tTJ
&
~
......
.....
(~
>
I"
CD
z
i~
-I
:t
SI~ SUUUARV: _.
. rIM AREA TO 6E ACOVIRED = 6.6&\/.28 s.r. (D.15 Ae) ~
50 0 50 100
L- .-1
scale ' '" 50' feet
EXHIBIT SHOWING
RIGHT-Of-WAY ACQUISfl1ON
FOR
GEORGIO COMMONS
VIRGINIA BEACH. VIRGINIA
SCALf:: 1- "" 50' DATE: 01-7--04
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: Absolute Hospitality, Inc. - Change of Zoning District Classification and
Conditional Use Permit (hotel/motel)
MEETING DATE: January 25, 2005
.
Background:
(a) An Ordinance upon Application of Absolute Hospitality, Inc. for a Chanqe of
Zoninq District Classification from 0-2 Office District to Conditional 1-1 Light
Industrial District on property located on the north side of Burton Station
Road, approximately 480 feet west of Northampton Boulevard (GPINS
14588980880000; portion of 14589910170000). The purpose is to allow use
of the site for hotels. The Comprehensive Plan designates this site as being
part of Strategic Growth Area 1 - Northampton Boulevard Corridor, suitable
for major corporate, employment and industrial uses. DISTRICT 4 -
BAYSIDE.
(b) An Ordinance upon Application of Absolute Hospitality, Inc. for a
Conditional Use Permit for a hotellmotel on property located on the north side
of Burton Station Road, approximately 480 feet west of Northampton
Boulevard (GPINS 14588980880000; portion of 14589910170000).
DISTRICT 4 - BA YSIDE
.
Considerations:
The applicant intends to construct two five-story hotels on the property. One hotel
will provide conference room facilities. The hotels will utilize similar materials to
match an existing hotel on the adjacent site.
The proposal is consistent with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan
for this area. Hotel use in this area, particularly quality hotels, is consistent with
the vision of the Comprehensive Plan for this area as an office and employment
center. The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding uses. The
proffered architectural rendering and site plan depict coordination with the
existing hotel to ensure a cohesive project.
The Virginia Beach Department of Economic Development is coordinating a
Northampton Boulevard Corridor Master Plan Study, a joint study between the
Cities of Norfolk and Virginia Beach and the Norfolk Airport Authority. The study
will provide recommendations and guidelines on transportation and land use
issues in this area. The study is not completed at the time of this application;
Absolute Hospitality, Inc.
Page 2 of 2
however, the Department of Economic Development has reviewed this rezoning
and use permit request and finds it acceptable.
The Planning Commission placed the items on the consent agenda because the
proposal is consistent with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan,
Staff recommended approval, and there was no opposition to the request.
.
Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10 - 0 with 1
abstention to approve the rezoning as proffered and the use permit with the
following conditions:
1. When developed, all buildings and improvements located upon the Property
shall be located substantially as shown on the exhibit titled "Conceptual Site
Layout & Landscape Plan of Limited Service & Extended Stay Hotels" dated
May 27,2004 prepared by M.S.A., P.C., exhibited to the City Council and on
file with the Planning Department (the Concept Plan).
2. When constructed, the buildings shown on the Concept Plan shall be
constructed using building materials, designs, and colors in substantial
accordance with those shown on the rendering titled "Site Perspective
Suburban Extended Stay Hotels" prepared by Porterfield Design Center
exhibited to the City Council and on file with the Planning Department.
3. The property shall be used only for hotel, and motels, including accessory
uses, as those terms are defined in the ClO.
4. Any freestanding sign shall be a monument sign, constructed of materials
substantially similar to those used for the building exteriors.
.
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 Manag~ ~. ð¿J 6>?2.
ABSOLUTE HOSPITALITY
Agenda Items # 7 & 8
December 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.
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
GPIN:
COUNCIL
ELECTION
DISTRICT:
SITE SIZE:
location and General Information
7) ChanQe of ZoninQ District Classification from 0-2 Office District to
Conditional 1-1 Industrial District.
8) Conditional Use Permit for hotel.
Property located on
Burton Station
Road approximately
480 feet west of
Northampton
Boulevard.
14588980880000; 14589910170000; 1458899320000
4 - BAYSIDE
2.99 acres
ABSOLUTE HOSPITALITY
Agenda Items # 7 & 8
Page 1
EXISTING
LAND USE:
The property is zoned 0-2 Office District.
East:
West:
. Single-family residential and storage yard / R-5D
Residential District and B-2 Business District
. Across Burton Station Road are single-family
residential I R-5D Residential District
. Wingate Inn (hotel) /1-1 Industrial District
. Single-family Residential, undeveloped property /
0-2 Office District and R-5D Residential District
SURROUNDING North:
LAND USE AND
ZONING: South:
NATURAL
RESOURCE
AND
CULTURAL
FEATURES:
The subject area has mature tree stands along the northwest portion
of the property. There is a power line easement that crosses this
property.
AICUZ:
The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65dB Ldn surrounding NAS
Oceana.
Summary of Proposa
The applicant intends to construct two five-story hotels on the property in accordance
with the concept plan as submitted with this application. One hotel will provide
conference room facilities. The hotels will utilize similar materials to match the existing
hotel on the adjacent site.
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.
ABSOLUTE HOSPITALITY
Agenda Items # 7& 8
Page 2
. Consistency with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan.
. Compatibility with the surrounding land uses.
. Coordination with Economic Development's Northampton Boulevard Corridor
Master Plan Study.
Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this property as part of Strategic Growth Area 1 -
Northampton Boulevard Corridor Area. This Strategic Growth Area (SGA) has
established itself as a major employment center with exceptional transportation access
to serve its corporate and industrial clientele. This area should continue to build upon its
strength as a major corporate, employment and industrial base.
A master plan study of this SGA is currently underway through the City of Virginia
Beach's Economic Development Department. A 2003 draft of a plan produced as part of
the study shows the existing hotel.
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.
ABSOLUTE HOSPITALITY
Agenda Items # 7.&8
paga 3
PROFFER # 1
PROFFER # 2
PROFFER # 3
PROFFER # 4
PROFFER # 5
When developed, all buildings and improvements located
upon the Property shall be located substantially as shown
on the exhibit titled "Conceptual Site Layout & Landscape
Plan of Limited Service & Extended Stay Hotels" dated
May 27,2004 prepared by M.S.A., P.C., exhibited to the
City Council and on file with the Planning Department (the
Concept Plan).
When constructed, the buildings shown on the Concept
Plan shall be constructed using building materials,
designs, and colors in substantial accordance with those
shown on the rendering titled "Site Perspective Suburban
Extended Stay Hotels" prepared by Porterfield Design
Center exhibited to the City Council and on file with the
Planning Department.
The property shall be used only for "hotels and motels,"
including "accessory uses", as those terms are defined in
the CZO.
Any freestanding sign shall be a monument sign,
constructed of materials substantially similar to those used
for the building exteriors.
Further conditions lawfully imposed by applicable
development ordinances may be required by the Grantee
during detailed site plan and/or subdivision review and
administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant
City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City
Code requirements.
Staff Evaluation of The proffers listed above are acceptable as they dictate
Proffers: the level of quality of the project.
City Attorney's
Office:
The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer
agreement dated August 17, 2004, and found it to be
legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form.
ABSOLUTE HOSPIT ALITY
Agenda Items #7.&8
Pag~4
Staff recommends approval.
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 proposal is consistent with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan
for this area. Hotel use in this area, particularly quality hotels, is consistent with
the vision of the Comprehensive Plan for this area as an office and employment
center.
(2) The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding uses. The
proffered architectural rendering and site plan depict a coordinated effort with the
existing hotel to ensure a cohesive project.
(3) The Northampton Boulevard Corridor Master Plan Study is a joint study between
the Cities of Norfolk and Virginia Beach and the Norfolk Airport Authority. Virginia
Beach Department of Economic Development is coordinating the study that will
provide recommendations and guidelines on transportation and land use issues.
The study is not completed at the time of this application; however, the
Department of Economic Development has reviewed this rezoning and use
permit request and finds it acceptable.
Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request with the conditions below.
Conditions
1. When developed, all buildings and improvements located upon the Property shall
be located substantially as shown on the exhibit titled "Conceptual Site Layout &
Landscape Plan of Limited Service & Extended Stay Hotels" dated May 27, 2004
prepared by M.S.A., P.C., exhibited to the City Council and on file with the
Planning Department (the Concept Plan).
2. When constructed, the buildings shown on the Concept Plan shall be constructed
using building materials, designs, and colors in substantial accordance with those
shown on the rendering titled "Site Perspective Suburban Extended Stay Hotels"
prepared by Porterfield Design Center exhibited to the City Council and on file
ABSOLUTE HOSPITALITY
Agenda Items # 7 & 8
Page 5
with the Planning Department.
3. The property shall be used only for hotel, and motels, including accessory uses,
as those terms are defined in the CZO.
4. Any freestanding sign shall be a monument sign, constructed of materials
substantially similar to those used for the building exteriors.
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.
ABSOLUTE HOSPITALITY
Agenda Items # 7 & 8
Page 6
Supplemental Information
Zoning History
Absolute Hos
00.
¡
[Ð DATE I REQUEST
1 02/25/74 Rezoning B-2 Community Business District to H-1
Hotel District
2 03/14/77 Rezoning B-2 Community Business Districtto H-1
Hotel District
3 10108/79 Rezoning 1-2 Industrial District to B-2 Community
Business District
4 10108/79 Rezoning B-2 Community Business District to 0-1
Office District (now 0-2)
5 01/25/82 Rezoning B-2 Community Business District to R-8
Residential District (now R-5D)
6 06/14/82 Rezoning B-2 Community Business District to 1-1
Industrial District
I ACTION
Denied
Granted
Granted
Granted
Granted
Granted
ABSOLUTEHOSPIT ALITY
Agenda Items #7ßt8
Pagê7
7 06/14/82
8 09/06/83
9 12/17/84
1 0 01/26/99
11 02/13/02
Rezoning 0-1 Office District to 1-1 Industrial District
Conditional Use Permit (Truck Pavilion)
Conditional Use Permit (Gas Station)
Conditional Use Permit (Gas Station)
Change of zoning from B-2, 0-2 & 1-1 to Conditional 1-1
Industrial District
Conditional Use Permit (Hotel)
Denied
Granted
Granted
Granted
Granted
Public Agency Comments
Public Works
Master Transportation
~
Burton Station Road in the vicinity of this application is
considered a two lane undivided minor collector
arterial. It is not designated on the Master
Transportation Plan.
Traffic Calculations: Street Present Present Generated Traffic
Name Volume CaDacitv
Burton 4,000 6,200 - 9,000 Existing Land Use L
Station AOT1 AOT 1 (Level of - 440 AOT
Road Service "C"- "0")
Proposed Land
Use 3 - 1 ,088 AOT
, .,
Average Dally Tnps
2 as defined by 40,000 sf office
3 as defined by 80% occupied hotel rooms
Note: The trip generation appears to portray the hotel having greater impact on the
roadway. However, the Peak Hour generation of the hotel is less than office use
(current zoning). This signifies that the office use has a greater impact on the
roadway at "rush hour" times than the hotel use, because the traffic generated by
the hotel is s read evenl over the hours of the da .
Public Utilities
Water:
The site must connect to City water.
There is an 8" water main in Burton Station Road that ends at the
southeast corner of the property.
I Sewer:
I This site must connect to City sanitary sewer. The gravity sanitary
ABSOLUTE HOSPITALITY
Agenda Items # 7.&8
Page 8
sewer main may be extended, provided there is adequate depth in
the sanitary sewer system. If not, a private grinder pump and force
main may be an option. Septic tanks will not be permitted. A pump
station analysis for Pump Station #326 must be done to show that
the pump station has adequate capacity for projected flows. This site
is outside of the pump station service area.
There is an 8" sanitary sewer main in Burton Station Road that ends
a roximatel 200 feet from the southeast corner of the ro ert .
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.
Applicant to provide a lighting and / or photometric
dia ram Ian for review b cit staff.
Fire and Rescue:
Fire Department concerns will be addressed during the
building permit process. Private fire hydrants must be
maintained annually as identified in N.F.P.A. 25. Obtain all
permits from Permits and Inspections Division of the
Planning Department and a Certificate of Occupancy prior
to occupancy.
ABSOLUTEHOSPIT ALITY
Agenda Items # 7 &8
Page 9
Exhibit A - 1
Aerial of Site
Location
ABSOLUTE HOSPITALITY
Agenda Items # 7& 8
Page 10
Exhibit A - 2
Aerial of Site
Location
ABSOLUTEHOSPITAI.iiITY
Agenda Items #7& 8
Page 11
»
OJ
en
c6'~
roC
:J-i
a.m
~tI:
-0
~en
ìJ(/)ìJ
Q)~-i
<C -.. »
ro . r
~Qo-i
NCO-<
Conceptual Site Layout & Landscape Plan Of
Limited Service & Extended Stay Hotels
Burton Station Road
Virginia Beach, VA
l
CAT~:; ~:;~NO'
DATE: OS/27/04
Exhibit Prepared (or Conditional Rezoning
...... <on""pI"""o ',t...,...... ......~.....-
...,.. """"'n knol """'.......... "".....Uon.
SJteDatg
Site Area:
Existing Zoning:
Proposed Use:
:l:3.0Ac
0.2
Hotel (1-1)
parking Summary
Parking Required: 5 Story Hotel
(1 Space/Unit): 92 Spaces
Parking Provided: 92 Spaces
Parking Required: 4 Story Hotel
(1 Space/Unit): 70 Spaces
Parking Provided: 70 Spaces
\~~,.
\\\\
. \\
\
';.... .L"":" 'f
, ~,". '" "
!VISA, P.C.
t...d",I'" O"~Bn
PI"""",
$"M')'In8
(ngi,...ti"g
f "jro"""'n ,~ 50>,""",
""., ,."", ~".."
"C
am
'a><
~::r
CD -.
a.C"
"C -.
_en""
I» -.
~s-m
~i
11
It
;;s:2
Exhibit C
Proposed Site
Perspective
>-
;<
r-
rJj
-
<>
¡
t::
~
¡;p
.~
]
0
¡,,;j
0
~
~
t.JJ
...z
>«
5 o:J rJj
"'" oJ ...J
"- ¡",¡,.. u.J
<n:=)'
;¡: cD ~
:-:: ---, v'
= -' ......
<:1'. cj) ...i-
-
~,~
S-k':'
-
-
--
'"
'i!
'"
::ë
.-
""
"
..
f
~
,!
.;.;
::"
"
~
-;..
'1?ë
'k.;;;
!~
""
¡g
ABSOL UTEHOS PIT ALITY
Agenda Items # 7& 8
Page 13
»
lJJ
(J)
»0
(Qr
roC
::s-l
c..m
I»j:
roO
3(J)
-uwìJ
1»=1*:-1
(Q »
ro~r
~"QO-I
~co-<
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If 11m applicant Is a tOtl)()!alíon. pmlnf}rshi¡), firm, busincss. or (¡tl1m UOi!1(;Ùf!)o!'f1lnd
organization, complete the following:
1, U$\ Itlt> applicant name followed by the namùs of all O ¡Cêrs. fI1t!mlIDrs. tru$\M$,
partnørs. otc, below: (Attach list if flQCQS8IJry)
Absolute Hospilalíty. Inc.; Pw$idon\: Jayantil"! J. enrot:
Mukosh J, 134)(01
~), Usl al.l businesses that have a thai have a I}aronl-subsidiaryj or atliHated business
colil! relationship with the applk:<lnl: (AtWefl/lst if ne-cassaf}')
0 Check horo if tho applicant rs NOT n wf!X)f(l\ion. parÜ;afship. finn. hus;I)(!$!:;, or
olhm unincorporated mg;mizatiol1
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Compte!1) litiS section ()l1ly If properf}' owner is different from øppllwof
If IhE'.. propttrty OV'incr is a corporation, partnorshlp. firm, business, Ot atht\(
lí"iocoqmmtod organizntion, complejo the lollowing:
I. Ust the pròpOtly ownr~r narne followe(l by \h(~ "ames of all ()ffHÙr:;., IIH!HibiHS,
iwslrws, p¡Utnorfi, ctc below (Altðcll list if tlccesSDry)
Same !1f, appj¡ç;m!
2 i.i';t
busioossos that have a flInt hay') n PiHfirlt-!;u\)¡¡kJlnry" Of n!!ili'lted hH(;inm's
l",lmiflnshlp W,n\ Hw ,1pphcnnl {AUt;¡:!I!i:;! d tVi(;{)Ssmy}
none
0 Check here if tho proporty O'NfIor \s NOT n corporation. parlnolship, linn, bU$:n()~s.
or othet unincorporated orq;¡nili1línn
:. ' ,i;.' "",q",:¡.,
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
Lh,1 all I\(\own ¡;()ntHHi!(}I$ or t¡¡¡¡¡¡no!;,,!!>; Ih.1I havo or wHI prtWlde >:crvir;es W¡\Ìl respe<~l
to (he I'()q~$too tHÚ¡)l'.Ity U$O, including but not limited to Iho pro"tdors of architectural
sulvlcc$, real estate services. financial SCrvlCOß. and legal services: (Attach lis! if
ní!OO~$åry)
j 'PareIU,slIb",ìdiary relationship' means "0 relalJooshlp \I1at exists whün ono
corpom!ion directly or indi(Ø(;Uy owns slimes po$$essing more tllM !¡O pCtCMt of (he
"otlng power 01 ano!hef wr }omtíon" Sac StIlt\) and local (>oycmnwnt CoHO'CI of
In(¡rèsts A<'.I, Va God') § 22.:11(11
¡ -Affiliated bU!"inoss ontíìy mlaUonshi )' mOMS »11 rolaIÌOfI$hi ). QII101 Ihiltl
parût1t-ßubstdiary mta!Í(It1shiçl, II1f1t exists when (I) one business Ql\lity has a
cotltrolllnn ownùrship I/\tIHû$\ íli tho ,,1M, busil\()$S rmlìty, (Ii) II COt1trollt"\! ON,\(\r in
one entity it 01$0 a (:onIW!htJU owner In tM otMt entity. or (ííij tl1oro is sl1awd
mam.!goffll)n(or çontml betwCQn thn I.HJ:;inl)$1\ enlitles. F.1Clors thai hhould he
OO(ísidaloo h1 delonninil1H tho oxi1\lcnclI ()f an lltlìlialcd businoss untily mlabonship
incftidn Ihat \110 $flmo püfoon Of substantially tho same reman own Of manll{lo the two
(1l1li\IM: there am common Of comminglod funds or 8S5etS: thlt business entitios sham
Ihe use of tho 5:1111t! oftíces or employe(;!:; ot oU\crvlì50 sham IIchvHiGs. lesourC()$ Of
pû(ßonncl on IJ myular basis, ör there i$ otherwise it dose wofking relatlOnshi ,
botwcon thl} onl;!í!)5" S"~1 ShHo and !J){ial Govoft1I1H!tI1 ConlHet of tntcr(\s!s ,\(:t Va
Cooo § 2.2..310\
CERTIFICATION: I œ.rtify that the intom1f1t1on contafncd hemin I", truo find I!rÆlIl11le
I undomtami i!'w( upon l()cÜipt 01 nolik:Hliün (lK)s!card) Il\at the ¡¡pplh:aw>n bon been
s;:hûduh:xII(>/ ¡miX!" IleD!'in\). I (Hn t($pom;Ü.\lü (01 otJlain<n¡1 ¡1J)(j (I{>S!Hlfj !h(1 requ'r,'d
sign on the subject pwpmiy ¡Ji le¡¡st 30 days ptìOf to the $(:hedutN! puþlk; MDtjn9
In Ihl", pnckagø
em
en -. ><
S'UJ::r
.... (') - .
CDÕC'"
3 UJ -.
CD C ....
~c;JC
Item #7 & 8
Absolute Hospitality, Inc.
Change of Zoning District Classification
Conditional Use Pennit
North side of Burton Station
District 4
Bayside
December 8, 2004
CONSENT
William Din: I'd like to call Items #7 & 8. This is Absolute Hospitality. This is an
application for a Change of Zoning District Classification from 0-2 Office District to
Conditional I-I Light Industrial District on property located on the north side of Burton
Station Road, approximately 480 feet west of Northampton Boulevard. Also, a
Conditional Use Pennit for a hotel/motel on the same property. This is in the Bayside
District. There are four conditions.
Jeff Maynard: Good afternoon Madame Chairperson. Thank you Mr. Din. Jeff Maynard,
I'm the attorney for the applicant. Also in the audience with me today is Mr. Jay Barot
from Absolute Hospitality, who is the applicant. We've reviewed and approved each of
the conditions.
=
William Din: Thank you Mr. Maynard.
Jeff Maynard: Thank you.
William Din: Is there any objection to placing this on consent? If not, I would like Mr.
Ripley to tell us about this item.
Ronald Ripley: This application came to us with a recommendation of approval by the
Planning staff. It's a rezoning as indicated and it's a Conditional Use Permit for a hotel.
The applicant proposed that a hotel be developed about two years ago at the intersection
of Northampton and Burton Station. This is an extension of that development. It's a
four-story hotel at that intersection. The Planning staff decided that it was a logical use
of the land. It's a challenging site in the form there is some high-tension power lines that
run through the middle of it so the intent is to working around that and its a challenging
development. Besides from that they have combined the entrances to just access one
point off Burton Station. That is at the farthest end of Burton Station near the
intersection. So, it's compatible with the residential and any existing residential that
might be along Burton Station. We felt that it was a good logical use of the land and fit
the Comprehensive Plan and felt comfortable recommending this be on consent.
William Din: Thank you Ron. I would like to make a motion to approve the following
consent items, Items #7 & 8 Absolute Hospitality, Inc. This is a Change in Zoning
District Classification from 0-2 Office District to Conditional I-I Light Industrial
Item #7 & 8
Absolute Hospitality, Inc.
Page 2
District. It is located on property at Burton Station Road and a Conditional Use Permit
for a motel/hotel on the same property. This is in the Bayside District and it has proffers
and four conditions associated with it.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Din. Do I hear a second?
Donald Horsley: Second.
Dorothy Wood: A motion by Mr. Din and seconded by Mr. Horsley. Yes, Mr. Miller.
Robert Miller: I need to abstain from Items #7 & 8. My firm is working on that project.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you sir.
=
ANDERSON
CRABTREE
DIN
HORSLEY
KATSIAS
KNIGHT
MILLER
RIPLEY
STRANGE
WALLER
WOOD
AYE 10
NAY 0
ABS1
ABSENT 0
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
ABS
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 10-0, with the abstention so noted, the agenda items have been
approved for consent.
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE
In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF-5860
DATE: December 14,2004
FROM:
Leslie L. Lilley
William M. Macali ~
DEPT: City Attorney
TO:
DEPT: City Attorney
RE:
Conditional Zoning Application
Absolute Hospitality, Inc.
The above-referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the City
Council on January 25, 2005. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated August 17, 2004,
and have detennined it to be legally sufficient and in proper legal fonn. A copy of the agreement is
attached.
Please feel ftee to call me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further.
WMMInlb
Enclosure
cc: Kathleen Hassen
Prepared By/Return To:
Troutman Sanders LLP
222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 2000
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made this 17th day of August, 2004, by and among
ABSOLUTE HOSPITALITY~ INC., a Virginia corporation ("Grantor"), and the CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia ("Grantee").
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Grantor has initiated an amendment to the Zoning Map of the City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia, by petition addressed to the Grantee, so as to change the existing
zoning classifications from 0-2 to 1-1 Conditional on certain property which contains
approximately 3.0 acres, more or less, located in the Bayside District of the City of Virginia
Beach, Virginia, which property is more particularly described in the attached Exhibit A
(hereinafter the "Property"); and
WHEREAS, Grantor is the CUlTent owner of the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Grantee's policy is to provide only for the orderly development ofland
for various purposes, including mixed use purposes, through zoning and other land development
legislation; and
WHEREAS, the Grantor acknowledges that the competing and sometimes incompatible
uses conflict, and that in order to permit differing uses on and in the area of the subject Property
and at the same time to recognize the effects of the change and the need for various types of uses,
certain reasonable conditions governing the use of the Property for the protection of the
community that are not generally applicable to land similarly zoned I-I needed to cope with the
situation to which the Grantors' rezoning application gives rise; and
WHEREAS, the Grantor has voluntarily proffered in writing in advance of and prior to
the public hearing before the Grantee, as part of the proposed conditional amendment to the
GPINs: 1458-88-9932, 1458-99-1017, and 1458-89-8088
Zoning Map, in addition to the regulations provided for in the existing I-I zoning district by the
existing City's Zoning Ordinance ("CZO"), the following reasonable conditions related to the
physical development, operation and use of the Property to be adopted as a part of said
amendment to the new Zoning Map relative to the Property, all of which have a reasonable
relation to the rezoning and the need for which is generated by the rezoning; and
WHEREAS, said conditions having been proffered by the Grantor and allowed and
accepted by the Grantee as part of the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, such conditions shall
continue in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes the zoning on the
Property covered by such conditions; provided, however, that such conditions shall continue
despite a subsequent amendment if the subsequent amendment is part of the comprehensive
implementation of a new or substantially revised zoning ordinance, unless, notwithstanding the
foregoing, these conditions are amended or varied by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's
Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and executed by the record
owner of the subject Property at the time of recordation of such instrument; provided, further,
that said instrument is consented to by the Grantee in writing as evidenced by a certified copy of
ordinance or resolution adopted by the governing body of the Grantee, after a public hearing
before the Grantee advertised pursuant to the provisions of the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-
2204, which said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with said instrument as
conclusive evidence of such consent.
NOW THEREFORE, the Grantor, for themselves, their successors, assigns, grantees,
and other successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement by or exaction
from the Grantee or its governing body and without any element of compulsion of auid "ro auo
for zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit or subdivision approval, hereby make the
following declaration of conditions and restrictions which shall restrict and govern the physical
development, operation and use of the Property and hereby covenant and agree that these proffers
(collectively, the "Proffers") shall constitute covenants running with the said Property, which
2
shall be binding upon the Property and upon all parties and persons claiming under or through
the Grantors, their heirs, personal representatives, assigns, grantees and other successors in
interest or title, namely:
1. When developed, all buildings and improvements located upon the Property shall
be located substantially as shown on the exhibit titled "Conceptual Site Layout & Landscape Plan
of Limited Service and Extended Stay Hotels", dated May 27, 2004, prepared by M.S.A., P.C.,
exhibited to the City Council and on file with the Planning Department (the "Concept Plan").
2.
When constructed, the buildings shown on the Concept Plan shall be constructed
using building materials, designs and colors in substantial accordance with those shown on the
rendering titled "Site Perspective Suburban Extended Stay Hotels", prepared by Porterfield
Design Center, exhibited to the City Council and on file with the Planning Department.
3.
The Property shall be used only for "hotels and motels", including "accessory
uses", as those tenns are defined in the CZO.
4. Any free-standing sign shall be a monument sign, constructed of materials
substantially similar to those used for the building exteriors.
5.
Further conditions lawfully imposed by applicable development ordinances may
be required by the Grantee during detailed site plan and/or subdivision review and administration
of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable
City Code requirements.
All references hereinabove to zoning districts and to regulations applicable thereto, refer
to the City Zoning Ordinance of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in force as of the date the
conditional zoning amendment is approved by the Grantee.
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,
3
including (i) the ordering in writing of the remedying of any noncompliance with such
conditions, and (ii) the bringing of legal action or suit to ensure compliance with such conditions,
including mandatory or prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages or other appropriate action,
suit or proceedings; (2) the failure to meet all conditions shall constitute cause to deny the
issuance of any of the ,required building or occupancy permits as may be appropriate; (3) if
aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Administrator made pursuant to the provisions of the
City Code, the CZO or this Agreement, the Grantor shall petition the governing body for the
review thereof prior to instituting proceedings in court; and (4) the Zoning Map shall show by an
appropriate symbol on the map the existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the subject
Property on the map and that the ordinance and the conditions may be made readily available and
accessible for public inspection in the office of the Zoning Administrator and in the Planning
Department and that they shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City
of Virginia Beach, Virginia and indexed in the name of the Grantor and Grantee.
This Agreement may be signed in one or more counterparts which, upon execution by all
the parties, shall constitute a single agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the foregoing Agreement is executed by the parties of the date
first written above.
GRANTOR:
ABSOLUTE HOSPITALITY, INC.,
a Virginia corporation
J
By:
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY/CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this n.!!.. day of August, 2004,
by Jayantilal J. Barot, in his capacity as President of Absolute Hospitality, Inc., a Virginia
corporation. /l
Q~. Q ~
/ 1 NoÌãÍ-y Public
My commission expires:~
4
2001 in Deed Book 4452, at Page 1250 of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Parcel B. consisting of two parcels:
Parcel One:
ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in the City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia, and being a part of Lot Number 27, on the plat of the Old James
Cornick Fann, which said plat is duly of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 66, at Page 157, and is more particularly described as
follows:
Beginning at a point on the northeastern side of Road No.1, as shown on said
plat, which point of beginning is approximately five (5) feet from a large gum
tree; thence running through the center of said gum tree in a straight line
perpendicular to said road, ninety (90) feet; thence running southeasterly and
parallel to the northeastern side of said road forty-five (45) feet; thence
southwesterly and parallel with the first mentioned line, ninety (90) feet to the
northeastern side of said Road No.1; thence northwesterly along the northeastern
side of said road forty-five (45) feet to the point of beginning.
Parcel Two:
ALL THAT certain piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in the City of Virginia
Beach, Virginia, and located near Burton's Station, and is more particularly described on that
certain plat of "Property of Hilda May Lawrence located near Burton's Sta. - in Princess Anne
Co., Va.", which plat is recorded in the above-mentioned Clerk's Office, with a Deed of Bargain
and Sale dated June 24, 1955, from June Smith and Clara Smith to Hilda May Lawrence, and in
Map Book 39, page 30, and in accordance with said plat said property is more particularly
described as follows:
Beginning at a pipe in the northwest comer of the property of Hilda May
Lawrence, thence running N. 30. 58' E. eighty-two (82) feet to a pin; thence
running S. 16. 02' E. sixty-one and fifty-three one hundredths (61.53) feet to a
pin; thence running S. 30. 58' W forty (40) feet to a pin in the northeast comer of
said Hilda May Lawrence's property; thence running N. 59. 2' W. forty-five (45)
feet to the point of beginning; said property is conveyed subject to the right of way
of the Virginia Electric and Power Company.
Parcel B is the same property conveyed by deed from Obediah Riddick, Jr. to Absolute
Hospitality, Inc., dated April 28, 2004, and recorded on May 6, 2004 as Instrument Number
200405060070782 in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia.
6
Parcel C:
ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land, with the appurtenances thereunto
belonging, lying, situate and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, being known,
numbered and designated as Parcel 1A containing 1.518 acres, more or less, as shown on that
certain plat titled, "RESUBDNISION PLAT OF PARCELS 1, 2 AND 3, AS SHOWN ON
RESUBDNISION PLAT OF PROPERTY OF MANUELITO O. & M.A. AURORA V.
CALAYO, BURTON STATION ROAD (MAP BOOK 205 AT PAGE 60)", dated December 12,
1995, revised January 23, 1996, made by Langley & McDonald, P.c., and recorded in the Clerk's
Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia in Map Book 254, page 84.
Parcel C is the same property conveyed by deed from Navy PWC Norva Federal Credit
Union to Absolute Hospitality, Inc., dated November 12, 2002, and recorded on November 25,
2002 as Instrument Number 200211253069851 in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the
City of Virginia Beach, Virginia.
7
Exhibit A
The Property subject to the foregoing Agreement is shown on an unrecorded exhibit titled
"Conceptual Site Layout & Landscape Plan of Suburban Extended Stay Hotel, dated May 27,
2004, prepared by MSA, P.C., and on file with the Planning Department of the City of Virginia
Beach. The Property is more particularly described as:
BEGINNING at a point located along the north side of Burton Station Road (the
"Point of Beginning"), which point is shown as an iron pin found on the
southwest comer of the property described as "Parcel lA" on the plat recorded in
the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia (the
"Clerk's Office"), in Map Book 254, at page 84 and which is further shown along
the southeast property line of the property shown on the plat as being now or
formerly owned by the City of Virginia Beach (GPIN: 1458-89-7024); thence
N26°07'07"E, a distance of 134.65 feet to a point; thence N63°52'53"W, a
distance of 65.00 feet, to a pin; thence N26°11 '33"E, a distance of 58.76 feet to a
pin; thence N63°51 '38W, a distance of52.17 feet to a pin; thence N26°08'22"E, a
distance of 208.69 feet to a pin; thence S63°51 '38"E, a distance of 42.19 feet to a
pin; thence 55°29' 12"E, a distance of233.58 feet to a pin; thence S30015'48"E, a
distance of 230.26 feet to a point; thence S54°39'05"W, a distance 114.43 feet to
a point; thence S05°14'11"E, a distance of 226.00 feet to a point; thence
S23°20'03"E, a distance of 24.60 feet to a pin; thence S45°16'31"W, a distance of
115.51 feet to a pin; thence N63°51 'OO"W, a distance of 242.0 feet to the Point of
Beginning.
The Property comprises all of Parcel A. all of Parcel B. and a portion of Parcel C. each
of which are described below:
Parcel A:
ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements
thereon, lying, situate and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and being known,
numbered and designated as Parcel 2A-I, as shown on that certain plat titled,
"RESUBDMSION PLAT OF PARCEL "IA" AND PARCEL IB" RESUBDIVISION PLAT
OF PARCLES 1,2, AND 3 AS SHOWN ON RESUBDMSION PLAT OF PROPERTY OF
MANUELITO O. & M.A. AURORA V. CALA YO BURTON STATION ROAD (MB 205, PG
80) (MB 254, PG84) AND PROPERTY OF FRANK T. WILLIAMS, LOT A RECORDED IN
DB 4309, PG 1788 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated August 15,2001 and made by MSA,
P.C., which said plat is duly recorded in the Clerk's Office in Map Book, 301, at pages 70 and
71.
Parcel A is the same property conveyed by deed fi:om Amphibious Base Naval Base
Federal Credit Union to Absolute Hospitality, Inc., dated May 31,2001, and recorded on July 5,
5
Conditional Zoning Change from R-5D to B-2
CUP for gas & convenience store
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: 7-Eleven, Inc. - Change of Zoning District Classification and Conditional
Use Permit (fuel sales)
MEETING DATE: January 25, 2005
.
Background:
(a) An Ordinance upon Application of 7-Eleven, Inc. for a Chanqe of ZoninQ
District Classification from R-5D Residential Duplex District to Conditional B-2
Community Business District on property located on the West side of Dam Neck
Road, approximately 600 feet North of South Rosemont Road (GPINS
14950238240000; 14950239800000; 14859391710000; 14849299920000). The
proposal is for an approximately 3,000 square foot convenience store and fuel
pumps. 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 3 - ROSE HALL
(b) An Ordinance upon Application of 7-Eleven, Inc. for a Conditional Use Permit
for fuel sales in conjunction with a convenience store on property located on the
West side of Dam Neck Road, approximately 600 feet North of South Rosemont
Road (GPINS 14950238240000; 14950239800000; 14859391710000;
14849299920000). DISTRICT 3 - ROSE HALL
.
Considerations:
The proposal consists of the development of a 2,807 square foot convenience
store and six gas pumps on a 1.2 acre site. The front of the store is oriented
toward Dam Neck Road. Because Dam Neck Road is identified by the Master
Transportation Plan as a limited access roadway, the commercial use will share
access with the entrance road to a new residential subdivision proposed on the
west and south sides of the site, which are being developed by-right under the
existing R-5D zoning.
The site plan shows a 25 foot landscape buffer along Dam Neck Road. There are
15 foot wide landscape buffers shown adjacent to the residential zoning on the
north and west sides. There are two access points shown on the future 50 foot
right-of-way that will be developed with the new residential neighborhood being
planned on property to the west and south of this site.
7-Eleven, Inc.
Page 2 of 3
Staff strongly believes that the proposed rezoning and Conditional Use Permit
requests for a convenience store with gas pumps do not conform to the
recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. Due to this area being within a
high AICUZ and in proximity to an Accident Potential Zone, the Comprehensive
Plan notes that within this part of Strategic Growth Area 11 the most appropriate
uses would be non-residential ones, including limited retail. However, the
Comprehensive Plan emphasizes that such uses should be encouraged only
where parcels of land have been consolidated to create large developable
parcels. In particular, the objective of the Plan was for the R-5D zoned parcels on
the north side of Dam Neck Road to be consolidated and conditionally rezoned
for a comprehensively planned development consisting of office and light
industrial uses with limited supporting retail. However, contrary to that objective,
the area north of Dam Neck Road in the vicinity of this application is developing
as a residential area under the existing zoning. Thus, the Comprehensive Plan's
recommendations for compatibility of proposed uses with residential
neighborhoods are more significant than the suggestion that limited retail is
appropriate within Strategic Growth Area 11. A convenience store with gas
pumps on a small parcel cannot be considered "strategic growth." A planned
office and light industrial complex on a large parcel could have been.
The Comprehensive Plan has already recognized the importance of this principle
of compatibility in its recommendations for the south side of Dam Neck Road,
adjacent to the established neighborhood of Landstown Meadows. This
particular use is not compatible with the new neighborhoods planned or under
development to the north, west and south of the site. The entrancelexit points for
this use are located on the one and only road that will serve the adjacent new
subdivision of 51 single-family homes. The use will be in operation 24 hours a
day, with peak periods of use coinciding with the peak periods of traffic flow into
and out of the neighborhood. The activity and overall character of the proposed
use is not conducive to providing stability for the new neighborhood. Common
sense and fundamental land use planning inform us that placing a spot of
intensive commercial zoning and use in the center of residential communities it is
not appropriate. The Comprehensive Plan states that established residential
neighborhoods shall be protected against invasive land uses that, due to their
activity, intensity, size, hours of operation or other factors, would tend to
destabilize them. This same principle can and should be extended to new
neighborhoods. The proposed rezoning is considered to be a spot zoning and
will have a negative impact on the character and image the adjacent new
neighborhoods can establish.
There was opposition to the requests.
.
Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-2 to approve
the Change of Zoning District Classification with the deletion of Proffer 2 and to
approve the Conditional Use Permit with the following condition:
7 -Eleven, Inc.
Page 3 of 3
1.
The external building materials, colors and architectural design elements
of the building to be constructed on the Property shall be substantially the
same as shown on the exhibit entitled "7 -Eleven Convenience Store with
Gas", which has been exhibited to City Council and is on file with the
Planning Department.
.
Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends denial. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Departmen~
City Manager: ~ k .~tM
7-ELEVEN, INC.
Agenda Items # 20 & # 21
December 8, 2004 Public Hearing
Staff Planner: Barbara Duke
The following report is prepared by the staff of the Virginia Beach Department of
Planning to provide data, information, and professional land use recommendations to
the Planning Commission and the City Council to assist them in making a decision
regarding this application.
REQUEST:
APPLICATION
HISTORY:
LOCATION:
Location and General Information
20) Chanqe of Zoninq District Classification from R-5D Residential
District to Conditional B-2 Community Business District.
21) Conditional Use Permit for fuel sales in conjunction with a
convenience store.
The Planning Commission deferred this item at the November
10,2004 public hearing to allow the applicant an opportunity to
upgrade and revise the building elevations that will be proffered.
Revised building elevations have been submitted and are
provided at the end of this report.
Property located
on the west side
of Dam Neck
Road, 600 feet
north of South
Rosemont Road
7-ELEVEN, INC.
Agenda Items # 20 & #21
Page 1
GPIN:
COUNCIL
ELECTION
DISTRICT:
1495023980; 1495023824; 1485929992;' 485939171
3 - ROSE HALL
SITE SIZE:
1 .24 acres
EXISTING
LAND USE:
Vacant Property
East:
West:
. Proposed single-family subdivision / R-5D
Residential District
. Proposed single-family subdivision / R-5D
Residential District
. Dam Neck Road
. Proposed single-family subdivision / R-5D
Residential District
SURROUNDING North:
LAND USE AND
ZONING: South:
NATURAL
RESOURCE
AND
CULTURAL
FEATURES:
There are no significant environmental features on the property.
AICUZ:
The site is in an AICUZ of 70 to 75dB Ldn and Accident Potential
Zone 2 surrounding NAS Oceana, The proposed use is compatible
within these areas. NAS Oceana has no opposition to this request for
rezoning.
Summary of Proposa
The proposal consists of the development of a 2,807 square foot convenience store and
six gas pumps on this 1.2 acre site. The front of the store is oriented toward Dam Neck
Road. Because Dam Neck Road is considered a limited access roadway, the
commercial use will share access with the entrance road to a new residential
subdivision proposed on the west and south sides of the site.
7-ELEVEN, INC.
Agenda Items # 20 &<j:21
Page 2
The site plan shows a 25 foot landscape buffer along Dam Neck Road, There are 15
foot wide landscape buffers shown adjacent to the residential properties on the north
and west sides. There are two access points shown on the future 50 foot right-ot-way
that will be developed with the new residential neighborhood being planned on property
to the west and south of this site.
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
. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations
Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan identifies this site as being located in Strategic Growth Area
11 located north of Dam Neck Road between Rosemont Road and Holland Road. This
strategic growth area is planned for non-residential uses including office, light industrial
and limited retail. The recommendations for this strategic growth area include the
following:
. Because of the multiple parcels of land that front on both sides of Dam Neck
between Rosemont and Holland Road, this plan strongly recommends that the
number of access points to Dam Neck road be limited. This objective should be
accomplished by consolidating parcels of land and/or providing common access
easements to create well-planned, unified developments.
. Where new developments within this Strategic Growth Area are proposed in the
vicinity of adjacent stable neighborhoods, the proposed uses must be
compatible with the residential character of that area. The portion of the
7,.,ELEVEN,INC.
Agenda Items # 20 & # 21
Page 3
Strategic Growth Area located north of Dam Neck Road between Rosemont
and Holland is planned for non-residential uses including office, light industrial
and limited retail. On the south side of Dam Neck Road, the undeveloped
parcels of land between this road and Landstown Meadows neighborhood are
located in the APZ and are suitable for low intensity retail and service uses that
are compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood. Examples of such
uses include garden centers and nurseries, neighborhood medical offices and
specialty shops providing goods and services to the local neighborhood market.
The area on the north side of Dam Neck Road surrounding this site is not developing in
accordance with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations, rather it is being
developed under the existing zoning, which is R-5D Residential Duplex District. Due to
this fact, the proposed use should be evaluated under the criteria in the Comprehensive
Plan for Primary Residential Areas as well as the Strategic Growth Area
recommendations. For properties within Primary Residential Areas, the Plan
emphasizes the need to preserve and protect the overall character, economic value and
aesthetic quality of neighborhoods, particularly through the avoidance of introducing
incompatible uses. Established residential neighborhoods shall be protected against
invasive land uses that, due to their activity, intensity, size, hours of operation or other
factors, would tend to destabilize them.
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," (§1 07(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.
7-ELEVEN, INC.
Agenda Items # 20 & # 21
Page 4
PROFFER # 1
PROFFER # 2
PROFFER # 3
PROFFER # 4
PROFFER # 5
The Property shall be developed substantially as shown on
the exhibit entitled "7-ELEVEN INCORPORATED 7-
ELEVEN CONVENIENCE STORE PRELIMINARY SITE
PLAN Dam Neck Road and Monet Drive, Virginia Beach,
Virginia", prepared by URS, which has been exhibited to
the Virginia Beach City Council ("City Council") and is on
file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning
("Planning Department").
The external building materials, colors and architectural
design elements of the building to be constructed on the
Property shall be substantially the same as shown on the
exhibit entitled "7 -Eleven Convenience Store with Gas",
which has been exhibited to City Council and is on file with
the Planning Department.
The internal lot lines of the Property will be vacated in
accordance with applicable City Ordinances.
No other B-2 Community Business District uses shall be
permitted on the Property other than a convenience store
with gross store area of less than five thousand (5,000)
square feet and an automobile service station.
Further conditions as may be required by the GRANTEE
during detailed site plan and/or subdivision review and
administration of applicable City Code requirements.
Staff Evaluation of The above referenced proffers do not adequately address
Proffers: the major issues identified above.
City Attorney's
Office:
The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer
agreement dated November 16, 2004 and found it to be
legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form.
7-ELEVEN, INC.
Agenda Items # 20 & # 21
Page 5
Staff recommends denial of this request.
Staffs evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials
and the proffers does not address each of the 'Major Issues' identified above. The
proposal's weaknesses in addressing the 'Major Issues' are as follows:
(1) The proposed rezoning and Conditional Use Permit requests for a convenience
store with gas pumps do not conform to the recommendations of the
Comprehensive Plan for this Strategic Growth Area. Due to the fact that the area
north of Dam Neck Road in the vicinity of this application is developing as a
residential area under the existing zoning, compatibility with these new
neighborhoods must be factored into the recommendation in the Plan to develop
the north side of Dam Neck Road with office/light industrial/limited retail uses.
The Comprehensive Plan has already recognized the importance of this principle
of compatibility in its recommendations for the south side of Dam Neck Road,
adjacent to the established neighborhood of Landstown Meadows. This
particular use is not compatible with the new neighborhoods planned or under
development to the north, west and south of the site. The entrance/exit points for
this use are located on the one and only road that will serve the adjacent new
subdivision of 51 single-family homes. The use will be in operation 24 hours a
day, with peak periods of use coinciding with the peak periods of traffic flow into
and out of the neighborhood. The activity and overall character of the proposed
use is not conducive to providing stability for the new neighborhood.
(2) The architectural plans submitted to Staff after the November hearing are, in
Staff's professional opinion, a step down from the quality of design of other
recently approved 7-11 stores. The building is utilitarian and non-residential in
appearance. Even if the architecture was outstanding, however, good
architecture and site designs are not acceptable substitutes for good land use
planning. The focus must be on applying sound land use planning practices first,
and then addressing design considerations. The issue with this request is
whether placing a spot of intensive commercial zoning and use in the center of
residential communities is appropriate. Common sense and fundamental land
use planning inform us that it is not appropriate. The Comprehensive Plan states
that established residential neighborhoods shall be protected against invasive
land uses that, due to their activity, intensity, size, hours of operation or other
factors, would tend to destabilize them. This same principle can and should be
extended to new neighborhoods. The proposed rezoning is considered to be a
7'..ELEVEN,INC.
Agenda Items # 20 
Page 6
spot zoning and will have a negative impact on the character and image the
adjacent new neighborhoods can establish.
(3) Staff recognizes that this property is within Accident Potential Zone 2 and AICUZ
Zone 70 to 75 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana and that the property is currently
zoned residential, a use that is considered incompatible in these areas by the
Department of the Navy. It is staff's recommendation that the area proposed for
rezoning (1.2 acres) be incorporated and reconfigured to a more central location
in the adjacent new subdivision as open space to fulfill the recreational
requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance, which requires approximately one
acre of open space for the proposed 51 lots.
Staff concludes these weaknesses cannot be adequately addressed through changes to
the proposal or through additional proffers and, therefore, recommends denial of the
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.
7-ELEVEN, INC.
Agenda Items # 20 & # 21
Page 7
Supplemental Information
Zoning History
Conditional Zoning Change from R-5D to 8-2
CUP for gas & convenience store
œ DATE I REQUEST
1 02/23/99 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (communication tower)
2 12/10/84 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (church)
3 07/03/01 REZONING from R-5D Residential to Conditional 1-1
4 08/11/92 REZONING from R-5D Residential to Conditional 0-1
5 OS/20/85 REZONING from AG-2 Agriculture to B-2 Business
6 01/08/91 REZONING from R-5D Residential to Conditional A-12
7 01/28/85 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (church)
I ACTION
GRANTED
GRANTED
GRANTED
GRANTED
WITHDRAWN
GRANTED
GRANTED
7-ELEVEN, INC.
Agenda Items # 20 & # 21
Page 8
Public Agency Comments
Public Works
Master Transportation
Plan (MTP):
Dam Neck Road is a four lane divided major suburban
arterial. The Master Transportation Plan shows this
right-of-way is intended to be 150 feet in width.
Currently, the right-of-way is between 125 feet and 135
feet. A variable width right-of-way dedication along the
frontage of this site may be required during detailed site
plan review. There are no improvements programmed
for the roadwa in the vicinit of this a lication.
Traffic Calculations: Street Name Present Present Generated Traffic
Volume Capacity
Existing land Use ;¿
35,390 32,500 - 69
Dam Neck Road ADT1 ADT1
Proposed Land
Use 3 - 633
Average Dally Tnps
2 as defined by six residential homes on R-5D zoning
3 as defined by retail and gas pumps
Public Utilities
I This site must connect to City water.
I This site must connect to City sewer.
~er:
I Sewer:
Public Safety
Police:
The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the
Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for
crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention
Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and
strate ies as the ertain to this site.
7-ELEVEN, INC.
Agenda Items # 20 & # 21
Page 9
Fire and Rescue:
7-ELEVEN,.INC.
Agenda Iterns # 20&;~~21
Pqge10
h"bit A - 1
Ex I Sïe
Aerial of .1
Location
7.,ELEVEN,INf.¡
ms # 20 & #
Agenda Ite . Page 1.1
Exhibit A - 2
Aerial of Site
Location
7-ELEVEN, lNG.
Agenda Items # 20
Pagê12
- - -- - ~.-.- ---- _._- - --.- -- - ';;;;;.'---'....- -- ---------
II II I I . I. t I ì
¡ 't,í, i~ § I II i ~ F~ ~ I!
þ: ~t I. ~ ~ . ¥ 11 I
' '1\ II 11 &
~ d I . ~ I ! 5!' !ì~ ¡ i 11 >- I i II r' .
=, i i. I ¡I IJill'h.... ", u iii ~Vl' 111 I' ij
~ I í ~ i~ i i... ~ I . f ~ It ì~¡ ~I~ It: ill z II i -,
S !i! L Ix 1111 jJ ~ ! ~ r >~, Ii ~!!! t; 1/ I ! II!
r; III i J PI I pi_I . II II I
. i I I II II !I III Ilill~U~I.lJhl ::::: ~í
.. ..
,...
w~
~æ OVOll )t~:JN WVO
== c I¡_:b_m_----~~~;
v-'- ~"I,..,.~:j'..:-ii:='~~\" ,. '.~:
,--:=.~m,m:m 'm.-'."" m' -
\
I
I
\
\
\
Exhibit B-1
Proposed Site
Plan
7-ELEVEN, INC.
Agenda Items # 20 & # 21
Page 13
I-¡¡¡
"'>
:r:-
0=
:!;CI
Q'l/O1l )I::SM ~O
Exhibit B-2
Proposed Site
Plan Shown with
Residential
Subdivision
"..--
"
\
\
,", ,',
,',,-) "
L' \;l~~;lH ',~
tfYIliuIH[ :" :....-
m',,', " -,.".',"'. '",,"'-,,'" ',',
t~:: ¡;:: 6'..~, \,
p..;;~'Å'~
! --, -, ",'
-----1
,
"
I
I
I
1
i'
!
...
~
... !
~
~
~!
.
¡ ¡
'"
¡
)\
, '
V
,
I.",
I
I
I
;1
;
,
..,~- "" l
~""-.
- --""""'.
--.........,
- """""",
- -......... - '
"----. .
'--. -- I
--.....¡.
"..'
,...1
, I
í
i
¡
¡
¡
I
I
/
I
. I
. i
,
,I
"-.
7 -ELEVEN ,INC.
Agenda Items # 20 &# 21
Page 14
,
¡
)
t
¡
r
,
1
t
r
j
¡
,/
<:
'.\
f
l1
~'
\ >
,/
".
',)
~
'\
"
tr~
'II
'!$.
'I
,r.
¥'
:1
:;
(
<:
,/
t)
"
,1
'"
;
,I
U
.'
'...
Ù
"
t
(
",
t
u
.,
"
~)
-:'
<
,',
I
I~
I'
<:
{.
:t
'.
LI
t
II
,
,/
'.t
It
~
,
\
,
"
t '0
~
t.J
C1
,~.
"
4
~)
4
u
1
":'
(,
;1
<:
f
< .
I-
«
'<0"
u
¡
u
fI
<1
I"
'$
~¡
!,
"","
CI
e
..
~
.~!
;f)
oj)
1:
~
Exhibit D
Proposed
Building
Elevation
7-ELEVEN, INC.
Agenda Items # 20 &# 21
Page 15
}
i)
I';
.
"1'
\j
h
n
if
Ci
ti'
':
,"
,-
"',
1
,
,(
;g
( )
:J
a.
ß)
;:;
( )-...J
33m
CIIr
: :t:m
N<
""Oem
ß)n.-.Z
<.c ~- ~
( ) :tI;".,...."..".
-"NZ
O'>-"p
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
I! thü apph,~¡mt is i;I cmporahon, par!l1Ctship. firm, tHi$ír1Ü$$. or othet unmcOtfH)!atoo
ofgamzat.of), cornpl<!te the fol!(w¡Íng,
t Ust the applicant name followed by the names of all offìcÐrs, members, 1I1Istee~,
partners, etc below (Artl1c/J list if lIeCQSStlfY!
7. Elovon. Inc. Soo attached shoot fin list of Officers. .
Z. Ust all businesses that have II parent-$ubstdiary' or affiliated bustno..
entity' relationship with the applicant: (ArtJtch list i' necessary)
Sj!o attacholt shoot.
0 Chock h,He II the applieant is NOT II corporation, p;ttIf1ü15!1'!J. firm. blls;l\Oss. at
other un;ncOlporated organizatJon
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Completo Itllf; ,melion Vtllf if ptQperty OWOfif is diff(J/(mt {mill applicant.
If the property ownml5 a corporation, parlnørship, linn, bli$lnW\S, or oll)(\r'
unificorpnrated organiwtino, col11pl",to tho foHowing
1 UM the pr<Jpmty owner name followed by 111& nanw~ of all ollitfilS, nwml)(ir$,
hUHlei!", pannel'. et>; holow: (AtWell list If uocQssaryJ
7- Uti aU bUSiIWSS(!$ tl)ilt have a p¡lfont-$ubSidiary' Or' ¡¡WHaled bllsinoss entity'
wlahul1s!Ùp WIOI 11m applicant (AIt;¡dl Nsl¡f fH1Ç(lssmYJ
X Ciw(;x hen, ,I the f\rúf)Ülly (oW(\IJf í~ NOT H CQtpor<\tion, partnmshl!J, firm, IllIsiness,
01 ÜlhN unincülpomted organizatiOf)
:~
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
t,st ail 'u"",o cünIH<dnrt. or bliS.110$!\(!S that ha",¡; 01 will provide $ù,Y,ŒS with
to thJ wqliüsh\,J piO¡>erty \1$<) including but not Iim:\iJd to t!w rF.lv¡r)(¡f$ 01 atdl
séf'tlœs. real estato sofVicos, financial seIVIC'.;> acco,-,n¡¡p¡~ servIces "no legal
1><)rvI<Æ1> (Attach ¡¡5t il !\íW3$Satyj
YB.~J~gJJ1.9.rati()J1..b.o.Ç.!J!¡r RYan. A Profcssiooat.ÇJ?lJ}Jl.[.!1IJQT1. Rood.Smith. P.C-.
BfAJ]!I.!lt~tQ.ÇkJMol1 C!.,h!. C
, "P¡¡((Jnt."ub$í<!'aty totaUonsh¡p' means 'a lo!ahon$11Ip thut m:i$ls wh<i\fI one
corporation directly or indirectly owns shareS possessing morn than $l) jwlc()nt of tho
vol""ÇJ pfJwer of ¡¡r!Other cor¡JOHlliÐlt Sce State and lOCal Govornment ConW.;;t of
Intillos\,¡ Act Va Code § 2.2-3101
one
"'An,L<lI!)tj business entity relalloI1Si1i¡Y' rI\oans 'a
pmont-suij$'d"-"y rü!,,(¡Qf1$l1ip, tlm! exists when {>¡ on,l businG';,
ownef.,h,p ,,"1\)1051 ¡n Ihe other bUSH1Ü$$ on\l!1' Ii (
,,1<;0 a controlling owner J! the OlhCI ent,ty Qt Hwr<! i$
t or (:ûnHGI between Iho ÞlI$Í!WS$ cn!iill1$ 1i\!J1 should hi)
in (j(]W'",lfhl1g the oJ,jsti)nco ot an alhha¡;;;d buS""j5$ !Jnhty rol¡¡\¡of1~\vp
.neb!€< Ü'k1! 1119 $'rt"\O o~rwn or $ubSW(¡!'¡¡ily tho same ¡<Q,,;on OS" 01 lI'Iilf1¡19D tt1;, two
ün\'¡'üs. ,horù m,: u)¡rmon ç; 1;01111""'91'11.1 funds 1)( 'bselS [)u$"'"',,," ",,1>1<1'8 ,\harù
i!'o,¡/,dlL>' ell.co$O£ udht'!vd5C$I:;YI,
r>üt:"ünrw! on" bas,s. 0' '> ';\,1DfWI,e () ,..."" ,','
hmwe"" !hi: Seø Statu ond tv:....1 GrN{)(nmnd Conn",
Gljda § 2 2.31\)1
CERTIFICATION: I UH\dy that rho ,nt<Y;\,;;\:Üf1 cent"i!)"'il
t IIndwsLHI'! ihl' .+on r<)Cü¡pt oj nD\II¡carian II'
~!'.I\()d"lüd 1m p\;\)i<; I'¡eimng, I 11m ¡e$p'.)!\sible Obi¡!'
$'9" on the ,;,,;,'" , ¡""pOlly <II !ea$1 30 days li'lO' \c) thr:
,¡ :-"'1 :lnd ucctJ'a!o
Sea attached slfmil1~iJ!UtWL--
""'H,WCTh"""" iOn",""'" (.f4"f¡""dfh"""I'r>h,,""Ì
;;;i'~;ïi, ~:~_._----'---_.
Va
~
........
~
C,..;:)
~
~
~
~
~
t::::>
~
C>
........
f-c
........
r--'}
m
><
::r
en C -.
r+ -. C"
D) tn -.
ar~r+
30m
CD tn
::s ~
r+CD
I
....J¡"
»
<C
(1)
::J
a.
t»
;:;:
(1)""¡
331
ClJm
r
: :t:m
-o~~
t»,.".,Z
<c )C"'-
(1): :t:--
"""NZ
...,¡......Ç')
E'OHER OF ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL MEtI BY 'l'¡mSE PRESENTS:
THAT I, ROY G. JONES
of. the co;Q!I\oowo41tl1 of \ilrc;tinia, have made, constituted, and
appointed,
and by these presents do make,
constitute,
and
appoint ARLENE FEREBEE, '9 my true and lawful attorney, for
me ami in my name, place bnd steil" to 40, ex~cute, and perform
all and every act, or acts, thinq or thinqu, in law needful,
necessary, or convenient to be dono, as fully, largely, and
amply, to all intents and pUrposes whatsoever as I m1ght or
could do if aotinq personally.
And especially, but not in
limitation òf the forQqoi~q powers, to ask, demand, sue for,
recover, and receive of and from all persons, corporations,
asGociationli, and other entities whomsoever, all. And every sum
or BUllIS of monòy, or other property, 1:oa1, mixed, or personal,
duo and owing, or that may become due and owing to me or which
I may bo entitled or may hereafter become entitled thereto,
whether due or to become duo, and to give receipts for sallIe.
01' ,
at the discretion ,.t the one acting,
to compound or
compromise tor samo, and g;:,ve discharqe:t and relenses, all as
I might or could do; to $:',<:10, draw, JDake, endorse, execute.
and deliver itH1truments, n,,)tO£l, chock£l, billo, bonds, deeds,
obligations, contracts, ,~ other papers; to' borrow money tor
such period" of time and IJpun such terms and conditions as the
ooe acting shall deem advis ,bIe and to mortgage or pledge such
portion of my property, teul or personal, as may be required
to secure any loan or loans; to sell. transfer, assign, lease,
or otherwise convey. all, or any part or parts, of my real,
mixed, or per~onal estate, or any interest which r may now
have,
or may hereafter acquire,
in (lny real,
lllixed,
or
personal e$tate, wheraso..ver situate, to make all necessary
deeds and conveyances th~raof, with all necessary covenants
and warrltntÜus and aaaurahco5, and to oign, oeal, acknowledge,
and deliver the same; to make investmanto ot my property in
the discretion of tho ono acting and without being restricted
to so-called legal inves~ents Inoluctinq, but not limited to,
investments in U.S. Government securities redeemable at par
in payment of u.s.
Estate taxa!:; to establish an agoncy
ðcc:ount tor the management; ðnd investJllont of any part or all
ot my property, in any banking or investment institution or
businoos; to have full ",CCOGU to any bank box rented to !tit! by
any baM with the right tn remove tram such box any and all
contonts which may bo¡ found therein; to hire employees and to
compensate them tor s61:vlcos rendered
for me or
in the
mðnagement of any oimy property; to prepare, IIxecute, and
rile income and other ta'¡ !:oturns of any nature requll:'ed by
any Government, an4 to act for me and to represent me before
the Treasury Department (,f the United Staten, Ot' any division
thereot' , any and all COUl.ts, or tlgoncioo of the united State"
Government, ðnd ",ny and all <':ourI:5, departtlents, 4qencies, and
divisions of any 'Othor G<>vel:'npont and to deal with the
repregentatives therClo€, in connection with 4nY of my
2
m
><
=r
ene-'
.... - . C"
s» fn -.
;-2.""
3 ~ m
CD s:: I
::S.., .....
.... CD .-
;g
CD
:J
C-
D)
;:;
CD ."'Ñ
3'
ClJm
r
:f;t:m
N<
"'Oem
D)n,.,Z
<C )C--
CD:f;t:""'"
->.NZ
(X)->.~
matters; to expend incomo ~r,principal or both for my Support,
maintenance, and comfort; to transfer assets to the Trustee
of any revocable or irravocable trust created by me during my
lifetime; and to do all ~~ch other acts, matters, and things
in relation to all and allY part, or parts, of or interest in
my property, estate, affairs, or business of any kind or
description in the State of Virginia, or elsewhere, as fully
as
I,
acting personally.
myself,
might
Ot. could do
if
Notwithstanding any
provision to the
contrary contained
herein, the attorney-in-I~act appointed by this document is
expressly prohibited from exercising any of my incidents of
ownership of any insuranc,' policies or contracts insuring the
life of said attorney-in"fact and such person shall have no
rights .in, or power over, ::Iuch contracts or policies by virtue
hereof.
And I hereby ratify and confirm all lawful acts done
by my sail:! attorney by vÍl'tue hereof.
This
power of
attorney
shall
not
terminate
on
lilY
disability. . ~
GIVEN lind'll' my hand :\ud seal this L day of ~
1995.
i;.1¥ G. ;¡ONE~Ø ,R,;' Ý-tVvJ;r (SEAL)
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, \.o-wit:
I, the undersigned, ... Notary Public in and for the City
and State aforesaid, dr:> : fll"o'Jb¡ certify that ROY G. JONFS whose
n!).~ is signed to the fm:egc.ing writing bearing date on the
¿. ~ day of ðv1 ~ . 1995, has acknowledged the same
before me .in my)ürIBðIëifoñ aforesaid. ,
GIVEN under lilY han,l.ilis ~ day of ~, 1995.
My Co_iasion Expire,.: 7Î lIÍ{q 7
N~~P/&¿ -
Jones.POA
m
><
:::T
ene-.
r+. -. C"
5» tn -.
¡;r2.r+
3 ~ m
CD C I
aaw
, "-'7 // ./ ,. , '
""'IJt., '~,;> ", ;; d,"""','>: ;", ',',', '//,/ ~",T'
,"4'-'" ," ~,..., "~.",v,
Dorothy L. :&fount '
/';~"'"
~"¿Z-{ '-'
Estella Hoggard
,,;:-1
, <,;.,.-/
Exhibit E - 4
Disclosure
Statement
4~)
1h x.h ..-Ç:~ ~
Keith Ferebee
. /,;.,j,t,(',/,,;~.} .I.;: .A.:r"'¡~,, ,',' ,,' ,,'
~,. .11 ..,/../ ~J"-/.("<.",,..,,,
,'Š,ardh F, Fe:n:bc<: ----
;;:/..."-""-.,.,-",,,,c/C ::':...3"'_"'J~,
Levood Ferebee
" "
;;f?JjJ:~!} /{L.(~/
'v
/~t, , ' J, ..; , ,.(" I'
C h jJ ,j C>-'j><.iAJ,!.. '"
Clyác L Ferebee. Jr. ;'
i " , í
A /,«'¡/j\. Q. ,J, j¿Ai Lfii ,
Diane D. Ferebee
,':")/"',"":"""""'(""'""", (¿.~"".,:,j;
, '" t:;. //,?/ ;'; ""'~".,
Queen E, Plummer
,^
!
, "
, ¡'.n ,11'
:;¡,Iì ,:..1,
Roy G, ~re~
C/ /
Þ 1/
'; : ,L-&,¿,"'--
,
(~I:',P (}, ~fl(U,)~ ./
Joy~e A! Lang'\
~~~; <::""",~/(¿~d{;..;/v'
Carolyn'FèfcbC'c Williams
«I/k/a Cam!yn Jane Madis¡)i) ,
¡'j,) L "\.'
Arlene D, Ferebee
<.' ;c'-(: /j,
"
, 'C v/"..~::'" ,;.".'~'~:c" ,VA
Ronnie: D. Ferebee
, c')
'~~'~:?::d~~
Larry Phlmmcr
,/,',\,.-
" J -- ,'\
L /,y..J,...;zc y.......,'Í;--.
David L Ftrebec
7-ELEVEN, INC.
Agenda Items # 20 
Page>t9
SPECIFIC POWER OF ATTORNEY
TO SELL RF.AI. ES~'ATE
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE
PRESENTS,
that,
RAYMOND
FEI,ŒEEl> ,
herewit,h nominate,
constitute and appoint
tARRY PLUMER,
,)1
! hp
City of virginia Beach, ViL'ginia, my true and lawful aU.ornr:y, for ¡
me and in my name, place and stead to:
Sell and convey by Genera1 Warranty Deed the propt:".YLy ,¡~\,a.L Ly
described as : ,:,~:.?,~-~....~c::.;es~~~r..1~:;¡:;¡~,..J,,?:~ð,t?'!"'fl- Subdhri tdo~,- :
:y_~rgi.nia Beach, Virgini.a, whose str(:et address is: 3352 Dum l..eck.
~<?2.?:,.."...Y.~.:I:'.,~!~..!~ Beach, Virgin.ia, <,:md in Lhis ccnmc~çtiQn, tu ,';';"'11:1,,;,'
in
and ht?ha lf
such papers
and
dncurr.enì.£;
bR
a:~
rr1r1y
DUX
nameS
required to convey said property as required by the VClCJ::,.m~¡;
i
I
Administration or the Federal Housing Admini sc'raL:i,or. , thn ~ ~ì n~~ ¡ n<~ '
at.torney or real estate agents,
including but not. Jim'it:~nq ê;\¡,~h
act.:...on t.o exeC:llt:i.ng t:he Deed, Listing Agreements,
loan :-:et:tlcment.
sb1tcments,
any lender's :::ertificati,ons or staLel11E'..r:U; t cqu; ,(.,: i;'ý
the
F('deral
Truth-in-Lending
Law or Rf;,;;¡]
Sett lerne-:l\:
;1;';d
beLate
Procedures Act of 1975, and any and all other papers I1~'Cef"',,':" ¡ (¡,
proper to consummate said transaction.
This power of attorney is speci:CicaJ Iv Ii mi teà t.¡; ! Ì"
c.L("i' .
purposes and,
if not e.xercise¿ prior to May 31,
2004,
.:;h¿l o,l
deemnd rnvoked.
This is a d1.lrable power of attorney which doe:! not
l",",nir:dt '..'
upon t.he disability of the principal (8) .
IN NITNESS ..JHEREOF,
,-Ie have hereunto Sf'!. nUl' ¡',«cd :.lLd ;';',"""
Chis /l)l:£ day o£~ 2003.
/~ç. ,_fÎ./:'
q~~L~!-
STATE OF,~lA...') 91f'Y/Cl2
CITY/COUNTY OF?:!!.IëiO.-,_, to,wit:
The fr),regoing instrument was acknowledged before ::9 thÜ~, ,
10 day of,.r.1!CJ.fLi'i1t.. 2003, by Raymond Fcœþee, wh:) ;:rJr:i-'r()~""-T1.l
Y£'Ù !//f/-.::.:c...:.?~/¿(- dBi::e!,tt..:{'~_ç'at::.çn:" r---
Exhibit E - 5
Disclosure
Statement
be ,
7~ELEVEN INC.
Agenda Items # 20,
Pagê.2°
f/~: A4! /~'b.ttJ
Helen Butts
Exhibit E - 6
Disclosure
Statement
/) ')
'¥~7Y¡"'ì CY/~~jç~
John C. Butts
c:'~ fZ'/..
Carlton sf Butts
;.~ .
. .
1/' J c;;/~ J
Ii //J tlyi:Jt-/",7\ .J /t1)",,'I~j
Dorothy L- J4rdaIi'¡
, 1 ~ J5;jjj-
Terry Butts!
<:.
J
\4"
J¡¡m~s Ed\vard Ferebee
Ie ' ~. <; f' . -"ir' ,/i,;.
/V Á-J:{, ',~V ' {M " .,,¡\..
Diana Mu]]cn (previous1y incorrectly
referred to as Dìana Mullens)
L. Orden Butts
--- ,
L/11,(; i.:
!\.;;J,:-!"dj ,! ,¡,IUJ),)),:;';
! ' ./c ,j ! ,,)1. , w'
Herman Riddick
j,!{V4: ., itJ~r
Sylvia y" Etheridg <
f -
t:."j¿;;«:&~,vv
ti~, ~
"c~~....../
Herman E. Haynes
v
,\ ^. " /\
-~ bi.-" 'I, " ".).-0/ tJ r,
~D~hne ~:;:"'- ~" ~V1.. &.r-.-
(tìkla Daphne Paiker)
7..ELEVEN,lNC.
Agenda Items # 20
Page21
'"
"
æ
u
~
,:,;'
~
;
,...
~
,..
::::
<-
~
:;:
;;
3::
~
~
~
>
£
;::,
~
q:
;j
:!o
<',
~I~~~~
)ì '- ': :;$ c.c:
~ t~~~~
"" """ "" c. "
: ~].~r~
",0(';:::-<>
z
0
-
....
<:
u
-
¡;;;.
-
..;¡
«
....
0'
;..
0
::I:::
r.;¡
Eo-
Eo-
r.;¡
..;¡
~
....
<:
u
-
~
-
Eo-
IX
r.;¡
U
~
N
-:
¡...
£!
...
~
:<
õ
~
>-
...
§
;.;
U
<r.
....
~
~
~
'õ
.:.c
t
-¡:;
>.
~
:<
~
t
-¡:;
""
'"
§
~
;.;
§
:;:
U
~'
-'6
.s
...:
¿¿
-
>'-
'"
-<
1X
:r.
~
~
<
~
.§
:I~
É.:::'
",,-
r2
it
i
"
'"
g
:§
...
~
1
~.
.;5
.'}
è. "
~': ~ "
!~,ri
!J~~
:: "'::= ;¡
~~j¡
unl
:: ~:;:. i"Í'-
~~~~
j !.~ ~ ~
][~~~
,§ .if '+' ~
;;l t~. :
6.£.3 (,
f;
,..
;.::
'Z
:;,
~
~
,...
'"
g
""
,",.
-
;;
.~
'-';
..
"
,~
,-
,-
'-
---
."
~
i
ð
~,
~
.£
'-
.,
~
¿
.Æ
/-
,
.~
/-
Exhibit E - 7
Disclosure
Statement
~~
ð c¿~.
~ ,~'.".J
7.
:;;;
-
~
¿a
è
~
-:
"
,~
-<
~
-
;;;
;¿
"'"
""
-
~
:!;
-.
- "
-:;::
1
;:
"
-
-
~
~
r
-
~
.
-
'J
'7
-
:/:
-
-
21
'"
.;,
0;;
~
~
-
'-
þ:
,...
-:;
7,
-
...
~
.. ,,"':'.
::! ;;,!; s
~ð~~
c" ::;;
-2]~f
¡:~~ !
~ ;:. ;:c. -:;:: E
::'¿š'Æ';';
" 0;, '" - ;;
j J l!~
;¿ .t ~=j
.£
~
~
:::
.",
'" ;~,
N'
~'@;;'~
HH)~
3~~.t~1
;;
-
-
-
7~ELEVEN INC.
Agenda Items # 20 
Page 22
;g
CD
::¡
C-
O)
<D"'"
3'
(J)m
r-
: tm
-U~~
0). '"'" z
(C C'"'-
~......!t:t::...~
N>.N>z
(.)'->.~
VIRGINIA: IN TilE VIRGINIA BEACH C!RCLIT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE
200~
1>Ir Itot>en J. SWIt
f)~I)âHrn~nl of PhU1ning
City orVirgillia Ikld!
Building 2, Room 115
1\Iuuidpal Center
Virf¡ìnia 11<>;lch. Virginia 231%.9020
CERTIFICATE/LKTTER OF QUALIFICATION
I. Ihe duly qilldífkd clerk/deputy clerk ofthí~ Colnt, CEIH1F\' that on AUGUST 13,2004
I(c
CAlum~ L.IJlJ'ITS
DC¡lr 1\Ir ScÙIl
duly qualified in this omce ullderapplìcahlc provision "Claw as ADMINISTRAI lOX OF IHE
ESTATE OF
;\ ty hllsband, John ('¡utls Butt.. (:I'kfa John C Bntts), is on,' of lhc pmpclty
o"nCl> nflht: propctty idcnlÌlÏed as (WIN 1.18$.<)2-')<)92 ("I'mpetty"), which i$ n ¡Hrl of
rho '¡!"">c ref('l('nœd Conditional I)"" Pctmit Hpplil';rliotl filcd ¡'y 7.b"'""n. 1m, My
¡'",¡""n!)"'S$('d ¡Iway \,t\ July 15, 20tH I ha\c <¡u:I¡¡lid :I, the Admìni"ralrix orh;"
""Wl<' ,\ <'('p' of my ¡llIalìlil';{!ion is aunched
JOliN CUlnlS BUTTS. UFCEASEI>
A.. Adrnillísuauíx of my husband's c¡latc, I am aWiIIC thaI 7.Elc"cn has tìkd.l
C"ndi, ;"ual U~(' (',..mil Apl:!Jícaliotl Ihal il11)h)(;" the I'mpeny. " t°I'Y of which 1>
"Had,'"" As Administrani\ "t'the "'laiC orJúhn Cuni, Bull,,! !retch) c"nsenlto !he
('"nw",,'" I'nJ""~,in,, of Ihe AI\plk;\liün
Bond $ 18,00000 WITI to! 1T sURETY -NONE REQUIRED IIY S rAnT 26.,;
I'm rJOIiœ and di,("iosure JlmJwsc" Ih,' ('olllaC! ìllfnrmu!ion fiw Ihe FMlilt' is ,IS
¡"H,m,
Cal ric I Hun" AdminishJHíx ,., l!re hlaw of John Cuni, Buu,
1761 Buckley Arch
Ilt'ac!! y,\ B453
757, 127.}205
1 hc powers of the Hdl1c1arYI ¡,'s) nill1",d "!x,,,c continue in filII tortc ;md dlcCl
Fax
EnMi! N/j\
Sí'Kcrdy,
IINA I'. SINNEN. ClIJ{~.',
lIy;(J~D ~
DqHHy {'j('rk
[MTE: Angusl H. 2004
1'"..",
"¡,,,¡,,'CII,¡i,l!uH>
m
><
::T
CIJ C -.
~ -. C"
I» (J) -.
(it2.r+
3 g m
CD s:: I
= CD"
- 00
7-Eleven,lne.Cfneers
(Havember :Z003)
Ja mes W. Keyes
Gary I\. Rose
Bryan F. Smith, Jr.
Masaa1cl AsakIn
Edward W. Moneypenr¡y
David M . Podesthi
Cynthia L. DaVIS
Joseph M. DePInto
Frank s. Gamblna
John W. Harris
David G. Huey
Sylvester Johnson
Gary c. Lockhart
PhlUtp K. Mon'Ow
Stanley W. Reynolds
Jeffrey A. SChenck
HantY A. Smith
Joseph M . Strong
Donald E. Thomas
RIck Updyke
Exhibit E - 9
Disclosure
Statement
presIdent and Chief executive Officer
Executive Vice President, operations
executive VIce PresIdent, General Counsel and Secretary
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President and Chief Flnandal Officer
Senior Vice PreSident, Men:handtstng
VICe pre$ldent, southwest DIVISion
VIce President, Operations
Vice president, Franchise
Vice presIdent, f1orida Division
Vice president, North Padnc Division
VIce president and Controller
Vice PreSident, Ga$ollne
Vice President and Chief Information Officer
Vice PresIdent and Treasurer
Vice President, Great Lakes Division
VIce PreSIdent. FIeld Men:handlslng
VIce president, Chesapeake Division
Vice president, central DMslon
VIce president, BusIness DevelopmentJE-commerœ
7~ELEVEN,INC.
Agenda Items # 20 &df21
Page 24
HarveyW. Blitz
Sieve bnvine
t,1argoor1to W. Brlndock
Robin D. Bryant
Ronald J. Bryant
Keny S. BUf$on
ASSISTANT $IiCRETARllt$ 01' T.I!Lf1V£N. INC.
AS OF APRIL 1, 2003
John DeMíguel
Asslslant Socrelaly
Frand1lse Speclallllt, Great Laku Division
AssIstant Secrel8lY
FtartthIs. Spada\!$!. Southweet DMaIon
DaVId T. Fenton
Gllry P. FulUngton
Msl,tant Seerelary
Stnlor Reall!sla~ ReprtlÞnIatlv8. Corpotalll Real "'tate
Assistant 8ecrtl$ry
Re..ardl & Sl8tJstiÇ8 supel"/lsor. COtpOI'IIte Real Estate
Renkln L Gasaway
Gary M. Gray
At$\alant StCtel8lY
Manager. Corporate Inaurtnce
ASsistant SI\'I8I81Y
DivisIon Merchandising Manager. M;d-Pacll'icDIvIsIOl'l
Gary L.. Gr1tftth
Steven E. Han
M$I,tant Se«elaly
Director. Fresh Food operations
Edward A. Carnevale. Jr. Anblent Secretary
senior ConstructiOn Manager
Joe t. CallCon
David Clark. Jr.
J. MIchael Coffman
Nancy $, COITIII
RobortJ. Cozens
Sandra D. CUnnIngham
»
(Q
CD
:J
0-
W
ro-.....¡
:3'
en !!
: tm
ìJ~~
Wn.-Z
(Q )<'--
CD .:tt .,...
I\)NZ
01"""~
Levy H. Cony
Michael R. Davis
Joann" K. DeLorÐf\Z.O
SIWInne Hamson
Asslsl8nt Secretary
Legal Departmant
",.Istant Sectetary
Lege! Dapartmenl
Thomas R. Hennon
Janet Henry
Assistant seaetary
Regional FrBtIchlse Specialist. Great Lakes DivisIon
ASslslant SecretaI)'
Sales & Merchandising Manager. Northust Division
Michael D. Hevran
David 8. Holland
Assistant Semlery
Director. Tax
ASsistant seaetary
Director. CompensatIon and Benefits
Robert M. Jenkins
KYle Johnson
Asslstanl Secretary
Vice President and Ass\$tant General Counsel
Trvy O. McWUllal1'\S
Asslsl8nt Secre1aty
Sales &. MerchandIsIng Manager. Southwest Division
Assistant SecretaI)'
Mar (øt Manager. Mid-Pacific DIvision
ÁSslstant Secretery
Ltgal Depar1nlent
As'Ì$tant secretary
Assistant Manager, corporate Relll Estate
A&&lstant Sec;(ØtaJy
Ulgal Depar1ment
Assistant $ec;(Øtary
Franchise Specialist. Northeast DMsbn
AssIstant Secretary
Franchls. Specialist, MId.Padl1c DMslon
ASclstant seemtary
VIce President. Real Eetet. and Development
Assistant Secretary
Legal Department
Assistant Secrotary
legsl Department
Assistant Secretery
Human Resourœ Manager. North PacIfic Division
Assistant Secretary
Senlot Tax Agent. Corporate Tax
A$slstanl Secretary
Manager, Corporate Real Estate
Assistant Sea81afy
Vice President. Intamational
Assistant secretary
outside Counsel (Utlgatlon MaUen' Only)
Assistant Secretary
Market Manager, Chesapeake Division
m
><
:r
-.
cnc2:
Sit 0' r+
;-2.m
3 ß I
mc~
::J ~
_me
William P. Nolan
Charlotte Pemphlle
Michael D. Pel1y
Dennis G. Phelps
craig Plá11n1no
Kevin P. PuRln
Cynthia l. RIdlardeon
James S. Roberbon
Arthur E. Rublnett
Stephanie C. Rumph
Robert M. Rutlodge
Uoyd T. Scott
Steven R. Se!dov.itz
Shohid Sheikh
Jerry L. Shennan
»
<C
(1)
::J
0..
D>
;:¡:
(1)-....1
:3.
CJ)rn
r
~m
N<
"'UOm
D>n-.Z
<C ~--
(1):tt""'"
NNZ
O'>.....~
James R. SIeev3
Mal1 an M. Smith
Assistant SeCIVtary
Sales & Metc:handlslng Manager. Oroat lakes DMslon
Assistant Secretary
Regional Fl'8l1Chl$o Specllllìst. North!!8st Dlvblon
Assrstonl Secretory
Legal Department
Assistant Stcfctary
Sales & Merdlandlsfng Manager, Central OMslon
Assistant sttrolary
Markot Manager, Mf<I-Pad1le> DMslon
Assistant Secretary
Markot Manager, Southwest DMslon
Assistant SeCletaty
Market Manager, MJd-Paâft<> DMalon
Assistant Secretaty
Sales & Merd\andlslng Manager, North Pacific Division
Assistant Se«etaty
Legal Department
Assistant SeCtemty
Ortoctor, Facl!ltJee and Energy
AssIstant Secretaty
I\V Tax Manager, Corporate Tax
Assistant S8et8tary
Loss provenUon Manager, Chesapeake DivisIon
AssIstant SeCftlaty
Legal Depertment
Assistant Secretaty
Markol Manager. Chesapeaka OMsion
Assistant Secretaty
SenIor Tax Agonl, COrporata Tax
Assistant Sectelary
Sales & Merohendlslng Manager. Chesap03ke Dlv/slon
Assistant Secretary
Corporate Real Eslale
John D. 8teczynakl
J. Donald Stevenson, Jr.
Gloria Swims
Robert J. Toblasz
Say Tran
Lauria A. Trotta
AntonIo Varela
Joanne Webb-Joyce
Ta",sa C. WIley
John W. WilkIe
Robert S. Wohlman
Assistant Satretary
Franchlae Specialist, Northeast Division
Assistant Secretary
Legal Department
Assistant Secretary
Franchise SpecialISt, Southwest Division
Assistant Secretary
Mal1<et Manager. Great Lakes Division
Assistant Setretary
field Consultant. Chesapeake Division
Antstant Secretary
Franchise SpeeiaUst, Northeast DMslon
Assistant Secretary
RegIonal Franchise Specialist, Mld.Paclf1c Division
Assistant Secretary
National Franchise System Manager
Assistant Secretary
Sales Tax Manager
Assistant Secretary
Vice President. CommunIcatIons
Assistant Secretary
Franchise Specialist, North PacifIc Division
m
><
:T
_0
cnc2".
¡rÜrr+
;-2.m
3 ~ I
CD C ..J¡"
~ ..,
- CD ..J¡"
Exhibit E - 12
Disclosure
Statement
Applicant Disclosure
2.
Businesses that have a Parent - subsidiary or Affiliated Business Entity Relationship
with 7-Eleven, Inc.
Ito-Yokado Co., Ltd.
Seven - Eleven Japan Co., Ltd.
IYG Holding Company
ACTIVE:
Jurisdiction of
Incorporation
Ba wco Co rpo ra t ion ----------------------------------------------- ---------------0 h i 0
Bev of Vermont, Inc.--------------------------------------------------------Vermont
Brazos Comercial E Empreendimentos Ltda. -------------------------------------- Brazil
Cityplace Center East Corporation ------------------------------------------------------ Texas
Cityplace Nevada L.L.C. ------------------------------------------------------------------Nevada
Melin Enterprises, I nc. ---------------------------------------------------------- Colorado
Phil-Seven Properties Corporation ------------------------------------------------- Philippines
Puerto Rico - 7, Inc. -------------------------------------------------------- Puerto Rico
Sao Paulo-Seven Comercial, SA ------------------------------------------------ Brazil
7 -Eleven Beverage Company, Inc. ----------------------------------------------------------- Texas
7 -Eleven of Idaho, Inc. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Idaho
7 -Eleven of Massachusetts, Inc. --------------------------------------------------------- Massachusetts
7 -Eleven of Nevada. Inc. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Delaware
7 -Eleven of Virginia, Inc. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Virginia
7 -Eleven Sales Corporation ----------------------------.--------------------- Texas
7-Eleven Canada, Inc. ----------------------------------------------------------..... Canada
7 -Eleven International, I nc. ---------------------------------------------------------- Nevada
Southland International Investment Corporation NV --------____-_m__-- Netherlands Antilles
7 -Eleven Sales Corporation ______m______---------------------------------------------------- Texas
TSC Lending Group, Inc. ------------------------------------______m_--____--- Texas
Va I so, S .A. ----------------------------------------------------------------'- Mexi co
INACTIVE:
La vici 0' s. I nc. ---------------------------------------------------------_____n--_____n- ____--_n_n Ca I if orn I a
MT A CAL. I nc. -------------------------------------------------------------------_--_--__n_- __n--_n--__- C a I ¡forn a
The Southland Corporation m______----------------------------_--___---mm____m__--m_m--_-_-------- Texas
7 -Eleven Limited ------------______n_________m_nn_---____-_-__---_m-----------_---_-mm United Kingdom
7 -Eleven Pty. Ltd. ---------------------------------------------------------------___--__n___-_------ Australia
7 -Eleven Stores (NZ) Limited --------------------------------------------------------______m_- New Zealand
SLC Financial Services, Inc. ------------------------------------------------______m------------- Texas
The Seven Eleven Limited -------------------------------------------------------------------- Hong Kong
7-ELEVEN, INC.
Agenda Items # 20 & # 21
Page27
Item #15 & 16
7-Eleven, Inc.
Change of Zoning District Classification
Conditional Use Permit
West side of Dam Neck Road
District 3
ose Hall
November 10, 2004
REGULAR
Joseph Strange: The next application is Item #15 & 16 7-Eleven, Inc. It's an Ordinance
upon Application of7-Eleven, Inc. for a Change of Zoning District Classification from
R-5D Residential Duplex to Conditional B-2 Community Business District on property
located on the west side of Dam Neck Road, approximately 600 feet north of South
Rosemont and an Ordinance upon Application of 7-Eleven, Inc. for a Conditional Use
Permit.
Dorothy Wood: You've been very patient. Thank you.
Steve Romine: Thank you. Good afternoon Madame Chair and members of the Planning
Commission, my name is Steve Romine, the attorney for 7-Eleven and it's application for
conditional rezoning and a Conditional Use Permit for allow fuel sales in conjunction
with a convenience store on the west side of Dam Neck Road, immediately south of Dam
Neck Road at the Monet Drive intersection. What I thought I would do today is give you
a little history and background and then cover some of the high points. I also have Rick
Burnell here who will discuss some additional issues. It is important to note in this
application that about 4 years ago, the 7-eleven had made an application. I'll point to the
aerial on the site up here on the comer of Buckner and Rosemont Road. It had gotten
down the path quite a ways. We got a letter from the City Manager and he asked us to
withdraw that application in order to provide it's future use by the Tidewater Community
College Campus and Facility. So, the developer at that time accommodated that request.
We backed off and left some invested monies in that site, and it has taken four years for
us to find a new site or another site in that sub- market and that's the site we're looking at
today that we're bringing to you. In order to find the place in site, the developer had to
assemble and purchase a 10-acre parcel. So the idea was in order to get the 7- Eleven to
work on the comer of this site on Dam Neck, we had to purchase more property than we
needed. So we did. We went into a venture with Beco related entity to develop the back
portion and the 51 residences, which is by right under the R-5D zoning. So, the comer is
being proposed for the 7-Eleven and that is to request today for the rezoning. The parcel
that you see in your package is approximately 1.2 acres. The developer originally
approached the City and had some discussions and Mr. Burnell will talk about that as
well to situate and position the store directly across the Monet Drive extension and was
told that was not a good idea and that is not where they wanted the store located. So we
settled on the new location that you see today as an appropriate place. Evidently, Monet
Drive extended goes nowhere and it ends up in a ditch and it really doesn't serve any
purpose. The current zoning, as I mentioned, is R-5D and we do have to have a CUP as
well. Let me quickly address some of the issues in the staff report. Contrary to the staff
Item #15 & 16
7 - Eleven, Inc.
Page 2
report, three things are the case. This application is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan. It does not result in illegal spot zoning and it is compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood. The site lies within a Strategic Growth Area 11. I passed it out so you all
will have a copy in front of you. You will note there that when you sort through it all this
identical section and precise location along Dam Neck Road is called for limited retail
uses. Now the question is what is limited retail? We believe a low intense, neighborhood
design convenience store that is compatible with the residential neighborhood behind. In
fact it's a master joint development is compatible with that and is limited retail. I'd like
to note on the aerial as well that is the area is not primarily residential. I think there is a
fallacy saying that it is a primary residential area. I'll go very quickly. You have
industrial here. You got office here. This is Holland Road and Dam Neck. You have an
existing gas station. You have mini-storage. You have industrial here. You have a
church. You have a whole TCC campus here, a city garage, sewer pump station, and
Sentara site. The predominancy of the screen of the aerial is you got a little pocket of
residential in an otherwise commercial, and industrial zone essentially. I would maintain
that Dam Neck Road is a commercial corridor. It's going to be widened up here as well.
What we are doing is trying to provide gasoline service on this side of the road where
there is none for a certain distance, which is a different market obviously than what the
BP is serving on the comer on the other side of Dam Neck Road. So, if you look at the
aerial, it kind of puts in to focus very quickly that a commercial site here, a 1.2-acres on
this comer with some residential behind it, actually completes this side of the corridor.
You got a couple of pockets of residential right here that all tie together. No connectivity
in the back but they will tie together with the commercial comer here which is very
consistent with the overall current commercial and industrial nature of the area. I
mentioned that this is not illegal spot zoning. It is a situation where there is a
predominance of commercial in the area. Even though it is not immediately adjacent to
an institutional or commercial use, under the Virginia Code, it is not illegal spot zoning.
I also maintain that it is compatible with the neighborhood. It is a neighborhood
convenience store and under the Comprehensive Plan basically it calls for these types of
uses to service neighborhoods in the area. It supplies goods and services to the local
neighborhood market. Part of the back and forth when we first designed this site was a
question of access. We were told by staff early on that they didn't want any more curb
cuts on Dam Neck and therefore, they encouraged us to do a shared access. If you look
in package and on the plan, we did exactly what we were asked to do. You take Dam
Neck Road we have provided for a deceleration lane into a spine road and our access are
off this road that services the residential neighborhood behind. I think there was another
plat that actually shows the overlay of the 51 lots in the back and how it all ties together
in the Comprehensive Plan. So we've addressed access to a share access situation.
We've provided for deceleration. As far as traffic patterns, any u-turns necessary when
your coming northbound on Dam Neck Road, there is a light at Monet and Dam Neck
and if you wanted to turn into the site you have a safe light controlled access on a u-turn.
Otherwise you have safe access out to the spine road that I showed you earlier. You also
have safe u-turns here if necessary at the corner of Rosemont Road controlled by a light
as well. 7-Eleven proposed a 2,800 square foot store. Its orientation was shown on the
site plan. It will be in the rear ofthe property with a canopy in the front, heavily
landscaped on all sides. The residential back here will have a 15 foot landscaped buffer.
Item #15 & 16
7-Eleven, Inc.
Page 3
These lots are part of the Joint Master Plan that we have proposed. There are notices that
will actually go in first. I think there will be full disclosures in each of the presentations
of lot sales in the rear. Although a representative from Beco is not here today, they do
support the application as well. We provide state ofthe art technology with respect to the
gasoline. We'll have a monument style sign, which I think all of you are familiar with.
For these reasons we think it's a good application. I also wanted to mention to you that
we've been willing to discuss architecture. I've had some feedback on architecture but
haven't frankly had the opportunity to do so with staff. Essentially, if you look at the site
plan, it is my assumption that staff maintains in their first objection that it's not
compatible with residential. So they assume there is a predominance of residential use
and therefore the land use is inappropriate. I hope I convinced you today that the land
use is not inappropriate. It's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. There is a lot of
commercial in the area. Having to assume that in objection one, they go down here and
staff's conclusion that good architecture and site designs are not acceptable substitute for
good land use planning. To my assumption there, they think this is good architecture
and there is no objection or concerns expressed with respect to what we're proposing on
architectural side. Now this store will be very similar to the one you see at Lynnhaven
and Dean. Where it replaced the old Forbes candy site. It will be all brick with
architectural style shingles on a mansard roof, brick raft canopies and very well
landscaped. So we think a nice little design store, good quality architecture. In closing,
I'll just say that Rick Burnell has some further comments and some other issues. I'll
standby for questions.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you.
Steve Romine: Thanks for your time.
Dorothy Wood: Are there any questions for Mr. Romine?
Joseph Strange: Speaking in support is Rick Burnell.
Dorothy Wood: We are happy to have you Mr. Burnell. Thank you for coming.
Rick Burnell: Thank you. Madame Chairman, my name is Rick Burnell. I live in
Virginia Beach. I'm a real estate developer. I'm 7-Eleven's preferred developer in the
Hampton Roads area. I don't want to be redundant. Mr. Romine covered most ofthe
issues. One thing I most like to talk about is the access point into the property. We've
heard that on the van ride that there was a lot of attention paid to the fact, that the
entranceway on Monet Drive did not go across Dam Neck and enter directly into the site.
One of our engineers had a discussion with Traffic Engineering early, early in the
process. In April, we at that point, had told them that we were willing to approach Mr.
Kopassis, who is developing the property to the north in an effort to try to secure some
property from him so that Monet could continue forward. We had our engineers talk to
Traffic Engineering. They told us no. We do not want an access point for the 7-Eleven
store on Dam Neck Road. We rather have you move it down adjacent to the entrance
road and put the entrances on the side. So, we volunteered. We even had our real estate
Item #15 & 16
7 - Eleven, Inc.
Page 4
broker have a discussion with the Kopassis folks. That was early on in the Kopassis
development before he had finalized his plans. At that point, he was willing to discuss it
with us. Now I think that is a very pertinent issue. At another time in our discussion
with Planning, we had volunteered to move the store building as far to the south as
possible and put the entrance road between the 7-Eleven store and the Kopassis
development and we were told that wouldn't make any difference, and that Planning
would still be against the project. I believe we have made every effort from an access
standpoint to try and work it out with Planning and with the City to make it a better
development. Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Burnell. We appreciate you coming.
Joseph Strange: Also, we have a Nick Hutsko.
Nick Hutsko: Commission members, good afternoon. My name is Nick Hutsko. I'm an
Associate Broker for Century 21 Nachman Realty. With me is my client Larry Plummer,
whose mother is Queen Ferebee Plummer. He is a patriarch of the Ferebee Family.
We're here to ask for your consideration for approval of this rezoning application. As a
human issue and as the actual long time landowners it would be a great benefit to the
family. Larry, would you like to say something?
Dorothy Wood: We're glad to have you with us today Mr. Plummer.
Larry Plummer: Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you so much for coming down.
Larry Plummer: Thank you very much. My name is Larry Plummer. I do agree with the
development on this property.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you sir. It's been in your family a long time sir?
Larry Plummer: Yes ma'am, for a real long time, and as a matter of fact, the home that I
live in now on that property, I was born there.
Dorothy Wood: Oh, that is nice. You were born right in the house.
Larry Plummer: Right in the house.
Dorothy Wood: Does your mom still live there?
Larry Plummer: No ma'am. She stays with one of my sisters now.
Dorothy Wood: Does she? Well, thank you for coming. We appreciate it.
Larry Plummer: Thank you very much.
Item #15 & 16
7-Eleven, Inc.
Page 5
Dorothy Wood: Are there any questions for Mr. Plummer? Thank you sir.
Larry Plummer: Thank you.
Joseph Strange: Speaking in opposition, we have Andrew Kopassis.
Dorothy Wood: Welcome Mr. Kopassis.
Andrew Kopassis: Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you for coming down today.
Mimi Kopassis: Thank you. For the record, my name is Mimi Kopassis and I represent
Kopassis Development.
Andrew Kopassis: And Andrew Kopassis.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. & Mrs. Kopassis.
Mimi Kopassis: He has me speaking for him and I don't know why. As a foreign
appoint, he can't talk to well and neither do I at this point. I think Kathy would
appreciate that. Just want to let you know that we own the adjoining property right next
to the proposed 7-Eleven. For the record, since it just got put toward recordation, the plat
is not showing where the street is. I'd like to pass this on to you. For the record again,
our subdivision is 24 lots of zoning R-5 minimum square feet 5000 lot. We worked very
hard with the City to enhance the neighborhood as the zoning, we did not go against
whatsoever the staff recommendation and it just got approved. I would like to show you,
which I didn't bring it with me, which is the high quality neighborhood that we are
putting up there. The 24 lots, all prices from $335 thousand and up. I've sold half of
them pre-construction. I have not mentioned this to any of the homeowners or the
proposed homeowners that are going to be living there knowing that there is going to be a
7-Eleven there. I believe if! were to go back to these 12 contracts that I have in my hand
I would probably lose them all. I don't believe any of you in this room would want to
live in a home of $335 thousand dollars with a 7-Eleven no matter what buffer you're
going to put on an R-5 that is not going to affect the 24 hour parking in and out of the
neighborhood, and drinking, and so forth. Just for the proposed project, I believe that this
is going to decrease and bring the value down for all this at this point.
Dorothy Wood: I think your time is almost up. Another 30 seconds.
Mimi Kopassis: Another 30 seconds. I'm going to turn it over to him.
Dorothy Wood: Okay.
Mimi Kopassis: I appreciate Steve Romine's comment about Landstown Meadows. It is
not a small neighborhood. It's a very high neighborhood area.
Item #15 & 16
7 -Eleven, Inc.
Page 6
Dorothy Wood: You're time is up. Maybe your husband can certainly summarize.
Andrew Kopassis: The way I feel like if you let them make a 7-Eleven there I'm losing
four lots. The people are not going to buy the houses. You know yourselves that if you
live in a neighborhood like that, if you have the 7-Eleven, you're going to have a lot of
trouble there. I think as R-5, the whole area should stay R-5.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you sir.
Andrew Kopassis: Thank you ma'am. I appreciate it.
Dorothy Wood: Are there any questions? We'll hand you this back in one moment.
Andrew Kopassis: No problem.
Ronald Ripley: I have a question.
Andrew Kopassis: Yes.
Ronald Ripley: You said you sold twelve lots. Were you aware that this application was
pending?
Mimi Kopassis: It was rejected on the first staff recommendation and I thought it was
down until I received it now. In the interim of the last turndown until now, twelve
contracts came through. In one week.
Ronald Ripley: You didn't have knowledge of this application pending?
Mimi Kopassis: No sir.
Andrew Kopassis: One thing that I want to say is that when I proposed to buy the
property, I came here and asked the City, the zoning office they told me that it could not
be rezoned for any commercial because I was trying to buy the property next door but
they rejected me because they wanted commercial. I don't see how they can make it
commercial as R-5.
Mimi Kopassis: When the broker approached us that is representing Mr. Burnell he came
to us if we were willing to and he never came back. I'm sure there is a lot developers or
builders in this community as well as us, we'll be happy to keep it in the same zoning
restriction area.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you ma'am. Are there any other questions? Mr. Miller.
Robert Miller: You were not asked to line up with Monet Drive, your entrance road and
so forth? Is that correct? Obviously it does not.
Item #15 & 16
7-Eleven, Inc.
Page 7
Andrew Kopassis: The first design that we made was through the road. The City told us
we had to shift and move your street over and that is when I lost four lots right there. To
shift the property over, I lost four lots.
Robert Miller: You don't have a park obviously.
Mimi Kopassis: We gave up the money for open space.
Robert Miller: Gave up the money for open space. Thanks.
Mimi Kopassis: Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Are there any other questions? Mr. Crabtree and then Mr. Strange.
Eugene Crabtree: Were there any objection by the Navy because of the noise zone?
Mimi Kopassis: No.
Eugene Crabtree: Any objection at all?
Andrew Kopassis: No.
Mimi Kopassis: It is 70-75 dbs. The project right next door also has 24 lots, and they
sold out. They are still building but they sold out way before.
Eugene Crabtree: So there was no objection by the Navy.
Mimi Kopassis: No objection by the Navy.
Eugene Crabtree: Disclosure.
Mimi Kopassis: Disclosure. That is correct. Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Strange.
Joseph Strange: I was wondering ifthey would show me which lots do they think they
would lose? Use the pointer there.
Andrew Kopassis: I already lost four. The other four where the 7-Eleven goes in that's
the one that the people don't want.
Joseph Strange: Right. Which four do you think that is?
Andrew Kopassis: On the left side. Right there. Fifty-foot lots.
Mimi Kopassis: We have to shift the cul-de-sac in order to accommodate the traffic light
Item #15 & 16
7-Eleven, Inc.
Page 8
that is right on parcel of that Delaney Court and the 7-Eleven. So, coming out of our cul-
de-sac you would have to kind of curve a little to get to the traffic light to get out.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you very much. Are there any other questions? Ms. Katsias.
Kathy Katsias: Mrs. Kopassis, do you think a buffer of trees or something that would
buffer the rear of your property would be something that you would consider?
Mimi Kopassis: Ms. Katsias, thank you for the request. I believe Andy can answer that.
Even with a buffer with such a small lot of 5,000, regardless of how much of a buffer
you're going to have you're going to hear the noise regardless. I just don't understand
but it seems like every block we have to have 7-Eleven. If you look on the other side of
Holland Road, it is less than a half mile, 700 feet there is another 7-Eleven. Right on
Shipps Comer and Holland Road. It's almost like it's on the back ofthat property, if you
look from the back end of it. I don't see the rest of it that I can explain to you. It's like
where Brinkley Estates is, Holland Road runs up that way. Andy, you can answer Ms.
Kastias question?
Dorothy Wood: Andy, do you want to answer a question about the buffered zone?
Andrew Kopassis: The buffer zone?
Mimi Kopassis: The lot hidden behind the property.
Andrew Kopassis: It backs on my lots. The buffer zone is not going to work because I
don't have any big lots in the back. That's the whole thing there.
Kathy Katsias: If it was on the 7-Eleven piece of property.
Andrew Kopassis: If you bought the houses and you're not going to like living there
because you have a 7-Eleven behind you. There is going to be a lot of noise with parking
and everything else.
Kathy Katsias: So, these contracts were just obtained?
Mimi Kopassis: I sold them two weeks ago Ms. Katsias.
Kathy Katsias: But the sign on the property.
Mimi Kopassis: That is correct. Again, I answered Mr. Ripley's question? You asked
me the question. Mr. Ripley asked me the question. Yes. We were aware of the 7-
Eleven zoning. That is correct. They were turned down by the notice that we received.
Kathy Katsias: It was deferred. It wasn't turned down. The application, I think was
deferred. Wasn't it?
Andrew Kopassis: We weren't appraised last time.
Item #15 & 16
7-Eleven, Inc.
Page 9
Kathy Katsias: Pardon?
Andrew Kopassis: We weren't appraised until that time.
Andrew Kopassis: We had no lawyer.
Mimi Kopassis: He couldn't be here but he couldn't represent us now.
Kathy Katsias: He was working on the application when it was deferred was working out
the problems with the City.
Mimi Kopassis: That is correct.
Dorothy Wood: Are there any other questions?
Kathy Katsias: You also said that you lost four lots.
Andrew Kopassis: To shift the street.
Kathy Katsias: You shifted the street? With the 7-Eleven and the shifting of the street,
you're losing eight residential?
Andrew Kopassis: The four lots will be in affect because of the 7-Eleven being there. I
feel like if! buy a house and there is a 7-Eleven behind me, I won't buy the house. I'm
going to have a hard time selling those four houses.
Kathy Katsias: Mill Dam Road is a perfect example.
Andrew Kopassis: Well, but. Mill Dam is different. It's got all commercial area not
residential.
Dorothy Wood: Are there any other questions? The Navy did not object.
Andrew Kopassis: No ma'am. It was zoned R-5.
Dorothy Wood: It's already zoned?
Mimi Kopassis: Yes. The Navy didn't go for the rezoning.
Eugene Crabtree: It's in the high decibel area.
Dorothy Wood: They didn't want it rezoned.
Mimi Kopassis: We're talking about 2,800 square foot house, two story, double car
garage.
Item #15 & 16
7- Eleven, Inc.
Page 10
Dorothy Wood: I am sure it will be lovely.
Mimi Kopassis: It's quality there.
Dorothy Wood: I wish you luck.
Mimi Kopassis: Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Mr. Romine. You or Mr. Burnell, which one of you wants
to rebut?
Steve Romine: Let me try to respond first.
Dorothy Wood: Which one of you wants to respond?
Steve Romine: I'll respond. Let me put my stuff back up here. I'm getting information
on the fly here so bear with me. I was told by the broker, who listed the property that Mr.
Burnell purchased that Mr. Kopassis tried to buy this property last year, and they couldn't
work it out because part of the conditions were that it was going to be commercial in the
front because they fell on the Dam Neck corridor. That was the proper use and the
highest invest use for that property. So, there was a dialogue last year. It's been on the
table for a while. So, I'm kind of surprise to hear that it is a surprise to them because
there was a negotiation back and forth that didn't work out. When Mr. Burnell put it on
contract it was always intended to put commercial use on the front. Beco has purchased
the back 51 lots and there are three or four lots that back up to the other side of the store
on the Beco side. Beco has no problems with that and with the ability to market and sell
those houses. So, I think the buffering and the compatibility is there. I just conclude by
saying that we think it's a well City plan. It's consistent with Comprehensive Plan. It's
compatible with the prevailing neighborhood. I'll show you the aerial again. It's
industrial all over this area. You got a pocket of residential, which I think is the
transitioning area. We believe it's an appropriate application. For these reasons, we ask
that you recommend approval to City Council.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Romine, as I told you we would like to see an upgraded 7- Eleven. I
think we deserve an upgraded one. I think we deserve everything upgraded in our
wonderful City.
Steve Romine: I would respond and say I think it would be virtually identical to the one
at Lynnhaven and Dean, which I think is a very nice store. There are architectural
features that the Planning Commission or staffwas interested in discussing. I'll be more
than willing to take a deferral and discuss that if that is critical important to Commission.
Clearly, we think it's of an appropriate land use. Ifthere is an issue to respect to
architecture that discussion has not been had based on the staff report that you have in
front of you in our attempts to do so.
Dorothy Wood: When you called me that is what I told you.
Item #15 & 16
7 -Eleven, Inc.
Page 11
Steve Romine: I know.
Dorothy Wood: Are there any other comments?
Steve Romine: I prefer to go forward.
John Waller: That building is in other residential areas around it. I know that 7- Eleven is
a big organization and they do what they want to do. They got a building and they build
allover everywhere except down here at Nimmo church. And very seldom, driving
around do you ever see a 7-Eleven that doesn't look like a gas station or a 7-Eleven or
whatever. It's their image. But, I think its time for them to take a good look if they want
to put a store in a place like that in a residential area they ought to bend a little and make
it a little bit more compatible with the neighborhood.
Steve Romine: We have upgraded various stores. The one at Sandbridge and Upton that
we did a year and half two years ago, and that's the Dragas property that was adopted to
the theme that was in that area. We've done it in three or four other locations. So,
clearly, I'm not telling you we can't do that and we wouldn't do that. It's just in this
application we never had an opportunity to have that discussion because staff opposed it
from a land use perspective and there were no architectural discussions. What we
presented according to the staff report was high architectural and good quality use.
John Waller: I would be opposed to it just because of it's architectural. The way it looks.
It just looks dead.
Steve Romine: Would it be a situation if we took a deferral and tried to upgrade and do
some architectural features that could change your mind, if that is the consensus of the
Commission?
Dorothy Wood: I agree with Mr. Waller. But lets hear what the other Commissioners
have to say.
Steve Romine: Okay.
Ronald Ripley: May I ask a question?
Dorothy Wood: Sure. I'm sorry.
Ronald Ripley: I'm sorry. I'm thinking. It looks like you paid attention to the buffering
around the edge of this property, in particular, areas to the south and to the west.
Steve Romine: It's hard to say.
Ronald Ripley: Is there any fencing with that or is it just landscaping?
Steve Romine: There's no fencing right? It's not shown.
Item #15 & 16
7-Eleven, Inc.
Page 12
Ronald Ripley: If we do decide to defer this perhaps you can take a look at that too. The
more that we look at those two identical uses.
Steve Romine: On this side and this side.
Ronald Ripley: Right.
Steve Romine: That is why I provided the conditions to you today. There were no
conditions in the package either. I was trying to stipulate the standard conditions that we
normally be subject too.
Kathy Katsias: How many prototype 7-Elevens does 7-Eleven have?
Steve Romine: There are predominately two or three styles. The Lynnhaven and Dean
would be one. I think if you look at Village and Laskin that is another prototype. When
we got approved last night at Council is at Aragona and Cleveland. That's an urban style
store. That is going to be different than the others. So, in a special application area
where you have an architectural theme we'll adopt to that, and use our architecture and
style in those situations. Typically in a commercial corridor and a roadway, we're
building what I think is a high quality product. It's all brick. Architectural shingles. It's
attractive for that type of use. If it needs to be ginger bread or if it needs to blend in
somehow, someway, then clearly those types of things can be done. We're not so rigid
that we can't come outside that box.
Kathy Katsias: So the Nimmo Parkway, the Nimmo Church and Princess Anne that was a
special?
Steve Romine: I think that is an older site isn't it?
Kathy Katsias: It is but it is a very attractive site.
Steve Romine: It's more Colonial historical overlay type thing.
Dorothy Wood: That is what we like.
Steve Romine: It's an older store, built under a different regime.
Donald Horsley: It was the one with the first public restrooms in it I think, compliemtns
of Al Balko.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Knight.
Barry Knight: I think Mr. Romine knows where the sense of this is going. He is probably
going to have a better chance getting approved if he accepts the 30 day deferral. He heard
the comments of Mr. Waller and Mr. Ripley, so I make a motion to defer it for 30 days.
Item #15 & 16
7-Eleven, Inc.
Page 13
Steve Romine: Thank you.
Dorothy Wood: A motion by Mr. Knight and seconded by Ms. Anderson to defer.
ANDERSON
CRABTREE
DIN
HORSLEY
KA TSIAS
KNIGHT
MILLER
RIPLEY
STRANGE
WALLER
WOOD
AYE 11
NAY 0
ABSO
ABSENT 0
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 11-0, the application of7-Eleven has been deferred for 30-
days.
~
Item #20 & 21
7 - Eleven, Inc.
Change of Zoning District Classification
Conditional Use Permit
West side of Dam Neck Road
District 3
ose Hall
December 8, 2004
REGULAR
Joseph Strange: The next items are Items #20 & 21, 7-Eleven, Inc. An Ordinance upon
Application of 7-Eleven, Inc. for a Change of Zoning District Classification from R-5D
Residential Duplex District to Conditional B-2 Community Business District on property
located on the west side of Dam Neck Road, approximately 600 feet north of South
Rosemont Road.
Bill Macali: Madame Chair, I need to give a little legal advice on this application.
Dorothy Wood: I would be very happy for you to. Thank you sir.
Bill Macali: This morning we learned for the first time that there was a new set of
elevations, which were submitted.
Dorothy Wood: Yes sir.
Bill Macali: This is a Conditional zoning application. The elevations have been
incorporated into the proffer agreement. So by changing the elevations in essence the
proffer agreement has been changed.
Dorothy Wood: Okay.
Bill Macali: It's not as bad as it sounds. But, the code requires that proffers be submitted
15 days prior to the Planning Commission.
Dorothy Wood: Do we need to defer this?
Bill Macali: No ma'am. That is what I'm saying. It's not as bad as it sounds. It's that if
the Commission decides to forward to the City Council a favorable recommendation, it
really could not do so on the basis of the new elevations. What it can do is note for the
record that the elevations are not really submitted in a timely manner and make its
recommendation conditioned upon the new renderings being considered by City Council
rather than the old ones. I could help you with that motion when the time comes.
Dorothy Wood: I am sure you will sir. You will make the motion if we do decide?
Item #20 & 21
7 - Eleven, Inc.
Page 2
Bill Macali: I would tell somebody.
Dorothy Wood: Would you all like to hear it or would you like to post pone it?
Ronald Ripley: I'd like to hear it.
Bill Macali: You can go ahead and'hear it.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Macali. Mr. Romine.
Steve Romine: Good afternoon Madame Chair and members of the Planning
Commission. For the record, my name is Steve Romine, a local attorney for 7-Eleven.
Today we're requesting that the Planning Commission recommend approval of a
Conditional Rezoning and Conditional Use Pennit to allow fuel sales in conjunction with
a convenience store on a parcel on the west side of Dam Neck Road, immediately south
of Dam Neck Road and Monet Drive intersection. I'm going to give you an abbreviated
overview just to refresh your recollection from last meeting, which was November 10,
2004. I'll really focus on design. Do I have five minutes? How long do I have? I think I
got ten minutes don't I?
~
Dorothy Wood: 10 minutes.
Steve Romine: Okay. Good.
DorothyWood: You already used two.
Steve Romine: I'm sure I have. As you recall the last time I was here on November 10,
2004, several years ago, 7-Eleven filed an application to amend the Green Run Land Use
Plan to construct a store at the comer ofRosemont and Buckner Boulevard. And just for
your orientation that was up here on this comer over here. At the time, we had moved
forward we had spent significant sums of money and had moved forward on that, and the
City Manager had asked us to withdraw that application.
Dorothy Wood: Mr. Romine, you need to come back to the microphone.
Steve Romine: I'm sorry. The City Manager had asked us to withdraw that application
in light of the fact they wanted to use part of it for the TCC Campus. There was no
contractual obligations or rights there but we backed off in light of that global plan. It's
taken the contract developer four years to find another site and that is the site that is in
front of you today. It ended up being an assemblage of 10 acres, which I think you will
see in your package and I'll put up the site plan as well. So it took four years and had
assembled 10 acres. The 10 acres is the parcel that you're looking at today. It is
basically a venture with Beco. Beco is going to develop the back part of this parcel for
51 homes. 7-Eleven hopefully, will develop the comer parcel in the front for its facility.
The proposed site is 1.2 acres and located on the west side of Dam Neck Road south of
Item #20 & 21
7 -Eleven, Inc.
Page 3
the intersection of Dam Neck and Monet Drive. Originally, we were going to purchase
the property to align the store with Monet Drive Extended but when we met with the City
and the staff and actually the traffic department early on, they said that was not
necessary. Where we were located was just as suitable a site if we were going to build on
that site as well. The current zoning is R-5D and we need a Conditional Use Pennit and a
Rezoning obviously to construct the store. The last time that I went through the
arguments that were in the Planning report with respect to consistency with the
Comprehensive Plan. We believe that it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. We
do not believe it results in illegal spot zoning. I can get into that if there are any
questions. We believe that it is very compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. In
fact, I'll quickly indicate again, and a picture is worth a thousand words, and I'll try to
stay between the mic and here. Our site is right here. And you will see a predominance
of industrial office, gas station, car wash, self-storage, industrial, church, the whole
Sentara site, Fanner's Market, TCC Campus, the pump station, zoning right next to us.
The predominance of that whole corridor featured are commercial, industrial type uses
and not residential. Basically moving over to the design features, which I think we are
most interested in talking about today. On November 10, 2004, we did a full presentation
and you asked us to look at some revised building elevations. We worked very diligently
with Mr. Waller and others to design a store that we believe is a high quality, attractive
neighborhood style store. I believe you have that in your handout in your package.
~
Ed Weeden: Could you bring the easel closer to the mic?
Steve Romine: Sure. I can talk louder too. Essentially what we did, we are constructing
a store that you see at Village and Laskin that we built within the last two years with one
slight modification. We have removed a white panel fascia strip here that was made out
of plywood 2-111 and we've extended the glass higher, which I think makes it look even
more attractive. But to hit the design real quick, the store includes red brick on all four
sides. It actually has a water table course on the bottom on all sides. At the four comers
there is an architectural tower which is topped with composition tile, two-thirds of the
façade is a light color smooth base architectural masonry, soldier course and the building
will have a flat roof constructed of composition tile as well. The canopy will have a
mansard roof with composition tile, which will be supported by red brick columns that is
indicated in the design. The signage will be as shown as well as a monument style sign
which I think you all have seen on a brick foundation will be utilized as well. As Bill
mentioned, and I just want to reference, the rendering is referenced in our second proffer
due to the lack of the back and forth and the lack of time to finalize the design that was
passed around yesterday and we would commit to finalizing the new design, having
submitted in time for City Council, consideration within the City ordinance guidelines.
Finally, I would like to mention two other things. One is your staff report with respect to
the noise zone restrictions, the AICUZ restrictions. The staff report indicates that this
parcel is partially in APZ2 Zone and also exceeding the 75db zone. I believe that is
accurate. We met with the Navy six or seven months ago when we scrubbed the site and
they didn't have opposition to this being developed for this purpose. Now its question
and its query, the Joint Land Use Study Task Force is going forward and I think part of
Item #20 & 21
7 - Eleven, Inc.
Page 4
what they're looking at is incompatibility of uses within this kind of noise zone which
would be the crash zone APZ2 and the noise zone. It may in fact be an issue with respect
to the residential that is already there. I'm not saying it will be but it is possible that the
City may come out and say that we have to do something with respect to residential
APZ2. So, please take that into consideration, as well, as you review this application.
And lastly, I think you again will hear from Mr. Kopassis, our adjoining neighbor on this
side of the property. His property is on this side over here. Beco will have residential
lots that extend in the back here. There are three or four over here. We have a 15- foot
landscape buffer on both sides of the property. We do not have direct access off Dam
Neck Road. We come down the spine road. Mrs. Etheridge was here earlier but she lives
over here. She is happy with the buffering that she is going to have with open space that
has been presented by the Beco development as well. So, I think we are compatible with
the neighbors. We have built the landscape buffering and as other issues arise, I would
like the opportunity to respond. I thank you for your time and consideration. I'll stand
by.
Dorothy Wood: Thanks Steve. We did drive down on our van trip and did see the 7-
Eleven at Village and Laskin.
Steve Romine: Thank you.
~
Dorothy Wood: Are there any questions for Mr. Romine?
Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is Rick Burrell.
Dorothy Wood: He's only here for questions.
Joseph Strange: Nicholas Hutsko.
Nick Hutsko: Good afternoon Madame Chainnan, members of Planning Commission.
My name is Nick Hutsko. I'm the associated broker with Century 21 Nachman. I
represent the owners of the property. Mr. Larry Palmer, who is the patriarch of the
family and Arlene Ferebee who is the matriarch of the family. They are the owners ofthe
property. They request your approval of this item. If you have any questions for them
please be free to ask.
Dorothy Wood: We appreciate your patience in being here. We know that it has been a
long time. Thank you for your patience.
Larry Palmer: Thank you and you're welcome.
Dorothy Wood: Any questions for them? Again, thank you for coming down.
Joseph Strange: Okay. Our next speaker is Andrew Kopassis.
Item #20 & 21
7-Eleven, Inc.
Page 5
Michael Nuckols: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. My name is Mike Nuckols.
This is Mr. Kopassis.
Andrew Kopassis: Andrew Kopassis.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Kopassis. Welcome.
Andrew Kopassis: My pleasure.
....:::::::...
Michael Nuckols: He may have some additional remarks to make but he has engaged me
on behalf of Kopassis Development, the developer of the property adjacent to what Mr.
Romine just spoke of. I would first just like to avoid repetition. You all heard a month
ago at your last meeting from Mrs. Kopassis a lot of the details and a lot of the issues and
history there. I would like to point out two things that are in the staff report. As best as I
can tell there are only two things different from the staff report that you had last month.
It's on page 6, at least as my copy printed out. In paragraph 2, it says, the architectural
plans submitted to Staff after the November hearing are, in Staff's professional opinion, a
step down from the quality of design of other recently approved 7-11 stores. The
building is utilitarian and non-residential in appearance. The second point is "The issue
with this request is whether placing a spot of intensive commercial zoning and use in the
center of residential community is appropriate." Common sense and fundamental land
use planning infonn us that it is not appropriate. Mr. Romine pointed out and I don't
have the diagram but all of the other zonings, office, and commercial but those are not in
the immediate adjacent property. Those are all residential. There are residential
developments that are already in place. My client has one immediately next door. He
has worked hard. He's got the road in. He's got the utilities in and the houses are
coming up out of the ground. These are not insignificant houses. They're going for
$335,000 and up. And, he has a number of contracts on those that abut where the 7-
Eleven is proposed that he is going to lose if the 7-Eleven gets built. I'm going to
estimate but I guess this room is about 50 feet wide. Mr. Miller you might be a better
estirnator than me. But there are 15-foot setbacks on each side of this property line for
buffers. These are two story houses that are going into this project, and if you were to
take about the second seat from the aisle side and use that as the back of the house, and
use that wall as the side of the garbage receptacle that is going to be placed next to one of
these first 4-5 lots. That is what these folks are going to be looking at in their $335,000
two-story building. That's atrocious.
Ed Weeden: Mr. Nuckols, you have about 45 seconds.
Michael Nuckols: Thank you. I guess the other issues that are related are you got 24-
hour operations for the 7-Eleven.
Dorothy Wood: Times up. Thank you. Would you please answer questions?
Michael Nuckols: I'll be happy too.
Item #20 & 21
7-Eleven, Inc.
Page 6
Dorothy Wood: Questions?
Robert Miller: If the dumpster is moved to the other side has that been a better scenario?
I know you had more d<;:tail.
Michael Nuckols: It's obviously a better example. Is it a cure all? I don't think so. I
think it's a bigger issue.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Please answer Ms. Anderson's question.
Michael Nuckols: Yes ma'am.
Janice Anderson: I know this probably won't be a cure all either but if there was a
requirement for some kind of fencing to buffer the properties.
Michael Nuckols: It would have to be about 30 feet high probably. I don't think it would
be.
Dorothy Wood: I could imagine that discussion.
.-::;:¡,.
Michael Nuckols: I don't think that's a solution unfortunately.
Janice Anderson: It wouldn't be a solution but would it be an improvement instead of the
IS-foot landscaping?
Michael Nuckols: I would have to defer to Mr. Kopassis on that. I don't know what his
feelings are.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you Mr. Nuckols.
Andrew Kopassis: My feeling is when you add three houses or four houses and you have
a 25-foot backyard and 7-Eleven is only 20 feet away. When you look in the back wall
that is where the 7-Eleven is going to be sitting. I already measured this room and I'll tell
you that's the 7-Eleven, that's the dumpster, and that is where the house would be. Now
you look at how much space you have. I try to protect the property and the buyers. It is
supposed to be residential. It should stay residential not put a 7-Eleven. Let them go
some place else.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you sir.
Andrew Kopassis: That is the way I feel.
Dorothy Wood: Would you answer Mr. Ripley's question please?
Item #20 & 21
7-Eleven, Inc.
Page 7
Ronald Ripley: Mr. Nuckols, is residential a more appropriate use? If in fact it were in
an APZ, accident potential zone. They're not concerned about noise they are concerned
about planes crashing. With that said, what would be more appropriate? Do you think
houses are going to be more appropriate or leave it undeveloped? There are houses next
to it.
Michael Nuckols: I think you can probably run a gamut on that one with the various
positions from different people. I guess that is what the study is currently under way to
detennine. The Comprehensive Plan says that the 7-Eleven would be a use that would be
compatible with the Comprehensive Plan. The 7-Eleven is not compatible with what is
already there, and what is in the pipeline. Part of this project as I understand it is a
residential community right adjacent to it. In fact, it's the street going into this new
residential community that is going to be the entrance to the 7-Eleven. It's the same
issue. It's the same exact issue. So, you can't isolate the Kopassis project from the 7-
Eleven project and what is going in behind it. It's exactly the same.
..=:..
Ronald Ripley: Well the property across the street is all agriculture. The A-12's, the R-
5D's, all that is incompatible with this APZ. In fact, I can tell you and I can't tell you
that this will be the recommendation but I will not be surprised to see a recommendation
coming out of the Task Force recommending redevelopment over these areas, which is
rerouting residential. We have APZ's that are safer and lot more appropriate. The
residential that is going in there now is by right, doesn't make it right though.
Michael Nuckols: I hear you. I understand where you're coming from.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Thank you sir.
Michael Nuckols: Are there any other questions? Thank you.
Steve Romine: In the interest of time I'll quickly try to respond to Mike's questions. The
staff report page 6, Number 2 was the rendering that we had submitted at the time, which
we have now changed. It was a modified design on the Nimmo church property. That
one has been replaced with what you now have in your packets. So, maybe Mike just
wasn't aware of that. As I mentioned earlier, I have case law to back it up if you would
like to talk about it. This is not illegal spot zoning. Under Virginia law the 15-foot
landscape buffer is what we provided on the side of the property. We offered to move the
dumpster. That was not satisfactory to Mr. Kopassis either. I guess our final comment is
that we are compatible with the Comprehensive Plan. We think we're compatible with
the neighborhood. Beco is not here today but they will come to City Council and say
they do not have any objection to the commercial development on the comer with respect
to the residential in the back. I believe the concerns on AICUZ are real. I think when
that develops and comes out at the end of January we will have a better idea of what is
compatible. But under the Comprehensive Plan we are consistent with what we think is
limited retail in a neighborhood residential designed store. So, I'll stand by for questions.
Item #20 & 21
7-Eleven, Inc.
Page 8
Dorothy Wood: Thank you sir. Discussion? How about a motion?
Eugene Crabtree: Very simple. I think 7-Eleven, Inc. has done everything we've asked
them to do. We have imposed on them. I think they have come forward and provided us
with everything that we have asked them to do. Therefore, I don't see the necessity in
prolonging them any longer. I'd like to make a motion that we approve the application.
John Waller: I second it.
Dorothy Wood: The motion will be decided by Mr. Macali. I believe.
Bill Macali: Maybe I can just suggest a motion. The Commission can make it. The
motion would be that and I think since there is a Conditional Use Pennit we can get at the
same thing in a different way. I think probably if Proffer #2, which is the architectural
elevations, were to be deleted from the proffers that can be done at any time. And simply
require that the language in that proffer be deemed a condition of the Conditional Use
Pennit then there really wouldn't be a problem. So, the motion would essentially be to
approve the application for the rezoning with the exception of Proffer #2, and that the
Use Pennit be approved with the extra condition added, which is the same as Proffer #2
in there now.
~
Dorothy Wood: Thank you. Is that what you meant to say Gene?
Eugene Crabtree: As what Mr. Macali stated.
Dorothy Wood: Do I hear a second? Ms. Katsias.
Ed Weeden: I believe Mr. Waller seconded it.
Dorothy Wood: I'm sorry. Mr. Waller seconded it.
Donald Horsley: I got one question.
Dorothy Wood: Yes sir.
Donald Horsley: Mr. Scott, would you address the staffs reason for denial of this
application before we vote on it?
Robert Scott: I want to clarify one thing on the accident potential zone. Maybe you can
look at it as a matter you have in your packet, all the lots that you see in that residential
subdivision, as it applies to the northern side of Dam Neck Road. There are two that are
in the accident potential zone. Most of them are outside it. There are some other areas
that need to be dealt with in tenns ofthe overall aspect of how these things are going to
come together. I thought the question of what would you use the property for is a good
question. It's the southern side of street that's the real problem. Not the northern side.
Item #20 & 21
7-Eleven, Inc.
Page 9
The northern side is primarily for residential streets. The fact that they got 51 lots in the
subdivision behind it defines the character that area is going to be. I know you're not
going to agree with it but this is an uncoordinated land use pattern. And the issue of
trying to deal with problems of accident potential and noise impact by agreeing to less
than satisfactory land use pattern is not going to get you where you need to be. You need
to think a little harder on that. We said in the beginning and I know the potential of the
Planning Commission would be drawn to the details of the design aspect of this project
and that is legitimate although there were some issues there. But our intention was drawn
to the fact that this is not a good land use pattern. It is not and I disagree with Mr.
Romine. It is not a commercial corridor. The proof of that is there is no commercial on
it. The commercial is all at one end all the way at the other end. In the middle there is no
commercial. But there is lots of residential. And it is easier for us to see what can be
proffered between commercial and residential that is going in there. In the long tenn, we
think it is going to be a problem. That is the reason why we said what we did.
Donald Horsley: Thank you Bob.
Dorothy Wood: Does anyone else have a comment?
~
Ronald Ripley: I'd like to make a comment. I think that the staff looked at this and we
read it and they talked about the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan clearly
talks about this not being an area not suitable for residential. However, with the residents
that back up that Bob had referred to that is what persuaded them to that extent. It is
tough for them to come down on one side or the other. You got to say what do you think
makes more sense? I just think the APZ is important enough and you can extend it that it
prevails. I think that is what we need to pay attention to for this particular application,
and that is what pushed me to that side of the decision. So, I'm in favor of rezoning this.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you. I think we have the vote open.
AYE 9 NAY 2 ABSO ABSENT 0
ANDERSON AYE
CRABTREE AYE
DIN NAY
HORSLEY NAY
KATSIAS AYE
KNIGHT AYE
MILLER AYE
RIPLEY AYE
STRANGE AYE
WALLER AYE
WOOD AYE
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 9-2, the application of 7 - Eleven, Inc. has been approved.
Item #20 & 21
7-Eleven, Inc.
Page 10
Dorothy Wood: Thank you for coming. Hope you all have a Merry Christmas. The
meeting is adjourned.
...:z:::..
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE
In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF-5916
DATE: December 14, 2004
TO:
Leslie L. Lilley
William M. Macali (}.A
DEPT: City Attorney
FROM:
DEPT: City Attorney
RE:
Conditional Zoning Application
7-Eleven, Inc.
The above-referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the City
Council on January 25,2005. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated November 16,
2004, and have detennined 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.
WMMInlb
Enclosure
. .
cc: Kathleen Hassen
DECLARATION OF CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS
THIS DECLARATION OF CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS ("Declaration")
effective the 16th day of November, 2004, by and between ROY G. JONES, DOROTHY L.
BLOUNT, JUANITA E. OWENS, SARAH F. FEREBEE, PHYLLIS M. WINSLOW,
DIANE D. FEREBEE, ROY G. FEREBEE, JAMES E. FEREBEE, JOYCE A. LANG,
ARLENE D. FEREBEE, RONNIE D. FEREBEE, and LARRY PLUMMER collectively,
party of the first part, and each a grantor for purposes of indexing, RP A DAM NECKIMONET.
LLC. a Virginia limited liability company, party of the second part, a grantor for purposes of
indexing, 7-ELEVEN. INC.. a Texas corporation, party of the third part, a grantor for purposes
of indexing, OVBB. L.L.C.. a Virginia limited liability company, party of the fourth part, a
grantor for purposes of indexing (the party of the first part, the party of the second part, the party
of the third part and the party of the fourth part collectively being referred to herein as
"GRANTOR"), and THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH. a municipal corporation of the
Commonwealth of Virginia, party of the fifth part and a grantee for purposes of indexing
("GRANTEE"), provides and states as follows:
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, collectively the party of the first part and the party of the fourth part own the
parcel of real property located in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia described in Exhibit A,
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference ("Property"); and
WHEREAS, the party of the second part proposes to purchase the Property from the
party of the first part and the party of the fourth part and thereafter lease the Property to the party
of the third part; and
WHEREAS, the party of the third part, as lessee of the Property, proposes to develop the
Property, and in connection therewith, has filed an application with the GRANTEE to rezone the
Property from R-5D to B-2 (Conditional); and
WHEREAS, it is GRANTEE's policy to provide only for the orderly development of
land for various purposes through zoning and other land development legislation; and
WHEREAS, GRANTOR acknowledges that the competing and sometimes incompatible
development of various types of uses conflict and that in order to permit differing types of uses
on and in the area of the Property and at the same time to recognize the effects of change that
will be created by the proposed rezoning, 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 resolve the situation to which the proposed rezoning gives rise; and
. GPIN: 1495-02-3980-0000; 1495-02-3824-0000; 1485-92-9992-0000 (portion only);
1485-93-9171-0000 (portion only)
Prepared by: LeClair Ryan, A Professional Corporation
999 Waterside Drive, Suite 2525
Norfolk, Virginia 23510
WHEREAS, GRANTOR has voluntarily proffered, in writing in advance of and prior to
the public hearing before GRANTEE, as part of the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map of
the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia ("Zoning Map") with respect to the Property, 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 proposed rezoning and the need for which is
generated by the proposed rezoning.
NOW, THEREFORE, the GRANTOR, its successors, assigns, grantees and other
successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement by or exaction from the
GRANTEE or its governing body and without any element of compulsion or quid pro quo for
zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit, or subdivision approval, hereby make the following
declaration of covenants and restrictions which shall restrict and govern the physical
development, operation, and use of the Property and hereby covenant and agree that this
Declaration shall constitute covenants running with the Property, which shall be binding upon
the Property and upon all parties and persons claiming under or through the GRANTOR, its
successors, assigns, grantees and other successors in interest or title:
I. The Property shall be developed substantially as shown on the exhibit entitled "7-
ELEVEN INCORPORATED 7-ELEVEN CONVENIENCE STORE
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN Dam Neck Road and Monet Drive, Virginia Beach,
Virginia", prepared by URS, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City
Council ("City Council") and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of
Planning ("Planning Department").
2. The external building materials, colors and architectural design elements of the
building to be constructed on the Property shall be substantially the same as shown on
the exhibit entitled "7-Eleven Convenience Store with Gas", which has been
exhibited to City Council and is on file with the Planning Department.
3. The internal lot lines of the Property will be vacated in accordance with applicable
City Ordinances.
4. No other B-2 Community Business District uses shall be permitted on the Property
other than a convenience store with gross store area of less than five thousand (5,000)
square feet and an automobile service station.
5. Further conditions as 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.
GRANTOR further covenants and agrees that:
All references herein to R-5D and B-2 Districts and to the requirements and regulations
applicable thereto refer to the City Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance of the City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia, in force as of the date of approval of this Declaration by City Council,
which are by this reference incorporated herein.
The above conditions, having been proffered by GRANTOR and allowed and accepted
by GRANTEE as part of the amendment to the zoning ordinance of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia, in force as of the date this Declaration is approved by the Virginia Beach City Council
("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 City Council 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.
1. The Zoning Administrator of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, shall be vested
with all necessary authority, on behalf of the governing body of the City of Virginia
Beach, Virginia, to administer and enforce the foregoing conditions and restrictions,
including the authority (a) to order, in writing, that any noncompliance with such
conditions be remedied, and (b) to bring legal action or suit to insure compliance with
such conditions, including mandatory or prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages,
or other appropriate action, suit, or proceeding;
2. The failure to meet all conditions and restrictions shall constitute cause to deny the
issuance of any of the required building or occupancy permits as may be appropriate;
3. If aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Administrator, made pursuant to these
provisions, GRANTOR shall petition the governing body for the review thereof prior
to instituting proceedings in court; and
4. The Zoning Map may show by an appropriate symbol on the map the existence of
conditions attaching to the zoning of the Property, and the ordinances and the
conditions may be made readily available and accessible for public inspection in the
office of the Zoning Administrator and in the Planning Department, and they shall be
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia, and indexed in the names of each of the GRANTOR and GRANTEE.
WITNESS the following signatures and seals:
GRANTOR:
1"\
CiA (VI.!-- Ù'1jl ~ü 'f"L-
it ~t6Â)-t' ~ M-}-Ü< N .L1
I tv Û L -r (SEAL)
Roy G. Jones
*Power of Attorney recorded: in the
virginia Beach Clerk's Office as
Instrument #2004l026ml70888
~ONWEAL TH V '; ~~J;h
~/COUNTYOF. . ... . to-wit: .
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 24< J'-. day of March,
2004, by Roy G. Jones.
My commission expires: ~.
[AFFIX NOTARY SEAL HERE]
[SIGNATURES CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE]
"
..
COMMONWEALTH ~ ~~~
CITY/COUNTY OF 'I ' tlto-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 9...) day of March,
2004, by Dorothy L. Blount.
My commission expires:
.
~v/ ,..
. "'~)'~.'v~
No ublic " :/
l{-.~{) ~6c¿
[AFFIX NOTARY SEAL HERE]
[SIGNATURES CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE]
COMMONWEALTH r¡: ~IRGINIA
CITY/COUNTY OF V \~~lCb.., to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this (9..3 day of March,
2004, by Juanita E. Owens.
,
My commission expires:
~~~r< ~~~
No Public
Lj - .30- (J t:
[AFFIX NOTARY SEAL HERE]
[SIGNATURES CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE]
w~ jj ~SEAL)
Sarah F. Ferebee
~ONWEAL THV~j~~
~COUNTY OF . to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this # day of March,
2004, by Sarah F. Ferebee.
My commission expires: ~.
[AFFIX NOTARY SEAL HERE]
[SIGNATURES CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE]
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
CITY/COUNTY OFV/\ ~Er;(.("h-, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ;:) ~ day of March,
2004, by Phyllis M. Winslow.
~. ? r~~ -~
'\ ~.\ ~ \ð,' ~
N Public i
My commission expires: v- 6 () -û g
[AFFIX NOTARY SEAL HERE]
[SIGNATURES CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE]
ID~ J, J.A t/-ez (SEAL)
Diane D. Ferebee
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
CITY/COUNTY OF ~ ?r. ' to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~ day of March,
2004, by Diane D. Ferebee.
"
My commission expires: L¡ - 3 0 - 68
[AFFIX NOTARY SEAL HERE]
[SIGNATURES CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE]
"
c
EAL)
COMMONWEAL 1H ~Gß
CITY/COUNTY OF -. o-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this /c¡#- day of March,
2004, by Roy G. Ferebee.
!o~c r I~
/"
My commission expires: 10"" ð 1- ø2t;~S.
[AFFIX NOTARY SEAL HERE]
[SIGNATURES CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE]
L
) f1 (YV\.-w t
ð" James E. Ferebee
'1J 0 /' ~AL)
COMMONWEAL Tij ~F ~~IA
CITY/COUNTY OF V /:;. ~h , to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 9- ,:S day of March,
2004, by James E. Ferebee.
~ LÅ~YVP, G~j
N tary PublIc .
My commission expires: 'f ~ -30 -0 ~
[AFFIX NOTARY SEAL HERE]
[SIGNATURES CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE]
(
~tLa, huý\ (SEAL)
J e Æ. Lang
\
COMMONWEALTH ?ð: ~~A
CITY/COUNTY OF ~ {, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~ day of March,
2004, by Joyce A. Lang.
~_\~~ )~C Cð.1l~- ~
No PublIc ;
My commission expires: ¥-3(j -(jet.
[AFFIX NOTARY SEAL HERE]
[SIGNATURES CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE]
~EAL)
COMMONWEAL T~QF VI~~
CITY/COUNTY OF 'A ß.. to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 'd.-:~ day of March,
2004, by Arlene D. Ferebee.
~p~~~' ~~\
My commission expires: 1 ~30 - Or{.
[AFFIX NOTARY SEAL HERE]
[SIGNATURES CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE]
~~ÐI~
Ronnie D. Ferebee
COMMONWEAL TII ~~
CITY ICOUNTY OF ~. to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this j.. i
2004, by Ronnie D. Ferebee.
~v.¥
Notary Public
My commission expires: ~ 3 o. ~ó 6 .
[AFFIX NOTARY SEAL HERE]
[SIGNATURES CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE]
(SEAL)
day of March,
(SEAL)
COMMONWEALTH Qf VIRGINIA
CITY/COUNTY OF ~ to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this c95+-~ay of March,
2004, by Larry Plummer.
My commission expires: ~.
[AFFIX NOTARY SEAL HERE]
[SIGNATURES CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE]
RPA DAM NECKIMONET, LLC,
a Virginia limited liability company
By: ~ Ai J4 (SEAL)
Rickard E. Burnell, Manager
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF CHESAPEAKE, to wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this! j ~ day of September,
2004, by Rickard E. Burnell, Manager ofRP A Dam NeckIMonet, LLC, a Virginia limited
liability company, on behalf of said limited liability company.
Æ~~
My Commission Expires: IO~(-o¿
7-ELEVEN, INC., a Texas corporation
"-
By:
Steven R. Seldowitz
Assistant Secretary
By:
Title: V} & Pi'e~~.JJ
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF DALLAS, to wit:
State, o~~: ~~=~~~ ~ ~~ for~ =~ ~~;:~:'! a
J /1 e., Pre.c;. )~J and an Assistant Secretary, respectively, of7-Eleven, Inc., know to me to
be the persons whose names are subscribed to the foregoing instrwnent, and acknowledged to me
that the same was the act of the said corporation and that they each executed the same as the act
of such corporation for the purposes therein expressed and in the capacities therein stated.
GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE this )9 ~ day of July, 2004.
bw¡ /Y"\ ~¡Y7 /Yl (J 11
Notary Public
- ~-
.~- - - - (
\' /~~~'(~~~\ Karen Penne\\ \"
fir (:.t.;\ *\ Notary Public, State o! Texas
\~.~./,,¡ Wr¡ comm. Expire! O~/O1/\)5
:~:~~~'.!~~~' - - - - . - - .-.-'
4
OVBB, L.L.C.,
a Virginia limited liability co
By:
(SEAL)
COMMO~ALTH OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF O£ ~pé'eík , to wit:
The foregoing instrument was ackno~ged before me this I (, --tt.. day of November,
2004, by þ(~c.. 6-. D lse>n, "" ~ of OVBB, LLC., a Virginia limited
liability company, on behalf of said limited liability company.
My Commission Expires: It -- ~t:Þ .. 2..b-tJ.
EXHIBIT A
DESCRIPTION
OF
7 -ELEVEN SITE
DAM NECK I MONET
ALL THAT CERTAIN LOT, PIECE OR PARCEL OF LAND, LYING AND BEING IN THE CITY
OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA AND BEING MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHERN LINE OF LOT 4 AS
SHOWN IN MAP BOOK 16 AT PAGE 34 WITH THE WESTERN RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF
DAM NECK ROAD, FORMERLY LANDSTOWN ROAD, SAID POINT BEING NORTHERLY 829
FEET MORE OR LESS FROM THE NORTHWEST INTERSECTION OF SOUTH ROSEMONT
ROAD AND DAM NECK ROAD, A POINT, THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE ALONG THE WESTERN RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF DAM NECK ROAD,
SOUTH 26°02'42" WEST, 212.78 FEET, TO A POINT;
THENCE DEPARTING THE WESTERN RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF DAM NECK ROAD,
NORTH 58°21'44" WEST, 131.41 FEET, TO A POINT;
THENCE ALONG A TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 550.00 FEET,
A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13°57'11", THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 65°20'20"
WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 133.61 FEET AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 133.94 FEET, TO A
POINT;
THENCE NORTH 31°38'16" EAST, TO SAID SOUTHERN LINE OF LOT 4,227.26 FEET, TO
A POINT;
THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERN LINE OF LOT 4, SOUTH 58°32'12" EAST, TO THE
WESTERN RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF DAM NECK ROAD, 243.29 FEET, TO A POINT, THE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 54,340 SQUARE FEET OR 1.2475 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.